This day on September 22
None

Happy Birthday To: Gall, oilerfan22

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Speculation » Advanced MetricsPages (10): [1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  >  »]
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Advanced Metrics [message #571967]
Sat, 12 May 2012 02:42 Go to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 1793
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

1 Cup

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/5/11/the-theory-and-nature-of-cur rent-advanced-hockey-analysis

The Theory and Nature of Current Advanced Hockey Analysis

""Counting numbers" is the name given to the familiar, conventional stats everyone recognizes and references in their analysis (goals, assists, points, etc). A better moniker would probably be "surface stats". They are the seemingly calm sea above a roiling soup of antecedents that are largely hidden from view. For some guys, counting stats are but a pale reflection of their abilities. For others, the boxscores act as a facade, worn to mask significant warts. For the former, a statsline can be a thin veil obscuring his value or even a scarlet letter, a stigma unfairly imposed by the results that impugns his true quality. For the latter, the boxcars are a vanity and inexorably fleeting. The quest to dump bad contracts that were previously signed by overeager managers every summer could be dubbed the bonfire of the vanities I think.

The penchant for even NHL general managers to be dazzled by the superficial illustrates the the seductiveness of surface stats to even the highest level decision-makers in the game. Results, after all, are what everyone is ultimately after, so it remains forever tempting to chase results in the pursuit of success. Doing so means inverting the causal chain, however: true analysis is understanding the variables and agents that give rise to outcome. The means to the end rather than just the end itself. The coal before before the diamond, if you will.

This is perhaps the crossroads at which conventional thought and so called "advanced stats" most frequently clash. Every hockey fan's (coach's, GM's, etc.) perception of a player is inevitably anchored by heuristics; "rules of thumb" which evolve from information that is perceptually impactful or easily available. Human cognition works in general by conjuring habitual psychological markers that act as lighthouses in the maelstrom of data that is life in general. The problem is, a heuristics is not a principle: it is a quick-start guide at best, an inherent bias at worst. It isn't the template. It is the stereotype.

The conflict occurs when analysis of the underlying numbers disagrees with the connotations we attach to the surface results. Think about the common mental signposts that are almost universally employed. A 20-goal scorer is a pretty good player, right? What comes to mind when one thinks of a 50-point player, for instance? How about a 10-goal forward versus and 10-goal defender? The automatic mental ranking that is next to unconscious for the experienced hockey fan is the activity of heuristics - rules of thumb - that are essentially functional assumptions in aggregate, but not necessarily accurate in the specific.
"


An excellent introduction to the current state of advanced stats. Explains the concepts with good analogies.

[Updated on: Thu, 18 July 2013 19:55]


Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #571971 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Sat, 12 May 2012 05:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Yeah, this is one of Kent's best - an oldie but a goodie.

NHL Numbers was just relaunched this week as an advanced stats site. They managed to score some of the best advanced stats bloggers in the business, under the umbrella of the Nation websites.

Kent Wilson, Gabe Desjardins, Jonathan Willis, Tyler Dellow, Eric T, Derek Zona and many others should make it a pretty great resource for some of the more statistically minded people. Pretty excited about it, all of those guys are great and really know their stuff.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #572099 is a reply to message #571971 ]
Mon, 14 May 2012 13:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
goalpost  is currently offline goalpost
Messages: 433
Registered: March 2007
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

hmc wrote on Sat, 12 May 2012 05:53

Yeah, this is one of Kent's best - an oldie but a goodie.

NHL Numbers was just relaunched this week as an advanced stats site. They managed to score some of the best advanced stats bloggers in the business, under the umbrella of the Nation websites.

Kent Wilson, Gabe Desjardins, Jonathan Willis, Tyler Dellow, Eric T, Derek Zona and many others should make it a pretty great resource for some of the more statistically minded people. Pretty excited about it, all of those guys are great and really know their stuff.


The only caution I would have with the nhlnumbers guys is that they find a good balance between thorough number crunching and "dumbing it down" so it is accessible and entertaining for guys like me that are interested in the topic but don't have the time, energy or desire to learn advanced statistics to understand a website.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #599843 is a reply to message #571971 ]
Mon, 03 June 2013 11:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/spector-on-kings-time-to- score-or-go-home/

Long an opponent of advanced stats, which he regularly derisively dismisses, Spector unwittingly gives a demonstration of his ignorance in his most recent article:

Quote:

Either you’re on the record (as I have been) against low-shots, low-chances – and as such – low-scoring hockey. Or, the style L.A. plays is your cup of tea. There’s no right and wrong here. It’s a matter of taste.

Today, however, even the biggest fan of Kings hockey would admit, the limits of the L.A. style have been stretched. L.A. has reached critical mass on the stingiest offence in the playoffs. It’s time to score, or time to go home.


So he prefers hockey with lots of shots...makes sense. More shots equals more chances, which generally equals more goals. So far, all is good.

Then this, only two paragraphs later:

Quote:

You can have your Corsi number, your Fenwick number, your PDO – whatever. In the end, there is only one number that truly matters in a team sport, and it is found on the scoreboard after 60 minutes (or more) of hockey.


Well, what is Corsi?

Corsi Number = (Shots on Target For + Missed Shots For + Blocked Shots Against ) - (Shots on Target Against + Missed Shots Against + Blocked Shots For)

What is Fenwick?

Fenwick Number = (Shots on Target For + Missed Shots For) - (Shots on Target Against + Missed Shots Against )

So if Spector is saying he prefers that you try to shoot more and get more chances, isn't he basically asking for a team to try to push their Corsi and Fenwick numbers?

Of course, Spector is notorious for not even knowing what the simple stats look like on the team he's covering, so learning the definitions of new stats is probably a lot to ask for.

Like anything else, I think these stats shouldn't be taken in isolation. They are a useful tool to supplement your analysis of players and teams.

Or you can dismiss them out of hand and just call for a team to take more shots...



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #599853 is a reply to message #599843 ]
Mon, 03 June 2013 15:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 1793
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

1 Cup

Spector makes me wonder how someone so dumb can get so famous as a hockey pundit. It makes me think that if I lost 100 IQ points, I could hired as the next expert analyst for HockeyCentral on Sportnet.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbecile

Lemmee see...
Imbecile: around an IQ of 26-50. Yup. That's Spector!



Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #574087 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Tue, 12 June 2012 03:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 1793
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

1 Cup

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2012/6/5/3052477/philadephi a-flyers-stats-zone-entries-overview

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2012/6/7/3066681/philadephi a-flyers-stats-zone-entries-puck-handling


Some great work on zone entries applied to all the Flyers' players.

I'm really curious to see how Hemsky would fare on these measures. We've seen hm for years on his highly frustrating unsuccessful zone entries with a loss of possession. It'd be nice to get an actual measurement to compare him to other puck carrying forwards.



Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #576083 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Tue, 26 June 2012 10:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 1793
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

1 Cup

A new evolution... they call it Moneyballplus:

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670059/moneyball-20-how-missile -tracking-cameras-are-remaking-the-nba

Moneyball 2.0: How Missile Tracking Cameras Are Remaking The NBA

Kevin Durant's open shot attempts:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inline-large/post-inline/kevin-durant-open-shots-attempts.jpg


Kevin Durant's open shots that he made:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inline-large/post-inline/kevin-durant-open-shots-makes.jpg


From a coaching perspective, assuming "north" is the top of the image, Durant should decrease his shot attempts from outside the 3 point line if he's in the north part of the court. As a shooter. he's more effective shooting from the south from longer distances.


Plus shots from outside the key are not very successful. He's lethal from the foul line.

This kind of data is so easy to see. As an opposing coach, I'd try and get my players to funnel Durant to the north for the best chance of beating him and nullifying his scoring.

[Updated on: Tue, 26 June 2012 11:02]


Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #576092 is a reply to message #576083 ]
Tue, 26 June 2012 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ronster  is currently offline ronster
Messages: 1050
Registered: October 2005

1 Cup

v4ance wrote on Tue, 26 June 2012 09:50

A new evolution... they call it Moneyballplus:

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670059/moneyball-20-how-missile -tracking-cameras-are-remaking-the-nba

Moneyball 2.0: How Missile Tracking Cameras Are Remaking The NBA

Kevin Durant's open shot attempts:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inline-large/post-inline/kevin-durant-open-shots-attempts.jpg


Kevin Durant's open shots that he made:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inline-large/post-inline/kevin-durant-open-shots-makes.jpg


From a coaching perspective, assuming "north" is the top of the image, Durant should decrease his shot attempts from outside the 3 point line if he's in the north part of the court. As a shooter. he's more effective shooting from the south from longer distances.


Plus shots from outside the key are not very successful. He's lethal from the foul line.

This kind of data is so easy to see. As an opposing coach, I'd try and get my players to funnel Durant to the north for the best chance of beating him and nullifying his scoring.


Now this is an area where the Oilers should explore. At least to change the dynamics around "coaching".

As much as I hate the Canucks, they do these types of "outside-the-box" analysis like sleep interval tracking that seems to work...somewhat.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #577419 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Tue, 03 July 2012 13:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Great article on shot quality, and how much it matters (more than the numbers say but less than most people would think:

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/3/shot-quality-matters-but-how- much

Some players definitely shoot for a higher percentage than others. This appears to be driven as much by where they shoot as from how well they shoot, but shooting locations are much more reproducible. In fact, people's shooting skill is so transient that only Ilya Kovalchuk and Alex Tanguay can be unambiguously identified as being good shooters. The result is that players' shooting percentages vary a lot from year to year, and you should look at several years' stats to estimate how a player will shoot going forwards.

The point is not: "There's no such thing as a good shooter, so ignore shooting talent completely."
The point is: "You can tell shot location skill quickly, but differences in shooting talent are significant and require a very large data set, so look at several years of shooting percentages to make your predictions."…


…Together, Fenwick/Corsi and Luck account for around 3/4 of team winning percentage. What's the remainder? Goaltending talent - which Tom Awad estimates at about 5% - and special teams, along with a very small sliver that's due to shooting talent and the oft-mentioned "shot quality."


Whole thing is worth a read, and a good intro on shot quality effects.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579135 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Tue, 24 July 2012 18:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

I think a thread we had in which Mike Gillis and advanced stats was discussed was lost in the crash, but I know we never had anything straight from Gillis, like we do here:

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2012/07/23/mike-gillis-discusse d-analytics-on-vancouver-radio-station/


It's pretty fascinating stuff: where he's coming from in terms player evaluation, and how he uses analytics. Thought this was especially interesting:

Well oddly enough we have looked at [passing efficiency] in soccer. And we put that in a very different context, we’ve looked at it relative to fatigue and conditioning and how your percentage of passing success is relative to your conditioning and the time in the game when you do it and how many minutes you’ve played. There are studies that we’ve looked at that indicate that passing percentage in soccer goes dramatically down depending on the time in the game or depending on the conditioning of the player.

That’s through practice, that’s through defined, you know, not in the spontaneity of the game and so there are things from other sports that we’ve been trying to utilize as much as we can. The problem in our sport is that when you combine hitting and you combine puck battles, that takes it away from every other sport.



But of course, he's never won a cup as a GM (only 15 games towards one, and 2 Presidents' Trophies), so he's overrated.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579138 is a reply to message #571967 ]
Tue, 24 July 2012 18:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Also, the number of views on this thread, considering how long it's been around for, speaks volumes. It's not even just "I don't believe in increasing the amount of information available to us", it's, literally, "I don't even want to accidentally read about it, so I ain't clicking on it."


Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579139 is a reply to message #579138 ]
Tue, 24 July 2012 19:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

hmc wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 18:58

Also, the number of views on this thread, considering how long it's been around for, speaks volumes. It's not even just "I don't believe in increasing the amount of information available to us", it's, literally, "I don't even want to accidentally read about it, so I ain't clicking on it."


I don't know about that...it could be a factor of the low number of responses in the thread. If it's not flashing, it's less likely to get read again and again and again and all those count.

1400 views on an 8 reply thread means that almost 200 people have at least read the thread...whether or not they went to the article.



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579140 is a reply to message #579139 ]
Tue, 24 July 2012 19:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Adam wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 21:10

hmc wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 18:58

Also, the number of views on this thread, considering how long it's been around for, speaks volumes. It's not even just "I don't believe in increasing the amount of information available to us", it's, literally, "I don't even want to accidentally read about it, so I ain't clicking on it."


