Fancy Stats

[Wafflewhipper]

I said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll pick a team just with players names and someone pick a team just with adv numbers if someone wants to set it up. We will do it in real time on a thread.

Someone who loves the stats gets numbers and i get names. I’ll win every time. Lets do it.

Any takers and someone willing to send the stats only and names only. It would put this to bed pretty quick.

 

[stopclickbait]

I said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll pick a team just with players names and someone pick a team just with adv numbers if someone wants to set it up. We will do it in real time on a thread.

Someone who loves the stats gets numbers and i get names. I’ll win every time. Lets do it.

Any takers and someone willing to send the stats only and names only. It would put this to bed pretty quick.

Just play on Draftkings all those people do on there is follow their advanced stats and let there optimizer make lineups for them. Should be easy for ya you will be a millionaire after this hockey season. Or just gamble on bet365 if you don't think you can beat the stats nerds easy game.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Just play on Draftkings all those people do on there is follow their advanced stats and let there optimizer make lineups for them. Should be easy for ya you will be a millionaire after this hockey season. Or just gamble on bet365 if you don't think you can beat the stats nerds easy game.

Lets you and i do it . You use you optimizer adv stats only and I’ll pick by names. Better get Ceci back he had good princess stats. He couldn’t hit the net with a shot if it was a ocean but them adv stats wow. Ha dubas said how good they were and still let him take a walk.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Watch a game while tracking the fancy stats listed in the OP, there is no way in hades any nhl team is using those for anything.

The stats become the argued when a player is crap and its the stats mongers that won’t listen to anything or anyone. Just the numbers are all they see.
They started the contentious bickering when a player hasn’t scored a point in two weeks and say they are playing good. I seen it a thousand times if i seen it once on here. The stats are interesting but when it comes down to defending junk players it’s tiring.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll pick a team just with players names and someone pick a team just with adv numbers if someone wants to set it up. We will do it in real time on a thread.

Someone who loves the stats gets numbers and i get names. I’ll win every time. Lets do it.

Any takers and someone willing to send the stats only and names only. It would put this to bed pretty quick.

Edit: whatttt no takers yet it’s been 1/2 hour since i challenged? Don’t worry i know it won’t happen.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I will be disappointed if the OP is a troll.


You seem to think that analytics creates more bias. It's actually the opposite because we can watch the same player but have different opinions. The right analytics and the right analysis cuts through this and provides objectivity.

There seems to also be a misconception that just because a person likes advanced stats that they don't watch the games. What we do is we first watch the players. Then we form some opinions, look at the advanced stuff. We look at where players are proficient and deficient and then we watch the players to see why they produce well/poorly.

Typically good players have good results.

Is it really?

 

[Fogelhund]

I said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll pick a team just with players names and someone pick a team just with adv numbers if someone wants to set it up. We will do it in real time on a thread.

Someone who loves the stats gets numbers and i get names. I’ll win every time. Lets do it.

Any takers and someone willing to send the stats only and names only. It would put this to bed pretty quick.

Which is really a ridiculous take. No team "just" uses stats. No team "just" uses the eye test.

It's like saying, you pick your team just by using Height and weight, and I will pick my team by something else...

Your exercise would prove nothing,

 

[ottomaddox]

TO has hired fancy stat experts, guys who have come up with Corsi, Fenwick and other such stats and so has other teams hired such people. Why hire them when the info they published was commonly available?

Who are the people publishing Corsi stats and other such stats, how do they have the time to view and evaluate 2,460 games plus playoff games? As far as I know these stats are provided by volunteers who probably are like Leaf fans viewing Leaf games, or Ottawa fans viewing Ottawa games and on and on. Leaf fans have a Leaf bias, Ottawa fans an Ottawa bias so how accurate are these commonly available stats?

Plus and Minus is a stat that the NHL actually pays someone to ascertain, it's a professionally provided and derived result, it might not be perfect but I think it's the only reliable stat that's available to us, the fans.

TO, Ottawa and other teams have analytics departments, I'm positive teams that have analytics dept. don't trust or rely on what many of we fans consider to be the bible.

An example of an amateur or biased results might be hitting, the Islanders have tradionally lead the NHL in the number of hits for the last 10 years(I'm guessing here) because they pad their home stats.

I'm not exactly sure what your point is or whether you care for a competent answer.

