2018-19 stats and underlying metrics thread

[DRW204]

 

[Maukkis]

bUt LaInE wOuLd ImPrOvE wItH sChEiFeLe.

I'm genuinely surprised CLT hasn't been utilised regularly this year. I think they have proven themselves as a top tier shutdown unit already. Ehlers is a boon, whereas Laine's season is just astonishingly FUBAR. That has to change.

 

[DRW204]

bUt LaInE wOuLd ImPrOvE wItH sChEiFeLe.

I'm genuinely surprised CLT hasn't been utilised regularly this year. I think they have proven themselves as a top tier shutdown unit already. Ehlers is a boon, whereas Laine's season is just astonishingly FUBAR. That has to change.

I think Copp-Lowry-Tanev should be reunited now.

Prior to the TDL i don't think the team had an additional top-9 caliber C to center a scoring line effectively (Roslovic perhaps? But don't think his game has been that great this year). But now with Hayes in the mix perhaps move Copp back to the Wing and Little at C

 

[Whileee]

Disconcerting Travis Yost interview yesterday on 1290. He says a team's underlying stats for the last 25 games of the season are more predictive of playoff performance than the season as a whole. If that pans out for the Jets, people will be wondering who let the Senators into the playoffs.

It's not a good sign for the Jets but there is a ton of noise / statistical error in those models. I won't be that surprised if the Jets or any team other than the Bolts get knocked out first round, but I also won't be that surprised if the Jets make it through at least a couple of rounds. Goaltending is really going to be a key along with the big questions around whether Scheifele returns to his form from last year's playoffs and whether Morrissey comes back healthy and sharp enough to transform how the Jets' top D pair plays.

 

[Maukkis]

Trying to make sense of the goaltending in the Central. All data from Corsica, 5v5 and goalies with 200+ minutes taken into account.

	GP	xSV%	dSV%	GSAA/60
CHICAGO
Crawford	37	91.39	0.07	0.02
Ward	31	90.92	0.68	0.23
Delia	15	91.41	1.03	0.41
COLORADO
Varlamov	47	92.04	0.17	0.05
Grubauer	35	92.44	-0.02	-0.01
DALLAS
Bishop	45	92.10	1.54	0.46
Khudobin	40	92.59	1.08	0.34
MINNESOTA
Dubnyk	67	93.14	-1.31	-0.37
Stalock	19	92.52	-1.86	-0.50
NASHVILLE
Rinne	53	92.00	0.75	0.22
Saros	31	92.11	0.23	0.07
ST. LOUIS
Allen	46	92.48	-0.88	-0.26
Binnington	30	92.26	2.03	0.51
Johnson	19	91.55	-3.42	-1.00
WINNIPEG
Hellebuyck	61	92.34	-0.42	-0.14
Brossoit	21	92.13	1.87	0.60

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Some reference points for evaluating what 'good' and 'bad' are supposed to look like:

John Gibson: 56 GP - 1.39 dSV% - 0.44 GSAA/60
Robin Lehner: 44 GP - 0.99 dSV% - 0.29 GSAA/60

Carey Price: 64 GP - 0.04 dSV% - 0.01 GSAA/60

Craig Anderson: 49 GP - -0.75 dSV% - -0.27 GSAA/60
Martin Jones: 61 GP - -1.84 dSV% - -0.49 GSAA/60

-----

Chicago has benefited greatly from their trio. Even with some porous xG numbers against, they have been up to the task. If and when they will go to the next season with Delia as a full-timer, things should become interesting there. We'll see if he can continue from where he left off this year.

Colorado isn't even interesting. They're about as average as it gets. That, though, maybe isn't the most desirable outcome from a tandem that is making close to 9 million a year. Nevertheless, their success isn't a by-product of unsustainable goaltending, so that is always a bonus.

Dallas, Dallas, Dallas. They are being carried hard by Bishop and Khudobin. It must be said that the team in front of them is doing a fine job limiting quality against, but the way in which their goalies have responded is remarkable. Only time will tell if this is sustainable or not, but for the time being, they will be rewarded with a playoff spot for their goalies' efforts.

