GDT#24 Capitals @ Islanders 7:00 p.m. Mon Nov 26, 2018 NBCSWA+, SN, MSG+

[PUCKNRUSH]

As I go down drowning, Maaco, and as the air bubbles pop at the surface, they release these words, over and over again:
"The +/- is not a very good stat....the +/- is not a very good stat....the +/- is not a......"
💧💦💧bluhb, bluhb, bluhb💧💦💧!  You're killin' me, my friend!😂😂


Rush

[alta]

also, this....


https://washingtoncapitalsfanforum.com/index.php/topic,54.msg17676.html#msg17676

[PUCKNRUSH]

there is a post about that elsewhere

Good recall, Alta!
I just wish it mattered!!🤣🤣😂🤣


Rush

[PUCKNRUSH]

also, this....


https://washingtoncapitalsfanforum.com/index.php/topic,54.msg17676.html#msg17676

I find myself returning to the old Monte Python videos, quite regularly!
It's a great therapy for those of us not growing fast enough to keep up with today's insane society!
Monte Python, we see now, was SO ahead of its time, and also so piss-your-pants funny!!
Wrong thread for any detail, but some faves of mine are, "The ministry of silly walks", "Dead Parrot", and yours, "Argument Clinic"!


Rush

[Maacoshark]

As I go down drowning, Maaco, and as the air bubbles pop at the surface, they release these words, over and over again:
"The +/- is not a very good stat....the +/- is not a very good stat....the +/- is not a......"
💧💦💧bluhb, bluhb, bluhb💧💦💧!  You're killin' me, my friend!😂😂


Rush

      Ive never said plus/minus was a good stat but it is better than corsi. Rush do you realize that corsi is a similar stat except is uses shots for compared to shots against instead if goals. In the end they are both differential stats. Now ask yourself what's more important, shots attempted differential or goal differential? Pretty easy answer. Who gives a shit how many shots you have directed at the net. So what if throw 50 low quality shots on net every game if you can't score. In the end its the goal differential that matters.
    And Corsi is not a possession stat. Its not even close.

[PUCKNRUSH]

      Ive never said plus/minus was a good stat but it is better than corsi. Rush do you realize that corsi is a similar stat except is uses shots for compared to shots against instead if goals. In the end they are both differential stats. Now ask yourself what's more important, shots attempted differential or goal differential? Pretty easy answer. Who gives a shit how many shots you have directed at the net. So what if throw 50 low quality shots on net every game if you can't score. In the end its the goal differential that matters.
    And Corsi is not a possession stat. Its not even close.

Maaco.
I'm really tryin with you, here, but this is like dealing with a turd that's slowly swirling down the bowl!!
+/- IS a Corsi-type stat, it is an individual hybrid form, developed FROM CORSI!!
And...YOO-HOO, HELLO, we both agree that it is a relatively insignificant stat!!


Now, enough of this crap!
If, your going to end your post with a chesty, testosterone-laden, comment, saying, "And Corsi is not a possession stat. It's not even close"


Then, take my darn bet, chicken shit!
Just returning the assertive energy back to you, with change for your dollar, my boy!
Maaco, assertive is OK.  Assertive, and INCORRECT, is foolish!
Take my damn bet, or clam it, if you've got any testicles!! SIMPLE!


Rush

[PUCKNRUSH]

Here Maaco, actually I'm going to hit the hay early! I'll save you a few bucks:


From the book, Hockey Analytics, Explained:
 Corsi[/size]: You may have heard of terms like Corsi and/or Fenwick being thrown around before. These are core concepts that are fundamental to understanding what drives the play during a game. Basically, Corsi is an approximation of puck possession that measures the total shot attempts for your team, and against your team, and stats can be viewed for Corsi results when a specific player is on the ice.[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]How about from Wikipedia:[/color]
[/size]Corsi. ... Corsi is used to approximate puck possession – the length of time a player's team controls the puck – and is typically measured as either a ratio (like plus-minus) of shot attempts for less shot attempts against, or as a percentage.[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Or this one, from the book, Understanding Hockey Analytics.[/color]
[/size] · [/color][/size]Corsi: the most popular advanced stat in the hockey blogosphere, Corsi is a possession metric developed by former Buffalo Sabres goaltending coach Jim Corsi.[/color]
[/size][/color]


