Shero had a resemblance to Arthur Miller, imo.


- PT21

Its all in the glasses and hairline

Im more concerned now and going forward with Sanheim being routinely pushed off the puck by 5'8 175lb players. he's as soft as Charmin and the coaching staff has to force him into a strength training program asap.
- juiced

Then there is the surferdude stoned Jesus look. That needs to change as well.

Its all in the glasses and hairline

- Lexington Flyer

Ole skool sexy.

Then there is the surferdude stoned Jesus look. That needs to change as well.
- PT21

In space he's good....but under heavy forecheck he tends to cave in a bit. He's better than any alternative we have but if he's going to improve, he's got to get his strength up a failry significant amount. Im still holding out hope that Sam's presence (even if he's not playing routinely) will make all the dmen play with a bit more snarl and bite.

Im more concerned now and going forward with Sanheim being routinely pushed off the puck by 5'8 175lb players. he's as soft as Charmin and the coaching staff has to force him into a strength training program asap.
- juiced

There isnt anything to be concerned abut. He is a young player in his 3rd season playing in the Playoffs for the first time. These are growing pains.

Just hand him a righty stick.

(In all seriousness, there's no need to replace Braun. Leave that spot open for competition from within)
- Tomahawk

They could also potentially look to trade Gostisbehere in a swap of defenseman.

In space he's good....but under heavy forecheck he tends to cave in a bit. He's better than any alternative we have but if he's going to improve, he's got to get his strength up a failry significant amount. Im still holding out hope that Sam's presence (even if he's not playing routinely) will make all the dmen play with a bit more snarl and bite.
- juiced

I was a tad disturbed how far away from his body and how unshielded the puck was when Brassard stole it. And in such a high danger area.

Myers seems to have more of that playoff intensity to him and Sanheim does seem a little dazed. Maybe its just inexperience. Time will tell.

There isnt anything to be concerned abut. He is a young player in his 3rd season playing in the Playoffs for the first time. These are growing pains.
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

He played against Pittsburgh

I thought he had a good game. Imo he was by far the best in getting pucks out calmly from our zone. I thought Hagg had probably his best game of the series.

My D rankings would be:

Provorov




Niskanen

Hagg
Myers


Sanheim
Braun
- PT21

Myers should be higher

Myers should be higher
- Pelle31Forever

Absolutely. Haag is a decent player but he is consistently overrated. He's fine in his role but there is a reason why his ice time is limited.

G and Jake didn’t have their best game, they were below their game 5 performance for sure.

But their line helped certainly played evenly with the top two Isle lines and G’s face off performance was huge last night.

Hart and Hayes were the first two stars, but they don’t win that game without the contributions of G Jake and JvR.
- Marc D

Not getting the Giroux and Voracek hate. They played with a lot of energy and created chances. Have not seen that all season until Tuesday. That's all I can expect from them other than more shots.

Not getting the Giroux and Voracek hate. They played with a lot of energy and created chances. Have not seen that all season until Tuesday. That's all I can expect from them other than more shots.
- easY

Hopefully you mean all playoffs....

Think its safe to say next season Hagg becomes a regular replacing Braun in the lineup?
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

I think he needs another season with a solid vet but maybe he's reliable enough if paired with anyone other than Gostibehere

The Couturier update will come tomorrow evening at 7:15.
- PLindbergh31

Oh the anticipation. Was good to see he wasn’t on crutches

The actual game. The strategies of the opposition. The other players. Time, place and score. Shall I go on?

When confronted, you retreat.
- MJL

I don't retreat so much as I try to avoid tedious exacerbation where I get caught up in spur-of-the-moment antagonism for meaningless ends.

All I was saying is that statistics influence strategies: everywhere. Say you have a hunch from all the things you mention. How do you know if they are working if you don't look at some stats?

Even the guys who say they are actually using their gut instinct, are really actually using stats subconsciously. This has been shown by studying neural activity in brains.

Like monkeys:

https://www.pnas.org/content/108/48/19401

Stats are especially useful to lay fans, who do not have the time or expertise to analyze games in detail. They summarize things and show patterns for us.

Statistics are not an elitist tool. They are a leveling one.

Hopefully you mean all playoffs....
- MBFlyerfan

Including playoffs

Do you know what a rhetorical question is?
- MJL

Nope

I don't retreat so much as I try to avoid tedious exacerbation where I get caught up in spur-of-the-moment antagonism for meaningless ends.


- PT21

If that was true you would not have responded by altering my post which had nothing to do with you personally, to taking a personal shot against me. That makes you full of what makes the toilet paper used.

All I was saying is that statistics influence strategies: everywhere. Say you have a hunch from all the things you mention. How do you know if they are working if you don't look at some stats?


- PT21

By watching the game. The number one thing coaches use is advanced scouting and watching video tape of the opposition. Despite some who believe otherwise, a coaching staff can break down the opposition and devise a game plan without stats. That's not to say that stats aren't a tool in the tool box.

Even the guys who say they are actually using their gut instinct, are really actually using stats subconsciously. This has been shown by studying neural activity in brains.

Like monkeys:

https://www.pnas.org/content/108/48/19401


- PT21

All I can do is laugh at that.

Stats are especially useful to lay fans, who do not have the time or expertise to analyze games in detail. They summarize things and show patterns for us.

