Oilers analytic/advanced stat thread

[Aceboogie]

So with my work on ranking every NHL team defensively, offensively, and overall completeness as a team, Edmonton is the 17th best defensive team when you include goals against metrics as well. I haven't done just purely shot suppression metrics. Edmonton is actually one of the better teams at preventing fenwick and shot against chances, and allowed the 8th least amount of goals. However Edmonton seems to allow a ton of dangerous chances and thus a lot of high danger goals. That's one major area Edmonton needs to improve.

This is a very really concern. Talbot faced some of the most high danger shots this year (and per game) and his high danger sv% was amazing. This is why Talbot was so much better than his raw sv% showed. When taking shot quality into consideration he was arguably the 3rd best, or even 2nd, goalie this year. Talbots impact mirrored mcdavids

Although this is a bit frightening because we are highly leveraged on him. If his ability to stop all those high danger chances decreases even slightly next year it could lead to more lost games.

Our team overall will have to tighten up in that regard. We're much better in overall shot suppression, still poor in high danger

 

[oobga]

This is a very really concern. Talbot faced some of the most high danger shots this year (and per game) and his high danger sv% was amazing. This is why Talbot was so much better than his raw sv% showed. When taking shot quality into consideration he was arguably the 3rd best, or even 2nd, goalie this year. Talbots impact mirrored mcdavids

Although this is a bit frightening because we are highly leveraged on him. If his ability to stop all those high danger chances decreases even slightly next year it could lead to more lost games.

Our team overall will have to tighten up in that regard. We're much better in overall shot suppression, still poor in high danger

Hard to back up with stats, but IMO, there is a coaching factor to this. McLellan seems to encourage tentative play when the team is tied or ahead. If we could just let loose some more, I think a lot of stats the Oilers get called out on would see improvement. Things like depth scoring are hurt by it as well, because McDavid is always going to be the most likely guy to be involved with getting a lead, but as soon as we get it everyone gets the call to play on their heels, so they don't get a chance to be involved in scoring pressure nearly as much. We need to take a page out of the Pens book, play the same way with the lead as you do without it.

That said, this team has been a disaster for so long, I can't really fault McLellan in using those tied/ahead situations to try to teach the team how to play a more responsible game, and I think it did pay off to some degree (not quite so much in that one game vs Anaheim in the playoffs, lol). I certainly hope he starts getting the team to try to not be afraid to bury teams with goals rather than just hoping Talbot can save the day next season though.

 

[Delicious Pancakes]

Hard to back up with stats, but IMO, there is a coaching factor to this. McLellan seems to encourage tentative play when the team is tied or ahead. If we could just let loose some more, I think a lot of stats the Oilers get called out on would see improvement. Things like depth scoring are hurt by it as well, because McDavid is always going to be the most likely guy to be involved with getting a lead, but as soon as we get it everyone gets the call to play on their heels, so they don't get a chance to be involved in scoring pressure nearly as much. We need to take a page out of the Pens book, play the same way with the lead as you do without it.

That said, this team has been a disaster for so long, I can't really fault McLellan in using those tied/ahead situations to try to teach the team how to play a more responsible game, and I think it did pay off to some degree (not quite so much in that one game vs Anaheim in the playoffs, lol). I certainly hope he starts getting the team to try to not be afraid to bury teams with goals rather than just hoping Talbot can save the day next season though.

I think it was plain to see that when the team was ahead McLellan instructed the team to play defensively because the whole team became more passive offensively and in their forechecking. It was definitely systematic. It's unfortunate because if they kept the same game plan they would score more by taking advantage of other teams' riskier play when the other teams are forced to start pressing offensively.

That said there are certainly players on the Oilers who naturally fall into that passive/defensive play style.

 

[nexttothemoon]

This is a very really concern. Talbot faced some of the most high danger shots this year (and per game) and his high danger sv% was amazing. This is why Talbot was so much better than his raw sv% showed. When taking shot quality into consideration he was arguably the 3rd best, or even 2nd, goalie this year. Talbots impact mirrored mcdavids

Although this is a bit frightening because we are highly leveraged on him. If his ability to stop all those high danger chances decreases even slightly next year it could lead to more lost games.

Our team overall will have to tighten up in that regard. We're much better in overall shot suppression, still poor in high danger

The season is pretty much over with either McDavid or Talbot getting injured or slumping for even a moderate stretch of games.