Minnesota's goaltending has cost them a playoff appearance. There is no way around it. Their combined raw GSAA of -25 equals to about 8 points in the standings, which would put the Wild into a wild card spot. Instead, the best team at limiting xG against is somehow having struggles at this area of the game. Stalock hasn't shown one sign of being able to step in for an underperforming Dubnyk. Mindblowing.

Nashville's goaltending can only be described with one word - good. Even after his fall from otherworldly grace, Rinne remains a positive contributor, and Saros hasn't let the team down as a backup either. If you're Poile, you've got to like this tandem even going into Rinne's final years.

St. Louis is a wild one. On one hand, you have a proven non-starter in Allen, who hasn't taken that step forward again this year. You'd think that experiment is over at this point. Then, on the other hand is Binnington, who would seriously make a decent Vezina candidate despite only having racked up 30 games. His numbers are stunning, and even behind a great Blues team, he has exceeded all possible expectations. A lot of the praise for their surge to the playoff picture should absolutely be directed towards JB. I wonder if he is going to be the one to finally stabilise that crease, or is this going to be a flash in a pan.

Oh, and then you have Johnson, who has been a f***ing catastrophe.

And finally, us. We know this story: while Hellebuyck has had a nice resurgence as of late, he still remains a slightly negative goalie over the whole season. Brossoit, on the other hand, has been exceptionally good over a much smaller sample size. Could be much worse.

 

[Maukkis]

To add to the previous post, looked up some goalies around the league for fun to see whether there are some obvious Vezina candidates or anything.

- Greiss: 1.61 dSV%, 0.48 GSAA/60. Absolutely stunning from a guy who got royally hung out to dry behind Weight's system last year.
- Halak: 1.84 dSV%, 0.53 GSAA/60. With just over 1800 minutes of 5v5 hockey at this level this year, I don't think Halak is as done as I previously thought.
- Mrazek: 0.95 dSV%, 0.26 GSAA/60. He has had one very quietly successful season. In fact, a bunch of these UFA goalies from last year have done so. Khudobin, Lehner, Halak, Brossoit... weird and impressive.

And now, the bad.

- Quick: -2.31 dSV%, -0.67 GSAA/60. It would be unfair to blame one guy for LA's horrific season, but God, these numbers are bad. I reckon Quick has been the worst starter in the league this year, and there is a bit of a gap between him and the next candidates too.
- Vasilevskiy: 0.07 dSV%, 0.02 GSAA/60. The bad here isn't the player, but rather that these will likely be the numbers of the Vezina winner. A guy whose stats are about perfectly in line with the league average...
- Niemi: -2.64 dSV%, -0.83 GSAA/60. From what I saw, Niemi has some of the worst numbers for a backup goalie who has retained his spot for more or less the entire year. And to say that he has utterly wasted Montreal's great on-ice play would be a gross understatement. Even though the sample size is very small, this is catastrophic. Giving your opponent a head start of almost one goal per game? Yikes.


The Vezina will be a tough one this year. A significant amount of teams have had their goalies split time very evenly, which is usually a negative thing for the voters. Of goalies with 50+ games, you have two goalies with a GSAA of more than 10: Gibson and Rinne. Gibson stands out significantly, but he's not getting one vote with the mindset of 'you must be in the playoffs to count for anything'.

Gibson is going to get snubbed. Again. Vasilevskiy-Andersen-Rinne/Bishop as the top 3 seems likely, yet unfair.

 

[Mud Turtle]

Yikes. That’s ugly.
Two constants in the bottom there. Laine and Little.

 

[Mud Turtle]

So with the underlying numbers SO good for Lowry, Tanev and Copp, how would an entire forward roster made up of those players perform?
Despite their lack of scoring, they still consistently score more than their opponents. And it’s not like they haven’t matched up against top lines before either.
Just curious for opinions on this. I’ve always wondered.

 

[ps241]

bUt LaInE wOuLd ImPrOvE wItH sChEiFeLe.

