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

**Leafs trade Josh Leivo to Canucks for Michael Carcone**

MindzEye said:
91sn32Q.jpg


The average Leaf game has 100 shot attempts total. Would you rather be the team with 53 shot attempts or 47 shot attempts?
Click to expand...

Sure, but I really wouldn’t give a shit if the guys taking the shot attempts were crap.

And shot attempts get blocked, they go wide, they frequently don’t result in shots at all. Why is this five man stat the be all and end all in evaluating one individual player? It’s absolutely absurd. Leivo has consistently proven he’s not good enough. Using this joke of a team stat to claim that he’s so great is ridiculous. He’s not and history is repeating in Vancouver.
 
I've politely taken the time and explained in the past. You choose to remain ignorant. My patience for explaining a very simple concept and it's importance are at an end.
 
Leivo has size and some skill but he isn’t talented enough to overcome his shortcomings. He’ll orobably be a solid add for Seattle then some team will pay him 4m per and end up regretting it.
 
MindzEye said:
I've politely taken the time and explained in the past. You choose to remain ignorant. My patience for explaining a very simple concept and it's importance are at an end.
Click to expand...

Whether I understand it or not, or care to or not, I think it’s pretty clear that your reliance on this stat is misplaced. At this point, what I’ve seen from him has been validated by how things have played out. Bottom six winger, most likely fourth liner, with issues in his game that cause coaches to sour on him and play him less. That’s just a fact currently.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
I don’t follow. What’s the connection between 53% of the shot attempts and 53% of the actual goals scored?
Click to expand...

what do you mean?

that is the margin of victory in the nhl. the difference between a great team and an awful team.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
I don’t follow. What’s the connection between 53% of the shot attempts and 53% of the actual goals scored?
Click to expand...

what do you mean?

that is the margin of victory in the nhl. the difference between a great team and an awful team.
 
zeke said:
what do you mean?

that is the margin of victory in the nhl. the difference between a great team and an awful team.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're saying. 100% of shot attempts don't end up in the net. Mindz was talking about 53% of shot attempts, and you're talking about 53% of goals scored.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
I'm not sure what you're saying. 100% of shot attempts don't end up in the net. Mindz was talking about 53% of shot attempts, and you're talking about 53% of goals scored.
Click to expand...

yes.

controlling 53% of the game, no matter what measure you use, is very good.
 
Those two things are not the same, so I'm not sure how you're establishing the link from 53% shot attempts to 53% goals. Of course having the majority of goals is going to make you a winner, but that's not necessarily the case with shot attempts. Better to have more, sure, but that doesn't translate into something so incredibly important. So take what Mindz said earlier - 100 shots attempts in a Leaf game, we get 53 and they get 47. Wonderful. Yes, I'd rather be the one with more, but six extra shot attempts - not even actual shots - is not something significant that I can make myself care about. On the whole and in a vacuum, more shot attempts should lead to more goals, but it's dependent on a ton of other things.

It's just such a leap to go from having more shot attempts to "having the puck more" and "controlling the game." You could have the puck far less and have more shot attempts, which would generally be determined by the quality of players on the ice. And what's better, and what makes you control the game more, one team's six shot attempts that never hit the net, or the other team's three shot attempts that do?

I'm happy to concede that, on a team basis, in evaluating how everyone as a collective is doing, there's some, just some, value to this stat. Nowhere near the level of importance attached to it here, but it does provide some information to throw into the mix in evaluating things.

But as a way to evaluate one player? The stat is complete hogwash. There is no way to isolate his contribution to it. These aren't HIS shot attempts, they are everyone's, and he may have none to his name. And how many shot attempts the other team gets while he's on the ice depends on what his teammates are doing, how good the forwards are backchecking, how good the dmen are at playing their positions. And I'm seeing the fallacy of it in full display with poor Leivo. He doesn't have anywhere near the talent or completeness to play higher up in the lineup, and the naked unbiased eye can see the mistakes he makes on the ice on a regular basis. It's then further validated by the actions of the top of the top in talent evaluators, his coaches, who don't feel he's good enough to play very much, and who've given him chances only to decide they didn't like what they saw.

On the Leafs, disregarding elite level talents like Matthews and Marner, everyone else has had to work their way up, and Babs has given them every opportunity. And he gave Leivo his opportunity. Then Vancouver takes a flyer on him and puts him with two of their best young players, who have been producing both with and without him. They got him specifically to give him this chance. And only ten games into it, they pulled the plug? Why? And if these possession stats mean anything in his case, why are they ignoring them? It's pretty easy to dismiss the professionals making these decisions as idiots, but it gets harder to do that when it happens in more than one organization.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Those two things are not the same, so I'm not sure how you're establishing the link from 53% shot attempts to 53% goals. Of course having the majority of goals is going to make you a winner, but that's not necessarily the case with shot attempts. Better to have more, sure, but that doesn't translate into something so incredibly important. So take what Mindz said earlier - 100 shots attempts in a Leaf game, we get 53 and they get 47. Wonderful. Yes, I'd rather be the one with more, but six extra shot attempts - not even actual shots - is not something significant that I can make myself care about. On the whole and in a vacuum, more shot attempts should lead to more goals, but it's dependent on a ton of other things.

It's just such a leap to go from having more shot attempts to "having the puck more" and "controlling the game." You could have the puck far less and have more shot attempts, which would generally be determined by the quality of players on the ice. And what's better, and what makes you control the game more, one team's six shot attempts that never hit the net, or the other team's three shot attempts that do?

I'm happy to concede that, on a team basis, in evaluating how everyone as a collective is doing, there's some, just some, value to this stat. Nowhere near the level of importance attached to it here, but it does provide some information to throw into the mix in evaluating things.

But as a way to evaluate one player? The stat is complete hogwash. There is no way to isolate his contribution to it. These aren't HIS shot attempts, they are everyone's, and he may have none to his name. And how many shot attempts the other team gets while he's on the ice depends on what his teammates are doing, how good the forwards are backchecking, how good the dmen are at playing their positions. And I'm seeing the fallacy of it in full display with poor Leivo. He doesn't have anywhere near the talent or completeness to play higher up in the lineup, and the naked unbiased eye can see the mistakes he makes on the ice on a regular basis. It's then further validated by the actions of the top of the top in talent evaluators, his coaches, who don't feel he's good enough to play very much, and who've given him chances only to decide they didn't like what they saw.

On the Leafs, disregarding elite level talents like Matthews and Marner, everyone else has had to work their way up, and Babs has given them every opportunity. And he gave Leivo his opportunity. Then Vancouver takes a flyer on him and puts him with two of their best young players, who have been producing both with and without him. They got him specifically to give him this chance. And only ten games into it, they pulled the plug? Why? And if these possession stats mean anything in his case, why are they ignoring them? It's pretty easy to dismiss the professionals making these decisions as idiots, but it gets harder to do that when it happens in more than one organization.
Click to expand...

you dismissed a 53-47% advantage as meaningless, when it is all the difference in the world. that is the margin between good and bad in the nhl.

and the whole point about the shot attempt metrics is that they are a better predictor of future goals than current goals for/against are.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Those two things are not the same, so I'm not sure how you're establishing the link from 53% shot attempts to 53% goals. Of course having the majority of goals is going to make you a winner, but that's not necessarily the case with shot attempts. Better to have more, sure, but that doesn't translate into something so incredibly important. So take what Mindz said earlier - 100 shots attempts in a Leaf game, we get 53 and they get 47. Wonderful. Yes, I'd rather be the one with more, but six extra shot attempts - not even actual shots - is not something significant that I can make myself care about. On the whole and in a vacuum, more shot attempts should lead to more goals, but it's dependent on a ton of other things.

It's just such a leap to go from having more shot attempts to "having the puck more" and "controlling the game." You could have the puck far less and have more shot attempts, which would generally be determined by the quality of players on the ice. And what's better, and what makes you control the game more, one team's six shot attempts that never hit the net, or the other team's three shot attempts that do?

I'm happy to concede that, on a team basis, in evaluating how everyone as a collective is doing, there's some, just some, value to this stat. Nowhere near the level of importance attached to it here, but it does provide some information to throw into the mix in evaluating things.

But as a way to evaluate one player? The stat is complete hogwash. There is no way to isolate his contribution to it. These aren't HIS shot attempts, they are everyone's, and he may have none to his name. And how many shot attempts the other team gets while he's on the ice depends on what his teammates are doing, how good the forwards are backchecking, how good the dmen are at playing their positions. And I'm seeing the fallacy of it in full display with poor Leivo. He doesn't have anywhere near the talent or completeness to play higher up in the lineup, and the naked unbiased eye can see the mistakes he makes on the ice on a regular basis. It's then further validated by the actions of the top of the top in talent evaluators, his coaches, who don't feel he's good enough to play very much, and who've given him chances only to decide they didn't like what they saw.

On the Leafs, disregarding elite level talents like Matthews and Marner, everyone else has had to work their way up, and Babs has given them every opportunity. And he gave Leivo his opportunity. Then Vancouver takes a flyer on him and puts him with two of their best young players, who have been producing both with and without him. They got him specifically to give him this chance. And only ten games into it, they pulled the plug? Why? And if these possession stats mean anything in his case, why are they ignoring them? It's pretty easy to dismiss the professionals making these decisions as idiots, but it gets harder to do that when it happens in more than one organization.
Click to expand...

you dismissed a 53-47% advantage as meaningless, when it is all the difference in the world. that is the margin between good and bad in the nhl.

and the whole point about the shot attempt metrics is that they are a better predictor of future goals than current goals for/against are.
 
I didn’t dismiss that advantage, but I downplayed it significantly in the specific context of shot attempts. Not goals, obviously.

And specifically, the issue is what that stat means in the context of one player, not the entire team. For the reasons stated, it is pretty meaningless when evaluating one player and using it to assert that that player is really good, especially when all other evidence is to the contrary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top