The Case for Tyler Bozak: All Tyler Bozak Discussion Here

[leafs in five]

Then how can you explain Kadri having better possession numbers than Bozak despite losing all these additional faceoffs?

by posting some Anze Kopitar stats, probably

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Then how can you explain Kadri having better possession numbers than Bozak despite losing all these additional faceoffs?

How do you explain Bozak having better production despite having much lower offensive zone starts?

5 on 5 directing low % shots at the net, what does this matter?

Hypothetically, would you rather win a draw starting a PP or lose a draw. BTW Bozak leads the team in PP goals doesn't he?

 

[AD1066]

How do you explain Bozak having better production despite having much lower offensive zone starts?

5 on 5 directing low % shots at the net, what does this matter?

Hypothetically, would you rather win a draw starting a PP or lose a draw. BTW Bozak leads the team in PP goals.

You still haven't answered his question. (And I doubt you ever will.)

If Kadri begins relatively fewer of his shifts with possession, but manages better possession numbers when all is said and done, he must be doing something right between the faceoff and the end of his shift.

 

[leafs in five]

Then how can you explain Kadri having better possession numbers than Bozak despite losing all these additional faceoffs?

by posting a hypothetical question and then reminding us that Bozak leads the team in PP goals

 

[The Winter Soldier]

You still haven't answered his question. (And I doubt you ever will.)

If Kadri begins relatively fewer of his shifts with possession, but manages better possession numbers when all is said and done, he must be doing something right between the faceoff and the end of his shift.

Corsi measures 5 on 5 play, it is a team stat that depends on your teammates and opposition you play against doesn't it? How does it equate to an individual? It's the same as plus - minus, a team stat that depends on the other 9 players and 2 goalies on the ice. Corsi does not measure possession, it is a proxy that is all it is. A suspect one at that as it does not measure scoring chances or quality of scoring chances, defensive play, character.

 

[leafs in five]

It's the same as plus - minus, a team stat that depends on the other 9 players and 2 goalies on the ice. It does not measure possession, it is a proxy that is all it is.

you use plus/minus to 'prove' your opinions about certain players all. the. time.

 

[leafs in five]

which stats in your opinion measure all of the following: scoring chances, quality scoring chances, defense, character?

is every stat that does not account for all of those things 'suspect'?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Bozak last 69 games, 59 points. 70 point projection

Offensive zone starts 40.4% this year, 41% last year.

Producing despite getting the hardest mins on the team for fwds, and with low % of offensive zone starts.

~Truth

 

[leafs in five]

getting the hardest mins on the team for fwds,

how do you know for a fact that he gets the hardest mins on the team for fwds?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Tyler Bozak

13-14 Offensive zone start 40.1%, Offensive Zone finish 46% +5.9%
14-15 Offensive zone start 40.4%, Offensive Zone finish 44.2% +3.8%

 

[Rogie]

How do you explain Bozak having better production despite having much lower offensive zone starts?

5 on 5 directing low % shots at the net, what does this matter?

Hypothetically, would you rather win a draw starting a PP or lose a draw. BTW Bozak leads the team in PP goals doesn't he?

It depends how you measure production, from Statshockey analysis:

At 5on5 ES (not close but all 5on5) this year:

Kadri 2.92 GF/60 2.50 GA/60 53.8% GF%

Bozak 1.97 GF/60 2.36 GA/60 45.5% GF%


So, when Kadri's been on the ice, the team scores more than the other team compared to when Bozak's on the ice; when Bozak's on the ice, the team gets scored on a bit less that when Bozaks on ice. But, overall, when Kadri's been on the ice the team gets a larger percentage of total goals scored - 53.8% and that's the bottom line - according to Stone Cold Austin.

 

[HonestHockey*]

It depends how you measure production:

At 5on5 ES (not close but all 5on5) this year:

Kadri 2.92 GF/60 2.50 GA/60 53.8% GF%

Bozak 1.97 GF/60 2.36 GA/60 45.5% GF%


So, when Kadri's been on the ice, the team scores more than the other team compared to when Bozak's on the ice; when Bozak's on the ice, the team gets scored on a bit less that when Bozaks on ice. But, overall, when Kadri's been on the ice the team gets a larger percentage of total goals scored - 53.8% and that's the bottom line - according to Stone Cold Austin.