I don't know about that...it could be a factor of the low number of responses in the thread. If it's not flashing, it's less likely to get read again and again and again and all those count.

1400 views on an 8 reply thread means that almost 200 people have at least read the thread...whether or not they went to the article.


Yeah, you're probably right. Though the lack of replies might say something as well. That said, I guess it has just become a dumping ground for "advanced stats" related articles.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579150 is a reply to message #579140 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 08:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BleedOil  is currently offline BleedOil
Messages: 515
Registered: May 2002
Location: Regina

No Cups

hmc wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 19:17

Adam wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 21:10

hmc wrote on Tue, 24 July 2012 18:58

Also, the number of views on this thread, considering how long it's been around for, speaks volumes. It's not even just "I don't believe in increasing the amount of information available to us", it's, literally, "I don't even want to accidentally read about it, so I ain't clicking on it."


I don't know about that...it could be a factor of the low number of responses in the thread. If it's not flashing, it's less likely to get read again and again and again and all those count.

1400 views on an 8 reply thread means that almost 200 people have at least read the thread...whether or not they went to the article.


Yeah, you're probably right. Though the lack of replies might say something as well. That said, I guess it has just become a dumping ground for "advanced stats" related articles.


One thing everyone has to remember, that advanced stats are just a piece of information towards a much larger picture. You cannot lean on them as your only, or major factor in any type of valuation.

When I started university, I was going to major in math, since I was very interested in statistics, but soon decided to go another way.

Where I work, there is too much focus and reliance on advanced statistics and advanced analysis, and I see major flaws and major holes in both, since neither can capture enough factors of the day-to-day business, or even disregard some major pieces of information. Of course, a lot of the people near the top of the company seem to swear by these, so we have to put together everything the way they want.



"One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane"
--- Nikola Tesla

People who have responsibility without rights are slaves. People who have rights without responsibility are leeches.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579152 is a reply to message #579150 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 08:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 3998
Registered: June 2009
Location: Out for Lunch with Craig ...

3 Cups

Like with laws, the more you have the more open on is to error, manipulation, and misrepresentation.

RNH looked like crap to me on paper, but the scouts were right. That really sums it up for me.

Advanced stats are fun, useful, but not overly so. I guess I'd call them a fail safe, a background test.

At my last job we had this system of recording stats that was so non-representative and rigid that our higher ups would be getting in trouble for them, while we were producing at levels congruent to industry standards (or better), some departments had it worse than ours.

There is no replacement for the human sense even though stats are more consistently reliable. This is why a good scout is worth his weight in gold, and a good statistician is a nice thing to have.

I don't know that I'm really all that behind what I just typed, but it's a bit of food for thought.



2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.

2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579153 is a reply to message #579150 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 09:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

BleedOil wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 10:43

One thing everyone has to remember, that advanced stats are just a piece of information towards a much larger picture. You cannot lean on them as your only, or major factor in any type of valuation.


This would be a great point if it wasn't for the fact that advanced stat guys DO use more/other information ("watching the games") towards player evaluation, while the head in the ground folks refuse to use ANY additional information ("advanced stats") towards player evaluation.

It's an argument that purports to be centred around some kind of 2 way street, but that just isn't the case. Yet.

Not to mention the fact that many of the people advancing the argument (BleedOil, this isn't directed at you - I have no idea about you specifically) that there's more to evaluation and analysis than stats don't know the first thing about the things they're trying to reject.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579155 is a reply to message #579153 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 10:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 3998
Registered: June 2009
Location: Out for Lunch with Craig ...

3 Cups

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 09:06

BleedOil wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 10:43

One thing everyone has to remember, that advanced stats are just a piece of information towards a much larger picture. You cannot lean on them as your only, or major factor in any type of valuation.


Not to mention the fact that many of the people advancing the argument (BleedOil, this isn't directed at you - I have no idea about you specifically) that there's more to evaluation and analysis than stats don't know the first thing about the things they're trying to reject.


[sarcasm] Nice conclusion, well founded [sarcasm/]. You don't know anything about anything so don't say anything? But I do so just shut up?

That line of argument is most despicable. For a number of reasons, it's arrogant, ignorant, presumptive, stifles discussion and is un-provable. You can't prove a negative (i.e. that someone doesn't know something), Logic 101 or maybe just 01.

Advanced stats have are their nuances, but it hardly takes a genius to understand them. In short, you’d have to be a real troglodyte to not have a general understanding of advanced stats, to the point where you can’t intelligently debate for and/or against them. You’d be a real a$$-lodyte to assume that numerous people are making arguments on such an unenlightened level, especially is regards to something that is relatively straight forward.

I get the you receive great enjoyment from these stats, that doesn't mean you have to insult people who don't share your view. I feel like iRobot where Will Smith and the romantic interest have the exchange of:

You're the dumbest smart person I've ever met.

That's supposed to be compliment, I think. Is it what it is... most, if not all things are.

[Updated on: Wed, 25 July 2012 10:26]


2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.

2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579156 is a reply to message #579155 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 10:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Magnum wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 12:21

[sarcasm]You don't know anything about anything so don't say anything? But I do so just shut up?


I was worried I might have come across sounding like that. Let me try and rephrase: I'm not trying to imply that people don't or can't understand some of the newer stats. I'm saying that they're not at the point where they're reflexively using them to determine whether or not player X is "worth" it. That is, a general search for a player's value might include a visit to NHL.com and maybe to CapGeek, but Behind the Net isn't exactly a destination website when we're trying to determine if the Oilers should go after a guy.

Better? And less despicable?



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579157 is a reply to message #579156 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 10:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 3998
Registered: June 2009
Location: Out for Lunch with Craig ...

3 Cups

Indeed. Flat out rejection of advanced stats suggests some sort of old time, stuck in old ways bias. Unencumbered embrace of them seems like youthful folly. As often is the case, the mid-point is best.

Nothing you don't already know, just wouldn't have gotten that from your last post.



2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.

2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579158 is a reply to message #579157 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 10:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Magnum wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 12:31

Indeed. Flat out rejection of advanced stats suggests some sort of old time, stuck in old ways bias. Unencumbered embrace of them seems like youthful folly. As often is the case, the mid-point is best.

Nothing you don't already know, just wouldn't have gotten that from your last post.


