Analytics be damned!!

[SplitLeaf]

I'm quite tired of people using just normal corsi or fenwick for advanced stats. The game is completely different based on situation: PK, PP, 4v4, 5v5, tie, close. There are variations of Corsi and Fenwick for these situations but they arent used often enough in advanced stats.

One one of the stupidest stats I saw recently was in Vollman's hockey abstract. He used wins by 1 goal as a measurement of luck. Empty net goals alone make any metric looking at final score silly.

 

[Tak7]

I think most of you have it right - analytics and advanced stats are a neat way to look deeper into the game, but those people who use them as conclusive evidence or fact to back up their opinion, are just foolish.

Personally it gets annoying listening to the stat-guys both here & on twitter, parading their knowledge of Corsei etc., as if they are better fans than the rest of us.

Wanna know what stat I care about at the end of the night? The final score.

Wanna know the only stat I care about at the end of the regular season? Wins and final place in the standings.

 

[jughead42*]

I think most of you have it right - analytics and advanced stats are a neat way to look deeper into the game, but those people who use them as conclusive evidence or fact to back up their opinion, are just foolish.

Personally it gets annoying listening to the stat-guys both here & on twitter, parading their knowledge of Corsei etc., as if they are better fans than the rest of us.

Wanna know what stat I care about at the end of the night? The final score.

Wanna know the only stat I care about at the end of the regular season? Wins and final place in the standings.

x2

These advanced stat monkeys are convinced they have found the secret formula for hockey success and now they are all assburnt about Toronto proving their little theories wrong. The funny thing is any fan with half a brain knows already that it takes more than puck possession to win a hockey game, but this is apparently news to the stat heads.

 

[Tdot Soldier]

I know what this thread needs badly. You know, that clip when Alex Ovechkin cycles around the Leafs zone 3 times with the puck and then passes it to nobody and puck goes into the corner.

my good sir

 

[Jtabo]

Heres a statistic thats easy to understand. We're giving up way too many shots. Theres no way our goaltending can hold up if we keep giving up 35+ shots a night.

Have you ever played the position? Most goalies thrive in high shot games. Personally, I would have no problem playing against what Bernier did last night. A few times he was tested, but I would say at least 25-30 of the shots were routine saves.

 

[leafs in five]

what did Mats ever win? if the final story is told by wins and losses then the Leafs haven't had any good players in a long time.

 

[leafs in five]

it so happens that OV doesn't direct a shot toward the net in that clip!

 

[Duke Silver]

what did Mats ever win? if the final story is told by wins and losses then the Leafs haven't had any good players in a long time.

We're talking about team performance, not individual performance.

 

[Jtabo]

Leafs remind me of Tampa in the playoffs from a few years back (the year Boston won it) with the exception being we have more depth, better skilled guys, and stronger goaltending. That team also almost beat a team that went all the way. It is a proven system and I don't have a problem with it. I still stand by my prediction (from 2010) that the Leafs will win a cup this decade.

 

[Razz]

Meh...losing teams always have tons of shots, it's what you do when you are losing. The Leafs have really skilled forwards and often play with a Lead. Goalies love seeing lots of rubber anyway. As long as they can see the puck, who cares how many shots hit them?

 

[ponder]

There are many, many ways to build a good team. We have a good team. That is really all that matters.

 

[Epictetus]

Eh. There are flaws in advanced stats, but I will take it over the 'eye test' and various other visual cues like 'watching the game' that are even more flawed when it comes to player evaluation.

 

[BayStreetBullies*]

Eh. There are flaws in advanced stats, but I will take it over the 'eye test' and various other visual cues like 'watching the game' that are even more flawed when it comes to player evaluation.

What is it that you think scouts do?

 

[knorthern knight]

Hi all; a Winnipeg+Toronto fan here, living in the GTA but grew up in Winnipeg. My take on "puck luck" is that it ignores something called "making your own luck". A good defense (including backcheck) that forces a lot of low-percentage shots from the boards or blueline will be labelled "lucky" by advanced stats guys. On the other hand, forwards who can break in quick and deep will have better than average scoring percentage.

A question for advanced-stat supporters, is there a statistical breakdown for shots by player by distance range? E.g. shots from...

• 0 to 5 feet out
• 5 to 10 feet
• 10 to 20 feet
• etc, etc

A player is a lot more likely to score from 5 feet out than on a "Vesa Toskala special".

 

[Median]

I'm curious if anyone has broken down the Corsi/Fenwick and PDO numbers for specific players / lines being on the ice.

Are our crappy possession and shot differential numbers a systems thing, or is a handful of players dragging the averages down? Like we played Colton Orr a lot last season, I'm sure that didn't help.

 

[Poignant Discussion*]

EPIC post by Palmateer. Thank you so much.

Advanced stats bother me in baseball too. Whenever I'm like "hey, that player is pretty good", all I hear is "blah blah blah his XFIP and SIERA are outliers and he will regress to the mean"...honestly, I don't care.

There are people who actually were downgrading Ichiro Suzuki joining the 4000 hit club saying it wasn't special. TWO others have done it but it's not special

 

[Rielly4]

Leafs remind me of Tampa in the playoffs from a few years back (the year Boston won it) with the exception being we have more depth, better skilled guys, and stronger goaltending. That team also almost beat a team that went all the way. It is a proven system and I don't have a problem with it. I still stand by my prediction (from 2010) that the Leafs will win a cup this decade.

i agree. Our blueline, forward group and goaltending looks really solid moving forward, youth, skill, toughness, leadership are all there.. We just maybe need a bit more depth.

 

[Grapes03]

There are people who actually were downgrading Ichiro Suzuki joining the 4000 hit club saying it wasn't special. TWO others have done it but it's not special

They have a point. He got a lot of his hits playing professionally in Japan, which is a substantial downgrade in competition.

 

[Purity*]

my good sir

LMAO I wonder what Gunnarsson was thinking the whole time he was defending him: "Wtf is Ovie doing??"

 

[HellasLEAF]

Why not go as far back as last year, when the team was seemingly in the playoffs for 3/4 of a season. Add them up and we are 5/6th a playoff team over two years.

Something like that.

We're good. We've been good for a while actually.

 

[Killion]

We're good. We've been good for a while actually.

Yep. We have been. Not out of the norm at all yet people panic. No idea what thats all about.

 

[Raym11]

until a stat measures quality of shots opposed to quantity. Looking at shots on goals means squat. A team can shoot from the perimeter all game and end up with more shots then the Leafs. We're one of those teams that turns the puckover instead of taking deep shots as we tend to try to move the puck into sweet spots. Jason Blake isnt on our team anymore, shots on goal go down, yet production and success go up.

 

[Bravid Nonahan]

Advanced stats are more credible in baseball. In hockey you have the puck randomly richocheting (sp?) off of people, you have scrambles in the crease, you have fights that change momentum, you have all sorts of things that are not repetitive. WIth baseball, you are guaranteed that the pitchers are gonna throw the ball at least somewhere near the strike zone at least 100 times during the game.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

my good sir

I am not sure what Ovie's possession stats are, but it is well known he coasts when he doesn't have the puck. Analytics who cite the importance of possession probably have not watched Ovie without the puck. He rarely backchecks with vigor, there is no stat that measures how a player plays without the puck.

 

[weems]

Eh. There are flaws in advanced stats, but I will take it over the 'eye test' and various other visual cues like 'watching the game' that are even more flawed when it comes to player evaluation.

This isnt baseball.
A talented scouts eye will always be > that of some advanced stats.