King of the ES Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 If you are talking about relative corsi (which is the category Grabovski lead, with Macarthur 3rd, Kesler 4th and Raymond 5th) - the thing about relative corsi is that you are comparing a given player to their team-mates. So your attempt to maintain that corsi stats lack credibility because a couple of Leafs rank highly is apparently lacking the realization that relatively solid two way Leafs enjoy the advantage of being compared to the rest of the Leafs hahaha - In the case of Grabovski (who is actually an exceptional two-way player, the best the Leafs have), he stands out at +21.3 compared to his fairly weak team-mates, including the likes of Phaneuf and Kessel, who some highlight reel fans think are "stars", but in the real world were minus relative corsi players - even on the Toronto Maple Leafs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 The "in before" was in reference to the fact that it has already been discussed a few pages ago. Gonna love the internet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 If that's the case, then why were there also 2 Vancouver Canucks in the top 5? President's Trophy winners. Was the Canuck bus driven that heavily by Kesler & Raymond in 2010-11? And BTW, Stamkos was one guy mentioned as a minus relative corsi player. Would he be considered a "star"? Maybe Toronto is assembling a team of corsi stars, rather than guys who can score...how's that been working out for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 In before the argument that Phaneuf can't play on the right side... Sigh... Zoolander couldn't turn left. When he did, he saved the world and Vietnamese underwear sweatshops. Where there's a will there's a way! A Vancouver defense with Phaneuf is a better team then a Vancouver defense without Phaneuf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 You really should check out some advanced stats, and try to understand them, cause the corsi and QOC corsi are a much better indicator than +/-. BTW, does anyone know a good site for advanced stats? The one I found the other day was pretty cumbersome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Regarding the Leafs - you whiffed entirely. There is no such thing as assembling a team of relative corsi stars - it is relative (to their team-mates) King. That one could use some rethinking. Makes you wonder how their stars wound up on the negative side...(ahem, Phaneuf and Kessel) ahem, they aren't particularly strong two way players ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 If that's the case, then I guess Daniel, Henrik, Edler, etc., aren't particularly strong two-way players, either, since Vancouver also had 2 of the top 5 in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Interesting analogy you choose - Phaneuf and Zoolander. Is that meant to make your proposal to acquire Phaneuf more convincing? BTW - Zoolander also opened a school - "The Derek Zoolander Center for Kids Who Can't Read Good and Wanna Learn to Do Other Stuff Good Too". I may not be the brightest guy on the webs, but I ain't enrollin' in that school as a solooshun. Besides, the Nucks already have Bieksa, Garrison - university edumacated blueliners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 If that's the case, then I guess Daniel, Henrik, Edler, etc., aren't particularly strong two-way players, either, since Vancouver also had 2 of the top 5 in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 I guess you missed the part where Kesler and Raymond were top 5 two years ago, whereas Daniel and Henrik were 1 and 4 last year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Your mind is like a parachute. It only works if it's open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Your mind is like a parachute. It only works if it's open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfxHaley Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Posted Yesterday, 04:12 PM Exactly, because they go against your "Opinion" you choose to ignore them.Sounds familiar, I pointed this out to you before. Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:43 PM Quote Wait a second! You can Ignore Brodeur's playoff performance, but we must NEVER forget Paajarvi's rookie season? Dafuq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 You always seem to skip past this King... Could you address it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 True, however he's only had 2 games since 2011 and he wasn't exactly remarkable. He wasn't in meltdown territory but definitely not as good as Cory was. It's hard to say if Luongo's bad days are behind him, I'm inclined to think they aren't. When we lost in 2009 I could swear such a thing would never happen again the way it did (I was still a big Luongo fan). Then it happened again in 2010 and I thought the high of winning the Olympics and the extra games may have affected him (still a fan). Then again in 2011 against Chicago I was like "what the hell", no Byfuglien, no Versteeg, no Ladd, no Eager, no really good supporting cast and we still very nearly blew a 3-0 series lead to an 8th seed. Then of course there was Boston and after the first two games especially, I really thought he had conquered his demons, then as we all know things went rather sideways after that (disgruntled, not a big fan). I am aware that we scored very few goals and it's not Luongo's job to do that, but there is no really good excuse as to why he gave up so many. Those kind of scores were uncommon in the Finals in the 80s. Then there was last year, we didn't score enough, Luongo was fairly ordinary for playoff games, and Cory took his job and gave the team a good chance to win (big Schneider fan, Luongo not so much, too many disappointments). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfxHaley Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Keep holding your breath. He only sees what he wants to and responds with info that he likes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Keep holding your breath. He only sees what he wants to and responds with info that he likes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 And the stat's reliability continues to strengthen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 It is interesting how a man will chose emotion over reason, even when faced with imminent destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 It is interesting how a man will chose emotion over reason, even when faced with imminent destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.