TSN: Jake Gardiner or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Advanced Stats

[ACC1224]

Well it stands to argue that if the goal of an offensive player is to generate goals, then the goal of a defensive player is to prevent them (which Gardiner does).

The measure of which is easy to see through a stat line, Goals + Assists = Points.
Preventing goals isn't measured so easily.

 

[91Kadri91*]

The measure of which is easy to see through a stat line, Goals + Assists = Points.
Preventing goals isn't measured so easily.

Sure it is: goals against (GA60).

 

[ACC1224]

Sure it is: goals against (GA60).

Yes similar to +/-.

 

[91Kadri91*]

Yes similar to +/-.

No, not similar to plus-minus. There's no reason to ever use plus-minus. Why would you use plus-minus when you can use even-strength GFRel?

Plus-minus is the difference of goals for/against, but doesn't account for teammates, and also penalizes allowing a goal/rewards producing a goal on special teams (plus for GF SH; minus for GA on PP), so it's not an accurate indicator of even-strength performance.

There is, however, no difference between using points (or GF) for measuring offensive production/ability, and using GA for measuring defensive production/ability (and GA can be adjusted for teammates).

 

[ACC1224]

No, not similar to plus-minus. There's no reason to ever use plus-minus. Why would you use plus-minus when you can use even-strength GFRel?

Plus-minus is the difference of goals for/against, but doesn't account for teammates, and also penalizes allowing a goal/rewards producing a goal on special teams (plus for GF SH; minus for GA on PP), so it's not an accurate indicator of even-strength performance.

There is, however, no difference between using points (or GF) for measuring offensive production/ability, and using GA for measuring defensive production/ability (and GA can be adjusted for teammates).

I think you missed my point, no worries.

 

[Swayze*]

Sure it is: goals against (GA60).

GA60 doesn't take into account a guy who's leaned on to play 25-30 mins a night like Keith, playing PP, PK and the against the teams best lines, fatigue from those high minutes night after night etc etc.

If player A plays 10 minutes and player B plays 30, just the odds of playing those extra 20 minutes is a factor in GA, nevermind all the other implications.

Another flawed stat

 

[91Kadri91*]

GA60 doesn't take into account a guy who's leaned on to play 25-30 mins a night like Keith, playing PP, PK and the against the teams best lines, fatigue from those high minutes night after night etc etc.

If player A plays 10 minutes and player B plays 30, just the odds of playing those extra 20 minutes is a factor in GA, nevermind all the other implications.

Another flawed stat

Uh, yeah, that's why you put limits on total TOI (to adjust for usage), and you make it GA60 (to remove the remaining difference).

Of course, goals against and goals for separately don't have a great deal of correlation with Pt%; goal differential (GF%), however, has a very strong correlation with winning.

That's why it's such a shame that Gardiner has the 22nd best GFRel% among defensemen (147) with 3000+ MP since 2011/12; I really do want him to suck for you. Why does he have to be such a good even-strength hockey player!? It's very frustrating...

 

[The Thin White Duke]

GA60 doesn't take into account a guy who's leaned on to play 25-30 mins a night like Keith, playing PP, PK and the against the teams best lines, fatigue from those high minutes night after night etc etc.

If player A plays 10 minutes and player B plays 30, just the odds of playing those extra 20 minutes is a factor in GA, nevermind all the other implications.

Another flawed stat

It's goals against.. per 60 minutes. It's right there in the name. On average player B will allow X amount of goals against Y average level of competition every 60 minutes. Everything you have mentioned is accounted for.

Not to mention Gardiner had the highest even strength TOI on our team for the past few years, should his GA/60 be even lower if we're accounting for fatigue now?

 

[91Kadri91*]

Oh, and all of those things goals against don't account for? Yeah... neither do points.

 

[Hockey Talker29]

Man, some people really need some serious help with their reading comprehension and deductive skills.

They likely have the skills. But they don't want to comprehend. They ignore, because it fits their agenda.

I don't even know why such people post here. I come here to learn from other people who love this game as much or even more than I do.

Sometimes those people make an argument that I originally disagree with, but eventually realize that it is more logical than my own. I love when that happens. I'm open to it happening.

Others...not so much.

 

[Swayze*]

Uh, yeah, that's why you put limits on total TOI (to adjust for usage), and you make it GA60 (to remove the remaining difference).

Of course, goals against and goals for separately don't have a great deal of correlation with Pt%; goal differential (GF%), however, has a very strong correlation with winning.

That's why it's such a shame that Gardiner has the 22nd best GFRel% among defensemen (147) with 3000+ MP since 2011/12; I really do want him to suck for you. Why does he have to be such a good even-strength hockey player!? It's very frustrating...

whoa calm down man, we're just having a chat on a message board

not a big deal

what exactly is the GFRel% and how is it caculated?

Goals for relative to teammates?

 

[Swayze*]

and where can I view all of these stats as well as definitions, calculations etc?

I googled GFRel% and nothing came up.

 

[Nithoniniel]

They likely have the skills. But they don't want to comprehend. They ignore, because it fits their agenda.

I don't even know why such people post here. I come here to learn from other people who love this game as much or even more than I do.

Sometimes those people make an argument that I originally disagree with, but eventually realize that it is more logical than my own. I love when that happens. I'm open to it happening.

Others...not so much.

Well said.

I've learned a lot during my time here, and still do.

 

[91Kadri91*]

and where can I view all of these stats as well as definitions, calculations etc?

I googled GFRel% and nothing came up.

GFRel% is a player's on-ice GF% minus said player's off-ice GF% (positive is good, negative is bad); it should be used with consideration of WOWY, usage and ToiC%.

Here's a glossary: http://war-on-ice.com/glossary.html

 

[Swayze*]

GFRel% is a player's on-ice GF% minus said player's off-ice GF% (positive is good, negative is bad); it should be used with consideration of WOWY, usage and ToiC%.

Here's a glossary: http://war-on-ice.com/glossary.html

I didn't see that one there

what do they all it on that list?

 

[91Kadri91*]

I didn't see that one there

what do they all it on that list?

It's near the bottom:

TeamGoal%Rel: The player's on-ice TeamGoal% minus the player's off-ice TeamGoal%; off-ice TeamGoal% is the percent of goals scored by the player's team when the player is not on the ice (but in games where the player is in the lineup); also known as GF Rel%

 

[Swayze*]

It's near the bottom:

Why would you subtract off ice goals?

Wouldnt they just not count them at all?

 

[Gallagbi]

Why would you subtract off ice goals?

Wouldnt they just not count them at all?

I expect for ease of reading/ reference. It makes positive good, negative bad instead of degrees of positive being good/bad.

 

[Gary Nylund]

They likely have the skills. But they don't want to comprehend. They ignore, because it fits their agenda.

I don't even know why such people post here. I come here to learn from other people who love this game as much or even more than I do.

Sometimes those people make an argument that I originally disagree with, but eventually realize that it is more logical than my own. I love when that happens. I'm open to it happening.

Others...not so much.

 

[Hockey Talker29]

Well said.

I've learned a lot during my time here, and still do.

After our playoff run, I knew exactly NIL about advanced stats. I know quite a bit now, and I incorporate it into my overall assessment of a player. It was definitely an eye-opener.

Probably the best I've ever had here.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

Is anyone else seeing Jake Gardiner messing up?

When I see Gards doing his indecisive moves on defence...I find it hard to believe that the coaches don't see it as well. It's almost comical to watch him on a 2 on 1 trying to figure out who to take and then taking nobody and allowing either a goal or a great shot on net.

This guy will NEVER smarten up...he just has a hamster brain and we should get what we can for him before everyone else figures out what we already know.

I am not comparing him to Morgan at all because that would be useless in so many ways...but jeez...the guy has no hockey sense at ALL!!

As for his supposed offence ....I don't exactly see him doing anything that would lead me to think he is a keeper.

Man...he is just a Corsi dream machine for some people but his ability to actually think is just sad. I see too many players nowadays taking shots from every angle just to have the Corsi tires pumped up and they are not even shots that you can say lead to a rebound and a secondary scoring chance in 99% of the cases.

I just think they should sucker someone into taking a chance on him...if Babs can't drill some sense into him...who can??

 

[champs*]

When I see Gards doing his indecisive moves on defence...I find it hard to believe that the coaches don't see it as well. It's almost comical to watch him on a 2 on 1 trying to figure out who to take and then taking nobody and allowing either a goal or a great shot on net.

This guy will NEVER smarten up...he just has a hamster brain and we should get what we can for him before everyone else figures out what we already know.

I am not comparing him to Morgan at all because that would be useless in so many ways...but jeez...the guy has no hockey sense at ALL!!

As for his supposed offence ....I don't exactly see him doing anything that would lead me to think he is a keeper.

Man...he is just a Corsi dream machine for some people but his ability to actually think is just sad. I see too many players nowadays taking shots from every angle just to have the Corsi tires pumped up and they are not even shots that you can say lead to a rebound and a secondary scoring chance in 99% of the cases.

I just think they should sucker someone into taking a chance on him...if Babs can't drill some sense into him...who can??

a few good LOL's in that post

 

[LeafGrief]

When I see Gards doing his indecisive moves on defence...I find it hard to believe that the coaches don't see it as well. It's almost comical to watch him on a 2 on 1 trying to figure out who to take and then taking nobody and allowing either a goal or a great shot on net.

This guy will NEVER smarten up...he just has a hamster brain and we should get what we can for him before everyone else figures out what we already know.

I am not comparing him to Morgan at all because that would be useless in so many ways...but jeez...the guy has no hockey sense at ALL!!

As for his supposed offence ....I don't exactly see him doing anything that would lead me to think he is a keeper.

Man...he is just a Corsi dream machine for some people but his ability to actually think is just sad. I see too many players nowadays taking shots from every angle just to have the Corsi tires pumped up and they are not even shots that you can say lead to a rebound and a secondary scoring chance in 99% of the cases.

I just think they should sucker someone into taking a chance on him...if Babs can't drill some sense into him...who can??

Defender takes the pass on a 2-on-1. It's almost always going to be a dangerous play with a goal or great shot, because the lone defender's job is to prevent the pass and tap-in goal. If the goalie gets beat by the player, that's not the defender's fault. Gardiner is not to blame for last night's OT goal, and Babcock has explicitly said so.

 

[Hockey Talker29]

Defender takes the pass on a 2-on-1. It's almost always going to be a dangerous play with a goal or great shot, because the lone defender's job is to prevent the pass and tap-in goal. If the goalie gets beat by the player, that's not the defender's fault. Gardiner is not to blame for last night's OT goal, and Babcock has explicitly said so.

I'm always impressed when the defender that is actually in the right position during a 2-on-1 is the guy getting blamed.

Somehow the guy who hung his partner out to dry is off the hook.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I'm mostly amused that some of the ones that are quickest to mock statistical analysis are the ones who would have the most use of it.