Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ devils -- 4/18/21

[SML2]

Holik by a huge margin.

Holik was bad but it was pre-cap. The damage wasn't as bad when deep pockets could make mistakes go away.

 

[chosen]

I wonder what Blackwell’s role will be next season. He has really made a name for himself this season. Not only the points but he has been consistent and reliable. My hat’s off to him.

I'd be fine with him on a 3rd line.

 

[chosen]

Holik was bad but it was pre-cap. The damage wasn't as bad when deep pockets could make mistakes go away.

Maybe not damaging enough, but they paid 9 million a year for 5 years for a checking forward. That's McDavid numbers.

 

[Ruggs225]

K'Andre made a couple of mistakes that stood out but like...

hi, its me again. More questions about this chart.

how does this chart measure scoring chances? Is it based off SoG?

would a two on one where nonshot happened, or missed net count as a scoring chance?

Just trying to understand how the numbers behind this chart.

 

[kovazub94]

I'd be fine with him on a 3rd line.

This would result in one of the kids (or Kreider which is unlikely) to be on a 4th line instead, unless Buchnevich is moved before the start of next season. Barron is also joining the varsity next year. Something's gotta give.

 

[pld459666]

Maybe not damaging enough, but they paid 9 million a year for 5 years for a checking forward. That's McDavid numbers.

The problem wasn't what they paid Holik

The problem is what they expected Holik to become after giving him that money.

Year 1 was a disaster as he came in out of shape.

Year 2 was much better and more typical of Holik career averages (led team in scoring)

His two seasons could not have been more jekyll & hyde.

 

[kovazub94]

Talking PP that has been more than red hot (or white hot, or as I prefer "blue hot") .

Don't know if it's a part of the new PP plan but noticed that lately either one of Panarin, Zibanejad or Strome find themselves at the top of the umbrella on the blue line taking one-timers.

 

[duhmetreE]

hi, its me again. More questions about this chart.

how does this chart measure scoring chances? Is it based off SoG?

would a two on one where nonshot happened, or missed net count as a scoring chance?

Just trying to understand how the numbers behind this chart.

you need it to be a shot on goal to be a scoring chance.

 

[duhmetreE]

Yeah, who could have foreseen a 4 game sweep... 'iNsAnElY uNlIkElY'

 

[TheBloodyNine]

I think he signed his extension with the understanding that he’d be a top 6 player, second to Panarin on the left side. Laf is gonna push him out of that. And if you’re talking RW, Kakko and Krav will keep him out of the top 6 for RW. We may convince him that he’d get more ice time with another team. The issue is if another team would even want that contract.

You keep hoping for that pipe dream to come to fruition - it’s not happening anytime soon. He signed the contract. More importantly the Rangers signed him and identify him as part of the core. He isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Ruggs225]

you need it to be a shot on goal to be a scoring chance.

ok so its not a true measure of all scoring chances then.

off the post or missing a wide open net (which we do way to often) wouldnt be counted, though in reality are better scoring chances than some that are counted.

this would explain why the charts dont match up that we to what i am watching. Because key plays or big chances arent being counted.

 

[romba]

So does the Rangers 4th goal and win count, even though it wasn't even strength and cannot be reproduced?

 

[romba]

ok so its not a true measure of all scoring chances then.

off the post or missing a wide open net (which we do way to often) wouldnt be counted, though in reality are better scoring chances than some that are counted.

this would explain why the charts dont match up that we to what i am watching. Because key plays or big chances arent being counted.

Supposedly it's high danger attempts which seems more useful

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

The kids are great. But they are no Panarin or Zibad, or Strome for that matter. Or Buchnevich, so where do you want to play them? There's a hierarchy in life and in sports. You upset that and what you have is chaos. There is a system in place, an organization that some monkeys here don't understand. A pecking order, ranking, ladder,... that's implemented by all NHL teams. Or for that matter any sports team. They do this, to insure the best players play to give them the best chance to win. Because winning is all that matters. That why we drafted these youngsters, gave millions to Trouba and Panarin, resigned Kreider. And why top players get top minutes. All to improve the team's ability to win games. And this team has improved this year, and is winning with more regularity as the season winds down. We have won 8 of our last 11, but all I hear about is how this team, its players, are being mismanaged. It's just the silliest, most petty grievance I ever heard.

There are fans here calling for Quinn's head on a stick. Like winning 8 out of 11 is a mortal sin or something. It's just laughable.

I like Panarin & the others. Believe me, I do. But if this group of vets was so dominant, we would already be in the playoffs. We would have done better v Carolina last year.

This team looks good, but not good enough to win. We need to build for the future, and a lot of that is getting the young players opportunities to play & learn & improve. If we are to win it will be with these young players in a larger role than what they have now.

You can say, well Kravtsov is new and Laf is new, so break them in slowly. Well, maybe, though they've both shown their quality. But this is Chytil's fourth year, he puts up good numbers, and last night he played all of 8:15. I don't get that.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

you need it to be a shot on goal to be a scoring chance.

This is not correct. It is based on shot attempts.

Natural Stat Trick - Glossary

Each shot attempt (Corsi) taken in the offensive zone is assigned a value based on the area of the zone in which it was recorded. Attempts made from the attacking team's neutral or defensive zones are excluded.

Attempts from the yellow areas are assigned a value of 1, attempts from the red areas are assigned a value of 2, and attempts in the green area are assigned a value of 3. Add 1 to this value if the attempt is considered a rush shot or a rebound. A rebound is any attempt made within 3 seconds of another blocked, missed or saved attempt without a stoppage in play in between. A rush shot is any attempt within 4 seconds of any event in the neutral or defensive zone without a stoppage in play in between (originally defined by David Johnson on the now-offline Hockey Analysis, and modified to 4 seconds by War-on-Ice).

Decrease this value by 1 if it was a blocked shot.

Any attempt with a score of 2 or higher is considered a scoring chance.

But to be precise that chart is not based on scoring chances, it is based on xGF or "Expected Goals For." It is a generally similar concept but not the same thing.

Understanding NHL Analytics: A Beginners Guide Part 2

 

[OrangePMD]

If we have any gamblers here who could look up the money line of the Rangers winning 4 games in the row against Devils. Guessing it would've been a nice chunk o' change if someone actually did make this bet.

I looked it up on one odds site, so grain of salt etc. Actual realized "average" parlay odds for all four games: 9.28 decimal = +838 American.
So, making that bet you might have got maybe something between +950 and +1050, maybe slightly more depending where you bet.

 

[kovazub94]

I looked it up on one odds site, so grain of salt etc. Actual realized "average" parlay odds for all four games: 9.28 decimal = +838 American.
So, making that bet you might have got maybe something between +950 and +1050, maybe slightly more depending where you bet.

Thank you! Would Quinn get props for his team beating these odds? Nah...

 

[Ruggs225]

This is not correct. It is based on shot attempts.

Natural Stat Trick - Glossary



But to be precise that chart is not based on scoring chances, it is based on xGF or "Expected Goals For." It is a generally similar concept but not the same thing.

Understanding NHL Analytics: A Beginners Guide Part 2

thank you.

Your link doesnt seem to define shot attempt though. Does it have to be on goal to be counted as an attempt?

thats a big deal.

also a big hole is the blown scoring opportunities that dont end up as a shot. Like cant settling a pass, or flubbing a shot etc.

 

[Machinehead]

hi, its me again. More questions about this chart.

how does this chart measure scoring chances? Is it based off SoG?

would a two on one where nonshot happened, or missed net count as a scoring chance?

Just trying to understand how the numbers behind this chart.

To have a scoring chance, a shot has to be at least be attempted. That creates a bit of a grey area on botched odd man rushes but no NHL team is creating enough odd man rushes for that to move the needle.

The primary driver behind quality is shot type -- royal road, deflection, rebound, etc. and shot distance is also considered.

 

[Peltz]

I think he signed his extension with the understanding that he’d be a top 6 player, second to Panarin on the left side. Laf is gonna push him out of that. And if you’re talking RW, Kakko and Krav will keep him out of the top 6 for RW. We may convince him that he’d get more ice time with another team. The issue is if another team would even want that contract.

I could see a team taking Kreider's contract if they have struggling special teams. He can be game breaking on the PP in front of the net when he's really on his game. And now he kills penalties pretty well too on one of the best PK squads in the NHL.

Kredier will eventually be a very expensive 3rd line player if we do keep him. But it's not like he's useless. It just shows we have a deep team on wing.

 

[OrangePMD]

Thank you! Would Quinn get props for his team beating these odds? Nah...

BTW, these odds include the chance of a "draw". If it were just a straight win / lose, the odds would obviously be much, much lower. But the main takeaway is that it wasn't anymore profitable or unlikely winning bet, than any other four game parlay where each pick is a decent favorite to win.

 

[Machinehead]

thank you.

Your link doesnt seem to define shot attempt though. Does it have to be on goal to be counted as an attempt?

thats a big deal.

also a big hole is the blown scoring opportunities that dont end up as a shot. Like cant settling a pass, or flubbing a shot etc.

What constitutes a shot attempt basically boils down to common sense.

You can't advocate for the eye test as your primary mode of analyzing games and then claim analytics are invalid because you can't infallibly define a shot attempt. That's a massive contradiction.

How do you define gap control? How do you define hustle? How do you define hockey IQ?

 

[Larrybiv]

Yeah, who could have foreseen a 4 game sweep... 'iNsAnElY uNlIkElY'

Me, me, me, me! And I am not testing my voice.
Being Mr. Unlikely Positive here (just call me MUP), all we have to do is win tonight (50/50 shot) and then destroy Philly 2 games (likely), so that will bring it to 7 in a row. Then Buffalo, so make that 9 !!!
We literally NEED TO WIN at least 4 of those 5, and even a point from whatever game we don't win.

If that happens then, those last 6 games with the Islanders, Caps and Boston will surely be meaningful.

 

[Ruggs225]

What constitutes a shot attempt basically boils down to common sense.

You can't advocate for the eye test as your primary mode of analyzing games and then claim analytics are invalid because you can't infallibly define a shot attempt. That's a massive contradiction.

How do you define gap control? How do you define hustle? How do you define hockey IQ?

huh?

if a player shoots the puck but it missed the net, is it counted as a shot attempt?

all i am asking.

It didnt say in the article, and i didnt want to assume.

im not trying to invalidate, but rather trying to understand what actually is on the charts.

I was just point out that flubbed chances are counted. No that i expect them to be, and that is all subjective anyway. But it is an area that isnt encapsulated and does explain why numbers dont match to eye test to some degree.

Now i am just curious about shot attempts. How is it defined?

Simple question.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

huh?

if a player shoots the puck but it missed the net, is it counted as a shot attempt?

all i am asking.

It didnt say in the article, and i didnt want to assume.

im not trying to invalidate, but rather trying to understand what actually is on the charts.

I was just point out that flubbed chances are counted. No that i expect them to be, and that is all subjective anyway. But it is an area that isnt encapsulated and does explain why numbers dont match to eye test to some degree.

Now i am just curious about shot attempts. How is it defined?

Simple question.

From the earlier link:

Corsi - Any shot attempt (goals, shots on net, misses and blocks) outside of the shootout. Referred to as SAT by the NHL.

Natural Stat Trick - Glossary