All Purpose Analytics and Extended Stats Discussion

I have praised Nick Jensen repeatedly this season, despite his offensive impact being incredibly small.

I have given the 4th line plenty of credit this year for their ability to play shutdown defensive minutes and free up the top 6 to play easier minutes.

I've agreed with Peter Laviolette's apparent strategy to play a slower paced game because the team's defense is its strength.

You're not really making a compelling argument if I can point to 3 counterexamples off the top of my head.

 

From what I can tell you're likely describing the Caps staff, whom we apparently don't trust with analytics.

 

You may be a student of stats but you're not a student of logic. Just because you say things doesn't mean you haven't said contradictory things.

You like Jensen I assume for his offensive POTENTIAL.
You've recently derided Lavi's use of the 4th line.
You've recently argued for not "stapling to the bench" the better offensive stat producers when leading in the 3rd period.

So excuse me if I don't buy into your counterexamples.

 

What is so objectionable about his posts in that thread? He listed some players he would like as replacements for "Orpik or Chorney". Well, in 2016, Orpik didn't have a ton of fans here, and not a single person here was predicting he was the key ingredient to a Cup that would come 2 years later. Lots of people were wrong about Orpik's value, for lots of reasons. Why does that "burn your beans" so much?

Are there times when fancy stats don't tell the whole story about a player's contributions? Of course, no one says otherwise, not even Twabby.

 

please stop Dave.......many of us saw the value in Orpik and openly supported him, especially in the postseason while some constantly crapped on the guy until forced to admit his worth in the end....only because Lord Stanley forced it.

Come on man...you know this is true. How are you not seeing a pattern is more curious to me?

and another thing.....fancy stats 100% of the time don’t tell the whole story about a player’s contribution (or even their potential negative contribution). 100%, not “at times”.

 

Sorry it's an old post and apparently the quote was clipped in my response for some reason. Maybe there was an edit.

Here's the whole posts:

Speculation: - Acq./Rost. Bldg./Cap/Lines etc. Part LXVII


Plenty of people disagreed with Twabby over Orpik's value. Myself included. And his argument was based entirely on the stats vs intangibles debate.

This isn't about one post so stop asking for specific examples among many thousands over many years.

 

You assume absolutely incorrectly, of course.

Yes, I think they're being overused in the third period sometimes. But overall their usage is pretty good.

Yes, that doesn't mean that I am completely ignoring defense. Indeed I have pointed out various times how Kuznetsov in particular has been a good defensive performer this year.

 

Brooks Orpik is one player of many on the team that won the Cup. Braden Holtby played up to snuff, Kuznetsov had his best run ever, and most importantly the Capitals got a boatload of luck in 2018. Pinning the win all on Brooks Orpik is curious, especially since he was one of the worst performers in the prior 3 seasons in the postseason.

 

More curious that Kuzy publicly admitted his and the team adoration for Orpik and his leadership.

all things you can’t put a number on. How to be a better pro....


This is always where the disconnect is. Math is only part of the complete analysis the Professionals like Lavi and staff make. They have so much more personal data than anyone else.

 

Citing support of Kuzy as proof of not being anti-defense and still trashing Orpik's value.

I rest my case.

 

Brooks Orpik “just one of many”.....


Case closed.

 

Eh, Brooks Orpik was a $5.5M 3rd pairing D on that Cup team, a luxury not many teams can ever afford. He was one of many players who contributed, that's not false, not undervaluing him either. His ES TOI in the playoffs was 5th among D, so he played 3rd pair minutes.

In fact looking back over that thread from 2016, it seems Twabby was suggesting, via fancies, that Orpik was an anchor as a top pair D, and belonged on the 3rd pair at best. That was 2016. The Caps DID NOT win the Cup in 2016 with Orpik on the top four. In 2016 his ES TOI was 3rd among D, they lost. They did finally win the Cup in 2018, with Orpik on the 3rd pair playing 3rd pair minutes, ahead of only Djoos, a puck moving D who could help get the puck out of the zone, since Orpik was no longer able to do that very effectively. The very next year he got Nacho duty a fair amount, but at $1M instead of $5.5M.

This IS NOT to suggest Orpik wasn't a key part of the Cup, he WAS. But its apparent that his contributions off the ice were outsized vs his contributions as a 3rd pairing D, one of many, on the ice.

Two things can both be true. Orpik can be a 3rd pair sheltered minutes guy, and he can be an invaluable contributor to the teams success. I don't see Twabby arguing that the latter cannot be true.

 

Dave, of course his off ice contributions were bigger than on ice in his last years. The fact that he was a major contributor in totality is all that matters in the Cup win.

Conversely, I don’t see anyone arguing Orpik was phenomenal on ice, but was he bad in your eyes, sub-par? You yourself say he was key. Was he “just one of many” or “key”?

I remember decent enough play on ice myself, I remember a GWG and a guy out there protecting the lead in the end.

I do see a poster constantly trying to devalue the guy even in with his self-admitted “being wrong” statement.

 

Lets not argue about the meaning of words here as in "key" vs "one of many". Lots of players were important to that Cup win. Nathan Walker and Alex Chiasson hooked up for a critical goal and barely saw any other ice time, how should we describe their contribution? It doesn't matter.

My point is, people were shitting on Twabby in that thread for suggesting the analytics told him Orpik belonged on the 3rd pair and would benefit from playing with a PMD. When they finally put him on the 3rd pair with a PMD, they won a Cup, but people are still shitting on Twabby's take. As I said, its possible Twabby was right that Orpik was not valuable as a top pair D, belonged on the 3rd pair if they wanted to win a Cup, and that he was also a key contributor as not many teams have a $5.5M player like Orpik on their 3rd pair, plus those off ice "intangibles" which are obviously important but not shown in fancies.

 

no let’s. That’s one crux of this argument. One is real, the other is a passive aggressive shot at a player who was invaluable.

Doesn’t it make it hard to defend your guy when you seem to be at odds with this basic point? “One of many” or “key”?

further going down the Orpik path is detracting from the greater point IMO. Anyone worth a lick knows Orpik was indeed KEY as you stated. Let’s leave it there.

So....if you don’t want someone to be “shit on” as you put it, maybe they don’t get in position for it so easily and so often.

 

Dude he was not just talking about shifting lines around, he was totally shitting on Orpik's value PERIOD. He wanted to play Chorney instead.




That's a trash take and it was based entirely on stats. We had endless arguments about this over the years. Again, it's not just one post. If Twabby 2021 pays a little lip service to maybe SOME value of traits that aren't quantifiable it's rare. Back before the Cup it was all about the fancy stats. IIRC he once told me he'd take a team full of Erik Karlssons and not ice a single stay at home or defensive player.



Scroll up in that thread and read some more.

Speculation: - Acq./Rost. Bldg./Cap/Lines etc. Part LXVII

Speculation: - Acq./Rost. Bldg./Cap/Lines etc. Part LXVII

His entire premise has been improving your offense makes playing defense unnecessary, or essentially insignificant. And that "intangibles" are worthless, as are "stay at home" d-men.

He eventually admitted he was wrong about Orpik, iirc, but apparently this has been flushed down the memory hole.

 

What's so controversial about having 6 Norris winners in your lineup?

Yeah, Erik Karlsson isn't what he used to be. But would you complain about the following defense corps:

Victor Hedman-Victor Hedman
Victor Hedman-Victor Hedman
Victor Hedman-Victor Hedman

Because in 2016, that was the argument I was making about Erik Karlsson.

 

He was a key part of changing the locker room culture and maybe helping players get more serious about fitness and nutrition. On the ice he was one of many contributors to the Cup but hardly an irreplaceable component on the ice. Again, 5th in ES ice time among D. He certainly wasn't a shut down D at that point. One could argue Kempny played a bigger role on the ice. One would never argue Kempny played a bigger role off the ice.