My most poorly worded argument!



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579159 is a reply to message #579158 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 11:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cableguy is currently online cableguy
Messages: 668
Registered: December 2005
Location: Victoria, BC

No Cups

The thing about Advanced stats for me is that I'm kind lazy and haven't forced myself into truly understanding them all yet. I'm just sort of waiting for a day when I'm "ready" to really dive into them, perhaps when its not summer!?!?

I've looked at some that have been posted on here and they can be interesting but for the most part i just couldn't be bothered.

I love debating a players merits over a pint or two and I don't like the idea of statistics entering that equation. My I-phone gets enough use as it is.



Still jaded but we've got McDavid

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579165 is a reply to message #579159 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 12:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hemmer2Eberle  is currently offline Hemmer2Eberle
Messages: 895
Registered: March 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

No Cups

cableguy wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 11:22

The thing about Advanced stats for me is that I'm kind lazy and haven't forced myself into truly understanding them all yet. I'm just sort of waiting for a day when I'm "ready" to really dive into them, perhaps when its not summer!?!?

I've looked at some that have been posted on here and they can be interesting but for the most part i just couldn't be bothered.

I love debating a players merits over a pint or two and I don't like the idea of statistics entering that equation. My I-phone gets enough use as it is.

This is my stance as well with advanced stats. They seem like the kinda thing that people who wanna feel like they know it all would use.

I just like to talk hockey.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579166 is a reply to message #579165 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 13:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:40

I just like to talk hockey.


There it is. This is the reductive argument that the non-advanced stats people make in my head, and it's ridiculous. It's reductive because it presumes that there's conversations going on in which people are talking in formulas and numbers, as if "shots directed at net", and "zone starts" are in some way not related to hockey. It's intellectually the same depth as saying "I just like to watch the games", which presumes that I don't.

Everyone else, I understand exactly where you're coming from.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579171 is a reply to message #579166 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 14:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hemmer2Eberle  is currently offline Hemmer2Eberle
Messages: 895
Registered: March 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

No Cups

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 13:05

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:40

I just like to talk hockey.


There it is. This is the reductive argument that the non-advanced stats people make in my head, and it's ridiculous. It's reductive because it presumes that there's conversations going on in which people are talking in formulas and numbers, as if "shots directed at net", and "zone starts" are in some way not related to hockey. It's intellectually the same depth as saying "I just like to watch the games", which presumes that I don't.

Everyone else, I understand exactly where you're coming from.

No, I'm saying people like you like to take it to a whole new level, and then people like myself, or the others that have mentioned they don't care about advanced stats as much as you do, try to converse about the game, and don't take it to your depths, you act like we don't understand hockey as well as you.

How often do you go out and hear people talking about hockey going into advanced stats? I for one have NEVER hear this.

Sure, what you are talking about might be related to hockey, but it takes it to a level that talking hockey isn't fun anymore.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579174 is a reply to message #579171 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:11

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 13:05

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:40

I just like to talk hockey.


There it is. This is the reductive argument that the non-advanced stats people make in my head, and it's ridiculous. It's reductive because it presumes that there's conversations going on in which people are talking in formulas and numbers, as if "shots directed at net", and "zone starts" are in some way not related to hockey. It's intellectually the same depth as saying "I just like to watch the games", which presumes that I don't.

Everyone else, I understand exactly where you're coming from.

No, I'm saying people like you like to take it to a whole new level, and then people like myself, or the others that have mentioned they don't care about advanced stats as much as you do, try to converse about the game, and don't take it to your depths, you act like we don't understand hockey as well as you.

How often do you go out and hear people talking about hockey going into advanced stats? I for one have NEVER hear this.

Sure, what you are talking about might be related to hockey, but it takes it to a level that talking hockey isn't fun anymore.


Here's where your argument falls apart on this.

You say you just want to watch the game, but then you're happy to join in arguments on the merits/failings of certain players. Those who watch the game AND take a closer look at that player's results with regards to how they're played (zone starts), who they're playing again (Quality of Competition) and the chances that are generated when they're on the ice (Corsi among others) are going to have a better understanding of that player that you do.

So that when you point to a specific incident and say, well, he made a mistake there and it cost his team a goal, you have to realize that that is not indicative of the player's ability or what he brings to the team. Even Crosby can make a glaring error that lands up in the back of his net. What advanced statistics can do, to a point, is show what the player's contribution is to the team in a way that traditional stats can't always do.

The last article on the Canucks is a prime example. Manny Malhotra was the worst plus/minus on the entire team, and wasn't putting up much for points. If you watched Canucks games, you probably often saw him battling in the defensive zone and rarely saw him generating quality offensive chances. But his zone starts were the most negative in the entire league...his coach basically only sends him out on the ice when the Canucks are facing off in their own zone, and he sends him out every time the faceoff is in the defensive zone. Meanwhile, the Sedins start virtually every time the faceoff is in the offensive zone. They definitely get the glory and as they are scoring a lot of goals, they're rightly so a very important part of the equation, but Malhotra is similarly an important part, because he enables the Sedins to focus on offence. Horcoff of course had the same role in Edmonton, with Nugent-Hopkins and Eberle playing the role that the Sedins do.

All these things you can learn by just reading and understanding the advanced stats lines, because there's all sorts of other people that will compile them for you. If you don't understand the values of advanced stats, then, with all due respect, you probably don't know the game as well as hmc does. That's fine, but it's a reality.

[Updated on: Wed, 25 July 2012 15:45]


"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579182 is a reply to message #579174 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hemmer2Eberle  is currently offline Hemmer2Eberle
Messages: 895
Registered: March 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

No Cups

Adam wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 15:42

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:11

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 13:05

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:40

I just like to talk hockey.


There it is. This is the reductive argument that the non-advanced stats people make in my head, and it's ridiculous. It's reductive because it presumes that there's conversations going on in which people are talking in formulas and numbers, as if "shots directed at net", and "zone starts" are in some way not related to hockey. It's intellectually the same depth as saying "I just like to watch the games", which presumes that I don't.

Everyone else, I understand exactly where you're coming from.

No, I'm saying people like you like to take it to a whole new level, and then people like myself, or the others that have mentioned they don't care about advanced stats as much as you do, try to converse about the game, and don't take it to your depths, you act like we don't understand hockey as well as you.

