2017-18 Kings News/Rumors/Tidbits

[Ziggy Stardust]

 

[tny760]

yes please.

 

[WHOneedsSOX]

Oooooh here's a fun stat I found on this awesome site I just found. Quick's GSAA (goals saved above average) is 14.19 which is #1 in the NHL. Meaning he's saved 14 more goals than an average goalie would've.

Jeff Zatkoff was at a lovely -8 last season. Interesting though that Budaj was also a -2.

 

[KINGS17]

Oooooh here's a fun stat I found on this awesome site I just found. Quick's GSAA (goals saved above average) is 14.19 which is #1 in the NHL. Meaning he's saved 14 more goals than an average goalie would've.

Jeff Zatkoff was at a lovely -8 last season. Interesting though that Budaj was also a -2.

I wonder how they calculate this stat.

 

[KINGS17]

It would be great if Kopitar and Doughty proved me along with many others wrong. In the past guys like Williams, Mitchell, Richards, etc. provided much of the leadership. If the early-30's, late-20's Kings are willing to accept the leadership role now, and the responsibility it comes with, this team may make some noise in the playoffs.

 

[WHOneedsSOX]

I wonder how they calculate this stat.

I'm curious as well. Haven't been able to find anything yet though. Here's the site, maybe you can find something.

http://corsica.hockey/goalie-stats/

 

[Fishhead]

I wonder how they calculate this stat.

Here's a description

http://ingoalmag.com/analysis/gsaa-essential-statistic-evaluating-goaltenders/

It's been around a while, but it's not something that's mainstream like Corsi or other popular advanced stats. It is extremely useful, however. For example, in 2011-2012 when both Quick and Smith had a huge impact on their teams even making the playoffs, let alone the conference finals, they were #1 and #3 in GSAA. They continued that in the playoffs where they were double that of the #3 spot.

It's also a very good predictor of Vezina trophies which means it's matching what the eye sees.

Vezina winners since the lockout vs. GSAA rank:

2006: Kiprusoff - rank #1
2007: Brodeur - rank #1
2008: Brodeur - rank #1
2009: Thomas - rank#1
2010: Miller - rank#1
2011: Thomas - rank#1
2012: Lundqvist - rank#2
2013: Bobrovsky - rank#1
2014: Rask - rank#2
2015: Price - rank#1
2016: Holtby - rank#5
2017: Bobrovsky - rank#1

Note that the stat (like most goalie stats) is impacted by shots allowed, so goalies that don't face a heavy workload are affected. Quick traditionally doesn't fare well in GSAA because of this very reason, but this year since the Kings are allowing way more shots, he's near the top of the list. It also indicates that Bobrovsky is the best goaltender in the game today and has been so for the last 5 years or so, which I can't argue with. The guy is amazing.

It has a few weaknesses (take it in context with total shots allowed), but it's the absolute best tool for evaluating goalies

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

"There is a relatively new statistic for hockey that has been made available by the folks at Hockey-Reference. It’s similar to baseball’s WAR, and it is called “GSAA” – Goals Saved Above Average. You take the league’s average save percentage and apply it to the amount of shots a particular goalie has faced. You get a number of goals that the average goalie in that league would have surrendered if they faced the same number of shots as the goaltender in question. That number gets compared to the number of goals surrendered by that goaltender, and a plus/minus is created. If a goalie is in the positive, that is how many goals they have saved compared to a league-average goalie. If they are in the negative, then it is safe to assume that they are performing worse than how a league-average goaltender would perform in the same situation."

http://ingoalmag.com/analysis/gsaa-essential-statistic-evaluating-goaltenders/

It's nice and this season in particular it's flattering to Quick, but it seasons past, it punished him for facing less shots than other goalies (our usual complaint) and thus the advanced stats nerds came to the conclusion that Scrivens is better than Quick, for example.

Edit: Fishhead is better than me.

 

[WHOneedsSOX]

Awesome, thank you guys. Very interesting stat. It's insane the things they track these days.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Awesome, thank you guys. Very interesting stat. It's insane the things they track these days.

I like it too. And that one's not too crazy since it just takes existing stats and merges them. I'm more interested in how they track more subjective stats going forward, like high danger scoring chances, zone entries/exits, shot quality, etc. Lot of cool stuff out there now that needs more support and development. I also have a particular interest in this stuff because I love defensemen and without real strong defensive metrics to 'measure' the contribution of stuff like Stevens, Pronger, even Lidstrom, more recent folks try to discredit them in favor of offensive guys (just saw someone say they'd take Brent Burns over Scott Stevens).

 

[jfont]

I like it too. And that one's not too crazy since it just takes existing stats and merges them. I'm more interested in how they track more subjective stats going forward, like high danger scoring chances, zone entries/exits, shot quality, etc. Lot of cool stuff out there now that needs more support and development. I also have a particular interest in this stuff because I love defensemen and without real strong defensive metrics to 'measure' the contribution of stuff like Stevens, Pronger, even Lidstrom, more recent folks try to discredit them in favor of offensive guys (just saw someone say they'd take Brent Burns over Scott Stevens).

yeah, that would be a NO..

What are these guys smoking?

 

[WHOneedsSOX]

I like it too. And that one's not too crazy since it just takes existing stats and merges them. I'm more interested in how they track more subjective stats going forward, like high danger scoring chances, zone entries/exits, shot quality, etc. Lot of cool stuff out there now that needs more support and development. I also have a particular interest in this stuff because I love defensemen and without real strong defensive metrics to 'measure' the contribution of stuff like Stevens, Pronger, even Lidstrom, more recent folks try to discredit them in favor of offensive guys (just saw someone say they'd take Brent Burns over Scott Stevens).

Kevin Weekes also said during Doughty's Norris winning year there's no question he'd take Burns over Doughty in a game 7.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Now there's a great example of broadcasters being enamored by the flavor of the month.

 

[Fishhead]

yeah, that would be a NO..

What are these guys smoking?

I'm going to go ahead and recommend that you skip the main board thread comparing EK to Lidstrom...

 

[KingsFan7824]

Which Stevens are we talking about? What he was a player, the one that could play like Scott Stevens, or the one that wouldn't be able to be the same Scott Stevens today? Probably still great without that same intimidation factor, but probably not the same kind of great.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Which Stevens are we talking about? What he was a player, the one that could play like Scott Stevens, or the one that wouldn't be able to be the same Scott Stevens today? Probably still great without that same intimidation factor, but probably not the same kind of great.

Historic version Scott Stevens in his own time, the main argument essentially boiling down to defense/intimidation are overrated and Burns impacts the game more

 

[KingsFan7824]

Historic version Scott Stevens in his own time, the main argument essentially boiling down to defense/intimidation are overrated

Some of it is, but not his version of it.

 

[WHOneedsSOX]

Historic version Scott Stevens in his own time, the main argument essentially boiling down to defense/intimidation are overrated and Burns impacts the game more

Burns impacting the game more was Weekes argument for him taking Burns over Doughty. Said if you're down a goal or two, you want Burns. Forgot to mention though that Burns is probably the reason why you're down a goal or two. Or if you're up a goal or two, would you really want Burns out there? No way.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Burns impacting the game more was Weekes argument for him taking Burns over Doughty. Said if you're down a goal or two, you want Burns. Forgot to mention though that Burns is probably the reason why you're down a goal or two. Or if you're up a goal or two, would you really want Burns out there? No way.

See I'm not sure how he ended the year, but for a long while, Burns was actually at an absolutely absurd 75% GF%, so even if he's bad defensively, he WAS impacting the game; however, that's because he had the softest deployment of any defenseman I can ever remember, because Vlasic/Braun were getting absolutely annhiliated with d-zone starts. That's my biggest qualm with Burns' year, which was phenomenal. But the bigger problem I have is the constant underrating of what a top-5 defensive d-man does, especially when the Sharks have one on their own team

 

[tsanuri]

There you go again trying to bring facts.
Haven't you learned that can only get you in trouble.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

There you go again trying to bring facts.
Haven't you learned that can only get you in trouble.

Totes.

My new favorite thing is posters slagging +/- in the EK was a -7 thread, only to point out how awesome he was because of goal differentials in the playoffs.

 

[Statto]

I like it too. And that one's not too crazy since it just takes existing stats and merges them. I'm more interested in how they track more subjective stats going forward, like high danger scoring chances, zone entries/exits, shot quality, etc. Lot of cool stuff out there now that needs more support and development. I also have a particular interest in this stuff because I love defensemen and without real strong defensive metrics to 'measure' the contribution of stuff like Stevens, Pronger, even Lidstrom, more recent folks try to discredit them in favor of offensive guys (just saw someone say they'd take Brent Burns over Scott Stevens).

High danger scoring chances was something I used to track for the pro team I worked with 15-20 yrs ago. So I expect the NHL teams have tracked it for years but it's only now I'm seeing it talked about in any significant way. I used to track around 10 different stats as a team of 1, so the NHL teams must have a bunch of stuff we never even hear about, let alone see.

 

[Statto]

Totes.

My new favorite thing is posters slagging +/- in the EK was a -7 thread, only to point out how awesome he was because of goal differentials in the playoffs.

People just don't understand +/- ; it's a great stat. Incredibly useful, but completely useless as a stand alone metric. It tells you a huge amount when using the correct context, supporting metrics and meaningful periods of time. Its main issue is the way people misuse it.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

It would be great if Kopitar and Doughty proved me along with many others wrong. In the past guys like Williams, Mitchell, Richards, etc. provided much of the leadership. If the early-30's, late-20's Kings are willing to accept the leadership role now, and the responsibility it comes with, this team may make some noise in the playoffs.

Yep. Mitchell, Williams, Richards, etc shouldered the leadership mantle during our runs. Hopefully Kopitar, Brown, and Doughty learned from that.

 

[Stimpythecat]

I'm listening to TSN Bobcast. there's a reference to Doughty and the leafs. Paraphrasing, it's not reality for now for the leafs to get him.

35:38 - Doughty reference
45:30 - concussion protocol discussion about Fluery and Quick

Short answer: - not mandatory because it did not fit the narrow scenarios for the protocol. It was thus discretionary.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/audio/the-tsn-hockey-bobcast-season-2-episode-4-1.904818