CAPTAIN VIDEO AND FANCY STATS

Robin Brownlee
July 24 2014 02:24PM

Roger Neilson

Having more information to draw on when you're building or coaching a NHL team is never a bad thing, be it in the form of grainy VHS videotape or advanced stats and analytics.

Almost 40 years ago, Roger Neilson was hailed throughout the hockey world as an innovator and a pioneer for using videotape as a coaching tool. Breaking down tape of games he'd just seen with his own eyes earned him the handle Captain Video. Cutting edge stuff, it was.

Decades later, with videotape long having long given way to the digital era and teams employing full-time "video" coaches for years now, Neilson's "innovation" is as much a part of NHL hockey life as sharpening skates and taping sticks. Doing so isn't news. Not using it is.

In that regard, employing advanced stats and analytics as a tool to provide a more complete picture beyond old-school boxcar numbers is today's version of videotape. "Fancy stats" have been in use to varying degrees around the NHL for some time, but not to the point where the hiring of Kyle Dubas as an assistant GM by the Toronto Maple Leafs this week wasn't news.

Five years from now, a hiring like this will be a sidebar.

INFORMATION AGE

UnderwoodKeyboard

I'm not a progressive guy. At 55, I'm a product of my generation. Hell, when I graduated journalism school we were using typewriters and carbon paper in the classroom, although there were bread-boxed sized laptops being used at the Pacific Coliseum and B.C. Place when I started covering the Vancouver Canucks and B.C. Lions in the early 1980s.

Advanced stats? I'd covered baseball, where statistics had long been in broader use than in hockey, with The Edmonton Journal from 1992-96, but when I was asked about advanced stats as part of an interview with the blog Oilgasm in March of 2008, I pretty much blew them off.

Q: On the Oilogosphere, many references are made to advanced hockey statistics such as EV/60 (Even-strength points per 60 minutes), PPP/60 (Powerplay points per 60 minutes), EV+/EV- (+/- after filtering out empty net goals for/against situations). Do GM's take these numbers into account, or do they take more of a conventional "Eye-based" scouting approach when negotiating contracts and signing free agents?

A: "I'm not the least bit interested in these numbers. I know what I see and I know what I think. I'll go with that over pages of statistics any day. As for GMs, that's a broad question. I suspect there's a wide range in answers for that."

Hardly a warm embrace of advanced stats and analytics, although in the context of covering a team day-to-day as a beat writer with daily deadlines as opposed to building a team or compiling data to look more deeply than "who's hot and who's not," I hadn't delved into them.

Now, seven years removed from the daily grind of the beat, I find myself considering the merits of advanced stats far more than I did when they actually might have helped me get a clearer picture of what I was seeing and writing about. In that, I'm clearly not alone.

HERE AND NOW

The use of advanced stats has come a long way even since I was asked about them in 2008. It's an evolving field of study with refinements being made on an almost daily basis. There's a long way to go to sort the meaningful from the meaningless, but teams committed to doing so already and those in the process will have a leg up on stragglers who don't.

There are a lot of people, many of them right here in Edmonton, doing the kind of work that pushed Dubas into the spotlight with the Maple Leafs this week. The Edmonton Oilers are among the growing number of teams taking advantage of that brain power. There are more hires to come.

Separating the useful from the useless will play itself out in good time, likely sooner than later. What has merit will stand, what does not will fall. There is more information to be had, and that's a good thing. Neilson understood that 40 years ago. Some of us are just getting it now.

Listen to Robin Brownlee Wednesdays and Thursdays from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260.

Aceb4a1816f5fa09879a023b07d1a9b4
A sports writer since 1983, including stints at The Edmonton Journal and The Sun 1989-2007, I happily co-host the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260 twice a week and write when so inclined. Have the best damn lawn on the internet. Most important, I am Sam's dad. Follow me on Twitter at Robin_Brownlee. Or don't.
Avatar
#1 Ed in Edmonton
July 24 2014, 02:37PM
Trash it!
16
trashes
Cheers
53
cheers

A philosopher once said "there are lies, damn lies and statistics". If a person wants to, one can make statistics back up almost any argument one might want to put forth. We see that on this site on a daily basis.

Statistics are a tool when used properly can be helpful, but are only tool. Like any tool you need a skilled person to get the desired result.

Avatar
#2 Jonathan Willis
July 24 2014, 02:42PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
50
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

A philosopher once said "there are lies, damn lies and statistics". If a person wants to, one can make statistics back up almost any argument one might want to put forth. We see that on this site on a daily basis.

Statistics are a tool when used properly can be helpful, but are only tool. Like any tool you need a skilled person to get the desired result.

That philosopher you quote is generally recognized to be Leonard Courtney, the same Leonard Courtney who was President of the Royal Statistical Society, a professional body for statisticians.

It was popularized by Mark Twain, who made it pretty clear that even someone like himself, who was 'often beguiled by figures' could tell the difference between senseless and sensible statistics with a little bit of thought.

Avatar
#3 justDOit
July 24 2014, 04:04PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
39
cheers
HallFever wrote:

Has the season started yet??

They haven't lost a game yet!

Avatar
#4 I Remember the Orange Jerseys
July 24 2014, 02:36PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
31
cheers

Roger played a significant role in the Oilers first Stanley Cup.

Avatar
#5 #ThereGoesTheOilers
July 24 2014, 03:21PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
31
cheers

I don't need advanced stats to know that a polar bear is a beast on the ice.

Avatar
#6 rubbertrout
July 24 2014, 03:22PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
31
cheers

I like soup.

Avatar
#7 baggedmilk
July 24 2014, 02:52PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
28
cheers

I LOVE MATH!

Avatar
#8 Oilbaron
July 24 2014, 03:05PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers

I LOVE VIDEO!

Avatar
#9 Jayz
July 24 2014, 03:31PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers

Question. Hockey is a team sport. Players individual stats are more of a result of a teams overall on ice strategy. Meaning a players corsi isn't so much a reflection of his performance per say but the performance and execution of a superior system put in place by the coaches and executed properly by the players. Case and point Clarkson had a decent corsi on Nj and terrible corsi on the Leafs.

I think fancy stats are great but when you start losing sight of hockey being a team sport driven by 5 players working together to get the tide pushed the right way we lose the meaning. Corsi is not any indication of any one players skill IMO. Corsi Rel and quality comp stats are. No?

Avatar
#10 Jonathan Willis
July 24 2014, 03:53PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
22
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

I'm not trying to say that only a very few people "skilled in the art" can get some meaning out of looking at stats. Although the more complex stats become the more this will be the case.

Rather if a person comes in with a conclusion in hand and only looks for stats that support his conclusion, he can probably find something.

EG If Taylor is good player? No way!!!! he lead the league in give-ways. Don't say that he was also 4th highest in take aways.

That's a fair comment in a lot of ways.

The one thing I'd add is with regard to the really complex stats. I wouldn't trust something too complex to be explained to the average fan - if there's value there, it should be demonstrable.

Avatar
#11 The Last Big Bear
July 24 2014, 03:24PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
20
cheers
baggedmilk wrote:

I LOVE MATH!

Oh baggedmilk, you can't even adequately moisten a serving-sized box of Froot Loops without getting milk all over my grandma's coffee table.

You're not fooling anyone about your ability to do math.

Avatar
#12 HallFever
July 24 2014, 04:01PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
20
cheers

Has the season started yet??

Avatar
#13 Soccer Steve
July 24 2014, 04:05PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
18
cheers

A question posited to Brownlee in which he gives a grumpy-sounding response? No, say it ain't so.

Avatar
#14 Oiler Al
July 24 2014, 05:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
17
cheers
kale wrote:

I heard on nhl radio today that the oilers are considering putting Pouliot at center as he once played center. Raises questions!

Hold it, better check his advance stats before you make that move.

Avatar
#15 Ed in Edmonton
July 24 2014, 03:19PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

That philosopher you quote is generally recognized to be Leonard Courtney, the same Leonard Courtney who was President of the Royal Statistical Society, a professional body for statisticians.

It was popularized by Mark Twain, who made it pretty clear that even someone like himself, who was 'often beguiled by figures' could tell the difference between senseless and sensible statistics with a little bit of thought.

I'm not trying to say that only a very few people "skilled in the art" can get some meaning out of looking at stats. Although the more complex stats become the more this will be the case.

Rather if a person comes in with a conclusion in hand and only looks for stats that support his conclusion, he can probably find something.

EG If Taylor is good player? No way!!!! he lead the league in give-ways. Don't say that he was also 4th highest in take aways.

Avatar
#16 justDOit
July 24 2014, 03:41PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

I'm not trying to say that only a very few people "skilled in the art" can get some meaning out of looking at stats. Although the more complex stats become the more this will be the case.

Rather if a person comes in with a conclusion in hand and only looks for stats that support his conclusion, he can probably find something.

EG If Taylor is good player? No way!!!! he lead the league in give-ways. Don't say that he was also 4th highest in take aways.

And people who try to use one stat to prove their point are very quickly exposed.

As in your example, give-aways are tied to puck possession - you can't give the puck away if you don't already have it. Puck possession is generally regarded as a good thing, and you'll find that the top 'give-away' artists in the league are also the top players in the game. So by digging a little, you can actually use that person's argument against them.

So arguing that stats can be used for whatever purpose the presenter has in mind, is ridiculous. Interpretation of all the data soon reveals the truth.

Avatar
#17 Ed in Edmonton
July 24 2014, 03:08PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
13
cheers
Confused wrote:

Wasn't this article about video?

"In that regard, employing advanced stats and analytics as a tool to provide a more complete picture beyond old-school boxcar numbers is today's version of videotape. "Fancy stats" have been in use to varying degrees around the NHL for some time, but not to the point where the hiring of Kyle Dubas as an assistant GM by the Toronto Maple Leafs this week wasn't news. "

Avatar
#18 RexHolez
July 24 2014, 03:35PM
Trash it!
25
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers

If advanced stats and video say Jultz is a good defenceman, then it's all useless!!

Avatar
#19 David S
July 24 2014, 04:28PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers

I have no problem with alternative methods of analysis like video and statistics in sport. I DO have a problem with some blogger's pompous narrative that all writers before them are basically dinosaurs, positioning themselves as the new guard despite having not a whiff of real-world experience in professional sport. It comes across as massively insecure, like they're the cool kids now. As if some high school math classes, a cadre of like-minded followers and a website suddenly elevates them to credibility that was earned the hard way previously.

But guys using advanced tools with a solid understanding of pro-level sport (beyond the pile of books they read on the subject)? Yeah I'm all over that.

Avatar
#20 Jesse
July 24 2014, 03:28PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Cheers
11
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

I'm not trying to say that only a very few people "skilled in the art" can get some meaning out of looking at stats. Although the more complex stats become the more this will be the case.

Rather if a person comes in with a conclusion in hand and only looks for stats that support his conclusion, he can probably find something.

EG If Taylor is good player? No way!!!! he lead the league in give-ways. Don't say that he was also 4th highest in take aways.

This shows a gross misunderstanding of how advanced stats are used by the majority of the online stats community.

Avatar
#21 northof51
July 24 2014, 04:29PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
10
cheers

Cheers to RB for warming up to advanced statistics.

I think people are missing the point a bit if they think that advanced stats are the antithesis to the old school, "seen him good" judgements. As mentioned, stats, when used properly, are just another tool for player and team evaluation. You can't ignore other factors as well, including the intangibles.

Avatar
#22 Spydyr
July 24 2014, 06:24PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
10
cheers

You can break the game down as much as you like.Say he scores on more two on ones on a Tuesday when the moon is full than any other time.

There is no stat that shows a guy took a puck to the face and came back to score the winning goal.

At the the end of the day the only stat that matters is did you score more goals than the other team at the end of the game.

Avatar
#23 Butters
July 24 2014, 06:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
10
cheers

What about those of us who subscribe to chaos theory?

Avatar
#24 ubermiguel
July 24 2014, 04:33PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
Jayz wrote:

Question. Hockey is a team sport. Players individual stats are more of a result of a teams overall on ice strategy. Meaning a players corsi isn't so much a reflection of his performance per say but the performance and execution of a superior system put in place by the coaches and executed properly by the players. Case and point Clarkson had a decent corsi on Nj and terrible corsi on the Leafs.

I think fancy stats are great but when you start losing sight of hockey being a team sport driven by 5 players working together to get the tide pushed the right way we lose the meaning. Corsi is not any indication of any one players skill IMO. Corsi Rel and quality comp stats are. No?

With a large enough sample size and where a player plays with many different people we can start to see patterns. Willis' amazingly titled article about Michal Handzus is a case in point. No matter who Handzus plays with the team performs worse. It's a team sport, but the team is made up of 6 individuals on the ice and each one of them impacts results. Clarkson's decline is likely due to age and being placed in the wrong role.

Avatar
#25 kale
July 24 2014, 05:14PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers

I heard on nhl radio today that the oilers are considering putting Pouliot at center as he once played center. Raises questions!

Avatar
#26 oilers2k10
July 24 2014, 08:21PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

Video killed the radio star...video killed the radio star..

Avatar
#27 David S
July 24 2014, 10:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

"Did someone say clutch?"