Some may consider that statement a little too much like a Chicken Little rant... but I think it's essentially true.

 

[Aceboogie]

Hard to back up with stats, but IMO, there is a coaching factor to this. McLellan seems to encourage tentative play when the team is tied or ahead. If we could just let loose some more, I think a lot of stats the Oilers get called out on would see improvement. Things like depth scoring are hurt by it as well, because McDavid is always going to be the most likely guy to be involved with getting a lead, but as soon as we get it everyone gets the call to play on their heels, so they don't get a chance to be involved in scoring pressure nearly as much. We need to take a page out of the Pens book, play the same way with the lead as you do without it.

That said, this team has been a disaster for so long, I can't really fault McLellan in using those tied/ahead situations to try to teach the team how to play a more responsible game, and I think it did pay off to some degree (not quite so much in that one game vs Anaheim in the playoffs, lol). I certainly hope he starts getting the team to try to not be afraid to bury teams with goals rather than just hoping Talbot can save the day next season though.

This is very real. When teams get a lead in a game they tend to sit back and play a shell D structure. Resulting in getting out shot badly. Just going off memory but oilers were top 10 in the league for playing time with a lead. So their unadjusted shot metrics would be worse off then a team who played mostly from a deficit and went all out offense more often

Too bad hockey analysis or corsica isn't around. We could confirm their score adjusted high danger chances. I don't think these would be nearly as bad as the unadjusted stats above, but still a cause of slight concern

Regardless, still something to consider. Talbot saved our bacon a ton last year. We're still susceptible to a down year by him sinking our season, but what team is not

 

[Aceboogie]

I think it was plain to see that when the team was ahead McLellan instructed the team to play defensively because the whole team became more passive offensively and in their forechecking. It was definitely systematic. It's unfortunate because if they kept the same game plan they would score more by taking advantage of other teams' riskier play when the other teams are forced to start pressing offensively.

That said there are certainly players on the Oilers who naturally fall into that passive/defensive play style.

Great explanation, I saw this alot too. It still resulted in wins so tough to argue against. But I'll never personally like the strategy. Why change your style that resulted in the lead in the first place.

My own thinking is that coaches are soooo risk adverse. If you are up and playing a shell defensive system with not much offensive push and your team blows the lead, people chalk it up to other team doing well and doesn't reflect on the coach.

But if a team continues to be offensive with a lead and the lead is blown, people will question why the coach doesnt play with a lead better

TM is a great coach so tough to argue him, that's just my own opinion

 

[oobga]

This is very real. When teams get a lead in a game they tend to sit back and play a shell D structure. Resulting in getting out shot badly. Just going off memory but oilers were top 10 in the league for playing time with a lead. So their unadjusted shot metrics would be worse off then a team who played mostly from a deficit and went all out offense more often

Too bad hockey analysis or corsica isn't around. We could confirm their score adjusted high danger chances. I don't think these would be nearly as bad as the unadjusted stats above, but still a cause of slight concern

Regardless, still something to consider. Talbot saved our bacon a ton last year. We're still susceptible to a down year by him sinking our season, but what team is not

Yeah, I agree, how players play is influenced heavily by the situation. There is no way to completely eliminate from a players mind how their decision making is based on the situation they're in. If you have a lead, you are going to be more inclined to take less risk. When you're behind, you're gonna feel like you have to go on the attack more.

IMO though, McLellan wasn't really combating the tentative play when tied or in the lead, I think he was actually embracing the players taking that stance. The dump in frequency goes way up, the tossing the puck in the air from our zone to create 50/50 battles in the neutral zone gets turned up. Guys abandon the offensive zone far quicker.
Seemed to just happen too consistently to just be because all our players don't know how to stay on the offensive in tough situations.

I could be wrong, maybe it is just the players, and that would be kind of unfortunate I'm holding onto the idea that McLellan was treating last year, playing with leads or tied in tight games, as a learning experience, trying to teach the players what it's like to play tight in the playoffs, and maybe he can flip the switch next year and get the team to take a little more risk offensive in those defensive situations as a next step.

 

[McDNicks17]

According to naturalstattrick, the Oilers are actually one of the more offensive teams in the league when up by 1.

5th in SCF/60 and 2nd in HDCF/60.

I would assume a lot of that is the McDavid factor though.

 

[oobga]

According to naturalstattrick, the Oilers are actually one of the more offensive teams in the league when up by 1.

5th in SCF/60 and 2nd in HDCF/60.

Interesting. Didn't think to look there.

Doesn't look as bad as I thought when up 1. The bad is when we're tied for whatever reason.

21st in SCF%. 25th in HDCF% when tied 5v5.

 

[Aceboogie]

According to naturalstattrick, the Oilers are actually one of the more offensive teams in the league when up by 1.

5th in SCF/60 and 2nd in HDCF/60.

I would assume a lot of that is the McDavid factor though.

Interesting

As for my above comment, oilers ranked 14th in toi spent with lead by 1 and had 11th most high danger shots against. So the additional time with lead doesnt explain totally the poor high danger chances against. The poor stats with game tied is a bit alarming

Oilers are ranked 1st for GF% when down by 1 tho, 7th for scf% and hdcf

Wow, we sure go beast mode down 1 haha

 

[Aceboogie]

Now I'm super interested in TMs roster decisions at these varies stages of the game

Edit: by total toi

Down 1:
Mcdavid
Klefbom
Larsson
Sekera
Maroon
LD

Tied: same players just different rankings. Same with up 1

Weird, cant make anything from that. Maybe different strategies?

 

[oobga]

Now I'm super interested in TMs roster decisions at these varies stages of the game

Edit: by total toi

Down 1:
Mcdavid
Klefbom
Larsson
Sekera
Maroon
LD

Tied: same players just different rankings. Same with up 1

Weird, cant make anything from that. Maybe different strategies?

Yeah, I'm confused now about how to follow up on my little theory

So there is a huge disparity between our Corsi % and scoring/high danger chance % stats when we're up one. Corsi % is, as expected, down a lot, but still mid range % in the league. But the SC/HDC %'s suggest we were really good counter punchers up by a goal. The tied stats though, just bad period. There must be something to work on there for McLellan and the team.

 

[ScrillaVilla]

This is a very really concern. Talbot faced some of the most high danger shots this year (and per game) and his high danger sv% was amazing. This is why Talbot was so much better than his raw sv% showed. When taking shot quality into consideration he was arguably the 3rd best, or even 2nd, goalie this year. Talbots impact mirrored mcdavids

Although this is a bit frightening because we are highly leveraged on him. If his ability to stop all those high danger chances decreases even slightly next year it could lead to more lost games.

Our team overall will have to tighten up in that regard. We're much better in overall shot suppression, still poor in high danger

Do you know what his history is regarding save percentage in this area. It would seem to me that it's less about ability and more about luck. So not if but when. There seems to be this overwhelming consensus that the oilers are a guaranteed playoff team, if not cup contender. I think a lot has to go thier way again just to make the playoffs.

 

[Aceboogie]

Do you know what his history is regarding save percentage in this area. It would seem to me that it's less about ability and more about luck. So not if but when. There seems to be this overwhelming consensus that the oilers are a guaranteed playoff team, if not cup contender. I think a lot has to go thier way again just to make the playoffs.

Not entirely sure, goes beyond what im aware of. Some quick research tho:

Save Percentage tends to rise a little in small samples as shots against rise, but that is largely because of the mathematical limits of save percentage itself. The rise continues to be somewhat visible in larger samples like seasons, but it is not strong enough to make us expect a higher save percentage in high shot seasons.

More shots does not mean more Low Danger shots and more Low Danger shots does not account for the observed rise in save percentage, either at the game or season level.
The proportion of Low and High Danger shots a goalie sees explains almost nothing about his save percentage, at least as those categories are currently measured.

Goalies who see more HD shots do not get “dinged†much in their overall 5v5 save percentage and goalies who see more LD shots do not get rewarded much. As weak as it an effect as workload has, it is strongest for LD shots in very large samples.

There is currently no way to determine what kind of save percentage we should expect from a goaltender based on the kind of shots he sees. That is: no baseline makes much objective sense given the current ways of measuring difficulty. This has the most impact on War on Ice’s Adjusted Save Percentage, but has implications for some of the various Expected Save Percentage formulas as well. These statistics should be used with great caution.

On the other hand a goalie’s High Danger Save Percentage explains a great deal about his 5v5 save percentage and gives far more information than workload does and may be the most important measurement outside of 5v5 Save Percentage in evaluating goaltenders.

