Post-Game Talk: #1 | Flyers at Blue Jackets | October 12, 2023 | 4-2 Win

[BernieParent]

I can start the petition.

 

[ajgoal]

I've got some time this AM, so it's going to be another lesson in metrics. I'm going to use Morgan Frost and Owen Tippett's xGF metrics as an example of understanding what happened last night. And before I go into the discussion, its more about understanding what these metrics are telling us, and not particularly defending Frost. I thought Frost was okay, not good, not great... Had a few turnovers that shouldn't have happened, and didn't backcheck hard (along with his other linemates) on the lone goal after a long offensive shift. But he was active in the offensive zone as well, his line just didn't get much credit for it.

People has said Frost's metrics were bad (so were Tippett's btw), and for sure they were. Frost and Tippetthad the worst on-ice xGF% ratio at ES on the night. But let's look at this data (per NST):

Below are two figures, the teams individual skater stats, and Morgan Frost's individual event map. I'm using Frost as an example, but it applies for Tippett (and somewhat for Brink as well)...

The iCF are total shot attempts (blocked, on net, saved, and scored). He had 4 total shot attempts, 3 of which were individual scoring chances for (iSCF). 2 of the 3 iSCFs were blocked by a Columbus defender. NST, does not use blocked shots in their calculation for individual expected goals (ixG)*, they only use saves, goals and missed shots. Only one of his three iSCF counted towards his ixG total (0.05). The lone shot that was used to generate his ixGF was a missed tip shot, represented as the green M below (I think it's green, I'm red/green colorblind so it could be a different color).

Frost had two shots attempts blocked (represented as the green Ab circles) that were taken right in front of the net (one at 5v5 and one at 4v4). If those shots are not blocked, then his ixG totals would have increased a fair bit (both were taken from within the faceoff dots). This is also true of his linemate Tippett, who had shot attempts from inside the dots that were blocked at both 4v4 and 5v5. Frost and Tippett were on the ice for all of these blocked shots.

If all of these shots are not blocked, you would see an increase in ES on-ice xGF for both Frost and Tippett. For those that don't know, on-ice xGF is an accumulation of any teammates ixGF for a single skater while that single skater is on the ice. For example, Tippett's ixGF would increase Frost's on-ice xGF and vice versa.

View attachment 752199

View attachment 752206

This is important to understand when looking at metrics on a game per game basis. Lets run the each blocked shot scenario 100 times. The shot may get blocked 30 times, miss the net 30 times, 20 times and goal is scored 10 times. There is so much variability in hockey, and understanding this is crucial in understanding stats. What happens in a single game isn't as important as what happens in a 20-40 game span.

Frost and Tippett's on-ice stats are awful for one game because they didn't get 'credit' (a la ixGF) for their better shot looks. On the other side of that coin is that they were in the middle of the offensive zone, attempting to get high quality chances. Some nights the bounces don't go your way, and some nights they do. If Frost and Tippett can continue to generate shots from those areas, eventually they'll go unblocked and their numbers will look better. Conversely, if this was a one-off night, and they can't continue to generate, these values will continue. Again, that's why a 20-40 game stretch is more telling than a 1 game sample.


*Individual expected goals is a value of on each non-blocked shot that represents its likelihood of resulting in a goal scored.

**I did not proof read this before replying**

This is really informative. Appreciate the write-up.

 

[Curufinwe]

This is really informative. Appreciate the write-up.

You should really wait for deadhead's rebuttal, though.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Asf says they're sending Andrea down on Saturday if risto is back, so he will get no games

#newEraofsameolsameol

 

[macleish1974]

VladDrag was definitely informing from a technical standpoint. This team definitely for better or worse is not a really electrifing team to watch. York and Sanheim were promising. The rest of team......well......this song really defines the team more or less




1967

 

[Bunch of Jurcos]

Can we start planning the parade now?

 

[Embiid]

Why did they win?

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Well I think the PK will be better if Couturier and Atkinson are healthy. Small sample size but I didn’t see any dangerous chances by Columbus last night.

 

[deadhead]

I've got some time this AM, so it's going to be another lesson in metrics. I'm going to use Morgan Frost and Owen Tippett's xGF metrics as an example of understanding what happened last night. And before I go into the discussion, its more about understanding what these metrics are telling us, and not particularly defending Frost. I thought Frost was okay, not good, not great... Had a few turnovers that shouldn't have happened, and didn't backcheck hard (along with his other linemates) on the lone goal after a long offensive shift. But he was active in the offensive zone as well, his line just didn't get much credit for it.

People has said Frost's metrics were bad (so were Tippett's btw), and for sure they were. Frost and Tippetthad the worst on-ice xGF% ratio at ES on the night. But let's look at this data (per NST):

Below are two figures, the teams individual skater stats, and Morgan Frost's individual event map. I'm using Frost as an example, but it applies for Tippett (and somewhat for Brink as well)...

