Fancy Stats

[Buds17]

I'd just like the team to be right about things more often than they are wrong. How they arrive at such conclusions isn't as much of a focal point to me.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Just because some people “assume” that Dubas has an approach, and changed it, does not make them right. It goes against a theory that he wants small and fast players only, probably because the theory wasn’t correct about his approach to begin with.

At least Dubas saw what he originally tried to do was not working and changed his approach, instead of doubling down on what he was already doing.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

When a human is compiling the data it’s always going to be prone to error, bias.

It happens.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Fancy stats are just a fad and the narrative surrounding them will go away on this board the moment Dubas is no longer the GM. It wasn't that long ago the "keep calm, corsi's wrong" narrative was strong around here.

Inconsistent opinions are strong around these parts.

But Corsi wasn't wrong, was it? Carlyle's run and gun luck ran out, just like every sane person was predicting. In fact, once it ran out he set the NHL all time record for the most shots against in a season, both total and per game (36+ if I remember).

Not that Corsi is the be all end all, it's a very basic counting stat just slightly better than +/-, but that seems like an odd thing to pick at when the results ended up exactly where they were predicted to.

 

[Dekes For Days]

48.4 career on faceoffs. If you think thats good. I proved enough for whoever reads that. Exposes you somewhat I’d say.

It's not particularly good, but it's also not particularly bad, especially when we are counting their rookie year which tends to be pretty bad for most players as they learn the tricks. It's just fairly meaningless overall, as I explained. 48.4% over his career means that he loses one more face-off than he wins once every 5 games. His 56% last year also shows that he has potential. I'd say that your overreliance on faceoffs kinda exposes yourself more-so than me.

Do you toss out every other player under 50% faceoffs in their career? Malkin? Sedin? Staal? Getzlaf? Stamkos? Forsberg? Mackinnon? Heck, McDavid himself has never had a season over 50%, and currently sits just over 44% in his career.

He is a third line center making $3,500,000 and thats another thing i said that you are contesting. He’s as good as gone as soon as he can be moved.

If the Leafs wanted him gone, they certainly could have gotten rid of him. He was kept for good reason. 3.5m is not unreasonable for a 3C with versatility. He's within his comparables.

He is weak and knocked off pucks easy i also said.

That's not true either. He's usually blowing past people too fast to be knocked off pucks. You're focusing on your (mostly incorrect) perceptions of individual, fairly meaningless aspects of play, and you're ignoring the way more important aspects of the player... like how they actually play hockey.

His three season zone starts % is 59 in the offensive zone and 41 in the defensive zone.

Zone starts are also fairly meaningless. The way it's traditionally stated is incredibly misleading because it leaves out the majority of zone starts that happen in neutral areas or on the fly. Kerfoot over his career has gotten 13.5% offensive zone starts and just under 10% defensive zone starts. This basically means he gets one extra offensive zone start every 2 games. This is not unusual or "very sheltered".

He won 32% faceoffs in playoffs wow eh

The fact that you're looking at face-offs in a 5 game sample pretty much says it all...

 

[Dekes For Days]

At least Dubas saw what he originally tried to do was not working and changed his approach

Dubas has not changed his approach in any significant way. Many people were just wildly wrong when making assumptions about his approach.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Dubas has not changed his approach in any significant way. People were just wildly wrong when making assumptions about his approach.

In this story that was published on October 5, 2020 Dubas talks about the team needing to get tougher.

Kyle Dubas says Toronto Maple Leafs must be more difficult to play against - TSN.ca

 

[Dekes For Days]

In this story that was published on October 5, 2020 Dubas talks about the team needing to get tougher.

Yes, all teams want to be "more difficult to play against". Even when you are specifically addressing potential deficiencies, that's not the same thing as changing an approach to team-building. He's talked about things like this for years; even before he was an NHL GM.

 

[meefer]

When it comes to Lou let's not forget he screwed up not getting William Nylander to sign a contract extension prior to the 2017-18 season or anytime after it started before July 1, 2018 when he became an RFA.

I hate bitching about things from the past, they are what they are, but if the magician known as Lou Lam could have roped in Nylander at a lower price, how would M/M contracts developed? Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

 

[LeafsNation75]

I hate bitching about things from the past, they are what they are, but if the magician known as Lou Lam could have roped in Nylander at a lower price, how would M/M contracts developed? Woulda, coulda, shoulda?

Lou is doing the same thing right now with Matt Barzal because he let him become an RFA and didn't sign him 1 year before he became an RFA.

 

[meefer]

Lou is doing the same thing right now with Matt Barzal because he let him become an RFA and didn't sign him 1 year before he became an RFA.

The Isles are in trouble with that one. I'm surprised Barzal hasn't received an offer sheet from somewhere.

 

[Fogelhund]

The Isles are in trouble with that one. I'm surprised Barzal hasn't received an offer sheet from somewhere.

Nobody has the money to do that now. The flat cap and Covid has kicked that probability out of the park.. I'm a bit surprised that nobody has tried for lower level players, on cap tight teams though. Like the Tampa guys

 

[Nineteen67]

At least Dubas saw what he originally tried to do was not working and changed his approach, instead of doubling down on what he was already doing.

Dubas said he was going to make the team tougher to play against and only added Bogosian who will play minimal on D.

Losing Clifford and adding Simmonds Thornton and Vesey doesn’t make them harder to play against

 

[LeafsNation75]

Dubas said he was going to make the team tougher to play against and only added Bogosian who will play minimal on D.

Losing Clifford and adding Simmonds Thornton and Vesey doesn’t make them harder to play against

So you would have been okay seeing the Leafs lose their 2021 2nd round pick to the Kings if they re-signed Clifford?

 

[Nineteen67]

So you would have been okay seeing the Leafs lose their 2021 2nd round pick to the Kings if they re-signed Clifford?

Not necessarily, just pointing out that Dubas said he wanted to make the Leafs harder to play against but didn’t really do much to address it.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

It's not particularly good, but it's also not particularly bad, especially when we are counting their rookie year which tends to be pretty bad for most players as they learn the tricks. It's just fairly meaningless overall, as I explained. 48.4% over his career means that he loses one more face-off than he wins once every 5 games. His 56% last year also shows that he has potential. I'd say that your overreliance on faceoffs kinda exposes yourself more-so than me.

Do you toss out every other player under 50% faceoffs in their career? Malkin? Sedin? Staal? Getzlaf? Stamkos? Forsberg? Mackinnon? Heck, McDavid himself has never had a season over 50%, and currently sits just over 44% in his career.

If the Leafs wanted him gone, they certainly could have gotten rid of him. He was kept for good reason. 3.5m is not unreasonable for a 3C with versatility. He's within his comparables.

That's not true either. He's usually blowing past people too fast to be knocked off pucks. You're focusing on your (mostly incorrect) perceptions of individual, fairly meaningless aspects of play, and you're ignoring the way more important aspects of the player... like how they actually play hockey.

Zone starts are also fairly meaningless. The way it's traditionally stated is incredibly misleading because it leaves out the majority of zone starts that happen in neutral areas or on the fly. Kerfoot over his career has gotten 13.5% offensive zone starts and just under 10% defensive zone starts. This basically means he gets one extra offensive zone start every 2 games. This is not unusual or "very sheltered".

The fact that you're looking at face-offs in a 5 game sample pretty much says it all...

Wow. Nevermind your nonsense

 

[stopclickbait]

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

It’s not January 13 yet I’m not sure if you are old enough to gamble you sound pretty young, but if you want I can remind you on the day of. Just make a DraftKings account for now deposit something like $1000 or whatever and I’ll link you the GPP contest to enter where you can make your team and school the nerds. You will be a millionaire in no time.

 

[Bomber0104]

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.

Correct.

In fact, they're mocked by the very people who actually do the "real" type of data collection for NHL teams.

The free blog stats have always been a mess of inaccurately collected data scraped from the NHL's website, that's been toyed around with and presented as a usable/informative model.

The sad reality is their only practical application is for hockey fans to try to "win" arguments on the internet.

 

[ACC1224]

So you would have been okay seeing the Leafs lose their 2021 2nd round pick to the Kings if they re-signed Clifford?

Dubas was ok with it which means it was the correct idea.

 

[ToneDog]

Lou is doing the same thing right now with Matt Barzal because he let him become an RFA and didn't sign him 1 year before he became an RFA.

Let's see if Lou let's Barzal bend him over or whether Barzal takes what is available or decides to sit out. With COVID and no butts in the seats, may not be so bad to sit out this (partial) season for both parties.

 

[Notsince67]

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.

Studying the game using all toolsets should always be encouraged. It can be fun. Whereas I would agree that the predictive value of advanced stats are awful, it doesn't mean that they are useless. Puck tracking may yield some magic beans but it also might be that the game is computationally irreducible (to borrow a term from Physicist Stephen Wolfram). That it is impossible to know what happens before simulations are run, despite simple rules. This doesn't mean that the simple rules of a simulation are invalid though and that you wont come closer to an answer using "true" rules vs "false" rules. It just means that there is a lot of shit that goes into winning a game than what can be displayed on a spreadsheet.

 

[Buds17]

So you would have been okay seeing the Leafs lose their 2021 2nd round pick to the Kings if they re-signed Clifford?

I don't think the upgrade in pick was a concern. The Leafs reportedly offered Clifford a three year deal at over 1M per. He did end up signing for less of both with STL, but that was the rumour.

 

[TMLegend]

But Corsi wasn't wrong, was it? Carlyle's run and gun luck ran out, just like every sane person was predicting. In fact, once it ran out he set the NHL all time record for the most shots against in a season, both total and per game (36+ if I remember).

Not that Corsi is the be all end all, it's a very basic counting stat just slightly better than +/-, but that seems like an odd thing to pick at when the results ended up exactly where they were predicted to.

I wasn't picking at anything. I was pointing out that the majority on this board will believe in what the Leafs brass tells them to believe in. Or they'll ignore information and facts that paint the team in a negative light. Any rational person could see Carlyle's teams were being propped up by unsustainable goaltending.

Myself, I don't have a particular strong opinion of analytics one way or the other. Like anything else, context is needed, and using them in isolation(which happens alot) is misleading. Andersen and Keefe come to mind immediately.

The never ending debate around these parts about them and Dubas is quite entertaining, however.

 

[hobarth]

I think the idea of fancy stats are awesome but I question the validity of publicly available stats.

How about the fact Dubas seemed to change his approach with the signings of Thornton, Bogosian, Simmonds, and Brodie. When you look at their height it goes against the theory he only wants small and fast players.

I don't think Dubie has changed his approach, I think he's looking for a different/better dynamic, I think he's legitimately questioning TO's leadership potential. I'd take a Gallagher over most huge players because of his heart, players don't need to be large to be good.

 

[LeafsNation75]

I don't think Dubie has changed his approach, I think he's looking for a different/better dynamic, I think he's legitimately questioning TO's leadership potential. I'd take a Gallagher over most huge players because of his heart, players don't need to be large to be good.

Besides the recent contract extension signed by Gallagher being less compared to Mitch Marner's contract, he's put up a lot less points than him. So wouldn't that mean Marner is better because of the offense he can produce?