Is there such thing as 'expert' hockey analysis? How would this affect peoples perceptions of the Canucks?

[slaythedragon]

First off they are not "experts. They claim to be but they are not. Secondly, who cares who they pick. It's not set in stone that forms will win just cuz they say so. The only reason everyone picks the flames is because no one expected them to be at this stage. Neither were we. But what's different. In their case is they haven't made the playoffs since 2009. It's a big deal. And as it's always been the case, it is personal bias. All I have heard is they have a lot of speed, they are very hard working, and good at coming back when they are losing. The X factor ofcourse is the GMH line. It's truly annoying. It will be sweet if Edler and Tan man drill Johnny frickin hockey to the ground. Seriously what is it with everyone? I am starting to hate the guy.

[Honky Cat]

Most people are betting on the flames over us

Even Iain McIntyre of the Sun is predicting the Flames in 7...

[BedBeats™2.0]

Ray Ferraro is the only guy i can stomach with his analysis.

Before the season started...he was the one that knowledgeably spoke about how Vrby would be a great fit for the Canucks before he signed.

His spots on 1040 are a blast to listen to, and he is not afraid to admit he was wrong about anything.

[dura_mater]

The Main Argument

Personally I feel annoyed that most of the media suggests that the flames will win round one. In this post I want to engage a discussion about the credibility of the self proclaimed hockey 'experts' that we see in the media.

How do you think the Flames have felt the past 10+ years when everyone was picking the Canucks. I don't understand why so many people are crying that some experts are picking the Flames to win. Theo Fleury picked the Canucks to lose in the first round in 2011. How did that turn out?

[on the cycle]

Elliott Friedman is good because he's is more reserved and looks at facts along with logical opinions. Button is an idiot.

[Spankenstyne]

Didn't you get the memo? Everyone who watches hockey is an expert. Including yourself and most of the posters on this board. I don't understand why you felt the need to criticize the 'experts' you see on TV as though your analysis is better than their analysis.

Predictions from experts are no better than predictions from a monkey or an octopus. Take them with a proverbial grain of salt.

This.

Thank you RonMexico.

Who cares what "analysts" think? They're just guessing & it makes it sweeter when they're wrong. Heck all but one of the mainstream "analysts" also didn't think Calgary would even make the playoffs, keep that in mind.

[Day one]

Analysts are high on the fact that CGY made the playoffs

They seem to forget that the reason Calgary made the playoffs is because the Canucks and the Oilers beat LA.

[King_Canuckian]

Even the "experts" don't all agree on the same winners. But let's put it this way - they are in a better position to give their predictions than any of us. They watch way more hockey than any of us, and have done so for several years. But it is also quite satisfying to outperform the experts, mostly because we go with gut-feeling, and know that anything can happen on the ice.

They seem to forget that the reason Calgary made the playoffs is because the Canucks and the Oilers beat LA.

The Flames also beat L.A. in the last week.

[elvis15]

Not really - yours is a fair point as you give reasons why you would discount the OP

The other guy merely relied on Ward's rings as his "reason"

I could pretty much infer that from his posts as it was what I was thinking anyway. Maybe he was being crass about it, but it wasn't that obscure either.

Sorry, I should of made it more clear - i'm not proposing that I know more than the 'expert' analysts. I'm proposing that no one has any higher basis of knowledge than anyone else. There is no such thing as an objective 'expert' and that everyone with an opinion on the topic has an equal weight.

I just think its absurd that people actually get paid to voice opinions that are no more informed than anyone else. Obviously, these people are only employed because there's a demand for their service, but I think my main point is that I want to call into question the service they're providing in the first place.

Well, some people have more experience which in turn makes them more knowledgeable. For instance, does my wife - who doesn't like hockey nor care to watch it really - carry an opinion of equal weight in comparison to mine - who spends far too much time following hockey - when predicting the outcome of this series? If you answered no then you've just disproved your own statement and invalidated the need for this thread.

Does that mean the experts get it right? No, but it doesn't mean their opinion isn't worth any more than some of the plebs around here, either.

[tyhee]

With sports talk radio going 24/7 and many hours to fill on TV (not to mention sport blogs, etc.) there is a lot of time and space to fill.

It is hard to be original so we do tend to hear the same thing again and again.

Most experts do not much insight that goes beyond what a reasonably thoughtful and well-informed fan would know. But some experts do have good insights and are worth listening to. Obviously Bob MacKenzie and Elliotte Friedman would be in this category and so would a few others.

I agree with this completely.

To add, or perhaps expand:

-Having played pro hockey and getting hired by a media company doesn't necessarily mean one is especially intelligent, insightful or knowledgeable. Remaining knowledgeable about various teams and players, in particular, takes considerable effort.

-Predictions are often based at least partly on emotions, so at least a few of the opinions may be not only the result of analysis but affected by the bias from the feelings of the people making the predictions.

-Like Bedbeats, I respect Ferraro. I'd add him to the examples of MacKenzie and Friedman mentioned by JamesB.