The short answer is that money seems to be wasted on The Advanced Stats Dept. if you want to reflect on TOR's results. We already know that Sports Science was tried by Dubas / Shanny with poor results, and is now disolved. Analytics promised us possession resulting in wins, plus talented players underpaid and on the fringes. None of this seems to have happened.

I can't wait to discuss all this in the future. Whether it was Shanny all along that was managing the team, and Dubas was more like a Gord Stellick GM.

This debate about Fancy Stats has gone on since before the hiring of Kyle Dubas and has morphed into philosophical/political discussions. These days it seems to be on the fringes. Older, more experienced GMs are winning cups while TOR fans remain hopeful The Leafs make the frickin post-season.

What is timeless and tested seems to remain: great advanced stats belong to good players. The smarter / more hungry players help your team win. Great goaltending helps your team win. A coach that can manage the room well help your team win. All eye test stuff IMHO.

 

[Dreakmur]

I honestly thought the first two posts were straight up trolls.

It's one thing to attempt to understand and not be okay with it, but it's another thing to outright be against something that all it does is give you more information, a greater understanding, and helps give you more than evaluating players/teams with points, wins, hits, and +/-.

If you want to know more there are plenty of people on this website or twitter that would gladly explain.

More information doesn’t always lead to a better understanding. The absolute biggest thing people need to do is understand what exactly a certain piece of information is showing.

The current “possession” stats don’t actually measure puck possession. They measure other stats that tend to correlate strongly with puck possession. I am not against that approach, since it’s a lot easier to measure and I have used a similar tactic with my teams for over 20 years. I have had passes counted and tracked. The more passes we had, the more likely it was that we had the puck a lot. The more passes a player had, the more likely it was that he had the puck a lot. Still, there’s no guarantee that it’s a true reflection of puck possession.

If you wanted to actually know puck possession, you just get out a stopwatch and time how long each player has the puck on their stick.

 

[robertmac43]

A lot of the Data is tracked by outside sources, the guys that work for the team just use the data to come to conclusions and evaluate the players.

Also why are we still so split of the eye test v data. Is it not clear that both have their benefits and that they should be used together?

 

[Nineteen67]

The stats become the argued when a player is crap and its the stats mongers that won’t listen to anything or anyone. Just the numbers are all they see.
They started the contentious bickering when a player hasn’t scored a point in two weeks and say they are playing good. I seen it a thousand times if i seen it once on here. The stats are interesting but when it comes down to defending junk players it’s tiring.

I’ve tracked games and theyre quite liberal in calling something high danger scoring chance, for example. By definition it may be somewhat accurate, but in reality it’s not. When a player shoots the puck 2feet wide and 2feet high because he can’t get passed two defenders that’s not a legit scoring chance.

I bet I’m right when I say the NHL teams look at the situation and either record what they see differently than corsi and those other guys, or at the least, they analyze the data differently. Why does player x have 10 hd chances but only 1 shot on goal.

I bet Marner has some terrific advanced stats, but because he can’t shoot the puck, teams defend him differently. How many ES goals do the Leafs score when Marner has possession of the puck in the offensive zone for 2,4,6,8 10+ seconds.

 

[Zybalto]

Lets you and i do it . You use you optimizer adv stats only and I’ll pick by names. Better get Ceci back he had good princess stats. He couldn’t hit the net with a shot if it was a ocean but them adv stats wow. Ha dubas said how good they were and still let him take a walk.

Actually, Ceci didnt have good overall advanced stats, he had good defensive stats that made him useful in certain situations.

If anything, Ceci stood out with the more concrete stats for a stay at home D with a solid +/- and super low goals against while on the ice. He would be more a guy that a traditional GM would take on. Not a good example really.

Whats the end game on the challenge you keep pushing anyways? Gonna load them all in to NHL21 game and then watch the result?

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Actually, Ceci didnt have good overall advanced stats, he had good defensive stats that made him useful in certain situations.

If anything, Ceci stood out with the more concrete stats for a stay at home D with a solid +/- and super low goals against while on the ice. He would be more a guy that a traditional GM would take on. Not a good example really.

Whats the end game on the challenge you keep pushing anyways? Gonna load them all in to NHL21 game and then watch the result?

