• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Around the League 2019-2024 Edition

MindzEye said:
Don't be afraid to pay a reasonable amount of AAV and player acquisition cost for a goalie that has a good performance track record over a reasonable multi year sample size in a similar role to what you envision him having here. Because what Bobrovsky proves is that even when you overpay and he underperforms, it stands a better chance of working out in the end than trawling the depths of the fucking ocean for your next goalie and hoping for the best.
Click to expand...
So watch other teams pay elite goalies longterm and watch them struggle to live up to that every single year. When he turns 35 years old, trade for him because he's obviously going to have his best year in 7 years, and win a cup. Got it. It's so simple. Totally predictable. A proven science. Get on it Tre.
 
Preston said:
So watch other teams pay elite goalies longterm and watch them struggle to live up to that every single year. When he turns 35 years old, trade for him because he's obviously going to have his best year in 7 years, and win a cup. Got it. It's so simple. Get on it Tre.
Click to expand...

5aqoih.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: CH1
MindzEye said:
Don't be afraid to pay a reasonable amount of AAV and player acquisition cost for a goalie that has a good performance track record over a reasonable multi year sample size in a similar role to what you envision him having here. Because what Bobrovsky proves is that even when you overpay and he underperforms, it stands a better chance of working out in the end than trawling the depths of the fucking ocean for your next goalie and hoping for the best.
Click to expand...

yeah… and walking by Dollarama without going in doesn’t mean you can only shop at Bergdorf Goodman.
 
Every year people get all wacky with the ol' confirmation bias thing when there's a cup winner. This isn't an attack on the folks here. Sometimes it's difficult to navigate things objectively, especially in sports which are full of emotion.
 
Preston said:
Every year people get all wacky with the ol' confirmation bias thing when there's a cup winner. This isn't an attack on the folks here. Sometimes it's difficult to navigate things objectively, especially in sports which are full of emotion.
Click to expand...

Wait until you hear about recency bias
 
CH1 said:
Wait until you hear about recency bias
Click to expand...
That's the obvious one, of course. But confirmation bias is the main culprit here!

We all agree that you need good goaltending to win btw! Just a reminder that this is not the argument!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CH1
We all have the same data in front of us and one side is choosing to believe something different than what the data actually says. The fundamental core of my dayjob is to actively avoid all preconceived perceptions and just let the data speak. I'm just not wired to have a narrative and stick to it no matter what I see. Maybe that's unpopular here but that just not what I'm trained to do. I will let this go. Clearly this is not a popular way to view things.
 
I guess there's no point in looking at any stats or scouting reports after all. Goalies are all just random numbers generated by voodoo. Just throw all the names in a Sorting Hat and sign the first one you pull out.

#TeamPresto
 
Good goalies win most years though.

IMO what Bob proves is that if you can get a better goalie then him for half the cap hit like Ullmark or Sarros you would be dumb not to because it’s good to have good goalies.
 
axlsalinger said:
I guess there's no point in looking at any stats or scouting reports after all. Goalies are all just random numbers generated by voodoo. Just throw all the names in a Sorting Hat and sign the first one you pull out.

#TeamPresto
Click to expand...
Nope not what I said. It's a game of probabilities with thin margins and enormous deltas. Obviously a historically great goalie is more likely to perform well than one who isn't great. It's about assigning value and premia to those "great" ones.

Of course coming into this year none of us would have felt Bobrovsky was a great goalie. I wasn't dunking on ME with the post from last playoff. He was right. A year later, a 35 year old suddenly finds his form from 2017, ignoring all age curves that apply to forwards or d. "Just get a good goalie" is not so simple. We are grossly underestimating the deltas. You want to give yourselves the chance the best odds to get good goaltending but you have to balance the impact it'll have on your cap structure too. And sometimes accepting slightly worse odds of average+ goaltending to save 3-4m per year could be a worthwhile venture.

And fwiw when Adin Hill won a cup I didn't immediately say the Leafs should find the worst goalie imaginable because it's possible they can win too. I'm simply advocating for caution and a more data driven approach.
 
You’re not saying anything. There is no difference between “get a good goalie” and “use a data driven approach”.

You think the board is arguing for the eye test?
 
leafman101 said:
You’re not saying anything. There is no difference between “get a good goalie” and “use a data driven approach”.

You think the board is arguing for the eye test?
Click to expand...
It's more than looking at gsax and save percentage. It's about understanding variance, differences in AAV, and assigning value while pricing in all of these factors. There is a large premium in acquiring or signing a big name longterm. How many extra goals is he likely really EXPECTED to save you compared to someone that costs 4m less? And more importantly what's the standard deviation?
 
Preston said:
And fwiw when Adin Hill won a cup I didn't immediately say the Leafs should find the worst goalie imaginable because it's possible they can win too.
Click to expand...

Adin Hill was good though....

Had an identical GSAA/60 over his 3 years leading up to the Cup win as Bob did in the last 3 years leading up to this one.

Just got stuck behind other goalies and didn't play a lot. Also, and importantly, he was one of 3 good goalies in the organization at the time.
 
MindzEye said:
Adin Hill was good though....

Had an identical GSAA/60 over his 3 years leading up to the Cup win as Bob did in the last 3 years leading up to this one.

Just got stuck behind other goalies and didn't play a lot. Also, and importantly, he was one of 3 good goalies in the organization at the time.
Click to expand...
If the argument is that the Leafs should find two goalies as good as Adin Hill, I agree. I think your odds significantly increase when you've got two capable goalies. Neither have to be expensive or sexy.
 
Preston said:
It's more than looking at gsax and save percentage. It's about understanding variance, differences in AAV, and assigning value while pricing in all of these factors. There is a large premium in acquiring or signing a big name longterm. How many extra goals is he likely really EXPECTED to save you compared to someone that costs 4m less? And more importantly what's the standard deviation?
Click to expand...

Ya, so “get a good goalie” and not a bad one.
 
Aiden Hill is one of the few exceptions if you are actually using a data driven approach.

If you use a data driven approach Ullmark/Sarros + Woll >>>>>>> 2 Hills.

But I guess you would have to believe in using a data driven approach and not just “get two cheap goalies because goalies are magic”.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top