Post-Game Talk: We are the ones who blow leads

[Unknown Caller]

this may not be a popular take, and we all love him....but Nico has to be better than what he has shown this year so far.

Not that he is the reason we are where we are at all, just making an observation.

I’ve been saying this since game 3. Nico is arguably the most important player on our team behind Hall and he’s been a complete no show. He’s not 18 years old anymore. He should be not only producing, but taking control of games.

 

[MadDevil]

The 4th line was fine last game outside of Wood’s goof. Nico gave us nothing, he looks horrible.

Lost in the blaming of the 4th line for that goal seems to be Subban's terrible breakout pass that started the whole disaster and Severson going for a change as the puck was being turned over.

 

[My3Sons]

I’ve been saying this since game 3. Nico is arguably the most important player on our team behind Hall and he’s been a complete no show. He’s not 18 years old anymore. He should be not only producing, but taking control of games.

He might be nursing an injury. That’s more likely than he lost all of his ability on cut down day.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

Lost in the blaming of the 4th line for that goal seems to be Subban's terrible breakout pass that started the whole disaster and Severson going for a change as the puck was being turned over.

Severson was just trying to save his plus/minus

 

[MartyOwns]

He might be nursing an injury. That’s more likely than he lost all of his ability on cut down day.

that could be it, but if that’s the case he shouldn’t be playing. but i don’t think it’s injury related, he looks unengaged out there, almost disinterested. he’s not competing like he has been for the last couple of years. it can’t last forever, i’m sure he breaks out and finds the back of the net soon enough

 

[Auto Pilot]

He might be nursing an injury. That’s more likely than he lost all of his ability on cut down day.

That falls on the staff for being clueless and putting him in while hurt. They got a history of rushing players back. Look at Schneider the last few years.

 

[My3Sons]

That falls on the staff for being clueless and putting him in while hurt. They got a history of rushing players back. Look at Schneider the last few years.

sadly if Hynes is feeling the heat I could see that.

 

[glenwo2]

Severson was just trying to save his plus/minus

Speaking of plus/minus, here's a weird stat for you :

Bratt is leading the team in +/- category with +3 . (yeah you read that right)

What’s wrong with this, "Coach" Hynes?

Oh , I forgot , Hynes says that it’s all about “finding identity”

 

[Emperoreddy]

Speaking of plus/minus, here's a weird stat for you :

Bratt is leading the team in +/- category with +3 . (yeah you read that right)

What’s wrong with this, "Coach" Hynes?

Oh , I forgot , Hynes says that it’s all about “finding identity”

Which is a pointless stat. Bratt shouldn’t be sitting, but he has not been playing well

 

[glenwo2]

Which is a pointless stat. Bratt shouldn’t be sitting, but he has not been playing well

I disagree with that.

Otherwise, if it was worthless, it wouldn't be included as part of the NHL Stats in the first place.

Just 'cause you view the stat as worthless doesn't remove it from the conversation.

BTW, You still haven't answered my earlier question regarding that tweet.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I disagree with that.

Otherwise, if it was worthless, it wouldn't be included as part of the NHL Stats in the first place.

Just 'cause you view the stat as worthless doesn't remove it from the conversation.

BTW, You still haven't answered my earlier question regarding that tweet.

Reposting trolling attempts on twitter isn’t allowed.

 

[glenwo2]

Reposting trolling attempts on twitter isn’t allowed.

Fine.

And what about my comment regarding plus/minus?

It's there in the Stats section of NHL.com.

Yet they are worthless, correct?

Apparently, the NHL and the statisticians don't agree with you and neither do I.

In fact :

In ice hockey, it measures a player's goal differential. When an even-strength goal or shorthanded goal is scored, the plus–minus statistic is increased by one ("plus") for those players on the ice for the team scoring the goal; the plus–minus statistic is decreased by one ("minus") for those players on the ice for the team allowing the goal.


Take a look at Wayne Simmonds for instance. He has played 9 games (1 more than Bratt), has 29 shot attempts to Bratt's pitiful 4, but has a -2 plus-minus rating.

So basically, Bratt may not be playing well...FOR BRATT but he is still playing well for an NHL player according to this. In the grand scheme of things, the "eye test" does not always work.

That said, the only critique I have of Bratt is that he needs to shoot the puck more as 4 shots in just 8 games isn't going to cut it.

But aside from that, I think he's being used as a scapegoat or a sacrificial lamb (take your pick) by Hynes so he can use Hayden instead.

 

[Blender]

Fine.

And what about my comment regarding plus/minus?

It's there in the Stats section of NHL.com.

Yet they are worthless, correct?

Apparently, the NHL and the statisticians don't agree with you and neither do I.

The only critique I have of Bratt is that he needs to shoot the puck more as 4 shots in just 8 games isn't going to cut it.

But aside from that, I think he's being used as a scapegoat or a sacrificial lamb (take your pick) by Hynes so he can use Hayden instead.

Yes +/- has very little value and come from a time when statistical analysis of the league was superficial at best. We have better data to evaluate performance with now, much better.

 

[glenwo2]

Yes +/- has very little value and come from a time when statistical analysis of the league was superficial at best. We have better data to evaluate performance with now, much better.

Then why is +/- still listed if it has so little value?

Why hasn't the NHL abolished that stat?

It must have value if they still use it, right?


See...this is what I don't get with all the dismissing of Plus/Minus.

Everyone sh-ts on that stat and say there is better data to evaluate performance....and yet PLUS / MINUS is the stat that still remains.

Where are these "better data to evaluate performance with" stats?

'Cause I don't see it on NHL.com.

 

[Tretyak 20]

Speaking of plus/minus, here's a weird stat for you :

Bratt is leading the team in +/- category with +3 . (yeah you read that right)

What’s wrong with this, "Coach" Hynes?

Oh , I forgot , Hynes says that it’s all about “finding identity”

Clearly. I mean practically every player on the team is running around all over the ice looking for identity... or something.

 

[NJDevs26]

Plus minus is irrelevant when you're talking about ten minutes a game for eight games type sample. Over a longer period I'd say it still matters comparing players with each other on the same team (a la Severson having the worst team plus-minus for years).

 

[glenwo2]

Plus minus is irrelevant when you're talking about ten minutes a game for eight games type sample. Over a longer period I'd say it still matters comparing players with each other on the same team (a la Severson having the worst team plus-minus for years).

So you're saying the best time to look at Plus / minus is toward the end of the season overall?

 

[Blender]

Then why is +/- still listed if it has so little value?

Why hasn't the NHL abolished that stat?

It must have value if they still use it, right?


See...this is what I don't get with all the dismissing of Plus/Minus.

Everyone sh-ts on that stat and say there is better data to evaluate performance....and yet PLUS / MINUS is the stat that is listed still.

The NHL is trying to add more statistics these days, they aren't looking to remove anything. Just because a stat is recorded doesn't mean it inherently is valuable for a specific analysis or conclusion. +/- in no way isolates the impact of an individual player on goals for or against, all it says is that they were on the ice for goals.

 

[glenwo2]

The NHL is trying to add more statistics these days, they aren't looking to remove anything. Just because a stat is recorded doesn't mean it inherently is valuable for a specific analysis or conclusion. +/- in no way isolates the impact of an individual player on goals for or against, all it says is that they were on the ice for goals.

Then please show me these new statistics so I can pay attention to them and not plus / minus which is apparently "worthless".

 

[Blender]

Then please show me these new statistics so I can pay attention to them and not plus / minus which is apparently "worthless".

Natural Stat Trick
NHL Player Stats - Corsica Hockey

NHL.com also has some advanced stats as well.

Bratt for example has an on-ice xGF% of 32.66%, which is pretty horrendous. Over time we'd expect to see for every 10 goals for he'd be on the ice for at 5on5, he'd be on for 31 against. xGs are a much better predictor of future performance than +/- for example, and it's not even close.

 

[glenwo2]

Natural Stat Trick
NHL Player Stats - Corsica Hockey

NHL.com also has some advanced stats as well.

Bratt for example has an on-ice xGF% of 32.66%, which is pretty horrendous. Over time we'd expect to see for every 10 goals for he'd be on for 31 against. xGs are a much better predictor of future performance than +/- for example, and it's not even close.

THANK YOU! This is what I'm looking for.

Now I don't have to annoy you all with Plus-minus.


BTW, @Blender do you think that horrendous number had more to do with him paired up with Goose?

I noticed that when he wasn't, that stat was higher (looking at the source now).

 

[Tretyak 20]

Natural Stat Trick
NHL Player Stats - Corsica Hockey

NHL.com also has some advanced stats as well.

Bratt for example has an on-ice xGF% of 32.66%, which is pretty horrendous. Over time we'd expect to see for every 10 goals for he'd be on the ice for at 5on5, he'd be on for 31 against. xGs are a much better predictor of future performance than +/- for example, and it's not even close.

I'm not remotely convinced by all the advanced stats mumbo jumbo. Too often it seems simply not to correlate either to the eye test or more basic stats like points.

And +/- is actually a useful stat if you know how to use it. Hockey is a team sport. There aren't just players standing around that have nothing to do with the play. If used to identify trends over time and used only to compare players on the same team, +/- is actually a very useful stat.

 

[Blender]

I'm not remotely convinced by all the advanced stats mumbo jumbo. Too often it seems simply not to correlate either to the eye test or more basic stats like points.

And +/- is actually a useful stat if you know how to use it. Hockey is a team sport. There aren't just players standing around that have nothing to do with the play. If used to identify trends over time and used only to compare players on the same team, +/- is actually a very useful stat.

"I don't understand them, therefore they are wrong" is a fallacious position to hold. They aren't perfect, that doesn't mean they aren't meaningful, and in many ways far more meaningful than rudimentary stats like +/- or giveaways.

Advanced stats such as corsi and xGs do correlate to future production/points by the way, that's a big reason why they are so widely used. This has been studied and analyzed plenty, so not sure where you are getting that they don't have support.

 

[Tretyak 20]

"I don't understand them, therefore they are wrong" is a fallacious position to hold. They aren't perfect, that doesn't mean they aren't meaningful, and in many ways far more meaningful than rudimentary stats like +/- or giveaways.

Advanced stats such as corsi and xGs do correlate to future production/points by the way, that's a big reason why they are so widely used. This has been studied and analyzed plenty, so not sure where you are getting that they don't have support.

I didn't say I don't understand them, actually. And as for not correlating, Bratt is pretty damn good example. According to advanced stats, he's one of the worst players in the league. That's just bullshit. He hasn't played his best lately, but has been better than advanced stats indicate.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

Bratt hasn’t played well, but he’s also had the misfortune of playing with Gusev while he’s learning how to play in the NHL. That has really skewed his numbers I’m sure. Jack’s struggles in the first couple games is likely tied to being with Gusev too.