As of today's currency values, $100, U.S., is equal to $132.82 Canadian.
If your wife is up to it, you can take her to dinner, and use the cash that you would have lost, to offset the dinner bill,  OR
Put the money towards your "I'm coming to D.C." fund, and start to make it happen!
You, DC, and I, can laugh over this shit by the time you get here!👍👍
Just don't claim that Corsi, is not a possession stat!  Fair enough!!
Thank you.


Rush




[/size][/color]

[BlackIce]

Corsi may not matter as much when you have a team like the Caps whose offensive philosophy is that the quality of shots generated is more important than the quantity.  To the extent that they are playing against teams who feel relatively less that way than they do, Corsi stats will be skewed against them.


+/- would be a great stat if each goal against were assigned as a -1 not to everyone, but instead, to everyone who made a documentable mistake that led to an opponent goal.  And conversely, every goal for would be a +1 only for those people actively involved in driving the play that led to a goal being scored.  In fact, I'll bet the Caps, and virtually all organizations, have at least some sense of this, in that they watch video to instruct players who made mistakes or didn't play the team system correctly, whether or not it led to a goal.

[Maacoshark]

Here Maaco, actually I'm going to hit the hay early! I'll save you a few bucks:


From the book, Hockey Analytics, Explained:
 Corsi: You may have heard of terms like Corsi and/or Fenwick being thrown around before. These are core concepts that are fundamental to understanding what drives the play during a game. Basically, Corsi is an approximation of puck possession that measures the total shot attempts for your team, and against your team, and stats can be viewed for Corsi results when a specific player is on the ice.

How about from Wikipedia:
Corsi. ... Corsi is used to approximate puck possession – the length of time a player's team controls the puck – and is typically measured as either a ratio (like plus-minus) of shot attempts for less shot attempts against, or as a percentage.

Or this one, from the book, Understanding Hockey Analytics.
· Corsi: the most popular advanced stat in the hockey blogosphere, Corsi is a possession metric developed by former Buffalo Sabres goaltending coach Jim Corsi.



As of today's currency values, $100, U.S., is equal to $132.82 Canadian.
If your wife is up to it, you can take her to dinner, and use the cash that you would have lost, to offset the dinner bill,  OR
Put the money towards your "I'm coming to D.C." fund, and start to make it happen!
You, DC, and I, can laugh over this shit by the time you get here!👍👍
Just don't claim that Corsi, is not a possession stat!  Fair enough!!
Thank you.


Rush

    Corsi is not a possession stat.

[richkrt99]

    Corsi is not a possession stat.

 


Pretty sure you missed the dead horse (the beaten one)

[alta]

[Maacoshark]

 


Pretty sure you missed the dead horse (the beaten one)

    You don't think I'm just going to let Rush off the hook. I gotta give him a hard time about something to make up for the ribbing I get about Carlson.

[PUCKNRUSH]

    You don't think I'm just going to let Rush off the hook. I gotta give him a hard time about something to make up for the ribbing I get about Carlson.

A great big thank you to you, Maaco! (For real)!
Now that’s a response I can deal with. It actually puts your last few comments in complete perspective! I had a hard time squaring up the “why”, of your last few responses!!


Scratching my head, trying to put some rationale into your last few posts,  AND, being totally willing to consider that the fault may have been with ME, possibly not communicating in a clear manner, or missing some small point, or my style may, somehow, have rubbed you the wrong way, I sought sincerely, (with some humor thrown in, to keep it in a lighter tone), to respectfully engage you in, what I perceived, some back and forth, sincere conversation, about our differing opinions! Well dude!  Congrats!! You fooled me good!!
I, sir, am now duly enlightened, yet simultaneously very disappointed in you, for operating from a different agenda, than you craftily purport!


