The Advanced Stats Thread Episode V: Rick Nash Camera Stares/60 | Page 4 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

The Advanced Stats Thread Episode V: Rick Nash Camera Stares/60

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mac n Gs said:
So, Nash leads the team in ixGF60 and is near the top of the league in it too.
Click to expand...

i dont know what that means, but i do know that Nash was playing great a few months back, and his play has progressively dropped off. flashes here and there, but by and large he looks...disappointing.

better than most of our forwards, but not a constant threat like he was before his second groin pull.
 
Individual xGF. He's had horrible puck luck, but hasn't been playing poorly.

Also, what's the difference between corsica and DTM About Heart's xG models? Corsica had us winning the xGF battle and we got crushed according to DTM's model
 
Mac n Gs said:
Individual xGF. He's had horrible puck luck, but hasn't been playing poorly.

Also, what's the difference between corsica and DTM About Heart's xG models? Corsica had us winning the xGF battle and we got crushed according to DTM's model
Click to expand...

Just kidding, here's DTM's model:

https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/10/01/expected-goals-are-a-better-predictor-of-future-scoring-than-corsi-goals/

I think the difference is that DTM's takes into account shooting-talent, while Manny's does not.

Don't quote me on that.
 
Last 6 Games (just 2-2-2):

CF% 53.89
xGF% 59.14
SCF% 60.29
(5v5 - Corsica)

Wins may not be coming but the eye test and stats suggest they're playing good hockey...PK still needs work
 
They've been great at 5v5. They're getting torched on special teams, and I think someone said last night the PK is 27th overall since January. Es no bueno.
 
Since January 1, only Dallas (25) has given up more goals 4v5 than the Rangers (24). Opportunities might not be the same, but that's still alarmingly high.

Did they really change their philosophy on the PK? I feel like the forwards are doing the same thing, but the defense is being uber aggressive.
 
mrjimmyg89 said:
Since January 1, only Dallas (25) has given up more goals 4v5 than the Rangers (24). Opportunities might not be the same, but that's still alarmingly high.

Did they really change their philosophy on the PK? I feel like the forwards are doing the same thing, but the defense is being uber aggressive.
Click to expand...

I may be misinterpreting the stats but since Jan 1 (4v5) only 6 teams have a lower xGA/60 and our GSAA is worst in NHL...wonder if that has more to do with defenders screening/not clearing crease for Hank/Raanta...:dunno:
 
Re-posting this here because fancy stats have been banned from the pgt:

5v5 close CF% rankings of conference finalists (Cup winners in bold, SCF loser in italics)
2016: 3, 5, 6, 13
2015: 2, 4, 15, 19
2014: 1, 2, 6, 26
2013: 1, 2, 4, 18
2012: 2, 11, 15, 19
2011: 1, 3, 6, 13
2010: 1, 11, 14, 27
2009: 1, 5, 7, 16
2008: 1, 13, 26, 27

7 of the last 9 Cup winners were top 3 in corsi. 13 out of the last 18 conference champions were top 7 in corsi. 20 out of the last 36 conference finalists were top 7 in corsi.
 
Zil said:
Re-posting this here because fancy stats have been banned from the pgt:

5v5 close CF% rankings of conference finalists (Cup winners in bold, SCF loser in italics)
2016: 3, 5, 6, 13
2015: 2, 4, 15, 19
2014: 1, 2, 6, 26
2013: 1, 2, 4, 18
2012: 2, 11, 15, 19
2011: 1, 3, 6, 13
2010: 1, 11, 14, 27
2009: 1, 5, 7, 16
2008: 1, 13, 26, 27

7 of the last 9 Cup winners were top 3 in corsi. 13 out of the last 18 conference champions were top 7 in corsi. 20 out of the last 36 conference finalists were top 7 in corsi.
Click to expand...

What a ****ing travesty. Guess when you bring something to say a player was bad or good using "pucks to the net" it's looked down upon.

When you don't allow a supported opinion with a something that is factual, such as shot attempts are, but allow someone to have an opinion with nothing behind it except, "watch the game" you set yourself up to let the inmates run the asylum.
 
Zil said:
Re-posting this here because fancy stats have been banned from the pgt:

5v5 close CF% rankings of conference finalists (Cup winners in bold, SCF loser in italics)
2016: 3, 5, 6, 13
2015: 2, 4, 15, 19
2014: 1, 2, 6, 26
2013: 1, 2, 4, 18
2012: 2, 11, 15, 19
2011: 1, 3, 6, 13
2010: 1, 11, 14, 27
2009: 1, 5, 7, 16
2008: 1, 13, 26, 27

7 of the last 9 Cup winners were top 3 in corsi. 13 out of the last 18 conference champions were top 7 in corsi. 20 out of the last 36 conference finalists were top 7 in corsi.
Click to expand...