I'm genuinely surprised CLT hasn't been utilised regularly this year. I think they have proven themselves as a top tier shutdown unit already. Ehlers is a boon, whereas Laine's season is just astonishingly FUBAR. That has to change.

I have blocked what seems like the last 30 or 40 Laine threads but I can’t imagine who’s fault it is now because we know it’s never Pate’s fault.

 

[JetsFan815]

I have blocked what seems like the last 30 or 40 Laine threads but I can’t imagine who’s fault it is now because we know it’s never Pate’s fault.

The latest narrative among some is that it's the coach's fault and that the coach has held him back.

 

[JetsFan815]

It's only been 4 games so small sample size caveats apply- in the month of April, the Jets have been #1 in the league in Corsi and #5 in Expected Goals. Wheeler and Scheifele's uptick and Buff has been a big part of it. Hopefully this carries on into the playoffs.

 

[Mud Turtle]

It's only been 4 games so small sample size caveats apply- in the month of April, the Jets have been #1 in the league in Corsi and #5 in Expected Goals. Wheeler and Scheifele's uptick and Buff has been a big part of it. Hopefully this carries on into the playoffs.

This short little post filled me with hope!

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

There is a definite large coaching contribution to Laine's play. Watch where he goes on the ice now. He backs his ass into the opposing goalie like he's Dave Andreychuk and hangs out on the half boards waiting to lose a inconsequential puck battle. He used to skate into the zone with the puck a lot. Now, that never happens. Laine didn't forget how to play hockey. I'm afraid our coaching staff turned a flawed superstar into a ****ty 4th liner. I ****ing hate Paul Maurice.

This is the de-development of Laine.

 

[Whileee]

Rank these three teams in xGF% in the last 10 games of the season... (or last 12 games, if you prefer)...

TB
WSH
WPG

 

[WPGChief]

I'm probably ruining Whileee's post, but playing around with NaturalStatTrick's new xG model and the ability to look at a custom amount of games played, here's how teams look going into the playoffs (all 5v5, score zone and venue adjusted):

Storylines:

• Toronto is really good at offense but equally as bad at defense, especially in terms of the quality of what was given up. If Andersen can revert back to the beginning of the season and stop above expected, this team is dangerous.
• Montreal was probably cheated out of a playoff spot because of a poor shooting % and a poorer save percentage. Price couldn't carry them far enough. Will be a dangerous team next year, likely.
• On the opposite hand, Calgary keeps on trucking in spite of poor goaltending.
• Pittsburgh has quietly become a powerhouse because of stellar goaltending from Murray, but everything else is just as stellar too - they're probably owed some goals in the next little while. Also see: Dallas Stars.
  
• Boston and San Jose are both pretty good teams, the difference being that Martin Jones apparently can't stop a puck lately.
• Washington and Tampa both going into the playoffs on very high shooting percentages even though most of the other metrics are middle of the pack.
• Winnipeg has limped into the playoffs surviving on essentially above average shooting % and save %.
• Buffalo is crap but probably don't deserve as much crap as Detroit and Ottawa should be getting.

A spoiler/hint to Whileee's post because I don't think I ruined it here, in terms of all situations (based on NaturalStatTrick: TBL, WSH, and WPG are all within 3% of each other but are not nearly as close to the top or bottom of the league as you might expect.

 

[ps241]

The latest narrative among some is that it's the coach's fault and that the coach has held him back.

GTFO

I blame my baby bomber friends for f***ing up a generation of their millennial litter by giving them all medals when they lost. It’s never our spoiled, bubble wrapped ruprecth kids fault. Blame the teachers, THE COACHES, the boss.

Where did we go wrong.....we were beaten and tormented by parents and authority figures when we were kids just to turn around and get rolled by our entitled, hipster, self absorbed, selfie snapping, posers.

Sadly I guess it’s not just the North American parents who dropped the ball......shame on you Scandinavia Boomers for abandoning the traditions of oppressing our children.

