Discussion in 'Los Angeles Kings' started by kingsboy11, Mar 19, 2021.
So ya, lets continue bashing Dom. His "model" is basically all about goals scored above or below expectation.
I like him for some stuff, but he is very critical. I used to really like Rob Vollman, who now works for the kings, as he would come onto the local radio station here. He is more of a guy that, to me, uses advance stats practically. For Dom it is the be all and end all.
I will not pretend this is true, but if the Kings did trade quick who would be their expansion draft bait? And would it damage their chances to maybe make the playoffs this year?
People can be annoyed by those comments/rankings in the Athletic, but it's not like they don't have a point.
The Kings are averaging a pathetic 1.67 5v5 goals per game. That's usually a pretty good indicator that your team sucks.
For perspective the lowly Ducks average 1.74 and the Sharks average 1.95.
This is me asking out of ignorance- would we be able to expose Grosenick with this tenure in the NHL and AHL?
Amadio was put on waivers??
Now who will be the designated whipping boy? Carter? Macdermid? Maatta? We should set up a new poll!
pfff wagner easy
Perhaps, but the Kings are just about the most disciplined team in the league and have the highest net penalty differential of any team. They're also one of the best teams on the power play. Advanced stats don't paint the whole picture.
The Kings don't have a lot of organizational goaltending depth right now. Trading Quick would leave them very vulnerable.
Not trading Quick. The rumblings earlier were the Kings were happy with the goaltending tandem. Plus, the kings need quick for the expansion draft.
Amadio down MacDermid next please hockey gods
I'd love to draft Wallstedt if we miss out on one of the defensemen. Quick -> Petersen -> Wallstedt.
very very good point.
If this did theoretically happen, we would need to get another goalie back for depth
Anyone: Does exposing Grosenick count as exposing a goalie if we protect Cal Worthington?
Easy fix any trade of quick gets a goalie back as a part of the package
Quick is in the same category as Dustin Brown. Sure some teams might be interested but they aren't gonna offer anything of value. The Kings don't need the cap space so they're better off keeping them.
I do expect the Kings to be drafting a goaltender relatively high in one of the next two drafts.
Ok, as a fan that don't understand anything about these numbers, tell me why I should be concerned about it? The Atlantic may have a point, but if I can't understand it, I'm not going to be as invested with what they say about the Kings' stats. Sometimes, regarding when people talk analytics, it's ok to dumb things down for people to understand.
I dont get the Macdermid hate.
I would be more open to dealing Quick than Brown
I do like looking to expected goals as one reference point of analysis when you’re comparing teams relatively, but they’re certainly not the end-all, be-all of hockey analysis. That’s especially true when the models vary widely depending on which source you’re looking at.
It’s been documented elsewhere that some of the models based on the public shot location data are not very good because the data are not very accurate. (As far as I know, Dom is using publicly available data.) From everything I’ve read and heard, the proprietary team models are much more accurate.
I actually listened to an interesting podcast along these lines the other day that gives good perspective on data v. eye test, especially when it comes to teams as they play systematically: Ep.388: Making Necessary Adjustments
for me it's not that i hare MacD but prefer Clague
If someone's willing to overpay for Quick, I'm all over it. It would just be practical, but no one is going to overpay for him so it won't be an issue. He's going to retire a King I'm fairly confident.
With Malkin placed on IR, I expect Hextall to replace his production by placing a claim for Michael Amadio.
He's not under contract next year so he won't meet the exposure standard. I don't think goalies have a games played requirement though.
I mean the stat I gave is pretty simple. 5v5 goals divided by games played.
As far as the expected goals model Dom is using, I'm not an expert on it, but it's based on likely scoring relative to the number of quality chances/shots the team is producing.
So in the NHL if a goal is scored on average once per 10 high danger chances, then you could deduce from the number of high danger chances what a teams expected goals scoring rate is going to be.
Conversely you could estimate expected goals a team is going to give up using this metric.
The difference between the two numbers, gives you insight into how a good a team is.
Separate names with a comma.