And who were on the top 6 of these teams during that time frame?

See this is where context gets lost, and people start getting pissy that "Clendo" isn't getting to play to up "our possession."

My point is that I'm not denying that these metrics correlate with winning teams. I mean most of the advanced(ness) of these stats is saying that winning teams outshoot their opponents.

The problem is have with the analytics thus far is not that the analytics exist. Instead, it's that there is little theory about how something like possession is obtained.

For example, a single player could have good CF%.

How does he do that? Outlet passing? Physical play? Synergy between D to D passing?

That's theory.

And my point in the begging of this post still stands. Yes, the winning teams outshot their opponents, but look at the fire power on those teams. It really changes the context of a lot of the bickering over minutiae, and seeing the discrepancy in top 6.
 
Last edited:
mrjimmyg89 said:
What a ****ing travesty. Guess when you bring something to say a player was bad or good using "pucks to the net" it's looked down upon.

When you don't allow a supported opinion with a something that is factual, such as shot attempts are, but allow someone to have an opinion with nothing behind it except, "watch the game" you set yourself up to let the inmates run the asylum.
Click to expand...


Corsi is flawed in a game to game basis because a goal or big mistake is too important in a game. So I honestly get annoyed when it's brought up in most context after a game. Even worse are the people who talk about corsi after a period. Agree with you though it's better than the "watch the game" guys. Even worse are the "have you ever played the game" people
 
ReggieDunlop68 said:
And who were on the top 6 of these teams during that time frame?

See this is where context gets lost, and people start getting pissy that "Clendo" isn't getting to play to up "our possession."
Click to expand...

I can't even tell what point you're trying to make. People get pissed Clendo isn't playing because he's a really good 4-6 defender being benched for multiple guys who don't belong in the league anymore.
 
pdogfizzle said:
Corsi is flawed in a game to game basis because a goal or big mistake is too important in a game. So I honestly get annoyed when it's brought up in most context after a game. Even worse are the people who talk about corsi after a period. Agree with you though it's better than the "watch the game" guys. Even worse are the "have you ever played the game" people
Click to expand...

It's actually much more likely that goals are flawed on a game to game basis, because there are so few of them.

More important? Yes, obviously. More trustworthy? No.
 
pdogfizzle said:
Corsi is flawed in a game to game basis because a goal or big mistake is too important in a game. So I honestly get annoyed when it's brought up in most context after a game. Even worse are the people who talk about corsi after a period. Agree with you though it's better than the "watch the game" guys. Even worse are the "have you ever played the game" people
Click to expand...

Less flawed than goals somehow.

eyjee said:
It's actually much more likely that goals are flawed on a game to game basis, because there are so few of them.

More important? Yes, obviously. More trustworthy? No.
Click to expand...

what he said.
 
A word about advanced stats...

The tone on the board right now is toxic.

Much of the discord and much of what has been causing good users to leave the site permanently is the back and forth bickering about advanced statistics versus the gut feel of a game/"the eye test."

Mods cannot and will not allow this to take over every thread. We have THIS specific thread for discussing the merits of these statistics, and general discussion of stats is off topic anywhere else. HOWEVER, advanced stats discussion is on topic if referenced in regard to a particular game or a particular player, depending on the thread in which it appears.

We will not hesitate to remove anyone, permanently if necessary, who turns a discussion of advanced stats into a general excuse to complain or throw talk off topic or troll.

This means no discussion of the type "we don't have an analytics department so we are never going to win a game again, and I hope we never sniff the cup again, and I hope someone burns the Garden to the ground." It really has been that black and white. This is prohibited by the site rules against trolling and against sweeping generalizations to mask personal attacks.

There is more to life than being right. There is more to life than saying "I told you so."

Treat each other like you want to be treated yourself.
 
Hope that also extends to the "lol how was the corsis tho" or "yeah but corsi" posts too.
 
pdogfizzle said:
Corsi is flawed in a game to game basis because a goal or big mistake is too important in a game. So I honestly get annoyed when it's brought up in most context after a game. Even worse are the people who talk about corsi after a period. Agree with you though it's better than the "watch the game" guys. Even worse are the "have you ever played the game" people
Click to expand...

So are many other stats, such as +/-, but anyone -30 in anything is doing something wrong. Single game or full season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom