• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Leafs/Habs/Sens 2014-15

It's context. That's it.

It's useless and you don't grasp why it's useless.

It says, "the Sens have had recent success against Montreal and Price". I know that's a radical thought for you to admit, but do try to get your head around it.

At that level, the SV% doesn't say anything of value when standing alone.
 
I have a hard time believing that Mindz would be signing the same song if a goaltender had posted .950% against the Sens over the past 3 years.

Hell, how many times have we heard how Reimer plays well against the Sens.
 
I have a hard time believing that Mindz would be signing the same song if a goaltender had posted .950% against the Sens over the past 3 years.

Hell, how many times have we heard how Reimer plays well against the Sens.

You're more than welcome to find an occasion that I hung my hat on a small sample of SV%. I don't give a **** what you would have a hard time believing. Sample size is everything with SV%.
 
I have a hard time believing that Mindz would be signing the same song if a goaltender had posted .950% against the Sens over the past 3 years.

Hell, how many times have we heard how Reimer plays well against the Sens.

Sens are Reimer's bitches :smilewinkgrin:
 
No one was claiming the sv% and gaa were highly predictive given the small sample sizes.

But the NHL (and every sports league for that matter) track splits vs opponents for a reason. They show us how players have fared in the past and can help us see trends.

If you've never played sports you wouldn't get that athletes tend to play more relaxed and confident vs some opponents they've had prior success against and struggle vs opponents who have given them problems in the past.
 
No one was claiming the sv% and gaa were highly predictive given the small sample sizes.

Horseshit. The entire argument started with the idea that the Sens "have Price's number" which absolutely suggests a trend that is expected to continue. You came right out and gave Hammond the edge over Price due to this small sample sv% performance of Price's.

But the NHL (and every sports league for that matter) track splits vs opponents for a reason

Because it's interesting, not because it's valuable. They also track splits by month vs division, etc. That's data for the "how hot is his girlfriend" crowd.

They show us how players have fared in the past and can help us see trends.

They have little to no predictive value. Any statistic without predictive value is useless.

If you've never played sports you wouldn't get that athletes tend to play more relaxed and confident vs some opponents they've had prior success against and struggle vs opponents who have given them problems in the past.

Oh, do tell me more about your volleyball experience.
 
Horseshit. The entire argument started with the idea that the Sens "have Price's number" which absolutely suggests a trend that is expected to continue. You came right out and gave Hammond the edge over Price due to this small sample sv% performance of Price's.

They have little to no predictive value. Any statistic without predictive value is useless.

Oh, do tell me more about your volleyball experience.

I repeatedly said I wouldn't be surprised to see Price play well and the trend reverse. Going into the series the Sens are VERY comfortable vs Price and Hammond is on fire. IF these recent trends continue, the Sens have an edge in goal. Not really too difficult to follow, for most.

Feel free to regale us with any experience you bring to the table as an elite athlete or coach in any sport.
 
Irrelevant appeals/Appeal to authority. It's the route people tend to take in an argument when they've got nothing else. It comes off as a little pathetic.
 
Irrelevant appeals/Appeal to authority. It's the route people tend to take in an argument when they've got nothing else. It comes off as a little pathetic.

I didn't bring it up. It's what he does to deflect the argument when things aren't going his way.

And experience does matter when it comes to understanding in any area of human endeavour.
 
Last edited:
ME brought this into the discussion.

Nope

If you've never played sports you wouldn't get that athletes tend to play more relaxed and confident vs some opponents they've had prior success against and struggle vs opponents who have given them problems in the past.

The clear suggestion here is that you have played sports and that I haven't. The only sport you have stated first hand experience with the past is volleyball. You were more than welcome to correct me and make an already ridiculous point more ridiculous by pointing out that because you played CIS something or other, you were an expert in the field of sports psychology, but you didn't.
 
Back
Top