Saturday, July 31, 2010
Just to make it clear that we haven't forgotten about our little blog...
This is our post for July. Yes, it was indeed posted during August.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Brad, you're the man. Really! You are!
Ok, I know it's been 24 scores and 6 minutes since our last post and I know this has nothing to do with hockey, but I had to touch on this. Brad Gilbert, one of my favorite people in the whole wide world, had this to say during Andy Roddick's round of 16 match against Yen-Hsun Lu at Wimbledon(paraphrased, only because I don't remember the exact quote, but this is pretty much what he said):
I still can't believe how conservative Roddick is playing today. He's gonna win this match or lose it based on this style of play.
Let me get this straight. Roddick is either going to win the match or he's going to lose the match? Thanks, Brad. You're swell.
I still can't believe how conservative Roddick is playing today. He's gonna win this match or lose it based on this style of play.
Let me get this straight. Roddick is either going to win the match or he's going to lose the match? Thanks, Brad. You're swell.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
youaintnothin!
There's been some great progress on one of my favorite stats, the Youth Over/Under Achievement Illustration Number Toward Notation of Overall Talent to Herald Induction to Nhl(youaintnothin). Its focus is on how well each team has done with their draft picks since 1994. It includes an impressive spreadsheet with all the stats for your sorting pleasure. Sure, there are some flaws, as well as some good arguments explaining why some teams look better/worse than others, but it's still pretty neat to look at. Make sure to read the comments underneath the posts, because there's a lot of great analysis in there as well. Credit to daoust from pensionplanpuppets for the spreadsheet and analysis, and to SkinnyFish from PPP and The Falconer from birdwatchersanonymous for other analysis.
Check it out!
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2009/6/21/920352/detroit-isnt-that-great-at
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2009/6/23/913771/how-well-does-the-draft-translate
http://www.birdwatchersanonymous.com/2009/6/22/921049/where-star-level-players-are-found
Check it out!
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2009/6/21/920352/detroit-isnt-that-great-at
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2009/6/23/913771/how-well-does-the-draft-translate
http://www.birdwatchersanonymous.com/2009/6/22/921049/where-star-level-players-are-found
Friday, May 7, 2010
Current NHL playoff standings, headed your way from a neutral source!
Notice anything wrong with this playoff bracket made by a great guy named Arbiter?
Did you notice the two problems? He forgot to put Detroit Red Wings down in the bracket slot, and he should have said "lead" instead of "leads" in the top left matchup. Other than that, there's absolutely nothing wrong or opinionated whatsoever!
Monday, April 26, 2010
The reason hockey fans are so ignorant...
What is it with the graphics this week?
During the Caps/Canadiens game tonight on versus, they show the following:
Jaroslav Halak this Series:
2 wins: .965
2 losses: .820
Jaroslav Halak this season:
26 wins: .948
18 losses: .886
Any goalie this season(or any season):
In wins: Save% that is likely to be pretty good(unless it's the 80's or early 90's, in which case it's probably still bad)
In losses: Save% that is likely to be pretty bad(or in the case of the 80's or early 90's, is guaranteed to be awful)
Come on. What are they even trying to prove with this? Not to mention, we're referring to an extremely small sample size, 4 games.
During the Caps/Canadiens game tonight on versus, they show the following:
Jaroslav Halak this Series:
2 wins: .965
2 losses: .820
Jaroslav Halak this season:
26 wins: .948
18 losses: .886
Any goalie this season(or any season):
In wins: Save% that is likely to be pretty good(unless it's the 80's or early 90's, in which case it's probably still bad)
In losses: Save% that is likely to be pretty bad(or in the case of the 80's or early 90's, is guaranteed to be awful)
Come on. What are they even trying to prove with this? Not to mention, we're referring to an extremely small sample size, 4 games.
Friday, April 23, 2010
The reason Detroit fans are so ignorant...
...is because they never had a chance from the start. It's hard to form a reasonable opinion when you're hand-fed garbage like this on a nightly basis.
Those of us lucky enough to watch tonight's Wings/Coyotes game were blessed with a great graphic late in the third period. It tells a hell of a story. Ready? Here it is:
Detroit in postseason since 2001-02 season when...
Datsyuk scores 1+ goal: 13-6 record
Zetterberg scores 1+ goal: 26-9 record
Datsyuk and Zetterberg both score: 9-1 record
Wow. Thanks for this groundbreaking information.
Check it out! I can do this too!
Pittsburgh in postseason since 2001-02 season when...
Crosby scores 1+ goal: 17-6 record
Malkin scores 1+ goal: 17-4 record
Crosby and Malkin both score: 8-0 record
You want another example? Ok!
Carolina in postseason since 2005-06 season when...
Staal scores 1+ goal: 13-3 record
Brind'Amour scores 1+ goal: 7-3 record
Staal and Brind'Amour both score: 2-0 record
How about one more just for fun!
Anaheim in postseason since 2005-06 season when...
Selanne scores 1+ goal: 13-4 record
Getzlaf scores 1+ goal: 15-1 record
Selanne and Getzlaf both score: 5-0 record
Wow, your little graphic doesn't seem so impressive anymore, does it?
I'm going to fill you in on something here. Hockey is a low scoring sport. The NHL average was 2.84 goals per game this season. We're not referring to a basketball game, where scoring 100 points in a game isn't even a guarantee that your team will win. This graphic is in reference to the NHL, where one goal is already 1/3 of the way to a team's average goal output in a game.
When you take one specific player from a team and figure out their record when he scores a goal, it's likely to be pretty good. This bit of info tells us that the team scored at least one goal in the game. This already eliminates shutout losses as an option and we haven't even considered production from the rest of the team, or even the possibility that this guy scored more than one goal in the game. How do you think a team would do if they had a one goal handicap in every game they played? Using this graphic, the only thing we know about the games that meet this criteria is that the Red Wings scored at least one goal at some point in the game.
The third stat in the graphic is absolutely ridiculous. We're not talking about two random players on a team here. We're talking about two SPECIFIC players. We're talking about Henrik Zetterberg AND Pavel Datsyuk scoring a goal in a game. Not Henrik Zetterberg and Valtteri Filppula, or Henrik Zetterberg and Dan(y)(ny)(iel) Cleary, or Pavel Datsyuk and Todd Bertuzzi. We're specifically talking about when Henrik Zetterberg AND Pavel Datsyuk score a goal in the same game. They'd better win most of the time if both of these specific players score a goal in the same game. This means we're 2 for 2 on specific players scoring a goal, still not including the rest of the team, and still not including the possibility of multi-goal games from either of these players.
I haven't even mentioned the most important part in this whole argument. We're talking about the Detroit Red Wings. We're not talking about the Atlanta Thrashers or the Nashville Predators. This is the Detroit Red Wings. You know, a team that has accomplished a few things in recent history. During this span of years, the Wings have won the stanley cup twice, lost in game 7 of the stanley cup finals once, and lost in the conference finals once. I used Pittsburgh, Carolina, and Anaheim as examples to prove the point that if you take teams that have had a lot of recent playoff success, you're going to have lopsided numbers when looking at wins and losses. That's the crazy thing about the playoffs: you can't be successful if you don't win a lot, because you'll be eliminated.
Here is Detroit's postseason record since the 2001-02 season: 68-43. And a lot of those losses go back to before the lockout when Zetterberg and Datsyuk weren't the main source of offense on the team. Their record when neither of them score? 38-29. Yeah. They're nine games over .500 when neither of their two best players score a goal. I wonder how many other teams can claim that(Hint: look for teams who win a lot of playoff games. I'd look it up myself but I don't feel like going through the trouble). When the two best forwards on their team, the two forwards that are likely eating up the most ice time, are both held without a goal, the team is still well above .500. Perhaps this graphic speaks more to the success of the team as a whole than it does the importance of Datsyuk and Zetterberg scoring goals.
Those of us lucky enough to watch tonight's Wings/Coyotes game were blessed with a great graphic late in the third period. It tells a hell of a story. Ready? Here it is:
Detroit in postseason since 2001-02 season when...
Datsyuk scores 1+ goal: 13-6 record
Zetterberg scores 1+ goal: 26-9 record
Datsyuk and Zetterberg both score: 9-1 record
Wow. Thanks for this groundbreaking information.
Check it out! I can do this too!
Pittsburgh in postseason since 2001-02 season when...
Crosby scores 1+ goal: 17-6 record
Malkin scores 1+ goal: 17-4 record
Crosby and Malkin both score: 8-0 record
You want another example? Ok!
Carolina in postseason since 2005-06 season when...
Staal scores 1+ goal: 13-3 record
Brind'Amour scores 1+ goal: 7-3 record
Staal and Brind'Amour both score: 2-0 record
How about one more just for fun!
Anaheim in postseason since 2005-06 season when...
Selanne scores 1+ goal: 13-4 record
Getzlaf scores 1+ goal: 15-1 record
Selanne and Getzlaf both score: 5-0 record
Wow, your little graphic doesn't seem so impressive anymore, does it?
I'm going to fill you in on something here. Hockey is a low scoring sport. The NHL average was 2.84 goals per game this season. We're not referring to a basketball game, where scoring 100 points in a game isn't even a guarantee that your team will win. This graphic is in reference to the NHL, where one goal is already 1/3 of the way to a team's average goal output in a game.
When you take one specific player from a team and figure out their record when he scores a goal, it's likely to be pretty good. This bit of info tells us that the team scored at least one goal in the game. This already eliminates shutout losses as an option and we haven't even considered production from the rest of the team, or even the possibility that this guy scored more than one goal in the game. How do you think a team would do if they had a one goal handicap in every game they played? Using this graphic, the only thing we know about the games that meet this criteria is that the Red Wings scored at least one goal at some point in the game.
The third stat in the graphic is absolutely ridiculous. We're not talking about two random players on a team here. We're talking about two SPECIFIC players. We're talking about Henrik Zetterberg AND Pavel Datsyuk scoring a goal in a game. Not Henrik Zetterberg and Valtteri Filppula, or Henrik Zetterberg and Dan(y)(ny)(iel) Cleary, or Pavel Datsyuk and Todd Bertuzzi. We're specifically talking about when Henrik Zetterberg AND Pavel Datsyuk score a goal in the same game. They'd better win most of the time if both of these specific players score a goal in the same game. This means we're 2 for 2 on specific players scoring a goal, still not including the rest of the team, and still not including the possibility of multi-goal games from either of these players.
I haven't even mentioned the most important part in this whole argument. We're talking about the Detroit Red Wings. We're not talking about the Atlanta Thrashers or the Nashville Predators. This is the Detroit Red Wings. You know, a team that has accomplished a few things in recent history. During this span of years, the Wings have won the stanley cup twice, lost in game 7 of the stanley cup finals once, and lost in the conference finals once. I used Pittsburgh, Carolina, and Anaheim as examples to prove the point that if you take teams that have had a lot of recent playoff success, you're going to have lopsided numbers when looking at wins and losses. That's the crazy thing about the playoffs: you can't be successful if you don't win a lot, because you'll be eliminated.
Here is Detroit's postseason record since the 2001-02 season: 68-43. And a lot of those losses go back to before the lockout when Zetterberg and Datsyuk weren't the main source of offense on the team. Their record when neither of them score? 38-29. Yeah. They're nine games over .500 when neither of their two best players score a goal. I wonder how many other teams can claim that(Hint: look for teams who win a lot of playoff games. I'd look it up myself but I don't feel like going through the trouble). When the two best forwards on their team, the two forwards that are likely eating up the most ice time, are both held without a goal, the team is still well above .500. Perhaps this graphic speaks more to the success of the team as a whole than it does the importance of Datsyuk and Zetterberg scoring goals.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Edmonton will miss the playoffs this year on the technicality of having less points.
During the Capitals/Bruins game today, Mike Emrick explains how the playoff seedings work.
There is quite a game that is going to take place later this afternoon...
Oh, right...the Rangers/Flyers game is today. You know, the one where the winner of the game makes the playoffs, and the loser doesn't. Yeah, I'd say that would be quite a game.
...In Chicago.
Oh. Nevermind.
If the Blackhawks win it, they will win the west on the technicality of having more wins.
"How the west was won" by Doc Emrick. No, I understand, the Hawks/Wings game will be important for playoff positioning, I was just expecting something different. In my opinion, when there are two teams fighting for the final playoff spot and they happen to be playing against each other on the last day of the regular season, that game would be the most important game of the day.
If Chicago wins it in overtime or in a shootout, Detroit would seal up 5th, on the technicality of more points.
So THAT'S how it works! More points! What a concept. So let me get this straight...Detroit will finish ahead of Nashville because they'll have...more points than Nashville! Now I know! Thanks, Doc!
There is quite a game that is going to take place later this afternoon...
Oh, right...the Rangers/Flyers game is today. You know, the one where the winner of the game makes the playoffs, and the loser doesn't. Yeah, I'd say that would be quite a game.
...In Chicago.
Oh. Nevermind.
If the Blackhawks win it, they will win the west on the technicality of having more wins.
"How the west was won" by Doc Emrick. No, I understand, the Hawks/Wings game will be important for playoff positioning, I was just expecting something different. In my opinion, when there are two teams fighting for the final playoff spot and they happen to be playing against each other on the last day of the regular season, that game would be the most important game of the day.
If Chicago wins it in overtime or in a shootout, Detroit would seal up 5th, on the technicality of more points.
So THAT'S how it works! More points! What a concept. So let me get this straight...Detroit will finish ahead of Nashville because they'll have...more points than Nashville! Now I know! Thanks, Doc!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)