No the actual results people are seeing and using is wins.
Yes, people are ignoring the actual results of their claims, all context, and the actual reason for the change in the one stat they're cherry picking, to pretend that it means whatever they want it to mean. Hockey is not replaying a level in a single player game, and even if it was, this would be like bragging about getting further on easy mode than somebody else got on hard mode - and before you even beat the level, let alone the game.
6 playoff wins in 9 playoff games atm. When did we do that under the last duo that you claim was so good?
6 in 10 now. We faced goaltending like this once under the last duo and we won that series. And that was against the 3x Eastern Champs, not Ottawa getting their first taste of playoffs.
It's funny you say this too when these analytics people get so upset their analytical darlings don't get chances when they go to many different teams and always end up in the press box or AHL and eventually to Europe or Russia, but yeah, everyone else is wrong and we must trust those analytics.
What the heck are you even talking about? I'm not sure where you get these ideas about what "analytics people" think, say, and do, but they're pretty much all wrong. People who utilize analytics are right more often, which is why it's been so widely adopted across the NHL.
Just because you and other analytical people assume physicality means more goons doesn't make that true, even though people have said many times that is not what they want when they say physicality.
I don't think physicality just means goons (in fact, that's the most useless type of physicality that exists), but we're not more physical in
any way, and people sure used to care about fighting. Now we have no fights and nobody cares. People used to complain that we needed to hit more. Now we hit less and nobody cares. People used to complain that we needed more pushback after injuries. Now we watch our stars get targeted for intentional injury and our starting goalie get concussed and puke on the bench and nobody cares. Keefe says focus on the game? RAGE!!! Berube says focus on the game? Oh, so smart, so calm, so composed - praise him.
I do agree we still lack the right players for this system to be the most effective but they are making it work with what they got.
It's not working well though. We should be playing better with the players we have. That's on the coach. And if you think we don't have the right players, he probably shouldn't be trying to force a mediocre system that requires a very, very specific build.
It's funny you say that we've become worse defensively and that these giants on defence needed to be replaced for some offence when we're scoring more in the playoffs, especially against Florida and those giant pylons have provided more offence than any d core the previous years have since it used to be just Rielly.
Well first off, it's not me saying that we've been worse defensively. It's the objective data saying that we've been worse defensively. Mostly because our PKing has fallen off a cliff.
Second, the argument was never that we needed giants on defense to score some fluke goals in a small playoff sample against trash goaltending. The claim was that we needed giants on defense to be great defensively, and protect the net front from rebound and high danger opportunities. All things we got worse at. We were also one of the worst teams in the league in goals from defensemen this year, for the record.
And third, I didn't say that we needed to replace them for offense. I've never had an issue with a defence group that leans more towards defense, as long as there is still some diversity and balance in playstyle and skills for different roles, and they actually get good defensive results.
Top 2 guys have a combined 4 goals right now.
The core 4 have scored and/or gotten a primary assist on over 78% of our goals so far, while providing high end defense and taking on the toughest matchups. At 5v5, we have a 19-9 goal differential with a core 4 member on the ice, and 4-9 without. You still don't understand how massive these players are to our team.
For a numbers guy 2 out of 6 years in out of the 1st round doesn't seem like a good percentage to support your case very well.
It's quite irrelevant to my case. It would be pretty embarrassing to rely exclusively on something like that to conclude everything about everything.
Stop acting like they aren't supposed to be carrying when they take up almost 50% of the cap.
Stop acting like they aren't carrying and pulling more than their share.
Oh so they found that traffic in front of the net can make it so goalies can't see the puck clearly which makes it harder to save. Analytics people really try to grasp at anything eh.
We've always got traffic to the front of the net. That hasn't changed. We've had some tips and bounces go our way in a small sample, and the goaltending we've faced has struggled a lot more with things like positioning and reaction time. They're also just getting beat clean on shots that past goalies saved. You're the one grasping at something that isn't even true to avoid acknowledging the worse goaltending we've faced.
We can't score it's just a hot goalie in your eyes, we do score and it's because the goalies bad and not carrying.
No. It's not how much you score. It's how much you score relative to the quantity and quality of the shots you create. You're the one trying to pretend that scoring is only about the skaters, when it's really the outcome of offensive generation and goaltending performance combined.
Ever think maybe the teams not as predictable anymore? Instead of overpassing looking for the perfect shot they shoot a low shot in the slot and look for a high tip and hope for the best.
Lol. In one sentence you're claiming we're not predictable, and then in the next sentence you're talking about how predictable we currently are. We never "overpassed looking for the perfect shot". In fact, we used to get a lot more shots than we do now.
Those Marner point shots he takes on the PP must drive you nuts since they are such low quality shots to your analytics, yet they have led to many goals.
I don't hate when Marner gets pucks on net. He's going for tips and rebounds, and those are pretty high percentage. Which just goes to show how little you understand the analytics you bash. It's you guys who scream "perimeter!!!" every time a shot is taken outside the crease.
They did though. Analytics loved Knies. I don't know what you were looking at.
They did. Y'all acted like Liljegren was a top 4 d man and was better than a majority of our d core atm. Went nuts when we never played him and then went nuts again when he was traded. This had nothing to do with analytics though right? Just your favourite player and you're upset? 2 coaches didn't trust him here yet y'all kept posting analytics to try and show why he's one of our best.
Lol. I don't what you were looking at or who you're mistaking me for, but this is all wrong. Liljegren was not even
close to my favourite player, and I didn't think he was better than the majority of our D core. I talked a lot about his playoff struggles and was actually in favour of trading him last off-season. I just wasn't a huge fan of our decision to keep him, overpay him, and then ship him off for peanuts and a cap dump without giving him a chance, when we were past any real opportunity for replacement.
What the analytics actually said about Liljegren was that he did really well in a bottom pairing role, and held up decently through certain stretches when he had to take on more responsibility, but was inconsistent whenever the chance came for a bigger role, and he struggled when he would get targeted in the playoffs.
Y'all kept posting Benoits xGF% and all that and said we need to find a replacement for him, preferably someone with more offence to their game.
I don't know where you're getting the stuff about replacing him for offense. The issue with Benoit was simply that he was playing badly. If he was playing like he was in 2023/24, it wouldn't have been an issue.