How often do you go out and hear people talking about hockey going into advanced stats? I for one have NEVER hear this.

Sure, what you are talking about might be related to hockey, but it takes it to a level that talking hockey isn't fun anymore.


Here's where your argument falls apart on this.

You say you just want to watch the game, but then you're happy to join in arguments on the merits/failings of certain players. Those who watch the game AND take a closer look at that player's results with regards to how they're played (zone starts), who they're playing again (Quality of Competition) and the chances that are generated when they're on the ice (Corsi among others) are going to have a better understanding of that player that you do.

So that when you point to a specific incident and say, well, he made a mistake there and it cost his team a goal, you have to realize that that is not indicative of the player's ability or what he brings to the team. Even Crosby can make a glaring error that lands up in the back of his net. What advanced statistics can do, to a point, is show what the player's contribution is to the team in a way that traditional stats can't always do.

The last article on the Canucks is a prime example. Manny Malhotra was the worst plus/minus on the entire team, and wasn't putting up much for points. If you watched Canucks games, you probably often saw him battling in the defensive zone and rarely saw him generating quality offensive chances. But his zone starts were the most negative in the entire league...his coach basically only sends him out on the ice when the Canucks are facing off in their own zone, and he sends him out every time the faceoff is in the defensive zone. Meanwhile, the Sedins start virtually every time the faceoff is in the offensive zone. They definitely get the glory and as they are scoring a lot of goals, they're rightly so a very important part of the equation, but Malhotra is similarly an important part, because he enables the Sedins to focus on offence. Horcoff of course had the same role in Edmonton, with Nugent-Hopkins and Eberle playing the role that the Sedins do.

All these things you can learn by just reading and understanding the advanced stats lines, because there's all sorts of other people that will compile them for you. If you don't understand the values of advanced stats, then, with all due respect, you probably don't know the game as well as hmc does. That's fine, but it's a reality.

The advanced stats thing is great, and I'm glad some people take them as serious as they do. But I don't need advanced stats to tell me that Horcoff is an awful player, or that Hall is a great player. You just have to watch the game IMO.

The thing with advanced stats is that its very new still to alot of people, so alot of us feel we don't really have to dive in head first to the subject. In a few years I might take an interest in them, as might others, but for now they don't interest me.

As for me when I go out and have a hockey conversation with people in a pub or whatever, nobody has yet brought up advanced stats. When that day comes, alot of the other people sitting at the table will probably bow out of the conversation, and give you your win. Advanced stats is also something else that alot of the older hockey fans don't care or know about at this point. I know a guy in his 50's who could tell you the entire history of each team, each players stats yadda yadda, but he barely knows about advanced stats, so does this mean you or HMC are better then him in a hockey conversation? No, not at all.

This is a new thing, let people get used to it, and don't shove it down others throats



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579184 is a reply to message #579182 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 17:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 16:58


The advanced stats thing is great, and I'm glad some people take them as serious as they do. But I don't need advanced stats to tell me that Horcoff is an awful player, or that Hall is a great player. You just have to watch the game IMO.

The thing with advanced stats is that its very new still to alot of people, so alot of us feel we don't really have to dive in head first to the subject. In a few years I might take an interest in them, as might others, but for now they don't interest me.

As for me when I go out and have a hockey conversation with people in a pub or whatever, nobody has yet brought up advanced stats. When that day comes, alot of the other people sitting at the table will probably bow out of the conversation, and give you your win. Advanced stats is also something else that alot of the older hockey fans don't care or know about at this point. I know a guy in his 50's who could tell you the entire history of each team, each players stats yadda yadda, but he barely knows about advanced stats, so does this mean you or HMC are better then him in a hockey conversation? No, not at all.

This is a new thing, let people get used to it, and don't shove it down others throats


Ahhh...well, I see a change in your attitude already. From "I don't care I just want to watch the game" to "let me get used to it."

A guy who knows the history of the league and its teams is always good to talk to...although he may or may not be able to tell you knowledgeably whether a player is good or bad. Certainly, you're falling in to a trap discussed in this article when you're saying "Horcoff=bad, Hall=good". If you had something to back it up other than "I watch the games, so I know," people would probably take that more seriously. I imagine if that's how your buddies and you discuss players, that there's not much debate and it's not particularly interesting conversation. How does that play out? You just say "Horcoff sucks" and they all agree, or one guy responds with "No he doesn't," and then you're done? I'm sure his salary comes up, so clearly numbers aren't completely out of your realm.

Lots of my friends think Horcoff sucks. I'm more of the opinion that he has a certain skillset and the coaches have really used him accordingly. It has not put him in a great position to succeed offensively, and he's certainly overpaid compared to other players used similarly, but he still is a useful player playing an important role and doing that role better than anyone on our current roster has shown themselves capable of doing. I'd get in to more specifics on that, but you'd rather I don't shove those down your throat...



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579194 is a reply to message #579184 ]
Thu, 26 July 2012 05:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 1793
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

1 Cup

Adam wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:06

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 16:58


The advanced stats thing is great, and I'm glad some people take them as serious as they do. But I don't need advanced stats to tell me that Horcoff is an awful player, or that Hall is a great player. You just have to watch the game IMO.

The thing with advanced stats is that its very new still to alot of people, so alot of us feel we don't really have to dive in head first to the subject. In a few years I might take an interest in them, as might others, but for now they don't interest me.

As for me when I go out and have a hockey conversation with people in a pub or whatever, nobody has yet brought up advanced stats. When that day comes, alot of the other people sitting at the table will probably bow out of the conversation, and give you your win. Advanced stats is also something else that alot of the older hockey fans don't care or know about at this point. I know a guy in his 50's who could tell you the entire history of each team, each players stats yadda yadda, but he barely knows about advanced stats, so does this mean you or HMC are better then him in a hockey conversation? No, not at all.

This is a new thing, let people get used to it, and don't shove it down others throats


Ahhh...well, I see a change in your attitude already. From "I don't care I just want to watch the game" to "let me get used to it."

