16-33-8 for 70% of the season 40 points out of 114 possible points 57 point pace over 82 games


this is the frustrating part

is it players or coaching

because botts kept the band together for the 2019-20 season
- homiedclown

Sorta maybe. He can't be done, because once all are signed, he has an extra NHLer and not enough F talent.

You mean like over 82 games where they got 76 points?

Things could have been different, but they weren't.

What you're doing is retconning the season by saying - "this never should have happened, but everything else would have been the exact same"

Sample sizes smooth out over long durations. Perhaps - and I won't say you should think harder, because that is a poopbird comment to make to someone who disagrees with you - perhaps they were a 76 point team that overachieved at times and underachieved at times, and it smoothed out to 76 points.

Or maybe I need to think harder
- jcragcrumple

So I guess I can say this is what you think:

They overachieved for 12% of the season

and underachieved for 70% of the season

Nice work, Melnyk. You're going to single handedly (frank) up dead cap transfers in the next CBA.

https://www.espn.com/nhl/...tors-violating-spirit-cba

So I guess I can say this is what you think:

They overachieved for 12% of the season

and underachieved for 70% of the season
- Stripes77

Why are we yelling at each other about hypotheticals.

Jake Gardiner.



This chart shows him in a large, mostly orange circle. That means

-He gets a lot of ice time
-His zone starts were approximately 50/50
-When he is on the ice, his linemates are outshooting the opponents. You will notice some big blue circles on here. They are not outshooting their opponents.
-His quality of competition is a mix of 1st and 2nd line players, primarily 2nd liners

https://public.tableau.co...es&:origin=viz_share_link

This chart here tells us that Gardiner is on the plus side of shot rates, verifying the previous chart.

https://public.tableau.co...es&:origin=viz_share_link

This chart here tells us that Gardiner is the most successful defenseman on the Leafs at expected goal differential. A player that can have this high of a rating while simultaneously playing as many minutes he does is a "quality" modern defenseman.

https://public.tableau.co...es&:origin=viz_share_link

Finally, this chart verifies the above charts with being able to control shot rates and 'win' offensively. It shows that he is mostly successful at preventing entry into his own zone, as well as exit his zone. He is "average" at entering the opposing zone, likely because Toronto's system is get it the (frank) to the forwards as fast as you can.
- TheSabresTaco

I like zone entry & exit stats

But Corsi related stats are just terrible measures of what’s actually happening on the ice on an individual basis
Very rarely would all 5 guys actually figure in to with getting a shot on goal, or allowing one
Therefore,
that stat is likely flawed for at least 1 guy on the ice every single time is taken

I think it’s a good overall measure of the team itself
But absolutely useless as a measure of individual play

I think the forgotten issue is the division we play in.

It’s similar to the Bills

We’re playing for two wild card spots amongst many teams.

Just like the Bills are always playing for second place in the division

It’s not on Botts that the Leafs actually built depth through previous drafts, and we’re able to sign a superstar for free

It’s not on Botts that Yzerman had a ton of drafting success the last 5-7 years that made them annual contenders.

And Boston has remained a powerhouse since 2011

As long as it looks like we’re moving towards those teams and closing the gap, that should IMO be the barometer

So I guess I can say this is what you think:

They overachieved for 12% of the season

and underachieved for 70% of the season
- Stripes77

You're still thinking for me, which is nice.

I think they were a 76 point team over 82 games.

If you want to slice and dice and take whatever samples you want, and create alternate realities where they were significantly worse, go for it.

But don't tell me I'm not thinking because you've created an parallel universe alternate timeline i hadn't considered. Cool, i guess they're a 64 point team if we completely change history in the ways you suggest, without considering that those changes would also have an impact on the rest of the season.

Or we could say they were a 76 point team over 82 games

When compared to McCabe and Scandella ...... yes. He’s better.

If he has a bad back ..... you can throw him on IR and call it a day. Callahan and others have done this
- Sabretooth9

It’s also possible that his back might not be bad enough to put him on IR,
while still hampering his play though

16-33-8 for 70% of the season 40 points out of 114 possible points 57 point pace over 82 games


this is the frustrating part

is it players or coaching

because botts kept the band together for the 2019-20 season
- homiedclown

Well, I am told the major trade deals happen between FA and Training Camp, so the jury is still out on the roster.
Apparently though, it was both...and if no more major moves are made we should find out the balance. Personally, the players need to realize collectively they have literally quit on two coaches now, and more so than the recent hot take of Botts being cheap, that quitting isn't very attractive to prospective FA's...and next year is big game hunting there..so hopefully they bust ass for Kreuger.
There is no denying the absurd number of below value contracts remaining however.
I think mid-80's is reasonable for the roster as presently constructed.

