The Advanced Stats Thread Episode IX

[Filthy Dangles]

Zibanejad averages more TOI per game than Eichel. When you really break down the zone start numbers, they aren't significant.

269 offensive zone starts for Eichel, 144 for Zibanejad. 125 difference looks kinda big on the surface but it's a little less than 2 per game, it really doesn't equate to much. offensive zone faceoffs at even strength aren't some treasure trove of offense.

They both play with some pretty good wingers. Skinner attached to Eichel and Kreider attached to Zib.

Eichel is 22nd in the league in P/60 this year, Zib 55th. I don't think anyone would argue Eichel isn't a better and more efficient point getter.

His on-ice stats are underwhelming, but he plays on Buffalo. I know you can adjust for relative and teammates but it's just such a cursed and terrible franchise that i am struggling to say his on-ice stats on that trash team means he sucks.

TLDR...I like Zibanejad but Eichel is definitely better.

 

[Machinehead]

Zibanejad averages more TOI per game than Eichel. When you really break down the zone start numbers, they aren't significant.

269 offensive zone starts for Eichel, 144 for Zibanejad. 125 difference looks kinda big on the surface but it's a little less than 2 per game, it really doesn't equate to much. offensive zone faceoffs at even strength aren't some treasure trove of offense.

They both play with some pretty good wingers. Skinner attached to Eichel and Kreider attached to Zib.

Eichel is 22nd in the league in P/60 this year, Zib 55th. I don't think anyone would argue Eichel isn't a better and more efficient point getter.

His on-ice stats are underwhelming, but he plays on Buffalo. I know you can adjust for relative and teammates but it's just such a cursed and terrible franchise that i am struggling to say his on-ice stats on that trash team means he sucks.

TLDR...I like Zibanejad but Eichel is definitely better.

That IS relative.

That's how he's impacting Buffalo...

 

[Filthy Dangles]

That IS relative.

That's how he's impacting Buffalo...

I don't understand that chart or those stats. Do you have a breakdown of them? Eichel is positive in every single relative metric, shots, goals, scoring chances, high danger chances etc. He's 10% GF relative and 11% HDSC Relative to Buffalo

 

[Machinehead]

I don't understand that chart or those stats. Do you have a breakdown of them? Eichel is positive in every single relative metric, shots, goals, scoring chances, high danger chances etc. He's 10% GF relative and 11% HDSC Relative to Buffalo

They don't include this season where Eichel has been better, but he's still an extremely sheltered player, and losing ROR has left that team in disarray. He probably was and is the better player.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

They don't include this season where Eichel has been better, but he's still an extremely sheltered player, and losing ROR has left that team in disarray. He probably was and is the better player.

I mean Buffalo was in the same disarray for years when they still had OReilly.

I wouldn't agree that he's 'heavily sheltered'. He plays the most minutes at even strength by far of any other center on Buffalo, and he's the only real threat at center on the team so teams can regularly get the match ups they want vs him. You seem to be basing the whole sheltered thing off his zone starts when analytics guys for years have been saying zone starts don't matter much. If he was like 75-80% OZS range, then I would probably agree, but if that were the case his minutes would go down too.

As for OReilly vs Eichel, I'd say Eichel. He can manufacture and drive offense like OReilly simply cannot. OReilly's a more opportunistic offensive player imo. He's been a 55-60ish point player for most of his career. I think Eichel will be an PPG+ish for most of his, but we'll see.

 

[Ola]

I came across this gem in another thread, it’s a bit old but I can’t stop myself from brining it up. It must really be one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever seen online, but I think it’s a misconception that is quite common and hence an interesting thing to look into.

Many believe that ‘bad’ is a binary term from a coach’s POV. Like you often hear, X couldn’t possibly be any worse than Y. But that is just so often totally not in touch with reality. “How can AV play Girardi with one minute to go? Anyone must be better, anyone!!??”

I think it’s understandable to have this misunderstanding. If you have learned most of what you know about hockey from watching the NHL — you have no idea what bad is. The best players in the world plays in the NHL, and all teams are run by a staf of at least a handful of people making a lot of money because they are deemed to be the best in the world of what they do. They work night and day to put combinations and players on the ice that are the best they can muster.

All many have ever seen is the worst of the best, literary. With that limitation, it’s like looking at the world through a key hole.

We don’t see bad. During scrimmages when things are off, someone fills in at the wrong position, you even at this level get results that transferred to a real game would mean a 20-0 loss. Easily.

Bad is extremely far from a binary term.

 

[SA16]

Well I'm pretty sure Cody McLeod is bad. I doubt he would even be much of an offensive threat in the games I play. There's only so much you can do when you have bad hands and can't skate. In a no-checking league would he even accomplish anything?

 

[Machinehead]

View attachment 202693

I came across this gem in another thread, it’s a bit old but I can’t stop myself from brining it up. It must really be one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever seen online, but I think it’s a misconception that is quite common and hence an interesting thing to look into.

Many believe that ‘bad’ is a binary term from a coach’s POV. Like you often hear, X couldn’t possibly be any worse than Y. But that is just so often totally not in touch with reality. “How can AV play Girardi with one minute to go? Anyone must be better, anyone!!??”

I think it’s understandable to have this misunderstanding. If you have learned most of what you know about hockey from watching the NHL — you have no idea what bad is. The best players in the world plays in the NHL, and all teams are run by a staf of at least a handful of people making a lot of money because they are deemed to be the best in the world of what they do. They work night and day to put combinations and players on the ice that are the best they can muster.

All many have ever seen is the worst of the best, literary. With that limitation, it’s like looking at the world through a key hole.

We don’t see bad. During scrimmages when things are off, someone fills in at the wrong position, you even at this level get results that transferred to a real game would mean a 20-0 loss. Easily.

Bad is extremely far from a binary term.

When we're talking about Glass, McLeod, Beagle, etc., yeah, bad is binary. They're bad.

Beagle, for example, was literally an ECHL player. No exaggeration there. And he was bad in the AHL -- couldn't score in the AHL. Hell, he had 13 points in 26 ECHL games. There's 10,000 hockey players who could that. Yeah, he could beat me and my friends. Not saying much. He's a bad professional hockey player. Tanner Glass, same thing. Couldn't score in the AHL. He's a bad player in the French League.

Granted, the players who fit the description of just straight-up bad are becoming fewer in the last 2-3 years.

 

[Machinehead]

Also, some coaches -not all- will absolutely play a guy they admit is bad because "we know what he brings" over a guy who might be good or bad.

Check out AV's usage of Tanner Glass. He was extremely sheltered.

 

[Ola]

When we're talking about Glass, McLeod, Beagle, etc., yeah, bad is binary. They're bad.

Beagle, for example, was literally an ECHL player. No exaggeration there. And he was bad in the AHL -- couldn't score in the AHL. Hell, he had 13 points in 26 ECHL games. There's 10,000 hockey players who could that. Yeah, he could beat me and my friends. Not saying much. He's a bad professional hockey player. Tanner Glass, same thing. Couldn't score in the AHL. He's a bad player in the French League.

Granted, the players who fit the description of just straight-up bad are becoming fewer in the last 2-3 years.

At the same time they don't make any negative plays for the role they play in on those 4th lines. Like surely, many SHLers -- without much preparation -- would drive a NHL coach nuts if they were put on a 4th line because they wouldn't perform all of the few duties they have while they would try plays not part of the game plan.

But of course, if you can carry a bad guy anywhere without it having a significant impact on your game, its 4th line wing. And the number of guys that with some work could do what they did are of course bigger than at any other place in the lineup. The 4th line wing position is also unique in a sense because a coach will often want someone there that doesn't try to show off during games, try to prove that they belong higher up the line-up than where they are played.

 

[Machinehead]

At the same time they don't make any negative plays for the role they play in on those 4th lines. Like surely, many SHLers -- without much preparation -- would drive a NHL coach nuts if they were put on a 4th line because they wouldn't perform all of the few duties they have while they would try plays not part of the game plan.

But of course, if you can carry a bad guy anywhere without it having a significant impact on your game, its 4th line wing. And the number of guys that with some work could do what they did are of course bigger than at any other place in the lineup. The 4th line wing position is also unique in a sense because a coach will often want someone there that doesn't try to show off during games, try to prove that they belong higher up the line-up than where they are played.

That's like saying a centipede doesn't have any legs.

 

[East Coast Bias]

At the same time they don't make any negative plays for the role they play in on those 4th lines.

This is not remotely true.

If you're inferring that coaches are well aware of what they're doing and expect to get their shit kicked in at the expense of a random punch thrown every 5 games when they roll bad 4th lines, well then they should be fired because that's stupid.

 

[Ola]

That's like saying a centipede doesn't have any legs.

Often a coach throws a 4th line out there to get some energy, play a straight shift. Get the puck deep and get jolt some life into the team. It would be quite annoying if a winger tried some low % stick-handle move on the offensive blue-line in that situation.

But overall, I think the big mistakes are made in relation to Ds.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Well I'm pretty sure Cody McLeod is bad. I doubt he would even be much of an offensive threat in the games I play. There's only so much you can do when you have bad hands and can't skate. In a no-checking league would he even accomplish anything?

Darren Langdon retired, and two years later, stepped onto one of Canada's better men's teams as a top three (and ~P/GP) forward.

So yes, NHL player 'x' would be an exceptional talent on amateur team 'y'.

 

[JetsFan815]

So Jack Eichel sort of...can I say sucks? I wanna say sucks.

Like, he doesn't suck. But he sucks. You know what I mean?

Yes, he scores a lot. However, I've always said I'm not a big usage guy unless the usage is absolutely ridiculous. His usage is absolutely ridiculous. The guy plays like 40 minutes a game and hasn't take a defensive zone faceoff since Midget-A. I'd be alarmed if he didn't have 72 points.

For a guy who couldn't tell you what his defensive zone looks like, his impact rates are a wet noodle:

Again, I'm not one to harp on usage to the point where I think it's the goal rather than the context, but isn't this sort of shocking for a guy eating the easiest minutes in the league?

@PlamsUnlimited

He has improved a lot this season. The 15-16 and to a lesser extent the 16-17 seasons makes his stats look worse than they should. He has been much improved his last 2 seasons and has demonstrated positive growth each season.

 

[EdJovanovski]

Well I'm pretty sure Cody McLeod is bad. I doubt he would even be much of an offensive threat in the games I play. There's only so much you can do when you have bad hands and can't skate. In a no-checking league would he even accomplish anything?

What level do you play? I would presume someone who scored 70 goals in the NHL would be a threat lol, guys I played with who were drafted in very late rounds of the WHL bantam draft were insanely good. To play a single game in the NHL you have to be one of the top 0.000000001% of players on the planet

 

[JoeThorntonsRooster]

Hey, I noticed you guys were arguing about Cody McLeod. Do any of you guys know the team’s record in games with and without him over the past two seasons?

 

[Ola]

I swear it has to be satire at this point.

How do you mean?

Maybe I was unclear, with "negative plays" I meant poor decisions, playing outside their roles, trying to do too much.

 

[Irishguy42]

NyLaNdEr hAs dOnE NoThInG SiNcE HiS ReTuRn

 

[Off Sides]

NyLaNdEr hAs dOnE NoThInG SiNcE HiS ReTuRn

Yeah but that chart does not show the ill will feeling some harbor because he held out, nor does it reflect that turnover.

Even without the chart,

I like Nylander, his cap hit going forward is lower than it normally would be, he is a good young player.

If he becomes available at a discount, I'd rather see the Rangers use cap space on him over any of the other ideas for that cap space which are often floated.

In my opinion, Nylander at ~7M going forward is much better use of cap space than 10-12M on Panarin, even if they have to give up some assets to get him

 

[Ola]

Hey, I noticed you guys were arguing about Cody McLeod. Do any of you guys know the team’s record in games with and without him over the past two seasons?

Our record is not worse than Tampa's with both Glass and McLeod dressed.

 

[Ola]

NyLaNdEr hAs dOnE NoThInG SiNcE HiS ReTuRn

Is that adjusted corsi?

 

[Irishguy42]

Is that adjusted corsi?

Not sure if adjusted or what game state. I poked Sean about it. Would imagine it's 5v5.

In either case, it likely wouldn't be too much different if adjusted, and it does match the eye test for me at least. He did start off a bit slow but then became one of TOR's top forwards, as he should be.

 

[Leetch3]

where is silverfish lately? I'll leave this here for the laughs

 

[FireGerardGallant]

Tableau Public
Is Deangelo not as good at entries ashes sometimes made out or am I missing something? Also, Smith is #notbad