The Advanced Stats Thread Episode VII: An Ode to the Sanity of Silverfish

[silverfish]

Ugh, don’t remind me. It’s why I’m so against trading Hayes because we have very object measures that he excelled as a matchup C this season, and we don’t have another NHL C except for him and Mika. Moving him, just to give Chytil ice time, is silly. Chytil already has an open slot since Desharnais left for the KHL.

It's so funny. People are like: "we're not EDM, they are dumb and rushed their prospects" and then turn around like: "Chytil for 2C!". Bro, what? Was so funny when Larry posted that article about the Rangers depth at center and how that makes Hayes expendable and he was like, the Rangers have: Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Namestnikov, and Howden. lol yeah Larry, look at the depth. We have no idea if three of those guys are even NHLers yet, let alone NHL centers.

I have so many issues with everything this organization is doing these days. But, that's just me.

 

[Mac n Gs]

It's so funny. People are like: "we're not EDM, they are dumb and rushed their prospects" and then turn around like: "Chytil for 2C!". Bro, what? Was so funny when Larry posted that article about the Rangers depth at center and how that makes Hayes expendable and he was like, the Rangers have: Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Namestnikov, and Howden. lol yeah Larry, look at the depth. We have no idea if three of those guys are even NHLers yet, let alone NHL centers.

I have so many issues with everything this organization is doing these days. But, that's just me.

I’m cool with stockpiling prospects since we did trade so many picks and don’t have young talent to infuse on ELCs, but I’m not ok with rushing them just to have them get NHL minutes. Being smart about accruing UFA seasons and contract slides is a big part of it, and I don’t necessarily see any of our guys as fully ready for an NHL season. I’d let them both start in Hartford and promote them if they continue their scoring and strong play.

Just be smart. There’s a good, cost-controlled nucleus in place to build around, so don’t trade them for the sake of trading them. Play the season, and if we’re young and competitive, fantastic. If we’re out of playoff reach, sell off UFAs and position yourself better in the lottery.

Trying to be competitive is a good thing, and I don’t understand why people don’t realize you can play competitive hockey and still be on track for a lottery pick. The biggest things moving forward will be developing our prospects and having salary cap flexibility.

We have a lot of data that suggests we have three prospects that will be 50-60+ point players if they stay the course.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I’m cool with stockpiling prospects since we did trade so many picks and don’t have young talent to infuse on ELCs, but I’m not ok with rushing them just to have them get NHL minutes. Being smart about accruing UFA seasons and contract slides is a big part of it, and I don’t necessarily see any of our guys as fully ready for an NHL season. I’d let them both start in Hartford and promote them if they continue their scoring and strong play.

Just be smart. There’s a good, cost-controlled nucleus in place to build around, so don’t trade them for the sake of trading them. Play the season, and if we’re young and competitive, fantastic. If we’re out of playoff reach, sell off UFAs and position yourself better in the lottery.

Trying to be competitive is a good thing, and I don’t understand why people don’t realize you can play competitive hockey and still be on track for a lottery pick. The biggest things moving forward will be developing our prospects and having salary cap flexibility.

We have a lot of data that suggests we have three prospects that will be 50-60+ point players if they stay the course.

I agree with this. What I don’t want understand is the idea that not only are both Andersson and Chytil going to make the team, but their presence makes this team better than the one after the trade deadline, as both players will hit the ground running.

 

[silverfish]

I’m cool with stockpiling prospects since we did trade so many picks and don’t have young talent to infuse on ELCs, but I’m not ok with rushing them just to have them get NHL minutes. Being smart about accruing UFA seasons and contract slides is a big part of it, and I don’t necessarily see any of our guys as fully ready for an NHL season. I’d let them both start in Hartford and promote them if they continue their scoring and strong play.

Just be smart. There’s a good, cost-controlled nucleus in place to build around, so don’t trade them for the sake of trading them. Play the season, and if we’re young and competitive, fantastic. If we’re out of playoff reach, sell off UFAs and position yourself better in the lottery.

Trying to be competitive is a good thing, and I don’t understand why people don’t realize you can play competitive hockey and still be on track for a lottery pick. The biggest things moving forward will be developing our prospects and having salary cap flexibility.

We have a lot of data that suggests we have three prospects that will be 50-60+ point players if they stay the course.

I've just never bought into the fact that this team needs to be bad for a year or two. I'm never going to. Call me stubborn or inflexible or whatever, but there was opportunity to keep this team competitive and plan for the future.

I agree with this. What I don’t want understand is the idea that not only are both Andersson and Chytil going to make the team, but their presence makes this team better than the one after the trade deadline, as both players will hit the ground running.

My reading comprehension is as off today as my internal clock (it's Thursday, wtf?) but I'm confused by this post. Are you saying that you don't think this is going to happen or you do think this is going to happen?

