2018-19 Regular Season Thread

[JojoTheWhale]

I think a lot of people here use metrics as validation for their own personal opinions and attempt to shove it down people's throats. There's certainly some value added by looking at different metrics and trying to determine how much it is noise and how much of it actually factors into the quality of player.

This is so weak, just like the “I have X on Ignore lololol” crap. These sweeping generalities are never productive.

Don’t read it if you don’t like it. Feel free to start a real discussion about what metrics are descriptive or predictive and the degrees of correlation or put me (or anyone else) on Ignore. I’m more than good either way.

 

[Lindberg]

This is so weak, just like the “I have X on Ignore lololol” crap.

Don’t read it if you don’t like it. Feel free to start a real discussion about what metrics are descriptive or predictive and the degrees of correlation or put me on Ignore. I’m more than good either way.

Oh please. That's exactly what a lot of people on here attempt to do to prove there point. His corsi is high, so he must be good! Obviously you've taken a lot of offense to it even though I didn't mention you so you obviously have a strong bias towards using metrics.

Point is from a fairly scientific point of view metrics are severely lacking in their inability to control much of anything. There's a lot of variables missing from the data which makes for a poor conclusion if you are judging things based on those measurements.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Oh please. That's exactly what a lot of people on here attempt to do to prove there point. His corsi is high, so he must be good! Obviously you've taken a lot of offense to it even though I didn't mention you so you obviously have a strong bias towards using metrics.

Point is from a fairly scientific point of view metrics are severely lacking in their inability to control much of anything. There's a lot of variables missing from the data which makes for a poor conclusion if you are judging things based on those measurements.

I have a bias against both using metrics in a way they should not be used and also people randomly spouting off against them on principle.

If you would like to have a meaningful discussion on the nuts and bolts of what is going on mathematically, I am happy to do so. Until then, I will continue to point toward your lack of substance.

TLDR; More weak stuff. Try not speaking in generalities.

 

[deadhead]

Metrics are inputs, eyeball are inputs, reputable scouting reports are inputs.
Problem is many people have frames that are extreme, so they filter inputs through those frames, and reject the ones that don't agree with their preconceptions.

To me, metrics often raise interesting questions, like why does Gudas look slow and awkward much of the time but consistently puts up good advanced analytics? Why do the Flyers have great xGA/60 on the PK but bad GA/60, why do their goalies look average to above at ES but are the worst in the NHL on the PK in S%.

Metrics should be the jumping off place for further analysis, not the be all and end all.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I don't feel like I need to comment. It speaks for itself.

Coaching perfection.

 

[Stizzle]

Worth a click.

 

[Lindberg]

I have a bias against both using metrics in a way they should not be used and also people randomly spouting off against them on principle.

If you would like to have a meaningful discussion on the nuts and bolts of what is going on mathematically, I am happy to do so. Until then, I will continue to point toward your lack of substance.

TLDR; More weak stuff. Try not speaking in generalities.

Ok Mr. PhD.

I'm not particularly interested in having a lengthy discussion on "metrics"/advanced statistics/or whatever you'd like to call it just out of sake for my own personal time. I've had enough science and mathematical classes to fully understand what is going on mathematically. This isn't differential equations, non-linear algebra, or control theory. Some of you guys act like you're building a rocket ship to the moon.

TLDR : I can deal without your smugness.

 

[crackdown44]

Flames fan coming in peace. I did look for a fantasy thread but could not find one. I picked up Konecny this year as he was slated to start on the first line RW slot originally I believe. That obviously hasn’t been the case. I haven’t caught any games, was wondering how he’s been playing in general, and if he might get another shot there

Cheers

 

[deadhead]

What's the big deal about differential equations and non-linear algebra (1st chapter of Debreu's Theory of Value)?

I thought advanced undergraduate statistics was the hardest course I took in graduate school, but it helped me get through a couple courses in Econometric Theory (which after passing the examined field test, I promptly forget, I wasn't a good enough math guy to be an Econometrician, I just studied it for the intuition so I could read papers and know what the heck was going on!).

Most math is pretty intuitive but statistics I always felt was just plain weird. Especially those Bayesians.
Of course, the standard joke about econometricians is about the one who lost his keys in the dark but kept searching under the street light (available data), because he could see what he was looking for.
And that's the problem with any statistical analysis, you can torture the data to confess, but you can't always find data with anything worthy to confess.

