Player Discussion BoJesus-Jangles Horvat

[Bleach Clean]

I never said it didn't get better, just that it has consistently been pretty bad. His first year you chalk it up to a combination of inexperience and small sample size, but it's four consecutive seasons now of pretty underwhelming data.

This last year's data is what I would like to see. How are you evaluating that his numbers were pretty bad this year? Which sources are you looking at/what are you considering?

 

[Melvin]

This last year's data is what I would like to see. How are you evaluating that his numbers were pretty bad this year? Which sources are you looking at/what are you considering?

I don't look at things in this way. The data is too noisy to be confident in trends IMO. What looks like improvement can be nothing more than the margin of error of the underlying data.

His CF% at ES has been 44, 45, 47, 48. I don't know if that is improved play or just consistently pretty bad with standard volatility of the metric.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I don't look at things in this way. The data is too noisy to be confident in trends IMO. What looks like improvement can be nothing more than the margin of error of the underlying data.

His CF% at ES has been 44, 45, 47, 48. I don't know if that is improved play or just consistently pretty bad with standard volatility of the metric.

What deviation are you accepting as a standard for volatility? 5%?

I think 100 games is a fair sample. It's been used in other studies. If you compare his current 100 games to his previous sample of 150+ games, there's a move up. It comes down to what you determine as volatility.

 

[Melvin]

What deviation are you accepting as a standard for volatility? 5%?

I think 100 games is a fair sample. It's been used in other studies. If you compare his current 100 games to his previous sample of 150+ games, there's a move up. It comes down to what you find acceptable in terms of a deviation.

It's fair but it's not flawless. It still contains noise. If I knew how much noise I would be working for a team*

*probably not; they dont pay very much

 

[Bleach Clean]

It's fair but it's not flawless. It still contains noise. If I knew how much noise I would be working for a team*

*probably not; they dont pay very much

Flawless, no, but we're looking for best guess.

Horvat has to get better than he is, of this I fully agree. However, I see improvement, despite it not being as much as I would want it to be.

 

[me2]

I think you make some fair points.

Horvat scored 24 ES points as a 19-year old rookie playing very little minutes and this season had 30 in basically the same amount of games with much higher-quality minutes.

It is not really as much progression as you would like to see and what he was doing as a rookie doesn't seem so impressive when he is playing much the same way three years later.

Not to pile on, but I also hoped that his shot metrics would look better after four years of data. He has consistently been a player who surrenders more shot attempts against than for under pretty neutral deployment and he is basically a complete disaster on the penalty kill to the point where they should really just give up on this idea.

I think it's fair to say that we need to Horvat to take his game to another level if he is going to be a first-line player on a quality team.

One think to look at is play relative to Ozone starts and/or Corsi. I'm too lazy to do Ozone for everyone but his Corsi% placement relative to the other forwards (min 300+)

13th, 12th, 9th, 5th.

When factor in the Sedins with the 70%+ zone starts are locking up the top 2 spots, he's making progress.

 

[Hemty]

**** me, i just realized i have an opportunity to see him play. Canada plays Latvia on the 1st. WHY DONT I HAVE A TICKET ALREADY?!