The Advanced Stats Thread Episode IX

[Machinehead]

Glad my post got completely ignored.

I read it, but it's all a bit over my head

 

[Blue Blooded]

So I analyzed the draft. Everyone always says that you can't get elite talent outside the top 5. So I tried to test that. I used the Chi-squared test. I looked at all drafts from 1990-2015 and players that were named to at least one "All-Star Team" and/or the HOF. That's a bit of a better measure than just being an all-star. In case someone else is as ignorant as I am, I didn't know what the difference was, but it appears being named to the All-Star Team is equivalent to an NFL All-Pro. Anyway, the chi-squared test looks at a crosstab and compares the actual to the expected if the crosstab were proportional. Then if the chi-squared provides a p-value of <0.05 then the actual is significantly different from the expected, meaning there's a less than 5% chance that the difference due to random variation.

	AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total
Top 5	32	98	130		Top 5	32	98	130		6-10	5	125	130
6-10	5	125	130		Rd 1 NT5	27	575	602		11+ Rd 1	17	455	472
Total	37	223	260		Total	59	673	732		Total	22	580	602
	AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total
Top 5	18.5	111.5	130		Top 5	10.5	119.5	130		6-10	4.8	125.2	130
6-10	18.5	111.5	130		6-10	48.5	553.5	602		11+ Rd 1	17.2	454.8	472
Total	37	223	260		Total	59	673	732		Total	22	580	602
P-value	1.64399E-06				P-value	2.07083E-14				P-value	0.895356853

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Expected is calculated as follows:

For example, Top 5 players that have made an all-star team or HOF, you can either divide all top 5 picks (130) by all top 10 picks (260) and multiply it by all AST/HOF players selected in the top 10 (37) divided by all players selected in the top 10 (260) and multiply it by all players (260). (130/260)*(37/260)*260. Or more simply, (130*37)/260.

The first test is the top 5 compared to picks 6-10, the next test is top 5 compared to not top 5 picks in the first round, and the last one is 6-10 compared to not top 10 picks. The first two are highly significant, the top 5 is disproportionately strong in these types of players compared to the bottom half of the top 10 and compared to the entire first round that's not the top 5. However, the bottom half of the top 5 is not any better in producing these type of players than first round picks that are not in the top 10. In fact, even eye-balling it, you'll see an uncanny proportionality. Each expected value rounds to the actual. And the p-value is extremely high.

That's interesting and goes well with what's been said about 6-10 picks being overrated. The human mind can't help but to conceive the value of something linear like picks 1-10 as being somewhat linear even though that is far from the case.

It'd be interesting to see a 1-3 vs 4-10 comparison as well as a 11-Rd1 vs Rd2 and 11-Rd1 vs Rd2-7.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

This thread seems to love discussing John Carlson, so I figured you may be interested in this analysis of him that I did.

Basically, he's a pretty average defensive player, and while he is well above average offensively, his numbers are so ridiculously propped up by what is a so ridiculously elite offense in Washington. He's not actually a guy that moves the needle, and in no way should he be compared to guys like Brent Burns and Erik Karlsson.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Glad my post got completely ignored.

I don't think you used appropriate cutoffs since the HoF criteria can only be met by < probably 5% of the entire sample. I think you'd need to find a way to equate guys from the 90 draft with guys from 2015. Maybe career ppg would be a better option for forwards? Idk how you'd set criteria for defenseman. Otherwise, just as a rough example, Leon Draisatl and Alex Daigle are equivalent with you how split players.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I don't think you used appropriate cutoffs since the HoF criteria can only be met by < probably 5% of the entire sample. I think you'd need to find a way to equate guys from the 90 draft with guys from 2015. Maybe career ppg would be a better option for forwards? Idk how you'd set criteria for defenseman. Otherwise, just as a rough example, Leon Draisatl and Alex Daigle are equivalent with you how split players.

It wasn't just HOF criteria. It was All-Star Team. Which, my understanding is like all-pro in the NFL. I was looking for the best of the best rather than just players selected to the all-star game or players that had an NHL career because when people talk about getting a top 5 pick, they say that you can't get a franchise player outside of the top 5 and that's all I was measuring, franchise type players. Good but not great players weren't relevant to this because people want top 5 picks because they want franchise players.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I read it, but it's all a bit over my head

Oh, c'mon stats professor! The way I count expected value is a bit confusing, but you can do it a simpler way if you look at the first one, there are an equal amount of picks in the top 5 and 6-10, so you "expect" all things being equal an equal amount of AST/HOF type players. That's all it's saying. The other way of calculating it is a bit tougher and I'm not 100% sure if I'm understanding the mechanics behind it, but it's proportion of the population of one criterion multiplied by the other one and by the total to get an expected value. So top 5 AND AST/HOF, what portion of all players is that? But if it's easier you can think of it in the other way. In the end, you just look for a p-value of less than 0.05.

Thinking about it some more, yeah the more complicated way of thinking about it is what I said, prob of event A AND event B multiplied by total. But the other way of thinking about it may be more intuitive.

 

[Mac n Gs]

It wasn't just HOF criteria. It was All-Star Team. Which, my understanding is like all-pro in the NFL. I was looking for the best of the best rather than just players selected to the all-star game or players that had an NHL career because when people talk about getting a top 5 pick, they say that you can't get a franchise player outside of the top 5 and that's all I was measuring, franchise type players. Good but not great players weren't relevant to this because people want top 5 picks because they want franchise players.

No I get that, but it stills seems a bit too reductive to me. My Daigle/Draisatl example reflects two guys who are neither HoF or all-stars. I think something more objective is required to better delineate players, especially when accounting for forwards vs. dmen.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

No I get that, but it stills seems a bit too reductive to me. My Daigle/Draisatl example reflects two guys who are neither HoF or all-stars. I think something more objective is required to better delineate players, especially when accounting for forwards vs. dmen.

Maybe, but all I'm saying is that for the purpose of this analysis I looked at high-end players only because people always say you need a top 5 pick to get a FRANCHISE player.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

So I analyzed the draft. Everyone always says that you can't get elite talent outside the top 5. So I tried to test that. I used the Chi-squared test. I looked at all drafts from 1990-2015 and players that were named to at least one "All-Star Team" and/or the HOF. That's a bit of a better measure than just being an all-star. In case someone else is as ignorant as I am, I didn't know what the difference was, but it appears being named to the All-Star Team is equivalent to an NFL All-Pro. Anyway, the chi-squared test looks at a crosstab and compares the actual to the expected if the crosstab were proportional. Then if the chi-squared provides a p-value of <0.05 then the actual is significantly different from the expected, meaning there's a less than 5% chance that the difference due to random variation.

	AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total
Top 5	32	98	130		Top 5	32	98	130		6-10	5	125	130
6-10	5	125	130		Rd 1 NT5	27	575	602		11+ Rd 1	17	455	472
Total	37	223	260		Total	59	673	732		Total	22	580	602
	AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total			AST/HOF	Not ASG/HOF	Total
Top 5	18.5	111.5	130		Top 5	10.5	119.5	130		6-10	4.8	125.2	130
6-10	18.5	111.5	130		6-10	48.5	553.5	602		11+ Rd 1	17.2	454.8	472
Total	37	223	260		Total	59	673	732		Total	22	580	602
P-value	1.64399E-06				P-value	2.07083E-14				P-value	0.895356853

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Expected is calculated as follows:

For example, Top 5 players that have made an all-star team or HOF, you can either divide all top 5 picks (130) by all top 10 picks (260) and multiply it by all AST/HOF players selected in the top 10 (37) divided by all players selected in the top 10 (260) and multiply it by all players (260). (130/260)*(37/260)*260. Or more simply, (130*37)/260.

The first test is the top 5 compared to picks 6-10, the next test is top 5 compared to not top 5 picks in the first round, and the last one is 6-10 compared to not top 10 picks. The first two are highly significant, the top 5 is disproportionately strong in these types of players compared to the bottom half of the top 10 and compared to the entire first round that's not the top 5. However, the bottom half of the top 5 is not any better in producing these type of players than first round picks that are not in the top 10. In fact, even eye-balling it, you'll see an uncanny proportionality. Each expected value rounds to the actual. And the p-value is extremely high.

This is some pretty solid analysis. Actually very eye-opening.

But, isn’t the general consensus that acquiring elite talent is pretty much impossible unless you tank and acquire a top-5 pick? I am a big advocate of the tank method, and my philosophy has always been that you need back-to-back top-5 picks in order to win. Good to see something that heavily enforces that notion.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This is some pretty solid analysis. Actually very eye-opening.

But, isn’t the general consensus that acquiring elite talent is pretty much impossible unless you tank and acquire a top-5 pick? I am a big advocate of the tank method, and my philosophy has always been that you need back-to-back top-5 picks in order to win. Good to see something that heavily enforces that notion.

Well, yes and I tested that and it confirms it. One thing I might have heard but wasn't sure about was whether 6-10 gives you a better shot than the rest of the first round and it doesn't.

 

[DanielBrassard]

That's good stuff Snowblind. This is why it is bothersome when the Rangers pick up points they don't deserve to. They need to get into the top-5, top-2 or 3 moreso. Unless they completely tank it, that will not occur.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Minor mistake, I had AST as ASG at first (All-star team vs. All-star game). I then corrected it in half, but left it in the other half, sorry for the confusion.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

That's good stuff Snowblind. This is why it is bothersome when the Rangers pick up points they don't deserve to. They need to get into the top-5, top-2 or 3 moreso. Unless they completely tank it, that will not occur.

Indeed. Not to be a dick, but for a quick anecdotal n=1, you guys could have had Pettersson if you had traded for the 5th overall pick instead. The difference between a Pettersson and a Lias Andersson is huge.

 

[Machinehead]

Indeed. Not to be a dick, but for a quick anecdotal n=1, you guys could have had Pettersson if you had traded for the 5th overall pick instead. The difference between a Pettersson and a Lias Andersson is huge.

Gorton rang the phones off the hook to get into that top 5. It just wasn't happening.

We reportedly had Pettersson 1oA on our list.

 

[Machinehead]

@JoeThorntonsRooster I see you've met Washington fans. Delightful bunch, aren't they?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

@JoeThorntonsRooster I see you've met Washington fans. Delightful bunch, aren't they?

Just about every fan base is just god awful when you argue against the effectiveness of one of their players. Same thing with Edmonton fans when I made the Draisaitl thread.

This forum in general has gotten a lot worse over the past few years since the server change, when they pulled back the rules on flaming. I don’t really care about being flamed by people who have never seen or met me, but it’s annoying when flaming takes up the majority of the discussion.

The big mistake that I made was responding to them. I should have said my piece one time in response to the general arguments that I saw coming up, rather than constantly go back and forth with people who can’t see my logic and can’t provide their own logic past personal attacks.

I’m curious to see whether or not the article was actually flawed in nature or poor analysis, and obviously the Washington fans think so. But of course they’re going to think so.

Personally, if I were a Washington fan, I would have no problem subscribing to the logic of “Yeah, Ovechkin, Backstrom and Kuznetsov are legitimately top notch. World class. We’ve got some pretty good other players, but they’re propped up by those three.”

 

[Machinehead]

Just about every fan base is just god awful when you argue against the effectiveness of one of their players. Same thing with Edmonton fans when I made the Draisaitl thread.

This forum in general has gotten a lot worse over the past few years since the server change, when they pulled back the rules on flaming. I don’t really care about being flamed by people who have never seen or met me, but it’s annoying when flaming takes up the majority of the discussion.

The big mistake that I made was responding to them. I should have said my piece one time in response to the general arguments that I saw coming up, rather than constantly go back and forth with people who can’t see my logic and can’t provide their own logic past personal attacks.

I’m curious to see whether or not the article was actually flawed in nature or poor analysis, and obviously the Washington fans think so. But of course they’re going to think so.

Personally, if I were a Washington fan, I would have no problem subscribing to the logic of “Yeah, Ovechkin, Backstrom and Kuznetsov are legitimately top notch. World class. We’ve got some pretty good other players, but they’re propped up by those three.”

