Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 6.0


Recommended Posts

FLORIDA

IS

NOT

INTERESTED

IN

ROBERTO

LUONGO

Doesn't matter if they have the pieces and Luongo wants to go only there. The GM doesn't want it done, the GM doesn't want it done. In Florida, in a shortened, injury riddled season, there is absolutely no pressure to perform knowing their youth are coming up, some this year, others next year and yet, others in two.

Luongo is not getting traded to Florida, if at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does he use to determine that the Canucks are "looking to trade the wrong goaltender?"

Nothing other than a dumb nagging theory that the Canucks management are basing their decision upon AV's decision to start Cory in Game 3 vs LA last season. I repeat: weak. Nothing 'advanced' about that theory that AV forced MG's hand by starting Schneider.

I guess you missed the fact that the writer doesn't use advanced stats to differentiate the goaltenders - he lumps them together to suggest they've been letting the team down lately.

And if you look at the letting the team down "lately" part, what are we talking about - the last 10 games, give or take a few, since the Canucks were the cream of NHL goaltending?

Luongo has given up 15 goals on 108 shots in his last five starts.

Schneider has given up 13 goals on 149 shots in his last five starts.

They have identical .912 sv % for the season. Last year, Schneider had the edge.

Advanced stats don't support the notion that the Canucks are looking to move the wrong goaltender...a dumb theory is what is used to support that weak claim. The article's main thesis really has no basis in "advanced stats" - it attempts to make MG and AV sound simple by suggesting this decision has been determined by one playoff game 3 start. Canucks management is not that stupid - there's a hell of a lot more to their decision than having their hand forced by AV's game 3 decision (if in fact, they move Luongo in the end). Given the additional fact that the author has no idea what the relative difference between offers for the two goaltenders has been, it's pretty safe to say that he doesn't know what in fact MG and AV are thinking, nor what they will do in the end.

Weak article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're reading 2 different articles, we clearly interpret it very differently. At no point did I interpret any of the information you did. He's talking about EV SV% and team sh%, you're talking about overall SV% - clearly 2 very different ideas. I never got the inference that he was trying to make AV or Gillis look 'simple'.

The author used advanced stats linking to historical data to show how important Luongo has been to the teams success over last few years. And how he's been the better goaltender this yr despite the small sample size. He states he still thinks Schneider will be a future star - but that his trade value/contract is better for a team like Van who's window he thinks is closing. Not sure how that's weak - whether you agree or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not clear what your point is? This is the full statement:

He's just outlined WHY Luongo's important to this team through advanced stats and historical data AND stated Schneids is easier to move - so why does it look strange that he's saying they might be moving the wrong goaltender?

Again, this is about you saying it's a weak article. I said it's not weak cause he's done what most people would do - give some data to back up the statement. Whether you agree with info or not, he's done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, if Luongo's even strength sv% over 12 games is better, and their overall sv% is identical, then Schneider's short handed sv% would have to be that much better than Luongo's, to make up the difference. If a 12 game ev strength sv% (that leaves out the sh sv% - that balances the two players out) - is enough to change his mind, sorry, but I find that to be really odd stuff - and not the most convincing usage of advanced stats.

To use a tiny sample and cherry pick a situational aspect of sv% is a very contrived way to try to argue that Luongo has been better recently. Goals and saves count whether they are given up at even strength or while shorthanded, and it's just as easy to argue that the better goaltender is the one who stands up better under the pressure and test of being shorthanded.

This is minutae, and regardless - here's the really dumb part again - and it has nothing to do with advanced stats.

"The blame lies mostly on the shoulders of whoever made the decision to start Schneider in Game Three against the LA Kings, which indadvertedly forced management's hand."

How has the hand been forced? There has yet to be a hand played.

And the contradiction from the link:

"As for who you move or keep in the offseason, I’m in Schneider’s camp."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're reading 2 different articles, we clearly interpret it very differently. At no point did I interpret any of the information you did. He's talking about EV SV% and team sh%, you're talking about overall SV% - clearly 2 very different ideas. I never got the inference that he was trying to make AV or Gillis look 'simple'.

The author used advanced stats linking to historical data to show how important Luongo has been to the teams success over last few years. And how he's been the better goaltender this yr despite the small sample size. He states he still thinks Schneider will be a future star - but that his trade value/contract is better for a team like Van who's window he thinks is closing. Not sure how that's weak - whether you agree or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty clear we interpret the article very differently. These stat guys use EV SV% cause roughly 75% of games are played at EV. So they think it's a more accurate way to evaluate goaltenders. They also say that shorthanded SV% fluctuates every year for goaltenders - that every yr a different goaltender is better in this category. He didn't just use this seasons small sample size, he used the previous 5 yrs for data as well. He's not cherry picking.

"As for who you move or keep in the offseason, I’m in Schneider’s camp." This is an ambiguous statement as he does state whether he thinks Schneider should be moved or kept in the offseason.

Again, I don't see any of this article as a weak. You may not agree, you clearly don't - but he's done due diligence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I personally don't believe it, but like I've said this whole time it's not about what either of us think. He wrote a legitimate article using stats to back up his belief. In hockey, you really only have stats to back up an argument as everyone 'sees' or 'believes' something different. Nothing wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about what the author thinks - and that's what I was taking issue with.

As for the Luongo vs Schneider aspect that isn't flushed out very well at all in his article, he didn't actually show Schneider's ev strength sv % - that much I had to deduce - so in that sense he didn't really compare the two - his point about choosing the wrong goaltender wasn't actually qualified, ironically, by his use of stats. What his stats showed was that Luongo has been better than the league average - not really revelation - and that Luongo has been valuable to the Canucks the past five years - not revelation - but not an argument relative to Schneider. What he did do was cherry pick this year's 12 game sample - which is hair-splitting to say the least.

His title thesis - not really qualified - and his claim that AV forced MG's hand by starting Cory in game 3 - also not much of an argument there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said the article was weak, I said it wasn't weak cause that's the best way to back up an argument in hockey by using stats. Which he's done. His title isn't his thesis. His thesis is Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years. Again, we're clearly interpreting the article very differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we are interpreting it differently.

When I read an article entitled:

Are we sure that the Canucks are looking to trade the right goaltender?

I would expect the advanced stats to actually be comparative of and address the difference between the Canucks' goaltenders, not a mundane sidetrack thesis that "Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years".

We could write an article based on advanced stats to claim that Daniel has been a key to the Canucks success as well - but it wouldn't follow that he's therefore better than Henrik. The author tries to finesse the claim that the Canucks are now looking to trade the wrong goaltender - and ironically the 'advanced stats' he relies upon don't do a very good job of qualifying that argument - if anything, the more I think about it, the weaker the article gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we are interpreting it differently.

When I read an article entitled:

Are we sure that the Canucks are looking to trade the right goaltender?

I would expect the advanced stats to actually be comparative of and address the difference between the Canucks' goaltenders, not a mundane sidetrack thesis that "Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years".

We could write an article based on advanced stats to claim that Daniel has been a key to the Canucks success as well - but it wouldn't follow that he's therefore better than Henrik. The author tries to finesse the claim that the Canucks are now looking to trade the wrong goaltender - and ironically the 'advanced stats' he relies upon don't do a very good job of qualifying that argument - if anything, the more I think about it, the weaker the article gets.

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...