I think we can mostly all agree, that the coach is playing peoples salaries and egos and his own misguided attempt to succeed. If they wanted to tank there has to be cleaner less expensive and frustrating ways. Does everyone remember the debate about two seasons ago where they played to win in the last 10-12 games and didnt tank? All this yapping about a culture of losing. Well thats what they have now, by desire or by horribly bad choices

Couterier has not looked the same since the lockout- he looked rather blah in that interrupted season when he started, almost like being the in A dragged him down- so did another player that was in the A with him, their game went to poopty

Happened at least twice yesterday that I can recall. Both times G dogged it back on an odd man Rush. Last time it ended up in the back of the net.
- wilsonecho91

I saw one shift where Voracek and Giroux were out for a shift that lasted 1:45 that ended with a goal scored.

I think we can mostly all agree, that the coach is playing peoples salaries and egos and his own misguided attempt to succeed. If they wanted to tank there has to be cleaner less expensive and frustrating ways. Does everyone remember the debate about two seasons ago where they played to win in the last 10-12 games and didnt tank? All this yapping about a culture of losing. Well thats what they have now, by desire or by horribly bad choices

Couterier has not looked the same since the lockout- he looked rather blah in that interrupted season when he started, almost like being the in A dragged him down- so did another player that was in the A with him, their game went to poopty
- Steelmanpa

Lecavalier is the 3rd highest paid forward on the team. He played the least time in the last game among all players with 5:56 of icetime. And he scratched the 2nd highest paid defenseman on the team.

It is impossible for the effects of playing against or with bad and good players to cancel out. That is a fallacy.

*facepalm*

Look at any of the work done on contextual stats like QoC, Zone starts, etc. Their impact at the season level is marginal because the large differences in usage decrease over time.

Eric T. has done insightful work in this regard.

I'll ask a few rhetorical questions that explain this. Regehr raw corsi numbers increased dramatically in LA versus Buffalo. Did Regehr become a better player as soon as he put on the LA sweater? And why would a players relative Corsi stay pretty much the same when his raw Corsi on number dramatically improved.

No, he didn't become a better player and no one would argue he became a better player. Because nobody uses raw corsi, and raw corsi alone to judge a player.

Done chopping down strawmen for the day. You've certainly lived up to the general disdain the exists for you around these parts.

*facepalm*

Look at any of the work done on contextual stats like QoC, Zone starts, etc. Their impact at the season level is marginal because the large differences in usage decrease over time.

Eric T. has done insightful work in this regard.


- AndrewD

Familiar with it all. None if it eliminates the false data issue. Simply because it's not possible to do so. It all starts with the data.

No, he didn't become a better player and no one would argue he became a better player. Because nobody uses raw corsi, and raw corsi alone to judge a player.

Done chopping down strawmen for the day. You've certainly lived up to the general disdain the exists for you around these parts.
- AndrewD

Really, you certainly have, as do plenty of other people who lack understanding of Corsi and misuse it. And you dodged the questions on Relative Corsi.

All I'm simply asking is for you, or any other Corsi believer to refute the issue of false data.
You call it a strawman because like the rest of the Corsi world, you just pretend it doesn't exist and sweep it under the rug under the guise of well, it's not perfect, but it's the best we have.

Oh yeah. Really riding last year's post season success to the 8 seed in the east.
- Neomike77

Actually, over the last 3 years, only the LA Kings and Miami Heat have won more playoff series.

No, he didn't become a better player and no one would argue he became a better player. Because nobody uses raw corsi, and raw corsi alone to judge a player.
- AndrewD

I prefer my Corsi medium well.

Actually, over the last 3 years, only the LA Kings and Miami Heat have won more playoff series.
- rangerdanger94

Yep, and 2 of those 3 teams have actually won (multiple) championships during those 3 years.

Familiar with it all. None if it eliminates the false data issue. Simply because it's not possible to do so. It all starts with the data.




