HTFN
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2009
- 12,663
- 11,704
How are you proving that, besides attributing all the successes to “giving analytics a shot” and the failures to “traditional scouting”?
Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines/etc) | 2023-24 Regular Season Edition
- Thread starter AlexModvechkin8
- Start date
- Status
twabby
Registered User
- Mar 9, 2010
- 14,316
- 16,192
In aggregate the nerds beat the pros. But certainly there are fine people on both sides of the issue!
One of the things I have liked about Carberry is that he has often cited fancy stats / analytics to back up his eye test. he is looking at both things which is productive.
gotta think Carbs is very involved with telling management what he needs to fill his gaps. What kind of player he is looking for. Carbs will factor in heavily with what GMBM goes after. If we make a run at Marner (or we don’t) that is going to be heavily influenced by what Carbs things.
gotta think Carbs is very involved with telling management what he needs to fill his gaps. What kind of player he is looking for. Carbs will factor in heavily with what GMBM goes after. If we make a run at Marner (or we don’t) that is going to be heavily influenced by what Carbs things.
- Jun 25, 2018
- 1,092
- 2,084
Ok, one last post fawning over the 4th line. Hopefully. I aggregated every individual forward season on Natural Stat Trick, limited it to seasons where the player had at least 200 5 on 5 minutes (total of 7461 player-seasons), then made this graph of OZ Faceoff Percentage vs GF Percentage. The individual 23/24 seasons of Beck, Dowd, and NAK are the three smaller red dots (in left to right order), and the big red dot is the aggregate of them together as a line. You can take my word for it that there's no other dots hiding underneath their bigger dots, those guys just inhabit their own little section of the graph.
In case anyone's as curious about outliers as I am, I'll identify some of the other potential dots of interest on this graph.
In case anyone's as curious about outliers as I am, I'll identify some of the other potential dots of interest on this graph.
- The two dots just above and the right of the line dot are Paul Gaustad in 14/15 and Tomas Nosek in 22/23.
- The lonely dot in the bottom left that's the only other player besides Beck to have a <10% OZ Faceoff season is Paul Gaustad again in 15/16. They tried to give him the same workload two years in a row and the second time around he got caved in. Nashville went *extreme* on the focused deployments that year - at the same time Gaustad was setting the record for lowest OZ Faceoff percentage at 6.9%, Ribiero was setting the record for the highest at 84.9.
- The two unlucky bastards who managed to play 200+ minutes without a single goal for while they were on the ice were Phillippe Dupuis (237 minutes) and Eric Boulton (332 minutes), both in 11/12.
- The guy who barely managed 30% GF while getting almost 80% OZ Faceoffs was rookie Leon Draisaitl in 14/15. I forgot how brutal his introduction to the NHL was.
- On the opposite side of the graph, the guy with about 70% GF on only 20% OZ Faceoffs is Nick Foligno in 22/23. Didn't expect that one either.
Attachments
Last edited:
Carbs is definitely a spreadsheet guy. That’s why he looks so mad on that bench. He wants to see his dashboards and numbers
The burst frequency may be a better indicator of playing speed than the top speed. For example, here's Mcmichael vs Lapierre:
While lapierre has a lower top speed, he does have more 20-22 mph speed bursts per game at 147/51 = 2.88 versus mcmichael's 180/80 = 2.25. There's a good reason lapierre stands out as faster to some people - he uses his speed more often even though he has less of it.
Another example of top speed being misleading is kuznetsov. His top speed this year was higher than mchmichael's, but his 20-22 mph burst frequency was only 95/63 = 1.5/game. That's why he looked so slow all year - he didn't skate fast in games despite being a fast skater.
Top speed shows which players CAN skate fast, but the speed burst count shows the players who DO skate fast.
HTFN
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2009
- 12,663
- 11,704
prove it, because the nerds also hyper-fixate on a few guys every year destined to become superstars or turn the corner that... don't.
you concluding this because it "feels right" when your whole point is that statistics should be able to outweigh feelings and the eye test is amazing.
Ovechkins Wodka
Registered User
This is a interesting metric. Stops and starts and the burst of speed out of a stop is huge. Who gets to the puck in the small time frame can change games.
trick9
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2013
- 12,676
- 5,926
Hindsight is always the best drafting GM.
Now let's see the receipts from when those past drafts were actually held. Go dig up your posts about who you thought then that we should have drafted at our spot and how many of those players turned into star players. If you find star players consistently i'd definitely recommend you to our scouting staff.
