weastern bias
worst team in the league
In general, it's pretty hard to play a guy 25+ minutes and shelter him.
Unless he plays nearly 2 minutes per PP
In general, it's pretty hard to play a guy 25+ minutes and shelter him.
He's unfortunately spent most of his career with statistically one of the worst defenseman in the NHL. McDonagh-Stralman were absolutely dominant the times they were together. Even when McDonagh has been on his off-side and paired with Staal, it's been better.Same with McD.
Unless he plays nearly 2 minutes per PP
yes just this season
Appreciate the effort but a single (partial) season is just way too small a sample to get any accurate picture of these players.
We know that goal differential is heavily influenced by SH% and SV% fluctuations that are essentially out of player control for the most part. It would take an extremely large sample for the goal differentials to even out.
Ex: Kris Letang.
This season he has a net impact of -1.71 according to your metrics. His GF% is 39.6% (at ES) and a -10 overall differential. Definitely not good. BUT all of his Corsi, Fenwick, Scoring Chances and High Danger Scoring Change percentages are well above 50% and positive differential.
Why are his goal numbers awful? He has a 4.88% on-ice shooting percentage. Well below league average of ~8%. He's playing well, but when he's on the ice no one is managing to score. It's reminiscent of what happened to Edler a couple of years ago when everyone thought he sucked because his +/- was bad. Posters like me pointed out his on-ice SH% was 4% and lo and behold, he "turned it around" next season. He didn't. He was playing the same by the underlying numbers.
To illustrate the problem with the sample size, Letang's Goals For % is 53% since the Pens cup run. He's a positive impact player.
It also does not account for on ice sv%/on ice sh%... they are not all luck but in many circumstances are heavily luck related, especially over a ~40-50 game sample.
Would be interesting to see both Corsi and Shot charts as well.
I mean, going off GF rel stats this season Luca Sbisa is elite... when he has some of the worst corsi rel stats in the league. He just has a horseshoe up his arse atm.
I never mind looking at the numbers and then trying to explain them.
It's not the fault of the numbers.
There are usually valid reasons why numbers are the way they are.
The interpretation is as interesting as the figure.
Who they play with is probably more important than their competition.This was my thinking as well. Usage matters as well but usually not as much as people think because players end up facing similar usage regardless of what their coaches try. Eg, nearly all players face competition in the range of 49% - 51% CF%
How does that NET60 part work? Specifically how does (GAWO60 - GFWO60) make sense? The player isn't on the ice in either case.Player | GFW60 | GFWO60 | GAW60 | GAWO60 | NET60
H. Lindholm | 0.99 | 2.05 | 1.33 | 2.56 | -1.06- (-0.51) = -0.55
That's the thing though, and that's what makes the numbers so interesting to me. Each player has contributing factors for why their numbers are the way that they are.
I never mind looking at the numbers and then trying to explain them.
It's not the fault of the numbers.
There are usually valid reasons why numbers are the way they are.
The interpretation is as interesting as the figure.
It always comes down to interpretation.
My point is there isn't much to interpret from partial, single season goal numbers because they are so volatile. They can't tell us anything really meaningful.
Yeah, I think any d-man playing over 25 minutes shouldn't be tagged for matchups in any way since it's pretty clear he's out playing with and against practically everyone.
Can you post the resource you used for this? Id like to recreate it with Klefbom and not Sekera. I was on stat.hockeyanalysis but I couldnt recreate anyones. Although good research. This is what HF needs more of, objective inquiry. So I commend this
How does that NET60 part work? Specifically how does (GAWO60 - GFWO60) make sense? The player isn't on the ice in either case.
Negative defensive impact is upside down. Consider Ristolainen. Starting on the d-zone against top6 lines means his teams GA/60 will inevitably be higher "with him". Corsi number as quality of competition is also bad stat crunching, shots created by first lines aren't equal to shots generated by shut-down/energy lines. Without Ristolainen, Buffalo would be even worse defensively, as his pairing is the only one that can match against opposition first lines on equal ground.
...so Subban isn't as bad as many here would have us believe??...colour me surprised...
Negative defensive impact is upside down. Consider Ristolainen. Starting on the d-zone against top6 lines means his teams GA/60 will inevitably be higher "with him". Corsi number as quality of competition is also bad stat crunching, shots created by first lines aren't equal to shots generated by shut-down/energy lines. Without Ristolainen, Buffalo would be even worse defensively, as his pairing is the only one that can match against opposition first lines on equal ground.