A guy who knows the history of the league and its teams is always good to talk to...although he may or may not be able to tell you knowledgeably whether a player is good or bad. Certainly, you're falling in to a trap discussed in this article when you're saying "Horcoff=bad, Hall=good". If you had something to back it up other than "I watch the games, so I know," people would probably take that more seriously. I imagine if that's how your buddies and you discuss players, that there's not much debate and it's not particularly interesting conversation. How does that play out? You just say "Horcoff sucks" and they all agree, or one guy responds with "No he doesn't," and then you're done? I'm sure his salary comes up, so clearly numbers aren't completely out of your realm.

Lots of my friends think Horcoff sucks. I'm more of the opinion that he has a certain skillset and the coaches have really used him accordingly. It has not put him in a great position to succeed offensively, and he's certainly overpaid compared to other players used similarly, but he still is a useful player playing an important role and doing that role better than anyone on our current roster has shown themselves capable of doing. I'd get in to more specifics on that, but you'd rather I don't shove those down your throat...



In my opinion, advanced stats seem to polarize people similar to what Galileo's theories did to Roman Catholics. People then and now were afraid; afraid of change, afraid of looking stupid, afraid of altering mindsets and patterns that were... ARE familiar and comfortable. They will say, "I only believe what I can see and I see the sun and the moon revolve around us!"

Using what we know are crude tools now, Galileo looked past the human limits of perception using the most advanced tools and technology of his time and flipped that worldview on it's head. Many intelligent souls, then and now, didn't and don't want to look at the world anew, with clearer vision, with more information. What you don't understand, makes you uncomfortable, makes you more willing to lash out than think. Detractors, then and now, lashed out with ad hominen attacks or worse because they don't understand and don't want to... in a way because it's easier. Rejection takes a second but understanding takes, hours, days, years...

It took decades for Galileo's theories to win the day. Advanced stats in hockey is now in the same degree of development as Galileo in his time with his telescopes. The methods and analysis will get better but if you're not even open to the possibilities, then you'll never understand, never see more than a rudimentary level of insight.

To paraphrase a movie quote: "I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it."



Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579172 is a reply to message #579165 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 3998
Registered: June 2009
Location: Out for Lunch with Craig ...

3 Cups

Hemmer2Eberle wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 12:40



I just like to talk hockey.


This seems like the kind of thing someone who doesn't know much would say about someone who knew more, but was unable to reconcile their sense of inferiority.

Knowing what everyone else knows + advanced stats makes a person better equiped to talk hockey.

You just like to talk hockey, great. You're not as good at it as people who have more tools in the tool belt, big deal. Why rip those who do?

That said, any new, technical, advanced metric has the same capacity for know-it-all-ism as it does for ignorance of its merit.

I agree with you in that I find it annoying when people pull out an advanced stat and claim that it counters a far fuller, but less statistic argument. Eberle's goal scoring/shot percentage is one I find particularly annoying, and short sighted. Okay, he has a high shot percentage, so he's going to decline. Uh, maybe he's good at shooting, maybe he gets into tough areas more easily than the next player, and it goes on.

For me, classic stats such as goals and assist are the steak, while advanced stats are the onions and carrots. Sure onions and carrots make things better, but if they're not on the plate, I'll still be satisfied.



2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.

2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579173 is a reply to message #579172 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Magnum wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:09

I agree with you in that I find it annoying when people pull out an advanced stat and claim that it counters a far fuller, but less statistic argument. Eberle's goal scoring/shot percentage is one I find particularly annoying, and short sighted. Okay, he has a high shot percentage, so he's going to decline. Uh, maybe he's good at shooting, maybe he gets into tough areas more easily than the next player, and it goes on.

For me, classic stats such as goals and assist are the steak, while advanced stats are the onions and carrots. Sure onions and carrots make things better, but if they're not on the plate, I'll still be satisfied.


Eberle is an interesting example, for a couple of reasons. First, people see a statistical model and writeup that says that Eberle might be due for a regression next year, and see "Eberle sucks". Really though, what's being said is "Eberle is a great player who more than likely has an unsustainable shooting percentage". It's certainly not an indictment of him as a player - you'd be hard pressed to find someone that truly believes that Eberle isn't highly skilled and a core part of the team (though, yes, I have said that he would be the 1st guy I'd trade of the kids - selling high, and all that).

Second, the talk around Eberle is purely statistical. I'm not expecting that anyone would go out and learn about regression analysis, and all that stuff. I barely understand it. When I talk about "advanced" stats, I'm really just talking about ways to evaluate players, as in new metrics. Heavy statistical stuff like Eberle and regression tries to be predictive, albeit using all of the historical numbers we have available. It is possible, of course, though unlikely, that Eberle is an outlier - sure it's possible that he's a great shooter, or good at getting to the net. That we don't know..yet. What we do know though is that Eberle is a fairly poor defensive player, based on his possession numbers against weak competition. And again, it's possible, if not likely, that that will change as he gets more experience (though Hall is already pretty great in that regard, and against tougher comp).



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579175 is a reply to message #579172 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Goose  is currently offline Goose
Messages: 1474
Registered: October 2006
Location: Vancouver

1 Cup

Magnum wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:09

Eberle's goal scoring/shot percentage is one I find particularly annoying, and short sighted. Okay, he has a high shot percentage, so he's going to decline. Uh, maybe he's good at shooting, maybe he gets into tough areas more easily than the next player, and it goes on.



This one bothers me a lot as well. If you look at the top 20 goal scorers from last year, yes Eberle has a high shooting percentage. So it's easy to take that stat in isolation and say that his shooting percentage will regress to the mean and therefore his goals will also go down. But he also had the 2nd lowest ice-time per game of any of those players, and by far the lowest number of shots of any of those players.

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579176 is a reply to message #579175 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:45

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


If you're at all interested:
http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579179 is a reply to message #579176 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BleedOil  is currently offline BleedOil
Messages: 515
Registered: May 2002
Location: Regina

No Cups

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 15:50

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:45

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


If you're at all interested:
http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season


Again, it is interesting to read and discuss, but it is still a 50/50 educated guess, but stated more definitive. His goals will decline. And here is why I think that they will decline, and back it up with a thought out breakdown...I am forced to predict the # of goals, but I have excuses ready. At least that is how it reads to me.

I don't dismiss it. I don't think it is crap. It can be useful tool, but don't say it trumps all other player evaluation, whether it is statistical or observational. Not one thing can be held as an absolute. They must work together, but even then, you are still far from perfect.