Yeah every fan base is awful just like everyone scored in the 80's. And then there was Gretzky.

That's HFCaps.

 

[Machinehead]

Meanwhile, John Carlson has fantastic analytics this year despite his competition getting......harder.

Washington DC is where everything that makes sense in the world goes to die, in more ways than one.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Gorton rang the phones off the hook to get into that top 5. It just wasn't happening.

We reportedly had Pettersson 1oA on our list.

I think I remember hearing that Colorado would trade down if Makar was taken before their pick, Dallas wanted both firsts, and Vancouver tried to trade back but then found out the Rangers loved Pettersson and kept the pick

 

[Machinehead]

I think I remember hearing that Colorado would trade down if Makar was taken before their pick, Dallas wanted both firsts, and Vancouver tried to trade back but then found out the Rangers loved Pettersson and kept the pick

Somehow, it's New Jersey's fault.

I'm sticking with that.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Somehow, it's New Jersey's fault.

I'm sticking with that.

I’m perfectly fine with blaming them and Philly

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Gorton rang the phones off the hook to get into that top 5. It just wasn't happening.

We reportedly had Pettersson 1oA on our list.

Seems weird that they liked Pettersson at 1oA and also loved Andersson at 7. I guess they liked them for different things. Honestly, in that range, I think Mittelstadt was the one guy that we could have drafted instead of LA. Whatever, I'm still not giving up on him. People have extremely unfair expectations of a 19-year-old. He'll likely never be a superstar or anything but a good defensive middle 6 guy is still useful.

 

[Machinehead]

Seems weird that they liked Pettersson at 1oA and also loved Andersson at 7. I guess they liked them for different things. Honestly, in that range, I think Mittelstadt was the one guy that we could have drafted instead of LA. Whatever, I'm still not giving up on him. People have extremely unfair expectations of a 19-year-old. He'll likely never be a superstar or anything but a good defensive middle 6 guy is still useful.

I think they felt pressured to get something for Stepan, and Andersson was considered, at the time, to be an extremely safe pick.

Andersson could still end up a good player, but I think the disappointing thing with him is, for a guy lauded to be such a safe pick, other prospects his age have passed him.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Just about every fan base is just god awful when you argue against the effectiveness of one of their players. Same thing with Edmonton fans when I made the Draisaitl thread.

This forum in general has gotten a lot worse over the past few years since the server change, when they pulled back the rules on flaming. I don’t really care about being flamed by people who have never seen or met me, but it’s annoying when flaming takes up the majority of the discussion.

The big mistake that I made was responding to them. I should have said my piece one time in response to the general arguments that I saw coming up, rather than constantly go back and forth with people who can’t see my logic and can’t provide their own logic past personal attacks.

I’m curious to see whether or not the article was actually flawed in nature or poor analysis, and obviously the Washington fans think so. But of course they’re going to think so.

Personally, if I were a Washington fan, I would have no problem subscribing to the logic of “Yeah, Ovechkin, Backstrom and Kuznetsov are legitimately top notch. World class. We’ve got some pretty good other players, but they’re propped up by those three.”

Not to take this OT, but I 100% disagree. You can finally post without feeling like you're walking on eggshells. Message boards are supposed to be fun but if every time you post you have to say a couple of hail marys so that you don't get infracted it's not fun and is actually pretty awful. I LOVE that the forum has become a lot more laid back. Adults should be able to handle every post not being peaches and cream towards them.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I think they felt pressured to get something for Stepan, and Andersson was considered, at the time, to be an extremely safe pick.

Andersson could still end up a good player, but I think the disappointing thing with him is, for a guy lauded to be such a safe pick, other prospects his age have passed him.

That's the only thing that's disappointing. He WAS supposed to be a guy that should be able to play sooner or later. But honestly, if Brian Boyle can improve his skating why can't Lias? Boyle became an elite 4th liner and even a good 3rd liner. Lias has way more offensive talent. Why can't he grow into a solid middle six guy? Maybe even a 2nd liner?