Oilers, Leafs, Flames near the bottom, Sens near the top - Analytics report

oilphan

Registered User
Nov 21, 2005
1,742
0
I'm not sure whether this belongs in the Analytics section, but I thought it would be interesting to discuss among a bunch on non-analytics people.

Rob Vollman's hockey abstract went through a process of trying to take luck out of equation when predicting the standing for next year. When normalized for these factors, he suggested that the Oilers, Leafs, Sabres and Flames would finish at the bottom of the standings next year, and the Sens at the top.

http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/20...ast-season-hockey-analytics-expert-concludes/

Whether you buy into this stuff or not, it is certainly interesting. I think the Sabres and Flames would not be up in arms if they finish near the bottom, but Oiler fans and Leaf fans would riot if the end up where this analysis predicts.
 

member 147413

Guest
Oh well, numbers are always right, we shouldn't even play hockey this season.
 

WilliamNylander

Papi's home
Jul 26, 2012
12,896
2,607
Yeah most analysts nailed the leafs being a lottery team last year, so I guess we might as well not even try this season
 

Lacaar

Registered User
Jan 25, 2012
4,066
1,212
Edmonton
As an Oiler fan I can't blame anyone for picking my team to finish crappy. It's admittedly been a pretty safe bet.
 

AUAIOMRN

Registered User
Aug 22, 2005
2,345
847
Edmonton
Ah yes, the world of "hockey analytics" - where winners are determined by who gets the most shots on net, not who scores the most goals.
 

Here I Pageau Again

Registered User
Jul 4, 2012
8,249
2,838
I'm shocked Leafs are at the bottom. While I might think they will do worse next year compared to this past season, I still think they will challenge for a playoff spot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pi

Registered User
Nov 16, 2010
48,856
13,830
Toronto
I don't get why it is "luck" if the Leafs have a high shooting percentage?

2012-13 5v5: 1st.
2011-12: 7th
2010-11: 5th
2009-10: 27th...probably the worst team the Leafs have iced in a decade or two.
2008-09: 12th.
2007-08: 15th.

So in the last 5-6 seasons...the Leafs have only been outside of the 15 in shooting percentage. It's not luck that the Leafs are a good goal scoring team, it's skill.

Over a 5 year period starting from 08 to 13' the Leafs rank 6th in the entire league in shooting percentage. Over that same period, the Leafs rank 29th in SV%.

Defense and goaltending was their problem. Both have gotten significantly better since 08.
 

jgravessimcoe

Registered User
Jun 21, 2009
479
0
niagara
Analytics find averages and put them on a massive pedestal. Good teams are good because they defy averages. Especially in a game that is so emotional and energy based, I have trouble with such stats.
 

Drury_Sakic

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
4,917
795
www.avalanchedb.com
I don't think its all that off base.

Most young teams DO need a healthy dose of "luck", I am not sure if I like that word to describe what that book is trying to take out of the equation, to turn from a young prospect filled team to the Chicago Blackhawks. Looking back at stats also will show very little about the potential of the roster as well, which is again why the Oilers would be at the bottom of that list, as they are full of that and not much else.

The same could be said for the Leafs, being a team that had been terrible for a few years running, finally turning the page last year. Looking at historical trends over the last 10 years, you would probably bet money on the Leafs being bad if stats alone was all you looked at.

Of course analytical analysis is going to say teams like the Oliers, Flames, and Leafs are going to be bad. DUH?

Nothing wrong with looking at the numbers are predicting things and no one should be hot and bothered if their team is shown to be bad based on these metrics....while we all know that hockey is so much more than just stats on a page....stats are a rough way to get a feel for the way a team is trending.
 

Knave

Registered User
Mar 6, 2007
21,627
2,226
Ottawa
I don't get why it is "luck" if the Leafs have a high shooting percentage?

Jordan Staal is an extreme example. Almost 30 goals his first year with an absolutely ridiculous shooting percentage of 22%.

The next year it plummeted to 7%. 3rd year it moved back up towards a more reasonable 13%.

Generally speaking if you have a high shooting percentage one year - it's not going to stay high. It will probably come back down to the average of what most NHL forwards have (in this case it's just a team number compared to the other teams though...).
 

sharks9

Registered User
Jan 16, 2012
16,444
2,604
Canada
I don't get why it is "luck" if the Leafs have a high shooting percentage?

2012-13 5v5: 1st.
2011-12: 7th
2010-11: 5th
2009-10: 27th...probably the worst team the Leafs have iced in a decade or two.
2008-09: 12th.
2007-08: 15th.

So in the last 5-6 seasons...the Leafs have only been outside of the 15 in shooting percentage. It's not luck that the Leafs are a good goal scoring team, it's skill.

Over a 5 year period starting from 08 to 13' the Leafs rank 6th in the entire league in shooting percentage. Over that same period, the Leafs rank 29th in SV%.

Defense and goaltending was their problem. Both have gotten significantly better since 08.

It's not luck that they're ranked high in shooting percentage, but the fact that they had a better shooting percentage than anyone over the past 5 years is due to the shortened season.
 

eklunds source

Registered User
Jul 23, 2008
8,323
0
Ed Snider's basement
Ah yes, the world of "hockey analytics" - where winners are determined by who gets the most shots on net, not who scores the most goals.
A perfect example of someone who doesn't get it.

Analytics are used to determine the most likely outcomes. Teams that tend to get heavily outshot tend to lose the most games. Edmonton and Toronto are horrifically outshot on a regular basis and adding Clarkson/Perron/Ference to those teams isn't going to significantly change the fact their goaltenders are hung out to dry.
 

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
The Oilers had great special teams...because their roster is filled with guys suited for those roles and their coach was a ST ace. A drop back to the league average is possible but unlikely.
 

Comic Book Guy*

Guest
Not sure if this is a shock to any of you... makes sense.

But doesn't mean anything till they hit the ice.
 

13TML13

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
75
0
I think we've all had enough of EDM drafting 1st overall :laugh: Let's hope it doesn't happen again
 

Quares27

Registered User
Apr 3, 2013
6,981
162
Huh? Most I read had them around the 6-9 mark. Where are the ones you are talking about ?

People had the Leafs at 6th to 9th in the East after they finished 26th in the NHL? in what world did that happen? If anything it gave people even more ammo to say the Leafs would suck.
 

Subbanned

Registered User
Nov 4, 2011
1,572
738
A perfect example of someone who doesn't get it.

Analytics are used to determine the most likely outcomes. Teams that tend to get heavily outshot tend to lose the most games. Edmonton and Toronto are horrifically outshot on a regular basis and adding Clarkson/Perron/Ference to those teams isn't going to significantly change the fact their goaltenders are hung out to dry.

The Leafs adding a top 5 league-wide volume shooter in clarkson is most definitely going to help their stupid shot differentials. As someone that hates the leafs I have to play they had a lot of skilled players scoring off the rush instead of dumping pucks on net and hoping for rebounds. The ridiculous advanced stats narrative (hurr durr) will tell you this means the leafs were unsustainably lucky because all it looks at is shot differential and league averages lol. So stupid.
 

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
Makes sense really. The Oilers were not hard to play against last year and outside of Hall, didn't create much. Not sure how they've changed their roster much, Perron should help, so I can see where these numbers come from.
 

TOML

Registered User
Oct 4, 2006
13,533
0
Walnut Grove
Sounds like a person is overrating teams based on 'hey, if they had these guys healthy...'

You can twist stats any way you want. Bottom line is crap, like injuries, happens during a season. This is a new season and the Oilers with their new coach and lineup will improve. I see the Sens as overrated at this point. They're good, but not Presidents good. TO i'm not sure about. A lot of 'ifs' are involved with continued improvement. There's certainly a lot of pressure on both the Oilers and TO to make the playoffs.
 

Offspring

Registered User
Feb 13, 2010
381
0
Makes sense really. The Oilers were not hard to play against last year and outside of Hall, didn't create much. Not sure how they've changed their roster much, Perron should help, so I can see where these numbers come from.

Oilers get older though. I pegged them last year to have a breakout season, it didn't happen but my money is again on them breaking out this upcoming season.
 

HavlatMach9

streamable 3rah1
Mar 17, 2011
13,445
394
Ottawa
They're good, but not Presidents good. TO i'm not sure about. A lot of 'ifs' are involved with continued improvement. There's certainly a lot of pressure on both the Oilers and TO to make the playoffs.
Sens have a solid team, but the arguments favoring the Sens should really just be about them making the playoffs again, not being a top team or even a contender.

The year before, the Sens were projected to finish last and made the playoffs so keep your heads up, even the Flames.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->