Speculation: Top 5 leading scorers for 2018-2019 - #3

[ACC1224]

Yeah...I understood what you said. I think it is fair to say that Matthews will inflate a lot of players stats. I would love to see what Matthews and Marner could do together.

Johnsson, Matthews, Marner
Marleau, Tavares, Nylander
Hyman, Kadri, Brown/kapanen
Whatever you like

You won't see that until they are signed.

 

[Morgs]

No, I didn’t say that. I said October and November aren’t random months to omit, because the stats are inflated in those months.

I also think October and November aren’t relevant for Marner because he has IMPROVED drastically throughout the year.

You’re right, the conversation is going nowhere because your reading comprehension is lacking.

I'm excited to quote your original post at the end of the season.

 

[Notsince67]

You won't see that until they are signed.

you are right. Statistical supression

 

[ACC1224]

you are right. Statistical supression

Can't blame them, they do have t be mindful of the cap.

 

[MyBudJT]

I'm excited to quote your original post at the end of the season.

Feel free. Shouldn’t be any worse than the average poster here...

 

[Morgs]

Feel free. Shouldn’t be any worse than the average poster here...

Oh it will be.

 

[MyBudJT]

 

[Notsince67]

Can't blame them, they do have t be mindful of the cap.

I'm surprised how disciplined they have been to date

 

[MyBudJT]

Oh it will be.

Will you at least concede that October and November aren’t random months to omit?

 

[Notsince67]

Feel free. Shouldn’t be any worse than the average poster here...

A few decade of a losing team kinda gets you used to the dreaded end of the year I told you sos. I thought that the fact that the Habs were crap might give a bit of a reprieve of that kind of crap. Oh well...into the breach

 

[ACC1224]

I'm surprised how disciplined they have been to date

They are in this for the long haul.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Nice rebuttal man. Are you disagreeing that scoring is inflated in October/November?

Scoring is slightly higher in the first few months, but not to a significant degree. If you translate the scoring increase to the individual level, the same player who gets 30 points in the second half might get 31-32 in the first.

There was a reason that Marner was not paired with Matthews that Babcock has discussed. People actually play better with Marner. That is what driving a line means
There is a lot of revisionist history going on around here.

WOWY is basically discarded by the statistical community, due to the very small sample size for most player combination. It is highly recommended to use RelTM numbers as a measurement of impact on teammate, as it provides an aggregate for WOWY while also controlling for the relative ice time factor.

Nylander has a significant lead in RelTM CF% over the full sample, Marner has a smaller lead using just last season.
Nylander has a smaller lead in RelTM xGF% over the full sample, but Marner has a significant lead using just last season.

xGF% is the better stat to look at to see who has performed better. CF% is the better stat to look at to see who does things that translate to future success.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I think Marner and Nylander are both pretty damn good...

 

[Notsince67]

Scoring is slightly higher in the first few months, but not to a significant degree. If you translate the scoring increase to the individual level, the same player who gets 30 points in the second half might get 31-32 in the first.


WOWY is basically discarded by the statistical community, due to the very small sample size for most player combination. It is highly recommended to use RelTM numbers as a measurement of impact on teammate, as it provides an aggregate for WOWY while also controlling for the relative ice time factor.

Nylander has a significant lead in RelTM CF% over the full sample, Marner has a smaller lead using just last season.
Nylander has a smaller lead in RelTM xGF% over the full sample, but Marner has a significant lead using just last season.

xGF% is the better stat to look at to see who has performed better. CF% is the better stat to look at to see who does things that translate to future success.

My understanding is that WOWY is a relative CF% of team mates playing with or without. In my mind it is far better than Corsi as a nominal comparison. There are far too many variables that affect corsi. As a scalar comparison of the affects of the same population, I believe it is really handy.
CF% might be somewhat predictive but there are real problems when factoring things like defensive styles. Gardiner (who pretty well constantly plays with the first line is a Corsi generator but when you look a good defensive team like Columbus, pretty much every defensive player has a CF% below 50%. It has been pointed out that guys like Cody Franson also generates a lot of shots but they are usually of the low danger shot variety. I have defended him but the criticism peaked my curiosity and I can't say that I disagree, after looking closely at other numbers.
Anecdotally, I have observed a ton of carry-ins by Nylander that resulted in a low danger shot attempt which credits his CF% but really is effectively a turnover unless he scores.
It is a great discussion for sure but I'll need more convincing that a scalar use of corsi among team mates is a poor way of measuring driving a line than an isolated nominal compare of CF%.

 

[Nithoniniel]

My understanding is that WOWY is a relative CF% of team mates playing with or without. In my mind it is far better than Corsi as a nominal comparison. There are far too many variables that affect corsi. As a scalar comparison of the affects of the same population, I believe it is really handy.

The issue with WOWY is that you get a chart that treats all player combinations equally, while most of them have so few solid minutes together that you can't draw any conclusions from them. RelTM offers the exact same thing, but aggregates the results and weighs them according to how much time they spend on the ice. Therefor, what Nylander does with Matthews is of much more importance than what ice time he gets along with someone that he is just out there for a few shifts with.

CF% might be somewhat predictive but there are real problems when factoring things like defensive styles. Gardiner (who pretty well constantly plays with the first line is a Corsi generator but when you look a good defensive team like Columbus, pretty much every defensive player has a CF% below 50%. It has been pointed out that guys like Cody Franson also generates a lot of shots but they are usually of the low danger shot variety. I have defended him but the criticism peaked my curiosity and I can't say that I disagree, after looking closely at other numbers.

I'm not sure what this had to do with using RelTM instead of WOWY? Either way, you can use xGF% for that.

Oh, and LA has been the best defensive team of the decade and has been a dominant CF% team.

Anecdotally, I have observed a ton of carry-ins by Nylander that resulted in a low danger shot attempt which credits his CF% but really is effectively a turnover unless he scores.

Nylander led the team in passes to high-scoring areas at even strength. His shot spread doesn't support your anecdote either, as he doesn't take more low danger shots than normal.

Furthermore, what drives CF% is ability to transition, sustain pressure, and create shot opportunities. If someone throws pucks on net like you describe, they'd just get one-and-done opportunities before the puck goes the other way, which would lead to bad shot metrics.

It is a great discussion for sure but I'll need more convincing that a scalar use of corsi among team mates is a poor way of measuring driving a line than an isolated nominal compare of CF%.

Like I said above, RelTM is WOWY but aggregated and weighed for the ice time factor.

 

[Notsince67]

The issue with WOWY is that you get a chart that treats all player combinations equally, while most of them have so few solid minutes together that you can't draw any conclusions from them. RelTM offers the exact same thing, but aggregates the results and weighs them according to how much time they spend on the ice. Therefor, what Nylander does with Matthews is of much more importance than what ice time he gets along with someone that he is just out there for a few shifts with.


I'm not sure what this had to do with using RelTM instead of WOWY? Either way, you can use xGF% for that.

Oh, and LA has been the best defensive team of the decade and has been a dominant CF% team.


Nylander led the team in passes to high-scoring areas at even strength. His shot spread doesn't support your anecdote either, as he doesn't take more low danger shots than normal.

Furthermore, what drives CF% is ability to transition, sustain pressure, and create shot opportunities. If someone throws pucks on net like you describe, they'd just get one-and-done opportunities before the puck goes the other way, which would lead to bad shot metrics.


Like I said above, RelTM is WOWY but aggregated and weighed for the ice time factor.

Washington won the cup and their defense looks sub-standard when measured by CF%. Min also looks dreadful from that metric. Predictively, controlled exits are what is gaining all the attention for Dmen even beyond Zone denial metrics. Doughty is high on the list of this as was Orlvov, Carlson, and Spurgeon.
Heck...I can point to a forward like Frolik on CGY whose CF% is a sky high 56.9% and only managed 23 points.
As for weighing a WOWY based on icetime...hard to know the impact of this with a real stress test. Nylander is playing with a very elite player in Matthews. What happens if he is taken out of the weightings? We already knows that he plays well with him and all the metric is showing is a bias towards that success. Babcock's comment on Marner driving a line was his observation that there are only a few forwards that can generate offense without a great center (Patrick Kane is one of them).What happens when something like a dump in doesn't get recovered (Nylander really low in dump in recoveries). All numbers have noise but again, I would prefer scalar over nominal compares 99% of the time while assessing strategy with statistics as a first look. Your RelTM basically doubles down on Nylander's success with Matthews and claim that the discussion is over. I'm not convinced.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Washington won the cup and their defense looks sub-standard when measured by CF%. Min also looks dreadful from that metric. Predictively, controlled exits are what is gaining all the attention for Dmen even beyond Zone denial metrics. Doughty is high on the list of this as was Orlvov, Carlson, and Spurgeon.
Heck...I can point to a forward like Frolik on CGY whose CF% is a sky high 56.9% and only managed 23 points.

Still don't understand your point. You were using CF% yourself in the WOWY you refer to. And again, if those things are your issue, then use xGF%.

As for weighing a WOWY based on icetime...hard to know the impact of this with a real stress test.

No, it's not hard at all. It's quite logical that you don't put as much weight on what happened in 20 minutes two players played together as the 1000 he played with someone else. The first is such a small sample size that it's unusable, the other is actually telling. WOWY doesn't take this into account, RelTM does. That's the only difference.

Your RelTM basically doubles down on Nylander's success with Matthews and claim that the discussion is over.

No, that's not what is happening. But it does care more about what Nylander did with Matthews than how he did with Bozak, as it's more reliable information.

Go read up on the subject. Nobody uses WOWY anymore. There's a reason for it.

 

[IPS]

You won't see that until they are signed.

Just curious towards you and the others who commonly make this argument.

Do you think it gets entirely overlooked in negotiations? Because it doesn't. In fact, I'll bet every penny I have plus my house that Matthews' agent is drilling home the fact that Matthews did not receive minutes that corresponded to his results on the ice, especially regarding the PP (where Matthews was 41st among centers in PP time). Matthews had every right to be upset with Babcock (which was revealed after their meeting in Arizona). So it really begs the question, what does "suppressing production" really accomplish when it comes to negotiations?

People on this board tend to be very one track-minded on this subject.

 

[Notsince67]

Still don't understand your point. You were using CF% yourself in the WOWY you refer to. And again, if those things are your issue, then use xGF%.


No, it's not hard at all. It's quite logical that you don't put as much weight on what happened in 20 minutes two players played together as the 1000 he played with someone else. The first is such a small sample size that it's unusable, the other is actually telling. WOWY doesn't take this into account, RelTM does. That's the only difference.


No, that's not what is happening. But it does care more about what Nylander did with Matthews than how he did with Bozak, as it's more reliable information.

Go read up on the subject. Nobody uses WOWY anymore. There's a reason for it.

I've read the criticism but it is largely about the predictive nature of scoring...not about the questions regarding what driving a line means. As a scalar measurement, WOWY can be used to calibrate decisions of better or worse, not how much.
Your point isn't invalid but neither is mine. I would argue that an elite centerman on your line will improve your overall metrics and may bias the results (of who drives a line) the other way. Here is my question...when Babcock states that Marner has unique skills to drive a line, do you think he is using WOWY or his eyes? If you think he is biased by advance metrics then you might have a point. If you think that he sees something (which a lot of people do) then the metrics that you choose to describe the two players might have something wrong with them. There may be a problem with sample size of minutes but Marner has the exact same issue though he is showing a large divergence of with and without against most of the team. If positional roles were reversed, do you think that Marner and Nylander would show similar results? Is a guy like Josh Baily going to have the same REITM results this year as last? Doubt it

 

[Nithoniniel]

I've read the criticism but it is largely about the predictive nature of scoring...not about the questions regarding what driving a line means. As a scalar measurement, WOWY can be used to calibrate decisions of better or worse, not how much.

Again, RelTM does the exact same thing as WOWY. There's nothing WOWY offers that RelTM does not, other than a level of detail that is more likely than not to be misleading.

Here is my question...when Babcock states that Marner has unique skills to drive a line, do you think he is using WOWY or his eyes? If you think he is biased by advance metrics then you might have a point.

Again, not sure what this has to do with the discussion at all. I don't even get your point. You're advocating using one stat, I am advocating using another. The only difference is that mine has a better track record while offering the same thing.

If you think that he sees something (which a lot of people do) then the metrics that you choose to describe the two players might have something wrong with them.

Appeal to authority, eh? Since your stat lines up with an incomplete statement from Babcock, it is right? That is weak. Sure, RelTM and everything else might get it wrong. WOWY might also get it wrong. Babcock frequently get things wrong too.

Take a step back and look at your position here. Pretty much everything we can show from goals and shot metrics down to individual actions point towards the players being fairly equal. You only have WOWY based on CF% left (a stat that you somehow criticize while defending your position), and that's mainly in the one year sample. A stat that is largely discarded for a better alternative that again does not support your stance.

At some point you'll have to acknowledge that the evidence is overwhelmingly against you.

If positional roles were reversed, do you think that Marner and Nylander would show similar results?

Yes. All evidence supports that.

Is a guy like Josh Baily going to have the same REITM results this year as last? Doubt it.

He's more likely to retain his RelTM than he is to retain his WOWY profile, as it's the more repeatable metric.

Again you are arguing for using one stat over another by attacking general limitations of all stats.

 

[Notsince67]

Yes. All evidence supports that.


He's more likely to retain his RelTM than he is to retain his WOWY profile, as it's the more repeatable metric.

Again you are arguing for using one stat over another by attacking general limitations of all stats.

We aren't going to agree here. I find it difficult to believe you don't understand what I am saying so I'll just attribute it to your cognitive dissonance. If you truly believe that Nylander drives a line better or equal to Marner, then you must admit that you do not agree with Babcock. There is no interpretive differences here because he clearly believes it. Yes it is technically an appeal to authority but let's just square up what the authority is...the head coach who watches them play more than anyone. You say this metric says x in contrast with Babcock. You can't both be right. You are mixing quantitative indicators predicting scoring vs qualitative ones of who can make other players better. I definitely know that weighing a variable higher based on ice time with Matthews will not aid to answer the later.

 

[Nithoniniel]

We aren't going to agree here. I find it difficult to believe you don't understand what I am saying so I'll just attribute it to your cognitive dissonance. If you truly believe that Nylander drives a line better or equal to Marner, then you must admit that you do not agree with Babcock. There is no interpretive differences here because he clearly believes it. Yes it is technically an appeal to authority but let's just square up what the authority is...the head coach who watches them play more than anyone. You say this metric says x in contrast with Babcock. You can't both be right. You are mixing quantitative indicators predicting scoring vs qualitative ones of who can make other players better. I definitely know that weighing a variable higher based on ice time with Matthews will not aid to answer the later.

I'm perfectly comfortable disagreeing with Babcock sometimes, especially when all the evidence is on my side.

You still don't seem to get what RelTM does. Nylander having Matthews on his line actually makes it harder for him to get a good RelTM, as the metric measures the impact Nylander has on Matthews compared to Matthews' baseline. Having a big impact on a player that is one of the best in the league is not as easy as raising the game of someone who needs you desperately, like a Bozak.

 

[Notsince67]

I'm perfectly comfortable disagreeing with Babcock sometimes, especially when all the evidence is on my side.

You still don't seem to get what RelTM does. Nylander having Matthews on his line actually makes it harder for him to get a good RelTM, as the metric measures the impact Nylander has on Matthews compared to Matthews' baseline. Having a big impact on a player that is one of the best in the league is not as easy as raising the game of someone who needs you desperately, like a Bozak.

Lets look at what Babcock actually said....
Conventional wisdom in hockey is that a center drives a line. Just wondering, in Mitch’s case as a winger, what it is about him that…
Babcock: That’s a real good question. Kane in Chicago is the same way. They can drive a line without a dominant center. That’s probably because they carry the puck so much and they have the puck so much. There is not many guys that I’ve seen over the years that can drive a line as the winger. They usually need a good centerman with them. I’ve always been under the assumption that if you can get the center, get the center every time. But, in Mitch’s case, he’s one of those guys that has that rare ability. Especially as a young kid, he’s been able to do it already.
-----------------------
Edit
Perhaps you misunderstood what Babcock actually said.
By your comment and in the context of what Babs said, REITM might not show what drives a line. We should be in agreement.

 

[Nithoniniel]

By your comment and in the context of what Babs said, REITM might not show what drives a line. We should be in agreement.

RelTM is the best we have when it comes to showing who drives lines. It is better than WOWY, that you used. That assertion is what we have been discussing here.

You are welcome to hang your entire case on an appeal to authority, but at least don't come dragging WOWY as some proof that Marner can carry his lines in a way that Nylander can't going forward. All your arguments is at least as applicable on WOWY as any other stat. If you do, it's quite clear that you only care about WOWY because it says what you want to hear.

EDIT: Regarding the Babcock quote. If having the puck and carrying the puck is what makes a winger drive a line, then Nylander should definitely be able to do that since all measurements of such have Nylander doing that to an even greater extent than Marner.

 

[Notsince67]

RelTM is the best we have when it comes to showing who drives lines. It is better than WOWY, that you used. That assertion is what we have been discussing here.

You are welcome to hang your entire case on an appeal to authority, but at least don't come dragging WOWY as some proof that Marner can carry his lines in a way that Nylander can't going forward. All your arguments is at least as applicable on WOWY as any other stat. If you do, it's quite clear that you only care about WOWY because it says what you want to hear.

EDIT: Regarding the Babcock quote. If having the puck and carrying the puck is what makes a winger drive a line, then Nylander should definitely be able to do that since all measurements of such have Nylander doing that to an even greater extent than Marner.

and you are welcomed to use a variable weighted to icetime with an elite center. When I see REITM actually drop for Marner this year which is consistent with your description of what happens, I will also tout the virtues of this.