The iCF are total shot attempts (blocked, on net, saved, and scored). He had 4 total shot attempts, 3 of which were individual scoring chances for (iSCF). 2 of the 3 iSCFs were blocked by a Columbus defender. NST, does not use blocked shots in their calculation for individual expected goals (ixG)*, they only use saves, goals and missed shots. Only one of his three iSCF counted towards his ixG total (0.05). The lone shot that was used to generate his ixGF was a missed tip shot, represented as the green M below (I think it's green, I'm red/green colorblind so it could be a different color).

Frost had two shots attempts blocked (represented as the green Ab circles) that were taken right in front of the net (one at 5v5 and one at 4v4). If those shots are not blocked, then his ixG totals would have increased a fair bit (both were taken from within the faceoff dots). This is also true of his linemate Tippett, who had shot attempts from inside the dots that were blocked at both 4v4 and 5v5. Frost and Tippett were on the ice for all of these blocked shots.

If all of these shots are not blocked, you would see an increase in ES on-ice xGF for both Frost and Tippett. For those that don't know, on-ice xGF is an accumulation of any teammates ixGF for a single skater while that single skater is on the ice. For example, Tippett's ixGF would increase Frost's on-ice xGF and vice versa.

View attachment 752199

View attachment 752206

This is important to understand when looking at metrics on a game per game basis. Lets run the each blocked shot scenario 100 times. The shot may get blocked 30 times, miss the net 30 times, 20 times and goal is scored 10 times. There is so much variability in hockey, and understanding this is crucial in understanding stats. What happens in a single game isn't as important as what happens in a 20-40 game span.

Frost and Tippett's on-ice stats are awful for one game because they didn't get 'credit' (a la ixGF) for their better shot looks. On the other side of that coin is that they were in the middle of the offensive zone, attempting to get high quality chances. Some nights the bounces don't go your way, and some nights they do. If Frost and Tippett can continue to generate shots from those areas, eventually they'll go unblocked and their numbers will look better. Conversely, if this was a one-off night, and they can't continue to generate, these values will continue. Again, that's why a 20-40 game stretch is more telling than a 1 game sample.


*Individual expected goals is a value of on each non-blocked shot that represents its likelihood of resulting in a goal scored.

**I did not proof read this before replying**

However, part of shooting is not getting your shot blocked, that is, either a quick release or the ability to use deception to get the puck on net (where often you're just trying to either get a deflection from a teammate or a rebound).

I don't think it's a big deal, lines were shuffled in camp, bunch of prospects played, it'll take a little while for everyone to get their timing down.

But if other players are having better games, your minutes are going to be reduced from your norm. Doesn't mean you're in the doghouse, just that for one night, you not one of the better players on the ice.

 

[bobbythebrain]

Konecny leading Mcdavid in scoring.
Hart tied w/ McDavid in points.

This team is legit

 

[deadhead]

The bar for being unacceptable is not the most dangerous plays you've ever seen. That's why suspensions aren't flat amounts. Nor does who was hit have anything to do with the level of danger involved. You're waving your hands and screaming star politics. I'm talking about what happened.

Whether he tried to or not, the man lead with his knee on a leg that was off the ice. The entire NHL fanbase has this same dopey conversation every time this happens. If you want to eliminate those knee hits, you have to punish them in some meaningful way. Or they can keep happening with relative frequency. Those are the choices. Personally, I would like to eliminate plays that add nothing to the game and carry significant potential for serious injury.

You can fix a knee, you can't fix a brain.

To me, head shots (whether elbows or smashing someone head first into the boards) are a tier above any other "dangerous" plays, now that we know how serious concussions are to long term mental health. And knee on knee isn't that dangerous in that situation, compared to kneeing or tripping someone skating at full speed. I'd give it a "3" on a scale of 10.

It's a matter of degree of potential danger.

One reason I'm happy NAK is gone is I've seen him throw an elbow at an opponent's head more than once - to me that's low life behavior in this day and age, deliberate attempt to injure. I love slobber knocker body hits in hockey or the NFL, but head shots are abhorrent. I'm glad the NFL banned the body slams of QBs for that reason.

 

[freakydallas13]

You can fix a knee, you can't fix a brain.

To me, head shots (whether elbows or smashing someone head first into the boards) are a tier above any other "dangerous" plays, now that we know how serious concussions are to long term mental health. And knee on knee isn't that dangerous in that situation, compared to kneeing or tripping someone skating at full speed. I'd give it a "3" on a scale of 10.

It's a matter of degree of potential danger.

One reason I'm happy NAK is gone is I've seen him throw an elbow at an opponent's head more than once - to me that's low life behavior in this day and age, deliberate attempt to injure. I love slobber knocker body hits in hockey or the NFL, but head shots are abhorrent. I'm glad the NFL banned the body slams of QBs for that reason.

Knee on knee isn't that dangerous, compared to kneeing.

 

[dragonoffrost]

You can fix a knee, you can't fix a brain.

To me, head shots (whether elbows or smashing someone head first into the boards) are a tier above any other "dangerous" plays, now that we know how serious concussions are to long term mental health. And knee on knee isn't that dangerous in that situation, compared to kneeing or tripping someone skating at full speed. I'd give it a "3" on a scale of 10.

It's a matter of degree of potential danger.

One reason I'm happy NAK is gone is I've seen him throw an elbow at an opponent's head more than once - to me that's low life behavior in this day and age, deliberate attempt to injure. I love slobber knocker body hits in hockey or the NFL, but head shots are abhorrent. I'm glad the NFL banned the body slams of QBs for that reason.

Knee on knee is horrible also. You really want these guys limping around later in life because some jackass was allowed to make that play Hathaway made last night? Trust me I blew my knee out before age 30 and now at almost 55 I have daily issues with my knee. My doctor knows it's going to be replaced, which isn't a perfect fix all the time, but won't do it until I reach a certain age or can't get by with the current pain levels.

Department of Player safety also just ruled otherwise to your point also. 5K fine.

 

[deadhead]

Knee on knee is horrible also. You really want these guys limping around later in life because some jackass was allowed to make that play Hathaway made last night? Trust me I blew my knee out before age 30 and now at almost 55 I have daily issues with my knee. My doctor knows it's going to be replaced, which isn't a perfect fix all the time, but won't do it until I reach a certain age or can't get by with the current pain levels.

Department of Player safety also just ruled otherwise to your point also. 5K fine.

Five K fine is a slap on the wrist, like I said a "3".
Not condoning it, but nothing worth getting the vigilantes riled up either.

 

[Audible Velvet]

Can we start planning the parade now?

Your team or ours?

 

[dragonoffrost]

Five K fine is a slap on the wrist, like I said a "3".
Not condoning it, but nothing worth getting the vigilantes riled up either.

You do realize there are maximum fines... I believe 5k might be it.

Edit: yes it is the max.

Flyers' Garnet Hathaway: Fined maximum amount

Flyers' Garnet Hathaway: Fined maximum amount

www.cbssports.com

 

[mr4tno]

Couturier back on the 20 minute grind is kinda insane to me

Best that they run him into the ground

 

[Curufinwe]

Well, he should be fresh after 22 months off.

 

[Larry44]

I can start the petition.

I'll sign, he should get 40 games for that. Just enough time for him to come back and dealt at the TDL.

 

[VladDrag]

However, part of shooting is not getting your shot blocked, that is, either a quick release or the ability to use deception to get the puck on net (where often you're just trying to either get a deflection from a teammate or a rebound).

I don't think it's a big deal, lines were shuffled in camp, bunch of prospects played, it'll take a little while for everyone to get their timing down.

I agree, it's probably not a big deal.

However, I did look at some shot data over the last 15 mins...Based on the data I've been thumbing through for the last 10-15mins, here are some cliff notes:
-Most forwards got about 18-25% of shots blocked
-Reasonably strong correlation between unblocked shots taken and ixGF, but no correlation to individual shot threat** and shots taken
-No real correlation to percent blocked shots and individual expected goals or individual shot threat
-Getting a shot blocked doesn't have any impact on how good a forward is at chance generation.

The debate would be quantity vs quality. You probably need to lean on a bit of both.


**individual shot threat is a crude shot metric where I take all unblocked shots and divide by total ixGF. That give me an approximate threat of goal per average shot. It's admittedly crude.**

 

[deadhead]

I agree, it's probably not a big deal.

However, I did look at some shot data over the last 15 mins...Based on the data I've been thumbing through for the last 10-15mins, here are some cliff notes:
-Most forwards got about 18-25% of shots blocked
-Reasonably strong correlation between unblocked shots taken and ixGF, but no correlation to individual shot threat** and shots taken
-No real correlation to percent blocked shots and individual expected goals or individual shot threat
-No real correlation to percent shots on net and individual expected goals or individual shot threat
-Getting a shot blocked doesn't have any impact on how good a forward is at chance generation.

The debate would be quantity vs quality. You probably need to lean on a bit of both.


**individual shot threat is a crude shot metric where I take all unblocked shots and divide by total ixGF. That give me an approximate threat of goal per average shot. It's admittedly crude.**

It would be interesting to look at the outliers, are there shooters who have a lower percentage of shot blocked yet still a high level of shot quality - that is, they're not shooting quickly but badly. To me, those would be the elite shooters, quick release combined with velocity and accuracy.

 

[youthoftoday]

Konecny leading Mcdavid in scoring.
Hart tied w/ McDavid in points.

This team is legit

I was having a shitty day at work and this post made things a lot better. Thank you.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

do any of even enjoy watching the games any more (not just the flyers)? all these metrics and analytics. just sit back and enjoy

 

[Curufinwe]

Enjoy a fourth season in a row of missing the playoffs.

 

[Striiker]

Wrong, Frost was a turnover machine early in the game. Game minutes aren"t given for screwing up.

How about we don't make up dishonest bullshit like suggesting that game minutes are given based on quality of play.

We know for an inarguable fact that this isn't true.