The Advanced Stats Thread Episode IX
- Thread starter Kakko
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
This - I bet if you dug hard enough you could disect a GDT where someone was speaking highly of how player A played because they had a goal or a nice play. Then goes and looks at the numbers and realizes that they got their teeth kicked in numbers wise and goes on to bash them.
Like everything the truth is in the middle somewhere....
silverfish
got perma'd
silverfish
got perma'd
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
Lettieri is truly awful. Spooner is worse. McLeod is McLeod. I guess it doesn't matter right now but this team desperately needs to address their 4th line going forward.
@Mac n Gs wasn't it you who said Namestnikov was the only thing making our 4th line not an AHL line? Well Namestnikov moved up and here it is!
Also, can we talk about Shattenkirk's +8.04 corsi rel and +10.38 xGF rel? I've officially retired from defending him in any thread but this one. It's just not worth it.
@Mac n Gs wasn't it you who said Namestnikov was the only thing making our 4th line not an AHL line? Well Namestnikov moved up and here it is!
Also, can we talk about Shattenkirk's +8.04 corsi rel and +10.38 xGF rel? I've officially retired from defending him in any thread but this one. It's just not worth it.
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
Agreed on Lettieri. I think if he was left handed, he would not be on the team right now.
Also Shattenkirk is bad, haven't you heard? @Machinehead
Also Shattenkirk is bad, haven't you heard? @Machinehead
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
I mean, Shattenkirk should have more points. That's absolutely on him.
Granted, we are playing Neal Stionk on the 1PP over him for some reason, where Stionk has been an absolute train wreck. Unfortunately, that Bobby Orr goal he scored (WHICH WAS AT EVEN f***ING STRENGTH) is going to buy him at least three months of being better offensively than Shattenkirk even if he doesn't score another point. This is why I hate the eye test.
Speaking of, no, to be completely honest, Shattenkirk doesn't really pass the eye test for me. But when you drive play like that, I reach a point where I literally don't care. Sorry.
Granted, we are playing Neal Stionk on the 1PP over him for some reason, where Stionk has been an absolute train wreck. Unfortunately, that Bobby Orr goal he scored (WHICH WAS AT EVEN f***ING STRENGTH) is going to buy him at least three months of being better offensively than Shattenkirk even if he doesn't score another point. This is why I hate the eye test.
Speaking of, no, to be completely honest, Shattenkirk doesn't really pass the eye test for me. But when you drive play like that, I reach a point where I literally don't care. Sorry.
Mac n Gs
Drury plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,835
- 13,558
I didn’t use that phrasing exactly, but it was clear he was the one making plays all over the ice.
As to Shatty, it’s a moot point because people will only look at his point totals and plus minus
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
*Buch takes a penalty late in the game*
Everyone: "Buchnevich, ya stupid!!"
Everyone: "Buchnevich, ya stupid!!"
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
I said that! (@Mac n Gs may also have said it at some point)
Shatty is playing great, though Smith is somehow putting up a godawful RelxGF% despite being his most common partner. Claesson-Shattenkirk have been sublime as a pairing.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
One of the biggest hurdles facing the acceptance of analytics: armchair statisticians who think saying the word "causation" makes everything they disagree with just go away.
Folks need to pick up a textbook (I have one they can borrow) and read about correlation vs causation. Learn how it actually works. It's valuable material. What it definitely isn't, is a magic bean that makes the bad man telling you you're wrong go away.
Folks need to pick up a textbook (I have one they can borrow) and read about correlation vs causation. Learn how it actually works. It's valuable material. What it definitely isn't, is a magic bean that makes the bad man telling you you're wrong go away.
If correlation and causation were the same, weather forecasts would be causing the weather. I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. xG (or whatever) models clearly have no causation in and of themselves, but neither do actual goals (or wins or whatever) so the idea (I assume) is to determine, where possible, what factors have a causal relationship with variables of interest that can also explain current goals (or wins or whatever) and capture them in your model. So if a model has a higher correlation to future goals, wins or whatever than actual goals, then the question that remains is whether the factors in the xG model have a causal relationship. This isn't a given. If a causal relationship can't be shown then what does the model actually tell you?
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
Who said correlation and causation are the same?
The point I'm making is, when one hockey event is correlating with another hockey event, it's reasonable (sure, not a given) that we have causation.
Let's say a player has played 10 years in the NHL. For 10 years, his team consistently performs poorly in shot metrics when he's on the ice. You can't just dismiss that as correlation. It's very reasonable that he's causing that.
- Oct 23, 2014
- 30,333
- 43,024
You are saying that correlation is not the same as causation and then in the next sentence say that if 2 events are correlated then there is causation. So no, what you are saying is not reasonable at all, IMO. I mean, it might be true but you can't just assume it.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
I'm not saying there is causation. I'm saying there could be.
People too readily assume that there isn't because "correlation does not equal causation" has become a meme.
There's causation probably more often than there's not.
Maybe I didn't get your original comment. Of course there can be but it's not something you can assume either.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
My original comment was that people who know nothing about statistics say "you're wrong because causation" because causation has become a meme.
There's an assumption among advanced stats opponents that we can take any two things that correlate and just say there's no causation even when causation is very reasonable.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
That was a great play. Makes all the difference in the world, most defenseman would go right off the glass in the situation.
I mean, it is a logical fallacy. I understand what you're saying (I think), but there's really no way to show it. What you seem to be saying is something akin to "I can't define it but I know it when I see it".
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
What I'm saying is everyone knows the rule that we can't assume causation, and now people are doing the opposite and just assuming there isn't.
silverfish
got perma'd
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
Kreider was drunk tonight.
Also, Pionk...man.
Absolutely horrendous CF% player, hits the ice at the first sign of trouble, getting the hardest minutes despite the fact that he's getting face-washed, doing little things to make the fans, coaches, and FO forget about it.
Who the f*** does that sound like?
I'm trying real hard to like him because he can do highlight reel shit, but I do not need another Dan Girardi in my life. I don't need it.
I'm getting it, aren't I?
Also, Pionk...man.
Absolutely horrendous CF% player, hits the ice at the first sign of trouble, getting the hardest minutes despite the fact that he's getting face-washed, doing little things to make the fans, coaches, and FO forget about it.
Who the f*** does that sound like?
I'm trying real hard to like him because he can do highlight reel shit, but I do not need another Dan Girardi in my life. I don't need it.
I'm getting it, aren't I?
Don’t even bring up +-. If you went by it, Shatty would be the 2nd best D on the team, and Stionk would be the worst player on the team by far.
Even meaningless stats aren’t in Pionk’s favor. Literally all Pionk has going for him is a few flashy offensive plays, he is egregiously bad defensively. I haven’t even followed metrics closely this year, he just looks absolutely putrid out there when not showing some offensive flash.
Last edited:
