Team "Unsustainable" vs. Team "Sustainable"

[Ainec]

Team "Unsustainable"
B.Tkachuk (2018) - Pettersson (2017) - Debrincat (2016)
iSH% (averaged): 42.9%
PDO (averaged): 129.2

Team "Sustainable"
M.Tkachuk (2016) - Hischier (2017) - A.Svechnikov (2018)
iSH% (averaged): 0.8%
PDO (averaged): 61.2

Click to read more...

 

[CP4]

Unsustainable AINEC

 

[M2Beezy]

Team Pettersson

 

[Deficient Mode]

Team "Unsustainable"
B.Tkachuk (2018) - Pettersson (2017) - Debrincat (2016)
iSH% (averaged): 42.9%
PDO (averaged): 129.2

Team "Sustainable"
M.Tkachuk (2016) - Hischier (2017) - A.Svechnikov (2018)
iSH% (averaged): 0.8%
PDO (averaged): 61.2

How exactly did you arrive at these numbers? Hischier had a 101.33 PDO last year and clearly fell on the side of good shooting luck. Matt Tkachuk had a 100.46 PDO in 16-17.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

How exactly did you arrive at these numbers? Hischier had a 101.33 PDO last year and clearly fell on the side of good shooting luck. Matt Tkachuk had a 100.46 PDO in 16-17.

If you think Hischier had good shooting luck......::

yikes

 

[FerklundCGY]

If you think Hischier had good shooting luck......::

yikes

He had an oiSH% of 10.7%.

If that's unlucky, I don't know what to tell you

 

[93LEAFS]

Why are we using PDO and not the more direct oiSH%, which is the entire contributor for the offensive luck side of the PDO equation?

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

He had an oiSH% of 10.7%.

If that's unlucky, I don't know what to tell you

Try watching instead of following some stats that clearly don't portray the picture

 

[TT1]

I like team sustainable's forward group more than team unsustainable's but Pettersson is the best forward of the bunch.. kinda hard to decide tbh.

 

[FerklundCGY]

Try watching instead of following some stats that clearly don't portray the picture

Hischier had the 11th highest 5v5 oiSH% last season. There was absolutely nothing "unlucky" about his season lmao

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Team "Unsustainable"
B.Tkachuk (2018) - Pettersson (2017) - Debrincat (2016)
iSH% (averaged): 42.9%
PDO (averaged): 129.2

Team "Sustainable"
M.Tkachuk (2016) - Hischier (2017) - A.Svechnikov (2018)
iSH% (averaged): 0.8%
PDO (averaged): 61.2

Unsustainable AINEC

Billions of years of evolution have led us to this moment right here.

 

[CP4]

Billions of years of evolution have led us to this moment right here.

Are you calling me stupid for my choice?

 

[Ainec]

Why are we using PDO and not the more direct oiSH%, which is the entire contributor for the offensive luck side of the PDO equation?

PDO is more of a name-brand, only wanted to include two advanced stats and I can't leave the iconic one out

 

[93LEAFS]

PDO is more of a name-brand, only wanted to include two advanced stats and I can't leave the iconic one out

It just makes limited sense to use it for what you are trying to measure. When judging point totals or offensive abilities, no one cares what rate the goalie is stopping the puck when you are on the ice.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

Hischier had the 11th highest 5v5 oiSH% last season. There was absolutely nothing "unlucky" about his season lmao

Trust the numbers instead of having watched yourself, i dont deal with such faulty logic

 

[Ainec]

It just makes limited sense to use it for what you are trying to measure. When judging point totals or offensive abilities, no one cares what rate the goalie is stopping the puck when you are on the ice.

I don't disagree

everyone knows and owns Apple phones but what the hell is a OnePlus

 

[Deficient Mode]

Trust the numbers instead of having watched yourself, i dont deal with such faulty logic

He was only unlucky if you expect a player to never miss an open net or a high danger chance. All players do this, however, so it's an extremely unreasonable standard. Hischier got a large share of his shots from the front of the net, but his conversion rate on those shots was just fine compared to expectation.

It just makes limited sense to use it for what you are trying to measure. When judging point totals or offensive abilities, no one cares what rate the goalie is stopping the puck when you are on the ice.

Is the poll only asking offensive ability? On-ice save percentage impacts public perception of forwards too since some still use +/-.

 

[93LEAFS]

He was only unlucky if you expect a player to never miss an open net or a high danger chance. All players do this, however, so it's an extremely unreasonable standard. Hischier got a large share of his shots from the front of the net, but his conversion rate on those shots was just fine compared to expectation.



Is the poll only asking offensive ability? On-ice save percentage impacts public perception of forwards too since some still use +/-.

Does anyone here still actually care about plus/minus outside the petty use of it in player vs player debates? But, oiSH% way better captures the sustainability of point production, which seems to be the emphasis here.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Team "sustainable" (really a PDO of 61 is extremely unsustainable) has better players imo. Obviously you take the high PDO guys over the low PDO guys if that's going to be their PDO over the seven game series. Still not clear to me when Hischier, M Tkachuk, and Svechnikov ever had a PDO close to 61.7.

Does anyone here still actually care about plus/minus outside the petty use of it in player vs player debates? But, oiSH% way better captures the sustainability of point production, which seems to be the emphasis here.

I see some people defend its use so IDK. Seems like on-ice goal differential is re-gaining popularity with some analytics types despite the overwhelming evidence that skaters don't control their on-ice save percentage.

 

[tony d]

Give me Team Unsustainable.

 

[ijuka]

Does anyone here still actually care about plus/minus outside the petty use of it in player vs player debates? But, oiSH% way better captures the sustainability of point production, which seems to be the emphasis here.

Plus/minus went from overvalued to undervalued. -12 in 15 games or something like that(See Ristolainen) is still something to take into account. The main reasons plus/minus is a bad output stat is because:
1. -20 over 100 games is very different from -20 over 10 games, while GF% doesn't have such an issue
2. It is affected by 6v5 and tends to favor defensive players who are out on the ice to defend a lead and to make offensive players trying to score a tying goal disadvantaged.

However, if you understand and recognize this, it still is as viable of an output(what actually happened)-type stat as any. You shouldn't just brush significant plus / minus issues aside with "it's a useless stat" simply because if plus / minus is terrible within its context, chances are that the stronger stats like GF% are terrible as well.


Oh, and team Unsustainable.

 

[93LEAFS]

Plus/minus went from overvalued to undervalued. -12 in 15 games or something like that(See Ristolainen) is still something to take into account. The main reasons plus/minus is a bad output stat is because:
1. -20 over 100 games is very different from -20 over 10 games, while GF% doesn't have such an issue
2. It is affected by 6v5 and tends to favor defensive players who are out on the ice to defend a lead and to make offensive players trying to score a tying goal disadvantaged.

However, if you understand and recognize this, it still is as viable of an output(what actually happened)-type stat as any. You shouldn't just brush significant plus / minus issues aside with "it's a useless stat" simply because if plus / minus is terrible within its context, chances are that the stronger stats like GF% are terrible as well.

A stat the punishes someone for just being on the PP (because even if you are the best PP player in the world, you can only get a negative, and the opposite holds true for PKing), and gives bonus points for just being on the PK is useless. While I don't think GF% is great, it at least eliminates that ridiculousness.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

A player still can’t make his goalie make a save, much prefer xGf% which doesn’t get tanked by bad oisv%