Vancouver led the league in points at Christmas, Can they continue this run into the New Year?

[Killer Orcas]

I don't know about all these advanced stats what not just know were 1 point back of 1st place in league. That's the stat I look at most points for !! Will we regress get better who knows enjoying ride and see what happens but right now it's looking rosy !!

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Not sure what you are talking about. Possession stats are also static based on the day you reference them.

Your so called real stats are also subject to many variables. Like no one thinks JT Miller is a top 3 offensive player in the NHL. He is sitting there according to the counting numbers, but we all know that is just due to many variables that have allowed him to temporarily hold that spot despite his actual talent being nowhere near that level.

And everyone knows he won't finish the season top 3 in scoring because the counting numbers are only good in large sample sizes. There are literally no difference between what you call predictive advanced stats and "real stats". They are both just stats. People feel that the advanced stats give a better indicator of what is actually happening on the ice because they increase the sample size by using many more events.

We know that stats are more accurate with larger sample size so it just makes sense to look at the largest sample size possible.

Oh, good grief.

My stats are not subject to any variables. They are a statement of fact and a snapshot of what a team has achieved to the time the stats were referenced. You're mixing up dynamic with static.

I don't need stats to tell me what is happening on the ice. I watch the games. At the end of a game I compile the stats. We won or we lost.

Sorry, man, but discussions of stats are the most boring thing on the planet. Do you even enjoy watching a game? Maybe try it without a calculator on your lap and a stats site on your phone. Hockey's a great support. Try watching it without a headful of numbers. Maybe you do enjoy it now, but I bet you'd enjoy it more. Sit back, crack a beer, and yell at the TV.

 

[TheOrangeDesk]

One set of stats is real and not open to change or misinterpretation. My point was, that predictive advanced stats are dynamic and subject to many variables throughout a season. The Canucks' stats I posted are static. They cannot be changed. Both, however, and I am in agreement with you, are pretty much useless at predicting anything down the road. That was the point of my post — dismantling the value of advanced stats and using static stats to do it. You can only trust one of them, but only as a snapshot of the day they're referenced.

Another thing is, by the time advanced stats hit this board they're subject to interpretations often based on the biases of the person who posts them. They can be massaged at the whim of the person using them in an argument. They're often used to support your own team as I did above, or to shit on a rival team like the guy above did. As I said, I'll take static stats. They are a real snapshot.

Good lord what is this language. Did you take stats class in a dumpster ?

 

[jackjohnson]

Predictive stats can be amazingly accurate


You keep.calling them predictive stats. They are just possession stats.

If you agree that the possession stats are more predictive than the "real stats" then that just means that they are better stats.

Stats are just a proxy used to tell us what is happening in the game. If you think some stats are more accurate than others, you should probably use the stats that are more accurate rather than the ones that are less.

I mean that just makes sense from a logical standpoint.

Not sure why all oilers fans became stats gurus once Canucks became a top team this season. You guys also always ignore canucks point percentage, regulation time win which is most in the league, goals for and goals against and the fact canucks have elite forwards and couple of high end defenseman and goalie helping them win. Maybe acknowledge those facts first before digging into obscure stats to support your misguided agenda. I especially wouldnt be talking about Canucks if my team got annhilated 3 times this season. Its honestly embarassing.

 

[Bank Shot]

Oh, good grief.

My stats are not subject to any variables. They are a statement of fact and a snapshot of what a team has achieved to the time the stats were referenced. You're mixing up dynamic with static.

Every stat is static. It stays the same in the moment you measure it.

Even something as simple as goals is effected by variables. A players goal totals will.be determined by whether he gets PP time, or gets on the ice with the empty net, etc.

I don't need stats to tell me what is happening on the ice. I watch the games. At the end of a game I compile the stats. We won or we lost.

Thats weird, because even professional coaches re-watch tapes of the game because its impossible to absorb everthing that happened in a single game. Maybe you are just better at watching the games than them.