Statistics are not an elitist tool. They are a leveling one.
- PT21

Stats can be useful for sure if used properly and with the correct amount of weight. Like I said previously, when you're ready to actually discuss the stats and the practical application of them in the field, not just in theory, let me know. Or you can stick with monkeys.

I don't retreat so much as I try to avoid tedious exacerbation where I get caught up in spur-of-the-moment antagonism for meaningless ends.

All I was saying is that statistics influence strategies: everywhere. Say you have a hunch from all the things you mention. How do you know if they are working if you don't look at some stats?

Even the guys who say they are actually using their gut instinct, are really actually using stats subconsciously. This has been shown by studying neural activity in brains.

Like monkeys:

https://www.pnas.org/content/108/48/19401

Stats are especially useful to lay fans, who do not have the time or expertise to analyze games in detail. They summarize things and show patterns for us.

Statistics are not an elitist tool. They are a leveling one.
- PT21

Are you saying those who reliably come to the same conclusions while watching as when using good stats are...smart monkeys?!!



E e a oo!

If that was true you would not have responded by altering my post which had nothing to do with you personally, to taking a personal shot against me. That makes you full of what makes the toilet paper used.
- MJL

That's the kind of stuff your attitude and ignorance, exemplified in the original comment, and below, invites. I posted a fairly widely used stat, iXG, and you responded by labeling it as equivalent to your toilet paper residue.

Why use such dismissive language off the bat? First, your insight is hardly well-respected here, and second, the fact that zillions of other people are using it should give you some pause. And third, you may disagree, such stats are the currency of modernity, so what is gained by just closing one's ears?

By watching the game. The number one thing coaches use is advanced scouting and watching video tape of the opposition. Despite some who believe otherwise, a coaching staff can break down the opposition and devise a game plan without stats. That's not to say that stats aren't a tool in the tool box.
- MJL

But we are not coaching staff. And the comment was made to support my claim that Giroux was not a dangerous player last game. You may disagree with the assertion, but I don't understand why you would disagree with the methods used to support the assertion.

All I can do is laugh at that. Stats can be useful for sure if used properly and with the correct amount of weight. Like I said previously, when you're ready to actually discuss the stats and the practical application of them in the field, not just in theory, let me know. Or you can stick with monkeys.
- MJL

And the world will laugh at you.

How do you know whether statistics are being used properly without further Statistics that tell you yes or no?

And no, I think I would like to move on.

Are you saying those who reliably come to the same conclusions while watching as when using good stats are...smart monkeys?!!



E e a oo!
- NC Flyers Fan

They are statistical monkeys, it seems, even though they might take pride in thinking otherwise and don't use it overtly. That's what seems to be emerging.

Look it up bro, there is a lot of stuff out there. Its not esoteric anymore. Just search.
- PT21

So since the Islanders had more expected goals than the Flyers last night, how in the world disbthe Flyers win?

Edit: Analytics are a tool to be used to predict future events based on recent trends. They do not actually have any effect in the game. How many goals one is expected to score is great and all, but if you don't end up putting any in the net while on the ice, then all of the expected goals in the world are worth nothing.

So since the Islanders had more expected goals than the Flyers last night, how in the world disbthe Flyers win?

Edit: Analytics are a tool to be used to predict future events based on recent trends. How many goals one is expected to score is great and all, but if you don't end up putting any in the net while on the ice, then all of the expected goals in the world are worth nothing.
- jmatchett383

For roughly the same reason that a pair of dice might come up snakes eyes.

Including playoffs
- easY

So you are saying Giroux and Voracek didnt play with a lot of energy or create chances all season long? I have to disagree.

That's the kind of stuff your attitude and ignorance, exemplified in the original comment, and below, invites. I posted a fairly widely used stat, iXG, and you responded by labeling it as equivalent to your toilet paper residue.


- PT21

Why take it so personally? Like I said, we can have a discussion on the stat and I'll explain my point of view. Something being widely used doesn't mean that it's actually good.

Why use such dismissive language off the bat? First, your insight is hardly well-respected here, and second, the fact that zillions of other people are using it should give you some pause. And third, you may disagree, such stats are the currency of modernity, so what is gained by just closing one's ears?


- PT21

First, you have no standing to comment on how well respected my insight is. That is patently false. Secondly, I have never stated that such stats shouldn't be used. There are plenty of stats that have usefulness. In my opinion, expected goals aren't one of them. What has been created using stats that overall are mediocre at best is to create a community that thinks that is can evaluate games or players without even watching them. It's created a community that wants to claim expertise by using analytics. Like I've said multiple times, I'll be happy to give my point of view on how I see things. Then we'll find out who knows what.

But we are not coaching staff. And the comment was made to support my claim that Giroux was not a dangerous player last game. You may disagree with the assertion, but I don't understand why you would disagree with the methods used to support the assertion.


- PT21

The context of the conversation was if the Giroux line was outplayed. It was not. I actually used the methods that you want to use to show that they weren't. You ignored it simply because it did not fit your narrative.

And the world will laugh at you.

How do you know whether statistics are being used properly without further Statistics that tell you yes or no?

And no, I think I would like to move on.
- PT21

So statistics are need to know if statistics are being used properly? LOL

You absolutely have the standing to say who the world will laugh at.