Well yes. I seen it arguing on here on Ceci. He killed penalties decent but our penalty killing is atrocious and needs fixing. I know we didn’t see Ceci on the powerplay and for sure that makes sense. I’m not against adv stats I’m against the context they are being portrayed in threads. It gets tiring listening the adv stats are good and you see the same weaknesses destroying your team from certain aspects. Injuries always bring these arguments out. You have to play them but you don’t have to sugar coat them is all i am saying.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I’ve tracked games and theyre quite liberal in calling something high danger scoring chance, for example. By definition it may be somewhat accurate, but in reality it’s not. When a player shoots the puck 2feet wide and 2feet high because he can’t get passed two defenders that’s not a legit scoring chance.

I bet I’m right when I say the NHL teams look at the situation and either record what they see differently than corsi and those other guys, or at the least, they analyze the data differently. Why does player x have 10 hd chances but only 1 shot on goal.

I bet Marner has some terrific advanced stats, but because he can’t shoot the puck, teams defend him differently. How many ES goals do the Leafs score when Marner has possession of the puck in the offensive zone for 2,4,6,8 10+ seconds.

Yeah it’s adv b.s after a bit at times. They track them much better than I’ve seen on here i would hope. Ha

 

[Wafflewhipper]

More information doesn’t always lead to a better understanding. The absolute biggest thing people need to do is understand what exactly a certain piece of information is showing.

The current “possession” stats don’t actually measure puck possession. They measure other stats that tend to correlate strongly with puck possession. I am not against that approach, since it’s a lot easier to measure and I have used a similar tactic with my teams for over 20 years. I have had passes counted and tracked. The more passes we had, the more likely it was that we had the puck a lot. The more passes a player had, the more likely it was that he had the puck a lot. Still, there’s no guarantee that it’s a true reflection of puck possession.

If you wanted to actually know puck possession, you just get out a stopwatch and time how long each player has the puck on their stick.

Yep proper context for sure is important. It goes dark grey at points on here with the supposed context.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I'm not exactly sure what your point is or whether you care for a competent answer.

The short answer is that money seems to be wasted on The Advanced Stats Dept. if you want to reflect on TOR's results. We already know that Sports Science was tried by Dubas / Shanny with poor results, and is now disolved. Analytics promised us possession resulting in wins, plus talented players underpaid and on the fringes. None of this seems to have happened.

I can't wait to discuss all this in the future. Whether it was Shanny all along that was managing the team, and Dubas was more like a Gord Stellick GM.

This debate about Fancy Stats has gone on since before the hiring of Kyle Dubas and has morphed into philosophical/political discussions. These days it seems to be on the fringes. Older, more experienced GMs are winning cups while TOR fans remain hopeful The Leafs make the frickin post-season.

What is timeless and tested seems to remain: great advanced stats belong to good players. The smarter / more hungry players help your team win. Great goaltending help your team win. A coach that can manage the room well help your team win. All eye test stuff IMHO.

Exactly. Special teams,sv %,goals against, shots against,shots for, goals differential etc are still the big ones. A solid system withthe right players composition is the new thing Dubas has learned etc.
There are uses for tracking adv stats. Some go way overboard with it and call whoever doesn’t agree old school or say you don’t understand them. Good post bro

 

[stopclickbait]

Lets you and i do it . You use you optimizer adv stats only and I’ll pick by names. Better get Ceci back he had good princess stats. He couldn’t hit the net with a shot if it was a ocean but them adv stats wow. Ha dubas said how good they were and still let him take a walk.

Sure games will always be posted in the lobby www.draftkings.com you will become a millionaire schooling all those stats nerds be sure not to lose all your money to them lol

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Sure games will always be posted in the lobby www.draftkings.com you will become a millionaire schooling all those stats nerds be sure not to lose all your money to them lol

Whatever man. If you don’t want to put your money where your mouth is, repeating yourself doesn’t hide that. I’ll take your SB cash for all to see. Just say the word

 

[Zybalto]

Exactly. Special teams,sv %,goals against, shots against,shots for, goals differential etc are still the big ones. A solid system withthe right players composition is the new thing Dubas has learned etc.
There are uses for tracking adv stats. Some go way overboard with it and call whoever doesn’t agree old school or say you don’t understand them. Good post bro

Yea, its just how much weight you want to put on the stats really. GAA used to be gospel for goalkeeping but has happily fallen out of favor for the more representative save% stat. Just using those stats you posted and we get basically the same conclusions as digging deeper into the advanced stats anyways.

The biggest one being that in spite of 5v5 shots against falling sharply this year, team save% fell from 7th in the league to 27th.