Again without QoC it's comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Rogie]

Again without QoC it's comparing apples to oranges.

I don't think so, the QofC metric has been pretty well debunked.

 

[HonestHockey*]

I don't think so, the QofC metric has been pretty well debunked.

Absolutely not. It's been debunked in here by people with an agenda that's all. Think about it. One player plays high competition the other doesn't. Who should have the most opportunity to produce points? It's not rocket science.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I don't think so, the QofC metric has been pretty well debunked.

Corsi has holes in it too, again, how does a 5 on 5 stat measure a player individual, or measure a more valid stat, quality of scoring chances? Does corsi measure a line that cycles a puck?

When it comes to advanced stats, if one analyzes deeply enough, one can debunk anything.

 

[ULF_55]

Corsi is not an individual stat anyway, no player has a Corsi rating.

Corsi is like +/-, based on every player on the ice at the time the event occurs.

There is no qualifiable aspect of Corsi, it is just counting pucks directed in the direction of the net.

Corsi is not about scoring chances, it is a simple counting of events (pucks in direction of net).

Bozak doesn't have one, Holland doesn't have one.

 

[Rogie]

Absolutely not. It's been debunked in here by people with an agenda that's all.

Not just by people in here. There are lots and lots of good articles explaining that there is so little difference between a player who has a higher QofC and a player who has a lower QofC score. Just take a look at the numbers and you can see the difference is small. Even without reading the research, the numbers - just be the eyeball test - cry out no difference.

Last year Bozaks QoC 5o5 was .120 and Kadris was -.002.

That difference is pretty much meaningless. The metric is the average weight +/- of the players they play against. How much difference is there between a player who has a plus/minus of +.1 versus a player who has a plus minus of -.002.

There are many good research articles explaining this clearly - it has nothing to do with agenda at all. I've always like Bozak and is one of my favorite players! I promise I have ZERO agenda here.

And not mention many people think the +/- is a lousy metric in itself to begin with!

 

[HonestHockey*]

Not just by people in here. There are lots and lots of good articles explaining that there is so little difference between a player who has a higher QofC and a player who has a lower QofC score. Just take a look at the numbers and you can see the difference is small. Even without reading the research, the numbers - just be the eyeball test - cry out no difference.

Last year Bozaks QoC 5o5 was .120 and Kadris was -.002.

That difference is pretty much meaningless. The metric is the average weight +/- of the players they play against. How much difference is there between a player who has a plus/minus of +.1 versus a player who has a plus minus of -.002.

There are many good research articles explaining this clearly - it has nothing to do with agenda at all. I've always like Bozak and is one of my favorite players! I promise I have ZERO agenda here.

Show me the articles. The man behind Corsi numbers Vic Ferrari stated QoC is the biggest factor.

 

[leafs in five]

Does corsi measure a line that cycles a puck?

sort of. a line that is cycling the puck for a sustained period is not conceding shot attempts against during the same period.

 

[leafs in five]

When it comes to advanced stats, if one analyzes deeply enough, one can debunk anything.

but when a guy who's never scored 50 points has a faceoff pct that resembles that of much better centres on stanley cup winning teams...

 

[Kyle Doobas*]

How do you explain Bozak having better production despite having much lower offensive zone starts?

Because it's 11 games into the season. Kadri has been a more dynamic offensive player at literally every level, and since becoming an NHL regular has predictably scored more and been a better possession player despite playing less often and with inferior linemates.

5 on 5 directing low % shots at the net, what does this matter?

http://puqmag.com/features/2014/101/what-is-corsi-why-does-it-matter/

"When trying to separate the statistical signal from the noise, larger sample sizes can help identify what’s useful and what’s not. The number of shot attempts a player or team takes grows much more quickly than the number of goals. Shot attempts are also a more repeatable phenomenon than goals — good play will often lead to more shot attempts, but goals can be subject to high amounts of variance, which is why shooting and save percentages can fluctuate considerably from season to season."

Hypothetically, would you rather win a draw starting a PP or lose a draw.

What is the purpose of this question? Obviously you'd rather win a draw than lose one, but it's not the be-all end-all. Case in point: Bozak is 58.7% on PP faceoffs, yet has a -1.28 relative Fenwick.

That's right - despite winning the draw almost 60% of the time, the team somehow allows more unblocked shot attempts against than for when Bozak is on the ice. On the ****ing powerplay.

Corsi measures 5 on 5 play

Doesn't have to.

it is a team stat that depends on your teammates and opposition you play against doesn't it?

Relative Corsi.

Corsi does not measure possession

It's been looked into (obviously), and Corsi was shown to have more than enough of a positive correlation to actual possession time that to actually sit there timing it with a stopwatch would be more or less redundant. Although with SportsVU on the way, we'll have stats for actual possession time too.

Show me the articles. The man behind Corsi numbers Vic Ferrari stated QoC is the biggest factor.

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/23/the-importance-of-quality-of-competition

http://hockeyanalysis.com/2012/01/25/importance-of-quality-of-competitionteammates/

 

[Rogie]

Show me the articles. The man behind Corsi numbers Vic Ferrari stated QoC is the biggest factor.

Here's one article; I don't bookmark or save stuff like this so I had to search for it. IN the Article, he even mentions Ferrari's numbers, but, this new measure is more sophisticated than Ferraris as he shows.

Here is an excerpt:

"However, for the most widespread competition metrics, no player faces extremely strong or weak competition on average – the measured differences, while real and persistent, are small and scarcely worth correcting for"
"However, although the differences between players in quality of competition are real, they are not very large. The plot above goes from +10 to -10, but actual year-end totals go from roughly +1.5 to -1.5, with most players falling in a much narrower range than that. Everyone faces opponents with both good and bad shot differential, and the differences in time spent against various strength opponents by these metrics are minimal. The Flyers were relatively focused on matching lines in 2010-2011 – Andreas Nodl ranked 15th in competition among NHL forwards with at least 500 even strength minutes played, while Blair Betts ranked 290th (out of 337). And yet a histogram showing how much of their ice time was spent against opponents of various strengths shows scarcely any difference between them:"

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/23/the-importance-of-quality-of-competition

 

[HonestHockey*]

Here's one article; I don't bookmark or save stuff like this so I had to search for it.

Here is an excerpt:

"However, for the most widespread competition metrics, no player faces extremely strong or weak competition on average – the measured differences, while real and persistent, are small and scarcely worth correcting for"
"However, although the differences between players in quality of competition are real, they are not very large. The plot above goes from +10 to -10, but actual year-end totals go from roughly +1.5 to -1.5, with most players falling in a much narrower range than that. Everyone faces opponents with both good and bad shot differential, and the differences in time spent against various strength opponents by these metrics are minimal. The Flyers were relatively focused on matching lines in 2010-2011 – Andreas Nodl ranked 15th in competition among NHL forwards with at least 500 even strength minutes played, while Blair Betts ranked 290th (out of 337). And yet a histogram showing how much of their ice time was spent against opponents of various strengths shows scarcely any difference between them:"

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/23/the-importance-of-quality-of-competition

That's correct. Read it again. When a player faces different QoC then his majority of ice, the number is so small it isn't really quantifiable. You can't really measure how he'd perform unless he performed against that quality consistently.

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2011/7/27/2294013/further-to-does-qualcomp-matter

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Corsi is not an individual stat anyway, no player has a Corsi rating.

Corsi is like +/-, based on every player on the ice at the time the event occurs.

There is no qualifiable aspect of Corsi, it is just counting pucks directed in the direction of the net.

Corsi is not about scoring chances, it is a simple counting of events (pucks in direction of net).

Bozak doesn't have one, Holland doesn't have one.

Well stated!

It doesn't mean Corsi is not an indicator, a proxy for hockey events.

But they do not represent what some are trying to pass them off as.

Some of us are bright enough to know this.

 

[leafs in five]

Corsi is not an individual stat anyway, no player has a Corsi rating.

Bozak doesn't have one, Holland doesn't have one.

http://theleafsnation.com/2014/5/21/ratings-and-records-and-misconceptions-about-analytics

corsi is a record of a specific event (shot attempts for and against). it can be recorded for individual players or for teams.

Corsi is like +/-, based on every player on the ice at the time the event occurs.

sure but there are many more shot attempts than goals in a game/season. and with volume it becomes possible to see if there are relationships or trends related to the records of events.

i wouldn't claim that corsi is a great indicator of individual performance but it can tell you what direction the play was going when specific players/lines were on the ice.