Cant draw much insight into future expected play based on High Danger SV%. So cant point to luck or to skill. I think its more than ok to say that some things cant be explained fully. We should limit our high danger chances but maybe well be ok if those levels stay relatively the same. Talbot is an amazing goalie

 

[McDNicks17]

Do you know what his history is regarding save percentage in this area. It would seem to me that it's less about ability and more about luck. So not if but when. There seems to be this overwhelming consensus that the oilers are a guaranteed playoff team, if not cup contender. I think a lot has to go thier way again just to make the playoffs.

I feel like I remember reading something about Talbot having a high HDSV% in NYR too, but I might be wrong.

 

[ScrillaVilla]

I feel like I remember reading something about Talbot having a high HDSV% in NYR too, but I might be wrong.

Yeah, I seem to remember him being up there out of all the available options for goaltending when they made the trade but not sure about league wide. He's solid for sure, another year like last and he's elite level. Not sure that's gonna happen though.

 

[Aceboogie]

I feel like I remember reading something about Talbot having a high HDSV% in NYR too, but I might be wrong.

He is a good High danger % goalie, but I wouldnt want to be testing him as much with that pure volume of high danger chances in the future

 

[Aceboogie]

Here is a good primer for expected goals. This is expected goals explained for soccer but hockey many of the same principles. Expect to see alot of xG talk in the future and this is developing into a pretty unique stat

https://cartilagefreecaptain.sbnation.com/2017/8/17/16164068/explaining-expected-goals-soccers-newest-star

 

[Jejune]

I think it was plain to see that when the team was ahead McLellan instructed the team to play defensively because the whole team became more passive offensively and in their forechecking. It was definitely systematic. It's unfortunate because if they kept the same game plan they would score more by taking advantage of other teams' riskier play when the other teams are forced to start pressing offensively.

That said there are certainly players on the Oilers who naturally fall into that passive/defensive play style.

I've heard this about many, many coaches over the years, and every single time one of them is asked they reply "No way would I ever instruct my team to play more defensively with a lead. It's just how they react to having a lead and it gets into their game."

I would expect McLellan would be thinking the same thing.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Hey guys so I made a new one with me weighting shot suppression metrics heavier and goals against metrics far weaker. Oilers are 19th place because of this, last time they were middle of the pack because of their far better goals against metrics. Oilers last season I believe was one of the best low and medium danger shot goal suppressors, even if their high danger goals against was mep. Meaning Talbot would rarely deflate the team, even if he doesn't always make the big saves like Price or Holtby.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

He is a good High danger % goalie, but I wouldnt want to be testing him as much with that pure volume of high danger chances in the future

Talbot had the best low and medium save percentage in the league last season, but his high danger save percentage was just good but not in the elite category (Price, Holtby, Crawford). Out of those 3 goalies, Crawford however actually had below average low and medium danger save percentage meaning he can steal a game and make some really fantastic clutch saves but like wise he's prone to just destroying his team with some very poor goals. Rinne was the opposite he had good low and medium danger save percentage but one o the worst high danger, meaning he rarely deflates the team with poor goals, but he doesn't ahve that clutch and game breaking factor. In the playoffs Rinne did steal a few games, but when he had to face some really difficult shots (Pittsburgh) he struggled. Rinne prior to Pittsburgh was almost impossible to beat from low and medium danger shots, and since Nashville did an excellent job limiting high danger, Rinne was able to go god mode. I don't recall Rinne letting down the team even once (Minus one game against Anaheim) in the 1st 3 series, whereas other goalies that make the Finals occasionally have a couple of bad games (Bishop, Lundqvist, Rask are examples of those whose teams made the Finals despite them occasionally having some poor games before the Finals).

 

[Aceboogie]

There has been 2 different Wins Above Replacement models released in the last year and one twitter one of the creators combined them together. Cant say Ive looked into the specifics but I can see some potential issues with just combining them together

Anyway, regardless of the actual legitimtacy of the averaged WAR models, I was looking at the top/bottom 30 players for WAR and almost spit my coffee out with laughter at this one. Bottom 30 forwards, see the 3rd worst forward:

 

[Aceboogie]

On the flip side, top 30 best forwards, see #12 (although I have a ton of questions about players in this list, bottom 30 I more or less agree with)

 

[Panda Bear]

Eberle at 18?

 

[Aceboogie]

Eberle at 18?

Theres a couple I dont agree with, such as Oshie, Eaves, Kesler,Eberle (But I do agree with Saad)

Both WAR models are pretty new so one would expect some odd outliers