Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - part VI

[Guttersniped]

Yeah it was him!

The issue I have with NHLe models is I don’t know how much the data from Sean Pronger, who was in the 1991 Draft, actually helps you now.

The draft changed in 2005 when they cut it down to 7 rounds, the draft classes dropped to 210-230. It’s a yearly event.

If I ran a team I think it would be very beneficial to do a historical statistical analysis of each year.

Where do all the players come from? How did the do? Which teams/ scouting directors/ GMs selected them took them?

Where did overager drafted picks and non-drafted players in the AHL and NHL the same age come from and how did they do?

I think NHLe modeling does allow teams to ask if there’s players falling through the cracks or being over-drafted too but it won’t be a timeless formula. Leagues change too much.

It’s a yearly historical event. One of the more fascinating things (for me!) was to go through the NHL.com draft lists, which list weight and height.

You can really see when the NHL became total size queens at some point in 1990s and then let up with that in 2010s. Those trends need to be mapped out.

The same with trends towards drafting in Russia, NCAA, USNTDP, etc These trends all have historical trends and just throwing 30 years of data in a blender doesn’t seem that helpful or interesting. (I also majored in history, so I’m biased lol.)

 

[Triumph]

Well, you missed my point a bit so I'll explain it again.

Let's just hypothetically say I come up with a new statistical analytic to measure hockey players. When I feed all the players into my algorithm, it says that Connor McDavid is actually a mediocre hockey player. The correct thing to do would be to admit that my model is extremely flawed and go back to the drawing board. The problem is that people like Bader and JFresh make a living by gullible people believing their models are incredibly accurate -- so they would respond to this same conundrum by tweeting out a dozen times that "Connor McDavid is not really as good as people think he is" or whatever. And that is why those guys are not very good at what they do. They're not giving us an alternate way to measure hockey performance -- no, they're selling their own s**t and trying to make a buck.

Ultimately, Brady Tkachuk is not an exceptionally hard player to model, he's just hard to model under a restrictive and limited algorithm which ignores several of the qualities which make an NHL forward effective. The fact is Brady Tkachuk is a PPG+ player who is also one of the top 5 forwards in the league when it comes to deflecting pucks, hunting rebounds, forechecking, screening goalies, winning battles down low and overall physical play. But the same way a lazy analytics-writer would prefer to insult a player than to second guess his algorithm, these people would also rather dismiss these extremely valuable qualities as unimportant than try to factor them into their algorithm.

It's lazy, and it's bad science.

But people are gullible, and they're willing to part with their money if they're manipulated correctly. And ultimately, that's what the Baders and JFreshes of the world are really good at, and that's why I speak out against it.

It's a blatant goalpost shift to use McDavid instead of Tkachuk, and you are using circular reasoning - who says all of that stuff is valuable? What value does it have? This is what people working with analytics are generally trying to answer. How do you know he's a top 5 forward when it comes to that stuff? Are you watching all of his games? How often do you watch Brady Tkachuk? Are you tracking his play relative to other players? Of course not. So all you know is from the 5-10 Senators games you watch a year and media opinion.

You're just picking on low-hanging fruit. Yes, Bader's process is bad, you've said a million times on this board - how many times are you going to mention this guy on here? I know it, you know it, the only thing he's doing is using NHLe. That has some merit, but it's going to miss very big more often than it hits big. Once you get past the low-hanging fruit, you won't find a whole lot there. It's because eyes + stats is the way and only eyes is falling off hard.

 

[TrufleShufle]

It's a blatant goalpost shift to use McDavid instead of Tkachuk, and you are using circular reasoning - who says all of that stuff is valuable? What value does it have? This is what people working with analytics are generally trying to answer. How do you know he's a top 5 forward when it comes to that stuff? Are you watching all of his games? How often do you watch Brady Tkachuk? Are you tracking his play relative to other players? Of course not. So all you know is from the 5-10 Senators games you watch a year and media opinion.

You're just picking on low-hanging fruit. Yes, Bader's process is bad, you've said a million times on this board - how many times are you going to mention this guy on here? I know it, you know it, the only thing he's doing is using NHLe. That has some merit, but it's going to miss very big more often than it hits big. Once you get past the low-hanging fruit, you won't find a whole lot there. It's because eyes + stats is the way and only eyes is falling off hard.

I think the issue here that is being glossed over, is people thinking it's the be all end all.

And yes, I saw where it was said that "no one thinks it's the be all end all." But at the same time I've never once seen someone bring something up, get called out for lacking valuable context and not respond with some type of "just say you don't understand and move on" smug, reddit like response.

People who use analytics are fine, people who treat it like a religion that needs to be defended at all costs are the issue.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

I think the issue here that is being glossed over, is people thinking it's the be all end all.

And yes, I saw where it was said that "no one thinks it's the be all end all." But at the same time I've never once seen someone bring something up, get called out for lacking valuable context and not respond with some type of "just say you don't understand and move on" smug, reddit like response.