Really, you certainly have, as do plenty of other people who lack understanding of Corsi and misuse it. And you dodged the questions on Relative Corsi.

All I'm simply asking is for you, or any other Corsi believer to refute the issue of false data.
You call it a strawman because like the rest of the Corsi world, you just pretend it doesn't exist and sweep it under the rug under the guise of well, it's not perfect, but it's the best we have.
- MJL

We've addressed your so called "false data" claim over and over - you refuse to accept a logical explanation. Instead you simply state that we haven't addressed it rather than address the points provided. It truly is infuriating.... goodnight.

Yep, and 2 of those 3 teams have actually won (multiple) championships during those 3 years.
- jmatchett383

Just goes to show that even though the Rangers didn't win last year, they're among championship caliber company.

Actually, over the last 3 years, only the LA Kings and Miami Heat have won more playoff series.
- rangerdanger94

*confettiiiiii*


woooooo hoo congrats bud

*confettiiiiii*


woooooo hoo congrats bud
- -davies-

Thank you.

- hereticpride

They can show trends of team play, and show what happens on the ice. They can't tell you why those results happen. That requires context and analysis. And then you get into issues such as confirmation bias. The problem that comes in is that you can use those stats to point out whatever you want them too. They are that poorly definitive.
- MJL

I would call it guilt by association. If the sample size is large enough then you should be able to statistically measure the trend. It won't be as definitively reliable as say baseball where the performance relies on the individual. But what I would say is this: no one in baseball questions a hitter's on base percentage because he faces multiple pitchers. And while hockey is much different with more players involved in plays, thus more variables. Those statistics will still have value when combined with a "hockey experts opinion". It only serves to enhance objective third party critique, not supplant it.

Just goes to show that even though the Rangers didn't win last year, they're among championship caliber company.
- rangerdanger94

this makes me feel loads better about the oodles of regular season wins the pens pile up. probably in some good company.

Just goes to show that even though the Rangers didn't win last year, they're among championship caliber company.
- rangerdanger94

Gunga-a-lunga

I know people are upset about the direction of this team but fact is, it is time to stop half arsing the rebuild. Anyone on D should be available for trade even Coburn. On forward we should be trying to get rid of guys like Lecavalier and Umberger. Emery should also be on the block because frankly it is pointless to keep him on the sinking ship.

I understand people want veteran Dmen to help the young guys but talent has no impact on a Dman's hockey sense. Honestly I don't want anyone on this team teaching anyone how to play D because frankly they all have a horrible hockey IQ. D doesn't play smart, they don't clear the crease, they constantly blow their coverage and they make other basic hockey fundamental errors like turning away from the attacking player on the rush.

Trade anyone on D of value to prepare for the future and look for a temporary replacement via Free agency until these guys are ready to come up from the minors. Coburn isn't going to help anyone. It is time we moved on.
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

Ok... Crazy block buster...since everyone is available: Eberle, Perron, Schultz, and Yakupov for Schenn x 2, Coburn, and Vinny. When they say no, same deal minus Yakupov. We get rid of a bad contract. They get Coburn who they have coveted. Baby Schenn who (at one time) was the best player not in the nhl. A veteran C in Vinny. And a young former stud d man that has stagnated and needs a change of scenery.

Ok... Crazy block buster...since everyone is available: Eberle, Perron, Schultz, and Yakupov for Schenn x 2, Coburn, and Vinny. When they say no, same deal minus Yakupov. We get rid of a bad contract. They get Coburn who they have coveted. Baby Schenn who (at one time) was the best player not in the nhl. A veteran C in Vinny. And a young former stud d man that has stagnated and needs a change of scenery.
- section32

There are many ways to break down why this would never happen.

But I'm pretty lazy and the fact that Vinny would never ever waive to go to Edmonton doesn't require much typing.

