Management State of the Bruins - Neely 5/19/22 (unedited)

[Lobster57]

Arguing about Forbort kind of seems like crying that the firetruck is parked in the bus lane while the school is burning down

 

[burstnbloom]

So where are the stats on blocked shots or does that not fit the narrative because he's good at it.

LOL

McAvoy was force fed more offensive zone starts than just about any defenseman in the league

Charlie McAvoy started in the Ozone 53.19% of the time. What are you talking about?

 

[Over the volcano]

LOL



Charlie McAvoy started in the Ozone 53.19% of the time. What are you talking about?

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

This has him at 72% and only one of two in that top ten who played more than 15min a night

 

[burstnbloom]

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

This has him at 72% and only one of two in that top ten who played more than 15min a night

Ah that's the issue. NHL doesn't differentiate zone starts from zone faceoffs. That's ozone faceoff percentage. It doesn't account for any shifts he started on the fly, which was 80 of his 182 shifts. I also thought you meant regular season. My apologies. Chuck started in the ozone 63% of the time in the carolina series. 53% for the season.

 

[EverettMike]

Uh oh - MNK called in reinforcements. The narrative around Forbort is "the world is flat" level cognitive dissonance at this point. yes, he starts in the d zone more than anyone. We know. That doesn't excuse his absolutely putrid numbers against the worst competition or the fact that every player he was paired with all year was worse with him than with other partners. This player is bad, he's always been bad, he was bad this year. He did block a lot of shots, cool. You know what though, let's not worry about what hte metrics say. Let's just look at what happened. The graphic below is Corey Sznajder's zone exit and defensive zone retrieval data for the playoffs against Carolina. what it tells you is that Forbort and Clifton were by far the worst pair at getting the puck and getting it out of the d zone and only Carlo was more likely to fail a retrieval attempt or exit. This graph doesn't care about ozone starts, it compares your chances to do something and how many times you failed at it. Forbort and Clifton played the weakest QOC of any of the D pairs in the playoffs and still their presence objectively lead to more zone time for Carolina. There's no real argument at this point that the guy is a good player other than you personally like him. That's fine. you can like him, but his performance is still bad. He's also not the only bad one. Clifton, not great, Carlo, putrid. Lindholm is hanging out in a pretty weird spot but its such a small sample.

View attachment 551369

This second graphic is from Forbort's player card for the regular season. What does this say? It says he's brutal on offense. below average on shots, shot assists, etc etc. but we already knew that. He does get his shot through better than most, which is surprising. He just never gets one off. The argument that he's "good" is always centerered around his defense, so lets spend our time there. He actually gets to the puck a lot in the d zone - thats mostly zone start related. He botches it more than almost anyone inthe NHL. He's downright bad at retrievals, retievals leading to exits, total exits, failed exits. So once the puck is in the d zone, he can't get it out. Also, on zone entry defense he way above average on how often the other team attacks him. They don't dump it past him, they carry it past him. To his credit, he's better than average at stopping them when they do that, but its telling that they just attack him. It's impossible for me to understand the explaining away of this very bad player. Damn you @MarchysNoseKnows, I was working. And just to cut off the "watch the games" criticism up front. The All Three Zones project is legitimately watching every game and tracking every play. He's watching closer than you, I promise.

View attachment 551372

Would have paid you to write this post, so thanks for doing it for free.

 

[Root]

Uh oh - MNK called in reinforcements. The narrative around Forbort is "the world is flat" level cognitive dissonance at this point. yes, he starts in the d zone more than anyone. We know. That doesn't excuse his absolutely putrid numbers against the worst competition or the fact that every player he was paired with all year was worse with him than with other partners. This player is bad, he's always been bad, he was bad this year. He did block a lot of shots, cool. You know what though, let's not worry about what hte metrics say. Let's just look at what happened. The graphic below is Corey Sznajder's zone exit and defensive zone retrieval data for the playoffs against Carolina. what it tells you is that Forbort and Clifton were by far the worst pair at getting the puck and getting it out of the d zone and only Carlo was more likely to fail a retrieval attempt or exit. This graph doesn't care about ozone starts, it compares your chances to do something and how many times you failed at it. Forbort and Clifton played the weakest QOC of any of the D pairs in the playoffs and still their presence objectively lead to more zone time for Carolina. There's no real argument at this point that the guy is a good player other than you personally like him. That's fine. you can like him, but his performance is still bad. He's also not the only bad one. Clifton, not great, Carlo, putrid. Lindholm is hanging out in a pretty weird spot but its such a small sample.