I will go back to my experience through work. There have been many young college graduates come in to the company, and they will hold up all the Statistical Analysis they have learned (and be arrogant about it), only to find out things are not Ceteris Paribus in real world application.



"One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane"
--- Nikola Tesla

People who have responsibility without rights are slaves. People who have rights without responsibility are leeches.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579180 is a reply to message #579179 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hmc  is currently offline hmc
Messages: 2283
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto

2 Cups

BleedOil wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 18:39

Again, it is interesting to read and discuss, but it is still a 50/50 educated guess, but stated more definitive. His goals will decline. And here is why I think that they will decline, and back it up with a thought out breakdown...I am forced to predict the # of goals, but I have excuses ready. At least that is how it reads to me.

I don't dismiss it. I don't think it is crap. It can be useful tool, but don't say it trumps all other player evaluation, whether it is statistical or observational. Not one thing can be held as an absolute. They must work together, but even then, you are still far from perfect.

I will go back to my experience through work. There have been many young college graduates come in to the company, and they will hold up all the Statistical Analysis they have learned (and be arrogant about it), only to find out things are not Ceteris Paribus in real world application.



I was just saying in another conversation (and I've kind of said it in this thread but maybe not well) that I actually understand the distaste towards this type of statistical stuff (re: Eberle). There's an old meme about how stats guys just use spreadsheets and calculators instead of actually watching the games. And this type of predictive stuff is pretty much that. Sure, Eberle might regress next year, but just declaring that he will is absolutely a thing that I can see taking some of the fun out of the game for some people. What's the point in just declaring it if you just want to watch the games and have a good time. That element I understand, for sure.

I'm much more interested in the evaluative stuff, which to me just adds another layer of information to a player's scorecard.



Then I'll just regress, because I feel I've made myself perfectly redundant.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579181 is a reply to message #579179 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

BleedOil wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 16:39

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 15:50

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:45

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


If you're at all interested:
http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season


Again, it is interesting to read and discuss, but it is still a 50/50 educated guess, but stated more definitive. His goals will decline. And here is why I think that they will decline, and back it up with a thought out breakdown...I am forced to predict the # of goals, but I have excuses ready. At least that is how it reads to me.

I don't dismiss it. I don't think it is crap. It can be useful tool, but don't say it trumps all other player evaluation, whether it is statistical or observational. Not one thing can be held as an absolute. They must work together, but even then, you are still far from perfect.

I will go back to my experience through work. There have been many young college graduates come in to the company, and they will hold up all the Statistical Analysis they have learned (and be arrogant about it), only to find out things are not Ceteris Paribus in real world application.



Absolutely true. You can't look at these things in isolation. Pat Falloon was a great player out of junior, started well in the NHL, had some personal issues crop up, let those interfere with his career and was out of hockey long, long before his much lower rated buddy Ray Whitney. Joffrey Lupul spent his time in Edmonton bouncing between the bars and the bedrooms of young ladies, and hockey was an inconvenience in his year as an Oiler. There's all sorts of factors that play in to performance and I don't think that there's any ignorance of that in that article. It merely says that it's rare for shooting percentages that high to be anything but an outlier and that looking at hundreds of forwards over several seasons, that kind of percentage has never been maintained beyond two years and only one player has managed to do two years even. So, while there's a possibility that Jordan Eberle is the most accurate sniper the league has ever seen, it's more likely that his shooting percentage will decrease next year.

That would be ONE factor that will affect his goal totals and ONLY his goal totals. He could still have more assists next year and that could give him a greater number of points, even if his shot totals stay the same and his shooting percentage declines.

As someone rightly pointed out earlier, Eberle had a very low TOI number for the points he produced. If he were to get even one minute more a game, he'd play an extra 80 minutes of ice time. That adds up to about five more games worth of time on the ice for him, and since he was shooting a couple shots per game, that adds about 10 shots to his totals - assuming he shoots at the same rate. He was also injured for four games last year, so there could be another 8-10 shots there. He could up his shooting frequency too...or he could be asked to face tougher competition and we might see his shooting opportunities decline...

Like anything forward looking, it's incredibly difficult to predict the outcome with any accuracy, because there's too many factors at play...but there are some things that are easier to predict than others. The probability of his goal production being down next year is a different number than the probability of his shooting percentage being down. I would bet on the second happening, but I don't think I'd put money down on the first.

PS. Readership on this has gone sky-high in the last 24 hours! Over 600 new views!

[Updated on: Wed, 25 July 2012 16:56]


"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579183 is a reply to message #579176 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Goose  is currently offline Goose
Messages: 1474
Registered: October 2006
Location: Vancouver

1 Cup

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:50

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:45

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


If you're at all interested:
http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season


I am interested, thanks for posting.

Adam seemed to think that I was suggesting that Eberle will maintain his shooting percentage, which is not at all what I'm saying. I fully understand that Eberle's shooting percentage is unsustainable over the long term.

My point is twofold really:

1. The best predictor of future goals scored is past season goal totals. There are obviously outliers, and I'm sure many times those are due to unsustainable shooting percentage. But Eberle has already shown that he can score 30 goals in the NHL, which makes it more likely he can do it again.

2. 2 seasons is way too small of a sample size to try and predict what Eberle's future success will be (although I understand the appeal of trying).

Interestingly, 10 of the 14 players that Willis used have since surpassed their highest goal total from their first 2 years. Of the 4 that haven't, Toews and Vanek have come within 2 and 3 goals respectively and really only Stempniak hasn't come close to his 2nd year total of 27 goals.

And I understand what Willis is saying in terms of Stastny and Crosby not improving their shot totals over their first 2 years, and then not really increasing those totals over the course of their careers so far. Again, 2 players is a crazy small sample size and can't really be used to predict anything. And Stastny and Crosby were already playing 21 min a night by their 2nd seasons. Eberle at 17+ leaves a lot of room to go up.

I don't want to come across as anti-stats, because I'm not. I love the player-usage chart that you posted and I look at it all the time.






Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579195 is a reply to message #579176 ]
Thu, 26 July 2012 07:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 3998
Registered: June 2009
Location: Out for Lunch with Craig ...

3 Cups

hmc wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 15:50

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 17:45

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


If you're at all interested:
http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season


I read that, it was thorough and a good read. Simple enough that the reader didn't have to do much to get through it. Probably the perfect advanced stats article.

After reading it, it had me thinking about Eberle's goals, and non of them seemed to be crazy accuracy shots or anything to that effect. He knows how to score, positionallty, in respect to other players, and has the cool to finish unlike the common goat Horcoff.

Also, to the advanced stat haters, advanced stats give quantification to some of the seen'em good aspects of the game, and it's fun when you validate your sense of perception with verifyable (although often questionable) data.



2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.

2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579177 is a reply to message #579175 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 15:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Goose wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 15:45

Magnum wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 14:09

Eberle's goal scoring/shot percentage is one I find particularly annoying, and short sighted. Okay, he has a high shot percentage, so he's going to decline. Uh, maybe he's good at shooting, maybe he gets into tough areas more easily than the next player, and it goes on.



This one bothers me a lot as well. If you look at the top 20 goal scorers from last year, yes Eberle has a high shooting percentage. So it's easy to take that stat in isolation and say that his shooting percentage will regress to the mean and therefore his goals will also go down. But he also had the 2nd lowest ice-time per game of any of those players, and by far the lowest number of shots of any of those players.

Goal scorers find ways to score goals. Look at any of the other players on that list that have played more than a few seasons - their shooting percentages can vary widely year-over-year, even in seasons where they've scored a similar number of goals.

So while shooting percentage can be used as one tool to try to predict goal scoring, it's way to premature to use it to try to predict what Eberle will or will not do. He's scored goals at every level he's played at (including the NHL), so I wouldn't bet against him not doing it again.


This has probably been posted before but it's a good read:

http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/16/how-many-goals-will-jordan -eberle-score-next-season

All the talk about Eberle's shooting percentage just points out that there's been very few instances of scoring on that percentage of your shots for an entire season. The opposite of this on the Oilers last year was Paajarvi, who, despite all the discussion about poor shot choices (which I agree with), scored at a much, MUCH higher rate in his rookie season before falling off a cliff on shooting percentage last year. It's likely that he's going to score a lot more in almost every hockey season he plays from here on out.

Eberle can absolutely score as many goals next year, and maybe he will if he gets more ice-time and takes more shots. It certainly won't hurt if the Oilers protect his minutes again this year, although I would argue the addition of Yakupov may make that somewhat more difficult, unless he's on the same line (as almost any 18 year old gets eaten alive against tough competition, so Kruger's likely to shelter his rookie).

But the chances of Eberle scoring on the same percentage of his shots is very unlikely. As the article shows, it isn't unprecedented - Johnathan Cheechoo managed to post back-to-back high percentage seasons...before falling off dramatically.

Again, none of that is a criticism on Eberle at all. Like hmc, I really think he's a very good player, certainly a very good offensive player, and I expect he'll continue to put up a pretty solid number of points. But if he slips to 25 goals next year, and he loses a few percent on shooting percentage, I won't be surprised at all. Or disappointed, really. With some luck, his linemates will score more next year and his points total overall might be higher either way.



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579161 is a reply to message #579138 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 11:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10749
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

It's just too deep a topic for most people to offer a good opinion on IMO. I'm getting more interested in looking at advanced stats, but the amount of time I would need to invest to actually have a worthwhile conversion about it is just more than I'm willing to give :)

I do appreciate you posting info like this. I, for one, do typically read it. I'm just thinking you shouldn't be too surprised that the tread doesn't blow up into a big in depth conversation exploring advanced stats trying to work towards some grand consensus between oilfans posters icon_wink



"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Advanced Stats [message #579178 is a reply to message #579161 ]
Wed, 25 July 2012 16:27 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11329
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

oobga wrote on Wed, 25 July 2012 11:56

It's just too deep a topic for most people to offer a good opinion on IMO. I'm getting more interested in looking at advanced stats, but the amount of time I would need to invest to actually have a worthwhile conversion about it is just more than I'm willing to give :)

I do appreciate you posting info like this. I, for one, do typically read it. I'm just thinking you shouldn't be too surprised that the tread doesn't blow up into a big in depth conversation exploring advanced stats trying to work towards some grand consensus between oilfans posters icon_wink


Well, there's no chance of that happening...even with the best statistical analysis available, we're never all going to agree on players.

When I first started posting here around the end of the lockout, I was not particularly aware of many/most advanced stats. I was generally considered among my friends to be one of the more knowledgeable guys regarding anything hockey-related, and especially anything Oilers-related.

Reading some of the threads I did back then from Mudcrutch, I was pretty incredulous. He went on and on ranting about how Fuhr wasn't that good, and how Conklin was going to be phenomenal. I still reject both of those arguments, but I think I'd be much better equipped to argue with him today than I was back then, because I just didn't have an understanding of a lot of the math he built his case on. Understanding that better gives me the tools to back up my arguments, and I think the best posters on Oilfans have always been the ones who have taken the time to defend their position. Stats is a great tool for that. When someone comes on and just says "So-and-so sucks!" there's really no argument being made, and the person might just as well have kept it to themselves in my mind - especially given my view that the fans of a club should be generally supportive of its players most of the time if they hope to have any positive impact on the team's results. We've certainly seen time and again that the howling mob DOES have the ability to impact a hockey player's performance. Marc-Andre Bergeron and Cory Cross spring immediately to mind as players who were VERY aware of their public perception in Edmonton and allowed it to negatively impact their game (something that would be very hard to show with advanced stats, and yet something oh-so-obvious when you watched Bergeron handling the puck with the crowd muttering, expecting the impending turnover).

That said, I do think there's a place for critical analysis of players (you always want to see the team improved, and there's always going to be areas on the team where upgrades would be nice), but there has to be a basis for that criticism beyond "that guy blows." Otherwise, how do you know what aspect of the game he isn't good at, and how do you know you haven't had your personal judgement biased by a couple of individual plays - something that clearly isn't representative of the player as a whole.

I doubt there is a team in the league who isn't using SOME advanced statistical analysis now, so why wouldn't fans who want to debate what a decent second-line centre looks like have some basic understanding of those metrics?



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

Pages (10): [1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  >  »]  
Previous Topic:Starting Lineups for 2017-2018 Season
Next Topic:Chris Neil
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2017.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement


Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca