 |
 Adam
Messages: 6844
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
6 Cups
|
|
| Goose wrote on Wed, 20 October 2021 13:30 |
I think this is just who Barrie is. He's just not that good of a defender, and he's looked bad on a few goals so it's been more obvious. I honestly think that if Smith stops that 4th goal, people are probably not as down on Barrie, even though he still would have been walked by Steel.
There's a reason that, in an off-season where teams were handing out $9M contracts to defencemen like candy, Barrie only signed for $4.5M despite leading all defencemen in points last year.
|
That viewer bias on mistakes leading to goals is huge. I think there's a similar one on stats, so someone who's -3 is automatically assumed to have had a terrible game, regardless of what the actual role they played in any goals against were. Smith was terrible last night, that third goal in particular should never have gone in, but it draws more attention to the people on the ice, regardless of how the rest of the game has gone.
I think the viewer bias is the same thing that leads to people praising the passing of Cody Ceci despite a myriad of dreadful passes. The one nice one leads to a goal, and suddenly "Ceci is really surprising with his playmaking abilities!"
Tyson Barrie is a guy who you notice in a negative way if there isn't corresponding offence. There were lots of games last year where he was just as inept defensively, but he had three powerplay assists and he's in consideration for the three stars of the game. If the Oilers had a real analytics group that the management paid any attention to, Bouchard probably plays more last year so that he's more in a position to come back, and Bear doesn't get moved for a third liner (even though I've been happy with Foegele's play). Barrie potentially could have been brought back on that deal - I prefer him to Ceci - but he'd have been further down the pecking order. I don't think any analytics person in the league would have recommended that contract for Cody Ceci. That's a player they should be able to get for half that money or less and only for a single season, not four.
"Thinking that a bad team's best players are the reason the team is bad is the "Tambellini re-signing Lennart Petrell" of sports opinions." @Woodguy55
#FireLowe #FireBobbyNicks #FireKenHolland #FireKeithGretzky
|
|
|
|
Review:
Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: OilFans on Tue, 19 October 2021 21:30 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Kr55 on Tue, 19 October 2021 21:50 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Mike on Wed, 20 October 2021 04:24 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Mullet on Wed, 20 October 2021 08:04 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Mike on Wed, 20 October 2021 08:25 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Goose on Wed, 20 October 2021 13:30 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 October 2021 16:09 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Mike on Thu, 21 October 2021 05:59 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
|
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Goose on Wed, 20 October 2021 14:09 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Kr55 on Wed, 20 October 2021 15:09 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: smyth260 on Wed, 20 October 2021 15:55 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 October 2021 16:10 |
|
Re: Review: Anaheim @ Edmonton (Game #3) |
By: K.McC#24 on Wed, 20 October 2021 22:42 |