 

[deadhead]

Flames fan coming in peace. I did look for a fantasy thread but could not find one. I picked up Konecny this year as he was slated to start on the first line RW slot originally I believe. That obviously hasn’t been the case. I haven’t caught any games, was wondering how he’s been playing in general, and if he might get another shot there

Cheers

He's been moved to the 2nd line with two other talented kids, Lindblom and Patrick, and right now is pressing, which he did last season before getting hit. Depends on Patrick's health, who got high sticked last night and didn't return. The line is looking like they're starting to jell, but may take a few weeks to hit their stride - but when that happens, expect TK to go on a scoring spree.

 

[crackdown44]

He's been moved to the 2nd line with two other talented kids, Lindblom and Patrick, and right now is pressing, which he did last season before getting hit. Depends on Patrick's health, who got high sticked last night and didn't return. The line is looking like they're starting to jell, but may take a few weeks to hit their stride - but when that happens, expect TK to go on a scoring spree.

Awesome. Love the kid and yahoo gives him all 3 forward positions so I think I’ll hold onto him

 

[Magua]

I don't feel like I need to comment. It speaks for itself.

So, in order to rectify these historically bad numbers, the coach in desperate hour turns to the very same players who are at the bottom of these stats. And sits the ones at the top.

put me (or anyone else) on Ignore

Damn. Okay. You, Madrigal, and Captain.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Ok Mr. PhD.

I'm not particularly interested in having a lengthy discussion on "metrics"/advanced statistics/or whatever you'd like to call it just out of sake for my own personal time. I've had enough science and mathematical classes to fully understand what is going on mathematically. This isn't differential equations, non-linear algebra, or control theory. Some of you guys act like you're building a rocket ship to the moon.

TLDR : I can deal without your smugness.

The majority of the math is not at all complicated, shouldn't scare anyone, and doesn't require a 5,000 word write up to discuss potential misuse. I don't like the superiority complex issues the community can have either.

I would tell you why you're an idiot if only I had the time is definitely one stance you could take. Another would be to spend the same amount of time explaining what your issues were. I'm going to leave it alone until you choose the latter because nothing positive will ever come of it.

 

[FLYguy3911]

You don't have to believe in advanced stats, but the concept is pretty simple. Over the long run, your on-ice shooting% and your on-ice save% will equal out to about 100%. If your team is giving up 5% of the shot share when you are on the ice as MacDonald has for the better part of 9 seasons and Hagg did last year, you have to run unsustainable percentages to just not be a liability.

I know people think Gudas pumps his numbers because of all of the point shots, but that doesn't explain how good he is at suppressing shots (and when you adjust for quality he still grades out just as well). I don't approve of shooting every puck you touch as a defenseman, but it works for some guys and Gudas has produced at an above-average rate offensively 5v5 since he's been a Flyer.

 

[deadhead]

The math is complicated, the intuition is not.
Most people (including most practitioners) don't actually have to understand the underlying math, that's why they have statistical packages, many of which are "idiot proof."
But you have to understand the intuition, otherwise, you won't understand what the results say (and don't say).
And you have to understand the limitations of statistical analysis (left-out variable error is omnipresent, and invalidates all significance tests to some extent).

"All models are wrong, some models are useful." George E. P. Box.

That's my motto.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

The math is complicated, the intuition is not.

Much better way to phrase it. Thanks, Deady.

 

[BernieParent]

"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." – Benjamin Disraeli

Just sayin'

 

[freakydallas13]

Nit Picking ®

 

[deadhead]

"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." – Benjamin Disraeli

Just sayin'

Marx never read Marshall and Disraeli never ran a regression.
Don't take those 19th century guys too seriously.

On the other hand:
Huff, How to Lie With Statistics, Norton 1954, is a classic.

One of my favorite papers:

Leamer, Edward E. 1983a. Let's take the con out of econometrics. American Economic Review: 73 (March):3 1-44.

 

[Lindberg]

The majority of the math is not at all complicated, shouldn't scare anyone, and doesn't require a 5,000 word write up to discuss potential misuse. I don't like the superiority complex issues the community can have either.

I would tell you why you're an idiot if only I had the time is definitely one stance you could take. Another would be to spend the same amount of time explaining what your issues were. I'm going to leave it alone until you choose the latter because nothing positive will ever come of it.