[Beary Sweet]

I agree with this completely.

To add, or perhaps expand:

-Having played pro hockey and getting hired by a media company doesn't necessarily mean one is especially intelligent, insightful or knowledgeable. Remaining knowledgeable about various teams and players, in particular, takes considerable effort.

-Predictions are often based at least partly on emotions, so at least a few of the opinions may be not only the result of analysis but affected by the bias from the feelings of the people making the predictions.

-Like Bedbeats, I respect Ferraro. I'd add him to the examples of MacKenzie and Friedman mentioned by JamesB.

I agree wit what your saying. I have respect for all analysts out there. Even though that they only know as much as we do, they are still encouraging positives for the team that they are required to speak about. Like bob Mackenzie is a legend. No one is as original as him. Peeps always say that flames will dispatch us in 6. Well guess what. Your completely false. Their just basing their opinion on what they think will falter us but who caerz . We have the capability to win it all. And our opinions will never change #CANUCKS4CUP2015

[BedBeats™2.0]

I agree with this completely.

To add, or perhaps expand:

-Having played pro hockey and getting hired by a media company doesn't necessarily mean one is especially intelligent, insightful or knowledgeable. Remaining knowledgeable about various teams and players, in particular, takes considerable effort.

-Predictions are often based at least partly on emotions, so at least a few of the opinions may be not only the result of analysis but affected by the bias from the feelings of the people making the predictions.

-Like Bedbeats, I respect Ferraro. I'd add him to the examples of MacKenzie and Friedman mentioned by JamesB.

With B-Mack...he seems much more in tune with the business side. Though that informs his predictions of team performances. Friedman is very much the same. Elliote is wonderful because he caps the idiots who have been surrounded with him in the last few years on HNIC, and he possesses more insight.

Whether you want to believe it or not Jaime McLennan is a decent scout/analyst when it concerns goalies and defence. Aaron Ward straddles that too.

But for my tastes...Ferraro is much more complete. Not sure why...but i find myself on board with him more often times than not.

[iinatcc]

No there isn't such a thing as "expert" analysis if many of them think Vancouver (even Calgary) is one of the weaker teams in the West. VAN, EDM, and CGY all dealt huge blows that cost LA a playoff spot yet analysts point it out more to LA's problems rather than how good Vancouver and Calgary were.

Also speaking of the weakest stats and standings wise there's nothing to suggest Vancouver is one of the weaker teams. But then again the NHL's definition of expert analysts are people who put LA #9 in the Power Rankings despite already missing the playoffs.

[Baggins]

ALSO **** Sorry, I should of made it more clear - i'm not proposing that I know more than the 'expert' analysts. I'm proposing that no one has any higher basis of knowledge than anyone else. There is no such thing as an objective 'expert' and that everyone with an opinion on the topic has an equal weight.

Completely disagree with that statement. Somebody who has played and/or followed the game for decades will be far more knowledgeable than the average or new fan.

A prediction is nothing more than opinion. They're paid to give their opinion. Just because some didn't pick our team to win doesn't mean they're "biased" towards us. It's just their opinion. As a matter of fact I'd wager it's your own bias that leads you to believe they are biased. lol

[elvis15]

From @NHL's twitter:

How #NHLBracketChallenge looks, according to the fans.

** Lock your picks before 7PM ET: http://t.co/RLmkXjKsOx ** http://t.co/4XVNdPB0ZE

If anything it goes to show the fans certainly aren't experts. They're choosing Calgary over Vancouver as well so far.

[TOMapleLaughs]

My favorite analysis these playoffs comes from the analytics group. Calgary is near dead last in every possession metric and by all rights should not even be in the playoffs, but these idiots pick them over us because of 'heart' and 'grit' ... FOAD.

[ubcanuck]

With B-Mack...he seems much more in tune with the business side. Though that informs his predictions of team performances. Friedman is very much the same. Elliote is wonderful because he caps the idiots who have been surrounded with him in the last few years on HNIC, and he possesses more insight.

Whether you want to believe it or not Jaime McLennan is a decent scout/analyst when it concerns goalies and defence. Aaron Ward straddles that too.

But for my tastes...Ferraro is much more complete. Not sure why...but i find myself on board with him more often times than not.

Think maybe you like Ferraro because he is such a homer? His glasses are so Canuck coloured it is annoying at times.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

Think maybe you like Ferraro because he is such a homer? His glasses are so Canuck coloured it is annoying at times.

To be fair, you're always bitching about something, whether it's the city, the fans, the team or now the media again.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

From @NHL's twitter:

If anything it goes to show the fans certainly aren't experts. They're choosing Calgary over Vancouver as well so far.

I agree with the Rangers series....

[Quoted]

From @NHL's twitter:

If anything it goes to show the fans certainly aren't experts. They're choosing Calgary over Vancouver as well so far.

Until the series is over, we won't know who was right or wrong. 51/49 is pretty much a toss up though. TBH, I have no real idea what to expect in this series and wouldn't be that surprized to see a Calgary sweep or Canucks in 7 equally.