Why are we yelling at each other about hypotheticals.
- TheSabresTaco

I'm not yelling

and it's not hypothetical at all

I like zone entry & exit stats

But Corsi related stats are just terrible measures of what’s actually happening on the ice on an individual basis
Very rarely would all 5 guys actually figure in to with getting a shot on goal, or allowing one
Therefore,
that stat is likely flawed for at least 1 guy on the ice every single time is taken

I think it’s a good overall measure of the team itself
But absolutely useless as a measure of individual play
- jdfitz77

I didn't provide corsi as a point in that entire post. Because I agree with the objections with that stat.

I didn't provide corsi as a point in that entire post.
- TheSabresTaco

The 3rd point u made was about outshooting his opponents

I'm not yelling

and it's not hypothetical at all
- Stripes77

I expected better than your snide comment

I didn't provide corsi as a point in that entire post.
- TheSabresTaco

But, you see, you used advanced stats, and advanced stats have Corsi, therefore they are limited whether you mentioned it or not, and therefore your analysis is flawed

...

Probably.

The 3rd point u made was about outshooting his opponents
- jdfitz77

xG is not corsi.

You're still thinking for me, which is nice.

I think they were a 76 point team over 82 games.

If you want to slice and dice and take whatever samples you want, and create alternate realities where they were significantly worse, go for it.

But don't tell me I'm not thinking because you've created an parallel universe alternate timeline i hadn't considered. Cool, i guess they're a 64 point team if we completely change history in the ways you suggest, without considering that those changes would also have an impact on the rest of the season.

Or we could say they were a 76 point team over 82 games
- jcragcrumple

The last 70% of the season the Sabres were awful the first 18 percent they were a border line playoff team and we all know about the 10 game win streak

70%, that is not a little streak, that's what I am trying to state.

Do I really think they are a 60 point team? No

But it is hard to discount how bad they were for 70 percent of the season, and it's not like I just looked at their bad games. All of those games happened between December and April. The most important time of the year.

But, you see, you used advanced stats, and advanced stats have Corsi, therefore they are limited whether you mentioned it or not, and therefore your analysis is flawed

...

Probably.
- buffalofan19

I'm gonna lowball your putz face into the bottom of the lake.

xG is not corsi.
- TheSabresTaco

I said “Corsi RELATED”
As in, using shot totals as a measure for success/failure

I figured you’d know what i meant

I'm gonna lowball your putz face into the bottom of the lake.
- TheSabresTaco

Lasalle Park...1 hour.

You mean like over 82 games where they got 76 points?

Things could have been different, but they weren't.

What you're doing is retconning the season by saying - "this never should have happened, but everything else would have been the exact same"

Sample sizes smooth out over long durations. Perhaps - and I won't say you should think harder, because that is a poopbird comment to make to someone who disagrees with you - perhaps they were a 76 point team that overachieved at times and underachieved at times, and it smoothed out to 76 points.

Or maybe I need to think harder
- jcragcrumple

I said “Corsi RELATED”
As in, using shot totals as a measure for success/failure

I figured you’d know what i meant
- jdfitz77

Expected Goals (xG) significantly outperforms score-adjusted Corsi (CF%) and Goals For (GF%) in predicting future goals at the team and player levels. xG is also descriptive, which makes it a superior tool in evaluating a team and player’s past and current offensive performance. All data is posted in the spreadsheet below.

https://hockey-graphs.com...scoring-than-corsi-goals/

I do know what you mean. But you're comparing a ball of dough (corsi) to a full blown, fresh pizza.

Or juniper berries to gin. Whatever.

You're still thinking for me, which is nice.

I think they were a 76 point team over 82 games.

If you want to slice and dice and take whatever samples you want, and create alternate realities where they were significantly worse, go for it.

But don't tell me I'm not thinking because you've created an parallel universe alternate timeline i hadn't considered. Cool, i guess they're a 64 point team if we completely change history in the ways you suggest, without considering that those changes would also have an impact on the rest of the season.

Or we could say they were a 76 point team over 82 games
- jcragcrumple

You are probably closer to the truth than not.
Before the end of the season, with about 15 games left to go, I had projected them to finish at 72 pts...using some of the logic that Stripes is proposing...i.e., replacing the 10 game streak with a w/l/t ratio representative of the whole 67 games played to that point, and the same with the remaining 15 games. The 2 wins in games 81 and 82 fvcked me from being spot on. Meh.

76pts or 72pts isn't significant to waste internet ink over...but, had they lost those 2 games they would have picked 6th instead of 7th...which means nothing since they would have picked Couzins anyway, lol.

All that to say, carry on.

Lasalle Park...1 hour.
- buffalofan19

Bring your chopsticks, I'll bring my pancho

Lasalle Park...1 hour.
- buffalofan19

I'm ready.

I'm gonna lowball your putz face into the bottom of the lake.
- TheSabresTaco

x-Lb2L/60