Post-Game Talk: Point taken

[Missing smitty]

I totally agree.
I think its lost on many posters that the Oilers spend bargain basement pricing on their goaltending. When you look at things through that lens then there really isnt an argument that the Oilers arent getting good value for their money.

As I mentioned with @Missing smitty (who I agree with completely) my frustration goes back to the Campbell signing and how that disaster of a move ultimately forced them to rush Skinner into the #1 spot long before he was ready.
He has been trying to get his feet under him ever since and thats in large part why he can be so inconsistent at times. I think thats him growing into the mental part of being a #1.
Skinner is improving though and I think he can be a legit starter in time.
Until that happens the team needs a solid veteran tandem goalie who can be a part time #1 if necessary.
I think that will help make Skinner a better goalie as well.


I think though that if this team was really dialed in for this game then it wouldnt have been close.

Oh for sure, objectively that was a terrible hockey game

 

[Drivesaitl]

The thing is that save percentage is a flawed metric though, Crott. The reality is - by every metric in existence this iteration of the Oilers is an elite defensive team. We generally always have the puck and thus don't give up many chances, and the chances we do give up are generally lower quality.

Statistically - we allow the least amount of shots in the league.

Statistically - we allow the 4th least amount of scoring chances against in the league.

Statistically - we have the lowest rate of High Danger Scoring Chances surrendered in the league by almost a standard deviation.

View attachment 970149

In fact - that 9.23 HDCA/60 is the lowest rate of HDCA of any team since they've started recording the star with this methodology. The second lowest being Sutter's King's in 2012 at around 9.5 and Third being Sutter's King's in 2014 at around 9.6.

So tell me - why are we 8th in GA/60 and not atleast top 5?

Add to this that the Oilers buy in being a shot blocking machine. Even when clubs think they have an open shot to net we're often getting in there with a block or tipping it out. Teams get frustrated and inevitably start shooting it from anywhere. Several of the shots Skinner faced tonight couldn't even be considered attempts to score. A few were from outside zone. several were bangs at pucks. Some barely made it dribbling in on him. So that when a tipped shot falls slowly into Skinners glove the broadcast sells that as somehow some kind of quality stop when really its not.

I think on this board anyway the broadcast really sells Skinner. Like I said earlier hes' being credited in the broadcast for saves on shots that were blocked or shot wide. Its kind of bizarre. for me anyway thats part of the reaction, and the feeling the org has to move on a goalie at TDL, but the fear they will not do that. Honestly I'm convinced the Oilers won't get a goalie. seen this movie before.

 

[bucks_oil]

The Wings were worse than the Oilers in this game. Basically all the numbers point that out. They expected their goalie to save their bacon and he did.

Do you think most goalies aren't going to try their best to be dialed in playing against the 2 best players in the league? They absolutely don't want to be embarrassed.

Lyon getting up for this game and having a great game, does not mean Skinner had a bad game.

In fact if I were assigning errors to goaltenders, I recall only two all night. One was Lyon failing to cover the puck on Skinners goal and maybe (but it might to even reach the standard) when he got caught behind the net and Drai missed far side wide.

Otherwise I saw very solid goaltending on both sides. Skinners work on the PK was exceptional… one save most people wouldn’t even notice because it was that perfect was a cross seam pass to a one-timer. Super slow Skinner read it well, got across and made a textbook save in his crest/belly and no rebound.

It’s so strange to me sometimes that the absolute best saves aren’t even appreciated by fans because they looked routine/easy… that was a good example.

 

[Oilhawks]

take the undeserved point and move on and be better against the Leafs

I will say, McLellan has that Wings team looking good...great coach

Could be he gets them as far as he does any team, Conference Finals and bust

 

[Drivesaitl]

I never thought I’d say this, but McDavid looked disinterested tonight. No compete, didn’t look like he cared if they won or lost.

On every PP he looked like he was shot out of a cannon coming out of zone. Man, I think we're spoiled. I'll take a "McD disinterested tonight" game over any of the OOT superstars in the league who aside from Mackinnon on a lot of nights you barely notice.

