Toggle sidebar

2024-25 Roster Thread #1: The Beginninging

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
deadhead said:
Whatever this team is, safe ain't it.

Right now, the primary problem is they just aren't on the same page offensively, they're misfiring on passes and shots, trying too hard and getting caught out of position.
Click to expand...
Problem is they just are not good enough. That is the main issue/primary problem. This isn't hard to figure out. Would a different coach get better results?

Once Seeler returns he will stabilize the lineup and look for the team to rebound big time
 
  • Haha
Reactions: freakydallas13
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Ironmanrulez and usahockey22flyers
We need a greater sample size - maybe by Nov 1st we'll have a real feeling of where things are going...but the early returns on the offensive analytics are not good.

I anticipate them being near the bottom - if all things are equal - in chances created, high danger chances, corsi, expected goals, and shooting %.

Not where you want to be.
 
xGF% 47.16 (22), HDCF% 41.15% (28), (GA-xGA)/60: +1.26.
xGF/60: 2.26 (26), xGA/60: 2.57 (16), HDCF/60: 8.41 (29), HDCA/60: 12.03 (25)

What's interesting is how much worse HDCA is than xGA, which suggests they're having too many breakdowns on defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernieParent
usahockey22flyers said:
We need a greater sample size - maybe by Nov 1st we'll have a real feeling of where things are going...but the early returns on the offensive analytics are not good.

I anticipate them being near the bottom - if all things are equal - in chances created, high danger chances, corsi, expected goals, and shooting %.

Not where you want to be.
Click to expand...
Dead said the next 6-8 games. Then the spin will go in another direction.

deadhead said:
xGF% 47.16 (22), HDCF% 41.15% (28), (GA-xGA)/60: +1.26.
xGF/60: 2.26 (26), xGA/60: 2.57 (16), HDCF/60: 8.41 (29), HDCA/60: 12.03 (25)

What's interesting is how much worse HDCA is than xGA, which suggests they're having too many breakdowns on defense.
Click to expand...
They are not a good hockey team. End of story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flyerfan4life
deadhead said:
xGF% 47.16 (22), HDCF% 41.15% (28), (GA-xGA)/60: +1.26.
xGF/60: 2.26 (26), xGA/60: 2.57 (16), HDCF/60: 8.41 (29), HDCA/60: 12.03 (25)

What's interesting is how much worse HDCA is than xGA, which suggests they're having too many breakdowns on defense.
Click to expand...

Can you, please, elaborate? Wouldn't HDCA automatically lead to a goal scoring chance that has high xGA, or? Genuine question. I usually love advanced stats, but perhaps Monday brain is not.. braining at the moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez, BernieParent, JojoTheWhale and 1 other person
ellja3 said:
Can you, please, elaborate? Wouldn't HDCA automatically lead to a goal scoring chance that has high xGA, or? Genuine question. I usually love advanced stats, but perhaps Monday brain is not.. braining at the moment.
Click to expand...
A HDCA would translate into xGA, but it's only a portion of what goes into xGA, a lot of low danger chances would increase xGA without impacting HDCA.

So to me, xGA reflects your overall defensive play, HDCA reflects how often you have breakdowns that allow good scoring chances. As Flyguy3911 points out, it's a crude measure, I'm sure teams have proprietary data that's more detailed, they probably have 1-2 people whose job is primarily to edit video for this purpose.

5 games is a small sample, especially given the circumstances at the start of this season, I think it takes about 20 games for metrics to start becoming meaningful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernieParent and JojoTheWhale
ellja3 said:
Can you, please, elaborate? Wouldn't HDCA automatically lead to a goal scoring chance that has high xGA, or? Genuine question. I usually love advanced stats, but perhaps Monday brain is not.. braining at the moment.
Click to expand...
Flyguy did a nice job explaining.

Advanced stats can sometimes trip me up too, this board has been so great at helping me better understand as well. And i’m still learning!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez, renberg, JojoTheWhale and 1 other person
deadhead said:
A HDCA would translate into xGA, but it's only a portion of what goes into xGA, a lot of low danger chances would increase xGA without impacting HDCA.

So to me, xGA reflects your overall defensive play, HDCA reflects how often you have breakdowns that allow good scoring chances. As Flyguy3911 points out, it's a crude measure, I'm sure teams have proprietary data that's more detailed, they probably have 1-2 people whose job is primarily to edit video for this purpose.

5 games is a small sample, especially given the circumstances at the start of this season, I think it takes about 20 games for metrics to start becoming meaningful.
Click to expand...
What circumstances?
 
deadhead said:
A HDCA would translate into xGA, but it's only a portion of what goes into xGA, a lot of low danger chances would increase xGA without impacting HDCA.

So to me, xGA reflects your overall defensive play, HDCA reflects how often you have breakdowns that allow good scoring chances. As Flyguy3911 points out, it's a crude measure, I'm sure teams have proprietary data that's more detailed, they probably have 1-2 people whose job is primarily to edit video for this purpose.

5 games is a small sample, especially given the circumstances at the start of this season, I think it takes about 20 games for metrics to start becoming meaningful.
Click to expand...

Thanks, this makes sense (the fact that low-danger chances also slowly add to the xGA).

usahockey22flyers said:
Flyguy did a nice job explaining.

Advanced stats can sometimes trip me up too, this board has been so great at helping me better understand as well. And i’m still learning!
Click to expand...

I'm analyst by profession and yet the squirrel in my brain still sometimes doesn't spin the wheel fast enough to make all the links, so it's indeed nice when someone explains it in simple terms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez, usahockey22flyers, BernieParent and 1 other person
ellja3 said:
Thanks, this makes sense (the fact that low-danger chances also slowly add to the xGA).
Click to expand...

Different sites use different definitions, but this might help contextualize it too.

image.png
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Ironmanrulez, pit, usahockey22flyers and 3 others
JojoTheWhale said:
Different sites use different definitions, but this might help contextualize it too.

image.png
Click to expand...
I wonder if the high danger region shouldn't extend horizontally to the face off circles, it seems to me watching games those two triangles are high danger shots. Would be interesting to see shooting success from that area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ellja3
deadhead said:
I wonder if the high danger region shouldn't extend horizontally to the face off circles, it seems to me watching games those two triangles are high danger shots. Would be interesting to see shooting success from that area.
Click to expand...

To really have this discussion, I would use one of HockeyViz's maps. You need more granularity than three broad buckets for me personally.

For example:

fabrics-7-2123-public.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez, kudymen and VladDrag
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom