GDT: Trade Deadline: Tampa won the Jeannot sweepstakes!

[Josey Wales]

updated the entire rumor chart today, and I am heading to dinner with a great source who is in town….I will have more tonight, but according to several sources, this morning/afternoon, the Penguins have engaged in talks with Montreal around Jake Allen (e4). More tonight… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Many analytics get mistaken as being solely about offense, when they might instead be indicating good _defense_. That's because good defense can lead indirectly to good offense.

-----
A player like Petterson ends up having good puck posesssion stats, because he does a lot to get the puck off the other team, and get it out of his own zone. So for example, that means that Petterson is going to have lower Corsi Against, or Expected Goals Against stats because of the work he does in his own end. Meanwhile, since he generally plays with offensively talented players, his own Corsi For or Expected Goals For stats are going to be higher. That translates into excellent CF% or xG% stats. Which some people interpret (incorrectly) as meaning he is good offensively.

One of these days, I should really write up a post about analytics, and what they're actually telling us (free preview: they don't actually indicate which player is overall "better" than another one all on their own).

The bolded is precisely my issue with how some use analytics because that's exactly what they DO interpret the results as telling them.

And maybe it's just the terminology they use. But there is no universe in which Pettersson is a top tier defenseman OFFENSIVELY nor is he someone who is top tier at generating offense when he's on the ice because both imply he DIRECTLY leads to offense, when that's not the case.

 

[Jobeycool]

updated the entire rumor chart today, and I am heading to dinner with a great source who is in town….I will have more tonight, but according to several sources, this morning/afternoon, the Penguins have engaged in talks with Montreal around Jake Allen (e4). More tonight… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Well at least we need a goal tender lol... Eklund has that part correct.

 

[SEALBound]

Only 3C that works is ROR. Barbashev isn’t good enough defensively.

Who cares about his defensive capabilities, we need a third line that can provide scoring depth. Use the 4th for heavy defensive loads.

The bolded is precisely my issue with how some use analytics because that's exactly what they DO interpret the results as telling them.

And maybe it's just the terminology they use. But there is no universe in which Pettersson is a top tier defenseman OFFENSIVELY nor is he someone who is top tier at generating offense when he's on the ice because both imply he DIRECTLY leads to offense, when that's not the case.

You'll have to point to some actual sources if I'm wrong, but I haven't see ANYONE in the media or on this board suggest that Pettersson is "Offensive".

 

[Rakell67]

updated the entire rumor chart today, and I am heading to dinner with a great source who is in town….I will have more tonight, but according to several sources, this morning/afternoon, the Penguins have engaged in talks with Montreal around Jake Allen (e4). More tonight… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Edmundson, Allen, Evans
For
Dumoulin, DeSmith, Blueger

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

You'll have to point to some actual sources if I'm wrong, but I haven't see ANYONE in the media or on this board suggest that Pettersson is "Offensive".

I tried to do a Google search, but couldn't find the tweet. It was either a JFresh or Evolving Hockey tweet about the top defensemen either offensively or at generating offense or some sort of "offense when they're on the ice" type stat that listed Pettersson in their top 10 tier. Might have been offensive WAR or some such stat.

In any case, when those types of tweets are made you have some folks then use that as proof that Pettersson's not a blackhole offensively because despite the fact he never finds himself on the scoreboard, apparently being on the ice when offense is created makes him top tier at the offensive side of the game.

 

[Gurglesons]

I tried to do a Google search, but couldn't find the tweet. It was either a JFresh or Evolving Hockey tweet about the top defensemen either offensively or at generating offense or some sort of "offense when they're on the ice" type stat that listed Pettersson in their top 10 tier. Might have been offensive WAR or some such stat.

In any case, when those types of tweets are made you have some folks then use that as proof that Pettersson's not a blackhole offensively because despite the fact he never finds himself on the scoreboard, apparently being on the ice when offense is created makes him top tier at the offensive side of the game.

@Jesse not @JackFr

 

[Turin]

@Jesse not @JackFr

Coool… somehow has no goals and the team keeps getting scored on and giving up a billion shots. Meh

 

[Gurglesons]

Coool… somehow has no goals and the team keeps getting scored on and giving up a billion shots. Meh

I don’t really agree with the assessment lol

 

[Freeptop]

The bolded is precisely my issue with how some use analytics because that's exactly what they DO interpret the results as telling them.

Oh, I agree entirely. It especially drives me nuts when I see some people who should know better do it, but honestly, anyone can fall into that sort of trap pretty easily.

My personal opinion is that it's dangerous to only pay attention to one or the other of analytics or the eye test. In both cases, one can end up getting tunnel vision and only seeing what you want to see.

To me, the most interesting thing is when they disagree. Because then it becomes useful to figure out _why_ they disagree. And that's where real insight can come from.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If advanced stats have Pettersson performing at a 96th percentile offensively, I'm seriously doubting the validity of those stats.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

The bolded is precisely my issue with how some use analytics because that's exactly what they DO interpret the results as telling them.

