2022-2023 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[STL fan in MN]

When Dom is given example after example that there’s a clear flaw in his model, you’d think that one day he would eventually adjust the calculations of the model.

The expected goals component of his model clearly doesn’t take into account the Blues strategy of passing up good looks for even better ones. I can only assume his model is highly based on the conventional wisdom that more shots = more goals but the Blues don’t go about it that way. They focus way more on quality than quantity and it breaks Dom’s model every time. Dom can be a somewhat useful read when he writes about the league in general but I just ignore him now when he writes about the Blues.

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

I'm confident that Binner is going to have a very good year. Maybe not great, but better than his career averages to date. What I'm curious about is how many starts he will get. If we're talking on the order of 60 or more, that's worrisome. Greiss needs to be Carter Hutton-level decent to make sure Binner doesn't get overused and burnt out.

 

[542365]

I thought Dom’s article was fair and I have similar concerns. I think the Blues will make the playoffs as a wild card on the back of the offense, but that about it. This core has peaked. Thomas and Kyrou will be the veterans leading the next truly great Blues teams in 28-29ish.

 

[PocketNines]

So if Dom has Blues point total in the mid 92s, I see multiple 94.5 lines and multiple 95.5 lines on a quick check. Last year the Blues were at 92.5 before the season.

FWIW, 91.5 is the average number of points accumulated in an 82 game season since the 05-06 loser point was infused to inflate everyone's point totals and make more attendance money.

 

[MissouriMook]

So the Athletic just posted their rankings for the new year. They have the blues ranked as the 17th best team in the league. Teams that are ahead of them are Bruins, Maple Leafs, Lightning, Panthers, Canes, Rangers, Penguins, Capitals, Stars, Preds, Avs, Wild, Flames, Oilers, Knights, and the Kings.

Dom probably had us in the 40s behind some AHL teams. The Blues really broke him when they beat the Bruins for the Cup.

 

[bleedblue1223]

but I do think that we are unlikely to beat our expected results by the same margin we did last year. But I do firmly believe that our 'pass up good looks to try to create great looks' style isn't measured accurately by his model.

This will be a big year for us and the analytics of the team. I also agree that we will absolutely have some regression to the mean, the big question I have is to what extent. To what extent can we expect the Blues to break Dom's model. Does our offensive system and prioritizing successful passes to the slot continue to work or are teams going to adjust to it. Are pairings like Krug/Faulk going to continue to outperform their expected numbers and to a similar rate or do they fall back?

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

So if the Blues wildly outperform his model again, can we start calling him Dum Decision if he doesn’t adjust it?

 

[PocketNines]

So he has the Blues 17th out of 32 teams but also above the average 91.5? Since I realize the average isn't the median, I'd be curious what all his over/under numbers total up to and if you divide that number by 32 how close it comes to 91.5.

Since the addition of the extra point there have been 20,054 regular NHL games played, and 4,654 of those games infused an extra point. Last year 288 of the 1,312 regular season games got an extra point, for 91.00 average. Overall the average is 91.51 points per team per 82 game season since 05-06.

 

[Brian39]

So he has the Blues 17th out of 32 teams but also above the average 91.5? Since I realize the average isn't the median, I'd be curious what all his over/under numbers total up to and if you divide that number by 32 how close it comes to 91.5.

Since the addition of the extra point there have been 20,054 regular NHL games played, and 4,654 of those games infused an extra point. Last year 288 of the 1,312 regular season games got an extra point, for 91.00 average. Overall the average is 91.51 points per team per 82 game season since 05-06.

I just went back a few years and the 17th place team finishes a couple points above that 91.5 point average pretty regularly. Going back 10 years to the lockout shortened 2013 season, the 17th place team finished with the following point totals (or was on pace for this number in a shortened season): 94, 90, 96, 87, 94, 95, 90, 93, 88, and 94. That's 6 years "over" and 4 years "under." Amusingly enough there were zero instances of a team hitting either 91 or 92.

No idea how the sum of his predictions adds up vs the actual median point total, but setting the over/under at 92.5 points for 17th place is pretty much right in line with the historical trend.

 

[PocketNines]

I just went back a few years and the 17th place team finishes a couple points above that 91.5 point average pretty regularly. Going back 10 years to the lockout shortened 2013 season, the 17th place team finished with the following point totals (or was on pace for this number in a shortened season): 94, 90, 96, 87, 94, 95, 90, 93, 88, and 94. That's 6 years "over" and 4 years "under." Amusingly enough there were zero instances of a team hitting either 91 or 92.

No idea how the sum of his predictions adds up vs the actual median point total, but setting the over/under at 92.5 points for 17th place is pretty much right in line with the historical trend.

I have an easy reference because I have it in a spreadsheet. In the full 82 game seasons, 17th team earned:

87, 89, 90, 90, 90, 91, 91
92, 92, 94, 94, 94, 95, 96

 

[execwrite1]

The big issue with needing a #1 LHD is that there aren't really that many true #1 LHD in the league. And the ones that are in the League aren't really available for trades.

A thin class of first-round d-men next year

12. New Jersey Devils: Cameron Allen, D, Guelph (OHL) (RHD)​

Allen is coming off a sensational first year with Guelph; the defenseman earned OHL Rookie of the Year honors. He had 13 goals and 37 points in 65 games. He captained Team Canada at the Hlinka Gretzky Cup, where he had seven points in the five games. The No. 3 pick from the 2021 OHL Priority Selection is a poised, two-way defenseman who already has exhibited top-tier leadership qualities.

15. Vancouver Canucks: Mikhail Gulyayev, D, Omskie Yastreby (MHL) (RHD)​

While Allen is the best North American defensemen, Gulyayev is the top blue-liner in Europe. The Russian is an extremely impressive skater with two-way skills. In his first season in the MHL, Russia's top junior league, he finished with 35 points in 54 games.

27. Vegas Golden Knights: Theo Lindstein, D, Brynäs IF (SHL) (LHD)​

Lindtsein is one of the top European defensive prospects in the class. He's a complete player with superb passing ability. He played at the U18, U20 and professional level in Sweden this past season, and at the Hlinka Gretzky Cup he had a goal and five assists in five contests.

 

[PocketNines]

It would be great to hit on some upcoming defensive draft picks that will help by 25-26 and later. They can help keep the aging team somewhat competitive.

FWIW Blues have drafted only one true all-around #1 defenseman in their entire draft history and it took the #4 pick to do it. So we shouldn't hold our breath on drafting one until they are a bottom team.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'm just hoping we repeat the Shawn Belle pick, but actually earn the last pick in the draft this time.

 

[STL fan in MN]

P9s makes a good point about likely needing a true #1 d-man to win the Cup. I just looked back to see when was the last time a team won the Cup without one of the top d-men in the game. I’d say the answer is 2006 Carolina. Their best d-man that year was Frantisek Kaberle. One could argue that Kris Letang wasn’t exactly peak Letang during the Pens first Cup run but that’s splitting hairs.

Since then, the #1 d-man on the Cup winning teams were:
Niedermayer/Pronger (ANA had 2 of them!)
Lidstrom
Letang (3x)
Keith (3x)
Chara
Doughty (2x)
Carlson
Pietrangelo
Hedman
Makar

The problem is finding one of those guys. And most of the guys on that list aren’t just #1 d-men (best 32 d-men in the league), but very easily top-5 to top-10 in the league with many being HHOF caliber.

Should the Blues give up then? No! I still think they have a good team and a solid top-4. They’re going to need Faulk and Parayko to split the duties of a normal #1 elite guy. There’s really no alternative as acquiring that caliber of player is near impossible.

As for Chychrun, I have near zero interest. The asking price is said to be sky high and he’s injury prone. Maybe if the price comes down and situations change to where he would make more sense but to be honest, I see him as about the same caliber as the 4 guys we already have. He brings different strengths/weaknesses, but he’s about that caliber. Doesn’t really move the needle much IMO.

 

[MissouriMook]

This will be a big year for us and the analytics of the team. I also agree that we will absolutely have some regression to the mean, the big question I have is to what extent. To what extent can we expect the Blues to break Dom's model. Does our offensive system and prioritizing successful passes to the slot continue to work or are teams going to adjust to it. Are pairings like Krug/Faulk going to continue to outperform their expected numbers and to a similar rate or do they fall back?

I guess I have a problem with the acceptance of the idea of "expected numbers", especially as the analytics have developed in hockey in general, but in particular with Dom's "model". One of the hallmarks of any analytical process (and any individual standing behind said process) is the thirst for knowledge to explain the deviations from the "expected" outcomes and the willingness to adjust the modeling to incorporate data to better predict the "expected".

The reason Dom is so vilified around these parts, aside from his unprofessional disdain for our beloved franchise, is he has looked at the Blues' outperformance to the "expected" for several years now and can only offer "they got lucky" as an explanation instead of searching for better data to create a more realistic expectation. For every squad like the Blues that overperforms relative to his flawed model, there is likely an equal an opposite data point that underperforms to the "expected" and his approach to that is likely met with "they got unlucky" as the explanation. If you're passion is data analytics and you have no curiosity as to why certain group over- or under-perform against your projections, you're probably in the wrong field.

Thus ends my rant against Dom and his lazy analytics.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

P9s makes a good point about likely needing a true #1 d-man to win the Cup. I just looked back to see when was the last time a team won the Cup without one of the top d-men in the game. I’d say the answer is 2006 Carolina. Their best d-man that year was Frantisek Kaberle. One could argue that Kris Letang wasn’t exactly peak Letang during the Pens first Cup run but that’s splitting hairs.

Since then, the #1 d-man on the Cup winning teams were:
Niedermayer/Pronger (ANA had 2 of them!)
Lidstrom
Letang (3x)
Keith (3x)
Chara
Doughty (2x)
Carlson
Pietrangelo
Hedman
Makar

The problem is finding one of those guys. And most of the guys on that list aren’t just #1 d-men (best 32 d-men in the league), but very easily top-5 to top-10 in the league with many being HHOF caliber.

Should the Blues give up then? No! I still think they have a good team and a solid top-4. They’re going to need Faulk and Parayko to split the duties of a normal #1 elite guy. There’s really no alternative as acquiring that caliber of player is near impossible.

As for Chychrun, I have near zero interest. The asking price is said to be sky high and he’s injury prone. Maybe if the price comes down and situations change to where he would make more sense but to be honest, I see him as about the same caliber as the 4 guys we already have. He brings different strengths/weaknesses, but he’s about that caliber. Doesn’t really move the needle much IMO.

Wasn't Letang injured for two of those Cups?

 

[Xerloris]

I fully agree that it's extremely difficult to acquire that #1D because of how rare and special they are.

It's extremely rare and special to win the Cup too. That is exactly what makes it worth chasing.

The Cup should be won by the elite of the elite, not the pretty good. The Blues are pretty good.

Talent alone doesn't account for who the "elite of the elite" is. You have to add everything else into the mix as well because a large part of what makes a team truly elite is what they do on the biggest stage with everyone watching.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I guess I have a problem with the acceptance of the idea of "expected numbers", especially as the analytics have developed in hockey in general, but in particular with Dom's "model". One of the hallmarks of any analytical process (and any individual standing behind said process) is the thirst for knowledge to explain the deviations from the "expected" outcomes and the willingness to adjust the modeling to incorporate data to better predict the "expected".

The reason Dom is so vilified around these parts, aside from his unprofessional disdain for our beloved franchise, is he has looked at the Blues' outperformance to the "expected" for several years now and can only offer "they got lucky" as an explanation instead of searching for better data to create a more realistic expectation. For every squad like the Blues that overperforms relative to his flawed model, there is likely an equal an opposite data point that underperforms to the "expected" and his approach to that is likely met with "they got unlucky" as the explanation. If you're passion is data analytics and you have no curiosity as to why certain group over- or under-perform against your projections, you're probably in the wrong field.

Thus ends my rant against Dom and his lazy analytics.

I won't speak for @Brian39, but when we talk about the expected numbers, we aren't referring to Dom's model and his expected results, but some of the more traditional advanced stats that have a longer history.

I think Dom's model has shown to do well in sports betting, but I'd argue that's sort of a different thing, even though projected teams and final standings is still technically 1 game at a time like sports betting, but still. And someone that lives in the analytic world, I don't really like the fact that he doesn't really have a background in analysis. I really doubt he does much if any of the development, he's just the face of it.

 

[PocketNines]

Talent alone doesn't account for who the "elite of the elite" is. You have to add everything else into the mix as well because a large part of what makes a team truly elite is what they do on the biggest stage with everyone watching.

Correct. Despite only drafting one of them, the Blues have had several elite #1 defensemen, including one that was flat out stolen from them and also a long stretch with two of them simultaneously who could not get over the hump with the Blues. There is a difference between having a #1 defenseman on your team and him leading your team to the Cup.

 

[Brian39]

The reason Dom is so vilified around these parts, aside from his unprofessional disdain for our beloved franchise, is he has looked at the Blues' outperformance to the "expected" for several years now and can only offer "they got lucky" as an explanation instead of searching for better data to create a more realistic expectation.

This is just flat out incorrect. Wildly incorrect. Both for how long he's been watching us outperform his model and for his response to what has happened on ice.

His model arguably undervalued us in 2018/19. It picked us to finish 18th in the NHL with 91.5 points. We obviously exceeded those expectations, but his written analysis was dead-on:

St. Louis’ forwards are great and rank 10th in the league collectively thanks to a superb top nine that ranks ninth. The defence group is even better; the Blues have arguably two top pairs that give them the fifth best top-four in the league and the seventh-best group overall. Put all their skaters together and the Blues have a top 10 team, as many expect.
2018-19 NHL Season Preview: St. Louis Blues
The problem with St. Louis is unsurprisingly in net. Jake Allen was a star in the playoffs two seasons ago, but has been largely inconsistent as a starter the last two seasons. His save percentage of .910 ranks 38th among goalies who’ve played 25 or more games. He did have a .920 in the season prior to that, but that’s starting to become a distant memory at this point.

In 2019/20, we outperformed his model a bit, but he had us picked as one of the best teams in the league. He projected us to win the Central and finish 4th in the NHL with 101.4 points. We exceeded that by finishing 2nd in the league and on pace for 108.5 points in 71 games played. It is pretty hard to be mad about a model that 'only' picked us to be 4th in the league when we in fact finished 2nd. The projected points number is the midpoint of the simulations, so it is very, very rare for teams to be modeled at over 110 points. The top few teams in the league always outperform their standings points prediction. But most importantly is this note about how we tweaked his model for 2019/20 specifically because of our team.

The Blues winning it all last season was the main reason I made some big changes to my model and lo and behold the team comes out looking very strong as a result. St. Louis are the fourth highest ranked team, are almost a 90 percent certainty to make the playoffs and have the third best chance of winning the Stanley Cup. Last season didn’t start how the team intended obviously, but it looks unlikely that there will be any bad times for the club this year as only seven percent of simulations have the team finishing with under 90 points.
2019-20 NHL Season Preview: St. Louis Blues
The changes were made in the name of better accounting for defense and utilizing the power of expected goals over shot attempts. Both play to the Blues’ strengths as they were the third strongest chance suppression team last season and had an expected goals percentage of 54 percent, fifth highest in the league and two percentage points higher than their Corsi rate. The Blues’ dominance wasn’t as evident by shot attempts alone as the team makes a concerted effort to both create better chances and stifle them the other way. That’s better reflected now, hence the higher standing.

In 2020/21, we very much underperformed his model. It picked us to finish 3rd in the weird NHL West Division with 70.8 points. In the written portion, he noted that if that projection was off, the next-most-likely projection was that we would be competing for the division title with Colorado and Vegas. Instead, we finished 4th in the division with 63 points. Our underlying metrics were awful that year for the first time in several years.

Your description of Dom and how he views the Blues (and in turn his model) isn't remotely accurate. He does in fact adjust his model to account for deviations, which is exactly what he did after we outperformed his model during the 2019 playoffs. His model was completely fair to us in 2018/19 and 2019/20. It was then too high on us in 2020/21 before being way too low on us in 2021/22. That's not remotely like him watching us outperform his model and just lazily saying 'they got lucky.' Your depiction of Dom is just fiction.

Edit: for the record, I take Dom's model with a large grain of salt. It is good for gambling. Combining it with my own eye test and gut feeling, I've made a good profit betting hockey the last couple years. It isn't remotely good for valuing individual defensive players or predicting goalie performances. It is decent at predicting standings finish, although I don't know of any model or expert who is better than decent. I fully agree that the Blues played a style last year that the model didn't accurately capture, but I don't have a problem with him not re-doing the entire model based on 1 season from 1 team.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And for the expected results that I'm more curious in, is not how the offense prioritizing slot pass opportunities, but the Krug/Faulk pair. At least with the offense, we kind of zeroed in on why they overperformed, and now we can see if that over performance can be sustained and made into a trend. With Krug/Faulk, they greatly overperformed their metrics, now a good portion can be chalked up to usage of being one of the more sheltered 2nd pairs in the league, but I don't think that fully explains their over performance on their underlying metrics.

And it's harder to figure out the on-ice explanations for defense because the goalie plays a big factor as well. If you have a goalie that can exceed in high-danger shots, then you defense is going to look like they are over performing because of it.

