Boston Bruins Advanced Stat Thread

[neverwatchthegames]

One of the great mysteries to me is how Forbort passes the "eye test". It's not just analytics - if you watch him, you see how much worse he is than anyone else, especially Grizz. But, as Fluto so eloquently put it yesterday, he is "stout".

I'm with you on this. I guess people put a premium on stoutness and...I dunno...cardio maybe?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

To be honest he's not as bad as anti-forbort people make it seem.

He's an NHL defenseman with a niche. On this team in particular we just project higher expectations (You'd think for 3 mil this would be the case).

Orlov since he's not played with Forbort, dominated.

Clifton's stats away from Forbort, fantastic.

No players stats with Forbort are better with than without haha. Every other defenseman on this team is carrying him when he's on the ice at even strength.

Just my opinion but he's the weakest link on a team with not very many weaknesses. And to me that's ok to point out.

Forbort is their 6th defensemen.

It shouldn't be surprising that everyone else that partners with him have worse numbers than playing with the better defensemen.

 

[False Start]

I'm with you on this. I guess people put a premium on stoutness and...I dunno...cardio maybe?

He's stout, he's 6'4 230 and hits like Brandon Carlo.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Forbort is their 6th defensemen.

It shouldn't be surprising that everyone else that partners with him have worse numbers than playing with the better defensemen.

Now 7th. But the lack of flexibility with him - where he's even more ineffective than usual playing with anyone but Clifton - really hurts the Bruins when he's in the lineup.

 

[False Start]

Forbort is their 6th defensemen.

It shouldn't be surprising that everyone else that partners with him have worse numbers than playing with the better defensemen.

I was not a fan of signing the 6th defenseman for 3x3 million.

I said it the day we signed him.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Now 7th. But the lack of flexibility with him - where he's even more ineffective than usual playing with anyone but Clifton - really hurts the Bruins when he's in the lineup.

Yeah, he's killing them.

Wouldn't call him lacking flexibility in the sense that he can play LD or RD.

By the way, his +16 is the worst of all their defensemen. Funning how that seems to support the eye test.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Yeah, he's killing them.

Wouldn't call him lacking flexibility in the sense that he can play LD or RD.

By the way, his +16 is the worst of all their defensemen. Funning how that seems to support the eye test.

You’re in the advanced stat thread so I feel comfortable pushing back (again). The +16 just demonstrates what a flawed stat plus/minus is.

And he doesn’t play RD not sure where you’re getting that.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I was not a fan of signing the 6th defenseman for 3x3 million.

I said it the day we signed him.

To be fair, he was more like a 4th defenseman when he signed.

 

[Dizzay]

Gryz-Clifton pair kinda scares me in the playoffs......

I wonder if they go:
Gryz-McAvoy
Lindholm-Carlo
Orlov-Clifton

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You’re in the advanced stat thread so I feel comfortable pushing back (again). The +16 just demonstrates what a flawed stat plus/minus is.

And he doesn’t play RD not sure where you’re getting that.

How does that demonstrate the plus/minus is flawed? It tells us exactly where Forbort fits on the defense.

He played RD some early on this season before McAvoy came back. Played there last season also when paired with Riley or Zboril or Vaaka. But that's by memory of eye test so it could be wrong.

 

[DominicT]

Now 7th. But the lack of flexibility with him - where he's even more ineffective than usual playing with anyone but Clifton - really hurts the Bruins when he's in the lineup.

Hurt is not the appropriate word. They've lost 8 games. How is that hurting?

Not performing as well I will give you. Hurting I will not.

That is unless the individuals stats are more important then the team stat.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Hurt is not the appropriate word. They've lost 8 games. How is that hurting?

Not performing as well I will give you. Hurting I will not.

That is unless the individuals stats are more important then the team stat.

The individuals stats aren't more important. But if we just judge on wins/losses, then there's really nowhere to improve on this team. From a team perspective...our PP has been really bad lately, but we've won 10 in a row. That shouldn't obviate the need to improve the powerplay, right?

More specifically, the team performs much better with Grizz on the ice than Forbort. The analytics say it, and to me, I don't know how the "eye test" passes either.

 

[Smitty93]

Based on the analytics, seems like something like this might be the most beneficial setup:

Grzelcyk-McAvoy
Lindholm-Clifton
Orlov-Carlo

McAvoy, Lindholm, and Orlov would play the most total time, but it keeps one of them on the ice at all times and optimizes pairings for the best expected results (albeit based on small sample size).