This was a substellar McD game. But the post and the takes here are engaging in making it look worse than it was. Like I said I think he has the flu. That can certainly impact things. The effort was there as it nearly always is with McD.

In anycase imagine saying to McD what you posted. I'm not calling you out. But his passion for the game is unmatched.

To me nobody on Earth cares about hockey games more than Drai, McD, Mackinnon. They're the only ones consistently on that list.

 

[guymez]

The thing is that save percentage is a flawed metric though, Crott. The reality is - by every metric in existence this iteration of the Oilers is an elite defensive team. We generally always have the puck and thus don't give up many chances, and the chances we do give up are generally lower quality.

Statistically - we allow the least amount of shots in the league.

Statistically - we allow the 4th least amount of scoring chances against in the league.

Statistically - we have the lowest rate of High Danger Scoring Chances surrendered in the league by almost a standard deviation.

View attachment 970149

In fact - that 9.23 HDCA/60 is the lowest rate of HDCA of any team since they've started recording the star with this methodology. The second lowest being Sutter's King's in 2012 at around 9.5 and Third being Sutter's King's in 2014 at around 9.6.

So tell me - why are we 8th in GA/60 and not atleast top 5?

These numbers dont tell the whole story.
They dont illustrate the situational breakdowns for this team. The breakdowns that occur during critical parts of the game.

They also dont show the fact that this team (so far this season) is simply not bearing down at the appropriate times in a game to close out a game. That includes offensively and defnsively.
It once again speaks to the tendency for this team to let games leak away at inappropriate moments.

There are usually critical moments in a game that ultimatley determine the outcome of the game.
So if a team fails at those ciritcal times then it undermines the significance of numbers like the ones you posted above.

All of what I have mentioned here is a symtpom of a team that plays their systems pretty well (most of the time) but isnt hungry enough to properly do what it needs to do to win games they should win.

These situational outcomes matter even if the numbers might suggest otherwise.
That is one reason why you simply cant definitively evaluate a team from just the numbers.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Could be he gets them as far as he does any team, Conference Finals and bust

Detroit dead things are great at being no clutch down the stretch. So much panic in their game and you can see it everywhere in their turnovers. The 2nd goal was lol what are they even doing? As games become more important and sticks tighter this Red Wings team will blow it again. I mean look how terrible Debrincat alone was tonight. If I had that guy as a team mate I'd barf. Then they get Patrick Kane retirement tour coming back at some point. Wings didn't really impress me much. Most of the game I was wondering how they've been winning games. They give up so much.

 

[bobbythebrain]

Oilers got a point cuz of Skinner. Some of you just really don't know much

 

[iCanada]

These numbers dont tell the whole story.
They dont illustrate the situational breakdowns for this team. The breakdowns that occur during critical parts of the game.

They also dont show the fact that this team (so far this season) is simply not bearing down at the appropriate times in a game to close out a game. That includes offensively and defnsively.
It once again speaks to the tendency for this team to let games leak away at inappropriate moments.

There are usually critical moments in a game that ultimatley determine the outcome of the game.
So if a team fails at those ciritcal times then it undermines the significance of numbers like the ones you posted above.

All of what I have mentioned here is a symtpom of a team that plays their systems pretty well (most of the time) but isnt hungry enough to properly do what it needs to do to win games they should win.

These situational outcomes matter even if the numbers might suggest otherwise.
That is one reason why you simply cant definitively evaluate a team from just the numbers.

You don't think our goaltender, you know the one that's currently 49th in Goals Saved Above Expected, could be the one missing magical it factor that causes us to get scored on more than the stats suggest we ought to?

Why is it that that can fall on the rest of the team, but not him?

How likely is it anyway that there are 18 people missing a thing consistently and not 1? Idk, I know which one I'd bet on, statistically.

 

[bucks_oil]

But this is after the fact analysis. In realtime I didn't know what McD was going to do there and neither did Lyon and even a "hafhearted" lack of execution or speed by McD is more than most players are bringing in a shootout. I didn't think McD was going to go where he did. He sold me, he didn't sell you? Thats fair. Different reads on the same play. I thought I saw a feint to tuck it other side. McD also has a quick shot when using it.

Just that Lyon was composed with the best player in the world walking in on him on shootout with game on line.

Sure what Raymond id is execute. its made easier because do that on Skinner and its a goal. He's not gonna rob you on many breakaways. Pick a spot and put it there.

Entirely disagree that McD came in with no speed. They were just as fast as the Wings attempts.

Well we can agree to disagree… I was swearing at the TV from the hash marks “no f’n speed”

As for Raymond that goal goes in on every goalie. It was perfect and Skinner did not give him any extra. The 7-hole goal hmmm maybe less than perfect, but it’s hard to know if you weren’t actually behind the mask or have 10 replays.

But this is the point, and I made it earlier.

For the shooter it’s about being perfect in your execution and either make your move perfect, or force a mistake and improvise.

It’s similar for the goalie, but there is a lot more emphasis on being perfect enough to force a mistake.

If both guys are truly perfect it’s still a goal nearly 100% of the time.

Most goalies would kill me for saying it, but those huge saves? They weren’t actually going bar down and you shot it glove high-ish even though I already had my glove… glove high-ish. You shoulda seen that and improvised… stick low was probably open and you didn’t make me move enough to expose 5-hole.

The goalie can still win, but he brought a knife to a gun fight, so the shooter needs to make a mistake.

 

[bucks_oil]

On every PP he looked like he was shot out of a cannon coming out of zone. Man, I think we're spoiled. I'll take a "McD disinterested tonight" game over any of the OOT superstars in the league who aside from Mackinnon on a lot of nights you barely notice.

This was a substellar McD game. But the post and the takes here are engaging in making it look worse than it was. Like I said I think he has the flu. That can certainly impact things. The effort was there as it nearly always is with McD.

In anycase imagine saying to McD what you posted. I'm not calling you out. But his passion for the game is unmatched.

To me nobody on Earth cares about hockey games more than Drai, McD, Mackinnon. They're the only ones consistently on that list.

I think I agree with you on flu. Whatever it was, he wasn’t his normal self.

Passion for the game can be productive or not… depending on your state of mind… I thought tonight he was frustrated and let it sink in.

Have we ever seen him lose the puck like that on a 2on1? I don’t remember it.

 

[bucks_oil]

These numbers dont tell the whole story.
They dont illustrate the situational breakdowns for this team. The breakdowns that occur during critical parts of the game.

They also dont show the fact that this team (so far this season) is simply not bearing down at the appropriate times in a game to close out a game. That includes offensively and defnsively.
It once again speaks to the tendency for this team to let games leak away at inappropriate moments.

There are usually critical moments in a game that ultimatley determine the outcome of the game.
So if a team fails at those ciritcal times then it undermines the significance of numbers like the ones you posted above.

All of what I have mentioned here is a symtpom of a team that plays their systems pretty well (most of the time) but isnt hungry enough to properly do what it needs to do to win games they should win.

These situational outcomes matter even if the numbers might suggest otherwise.
That is one reason why you simply cant definitively evaluate a team from just the numbers.

All of that is true, it factors in none of that, but you are still giving it too much credit.

I don’t remember which resident stat expert told me this, but the publicly available expected goal models can’t even distinguish whether a preceding pass contributed to the quality of a chance.

Think about what that means…

It means a routine shot from the has the same difficulty as a guy receiving and finishing a pass on a two on one break.

It means a cross crease tap in is the same difficulty as a guy coming in with two defenders on his back and jamming the puck into the pads of a goalie already down in butterfly sealing the near post. Or the same difficulty as the third and fourth whacks at a puck already lodged up against the goalies pads… those all count as high danger saves.

In short: completely f’n useless in differentiating what would be a hard save or an easy save.

We need to wait a decade before we take any of those stats half as seriously as some around here do.

 

[guymez]

You don't think our goaltender, you know the one that's currently 49th in Goals Saved Above Expected, could be the one missing magical it factor that causes us to get scored on more than the stats suggest we ought to?

Why is it that that can fall on the rest of the team, but not him?

How likely is it anyway that there are 18 people missing a thing consistently and not 1? Idk, I know which one I'd bet on, statistically.

That doesnt refute what I detailed above.

In addition...to suggest that just because a number of posters on here have concluded something doesnt make it definitively true. Doesnt mean that it is above being challenged.
Its quite the opposite actually.

 

[MessierII]

All of that is true, it factors in none of that, but you are still giving it too much credit.

I don’t remember which resident stat expert told me this, but the publicly available expected goal models can’t even distinguish whether a preceding pass contributed to the quality of a chance.

Think about what that means…

It means a routine shot from the has the same difficulty as a guy receiving and finishing a pass on a two on one break.

It means a cross crease tap in is the same difficulty as a guy coming in with two defenders on his back and jamming the puck into the pads of a goalie already down in butterfly sealing the near post. Or the same difficulty as the third and fourth whacks at a puck already lodged up against the goalies pads… those all count as high danger saves.

In short: completely f’n useless in differentiating what would be a hard save or an easy save.

We need to wait a decade before we take any of those stats half as seriously as some around here do.

And to be fair expected goals are huge progress from corsi which 15 years ago was all we had publicly. There was people then who thought they discovered some magical good player/bad player stat. The same thing is happening now with expected goals. It’s good and a step in the right direction but not even close to being a complete stat.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

Def a problem yup

Grant fuhr was looked a problem back in the day and he did coke, which probably alerted his systems well. He made timely saves

Fuhr was always looked at to make that big save. Not always about numbers

You have to come up clutch. That's it. Nothing else matters in sports

That's why these big boys make big money

Its a very stressful environment. You better perform or gtfo out of here. No babying around here.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

Michael Jordan went to a crap Toronto town and said I want to play because kids came to see me

That's a pro.

We need more of these guys on our team. That hate to lose. Have that drive inside.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

Too many people just accept less than success. That's why only a few in this world are at the top of their game. They work harder than everybody or try to top others (like our gm)

 

[bucks_oil]

How likely is it anyway that there are 18 people missing a thing consistently and not 1? Idk, I know which one I'd bet on, statistically.

You maybe don’t understand statistics as well as you think you do.

If it only takes one critical error to lead to a goal against and we assume that all humans are error prone…

Well then it stands to reason that the goalie would be committing 1/6th of the errors and the skaters were committing 5/6ths of the errors.

So the odds that you’d be right when picking the goalie would not be in your favor.

And then… if you take it a step further, you’d have to consider the fact that the goalie doesn’t even get a chance to make an error unless there was a shot on goal, and so maybe the shot on goal itself was caused by an error.

Boy… this is getting harder, now I have to parse whether it the skaters error or the goalies error that was the bigger issue. I suppose it depends, right?

Well I dunno, that’s too complicated to suss out… we need something easier.

Well I have noticed that every single time the goalie makes an error a red light goes on… I mean that’s pretty obvious right?

Oh, but you’re saying that maybe the error came earlier in the play? But that just takes us back to having to suss out relative blame and I just hate doing that… I liked the red light idea better.

Plus is just get so mad when we get scored on you know? It’s like garrrrrr!!!! And then that red light comes on and I’m like “I need to kill someone”!!!! You ever get that feeling?

Plus… maybe it’s just me, but have you noticed that the goalie is on for every single goal against? It’s pretty uncanny! Ooohhh… y’know im starting to hate that goalie guy, especially the one with the flippy hair… see him letting in goals all the time.

I guess you’re right after all… way more mistakes. Burn him! He’s a witch!!!

 

[bucks_oil]

And to be fair expected goals are huge progress from corsi which 15 years ago was all we had publicly. There was people then who thought they discovered some magical good player/bad player stat. The same thing is happening now with expected goals. It’s good and a step in the right direction but not even close to being a complete stat.

