The 2019-2020 MotherFucking Season Thread

[leaffan2005]

Expected Goals against Per 60min, All Situations:

16-17 (Babs): 28th
17-18 (Babs): 22nd
18-19 (Babs): 22nd
19-20 (Babs): 26th
19-20 (Keefe): 8th

And Keefe was missing his top 2 dmen for good chunks.

What goes into this expected goals stat? How reliable is it? I imagine it's run off some sort of statistical model with probabilities based on where shots and chances are coming from but it really is impossible to control for every variable that goes into a hockey game and give some sort of number and how many goals should have gone in.

Not sure I would be using this stat as some sort of ultimate proof about a team's defensive play.

 

[hockeylover]

What goes into this expected goals stat? How reliable is it? I imagine it's run off some sort of statistical model with probabilities based on where shots and chances are coming from but it really is impossible to control for every variable that goes into a hockey game and give some sort of number and how many goals should have gone in.

Not sure I would be using this stat as some sort of ultimate proof about a team's defensive play.

Which numbers/evidence would you use?

 

[zeke]

What goes into this expected goals stat? How reliable is it? I imagine it's run off some sort of statistical model with probabilities based on where shots and chances are coming from but it really is impossible to control for every variable that goes into a hockey game and give some sort of number and how many goals should have gone in.

Not sure I would be using this stat as some sort of ultimate proof about a team's defensive play.

Yeah you're right - probably just a lucky fluke.

Never mind.

 

[leaffan2005]

Which numbers/evidence would you use?

I never claimed to have a better more all-inclusive number. I am simply questioning that particular statistic. The number of goals we have given up per game is a good number to look at. Not as fancy but the fancy ones are all theoretical at this point. Anderson hasn't been good but the guys in front of him haven't been great either. Just ask Keefe, he has acknowledged as such many times since he has been here.

 

[Artnes]

Wins losses goals and assists are all I need

 

[leaffan2005]

Wins losses goals and assists are all I need

Yeah my bad. Better to use a flawed stat with questionable significance than actual results. The results are we still give up a lot of goals against. There is an argument for the goaltending being a part of that but it doesn't tell the whole story. Again, Keefe himself has mentioned the same things I am saying. Is he an idiot simpleton as well?

 

[Deckie007]

Yeah my bad. Better to use a flawed stat with questionable significance than actual results. The results are we still give up a lot of goals against. There is an argument for the goaltending being a part of that but it doesn't tell the whole story. Again, Keefe himself has mentioned the same things I am saying. Is he an idiot simpleton as well?

No, just you. He has to protect his goalies pride and confidence.

 

[leaffan2005]

No, just you. He has to protect his goalies pride and confidence.

By saying the team is immature and makes too many mistakes? Could easily just spit lazy cliches like "we need to play better as a team". He was pretty specific about his analysis of the club. But okay.

 

[leafman101]

you’ll have to show how xG are flawed and what makes its significance questionable. That’s a bold claim with no backup.

but even just looking at GA and save% “a part of it” is undersellinggoaltending. It’s A huge part, if not all of it.

 

[hockeylover]

I never claimed to have a better more all-inclusive number. I am simply questioning that particular statistic. The number of goals we have given up per game is a good number to look at. Not as fancy but the fancy ones are all theoretical at this point. Anderson hasn't been good but the guys in front of him haven't been great either. Just ask Keefe, he has acknowledged as such many times since he has been here.

You have a contention.
Someone came forward with a rebuttal that included evidence/numbers.
Just asking what your numbers are -- show us. Show us it's defense.

That's kinda what people do on this board.

 

[zeke]

you’ll have to show how xG are flawed and what makes its significance questionable. That’s a bold claim with no backup.

but even just looking at GA and save% “a part of it” is undersellinggoaltending. It’s A huge part, if not all of it.

Hey, maybe the stat is flawed in just the perfect way to make this one coaching change for this one team, and those critics who of the fired coach, to look better than they should.

 

[leaffan2005]

You have a contention.
Someone came forward with a rebuttal that included evidence/numbers.
Just asking what your numbers are -- show us. Show us it's defense.

That's kinda what people do on this board.

I already said Anderson has been bad didn't I? I'm not the one claiming this has been an excellent defensive team who has merely been brought down by a shit goaltender though. I watch the games. Others watch the games. Many people, especially former hockey players who watch and analyze games for a living are pointing out the same thing I am. They have given up lots of goals since Keefe took over. There is a stat. Are goals against solely the responsibility of a goalie?

I'm open to using these new stats but again I don't see them accounting for all of the variables. Hockey isn't baseball. There is no WAR or any kind of stat that is definitive for a fluid game with so many changes in possession, bounces, etc. I still see value in watching games and analyzing results.

 

[leaffan2005]

Hey, maybe the stat is flawed in just the perfect way to make this one coaching change for this one team, and those critics who of the fired coach, to look better than they should.

Pretty sure you were shooting down these "Leafs are a poor defensive team" chants in the Babcock years as well. Funny you never pointed out this stat until recently. Fits the profile of somebody who uses numbers to fit a narrative.

 

[zeke]

Pretty sure you were shooting down these "Leafs are a poor defensive team" chants in the Babcock years as well. Funny you never pointed out this stat until recently. Fits the profile of somebody who uses numbers to fit a narrative.

Yep, first time ever used.

 

[leafman101]

Under Keefe the Leafs have given up 87 goals on 899 shots and have a .903 save percentage in all situations.

The previous 2 years the Leafs had a .913 save%.

If you give them their previous seasons goaltending that would be 76 goals against, or 2.71 GA/g. That would be 7th best in the NHL over that span.

 

[zeke]

Under Keefe the Leafs have given up 87 goals on 899 shots and have a .903 save percentage in all situations.

The previous 2 years the Leafs had a .913 save%.

If you give them their previous seasons goaltending that would be 76 goals against, or 2.71 GA/g. That would be 7th best in the NHL over that span.

But good defensive teams don't give up odd man rushes.

 

[leafman101]

I mean I guess there could be no good defensive team in the NHL now.

 

[Jeremy]

Marner is producing almost at the same rate as Nathan MacKinnon since the Maple Keefe era started. 1.45 for Marner, 1.46 for Nate Mac. That’s a 118 pt pace for Marner. Is he underrated?

 

[LeafOfFaith]

He's a great player. He deserves his money.

 

[Jeremy]

He’s ahead of McDavid over that stretch.