GDT: We're Here: Your New Jersey Devils @ Philadelphia Flyers, 7 PM, ESPN+/Hulu

[HBK27]

Hated the NHL went back to ESPN, they are an absolute garbage network run by even bigger morons than who run our team. Multi-billion dollar company and they STILL can’t synch a hockey broadcast correctly.

I can't understand why anybody actually cheered this move. As if the extra "exposure" the NHL would receive from ESPN would in any way improve the product for fans.

I spent the first few minutes of the game trying different sound modes on my TV to make it remotely listenable. I have no idea how they put out such a terrible broadcast last night.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

Again...assuming what's being defined as "high danger" is truly, the highest danger.

But the metric is the same across games. Even if you don’t agree with where they set the bar, the method of comparison is still valid.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Again...assuming what's being defined as "high danger" is truly, the highest danger.

It's literally defined.

But yes I am sure that none of Buffalo's chances allowed were uncovered and all of ours were. That makes more sense.

Hated the NHL went back to ESPN, they are an absolute garbage network run by even bigger morons than who run our team. Multi-billion dollar company and they STILL can’t sync a hockey broadcast correctly.



If Anderson was in net for us last night he lets up 4/5 easily

Literally baseless.

That vaunted buffalo sabres defensive zone coverage!!

 

[guitarguyvic]

But the metric is the same across games. Even if you don’t agree with where they set the bar, the method of comparison is still valid.

What? That’s not remotely true. If there’s chances going on in the game that are actually really dangerous but they’re not being defined that way and hence aren’t being counted, and vice versa…then the only things it’s doing is consistently measuring something that doesn’t matter nearly as much as portrayed.

Plus/minus measures the exact same thing across all games and players. In that regard you can say comparisons between players are “valid”. That doesn’t automatically mean it’s accurately measuring performance in the manner it purports to.

 

[ninetyeight]

Ruff should have been let go with the other coaches, clean slate. It makes no sense why he's still there, especially when we have a Jack Adams Trophy finalist hired to to the staff, only to have him watch Ruff do his thing. That's on Fitz.

And even if we ignore how Ruff's system may or may not work, he could be fired from the multiple mistakes he made that partly lead to this loss.
1. Not have your team fired up and ready for a season opener against one of the bottom teams, when we know how important every point is.
2. Start MBW. Vanecek clearly outplayed MBW in the preseason and has been a lot more solid the past few years.
3. Mix up the lines again, instead of using tested preseason lines.
4. Give arguably the second best player in the team in Bratt the least ice time in the top9.
5. Not take timeout or pull Blackwood when the Flyers scored 2 goals in a minute.

 

[guitarguyvic]

It's literally defined.

I didn’t say it wasn’t defined. You assume that said definition is adequate for identifying the chances that have the highest probability of resulting in goals.

 

[Unknown Caller]

He set up Sharangovich beautifully for a point blank chance, had his own partial breakaway, set up Mercer a couple times. I don’t even want to mention the two setups to Smith because they barely even count going to that guy lol.

All well and good that he had a couple nice passes, but it was not a strong game for him.

 

[Devils090]

It's literally defined.

But yes I am sure that none of Buffalo's chances allowed were uncovered and all of ours were. That makes more sense.


Literally baseless.

That vaunted buffalo sabres defensive zone coverage!!

It's literally defined.

But yes I am sure that none of Buffalo's chances allowed were uncovered and all of ours were. That makes more sense.


Literally baseless.

That vaunted buffalo sabres defensive zone coverage!!

Keep making your snarky little comments, you’re wrong about this team every single year

 

[Unknown Caller]

Jack was fine, very far down the list of what went wrong last night

Completely disagree. For a guy that people are saying should flirt with 100 points, he did not look very good. You see the stars for division teams like the Rangers and Penguins carrying them from game 1. Jack was not the difference maker the Devils need him to be.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Keep making your snarky little comments, you’re wrong about this team every single year

I'm glad that we know what this team is after one game with terrible goaltending.

I assume since you know, you won't be watching anymore?

Also if your takeaway from last night was Jack Hughes wasn't good lol yikes

 

[Unknown Caller]

I'm glad that we know what this team is after one game with terrible goaltending.

I assume since you know, you won't be watching anymore?

Enough with the goaltending excuse. They played one of the weakest teams in the entire NHL and the game was even, essentially a coin toss as to who would win even with average goaltending. That's not good enough.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

What? That’s not remotely true. If there’s chances going on in the game that are actually really dangerous but they’re not being measured that way, and vice versa…then the only things it’s doing is consistently measuring something that doesn’t matter nearly as much as portrayed.

