GDT: Desert Dogs vs Canes

[hockeynjune]

He was very good, and also extremely lucky. There were a solid handful of plays where the puck rolled just wide or short of the goal line, hit the post, etc.

A team can only dodge just so many bullets like that. When it's happening on top of the goalie also making robbery-level saves, you're probably gonna lose.

The play where he just dove out into left side ice and ended up a good 10 ft from the crease comes to mind.

 

[AhosDatsyukian]

Agreed on Jarvis.

Click on MoneyPuck.com and wait for the thing to update the deserve-to-win based on scoring chances. I scarcely recall a team having as high a chance as the 81.2% the Canes had. Wow!

I didn't watch the game, so my opinion means even less than 0, but upon looking at the highlights, it was simply god-mode by Vejmelka. He must have made at least 10 highlight saves.

So, uhh, I just checked this thing out for the first time... Is this deserve to win o meter just completely random or what?

Coyotes were 80% deserve to win earlier in the year when they got smoked by the BJs 8-2...

MoneyPuck.com

 

[Discipline Daddy]

So, uhh, I just checked this thing out for the first time... Is this deserve to win o meter just completely random or what?

Coyotes were 80% deserve to win earlier in the year when they got smoked by the BJs 8-2...

MoneyPuck.com

LOL that one is amazing. Carter Hutton gonna Carter Hutton.

I think it's a pretty misleading model at times. I have no idea how it works but I suppose that it tracks only shot location to determine the quality of shot. I don't know if things like goalie being screened/sneaky wrist shot/quick release/one-timer/puck moving across the crease factor into the formula for how "dangerous" a shot is. It's hardly a substitute for the eye test, but at least it has some metric for shot quality, so you can see if your team took a bunch of baloney shots from just inside the blueline or whether you had a lot of net-front looks.

I think the formula calculates the deserve-to-win ONLY looking at those dangerous shot selections, and not factoring in how good a team is or how good the goalie is historically.

 

[tarheelhockey]

LOL that one is amazing. Carter Hutton gonna Carter Hutton.

I think it's a pretty misleading model at times. I have no idea how it works but I suppose that it tracks only shot location to determine the quality of shot. I don't know if things like goalie being screened/sneaky wrist shot/quick release/one-timer/puck moving across the crease factor into the formula for how "dangerous" a shot is. It's hardly a substitute for the eye test, but at least it has some metric for shot quality, so you can see if your team took a bunch of baloney shots from just inside the blueline or whether you had a lot of net-front looks.

I think the formula calculates the deserve-to-win ONLY looking at those dangerous shot selections, and not factoring in how good a team is or how good the goalie is historically.

Score effects, also. When it's 8-2 things loosen up quite a bit and the bottom line/pairing guys start getting big ice time. If the model doesn't take that into consideration, it's weighing those last 10 pointless minutes the same as the 10 minutes that blew the game open.