Now let's see the receipts from when those past drafts were actually held. Go dig up your posts about who you thought then that we should have drafted at our spot and how many of those players turned into star players. If you find star players consistently i'd definitely recommend you to our scouting staff.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 33,137
- 10,611
I dunno. Isn’t Carolina the head of the nerds in the NHL? Feels like every year at the draft it’s, “zomg how did XX player fall to Carolina,” or “of course Carolina took the best hidden gems in the draft — that organization is playing a different sport than everyone else,” and what do they have to show for it? A lot of players who are pretty to very good and no stars. No stud 1C, no 1RD, no goalie. They’re the disappointment of the postseason year after year.
I’m a numbers guy myself so I’m by no means anti-metrics or anti-nerd but I think putting blind faith in the analytics in hockey is misguided due to the randomness of the sport and the complexity of the developmental ecosystem that — in aggregate — combines to make predicting performance of players in the NHL more difficult than in any other sport.
twabby
Registered User
- Mar 9, 2010
- 14,316
- 16,192
I mentioned this last year but I'll say it again. It's not that I think just blindly following the numbers is the optimal solution (well at least until the metrics get better). It's just that blindly following the numbers right now is better than what most teams are currently doing.
I'm not sure where Carolina stands in their adoption of analytics vs. the rest of the league. They certainly have high profile analytics hires but how much do they rely on them? I kind of doubt the analytics folks wanted Kotkaneimi, for instance. That seemed very much like a spite move to "punish" Montreal. Who knows how many other huge decisions like that (including drafting) come down to some petty grievances or "hunches" or whatever.
StrikingDistance
Buford T. Justice
Was on vacay visiting a couple caribbean isles and yes, this was my local bartender for 3 days. I couldn't interpret a lot of what he said, but all the weed talk seemed to resonate...
think I posted that at the bar...I think. haha
StrikingDistance
Buford T. Justice
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 67,001
- 22,067
It always comes back to this…I can’t even read these long rambles about GMBM when he was there supporting McPhee as his number 1, and the player personnel people are all pretty much the same, and we KNOW those are the guys paid to set up draft targets. The drafting could certainly do better, but that’s an organizational effort, not one man.
Maybe @Vivaldi criticisms would resonate more if he acknowledged this.
Last edited:
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
Any source out there that's tracked nerd projections vs. scouting services vs. draft position?
We've got to be upwards of a decade with #fancystats widely available to the public. I'm genuinely interested in how they've done.
We've got to be upwards of a decade with #fancystats widely available to the public. I'm genuinely interested in how they've done.
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 67,001
- 22,067
Ondřej Kaše's path to NHL comeback looks clear 2 years after neurological issues derailed career — The Athletic
Kase, whose last NHL game was in 2022, had a rare healthy year playing at home in Czechia and is impressing at the World Championship.
apple.news
Hmmm…
He needs to be patient until Ovi, Backie, JC, Oshie and Kuzy are off the books. Then he needs to show he can build a team from nothing. So for Ovi, 895 or so. The cap will open up a lot next year. If he doesn't do something big then, it will be time to grump.
Carolina has the 3rd best record in the regular season over the past five years.
Objectively, that’s elite. I get the postseason disappointments but winning in the regular season is what gives your team the best opportunity to win a cup. They’ve been doing that. Not sure if it’s because it’s nerd driven but they are a very good team year in and year out
Ovechkins Wodka
Registered User
Ahh yes the classic “what move did we miss out on” defense. Just because a move wasn’t made doesn’t mean one wasn’t available. I’ll give you one example off the rip. Ehlers was available last year. And again this year. You don’t think this team could use 25 more goals or 60 more points? Vs whomever they pick at 17 who we won’t see for 3 plus years?
I maybe misspoke or chose poor verbiage but I wasn’t insinuating that you personally blindly follow the numbers. Would assume if they hire a bunch of analytics people they’re not doing it to let them play video games all day and use their gut to make decisions.
This is a bit misleading though, yeah? Since they moved to Carolina they finished with a top ten league record one time since 1998 outside of the timeframe you’re discussing. They finished 4th in 2006 and got lucky as hell and won a Cup. In the 10 years prior to Covid they finished 11th, 21st, 21st, 18th, 26th, 24th, 26th, 23rd, 19th, and 24th, and this was pre-expansion so there were only 30 teams. They missed the playoffs nine straight years leading up to 2018-19. That’s an impressive level of futility and they should be good now drafting as high as they were for as long as they were. So sure, they’re good now, but they had to mostly suck for 20+ years to get there. How much credit do they get for being smart vs how much of it is actually not being objectively terrible with premium assets?
But that’s the job lol. He’s paid to have things “work out”. Throwing your hands up and saying well hell I can’t predict the future is a cop out.
- Status