Plus/minus measures the exact same thing across all games and players. In that regard you can say comparisons between players are “valid”. That doesn’t automatically mean it’s accurately measuring performance in the manner it purports to.

It matters as a relative comparison between the two teams, which is what the post you were responding to was doing. Plus/minus has a whole host of contextual elements that are not taken into account by the stat, but high-danger chances does. That’s a really bad comparison.

So again, even if you want to say there are dangerous chances not being captured by the metric because of its cut-off/methodology, it’s still being tracked the same way across the league. So you can say “Buffalo faced more high-danger chances than the Devils” completely assuredly regardless of that line. It’s not a singular evaluation of New Jersey and it doesn’t have to be.

 

[Devils090]

Enough with the goaltending excuse. They played one of the weakest teams in the entire NHL and the game was even, essentially a coin toss as to who would win even with average goaltending. That's not good enough.

Flyers outplayed them and out worked them, Lindy Ruff hockey

 

[guitarguyvic]

I'm glad that we know what this team is after one game with terrible goaltending.

I assume since you know, you won't be watching anymore?

Also if your takeaway from last night was Jack Hughes wasn't good lol yikes

Another one of these tired quips “I guess you won’t be watching anymore!”

Why do you bother watching the games if you’re just going to ignore what you’re witnessing in favor of heat maps and bar graphs?

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

Only one game but I did think that was embarrassing for Ruff and Blackwood, two guys I don't expect to be in NJ next year.

Onto the next game.

 

[Azathoth]

Enough with the goaltending excuse. They played one of the weakest teams in the entire NHL and the game was even, essentially a coin toss as to who would win even with average goaltending. That's not good enough.

If the game was even, then why was the score so lopsided? There are going to be games when the play on the ice is evenly matched, hence why sub par goaltending can have such a huge impact. I do get your point about being disappointed in the fact that should have looked much better against the flyers.

 

[JimEIV]

Op
Toe
Misum

I has it!

 

[guitarguyvic]

It matters as a relative comparison between the two teams, which is what the post you were responding to was doing. Plus/minus has a whole host of contextual elements that are not taken into account by the stat, but high-danger chances does. That’s a really bad comparison.

So again, even if you want to say there are dangerous chances not being captured by the metric because of its cut-off/methodology, it’s still being tracked the same way across the league. So you can say “Buffalo faced more high-danger chances than the Devils” completely assuredly regardless of that line. It’s not a singular evaluation of New Jersey and it doesn’t have to be.

I can’t agree with this. When one says “Buffalo faced more high danger chances than the devils” it’s implying that the devils opposition didn’t have opportunities to score that they were likely to score on as buffalo’s opposition. And that assertion may in. Fact be completely wrong, if the metric is not accounting for chances that are actually more dangerous than what it is purporting to measure.

It’s a valid comparison of what it’s measuring, but if it’s not measuring the right thing, then the implication may not be correct.

 

[Cheddabombs]

Op
Toe
Misum

I has it!

Damn, Jim's still drunk from last night

 

[Devils090]

Don’t worry guys I’m sure winning on the spreadsheets will translate to winning on the ice real soon

 

[Unknown Caller]

If the game was even, then why was the score so lopsided? There are going to be games when the play on the ice is evenly matched, hence why sub par goaltending can have such a huge impact. I do get your point about being disappointed in the fact that should have looked much better against the flyers.

Truly good teams don't play the worst teams in the league evenly. Instead of just pounding the Blackwood drum, why don't we ask why the Devils couldn't skate the Flyers into the ground at 5v5? A team that's ready to take the next step would have stepped on their throats from puck drop and not let up.

It's one game so let's see what happens moving forward, but that was a rough performance and it's not just on goaltending.

 

[JimEIV]

Damn, Jim's still drunk from last night

Nahh. I got up at 6:00 this morning and went for a 3 mile hike...I have rockstar blood

 

[RangerDoggo]

I'm glad that we know what this team is after one game with terrible goaltending.

One game plus one full season and a half a season under the same coach, the same number 1 goalie, the same system, the same culture of failure. Point at all the numbers you'd like, but they don't match with the results. And if you think it's just the goalie, you've got another thing coming.

 

[HersheyBob27]

Another one of these tired quips “I guess you won’t be watching anymore!”

Why do you bother watching the games if you’re just going to ignore what you’re witnessing in favor of heat maps and bar graphs?

Don’t waste your time with these people are very insecure. Everything is good/bad right/wrong no grey area. Have to keep it very simple for them

 

[ZachaFlockaFlame]

Yeah, that loss would've been more understandable if it wasn't to our second biggest rival + bottom feeder for Bedard. And Jack wasn't good last night, he looked completely off than his normal self. Bound to have games like that but can't make it a habit and he probably knows it himself too.