I don't think it has anything to do with taking a particular stance on the topic. The major overarching point I'm trying to make is that the data is susceptible to being manipulated into whatever you want it to say. The data is more of a thought experiment rather than being able to accurately describe a player's on ice performance. Its almost impossible to definitely say that data A describes outcome A when there isn't much if any control variables applied.

 

[Lindberg]

What's the big deal about differential equations and non-linear algebra (1st chapter of Debreu's Theory of Value)?

I thought advanced undergraduate statistics was the hardest course I took in graduate school, but it helped me get through a couple courses in Econometric Theory (which after passing the examined field test, I promptly forget, I wasn't a good enough math guy to be an Econometrician, I just studied it for the intuition so I could read papers and know what the heck was going on!).

Most math is pretty intuitive but statistics I always felt was just plain weird. Especially those Bayesians.
Of course, the standard joke about econometricians is about the one who lost his keys in the dark but kept searching under the street light (available data), because he could see what he was looking for.
And that's the problem with any statistical analysis, you can torture the data to confess, but you can't always find data with anything worthy to confess.

Nothing note worthy in particular but they are viewed as some of the most rigorous undergrad mathematical classes one can take. Fundamental understanding varies significantly between people and how the material is presented.

I don't agree that most math is pretty intuitive, the application of it for physical concepts can be difficult at times. There's a reason a lot of engineers flunk out.

 

[deadhead]

I don't think it has anything to do with taking a particular stance on the topic. The major overarching point I'm trying to make is that the data is susceptible to being manipulated into whatever you want it to say. The data is more of a thought experiment rather than being able to accurately describe a player's on ice performance. Its almost impossible to definitely say that data A describes outcome A when there isn't much if any control variables applied.

All data is susceptible to manipulation, one of the issues in academia is the prevalence of positive results (i.e. suggesting both bias by editors and gaming editors by researchers), "data mining" is a serious issue in the social sciences (and why Big Data is overblown, correlation is not causation).

However, more data is better than less, including anecdotal data as long as it's valid data.
Measurement error is always a problem, especially if you don't know the potential bias or inaccuracy.

Corsi has value, xGF% has value, relative and adjusted measures have value.
They're not the be all and end all, but used together can provide a picture of how a player is doing.
More detail can be found with entry and exit stats, etc.

But there are left out variables, MacDonald has given up fewer goals on ice than would be predicted by his xGA, one season could be a fluke, an extended period is more likely a trend due to an unobserved variable.

Of course, right now MacDonald has horrible stats because, well, he's been horrible, a strong correlation there.

I think it's because his legs aren't in game shape and he's a step behind, but at 32 he could be approaching the career cliff.
The next few weeks will tell the tale, if he doesn't pick up his game, he could be gone by Thanksgiving.

 

[Curufinwe]

Patrick out 7-10 days, which is good news considering it wasn't totally obvious what the injury was.

OTF: Nolan Patrick injury update

 

[TB87]

I don't think it has anything to do with taking a particular stance on the topic. The major overarching point I'm trying to make is that the data is susceptible to being manipulated into whatever you want it to say. The data is more of a thought experiment rather than being able to accurately describe a player's on ice performance. Its almost impossible to definitely say that data A describes outcome A when there isn't much if any control variables applied.

Any questions or concerns about the various metrics inputs should be directed toward those who are responsible for the various metrics. People like Emmanuel Perry of Corsica, the @EvolvingWild (twitter handle) twins of evolving-hockey.com, Chace McCallum (CMhockey66) on twitter known for his Goals Above Replacement Data, the people behind NaturalStatTrick, the people behind OffsideReview, etc. The answers are out there for you. These people, like most scientists, control for as many variables as possible prior to rolling out their stats for public consumption. It’s next to impossible to control for everything. Thinking that that is the only way for every one of these metrics to be useful/applicable is folly. Science isn’t perfect and neither are stats. They’re a jumping off point for further analysis.

 

[BernieParent]

Marx never read Marshall and Disraeli never ran a regression.
Don't take those 19th century guys too seriously.

On the other hand:
Huff, How to Lie With Statistics, Norton 1954, is a classic.

One of my favorite papers:

Leamer, Edward E. 1983a. Let's take the con out of econometrics. American Economic Review: 73 (March):3 1-44.

Oh I know. I was just being low-level provocative with one of my favourite quotes during journalism school. A big part of my daily (medical) writing/editing is statistical analysis and what constitutes a well-designed study.