Sorry, man, but discussions of stats are the most boring thing on the planet. Do you even enjoy watching a game? Maybe try it without a calculator on your lap and a stats site on your phone. Hockey's a great support. Try watching it without a headful of numbers. Maybe you do enjoy it now, but I bet you'd enjoy it more. Sit back, crack a beer, and yell at the TV.

Ok. You don't like and don't understand stats. That is fine. You will get to be surprised when overacheiving teams and players fall back to earth. I can see why that is fun for you. I prefer to try to be informed. To each their own.

 

[jackjohnson]

I am? I'm commenting in one thread that their possession stats don't indicate a first place team.

No i always see you trolling Canucks fans trying to get a reaction out of them.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Good lord what is this language. Did you take stats class in a dumpster ?

Your concise dissection of my post on a point-by-point basis is outstanding. Dude, you win.

 

[Dust]

Its tough to argue with posters that ignore facts and stats like wins, GF and GA and points and win%. They also cant bring up the sample size BS since we are already at the halfway point. So the only way to discredit the number 2 team in
the league Is by talking about underlying stats. If after 40 games, a team is 2nd in NHL, does that mean they are an average team?? A bad team?? The mental gymnastics that one goes through to justify the opposite of what the results are saying is insanity.

The Canucks have proven through the 1st half of the season that they are a good team. People pointing out that there are some concerning underlying numbers doesn't change that, but it also doesn't mean they should be discredited completely just because you said so.

The highest team shooting percentage in the last 20 years is 12.4% by St. Louis two years ago. Last year Edmonton led the league with 11.8%. This year's Canucks are currently sitting at 13.8%. It's highly unlikely they are going to obliterate that by nearly 1.5%, it's going to come down. That doesn't mean they are suddenly going to stop winning games, but it's a realization that you shouldn't just scream and complain when people point out.

 

[jackjohnson]

I don't know about all these advanced stats what not just know were 1 point back of 1st place in league. That's the stat I look at most points for !! Will we regress get better who knows enjoying ride and see what happens but right now it's looking rosy !!

I wonder if people look at the advance stats of the cup winners and determine if they deserved the cup or it was a fluke and they arent actual cup winners. Imagine that lol. Wonder why we even play the games on the ice or have playoffs when we could just look at the advanced stats and give the cup to the team that had good underlying stats. Also ignore the goals for, goals against, win percentage and other metrics. Stats like xGF and PDO is what determines which team is excellent even if they are middle of the pack team in standings or have poor results.

 

[Bank Shot]

No i always see you trolling Canucks fans trying to get a reaction out of them.

What did I say that wasn't just factual?

Am I lying by saying the Cancuks have poor possession stats?

I wonder if people look at the advance stats of the cup winners and determine if they deserved the cup or it was a fluke and they arent actual cup winners. Imagine that lol. Wonder why we even play the games on the ice or have playoffs when we could just look at the advanced stats and give the cup to the team that had good underlying stats. Also ignore the goals for, goals against, win percentage and other metrics. Stats like xGF and PDO is what determines which team is excellent even if they are middle of the pack team in standings or have poor results.

Possession stats have been the most accurate predictor of playoff success for years.

Thats why people keep using them.

 

[Dust]

I wonder if people look at the advance stats of the cup winners and determine if they deserved the cup or it was a fluke and they arent actual cup winners. Imagine that lol. Wonder why we even play the games on the ice or have playoffs when we could just look at the advanced stats and give the cup to the team that had good underlying stats. Also ignore the goals for, goals against, win percentage and other metrics. Stats like xGF and PDO is what determines which team is excellent even if they are middle of the pack team in standings or have poor results.

The playoffs are a different beast, and a much smaller sample. We've already seen teams get hot, or get a hot goalie and ride that to the Cup finals when they weren't anything special in the regular season.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Every stat is static. It stays the same in the moment you measure it.

Even something as simple as goals is effected by variables. A players goal totals will.be determined by whether he gets PP time, or gets on the ice with the empty net, etc.



