The Advanced Stats Thread Episode V: Rick Nash Camera Stares/60 | Page 16 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a random thought, but would there be any point of looking at a ratio of either corsi or fenwick against to xGA? Would it tell us anything that we don't already know?
 
Just a random thought, but would there be any point of looking at a ratio of either corsi or fenwick against to xGA? Would it tell us anything that we don't already know?

That's expected fenwick shooting percentage and expected fenwick sv percentage.

xGF/FF = expected fenwick shooting percentage
1 - xGA/FA = expected fenwick save %
 
That's expected fenwick shooting percentage and expected fenwick sv percentage.

xGF/FF = expected fenwick shooting percentage
1 - xGA/FA = expected fenwick save %

Damn Manny and his labels :sarcasm:

Do you think it's a good way to evaluate defensive players? Or at least take it into consideration more?
 
Damn Manny and his labels :sarcasm:

Do you think it's a good way to evaluate defensive players? Or at least take it into consideration more?

I think it's exactly what it's meant to be and nothing more. It's the closest thing to a "quality" metric that we have.

What is interesting, is that Girardi bleeds shots against (we all know this), but his xFSv% is 2nd best on the team among D behind McDonagh. So there is some merit to the discussion that Girardi, despite bleeding attempts against, is limiting quality.

Now then, though, this opens up the door to what is more important? Quality or quantity? Well, the only way to truly suppress quality is to suppress quantity.
 
I think it's exactly what it's meant to be and nothing more. It's the closest thing to a "quality" metric that we have.

What is interesting, is that Girardi bleeds shots against (we all know this), but his xFSv% is 2nd best on the team among D behind McDonagh. So there is some merit to the discussion that Girardi, despite bleeding attempts against, is limiting quality.

Now then, though, this opens up the door to what is more important? Quality or quantity? Well, the only way to truly suppress quality is to suppress quantity.

Yeah, and just commenting on purely defensive Ds in general -- you are going to have shifts who are purely defensive during games. Like how often does a team up one goal spend the final 60 sec of a game in the attacking zone.

Just saying, preference towards a puck possession style doesn't rule out acknowledging that being able to play well defensively, clear the crease etc also is valuable.
 
I think it's exactly what it's meant to be and nothing more. It's the closest thing to a "quality" metric that we have.

What is interesting, is that Girardi bleeds shots against (we all know this), but his xFSv% is 2nd best on the team among D behind McDonagh. So there is some merit to the discussion that Girardi, despite bleeding attempts against, is limiting quality.

Now then, though, this opens up the door to what is more important? Quality or quantity? Well, the only way to truly suppress quality is to suppress quantity.

I still think there's that sweet spot between the two, but I agree with you. I like this because it helps confirm what I was seeing that Staal and Holden were worse than G in the long run. I think the biggest issue is determining whether this is a repeatable skill (giving up SAT but limiting quality), or if you're just better off limiting the quantity altogether. The latter obviously makes the most sense to me, but it's the hardest to do.
 
Team ranks first round of the playoffs:

[5v5 Corsica]
Shots attempts against per 60: 13th
Expected goals against per 60: 12th
Goals against per 60: 4th
Shot attempt %: 14th

[All situations Corsica]
Low danger attempts against per 60: 8th
Med danger attempts against per 60: 7th
High danger attempts against per 60: 14th
Goals saved above expected: 1st

Team defense wasn't really any better during the series than it was during the season, we just got ridiculous play out of Hank.

Once again, the goalie makes the coach and the defense look better than they are.

For the love of God where can I find current player usage charts!?

Download the data from Corsica and make your own? :)
 
I'm not going to "ruin anyone's fun" in the Girardi thread, so I'll just post this here...

Praising G for being on the ice for only 1 5v5 GA in the 6 game series is exactly the sort of bad analysis that rewards G with a contract like the one he has now.

He wasn't good in that series. Lundqvist was great.
 
I'm not going to "ruin anyone's fun" in the Girardi thread, so I'll just post this here...

Praising G for being on the ice for only 1 5v5 GA in the 6 game series is exactly the sort of bad analysis that rewards G with a contract like the one he has now.

He wasn't good in that series. Lundqvist was great.

How many goals against are you going to be on the ice for when your goalie is posting a save % of .943? Unless, they are getting north of 50 shots a night.
 
I'm not going to "ruin anyone's fun" in the Girardi thread, so I'll just post this here...

Praising G for being on the ice for only 1 5v5 GA in the 6 game series is exactly the sort of bad analysis that rewards G with a contract like the one he has now.

He wasn't good in that series. Lundqvist was great.

He did have a few games with an unusually strong CF%, but yeah Hank masks a lot of mistakes. It doesn't hurt that Staal is in total free fall, dragging Holden along with him. Everyone looks good in comparison to them.
 
How many goals against are you going to be on the ice for when your goalie is posting a save % of .943? Unless, they are getting north of 50 shots a night.

This is exactly my point. Using GA to analyze a d-man isn't good analysis unless you have a very large sample size. Hell, I don't like using GA as a measure of skater skill really ever, regardless of sample size, especially now that we have xG. To do it in a 6 game series? When your goalie plays lights out? I don't agree with that method.

I think you'd be much better off looking at shot attempts against or expected goals against.
 
I'm not going to "ruin anyone's fun" in the Girardi thread, so I'll just post this here...

Praising G for being on the ice for only 1 5v5 GA in the 6 game series is exactly the sort of bad analysis that rewards G with a contract like the one he has now.

He wasn't good in that series. Lundqvist was great.

Agreed but what are some stats that made him look bad? What was his CF% for the series?
 
I think girardi looked better than usual (which isn't saying much) because Montreal wasn't too fast. I haven't watched the sens too much. What's their style?
 
I'm not going to "ruin anyone's fun" in the Girardi thread, so I'll just post this here...

Praising G for being on the ice for only 1 5v5 GA in the 6 game series is exactly the sort of bad analysis that rewards G with a contract like the one he has now.

He wasn't good in that series. Lundqvist was great.

Story of his career.
 
I think girardi looked better than usual (which isn't saying much) because Montreal wasn't too fast. I haven't watched the sens too much. What's their style?

Girardi was valuable for us this series. Played many tough minutes and got the job done.

Many would like to see guys like Clendenning for us and Nesterov for MTL (top CF% for each team) play those late shifts and don't think it would matter, but it would. But I think this is one of those things we never will straighten out at this place. All coaches in the NHL are worthless and have no idea what they are doing, Beuke is brain dead, Girardi does nothing good, Chris Holt is better than Lundqvist, and so forth... ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad