Sell me on Analytics... then sell me on ours

[DuklaNation]

 

[Stonehands1990]

My favorite analytical tool is the score at the end of the game. Always tells you who won/lost the game. I'm really tired of the xGF stat being thrown around like its gospel.

xGF doesn’t take into account teammate position, goalie position or opposition position. It’s a flawed stat

 

[Gabriel426]

The success of an executive is being able to execute the vision with the right pieces. The direction was correct but the player selection fizzled out.

Thats the same as saying Gordan Ramsy want to make a steak dish but he only got salmon and thats why the steak dish taste weird. Should Ramsy just make a salmon dish instead?
I think all GM have some sort of vision of what is needed to build a team to win the Cup but not all GM have the players to do so. Having said that, I don't think Dubas expected AM and MM to be literally no show in the playoffs. Thats something you can't plan.

 

[Menzinger]

So, then are you concluding they are necessary but that ours is not effective as currently constructed?

Not at all. Analytics are a tool for a front office and coaching staff to use, they aren't there to provide a formulaic response to account for everything that happens on the ice. Someone can have good data in front of them and still potentially make the wrong decision or that factors beyond their control (a players mental state for example) can still impact the outcome of a game.

 

[Gallagbi]

Imagine if the players and their agents somehow found out exactly what the Leafs are tracking / valuing with all their bean-counting?



This may very well be one of the biggest frustrations of modern day hockey coaching.

When was the last time you heard a Corsi argument?

 

[Stonehands1990]

Key things to note before reading:
- We have a s*** core. When a line that consists of 33 mil can't score during the playoffs, you will lose
- Muzzin and Tavares were injured, two guys who generate great underlying numbers, so losing them hurts quite a LOT
- We did not have the edge in terms of analytics once Tavares went down. The average value of the lines, with the exception of the top line, was actually lower than the average value of the habs lines or extremely close. Habs defense is also very good.


1. Let's look at the teams that barely or don't use analytics. Do you really want to be the Buffalo Sabres? How about Peter Chiarelli's Oilers? Brian Burke's leafs? The Nonis era leafs?

It's been proven that the organizations that use analytics well have gone on to win championships. Bill James, the guy who wrote sabremetrics, has won championships with the Red Sox. The blackhawks, kings have been noted to extensively use analytics during their cup runs. In basketball, even on the nba subreddit, every fan and manager embraces analytics (they look at true shooting percentage, lots of fans like rapm).

The reason why you want to pour more money into analytics is because it is also an ongoing process. Note the drastic decline of the blackhawks. The GM traded Hjalmarsson, Byfuglien, Nick Schmaltz, Saad, then traded panarin for saad away. Most of these guys, if not all, are analytics darlings. One of the best moves Chicago has done, from an analytics perspective, was draft debrincat. Since Kane's 3rd championship, chicago has made a lot of mistakes. My point is that there's positive correlation between positive results and the use of analytics so when a team decides to completely ignore the use of analytics, their decision-making absolutely falters and losing happens.

Analytics is a tool used, alongside the eye test, to help answer the question, "how do i build the best team possible or a championship winning team?" Dubas, from the looks of it, is using the RAPM model (me and him think alike except for the tavares signing, marner contract (i wanted to starve him), matthews contract. From his point of view, his idea of winning is to limit high danger scoring chances against the leafs, generate great opportunities against other teams and transitions (moving out of defensive zone or skating into the offensive zone). Therefore he looks for players who can do all that and in order to do that, you need metrics. For example, Dubas needed to find a dman who could play in the top 4, but could also limit scoring opportunities against the leafs so he traded for Muzzin. Dubas signed Jason Spezza (don't you dare talk s*** about Spezza) because he's good at transitions. Analytics has data for this and without this data, these signings wouldn't be possible.

2. I don't know if I could say he's good at his job, but there's not really a gm in the league I would want to replace Dubas. I don't think he should be fired though. Dubas' mistakes are actually fixable. Marner can be moved. Our prospect cupboard is pretty decent and can supplant any roster inefficiencies. He has done good things and his good things outweigh his bad things. He has used analytics to make great decisions in Muzzin (although injury history concerns me), Campbell (he wasn't good in game 7, but the leafs did ONLY score 1 goal in total), Cody Ceci was a decent 3rd pairing dman and Penguins fans love him, developed an ECHLer into a 2-3rd pairing dman in Holl, signed Spezza for cheap, established a good reputation with european free agents, somehow got a 15th overall pick for kapanen, signed TJ brodie. Vesey was a dumb signing that I was able to see a mile away. One area that dubas has done well in would be drafting and amateur scouting. Sandin's already seeing NHL games, Robertson is very close and if you have followed the 2020 draft, the leafs did VERY WELL. The draft alone is why dubas is good at his job. Robertson works hard. Niemela and ovechkinov play with effort. You're going to LOVE ryan tverberg.

What other resources does he need to make analytics useful? Experience and not get fired.

Moving forward, I think the leafs will most likely keep making the playoffs, perhaps make it to the 2nd round and then flame out until matthews and marner (the hometown kid) leave. I believe the players that dubas drafts will make the new and better core of the leafs and its only until then that the leafs win a cup.

Dubas is the best drafting GM I think we have every had. Also I’ll never understand how basketball and baseball fans embrace analytics but hockey fans are resisting it so greatly

 

[Menzinger]

When was the last time you heard a Corsi argument?

Exactly. This is the problem too is too many anti-stats people latch on to the little bits they know about when crafting strawmen type critiques. You still see statements like "possession can't be used the same as WAR" - and it's like well duh, it was never supposed to be that type of stat lol.

Or the suggestion that contracts are influenced by old stats like Corsi is just silly stuff

 

[AllDay28]

The funniest part of this thread is ppl thought Leafs were the overwhelming favs? Cause colorado and Tampa would steamroll them.

also Tampa cap circumvented but that’s another story

 

[gamer1035]

It's simple. Analytics are very useful. However, whatever analytics dubas lives by are complete trash and provide him with worthless/net negative information.

 

[Menzinger]

Also wow, hockey players make mistakes and it costs them hockey games? Shocker. I didn’t know that’s how teams lost.

Imagine defending Thornton and Simmonds to harp on Analytics. Imagine liking a sport and knowing nothing about it. Good times.

The other great irony, the only free agency signings/trades. that I think analytics people seemed to like by the Leafs was Bogo (for his PKing) and even then they were generally split on him. It's not as if the Athletic stats guys were writing fawning articles about the wonderful underlying numbers of Vesey, Thornton or Galchenyuk (they weren't just to be clear).

 

[LaPlante94]

You should apply to be a NHL GM. You got it all figured out.

30 of the 31 teams have an analytics department though so that might be a tad weird for ya

Never said i'm against all analytics.

 

[Gabriel426]

Dubas is the best drafting GM I think we have every had. Also I’ll never understand how basketball and baseball fans embrace analytics but hockey fans are resisting it so greatly

Baseball is always about analyics even though they didn't call it back then, like righty vs lefty, where to pitch, positioning(not so much as the shift now)....
Basketball was about sweet spots for shooters and forcing offhand for defence.
Not saying Hockey is not a stats game but like football(soccer), there are stats that are very useful but some stats are not as good as people think. I did football analytics 20 yrs ago, a lot of those stats are useless, for example, a stat we used to judge player is passing rate and complete pass %, but it doesn't say is the pass is forward, sideways, or backwards and how far. Even if we further broke it down, it still won't tell you if the passer or receiver were under pressure or not.
Stats are good but at the end of the day, players determine the results. Hitters still crush the shift if it is on. Walking a batter to first and try to make a DP to get out of an inning is not a sure thing b/c it could back fire.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

Analytics is not a be all , end-all resource. It provides additional information that can help you make decisions or read how the game is going. Im not even a big analytics guy and never really post any fancy stats but I think its silly to completely disregard them.

Puck posession absolutely makes sense to me. Why dump a puck in the zone just to have a 50% chance of getting it back if you have the opportunity to skate it in? Why dump the puck to get a line change and give the other team posession when you can have the puck carrier circle back until the change is complete?

There are people that think that this team lost because it was considered a puck posession style team. To me a team can win using these tactics above but if the personnel don't have the balls to make a hit to get the puck when they don't have it or take a hit to make a play (which is what this team showed throughout this series), then its not going to work. Even the gritty players we acquired did not come as advertised. Where was Simmonds since game 1? Plus this team made a bunch of bone head plays throughout this series

-Galchenyuk Giveaway
-Dermott spin-o-rama giveaway at the blue line
-how many puck over glass penalties?
Etc.

Once again this team with the exception of Spezza, Nylander and Hyman showed no compete and no heart.

 

[Pookie]

Not at all. Analytics are a tool for a front office and coaching staff to use, they aren't there to provide a formulaic response to account for everything that happens on the ice. Someone can have good data in front of them and still potentially make the wrong decision or that factors beyond their control (a players mental state for example) can still impact the outcome of a game.

So... confused here.

We had good data in front of us and made the wrong decisions or didn't have the right data... or we had the data, made the right decisions but the players didn't follow the instructions?

2 of those outcomes point to Dubas and co being inept... the other points squarely at 34 and 16.

Which is it?

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

Analytics is not a be all , end-all resource. It provides additional information that can help you make decisions or read how the game is going. Im not even a big analytics guy and never really post any fancy stats but I think its silly to completely disregard them.

Puck posession absolutely makes sense to me. Why dump a puck in the zone just to have a 50% chance of getting it back if you have the opportunity to skate it in? Why dump the puck to get a line change and give the other team posession when you can have the puck carrier circle back until the change is complete?

There are people that think that this team lost because it was considered a puck posession style team. To me a team can win using these tactics above but if the personnel don't have the balls to make a hit to get the puck when they don't have it or take a hit to make a play (which is what this team showed throughout this series), then its not going to work. Even the gritty players we acquired did not come as advertised. Where was Simmonds since game 1? Plus this team made a bunch of bone head plays throughout this series

-Galchenyuk Giveaway
-Dermott spin-o-rama giveaway at the blue line
-how many puck over glass penalties?
Etc.

Once again this team with the exception of Spezza, Nylander and Hyman showed no compete and no heart.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

My favorite analytical tool is the score at the end of the game. Always tells you who won/lost the game. I'm really tired of the xGF stat being thrown around like its gospel.

What I don't know is this: Do they factor who is shooting in that xGF? If Auston has a chance in the slot (pre-playoffs)...does that count the same as if Kerfoot was there? If not...then it doesn't work the way they think it does.

 

[Gallagbi]

So... confused here.

We had good data in front of us and made the wrong decisions or didn't have the right data... or we had the data, made the right decisions but the players didn't follow the instructions?

2 of those outcomes point to Dubas and co being inept... the other points squarely at 34 and 16.

Which is it?

Can I ask what you think our issues were in the series? What needed to change for us to win?

 

[Menzinger]

So... confused here.

We had good data in front of us and made the wrong decisions or didn't have the right data... or we had the data, made the right decisions but the players didn't follow the instructions?

2 of those outcomes point to Dubas and co being inept... the other points squarely at 34 and 16.

Which is it?

I think it's reasonable to say that management coaches and players all made mistakes/contributed to the season outcome results. I don't know why you seem to think it has to be one over the other.

And again, analytical data is not going to be able to account for everything that happens. Nobody has ever claimed that to be the case either.

 

[Pookie]

Can I ask what you think our issues were in the series? What needed to change for us to win?

Sure.

As I have stood by, I don't think coaching makes a difference when we win and I sure don't think it matters that much when we lose. So, this is absolutely not on Keefe.

Though I am wondering how the crow tastes for some of the Keefofans.

A talented, competing, healthy roster wins games.

Obviously losing JT hurt but they also won 3 in a row without JT. So, the roster had the talent to beat the team they finished 18 points up on in a 56 game season.

In my opinion, the Core is not a compete core. And JT's injury exposed that.

Montreal worked harder. End stop.

I think our core are sold on the idea of being superstars without earning the title. They like the attention. They are used to things going their way.

They aren't prepared to work for it.

They got drafted into the hottest hockey market. Got immediate stardom and financial independence. I'm sure they wouldn't be challenged to find a date nor any one of a million clingons in this city willing to tell them how great they are in exchange for a selfie or a few moments of fame.

I'm not doubting their talent. I think they expect success without the effort required to see it through.

How else do you explain not performing when less talented players outwork you?

I base that on Babcock's long standing challenges to Matthews regarding being outworked by players like Toews and others. As well as the ice time debate that ultimately led to Matthews getting his coach.

Matthews got all the ice time he wanted. Got his preferred line mate. And ended up with less playoff points than Kerfoot and Spezza.

Spoonfed and entitled. They aren't prepared to work.

We need a new nucleus.

We will never win with 34.

 

[Stephen]

Thats the same as saying Gordan Ramsy want to make a steak dish but he only got salmon and thats why the steak dish taste weird. Should Ramsy just make a salmon dish instead?
I think all GM have some sort of vision of what is needed to build a team to win the Cup but not all GM have the players to do so. Having said that, I don't think Dubas expected AM and MM to be literally no show in the playoffs. Thats something you can't plan.

Yeah I was thinking of a food analogy as well. If the fanbase is somehow “responsible” for ordering a ribeye steak and the chef sources ground beef and gives you a sloppy joe, it’s not the fanbase’s fault is it?

That said, I do sympathize with Dubas for putting so much faith in two franchise guys who buckled when it mattered most. Probably on the extreme end of the distribution curve in terms of what kind of regular to post season drop off. Even if you can’t be Mackinnon Rantanen, be better than Suzuki Kotkaniemi for crying out loud.

 

[Prominence]

So... confused here.

We had good data in front of us and made the wrong decisions or didn't have the right data... or we had the data, made the right decisions but the players didn't follow the instructions?

2 of those outcomes point to Dubas and co being inept... the other points squarely at 34 and 16.

Which is it?

More often, dubas did make the right moves in terms of the draft (there is usage of analytics used in drafts by the way) by trading for muzzin (albeit always injured), signing tj brodie/spezza, and developing holl. The 2nd line was money and i thought engvall and mikheyev both played hard and well even though they didn’t score a lot. 4th line is always meh, but they don’t play much. So that leaves the top line.

Those two players are 27% of the cap and they play over one third of the game and when they can’t produce, it does create huge problems. As highly paid players, they are paid to not only be exceptional, but set the tone of the team.

How do you see it as an analytics problem?

 

[Stephen]

I think it's reasonable to say that management coaches and players all made mistakes/contributed to the season outcome results. I don't know why you seem to think it has to be one over the other.

And again, analytical data is not going to be able to account for everything that happens. Nobody has ever claimed that to be the case either.

A playoff catastrophe like this has to be a perfect storm of everything going poorly. And for a while I would say players, coaches and GM alike weathered the various storms and adversity fairly well. They don’t get any benefit of the doubt now but they actually overcame quite a few things before it all kind of fell apart.

 

[Gabriel426]

Yeah I was thinking of a food analogy as well. If the fanbase is somehow “responsible” for ordering a ribeye steak and the chef sources ground beef and gives you a sloppy joe, it’s not the fanbase’s fault is it?

That said, I do sympathize with Dubas for putting so much faith in two franchise guys who buckled when it mattered most. Probably on the extreme end of the distribution curve in terms of what kind of regular to post season drop off. Even if you can’t be Mackinnon Rantanen, be better than Suzuki Kotkaniemi for crying out loud.

Thats exactly what I think too.
We all talked about that extra gear in playoffs. Not only did AM and Marner didn't play like they do in the regular season, they literally dropped off.

 

[Pookie]

More often, dubas did make the right moves in terms of the draft (there is usage of analytics used in drafts by the way) by trading for muzzin (albeit always injured), signing tj brodie/spezza, and developing holl. The 2nd line was money and i thought engvall and mikheyev both played hard and well even though they didn’t score a lot. 4th line is always meh, but they don’t play much. So that leaves the top line.

Those two players are 27% of the cap and they play over one third of the game and when they can’t produce, it does create huge problems. As highly paid players, they are paid to not only be exceptional, but set the tone of the team.

How do you see it as an analytics problem?

I'm not really referring to analytics in terms of team construction.

I'm referring to analytics in terms of dictating pre or in game strategy.

For example, Dubas created a position this year called Director of Hockey Strategy and hired Eric Joyce for the role. What the hell happened there? What input did Joyce give regarding game strategy between game 4 and game 5? 5 and 6? 6 and 7? of the 11 periods of hockey played over 3 games in which we only outscored them for 1... ONE... 20 minute segment.

He's also spoken publicly about Keefe and how he was "very open to learning everything our analytics department could generate, using statistics and data to improve team performances."

So, what did the department generate? How did Keefe interpret it? How did the 8-10 Analysts that work with the stats team interpret it? What did he tell the players to do? Did the players listen?

I mean, if we were incorporating stats into our decisions... what stats? And why were the decisions obviously so far off the mark?

Seems to me that we either collect stats that aren't correlated to winning or we have trouble acting on/interpreting what we have.

For all the money the board is spending... answers are deserved.

 

[Gallagbi]

Montreal worked harder. End stop.

I think our core are sold on the idea of being superstars without earning the title. They like the attention. They are used to things going their way.

They aren't prepared to work for it.

They got drafted into the hottest hockey market. Got immediate stardom and financial independence. I'm sure they wouldn't be challenged to find a date nor any one of a million clingons in this city willing to tell them how great they are in exchange for a selfie or a few moments of fame.

I'm not doubting their talent. I think they expect success without the effort required to see it through.

How else do you explain not performing when less talented players outwork you?

Cut some to shorten the quote. I think the payment is more of an issue for expectations that they're now crumbling under and moreso Marner to be honest. I could get there on Matthews, but I'm okay with giving him a little more rope as I flat out think he's been better the last few years in all situations (playoffs and regular season)

For the thread, I was curious to see how this aligned with the thought process works with the analytics and why you think the harder working team may not be showing up as well there. Is it simply they don't feel they can compete in the way things like chances are measured?