Thats weird, because even professional coaches re-watch tapes of the game because its impossible to absorb everthing that happened in a single game. Maybe you are just better at watching the games than them.


Ok. You don't like and don't understand stats. That is fine. You will get to be surprised when overacheiving teams and players fall back to earth. I can see why that is fun for you. I prefer to try to be informed. To each their own.

You are predicting future outcomes. You are predicting future stats. That's what this entire conversation has been about. You did it in the first post of yours that I quoted. Those are predictive stats. There are no guarantees your predictions will come true.

You're right. Math is not my thing, but English is. You need to learn words.

 

[Bank Shot]

You are predicting outcomes. You are predicting future stats. That's what this entire conversation has been about. You did it in the first post of yours that I quoted. Those are predictive stats.

You're right. Math is not my thing, but English is. You need to learn words.

Just because I am using stats to predict things doesnt mean that those stats are any different than any other stat.

If someone's shooting percentage is 37% I will predict that it will go down.

That doesn't make it a predictive stat. It just means that a guy is way outside the normal range so its a no brainer to predict regression. If that does make it a predictive stat in your mind, then every stat is a predictive stat.

 

[jackjohnson]

The Canucks have proven through the 1st half of the season that they are a good team. People pointing out that there are some concerning underlying numbers doesn't change that, but it also doesn't mean they should be discredited completely just because you said so.

The highest team shooting percentage in the last 20 years is 12.4% by St. Louis two years ago. Last year Edmonton led the league with 11.8%. This year's Canucks are currently sitting at 13.8%. It's highly unlikely they are going to obliterate that by nearly 1.5%, it's going to come down. That doesn't mean they are suddenly going to stop winning games, but it's a realization that you shouldn't just scream and complain when people point out.

You really think when someone keeps bringing up underlying stats to make a team look bad, thats not discrediting them? Completely ignoring the fact that they are on top in the standings and have many goal scorers and multiple elite players. Look which posters talk about canucks advanced stats without giving them any credit. I call that discrediting the team. Heck i even compliment oilers players like McDavid but Canucks never get any respect from oilers fans which is hilarious. So canucks fans have a right to complain. You even do it in your post which is funny. Pointing out advanced stats eveeytime Canucks win is very annoying and gets old real fast. The hilarious thing is that it never causes the canucks to regress and go down in the standings. Kind of how real state speculators keep talking about Vancouver house bubble popping for 15 years which hasnt happened and in fact prices of real estate has kept going up. Same thing with these predictive stats that still cant predict where Canucks finish lol

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Just because I am using stats to predict things doesnt mean that those stats are any different than any other stat.

If someone's shooting percentage is 37% I will predict that it will go down.

That doesn't make it a predictive stat. It just means that a guy is way outside the normal range so its a no brainer to predict regression. If that does make it a predictive stat in your mind, then every stat is a predictive stat.

I predict the sun will come up tomorrow and you'll still be here.

Good night.

 

[jackjohnson]

Just because I am using stats to predict things doesnt mean that those stats are any different than any other stat.

If someone's shooting percentage is 37% I will predict that it will go down.

That doesn't make it a predictive stat. It just means that a guy is way outside the normal range so its a no brainer to predict regression. If that does make it a predictive stat in your mind, then every stat is a predictive stat.

You arent predicting anything because you dont know when that shooting percentage will go down. You dont know by how much it will go down. You dont know how the team result will be impacted. You dont know if another player gets hot to replace that production. You are just seeing a number higher than average and thinking it has to go down since its above average. Now when that happens? You dont know

 

[Bank Shot]

I predict the sun will come up tomorrow and you'll still be here.

Good night.

The sun is already up where I am. Haha.

Maybe read up on them stats bro.

 

[jackjohnson]

Thats like me saying the Oilers will eventually lose a game after tonight since their effort is unsustainable and they cant possibly win all the remaining games from now til the end of the season. It doesnt really take a genius to predict that. It would be more impressive to determine where oilers finish in the standings and how many wins they get til the end of the season.

The sun is already up where I am. Haha.

Maybe read up on them stats bro.

Again you arent saying much of anything. Bringing up those stats, saying it will go down. Even my mom could predict that it will go down since its above average. But when will it regress, and by how much???

 

[Oliewud]

The sun is already up where I am. Haha.

Maybe read up on them stats bro.

im gonna feel bad when we spank u guys again because at this point its just pure humiliation

 

[DFAC]

Probably not but I dont care - this is fun

 

[Sykur]

If someone's shooting percentage is 37% I will predict that it will go down.

Go down to what? Go down when?

See, this is like predicting there's going to be an earthquake soon. Sure, if you shotgun your prediction every day, eventually you're going to be correct.

But without specifics, the prediction loses most -- if not all -- of its explanatory power. It is inherently useless.

 

[jackjohnson]

The playoffs are a different beast, and a much smaller sample. We've already seen teams get hot, or get a hot goalie and ride that to the Cup finals when they weren't anything special in the regular season.

Ok but does that discredit them from winning the cup?? People that watch hockey aside from oilers fans dont care about underlying stats because they watch the game. When i watch playoffs i dont care about sample size and playoffs best of seven series in each round is plenty enough to determine a championship team. By your logic, the playoffs would have 82 games each round to determine a winner because of sample size. In the world cup of soccer they play one game in the finals to determine the world champion. No matter how much you try to minimize luck, you cant because its part of the game. And what i like about hockey is the unpredictibility of it.

Go down to what? Go down when?

See, this is like predicting there's going to be an earthquake soon. Sure, if you shotgun your prediction every day, eventually you're going to be correct.

But without specifics, the prediction loses most -- if not all -- of its explanatory power. It is inherently useless.

So true, same as these global warming fear mongers, real state speculators etc. They all point out the obvious based on stats but cant tell us anything useful that a monkey cant decipher.

 

[jackjohnson]

im gonna feel bad when we spank u guys again because at this point its just pure humiliation

Bet his stats didnt predict the 3 spankings the Canucks gave Oilers early this year. This is why i love hockey lol. Luck is an important part of the game as well but stat nerds keep ignoring those factors.

 

[Dust]

You really think when someone keeps bringing up underlying stats to make a team look bad, thats not discrediting them? Completely ignoring the fact that they are on top in the standings and have many goal scorers and multiple elite players. Look which posters talk about canucks advanced stats without giving them any credit. I call that discrediting the team. Heck i even compliment oilers players like McDavid but Canucks never get any respect from oilers fans which is hilarious. So canucks fans have a right to complain. You even do it in your post which is funny. Pointing out advanced stats eveeytime Canucks win is very annoying and gets old real fast. The hilarious thing is that it never causes the canucks to regress and go down in the standings. Kind of how real state speculators keep talking about Vancouver house bubble popping for 15 years which hasnt happened and in fact prices of real estate has kept going up. Same thing with these predictive stats that still cant predict where Canucks finish lol

I don't even know how to respond to this wall of text that clearly didn't read my post. I said that you shouldn't discredit people pointing out concerning underlying numbers. It had absolutely nothing to do with discrediting the Canucks. People are pointing out some valid concerns.

You need to learn to separate the trolls from the people providing honest feedback. Not every thing is an attack on your team.

 

[RobsonStreet]

If the Canucks had good stats I would say they have a good chance of staying in first.

But they don't. So they will regress to the mean. Probably lose in the first round and go back to being an average team next year fighting for a playoff spot.

They’re an average five on five team with a good powerplay. Their goaltending was awful last year and is amazing this year because this happens. Amazing run of good fortune turning shots into goals.

The lessons here:
- shooting and goaltending heavily influence the standings and can swing wildly year over year.
- People consistently underestimate the tails of the distribution when making predictions about the future.
- Don’t bet on hockey.