egroen 384 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 I remember at the beginning of the season someone shared a link of someone who was meticulously watching Wings games and assessing plusses and minuses based on actual individual game play. Anyone remember the link? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mabuhay Red Wings 177 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2010/12/9/1866269/cssi-tracking-post Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 Thanks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mabuhay Red Wings 177 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 Thanks! No problem. What do people think of that whole thing? It's quite an interesting observation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dano33 41 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 I don't get it, is there an explanation on this page that I am missing? Where do the adjusted numbers come from, and what do they mean? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mabuhay Red Wings 177 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 I don't get it, is there an explanation on this page that I am missing? Where do the adjusted numbers come from, and what do they mean? http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2010/10/6/1732677/the-common-sense-scoring-index Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smite 399 Report post Posted March 4, 2011 Someone has too much time on there hands.... why dont you give a guy a marking out of 100 from what you see. Awarding points on judgemnet is not an actual point. just my .02 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hooon 1,089 Report post Posted March 5, 2011 I kind of agree. It just seems way too subjective, especially coming from a fan of the team. I'm sure he is doing his best to be as fair as he can, but still, I don't see how this system can really be taken too seriously. Far too many variables and judgement calls. Still interesting numbers though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted March 5, 2011 Not to offend anyone, but those stats and the rationale for determining them, in my opinion, is absurd. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted March 5, 2011 Not to offend anyone, but those stats and the rationale for determining them, in my opinion, is absurd. It's different from what I had thought - I simply though it only awarded negatives to those individuals sharing responsibility to goals against. They have added a whole lot of extremely subjective variable - but interesting to look at nonetheless. It does seem to pass the 'eyeball test' of matching up well with those players whose official stats do not necessarily reflect how they are actually performing on the ice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mabuhay Red Wings 177 Report post Posted March 5, 2011 It's different from what I had thought - I simply though it only awarded negatives to those individuals sharing responsibility to goals against. They have added a whole lot of extremely subjective variable - but interesting to look at nonetheless. It does seem to pass the 'eyeball test' of matching up well with those players whose official stats do not necessarily reflect how they are actually performing on the ice. Did you read through some the single game analyses? Sometimes they're not bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earthhuman 8 Report post Posted March 5, 2011 I don't think the guy is suggesting that Datsyuk should have almost 70 points. The point is to compare players of the same team in terms of relative value. The point is to show how useful they are to the team in relation to one-another. Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Zetterberg are having strong years. But look at Holmstrom, Helm, Eaves... that's the point. Now, I think he rewards too much for penalties drawn and things like that, forwards are probably more likely to benefit from that, but it's interesting to see contribution in terms of more than goals for on ice/goals against on ice. The plus/minus stat is a worthless one anyway, why not make it a little less accurate, but taking much more into account? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites