Jump to content

Completely devoid of talent except the goalies


filly4life

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, JR Ewing said:

Holy crap. I'm hearing this straight? The problem is that Giroux, Simmonds and Voracek don't shoot the puck enough?

 

Giroux shoots the puck 2.85 times more than league average.

Simmonds shoots the puck 2.26 times more than league average.

Voracek shoots the puck 2.69 times more than league average.

 

Laying a lack of playoff success at the feet of the guys, and saying it's because they don't shoot the puck often enough is an obtuse argument.

 

 

 

I agree. How did that work for the Caps in game 5?? They had 80+ shots 44 hit the net and zero got by Neuvy. It is all about quality not quantity.

 

Flyers had 11 shots on net and 2 goals (one empty netter).

 

giphy.gif

 

 

QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

 

Is it now? What about more European players? Are you saying we need them and need to shoot more?! :BrownBag:

 

  how are they supposed to win, by not shooting the puck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, briere48 said:

  how are they supposed to win, by not shooting the puck?

 

Sure, why not. They could pass it around until it bounces off someone's skate and into the net. It's so hard to score these days, a bank pass off a D-man's skate is as good as shot I reckon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

As much as i want that bum off the team, I think I'd rather have him clear off the cap forever after next season. 

 

I wouldn't at all mind a $1.5M cap hit in 17-18 to get an actual hockey player on the ice instead of a boat anchor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

I agree. How did that work for the Caps in game 5?? They had 80+ shots 44 hit the net and zero got by Neuvy. It is all about quality not quantity.

 

Flyers had 11 shots on net and 2 goals (one empty netter).

 

 

QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY 

 

Sure. And back in high school I won a fight I had no business walking away from without a broken nose, but if we did that ten times, he'd have probably won 8 or 9 of them. So sure, the Flyers won those games, but being horrendously outshot isn't a solid part of a long term strategy (and no, I don't accuse you of forwarding that plan). Much more often that not, you lose.

 

I took a look at the last 48,319 goal scored... If we look at the correlation between goals scored and check to see if volume or quality is the superior choice, we get:

 

Shots For/60: 0.83

Scoring Chances For/60: 0.38

 

Two data sets aren't even considered to be correlated until you're in the range of +0.6, so, that gap is really notable. That isn't to say that a team should just waste their chances, or step over the blue line and fire a Ryan Smyth-esque slapper, just wasting possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

I agree. How did that work for the Caps in game 5?? They had 80+ shots 44 hit the net and zero got by Neuvy. It is all about quality not quantity.

 

Flyers had 11 shots on net and 2 goals (one empty netter).

 

giphy.gif

 

 

QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY 

 

I think that is both quality and quantity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...