Brady Tkachuk is on pace for one of the greatest season in analytics history

[sufferer]

He's awesome, as is Matt Tkachuk. Can't wait to them on Olympic ice with Matthews/Eichel.

 

[Mickey Marner]

Should probably mention which expected goals your using, since they all have different results.

But yeah, Brady Tkachuk tries to score a lot of garbage goals.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

He'll eventually slow down and have slump, like any other player in the league (most)

To be honest, he hasnt been good at all compared to what we're used to. More likely he plays better than worse, he's just elite at what he does(around the net).

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Threads like this make me feel like hockey has passed me by.

 

[Bedards Dad]

Thats pretty impressive. The nly thing I'll note is somone was explaining this weekend that xGoals/60 dos not take into account schooter skill. So it counts a Jimmy Vesey (lol) shot the same as an Auston Matthews shot.

Here is the list sorted by importance (from Money Puck model):

1. Shot Distance From Net
2. Time Since Last Game Event
3. Shot Type (Slap, Wrist, Backhand, etc)
4. Speed From Previous Event
5. Shot Angle
6. East-West Location on Ice of Last Event Before the Shot
7. If Rebound, difference in shot angle divided by time since last shot
8. Last Event That Happened Before the Shot (Faceoff, Hit, etc)
9. Other team’s # of skaters on ice
10. East-West Location on Ice of Shot
11. Man Advantage Situation
12. Time since current Powerplay started
13. Distance From Previous Event
14. North-South Location on Ice of Shot
15. Shooting on Empty Net

Expected Goals (xG) Models Explained

As you can see, none of the factors include the player. That said it's the best we have for now, but I do look forward to the day the player quality is added to this list.

 

[jetsforever]

IDK how that stat is defined, but cool I guess?

 

[Bedards Dad]

So you're saying that you would rather take Connor McDavid over Zach Hyman? You must be a crazy person.

While I get your point, Zach Hyman is 31st in the league in ixg%. Players behind Hyman that I would take over him are:

• Kane
• Aho
• Barkov
• Barzal
• Ratanen
• Bergeron
• Connor
• etc etc

So there are scenarios that a player with a lower xGoals would be taken 10 times out of 10. Lets leave the hyperbole at the door.

 

[Bedards Dad]

IDK how that stat is defined, but cool I guess?

Here you go.

Expected Goals (xG) Models Explained

 

[Kairi Zaide]

Because I'm seeing a lot of people implying that this shows advanced stats are meaningless and all, I just want to point out that nobody who's competent in their use of analytics would claim that Tkatchuk is on pace to have one of the greatest season in analytics history.

xG, mostly ixG (individual xG), is a measure of central tendency amongst all players, which as stated previously, doesn't take into account for individual shooting talent. Its value lies in that if you were to predict future individual goals scored amongst all players in the league (including players with the highest shooting talents and those with the lowest), you would have better results using both actual individual goals scored and individual expected goals than just actual individual goals.

As with every stat, there is a distribution around central tendencies, with players being below or above by sometimes several standard deviations (if the distribution is assumed to be normal).

 

[Artorius Horus T]

Sens fan here, just shows how meaningless some of these advanced stats are. Solid player but he isn't dominating games by any stretch of the imagination.

This 100%

 

[iCanada]

Because I'm seeing a lot of people implying that this shows advanced stats are meaningless and all, I just want to point out that nobody who's competent in their use of analytics would claim that Tkatchuk is on pace to have one of the greatest season in analytics history.

xG, mostly ixG (individual xG), is a measure of central tendency amongst all players, which as stated previously, doesn't take into account for individual shooting talent. Its value lies in that if you were to predict future individual goals scored amongst all players in the league (including players with the highest shooting talents and those with the lowest), you would have better results using both actual individual goals scored and individual expected goals than just actual individual goals.

As with every stat, there is a distribution around central tendencies, with players being below or above by sometimes several standard deviations (if the distribution is assumed to be normal).

Advanced stats aren't meaningless. They're just frequently very overstated and used to push absurd narratives. Unlike say baseball analytics, most hockey analytics take a step away from a guys contributions that win games (goals / points / +/- to Corsi / expected goals as apposed to say runs to on-base %).

For example, according to some Nichuskin is better than Draisaitl. Clearly absurd.

 

[CraigsList]

Finally, a reason to say I pick him over Matthews.

 

[Pez68]

This is a satirical thread, right?

 

[foggyvisor]

Im not anti analytic at all, but the term 'expected goals' always makes me laugh.. Reminds me of the 'hypothetical dollars' from South Park.

I make fun of anyone who quotes expected goals. We should have an Expected Stanley Cups.

 

[Bedards Dad]

I make fun of anyone who quotes expected goals. We should have an Expected Stanley Cups.

It has value, just not on it's own.

 

[NyQuil]

Inevitably every discussion of a statistical metric focuses on a quirk or an outlier as opposed to the simple fact that a given statistical tool represents one of many approaches to the evaluation of a hockey player that should in all good conscience be considered in concert with others as opposed to being relied upon singularly.

 

[Brobust]

Someone recently posted on twitter that most teams' internal analytics and tracking rates Brady Tkachuk a lot lower than public tracking. There seems to be some miscounting going on when he stands a foot from the goalie and just whacks away.

 

[Avelanche]

Tkachuk is ~4 goals goals behind (has scored 6 total goals) of that 10.18 of total expected.

Matthews has scored ~10 goals more (18 total) than his expected 8.09.

Just statistical variation or is there something flawed how these are count?

These stats really aren’t meant to be looked at after 20 games.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

I hope this is satire

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Shame about the face, though

He looks like that awful Ronaldo statue thingy

 

[Michael HOMERUNing]

Tkachuk is ~4 goals goals behind (has scored 6 total goals) of that 10.18 of total expected.

Matthews has scored ~10 goals more (18 total) than his expected 8.09.

Just statistical variation or is there something flawed how these are count?

xG is more or less a measure of quality of scoring chances. Each time a player takes a shot, the number goes up based on the probability of the shot going in. The way they calculate this is by looking at past shots that are similar in location and circumstance (rebound, off the rush)

If it's a quality scoring chance, there's a bigger increase in xG, and if it's not then the increase is smaller.

Matthews' goal totals are always going to be way over his expected goal totals because he's an elite shooter. He scores goals on shots that most other players won't

 

[Korpse]

These stats really aren’t meant to be looked at after 20 games.

You can look at last season, Brady Tkachuk lead in ixG at 5v5, again ahead of Auston Matthews who was 4th. Gallagher was 2nd last season and 1st the season before. It's not a great stat and players regularly overperform it.

 

[snipes]

Tkachuk takes a shit load of shots.

Tkachuk also takes a shit load of shots near the net (banging away).

Of course his analytics will be good. Doesn't mean he's actually as good as they suggest though.

Really? We all thought this meant, without the context that analytics require, that he’s the greatest player in the NHL.

In all seriousness, he’s a good player and plays a hard tough game to handle. Any team would love to have him. Doesn’t play with the fake tough guy rat style of his brother Matthew nearly as much either.

 

[Dexter Colt]

Im not anti analytic at all, but the term 'expected goals' always makes me laugh.. Reminds me of the 'hypothetical dollars' from South Park.

Using this metric blindly can be a lot of fun. Player X can be a monster with a high expected goals but never bury shit.

The above was not a dig at Brady Tkachuk. I like him.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Yea but what is his expected buttocks exposure during off-season

that’s the only stat I care about, and Matthews is generational on that one