Buds Board Keepers League

I've got no problem with Nonis and will praise him when he settles this Kadri/Franson problem. He's probably improved the team. I think last year we likely benefited a little bit from the small sample size.

Kind of find it funny how most leaf players are extremely over valued in this league, yet the team is extremely underrated. Don't get it lol.

7-9

Besides a small sample size the Leafs also benefitted from the highest PDO in the league. http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/stats ... tage/2012/ This indicates that we were probably the recipients of some good luck last season and chances are we don't lead the league in SH% again. It's not that the team didn't improve it's that the team in 2012-2013 made the playoffs based on a high shooting % and Reimer playing amazing and if the season was 82 games last year we ran the risk of regression to the mean and possibly losing more often in games 49 through 82.

I still bleed blue and am a diehard who will watch every game hoping for wins and another playoff berth, but I disliked this offseason personally and feel like Nonis took a team in a prime cap position and turned them into a team who potentially can't sign two of it's better players without moving assets out (please not Kule) and will be once again strapped for cash next season and will need a large cap increase to help pay all the expiring guys.

shooker wroteCOLONKind of find it funny how most leaf players are extremely over valued in this league, yet the team is extremely underrated. Don't get it lol.

That is just opinion though isn't it? Perhaps the team isn't underrated and you just feel they are based off of a 48 game season. I was surprised by the predictions and it seems most Leafs fans here have come to terms with us being a bubble team in the East and aren't convinced swapping Clarkson and Bolland with Grabovski and MacArthur is going to lead to a big improvement especially since we already had luck on our side in 12-13.

Bruyns wroteCOLON7-9

Besides a small sample size the Leafs also benefitted from the highest PDO in the league. http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/stats ... tage/2012/ This indicates that we were probably the recipients of some good luck last season and chances are we don't lead the league in SH% again. It's not that the team didn't improve it's that the team in 2012-2013 made the playoffs based on a high shooting % and Reimer playing amazing and if the season was 82 games last year we ran the risk of regression to the mean and possibly losing more often in games 49 through 82.

I still bleed blue and am a diehard who will watch every game hoping for wins and another playoff berth, but I disliked this offseason personally and feel like Nonis took a team in a prime cap position and turned them into a team who potentially can't sign two of it's better players without moving assets out (please not Kule) and will be once again strapped for cash next season and will need a large cap increase to help pay all the expiring guys.

Seriously, can we get this guy a fucking team already?

Bruyns wroteCOLON

shooker wroteCOLONKind of find it funny how most leaf players are extremely over valued in this league, yet the team is extremely underrated. Don't get it lol.

That is just opinion though isn't it? Perhaps the team isn't underrated and you just feel they are based off of a 48 game season. I was surprised by the predictions and it seems most Leafs fans here have come to terms with us being a bubble team in the East and aren't convinced swapping Clarkson and Bolland with Grabovski and MacArthur is going to lead to a big improvement especially since we already had luck on our side in 12-13.

not opinion, just observation. Most leaf players and prospects in this league go for much higher than they should. By trade value you would have to assume that they have very good players and thus should have a good team. It is just odd that the players that play for the blue and white are over rated but the team isn't. It doesn't add up.

Adding Clarkson is a notable add - sure people can dislike his contract, but it doesn't change that it's awesome to have him on the team. Gardiner was virtually no impact last year, I expect that to be a second bump in our quality.

I don't believe Bolland is an upgrade over Grabo - however in role he might be.

Bernier is a good thing even if he's just a backup pressing Reimer...


Taking too much meaning from any 1 advanced stat is always a risk - especially with zero attempt to control any confounds.

I don't hear people saying Pitts or Wash should regress to the norm from their PDO scores... Why should our sv% fall ? Did our goalies or defensive system get worse? What is the reason for our shooting% to decrease ? There's so many variables in shooting% that even using it seems silly to me, kinda like +/-. Regression to the norm is a fair argument if all other aspects are equal... but as all of us know, they are not.

shooker wroteCOLON

Bruyns wroteCOLON

shooker wroteCOLONKind of find it funny how most leaf players are extremely over valued in this league, yet the team is extremely underrated. Don't get it lol.

That is just opinion though isn't it? Perhaps the team isn't underrated and you just feel they are based off of a 48 game season. I was surprised by the predictions and it seems most Leafs fans here have come to terms with us being a bubble team in the East and aren't convinced swapping Clarkson and Bolland with Grabovski and MacArthur is going to lead to a big improvement especially since we already had luck on our side in 12-13.

not opinion, just observation. Most leaf players and prospects in this league go for much higher than they should. By trade value you would have to assume that they have very good players and thus should have a good team. It is just odd that the players that play for the blue and white are over rated but the team isn't. It doesn't add up.

Ya I follow what you mean now, GMs like Leafs players hence the team should be getting more love in this thread.

Bruyns wroteCOLON Ya I follow what you mean now, GMs like Leafs players hence the team should be getting more love in this thread.

yup.

Nick wroteCOLONAdding Clarkson is a notable add - sure people can dislike his contract, but it doesn't change that it's awesome to have him on the team. Gardiner was virtually no impact last year, I expect that to be a second bump in our quality.

I don't believe Bolland is an upgrade over Grabo - however in role he might be.

Bernier is a good thing even if he's just a backup pressing Reimer...


Taking too much meaning from any 1 advanced stat is always a risk - especially with zero attempt to control any confounds.

I don't hear people saying Pitts or Wash should regress to the norm from their PDO scores... Why should our sv% fall ? Did our goalies or defensive system get worse? What is the reason for our shooting% to decrease ? There's so many variables in shooting% that even using it seems silly to me, kinda like +/-. Regression to the norm is a fair argument if all other aspects are equal... but as all of us know, they are not.

That's a fair critique on PDO and it is definitely one of the more flawed stats since there is so much that affects SV and SH %s. It is usually an accurate predictor at finding outliers who might not be as good or as bad as their #s seem to suggest. An often cited example is the Wild in 2011-12 who were first in the NHL around the half way mark riding an unsustainably high PDO and like many predicted they crashed back to earth in the 2nd half and missed the playoffs. It isn't a given that the Leafs SV and SH %s regress, but I think most people out there would concede the Pens are the better team even though we had the better %s so that is one reason to expect the Leafs PDO to drop more than a team like the Pens.

Don't paint me as a hater though lol, Im a HUGE Leafs fan its just easier to not get caught up in hype and set expectations low especially after years of thinking they could sneak into the playoffs and instead witnessing terrible seasons.

Which leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

Mark Fraser...

gooker wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

Mark Fraser...

Guy's a bum

Mike wroteCOLON

gooker wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

Mark Fraser...

Guy's a bum

A bum? or a PENNER??

haha

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/roster.htm

I'm a big fan of advanced stats, but only in context.

On one front, winning games is what those numbers are trying to predict, and it's often twisted and taken in the context of predicting who didn't deserve to win games (measuring luck as a factor of subjective good teams and 'deserved' distance from the mean).

I recall when, after the fact, everyone pointed to PDO when the Wild collapsed and their numbers actually fell below the mean - but that just means they lost games.


Or when shot differentials was taken as a MUST be posititve stat - yet teams like the penguins, bruins and others were actually negative or neutral on the measured shots, and many of the cup winners were actually negative on shot attempts per game, but had really high blocked shots - Red Wings - Canes - etc... But I still believe the big error in both of these, is the urge to derive too much meaning from one stat, or worse, to apply a league wide generalization.

shooker wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/roster.htm

Lupul & Clarkson have been swapped around lots this summer - prices hardly off the charts... Phaneuf seems to be valued at his stats, Franson perhaps a little under his stats... It's fun and easy to say in the BBKL the leafs are obviously over-valued... but what are the stories or hard examples?

Nick wroteCOLON

shooker wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONWhich leaf players, aside from Gardiner, are really over-valued in the league?

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/roster.htm

Lupul & Clarkson have been swapped around lots this summer - prices hardly off the charts... Phaneuf seems to be valued at his stats, Franson perhaps a little under his stats... It's fun and easy to say in the BBKL the leafs are obviously over-valued... but what are the stories or hard examples?

LOL I thought posting that would get a stir.

I don't have the energy to prove this. Any non leaf fan and most leaf fans in bbkl will agree with my statement. I over value or under value canucks as I watch every game of theirs. It is not an insult but a truth that we are all bias towards our favourite team and its players. I constantly hear opinions regarding leaf players that consistently hold them in higher regard then non leaf fans would consider them. Again this would be true if this was a mainly Flames, Oilers, Sharks or any other team league. My point was that despite hearing this constant love for the players on the team, people believe the team isn't a playoff team. I just didn't see how that was possible after hearing the opinions all season long about how great certain players were.

Early bbkl days everyone hated the leaf players and everyone felt the team was shit so it was fitting. I just figured with all the love thrown around in the past year or so, people would think the leafs would be at minimum a playoff team.

I don't want to get into some debate over this, it was just an observation.

Nick wroteCOLONI'm a big fan of advanced stats, but only in context.

On one front, winning games is what those numbers are trying to predict, and it's often twisted and taken in the context of predicting who didn't deserve to win games (measuring luck as a factor of subjective good teams and 'deserved' distance from the mean).

I recall when, after the fact, everyone pointed to PDO when the Wild collapsed and their numbers actually fell below the mean - but that just means they lost games.


Or when shot differentials was taken as a MUST be posititve stat - yet teams like the penguins, bruins and others were actually negative or neutral on the measured shots, and many of the cup winners were actually negative on shot attempts per game, but had really high blocked shots - Red Wings - Canes - etc... But I still believe the big error in both of these, is the urge to derive too much meaning from one stat, or worse, to apply a league wide generalization.

I also agree stats are to be taken with a grain of salt and don't subscribe to notions like player A is better than player B because of his relative corsi etc. It is nice to have ammunition when making an argument and often stats can be used to support a stance and help provide context to why a player/team succeeds/fails, but like you mentioned some can get carried away and apply to much merit to a particular stat.

With the Wild example we are dealing with correlation/causation. Did Minny's PDO drop below the mean because they were losing games or was it inevitable that their %s were in for a decline and that helped contribute to the extra losses?

I'm not as hardcore into the advanced stats as some people are who break things down to numbers and stats and don't attribute enough success to "intangibles" that can't be identified in the stats, but I do enjoy using them as just another form of analysis outside the basic stats we all grew up on and know.