People who use analytics are fine, people who treat it like a religion that needs to be defended at all costs are the issue.

The purpose of analytics is to be able to give people more information on how players stack up across the league. Literally no one can watch every player, in every game, on every night. It isn't humanly possible.

The reason they are "defended at all costs" is because its simply information. You can choose to use it, or not. If you don't want to use it, thats fine. But don't say that the information is "wrong" or "doesn't matter" or is "made up". Thats BS. What I also have a problem with is when people say "Well, I will simply watch the games, not the fancy charts!". Thats such a lazy BS nonsense comment. The "fancy charts" are based on what happens in the games!

Counting stats, advanced stats, and the eye test are all important when evaluating a player. None of them are infallible. They are information.

 

[Triumph]

I think the issue here that is being glossed over, is people thinking it's the be all end all.

And yes, I saw where it was said that "no one thinks it's the be all end all." But at the same time I've never once seen someone bring something up, get called out for lacking valuable context and not respond with some type of "just say you don't understand and move on" smug, reddit like response.

People who use analytics are fine, people who treat it like a religion that needs to be defended at all costs are the issue.

I don't care about this. I legitimately do not care. That is their problem, not mine. Living in a world of uncertainty isn't for most people, so if they have to glom on to statistical dogma to cling to, fine. Most of hockey is slightly weighted coinflips. That's fine.

To me, the issue is more people who treat anti-analytics like a religion, just calling people top 5 at stuff without any basis. I don't watch every game, but I try to listen to people who do.

 

[TrufleShufle]

The purpose of analytics is to be able to give people more information on how players stack up across the league. Literally no one can watch every player, in every game, on every night. It isn't humanly possible.

The reason they are "defended at all costs" is because its simply information. You can choose to use it, or not. If you don't want to use it, thats fine. But don't say that the information is "wrong" or "doesn't matter" or is "made up". Thats BS. What I also have a problem with is when people say "Well, I will simply watch the games, not the fancy charts!". Thats such a lazy BS nonsense comment.

Counting stats, advanced stats, and the eye test are all important when evaluating a player. None of them are infallible. They are information.

Yea that's been said a thousand times, but the problem is you can post analytics about a guy you never watch to make a point, someone can say, I actually watch this guy all the time and have for a long time and you would say. Nope sorry, numbers don't lie.

So this whole straw man argument about other people saying they don't matter and are made up doesn't hold any weight when you especially never give ground the other way.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Yea that's been said a thousand times, but the problem is you can post analytics about a guy you never watch to make a point, someone can say, I actually watch this guy all the time and have for a long time and you would say. Nope sorry, numbers don't lie.

So this whole straw man argument about other people saying they don't matter and are made up doesn't hold any weight when you especially never give ground the other way.

numbers don't usually lie. How you interpret them does lie. The "eye test" lies, as well. so, yeah.

I don't even think you believe some of the stuff you argue "against" to be honest, I think you just enjoy being contrarian. Which is fine I guess, but kinda weird.

 

[TrufleShufle]

I don't care about this. I legitimately do not care. That is their problem, not mine. Living in a world of uncertainty isn't for most people, so if they have to glom on to statistical dogma to cling to, fine. Most of hockey is slightly weighted coinflips. That's fine.

To me, the issue is more people who treat anti-analytics like a religion, just calling people top 5 at stuff without any basis. I don't watch every game, but I try to listen to people who do.

I have never seen this.... I see people get frustrated being told their opinions on players they watch on a regular basis is wrong because "here look at this graph." Then they respond with, yea but that doesn't take XYZ into account and they are told it's only because they don't understand. It happens constantly.

 

[Billdo]

Never saw this before

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

like, I enjoy STI's posts, he watches more prospects than I ever will or care to. I appreciate what he does for this board. But, and I mean this as respectable as possible, I don't think he has the best handle on the current state of players around the league, to be honest. And most of his opinions on current players seem to be skewed by his draft takes.

And to say "JFresh is an idiot" or whatever it was he said is simply ridiculous to me. Again, if you don't like the information and don't care to use it, thats totally fine. But don't disrespect others who do find it informative.

 

[TrufleShufle]

numbers don't usually lie. How you interpret them does lie. The "eye test" lies, as well. so, yeah.

I don't even think you believe some of the stuff you argue "against" to be honest, I think you just enjoy being contrarian. Which is fine I guess, but kinda weird.

What are you even talking about? What am I arguing against that I don't believe? Not everyone that disagrees with you is being "contrarian."

I've talked about this with High danger chances, it definitely can not take everything into account no matter what you say. And to defend it as such is no different than defending +/- blindly.

Before you get all crazy, I understand high danger chances is a much better/useful stat than +/- (even though I know that won't stop you from reminding me) But the point stands about context.

 

[Cheddabombs]

Never saw this before

I lol'd

 

[Triumph]

I have never seen this.... I see people get frustrated being told their opinions on players they watch on a regular basis is wrong because "here look at this graph." Then they respond with, yea but that doesn't take XYZ into account and they are told it's only because they don't understand. It happens constantly.

Go back and read STI's posts. You will see the anti-analytics manifesto written out perfectly right there. Nobody in sports says they're against statistics, because goals and assists are also statistics and they've heard that gambit before. And enough sports teams have won championships giving credit to 'analytics' and whatever that it's hard to just flat out say 'this has no value'. So instead the argument is 'Well, I'd believe the numbers, but they're missing A, B, and C', and what that boils down to is 'I believe the numbers when they support me, and I don't believe them when they don't.' In which case, the numbers are adding absolutely nothing at all. If you can't ever look at statistical-based arguments and think you've got something turned upside down about the way you think about something, then you don't and never will believe in 'analytics' or anything like that. Which makes you, definitionally, anti-analytics.

 

[glenwo2]

Pointless tweet by me because I'm bored :

 

[TrufleShufle]

Go back and read STI's posts. You will see the anti-analytics manifesto written out perfectly right there. Nobody in sports says they're against statistics, because goals and assists are also statistics and they've heard that gambit before. And enough sports teams have won championships giving credit to 'analytics' and whatever that it's hard to just flat out say 'this has no value'. So instead the argument is 'Well, I'd believe the numbers, but they're missing A, B, and C', and what that boils down to is 'I believe the numbers when they support me, and I don't believe them when they don't.' In which case, the numbers are adding absolutely nothing at all. If you can't ever look at statistical-based arguments and think you've got something turned upside down about the way you think about something, then you don't and never will believe in 'analytics' or anything like that. Which makes you, definitionally, anti-analytics.

"then you don't and never will believe in 'analytics'"

"believe in"

You get it right?


I look at all the analytics posted here and take them in, a lot are about players I don't watch, so I take it as fact, other times they are about players I watch and it makes sense. Sometimes you see something though and it just doesn't seem right, it should be ok to say.... Hey, I think something is off here, this doesn't take ABC into account and not get told what you believe or don't believe. Or better yet understand or don't.

I'm not anti vegan in the least, have a lot of vegan friends, I'm against "in your face screaming at you about eating things with eggs in it" vegans. They are a super small minority of vegans, but stand out the most.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

There is no "stat" or "eye test" that takes literally everything into account. That doesn't exist. So I don't know why we need to bring that up in EVERY discussion to be honest.

Thats why they are all pieces of information. None are all encompassing, but all are important.

 

[Nocashstyle]

Elias posted a story of what looks like him shooting pucks at an empty net for Meier to try tipping in.

Not sure that’s a good sign for him playing tonight or not? Either way, very cool to see Elias there and that involved right now.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Elias posted a story of what looks like him shooting pucks at an empty net for Meier to try ripping in.

Not sure that’s a good sign for him playing tonight or not? Either way, very cool to see Elias there and that involved right now.

I believe that video was taken yesterday, but yeah encouraging.

 

[TrufleShufle]

There is no "stat" or "eye test" that takes literally everything into account. That doesn't exist. So I don't know why we need to bring that up in EVERY discussion to be honest.

Thats why they are all pieces of information. None are all encompassing, but all are important.

Exactly..... So if someone says something, then they get shown a stat (that you just admitted) doesn't take everything into account, is that ok to say now?

"Thats why they are all pieces of information. None are all encompassing, but all are important." I've seen this said to you and a couple others in EVERY discussion, I'm glad you finally get it.

 

[Cheddabombs]

Hoooold

 

[Nubmer6]

Hoooold

Where Timo?

 

[TrufleShufle]

Where Timo?

It's only a trickle, give it a minute.

 

[Cheddabombs]

Where Timo?

Hoooooooooooooold

 

[Darkauron]

Id also rather have Timo wait til he is 100% before playing

 

[Triumph]

"then you don't and never will believe in 'analytics'"

"believe in"

You get it right?


I look at all the analytics posted here and take them in, a lot are about players I don't watch, so I take it as fact, other times they are about players I watch and it makes sense. Sometimes you see something though and it just doesn't seem right, it should be ok to say.... Hey, I think something is off here, this doesn't take ABC into account and not get told what you believe or don't believe. Or better yet understand or don't.

I'm not anti vegan in the least, have a lot of vegan friends, I'm against "in your face screaming at you about eating things with eggs in it" vegans. They are a super small minority of vegans, but stand out the most.

The problem is that nothing takes everything into account. One's memory is only so good - mine can only remember the last 20 times on this board I've had this boring discussion. Those are just what the numbers say, take them or leave them - there's always room for disagreement. The numbers are the numbers.

Veganism is often a moral choice. Some people think analytics are a moral choice. I don't, it's just a way for me to see the game better; I feel like I understand the game a lot better now that I'm paying attention to what's important.