 

he was irreplaceable overall and on ice protecting the lead when they won it. Stop the BS.

 

Disagree his 13 mins ES TOI was irreplaceable. You're revising history. At that point in his career plenty of other D men at $5.5 M could have replaced him on the ice. Probably a handful of D men at 2.5M could have.

 

ok Dave, you’ve made your (unpopular) opinion of Orpik’s overall value known. Moving on.

It’s never been about his cap hit. Everyone knew he was overpaid, but that was the price of landing he and Nisky, and they both brought instant credibility to a D that lacked it for a decade or more.

your BS $2.5 million D doesn’t bring that.

 

When they were signed in 2014 they brought instant credibility and solidified a defense that was neglected for years, on that we agree. But by 2018, Orpik was on his last legs and no longer worth his salary for his on ice contribution at that pay rate. That's not just my unpopular opinion, BMac traded him, Colorado bought him out, and we took him back at $1M that summer. The point about his cap hit was that his 13 ES minutes on the ice could have been replaced with other players at or less than $5.5. I never said he wasn't a key member of the Cup team. These are two different aspects - on ice and overall contribution/off ice importance.

You think I'm disparaging Orpik in some manner, but I'm not. His overall contribution was huge and he will always be an important part of the Cup team - Batya!!! And I thank him for that. But by 2018, what he brought on the ice was what I described, a 3rd pair guy who needed help getting the puck out of his end. He could still bring the physical play, and thats valuable, but he simply wasn't a top 4 D anymore, thats not hating, its not BS, its simple facts. You're conflating my observation of his on ice ability in 2018 with his overall contribution to the Caps on and off the ice over his entire term... not sure why other than to defend against some point I never made. In fact we agree on more than we disagree on I bet, regarding Orpik.

 

Ok Dave.

nobody said any nonsense today about Top-4 or being worth his cap hit vs on ice performance.

just that he was integral, not simply “one of many” like I said, moving on.

 

Because of the discussion in the other thread about Backstrom, I decided to look at rolling 10 game averages of himself compared to the team. All data is from Evolving Hockey.

First, his overall 5v5 xGF%:



So aside from the middle of the season from about Games 17-25 he's underperformed the team in terms of xGF%, and in many stretches considerably underperformed the team. He hasn't really at any point considerably outperformed the team in a 10 game stretch.

Now it's probably good to take a look at both the offensive and defensive sides separately at 5v5.

Offensive generation:



There's not a single 10 game stretch where Backstrom is on the ice for more chances, as measured by expected goals for, than the team as a whole.

Now looking at defense (lower numbers are better in this graph):



Backstrom has performed pretty well defensively, as measured by expected goals against. Aside from a few 10 game stretches, Backstrom is generally performing better than the team in terms of expected goals against.

However, he has not outperformed the team defensively to nearly the same effect that he has underperformed the team offensively, at least in terms of expected goals. The last two graphs are to the same scale and you can see how the defensive rolling averages are tighter together than the offensive rolling averages.

The concerning thing is that Backstrom is no longer tasked with shutdown duty as he has been in years past, and Backstrom also enjoys significant offensive zone starts. Despite this he has struggled to generate offense. I think he can turn it around, and maybe there are some unique factors due to COVID and the compressed schedule that have hurt him more than others. But despite scoring a decent amount I don't think his overall level of play this season is a good sign going into the playoffs. Something needs to change.

 

What about other individuals? How big is the delta between their O and D plots? Is it particularly unusual to be only slightly better defensively than you underperform offensively? Or is it supposed to be 1:1?

He needs to shoot more, imo. As noted in the recent GDT he's shooting near half as much as he was early in the season. If he's looking to distribute and passing up shot chances-- instead trying to force the puck to teammates to "get them going" (possibly a coaching/personal role) --then chances for the entire line may drop even as they retain possession and the defense remains.