 

[Ghost of jas]

I've just never bought into the fact that this team needs to be bad for a year or two. I'm never going to. Call me stubborn or inflexible or whatever, but there was opportunity to keep this team competitive and plan for the future.


My reading comprehension is as off today as my internal clock (it's Thursday, wtf?) but I'm confused by this post. Are you saying that you don't think this is going to happen or you do think this is going to happen?

I remain highly skeptical. I think there is going to be a lot of growing pains that people are willing to gloss over.

 

[silverfish]

I remain highly skeptical. I think there are going to be a lot of growing pains that people are willing to gloss over.

Ah, yes, this is more in line with your current aesthetic (the Rangers are bad) than the other side, which is why I was confused.

I mostly agree, especially if the plan is to YOLO them at 2C after trading Hayes for a d-man who has no character but the character people gloss over that and a draft pick we'll probably waste.... or something like that.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I've just never bought into the fact that this team needs to be bad for a year or two. I'm never going to. Call me stubborn or inflexible or whatever, but there was opportunity to keep this team competitive and plan for the future.


My reading comprehension is as off today as my internal clock (it's Thursday, wtf?) but I'm confused by this post. Are you saying that you don't think this is going to happen or you do think this is going to happen?

Dude, I thought it was Monday when I woke up. Happy Thursday.

Back to Rongos, I don’t want them to be bad at all. I think it’s possible to load up on assets while simultaneously trying to be a competitive hockey team, since they already have some good NHL players.

It’s why I want them to add guys like Duclair and Shore because I see a team that’s top heavy with bad depth. I don’t think the prospects are ready for full-time nhl minutes yet, but do think they will be next year. I think the defense will be passable in a zone system, but that depends on how Quinn performs as a coach. I’m expecting some early struggles that will take ~15 games to get past, just like it did with AV.

I want them to do whatever they can to win hockey games (within reaason), and if they are out of playoff reach, then position themselves better for a lotto pick and sell of UFA assets they won’t keep.

What’s wrong with that?

 

[silverfish]

Dude, I thought it was Monday when I woke up. Happy Thursday.

Back to Rongos, I don’t want them to be bad at all. I think it’s possible to load up on assets while simultaneously trying to be a competitive hockey team, since they already have some good NHL players.

It’s why I want them to add guys like Duclair and Shore because I see a team that’s top heavy with bad depth. I don’t think the prospects are ready for full-time nhl minutes yet, but do think they will be next year. I think the defense will be passable in a zone system, but that depends on how Quinn performs as a coach. I’m expecting some early struggles that will take ~15 games to get past, just like it did with AV.

I want them to do whatever they can to win hockey games (within reaason), and if they are out of playoff reach, then position themselves better for a lotto pick and sell of UFA assets they won’t keep.

What’s wrong with that?

Lucky. I thought it was Sunday when I woke up and even on the subway heading to work it felt like one of those days where I'm just shooting back to Long Island early in the morning to escape the city for a day over the weekend. Then I snapped out of it at my desk and I'm like...



But there isn't anything wrong with your post. That's basically exactly how I'd go about doing it except there is a part of me that feels like this team is only two pieces away from actually competing. Those are pretty large pieces (1RD, prolific winger), but they aren't unattainable pieces if you're smart about it.

KZB
_____ - Hayes - Zucc
Duclair - Chytil - Names
Vesey - Andersson - Fast

Skjei - _____
Smith - Shattenkirk
Staal - Pionk
Claesson

I mean... Is that really a non-playoff team? That 2LW spot could just go to Spooner, in reality, and the only hole that exists is at RD. Every kid in the lineup is in a low-pressure situation where they're allowed to succeed, and if they aren't cutting it, are in low-pressure situations that are easy to backfill if they go to the AHL.

But instead we're going to trade Hayes and Spooner for futures because I don't know why, and just make the team bad? I don't get it.

I guess this post is legendary for being OT in this thread so I'll say something I've been thinking for a long time and that is that the easiest place to make your team better than the rest of the NHL is to just have a capable fourth line. I've done the studies before that show the game slows down tremendously when fourth liners are on the ice, offense for both teams in terms of shot attempts per 60 (boom, back on topic), so the above team throws that shit on its head because the Rangers have four lines that can all push the pace and play hockey.

Imagine lining up the fourth line here with the Islanders third or fourth line?

Break the game.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Lucky. I thought it was Sunday when I woke up and even on the subway heading to work it felt like one of those days where I'm just shooting back to Long Island early in the morning to escape the city for a day over the weekend. Then I snapped out of it at my desk and I'm like...



But there isn't anything wrong with your post. That's basically exactly how I'd go about doing it except there is a part of me that feels like this team is only two pieces away from actually competing. Those are pretty large pieces (1RD, prolific winger), but they aren't unattainable pieces if you're smart about it.