Ok... Crazy block buster...since everyone is available: Eberle, Perron, Schultz, and Yakupov for Schenn x 2, Coburn, and Vinny. When they say no, same deal minus Yakupov. We get rid of a bad contract. They get Coburn who they have coveted. Baby Schenn who (at one time) was the best player not in the nhl. A veteran C in Vinny. And a young former stud d man that has stagnated and needs a change of scenery.
- section32

do you really see these values as equivalent?

Ok... Crazy block buster...since everyone is available: Eberle, Perron, Schultz, and Yakupov for Schenn x 2, Coburn, and Vinny. When they say no, same deal minus Yakupov. We get rid of a bad contract. They get Coburn who they have coveted. Baby Schenn who (at one time) was the best player not in the nhl. A veteran C in Vinny. And a young former stud d man that has stagnated and needs a change of scenery.
- section32

If Hex was the GM in Edm, he'd pull the trigger on this deal

do you really see these values as equivalent?
- stayinthefnnet

Couturier for Maatta

If Hex was the GM in Edm, he'd pull the trigger on this deal
- CACannon18

Maybe if you subbed out B. Schenn with Umberger

Break this down for you simply. What factors influence a players on ice results?

Who he plays against.

Who he plays with

Luck

And his own individual talent.

The influence of luck declines naturally over time, plenty of literature out there JFGI. Differences in quality of competition even out over time. In a sample size as small as one season, differences in QoC have an impact as smaller than plus or minus one percent.

The influence of teammates has a major dramatic impact, as they tend to stay constant over larger samples. But when you start building 3 or 4 years of data on a player, you see how he performs with a variety of teammates as well.

The one constant in determining a player on ice results is the player himself. Over time, as the effects of playing against or with bad and good players cancel out, a player's influence over his own results becomes the strongest signal in the big pot of noise that is a team game.



I admitted this from the beginning of our conversation? Don't pretend otherwise.



Regher 2011-2012, last full season with a bad buffalo team. Raw Corsi On: -10.88 Adjusted Corsi Relative: -13.9

Regher 2013-2014, first full season with a cup winning Kings team. Raw Corsi On: 6.05. Adjusted Corsi Relative: -12.6

Raw numbers improved, his performance relative to his team did not.



The flaws in MacDonald's game might well be minimized on a better team, but they will still be present. MacDonald has failed to produce adequate results under multiple coaching staffs, with multiple teams, and a variety of deployments.

I find the notion that his biggest problem is the team around him to be suspect at best. But I'd welcome a trade to the Kings to find out
- AndrewD

And that's why MacDonald was better last year. This team was better last year.

Break this down for you simply. What factors influence a players on ice results?

Who he plays against.

Who he plays with

Luck

And his own individual talent.

The influence of luck declines naturally over time, plenty of literature out there JFGI. Differences in quality of competition even out over time. In a sample size as small as one season, differences in QoC have an impact as smaller than plus or minus one percent.

The influence of teammates has a major dramatic impact, as they tend to stay constant over larger samples. But when you start building 3 or 4 years of data on a player, you see how he performs with a variety of teammates as well.

The one constant in determining a player on ice results is the player himself. Over time, as the effects of playing against or with bad and good players cancel out, a player's influence over his own results becomes the strongest signal in the big pot of noise that is a team game.



I admitted this from the beginning of our conversation? Don't pretend otherwise.



Regher 2011-2012, last full season with a bad buffalo team. Raw Corsi On: -10.88 Adjusted Corsi Relative: -13.9

Regher 2013-2014, first full season with a cup winning Kings team. Raw Corsi On: 6.05. Adjusted Corsi Relative: -12.6

Raw numbers improved, his performance relative to his team did not.



The flaws in MacDonald's game might well be minimized on a better team, but they will still be present. MacDonald has failed to produce adequate results under multiple coaching staffs, with multiple teams, and a variety of deployments.

I find the notion that his biggest problem is the team around him to be suspect at best. But I'd welcome a trade to the Kings to find out
- AndrewD

And that's why MacDonald was better last year. This team was better last year.