 

[JetsFan815]

Whatever is going on with Scheifele and Wheeler at 5 on 5 should be like a horror movie for the fans. This season is what it is but Wheeler/Scheifele stuff has long term implications for the future. I see two players who are having one hell of a time breaking 50% in their underlying metrics game after game and it has been going on for a long time. If this is the new normal then we are truly f***ed. If you go on Corsica and look at CSW line's stats from last season and compare them to this season, it is truly depressing how far they have fallen, I just hope that it's not one of these two falling off a cliff.

 

[Board Bard]

Whatever is going on with Scheifele and Wheeler at 5 on 5 should be like a horror movie for the fans. This season is what it is but Wheeler/Scheifele stuff has long term implications for the future. I see two players who are having one hell of a time breaking 50% in their underlying metrics game after game and it has been going on for a long time. If this is the new normal then we are truly ****ed. If you go on Corsica and look at CSW line's stats from last season and compare them to this season, it is truly depressing how far they have fallen, I just hope that it's not one of these two falling off a cliff.

You often see players jawing at each other after a game ends. The look on their faces is invariably one of scorn or mockery or anger or vengeance, something denoting conflict. Last night Scheifele was in just such a chirping session with a Blues player after the horn, but the look on his face was more like sadness and pleading. That's not normal Scheifele, or normal chirping, or normal hockey. It gave me the impression there's something seriously off psychologically with Scheifele this season, like a death or lingering illness in the family, something along those lines. Maybe the ex-girlfriend, who knows, but he sure looked like a beaten man.

 

[Guffman]

I'll try to help:

Shot Metric Types
Corsi - shot attempts (goals, saves, misses, blocks)
Fenwick - unblocked shot attempts (goals, saves, misses)
Shots (on net) - as implied (goals, saves)
Goals - as implied (goals)
xGoals - expected goals (There are many different formulas but most are Fenwick adjusted for shot location and other factors. Note: reasoning why it's Fenwick adjusted and not Corsi adjusted is because the locational data in NHL pxp uses where the shot was blocked and not where the shot was taken)

Metric Forms
_F - events for team or for team with player on ice, ex: CF, xGF
_A - events against team or against team with player on ice, ex: CA, xGA
_D or _PM - differential or plus minus, ex: CD = CF - CA
_F% - events for team relative to all events, ex: CF% = CF / (CF + CA)
_/60 - events relative to an hour of ice time, ex: CF/60

Type of Adjustments
Score Adjustments - adjusts the volume of shots based on the score of the game and period
Venue Adjustments - adjusts for home team advantage
Arena Adjustments - adjusts for arena biases in how some arenas tend to count more conservatively/liberally or tend to push shots one way or another
RAPM - adjusts using ridge regression for players on the ice (QoC and QoT), zone starts, schedule (B2B or not), and the previously mentioned adjustments



Now to try and answer your questions directly...

1) Generally not. xGF is to account for shot quality not finishing talent. These are considered two separate skillsets and so they are typically separated. There was on xGF model that accounted for shooter talent but that model no longer exists.

2) xGoals use things like rush shots vs sustained pressure shots to adjust for shot quality. Again there is no adjustment for player shooting, but that is intentional. You can think of things like:
GF => xGF x luck x finishing talent
GA => xGF x luck x goaltending talent

3) xGF still matters for a player like Laine. Yes the average shot for Laine at the same location is worth more than the average player, but that doesn't mean that more shots or closer shots are not better for Laine to have. It's merely the shot finishing translator would be different. Ex: Laine has his worst career xGD/60 this season and his worst GD/60 this season (both when RAPM adjusted). That's not coincidental. That said, with Laine and Lemieux both having the worst xGD/60 (RAPM adjusted) on the Jets, I give Laine more leeway than a player like Lemieux with less finishing talent.

Garret, thanks for the above. One other question for you.

I see some people use xGF to assess how well goaltenders and individual players did in a particular game. That just seems completely inappropriate.

I thought this stat and other shot metric stats gain more meaning over a large block of time instead of using this on a game level. To use it at a game level would demand quite a bit more input data to assess the play than what is currently used to compile this data.

Can you please clarify?

 

[Whileee]

Whatever is going on with Scheifele and Wheeler at 5 on 5 should be like a horror movie for the fans. This season is what it is but Wheeler/Scheifele stuff has long term implications for the future. I see two players who are having one hell of a time breaking 50% in their underlying metrics game after game and it has been going on for a long time. If this is the new normal then we are truly ****ed. If you go on Corsica and look at CSW line's stats from last season and compare them to this season, it is truly depressing how far they have fallen, I just hope that it's not one of these two falling off a cliff.

They both had good metrics in 2017/18,and sparkling metrics in the playoffs last season. I don't think it's necessarily a long-term issue. They just got into a lull where they weren't executing well defensively. Their Corsi numbers are pretty good in the playoffs so far.

 

[garret9]

Garret, thanks for the above. One other question for you.

I see some people use xGF to assess how well goaltenders and individual players did in a particular game. That just seems completely inappropriate.

I thought this stat and other shot metric stats gain more meaning over a large block of time instead of using this on a game level. To use it at a game level would demand quite a bit more input data to assess the play than what is currently used to compile this data.

Can you please clarify?

The more data you get, the more confidence you gain. There is no black or white, just change in confidence intervals.
That's all data, including that from eyetest.

So, yes, statistics like xG and Corsi become more meaningful as "good performance" and "good player" align together as sample increases. How confident you are depends on the sample size, but also what you are using to measure as well as what question you are trying to answer.

I'd argue that using those statistics are good tools to measure how well individuals perform in a particular game, as they will paint part of the picture... but not the whole picture... but enough that it cannot and should not be ignored... but I'm a lot more confident in those measures at 15 games than 1.

 

[Whileee]

The more data you get, the more confidence you gain. There is no black or white, just change in confidence intervals.
That's all data, including that from eyetest.

So, yes, statistics like xG and Corsi become more meaningful as "good performance" and "good player" align together as sample increases. How confident you are depends on the sample size, but also what you are using to measure as well as what question you are trying to answer.

I'd argue that using those statistics are good tools to measure how well individuals perform in a particular game, as they will paint part of the picture... but not the whole picture... but enough that it cannot and should not be ignored... but I'm a lot more confident in those measures at 15 games than 1.

Agreed, and well-stated. I would add that very large sample sizes can make even the most minute difference statistically significant, even if the effect size is unimportant. In most applied statistics, it is customary to share / display both the effect sizes and the statistical error (e.g. confidence intervals). We seldom see that in hockey analytics... it looks less elegant, I suppose.

 

[Jimby]

Interesting to see that so far this post season there has been zero correlation with regular season CF% and playoff success with the teams having the better regular season CF% getting eliminated by the poorer performing CF% team.

 

[garret9]

Interesting to see that so far this post season there has been zero correlation with regular season CF% and playoff success with the teams having the better regular season CF% getting eliminated by the poorer performing CF% team.

Sometimes you flip heads a lot in a row, but it takes a lot of flips to tell if it’s weighted.

I mean, the most slanted statistical game going in was TBL, which was 68% (lower odds than betting lines (open at 73 and closed at 77) or the overall media experts consensus (77) or fans in a survey (74)).

In fact, in all 4 eliminations stats thought an upset was more likely than experts, betting lines (open or close), or fans.
TBL: 68 vs 73, 77, 77, 74
CGY: 63 vs 68, 64, 67, 70
PIT: 52 vs 56, 55, 59, 62
WPG: 43 vs 48, 48, 46, 46

Also, one team with lower Corsi team got eliminated... WPG. That’s the one team everyone got right, and the only team anyone got right... and stats were most right on the right one and least wrong on the 3 wrong ones.

In case anyone curious these numbers are from Dom L., from Athletic and Hockey Graphs, who grabs surveys of stat models, betting lines, media outlets, and fans and then compares them every year. So far stats outperform the rest, this year and others.


FYI: the other ones by stats models: WSH is basically 50/50, BOS 52, NSH 62, and LVK 51.

 

[WPGChief]

It’s time to stop talking about analytics

Has the bearings to be an interesting article and series on what the purpose of analytics truly should be when you’re not just scraping its surface.