And maybe it's just the terminology they use. But there is no universe in which Pettersson is a top tier defenseman OFFENSIVELY nor is he someone who is top tier at generating offense when he's on the ice because both imply he DIRECTLY leads to offense, when that's not the case.

Nobody would argue Pettersson has offensive skills. But generating offense takes may forms. Getting to a dump in and getting it up and out of you zone generates offense. Id argue generating offense takes place as much in your half of the ice as it does he attacking end.

 

[Gurglesons]

Pettersson’s patented move is a shitty slap shot from the point so I’m confused why analytics love him.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Pettersson’s patented move is a shitty slap shot from the point so I’m confused why analytics love him.

Because hockey analysis is basically phrenology but less accepted.

 

[eXile3]

Back to bashing analytics because they don’t align with your point of view again I see. One of my favorites next to trade Jake and the “size and grit” crowd.

Some of you would have made good GMs in the late 90s. Too bad that was 23 or so years ago.

 

[HandshakeLine]

tell me what has analytics predicted? school me in your entrail reading, I mean stats.

 

[canadianguy77]

Pettersson’s patented move is a shitty slap shot from the point so I’m confused why analytics love him.

He’s pretty good at holding the line and generally keeping the cycle alive. Probably has more to do with his reach and ability to read the play than anything.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

He’s pretty good at holding the line and generally keeping the cycle alive. Probably has more to do with his reach and ability to read the play than anything.

Yea that's how I read Petts. His reach and size allow him to do a few things well:

- Deny zone entries with his wingspan
- Generally keeps pucks in at the blueline in the offensive zone

As for his passing, he's an average player. His shot is muffin-esque

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

@Jesse not @JackFr

Marcus Pettersson, the $8.5 million AAV d-man.

 

[Pancakes]

If advanced stats have Pettersson performing at a 96th percentile offensively, I'm seriously doubting the validity of those stats.

I have the opposite view. There's a lot of people with terrible opinions that they cling to for no reason other than the eye test. Without analytics it's just your word against theirs.

Then again I can probably count on one hand the amount of opinions that have changed as a result of arguments here so I don't know why any of us bothers. We all have our own stubborn opinions and for the most part none of us budge on our biases whether there's data points lending weight to our arguments or not.

 

[HandshakeLine]

the thing is, the advanced stats are a noticeable improvement over things like +/-. they're just not completely mature yet and still don't measure as much as we'd like them to. that's not the stats' fault, a metric is only as good as the concept behind it and what it's measuring.

 

[SEALBound]

@Jesse not @JackFr

The problem is people not understanding how those stats are calculated. You don't have to produce the points yourself to be rated high in those categories. The way to look at it is - is your play helping create more shots and more goals on the other team's goalie, yes or no? Say Pettersson gives a good 1st pass and they successfully break it out of the dzone. Then the team spends a full 2 min in the offensive zone while Pettersson mans the point. Even if all he does is pinch a couple of times to keep the play alive, he's still getting the benefit of those created shots, goals, and zone time (that quite honestly are typically the result of the good play of a top 6 scoring line while your Partner is Petry or Letang). That's the way these adv stats work.

If people are hell-bent on production alone, there's a stat for that - goals, assists, points.

Misinterpreting or misrepresenting what those numbers mean because you don't want to believe is not a Pettersson issue, it's an issue for the reader. And Pixie, this obviously isn't solely directed at you, this is for everyone part of the Pettersson adv stat conversation.

 

[SEALBound]

the thing is, the advanced stats are a noticeable improvement over things like +/-. they're just not completely mature yet and still don't measure as much as we'd like them to. that's not the stats' fault, a metric is only as good as the concept behind it and what it's measuring.

Agreed. Two things I remind people to keep in mind:

1. Adv stats are the results of trends over several minutes, several periods, and several games. They are not meant to comment on individual games or instances. This is something Ryan Wilson got wrong for so many years.

2. There's a spectrum of how to evaluate hockey. On one end is the adv stats test, and on the other is the eye test. If you veer too far to one side, you're missing out on the other and you won't get a good evaluation. You need a good balance.

Adv stats say Pettersson is good at generating offense. The eye test likely agrees given that he's typically paired with Letang who is typically linked to a top 6 line. At a super high level like that, it makes sense.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I just don't think there's a place for analytics in hockey right now, maybe ever. This sport's so f***ing chaotic and impossible to predict as opposed to a relatively neat and tidy sport like baseball, which is prime for analytics. Hockey's got about a billion moving parts and variables at play, all changing throughout the course of a shift, let alone a game or season. Seems like a fruitless endeavor to me, but whatev.

It's very easy to just kinda laugh and roll your eyes whenever something suggests Petts is in the upper elite for anything offensively related, or when some analytic put McCann in the same convo as guys like McDavid, Draisaitl or Barkov a few years ago when he was still with the Pens.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Time to take Maatta off your wishlists everyone.

I'm genuinely surprised and impressed the dude is still in the league and getting contracts. He looked absolutely god awful as his time wore down here. But then again, Jack Johnson has been in the NHL for about 10 years longer than he should've been--conservatively. So anything's possible. Follow your dreams.