Goaltending was the biggest issue this last season. Its not even close (unless you want to talk injuries). You give us the goaltending from a couple of years ago and we're golden.

Also, just for fun, I'll take a guess at what a purely "fancy stat" guy would pick on D:

Top 5v5 xGF% (REL) this past season for Dmen (min 1200 minutes played)

1. Josi
2. McAvoy
3. Ekblad
4. Theodore
5. Pietrangelo
6. Slavin
7. Petry
8. Heiskenen
9. Chabot
10. Provorov

It excludes those who were injured for a time this year of course but it seems a relatively strong list no? Factoring in the D who were still elite but injured would take some time I dont have right now.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Yea, its just how much weight you want to put on the stats really. GAA used to be gospel for goalkeeping but has happily fallen out of favor for the more representative save% stat. Just using those stats you posted and we get basically the same conclusions as digging deeper into the advanced stats anyways.

The biggest one being that in spite of 5v5 shots against falling sharply this year, team save% fell from 7th in the league to 27th.

Goaltending was the biggest issue this last season. Its not even close (unless you want to talk injuries). You give us the goaltending from a couple of years ago and we're golden.

Also, just for fun, I'll take a guess at what a purely "fancy stat" guy would pick on D:

Top 5v5 xGF% (REL) this past season for Dmen (min 1200 minutes played)

1. Josi
2. McAvoy
3. Ekblad
4. Theodore
5. Pietrangelo
6. Slavin
7. Petry
8. Heiskenen
9. Chabot
10. Provorov

It excludes those who were injured for a time this year of course but it seems a relatively strong list no? Factoring in the D who were still elite but injured would take some time I dont have right now.

Yeah, very good list. Hutch almost cost us playoffs and Andersen had a down year. The team had a down year i believe in the overall context. I fully expect to win the Canadian division if everyone just comes back to normal jump. There is potential they had a light go off in their heads and it translates to best they have played together as a team too. They are expierenced but still young. Before they were young and inexperienced. It could be a good year here coming without being to overly optimistic to the point of cocky.

 

[axlrose87]

Unfortunately the "Hunter approach" doesn't really work in the NHL since you can't cheat by paying players under the table like in London.

Unless you're talking about his drafting approach, where the best draft pick he made outside of the first round is a #6/7 D at 24. I don't understand how someone who wasn't good enough for EDMONTON's scouting staff is still taken seriously as an NHL scout by anyone. Either one of Dubas' 2018 or 2019 drafts on its own is likely to produce more NHL games than Hunter will draft outside the 1st in his lifetime.

Our current approach has not worked either.
We all wanna pretend this group had what it takes to win but it didn’t.
Now, we brought in some tough veterans to right the ship.
I see that some people were offended but I stand by what I said: this team has not had a heartbeat or pulse for years.
I sure hope the new guys can help fix that.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Which is really a ridiculous take. No team "just" uses stats. No team "just" uses the eye test.

It's like saying, you pick your team just by using Height and weight, and I will pick my team by something else...

Your exercise would prove nothing,

Yes it would prove the numbers are nothing if the player is no good. I say I don’t like Kerfoot, he loses faceoffs and is weak. Somebody throws a adv stat at me to say he is good. I still don’t like him and i still think he is to much for a 3rd line center. Who is right. I am. Tell them I’m right. It’s b.s arguments that comes next. Why should i bother then. Gets ridiculous actually the extent some will push them. Anyways it has little bearing on hockey for me. Simple stats tell enough along with my two eyes

 

[Fogelhund]

Yes it would prove the numbers are nothing if the player is no good. I say I don’t like Kerfoot, he loses faceoffs and is weak. Somebody throws a adv stat at me to say he is good. I still don’t like him and i still think he is to much for a 3rd line center. Who is right. I am. Tell them I’m right. It’s b.s arguments that comes next. Why should i bother then. Gets ridiculous actually the extent some will push them.

Both sides have ridiculous arguments. Your example would prove nothing, at all.

There are people that are lousy at eye test judging, there are people that are lousy at understanding, and incorporating stats. That one person is lousy at eye test judging, does not make eye test judging irrelevant. That one person, one organization have lousy people doing stats, does not invalidate stats.

Understanding this, is very basic.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Both sides have ridiculous arguments. Your example would prove nothing, at all.

Yeah it would

 

[Fogelhund]

Yeah it would

I've edited above.