Agree with this, but my frustration is just how faulty the logic is… I don’t have confidence we are even on the right path to get to a real/valid set of stats.

I mean at the very heart of it a “high danger chance” is a highly complex, so many variables to consider that it becomes unmeasurable.

… but you know it when you see it right? And most reasonable hockey minds would be able to score it… so why don’t we just actually count them? Shots on goal are low med and high.

There is an EBUG at every game, they know lots about being scored on, put them in a booth with a scorecard.

 

[Soundwave]

So Jeff Skinner has 3 goals (5 points) and is a +4 in his last 9 games despite Knoblaugh trying to drive him off the team, exclusively with bottom 6 time.

 

[ijuka]

… but you know it when you see it right? And most reasonable hockey minds would be able to score it… so why don’t we just actually count them? Shots on goal are low med and high.

You can algorithmically analyze millions of shot attempts and give them expected goal values in a couple of seconds.

If you tried to analyze those millions of shot attempts by looking at the tape and grading them manually, you not only would take an eternity, but could also inadverently introduce some bias / subjectivity.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

I couldn't watch. How did Klingberg look?

 

[tardigrade81]

Vegas lost. We are still first place. All good.

 

[Fourier]

You maybe don’t understand statistics as well as you think you do.

If it only takes one critical error to lead to a goal against and we assume that all humans are error prone…

Well then it stands to reason that the goalie would be committing 1/6th of the errors and the skaters were committing 5/6ths of the errors.

So the odds that you’d be right when picking the goalie would not be in your favor.

And then… if you take it a step further, you’d have to consider the fact that the goalie doesn’t even get a chance to make an error unless there was a shot on goal, and so maybe the shot on goal itself was caused by an error.

Boy… this is getting harder, now I have to parse whether it the skaters error or the goalies error that was the bigger issue. I suppose it depends, right?

Well I dunno, that’s too complicated to suss out… we need something easier.

Well I have noticed that every single time the goalie makes an error a red light goes on… I mean that’s pretty obvious right?

Oh, but you’re saying that maybe the error came earlier in the play? But that just takes us back to having to suss out relative blame and I just hate doing that… I liked the red light idea better.

Plus is just get so mad when we get scored on you know? It’s like garrrrrr!!!! And then that red light comes on and I’m like “I need to kill someone”!!!! You ever get that feeling?

Plus… maybe it’s just me, but have you noticed that the goalie is on for every single goal against? It’s pretty uncanny! Ooohhh… y’know im starting to hate that goalie guy, especially the one with the flippy hair… see him letting in goals all the time.

I guess you’re right after all… way more mistakes. Burn him! He’s a witch!!!

Without getting into a heated debate, we are not talking about a uniform distribution of responsibilities here. The fact that there are 6 players on the ice does not imply that their potential responsibility for a goal against is equal. No matter what, the last line of defense is almost always the goalie. If he makes an error the result is probably a goal. If the right wing makes an error there are generally lots of potential remedies before a goal happens.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

These numbers dont tell the whole story.
They dont illustrate the situational breakdowns for this team. The breakdowns that occur during critical parts of the game.

They also dont show the fact that this team (so far this season) is simply not bearing down at the appropriate times in a game to close out a game. That includes offensively and defnsively.
It once again speaks to the tendency for this team to let games leak away at inappropriate moments.

There are usually critical moments in a game that ultimatley determine the outcome of the game.
So if a team fails at those ciritcal times then it undermines the significance of numbers like the ones you posted above.

All of what I have mentioned here is a symtpom of a team that plays their systems pretty well (most of the time) but isnt hungry enough to properly do what it needs to do to win games they should win.

These situational outcomes matter even if the numbers might suggest otherwise.
That is one reason why you simply cant definitively evaluate a team from just the numbers.

Yeah, the oilers are the only team in the league with situational breakdowns.

Not my fault skinner