So let me get this straight.....because I don’t share the same view on Carlson as you do, you’ve decided to employ a cookie-cutter strategy of needing to oppose my view, on other hockey issues, regardless of whether you were to agree, or disagree, with my position, so as to create some kind of self imposed, harmonious balance, in order to make equal, or offset, your imagined, cumulative count, of who’s opinion, between us, has been more right, or wrong!!  WOW!!


Let me be REAL CLEAR with you!
You WILL do the following, before I EVER waste even one more calorie of my brain energy, engaging in  posts with you:
1) YOU WILL APOLOGIZE TO ME
2) You will agree, at a minimum, in the future,  to respond to me, with integrity, and sincerity of heart, regardless of how wide the gap of our differing opinions may be! Thus, being void, in nature, of a superfluous agenda, assuring that neither of us WASTES our God-given breath of life on one another, by communicating under a false pretense of legitimacy!!


Not trying to come off as “Holier than Thou”, rather, just my way of trying to follow a piece of advice from “The Good Book”.  It admonishes us to “NOT give a fool their folly”!


Rush

[BlackIce]

Well, now let's see what the league does, given that everyone, including the guy hit, has agreed that it was a hit to the shoulder rather than the head.


That call was not made right away.  There was a PENALTY call right away, then the officials huddled for an extended period of time discussing what to do.  After that, they made the match penalty call and threw Wilson out of the game.


Now, what could they have been discussing?  The possibilities:


(1) What exactly did we see? (the most neutral and "fair" possibility).  After conferring, 4 officials reached a consensus that they had seen a head shot, because the call on the ice was "check to the head."  In other words, up to 4 officials "saw" the play incorrectly.


(2)  We think/it's possible there was head contact, but it's Wilson -- do we really want to get this guy in trouble again? (the most pro-Wilson bias).  Yep, too bad, we have to call what we "saw."


(3)  We think/it's possible there was head contact, and it's Wilson, so it had to have been dirty and a head shot (the most anti-Wilson bias).  Let's throw the book at him.


Now, which was the tenor of the discussion?


Tom Wilson is not predatory.  His previous hit, for which he was suspended 20 games by the league, was not predatory.  A predator stalks his prey, and literally one second before that hit occurred there was no hit coming.  It was the instant when the player cut to the middle suddenly, in the path of a COASTING Tom Wilson, that the hit occurred.  And I explained previously that the primary force of the hit HAD to be to the periphery of the body rather than the head because of the way the player spun around as a result.


BUT the recent actions of the league sure give the appearance that the NHL is predatory.  They are out to get a guy who is a hell of a player, and they ARE stalking Wilson when he is on the ice, looking for anything iffy to throw the book at him.


By the way, I didn't see the 4-minute penalty that was discussed previously -- I was in the men's room at the time.

[Maacoshark]

     The penalty on Wilson was clearly a reputation call. They took a guess and got it wrong. A ref can not make that call unless he actually sees the head contact. He obviously didnt see it because it didnt happen. If he uses the excuse that he thought he saw contact to the head then it tells us that he is incompetent. I think the officials saw what they wanted to see because it was Tom Wilson.
    I have watched this replay over and over and the more I look at it the more I think that Wilson won't get suspended for this play. If he does get suspended I think it will be a black mark on the league.
     I hope these officials man up and admit that they got it wrong. I think the league should be fining officials for bad calls.

[Mickstix]

How, in this day and age, can you be given a match penalty w/o the refs reviewing the play?? Just seem like a no brainer to make sure you're not ejecting someone for something you "might/thought" you saw?


* Why are we commenting on Wilson's hit in the Islanders GDT?? 

[BlackIce]

Sorry -- I got screwed up and somehow put my post in the wrong thread.