View attachment 551369

This second graphic is from Forbort's player card for the regular season. What does this say? It says he's brutal on offense. below average on shots, shot assists, etc etc. but we already knew that. He does get his shot through better than most, which is surprising. He just never gets one off. The argument that he's "good" is always centerered around his defense, so lets spend our time there. He actually gets to the puck a lot in the d zone - thats mostly zone start related. He botches it more than almost anyone inthe NHL. He's downright bad at retrievals, retievals leading to exits, total exits, failed exits. So once the puck is in the d zone, he can't get it out. Also, on zone entry defense he way above average on how often the other team attacks him. They don't dump it past him, they carry it past him. To his credit, he's better than average at stopping them when they do that, but its telling that they just attack him. It's impossible for me to understand the explaining away of this very bad player. Damn you @MarchysNoseKnows, I was working. And just to cut off the "watch the games" criticism up front. The All Three Zones project is legitimately watching every game and tracking every play. He's watching closer than you, I promise.

View attachment 551372

So Zone Exits and Defensive zone retrieval’s are how we judge how well a defensemen played? So Matt Grzelcyk and Mike Reilly played well and Forbort and Clifton sucked...is that why Grzelcyk was scratched? Reilly and Grzelcyk are there for their skating/puck retrieval. They don’t kill penalties, they don’t give you much in the offensive zone and their high offensive zone starts despite their lack of offense suggest that their coaches are afraid of them in the defensive zone. I would hope they are better at defensive zone retrievals than two 3rd pairing defensive defensemen.

Like all analytics in hockey there are far too many variables this chart doesn’t account for. Not all zone exits are created equal, some are going to be under far more pressure (you know, like if you start in the defensive zone more). If this is the end all be all then why don’t Gryz and Reilly kill penalties? According to this chart they’d break the puck out and the Bruins wouldn’t even have to defend. Are NHL coaches really that stupid or is this chart ridiculously flawed?

I feel a bit for the analytics crowd. Many of whom probably have watched hockey for a long time with little to no understanding of what is going on. Then analytics come along and they cling to it because they so badly want to understand the game. The problem is hockey isn’t baseball. Baseball is tailored made for analytics with one on one matchups. Hockey is chaos, far too many variables to put on a chart and try to explain the game. I don’t think Analytics are useless, they can be useful with context. But they don’t even show half of the overall picture. They are very, very flawed.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I feel a bit for the analytics crowd. Many of whom probably have watched hockey for a long time with little to no understanding of what is going on. Then analytics come along and they cling to it because they so badly want to understand the game

This is incredibly condescending and pedantic. Did you mean for it to come off that way?

 

[Root]

It is condescending and pedantic but me and @burstnbloom have gone back and forth a few times and even private messaged and admitted we both can be condescending and pedantic so I know he will not take offense. I’m sure he will have a well thought out rebuttal and I know we are on the same page about not taking it personally.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

It is condescending and pedantic but me and @burstnbloom have gone back and forth a few times and even private messaged and admitted we both can be condescending and pedantic so I know he will not take offense. I’m sure he will have a well thought out rebuttal and I know we are on the same page about not taking it personally.

Fair enough. Can’t argue with that. I just believe in analytics too so I guess I put myself as one of the people you were talking about.

 

[Root]

Fair enough. Can’t argue with that. I just believe in analytics too so I guess I put myself as one of the people you were talking about.

I would have been better off saying that with the rise of analytics I think many people stopped trusting what their eyes were telling them. For example, early in the season Mike Reilly was playing poorly and was healthy scratched. During that stretch a NY Rangers beat reporter was arguing with some fans how the Rangers should have signed him because he was having a great season and backed up his argument by posting Reilly’s analytics. The NY Rangers beat reporter had no idea Reilly was being scratched, he was just looking at the analytics. My opinion is that are very flawed, especially when they come to defensemen.

 

[burstnbloom]

So Zone Exits and Defensive zone retrieval’s are how we judge how well a defensemen played? So Matt Grzelcyk and Mike Reilly played well and Forbort and Clifton sucked...is that why Grzelcyk was scratched? Reilly and Grzelcyk are there for their skating/puck retrieval. They don’t kill penalties, they don’t give you much in the offensive zone and their high offensive zone starts despite their lack of offense suggest that their coaches are afraid of them in the defensive zone. I would hope they are better at defensive zone retrievals than two 3rd pairing defensive defensemen.

Like all analytics in hockey there are far too many variables this chart doesn’t account for. Not all zone exits are created equal, some are going to be under far more pressure (you know, like if you start in the defensive zone more). If this is the end all be all then why don’t Gryz and Reilly kill penalties? According to this chart they’d break the puck out and the Bruins wouldn’t even have to defend. Are NHL coaches really that stupid or is this chart ridiculously flawed?

I feel a bit for the analytics crowd. Many of whom probably have watched hockey for a long time with little to no understanding of what is going on. Then analytics come along and they cling to it because they so badly want to understand the game. The problem is hockey isn’t baseball. Baseball is tailored made for analytics with one on one matchups. Hockey is chaos, far too many variables to put on a chart and try to explain the game. I don’t think Analytics are useless, they can be useful with context. But they don’t even show half of the overall picture. They are very, very flawed.

I can't imagine what it takes to get into the headspace where a guy, whose level of posting on the whole is very low quality, has this incredibly condescending opinion of the people that disagree with him. Your therapist is a miracle worker.

It is condescending and pedantic but me and @burstnbloom have gone back and forth a few times and even private messaged and admitted we both can be condescending and pedantic so I know he will not take offense. I’m sure he will have a well thought out rebuttal and I know we are on the same page about not taking it personally.

I believe in that PM I told you that condescending insults were not something I was comfortable with. The implication that anyone who takes the time to understand predictive models in a way to intelligently talk about them is someone incapable of understanding the game of hockey, which you understand so well, is hilarious but also very insulting. Do better.

 

[burstnbloom]

Would have paid you to write this post, so thanks for doing it for free.

Just give me an @ and venmo 5 dollars and ill sling charts all day.

 

[bruinmann77]

Still no news on a new contract for D S

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I can't imagine what it takes to get into the headspace where a guy, whose level of posting on the whole is very low quality, has this incredibly condescending opinion of the people that disagree with him. Your therapist is a miracle worker.




I believe in that PM I told you that condescending insults were not something I was comfortable with. The implication that anyone who takes the time to understand predictive models in a way to intelligently talk about them is someone incapable of understanding the game of hockey, which you understand so well, is hilarious but also very insulting. Do better.

Well he certainly represented that a lot differently lol.

 

[Root]

I can't imagine what it takes to get into the headspace where a guy, whose level of posting on the whole is very low quality, has this incredibly condescending opinion of the people that disagree with him. Your therapist is a miracle worker.




I believe in that PM I told you that condescending insults were not something I was comfortable with. The implication that anyone who takes the time to understand predictive models in a way to intelligently talk about them is someone incapable of understanding the game of hockey, which you understand so well, is hilarious but also very insulting. Do better.

I’d suggest rereading what you said in the PM. You’re being dishonest but that’s your deal.

As far as the analytics, we see the game differently. That’s fine, no point in going back and forth. I have no idea why anyone would think zone exits are the gold standard to judge how well a defensemen played. For that metric to work than it would need to be assume that all zone exits are created equal, which they are not, but I guess that’s the only way you can put it on a chart so there’s the answer.

 

[bruinmann77]

still all quiet on the DS front

 

[burstnbloom]

I’d suggest rereading what you said in the PM. You’re being dishonest but that’s your deal.

As far as the analytics, we see the game differently. That’s fine, no point in going back and forth. I have no idea why anyone would think zone exits are the gold standard to judge how well a defensemen played. For that metric to work than it would need to be assume that all zone exits are created equal, which they are not, but I guess that’s the only way you can put it on a chart so there’s the answer.

receipts

Also to the second part of your post, you always say things like that, and you think they are a trump card, but they really just tell me (and the world) you don't really get how statistics and sampling works.

Let's be done, but can you just stop saying that people that are interested in using stats to support their argument don't understand the game at the level you do? It's supremely assholish.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

Just read the article on Bruins site re Neely end of year comments. Guy is totally delusional. He’ll extend Don, fire Cassidy. This team will go nowhere with them at the helm. For years. Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

 

[Spooner st]

Just read the article on Bruins site re Neely end of year comments. Guy is totally delusional. He’ll extend Don, fire Cassidy. This team will go nowhere with them at the helm. For years. Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

I'm afraid we're at the event horizon of the black hole. The point of no return... were going to buried in bad contacts.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I'm afraid we're at the event horizon of the black hole. The point of no return... were going to buried in bad contacts.

A bit melodramatic no?

 

[Patdud]

still all quiet on the DS front

They are waiting until the Celts win/lose the east or the finals to announce something.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Ah that's the issue. NHL doesn't differentiate zone starts from zone faceoffs. That's ozone faceoff percentage. It doesn't account for any shifts he started on the fly, which was 80 of his 182 shifts. I also thought you meant regular season. My apologies. Chuck started in the ozone 63% of the time in the carolina series. 53% for the season.

Please explain shifts started on the fly as a zone start.

 

[Spooner st]

A bit melodramatic no?

Some will see it that way... others never see things coming until it's too late.
But, if you pay attention at what's going on... and keeps repeating itself in the hope to have different results... it's not hard to see this is trending down and gaining speed With no intention to steer it in a different direction. Then... what do you think the end result would be?

This is not a new strategy, Sinden did it his whole career. We know the end results.

 

[MattFromFranklin]

Just read the article on Bruins site re Neely end of year comments. Guy is totally delusional. He’ll extend Don, fire Cassidy. This team will go nowhere with them at the helm. For years. Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

To be fair, Neely took several punches to the head during his playing days.

 

[burstnbloom]

Please explain shifts started on the fly as a zone start.

I'm not sure what there is to explain. A player comes off the bench and the puck is either in the d-zone, the neutral zone or the o-zone.