KZB
_____ - Hayes - Zucc
Duclair - Chytil - Names
Vesey - Andersson - Fast

Skjei - _____
Smith - Shattenkirk
Staal - Pionk
Claesson

I mean... Is that really a non-playoff team? That 2LW spot could just go to Spooner, in reality, and the only hole that exists is at RD. Every kid in the lineup is in a low-pressure situation where they're allowed to succeed, and if they aren't cutting it, are in low-pressure situations that are easy to backfill if they go to the AHL.

But instead we're going to trade Hayes and Spooner for futures because I don't know why, and just make the team bad? I don't get it.

I guess this post is legendary for being OT in this thread so I'll say something I've been thinking for a long time and that is that the easiest place to make your team better than the rest of the NHL is to just have a capable fourth line. I've done the studies before that show the game slows down tremendously when fourth liners are on the ice, offense for both teams in terms of shot attempts per 60 (boom, back on topic), so the above team throws that **** on its head because the Rangers have four lines that can all push the pace and play hockey.

Imagine lining up the fourth line here with the Islanders third or fourth line?

Break the game.

To get this back on topic, how you would go about filling those positions smartly? Which players have strong underlying numbers in 2nd pairing or third line usage that could fare well in tougher minutes?

Dumba? Skjei is an in-house option to move to 1LD. Who’s the next Colin Miller or Ondrej Kase?

 

[silverfish]

To get this back on topic, how you would go about filling those positions smartly? Which players have strong underlying numbers in 2nd pairing or third line usage that could fare well in tougher minutes?

Dumba? Skjei is an in-house option to move to 1LD. Who’s the next Colin Miller or Ondrej Kase?

Simplest solution might be to just put Shattenkirk there, and then backfill (re-create in the aggregate!). But you know the guys I'd look for. Franson to take the 3RD spot. Tim Heed for 2RD. Can move Smith back to the right side and plug Claesson in at 2LD. Options abound. But I'd need the time to do the research to actually find a player who can be traded for to take that spot.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Lucky. I thought it was Sunday when I woke up and even on the subway heading to work it felt like one of those days where I'm just shooting back to Long Island early in the morning to escape the city for a day over the weekend. Then I snapped out of it at my desk and I'm like...



But there isn't anything wrong with your post. That's basically exactly how I'd go about doing it except there is a part of me that feels like this team is only two pieces away from actually competing. Those are pretty large pieces (1RD, prolific winger), but they aren't unattainable pieces if you're smart about it.

KZB
_____ - Hayes - Zucc
Duclair - Chytil - Names
Vesey - Andersson - Fast

Skjei - _____
Smith - Shattenkirk
Staal - Pionk
Claesson

I mean... Is that really a non-playoff team? That 2LW spot could just go to Spooner, in reality, and the only hole that exists is at RD. Every kid in the lineup is in a low-pressure situation where they're allowed to succeed, and if they aren't cutting it, are in low-pressure situations that are easy to backfill if they go to the AHL.

But instead we're going to trade Hayes and Spooner for futures because I don't know why, and just make the team bad? I don't get it.

I guess this post is legendary for being OT in this thread so I'll say something I've been thinking for a long time and that is that the easiest place to make your team better than the rest of the NHL is to just have a capable fourth line. I've done the studies before that show the game slows down tremendously when fourth liners are on the ice, offense for both teams in terms of shot attempts per 60 (boom, back on topic), so the above team throws that **** on its head because the Rangers have four lines that can all push the pace and play hockey.

Imagine lining up the fourth line here with the Islanders third or fourth line?

Break the game.

How much different is that lineup from the lineup that was trotted out after the trade deadline? And what happens when there are injuries?

 

[Mac n Gs]

Simplest solution might be to just put Shattenkirk there, and then backfill (re-create in the aggregate!). But you know the guys I'd look for. Franson to take the 3RD spot. Tim Heed for 2RD. Can move Smith back to the right side and plug Claesson in at 2LD. Options abound. But I'd need the time to do the research to actually find a player who can be traded for to take that spot.

I’ll do the same. Tag me when you get a chance to do it

 

[silverfish]

How much different is that lineup from the lineup that was trotted out after the trade deadline? And what happens when there are injuries?

I'm assuming the team will make their usual Paul Carey esque signings as just in case depth.

This lineup doesn't have Cody McLeod or Beleskey or Fogarty or O'Gara or Sproul?

This lineup also doesn't have a coach who employs a system that gives up a historically bad rate of xGA during 5v5 play? (I hope).

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

What is everyones thoughts about the team potentially hiring Kathryn Yates away from BU?

As someone pointed out in the Quinn thread, she isn't listed on the staff for this upcoming season, and she had a good relationship with Quinn.

Obviously I'm making a bit of a jump here but there's a chance that could be the case

I just listened to this interview with her and it had some interesting tidbits

 

[silverfish]

What is everyones thoughts about the team potentially hiring Kathryn Yates away from BU?

As someone pointed out in the Quinn thread, she isn't listed on the staff for this upcoming season, and she had a good relationship with Quinn.

Obviously I'm making a bit of a jump here but there's a chance that could be the case

I just listened to this interview with her and it had some interesting tidbits

The more people in the org with 'analytics' in their title, the better.

Thanks for posting that interview. Will check it out later!

She still has BU Director of Analytics as her current position on LinkedIn FWIW

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I'm kind of smitten by Kathryn Yates. Loves hockey? Check. Brains? Check. Beauty? Check. (At least according to the pic).

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Also, the guy interviewing her has as much personality as potato. He's brutal to listen to.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I'm assuming the team will make their usual Paul Carey esque signings as just in case depth.

This lineup doesn't have Cody McLeod or Beleskey or Fogarty or O'Gara or Sproul?

This lineup also doesn't have a coach who employs a system that gives up a historically bad rate of xGA during 5v5 play? (I hope).

Until it does. It also has an older Staal, and young players still needing to adjust to the NHL game and a potential backup goalie that is still an unknown entity. Lose Kreider and/or Zibanejad and you’re looking at a squad post-trade deadline without two of the best players.

People are making predictions based on nothing going wrong. People also act as if lineups are static, which is very rarely the case.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I'm kind of smitten by Kathryn Yates. Loves hockey? Check. Brains? Check. Beauty? Check. (At least according to the pic).

Isn't she also a Rangers fan?

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Isn't she also a Rangers fan?

Oh yeah, forgot the most important part!

 

[silverfish]

Until it does. It also has an older Staal, and young players still needing to adjust to the NHL game and a potential backup goalie that is still an unknown entity. Lose Kreider and/or Zibanejad and looking at a squad post-trade deadline without two of the best players.

People are making predictions based on nothing going wrong. People also act as if lineups are static, which is very rarely the case.

I mean this is getting OT for this thread again, but sure.

Yes, lose one or two of the team's best forwards and the team will be in trouble. I'm not shocked by this. I'm also not worried about the backup goalie. Maybe I should be, but I'm not. In terms of adjusting kids, they are all insulated and in positions to succeed and if they don't, as I touched on, they're not major players in the lineup that we are banking on that are hard to replace. We're talking about the 3C and 4C and the 3RD. This is the perfect scenario, IMO, this year for Chytil and Andersson and Pionk.

 

[Edge]

Until it does. It also has an older Staal, and young players still needing to adjust to the NHL game and a potential backup goalie that is still an unknown entity. Lose Kreider and/or Zibanejad and looking at a squad post-trade deadline without two of the best players.

People are making predictions based on nothing going wrong. People also act as if lineups are static, which is very rarely the case.

A whole lot would have to go right this season. Not impossible, but improbable.

There's also a tendency to over-project most players before the season starts. We've discussed it before, but it feels that a lot of guys are usually over-projected by about 5 goals and 10 points. Granted there are some who exceed projections, but for the most part there's always a net decline in what we see versus the board's more optimistic projections.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I mean this is getting OT for this thread again, but sure.

Yes, lose one or two of the team's best forwards and the team will be in trouble. I'm not shocked by this. I'm also not worried about the backup goalie. Maybe I should be, but I'm not. In terms of adjusting kids, they are all insulated and in positions to succeed and if they don't, as I touched on, they're not major players in the lineup that we are banking on that are hard to replace. We're talking about the 3C and 4C and the 3RD. This is the perfect scenario, IMO, this year for Chytil and Andersson and Pionk.

But it’s all part of equation. I just don’t see a playoff team with that lineup. Which team is that group pushing out of a playoff spot?

 

[silverfish]

But it’s all part of equation. I just don’t see a playoff team with that lineup. Which team is that group pushing out of a playoff spot?

I think the Flyers or Devils are suspect to making the playoffs this coming year. With that said, I see Carolina making it. But I say that a lot and it never happens but holy shit that defense if Darling can make a save then look out.

I'm also not a prophet, so I have no idea.

 

[Ghost of jas]

A whole lot would have to go right this season. Not impossible, but improbable.

There's also a tendency to over-project most players before the season starts. We've discussed it before, but it feels that a lot of guys are usually over-projected by about 5 goals and 10 points. Granted there are some who exceed projections, but for the most part there's always a net decline in what we see versus the board's more optimistic projections.

Not only does this team need a bunch of questions answered affirmatively, it needs a couple of teams above it have a bunch of things go wrong.