I know the Blues have received some negative stuff from people out there for not having a clearly defined analytic department, but based on the team was deployed last season, I think it's clear someone internally is utilizing analytics and usually the key to analytics and is being ahead of the curve. What's something that can give us a competitive advantage sort of thing. I don't think we lucked our way into outperforming some analytical models by old-school hockey methods.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

And for the expected results that I'm more curious in, is not how the offense prioritizing slot pass opportunities, but the Krug/Faulk pair. At least with the offense, we kind of zeroed in on why they overperformed, and now we can see if that over performance can be sustained and made into a trend. With Krug/Faulk, they greatly overperformed their metrics, now a good portion can be chalked up to usage of being one of the more sheltered 2nd pairs in the league, but I don't think that fully explains their over performance on their underlying metrics.

And it's harder to figure out the on-ice explanations for defense because the goalie plays a big factor as well. If you have a goalie that can exceed in high-danger shots, then you defense is going to look like they are over performing because of it.

I know the Blues have received some negative stuff from people out there for not having a clearly defined analytic department, but based on the team was deployed last season, I think it's clear someone internally is utilizing analytics and usually the key to analytics and is being ahead of the curve. What's something that can give us a competitive advantage sort of thing. I don't think we lucked our way into outperforming some analytical models by old-school hockey methods.

We clearly rely on analytics, we just aren’t very transparent about how. Because if you have advantage why would you tell on yourself?

 

[bleedblue1223]

We clearly rely on analytics, we just aren’t very transparent about how. Because if you have advantage why would you tell on yourself?

Well, we wouldn't say what our internal metrics or methodology is, but one of the amateur hockey analytic twitter accounts had a tweet out over the past year or 2 about how many NHL teams had a dedicated analytic department listed on their website and those that didn't, and then which ones made the playoffs. We were one of the few teams that didn't have a analytic department, but made the playoffs.

The problem with their "analysis", some of the analytic departments when I started spot checking them were clearly business analysis departments, where yes it's technically an analytic department, but it's for implementing ERP systems, building Power BI reports, improving efficiencies on business processes, etc., basically had nothing to do with the hockey operations side of things.

Sort of how we have Ryan Miller handle the cap and financial side of negotiations, I highly suspect we have someone in hockey operations that's responsible for some sort of analytic responsibility, and that's part of what drove prioritizing slot passes and deploying Krug and Faulk in a way that more benefits them. And it's blending eye test with numbers because our changes were meant to maximize the skills of the players we have. When you have one of the best passers in the league in Thomas, you can be more aggressive with those dangerous passes. When you have someone like Parayko that can play extremely hard minutes, you can play Krug/Faulk in heavily sheltered minutes.

 

[Celtic Note]

When Dom is given example after example that there’s a clear flaw in his model, you’d think that one day he would eventually adjust the calculations of the model.

The expected goals component of his model clearly doesn’t take into account the Blues strategy of passing up good looks for even better ones. I can only assume his model is highly based on the conventional wisdom that more shots = more goals but the Blues don’t go about it that way. They focus way more on quality than quantity and it breaks Dom’s model every time. Dom can be a somewhat useful read when he writes about the league in general but I just ignore him now when he writes about the Blues.

I think he would adjust the model if he could figure out why the model doesn’t reflect well on the Blues. But given the Blues seem to outperform some of the more common advanced metric, I bet it is pretty difficult to ascertain what metric you should use that wouldn’t break the rest of the model that is pretty accurate.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Well, we wouldn't say what our internal metrics or methodology is, but one of the amateur hockey analytic twitter accounts had a tweet out over the past year or 2 about how many NHL teams had a dedicated analytic department listed on their website and those that didn't, and then which ones made the playoffs. We were one of the few teams that didn't have a analytic department, but made the playoffs.

The problem with their "analysis", some of the analytic departments when I started spot checking them were clearly business analysis departments, where yes it's technically an analytic department, but it's for implementing ERP systems, building Power BI reports, improving efficiencies on business processes, etc., basically had nothing to do with the hockey operations side of things.

Sort of how we have Ryan Miller handle the cap and financial side of negotiations, I highly suspect we have someone in hockey operations that's responsible for some sort of analytic responsibility, and that's part of what drove prioritizing slot passes and deploying Krug and Faulk in a way that more benefits them. And it's blending eye test with numbers because our changes were meant to maximize the skills of the players we have. When you have one of the best passers in the league in Thomas, you can be more aggressive with those dangerous passes. When you have someone like Parayko that can play extremely hard minutes, you can play Krug/Faulk in heavily sheltered minutes.

Our web site now lists a director of hockey analytics, so we are more forthcoming this year.