Saying that, I doubt they do this. They clearly want to cycle through defensemen, and you wouldn't want to put Forbort in as a replacement for any of those pairings.

 

[GoBs]

Omg here we go again…
Forbort is valuable penalty killer and shot blocker
Some teams are relying on 25-30% of their offense from their powerplay

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Omg here we go again…
Forbort is valuable penalty killer and shot blocker
Some teams are relying on 25-30% of their offense from their powerplay

But this is the Advanced Stats Thread. Advanced stats don't illustrate that Forbort is worth that value of being on the PK. Is he really better to have him on the PK than Orlov, versus the value of having Grizz on the ice 5v5 instead of Forbort.

 

[neverwatchthegames]

Based on the analytics, seems like something like this might be the most beneficial setup:

Grzelcyk-McAvoy
Lindholm-Clifton
Orlov-Carlo

McAvoy, Lindholm, and Orlov would play the most total time, but it keeps one of them on the ice at all times and optimizes pairings for the best expected results (albeit based on small sample size).

Saying that, I doubt they do this. They clearly want to cycle through defensemen, and you wouldn't want to put Forbort in as a replacement for any of those pairings.

These would be my pairings as well.

 

[JOKER 192]

I do not.

I do not.

Me neither, I don't put Ketchup on anything it's disgusting.

So my take away reading here.
If the advanced stats don't say what we want them to say then we chalk it up to bad luck or poor goaltending.

If however they say what we want them to say then no such excuses are offered up for that player.

I don't subscribe to advanced stats because I see way to many variables for them to tell the whole and accurate story. Proof of that is when we attribute results we don't like to bad luck and poor goaltending . Which can actually be factual but the stats don't tell us that.
For me they complicate what
I enjoy the most which is watching the game. Only to be told I didn't actually see what I thought I did.

Stats are but one tool among a tool box full and way to much work for the miniscule advantage they provide IMO.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Me neither, I don't put Ketchup on anything it's disgusting.

So my take away reading here.
If the advanced stats don't say what we want them to say then we chalk it up to bad luck or poor goaltending.

If however they say what we want them to say then no such excuses are offered up for that player.

I don't subscribe to advanced stats because I see way to many variables for them to tell the whole and accurate story. Proof of that is when we attribute results we don't like to bad luck and poor goaltending . Which can actually be factual but the stats don't tell us that.
For me they complicate what
I enjoy the most which is watching the game. Only to be told I didn't actually see what I thought I did.

Stats are but one tool among a tool box full and way to much work for the miniscule advantage they provide IMO.

This is a really poor representation of what several posters have taken time to carefully write out in many posts in this thread and elsewhere.

 

[GatorMike]

You know what would be nice?

It'd be nice if there were one thread on this forum where people who like analytics and find them interesting could discuss them without having to defend the entire analytics industry or why we find them useful and/or interesting.

 

[Gee Wally]

You know what would be nice?

It'd be nice if there were one thread on this forum where people who like analytics and find them interesting could discuss them without having to defend the entire analytics industry or why we find them useful and/or interesting.

I’ll do you one better. Dear old HF has entire Forum:

By The Numbers

Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

forums.hfboards.com

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I’ll do you one better. Dear old HF has entire Forum:

By The Numbers

Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

forums.hfboards.com

If you keep pushing us further away Wally we’ll end up on a soccer forum.

 

[Gee Wally]

If you keep pushing us further away Wally we’ll end up on a soccer forum.

Im not pushing at all.
Just pointing out again an alternative.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Im not pushing at all.
Just pointing out again an alternative.

There’s lots of alternatives. Some of us would like to talk Analytics on the Bruins board we frequent.

 

[Sheppy]

Me neither, I don't put Ketchup on anything it's disgusting.

So my take away reading here.
If the advanced stats don't say what we want them to say then we chalk it up to bad luck or poor goaltending.

If however they say what we want them to say then no such excuses are offered up for that player.

I don't subscribe to advanced stats because I see way to many variables for them to tell the whole and accurate story. Proof of that is when we attribute results we don't like to bad luck and poor goaltending . Which can actually be factual but the stats don't tell us that.
For me they complicate what
I enjoy the most which is watching the game. Only to be told I didn't actually see what I thought I did.

Stats are but one tool among a tool box full and way to much work for the miniscule advantage they provide IMO.

I do enjoy ketchup chips, though. I'm not going to lie...

 

[Gee Wally]

There’s lots of alternatives. Some of us would like to talk Analytics on the Bruins board we frequent.

thats why this is here as I said in first post.