- Jordan Eberle

Avatar
#28 Confused
July 24 2014, 02:42PM
Trash it!
27
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

A philosopher once said "there are lies, damn lies and statistics". If a person wants to, one can make statistics back up almost any argument one might want to put forth. We see that on this site on a daily basis.

Statistics are a tool when used properly can be helpful, but are only tool. Like any tool you need a skilled person to get the desired result.

Wasn't this article about video?

Avatar
#29 Max
July 24 2014, 06:23PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

OMG - I just saw Andrew Ferrance's picture on Twitter, then read your headline quickly - I read it as Captain video and fancy pants....

Avatar
#30 Dennis
July 24 2014, 10:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

What is carbon paper?

Avatar
#31 BlazingSaitls
July 24 2014, 03:26PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

Im no mathmagician but ive always loved stats and useless knowledge about sports. Analytics is greatly appreciated.

Avatar
#32 The Last Big Bear
July 24 2014, 06:03PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

There's no one stat that best describes a player's performance.

Vollman's player usage diagrams are a very good start for forwards. I don't really think there's much benefit when evaluating a forward in going beyond his box stats, his PP/PK/EV breakdown, and his Vollman diagram. Corsi Rel is good too, but loses a lot of value if the guy plays for a really good or really crap team.

I think the best metric for judging defencemen is "Time On Ice". This is obviously just a way of saying stats are no good for defencemen, and deferring judgement to an expert (ie an NHL head coach). I don't think there is any advanced stat that provides information above and beyond a defenceman's ice time breakdown, and maybe his points totals.

I never understood people using Wins and GAA to assess goalies. EV sv% pretty much covers goalies, I think.

Avatar
#33 Ed in Edmonton
July 24 2014, 04:42PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
ubermiguel wrote:

With a large enough sample size and where a player plays with many different people we can start to see patterns. Willis' amazingly titled article about Michal Handzus is a case in point. No matter who Handzus plays with the team performs worse. It's a team sport, but the team is made up of 6 individuals on the ice and each one of them impacts results. Clarkson's decline is likely due to age and being placed in the wrong role.

And isn't that the rub, it's not the stats themselves, but the meaning people get from the stats. And that can be subjective. With human nature being what it is people tend to see what they want to see. Some people are better at remaining objective than others.

As in your example you have came to the conclusion that Handzus is just not good at the NHL level. But Clarkson's decline may be due to other reasons. It's not the stats themselves but the meaning you get out of them.

Avatar
#34 Danger Pay
July 24 2014, 06:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

I thought that was a pic of Gene, from back in the day.

Avatar
#35 @Oilanderp
July 24 2014, 07:12PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

The only difference between the 'saw him good' and the 'analytics' crowd is that one group doesn't meticulously record and revisit their observations.

Avatar
#36 @Oilanderp
July 24 2014, 07:29PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

@ubermiguel

Stats are just one way to interpret reality and create meaning.

This is patently false. Properly collected statistics are not opinions. They are not relativistic interpretations. They are recorded factual observations of actual real events.

That you may use these facts to reach an incorrect conclusion is your fault, not the fault of the statistics.

Consider, for example a car accident insurance investigator. The investigator notices after hundreds of incidents that in 98.7% of the cases there are police cars at the scene. She then concludes that police cars cause accidents and procedes to recommend a policy of banning police cars.

The number of police cars is not in dispute, not up for debate, and most importantly not relevant to the goal at hand.

Avatar
#37 Harlie
July 24 2014, 07:30PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

Moneyball

Avatar
#38 Serious Gord
July 24 2014, 09:45PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
#ThereGoesTheOilers wrote:

I don't need advanced stats to know that a polar bear is a beast on the ice.

But advanced stats are akin to knowing when that beast last ate.

Avatar
#39 Quicksilver ballet
July 25 2014, 10:59AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

I think we can all agree, these personal numbers assigned to each player (advanced stats) are still really team based rather than player only based. Hemsky could literally play on 30 different teams and be portrayed in 30 different slants.

Who knew Spezza playing with Hemmer would trump 83 playing with Gagner. Nothing to see here folks......move along.

I still feel this is a make work project, created by the Canadian Government to keep unemployed hockey fans working/off welfare. They should turn these mathletes loose on the airline industry..... help reduce that multi decade old flying through the skies while seated in a chair experience.

*Cool fact. The lines painted on the roads heading into Toronto (hwy 400) are Oiler orange. They are obviously still not aware of the problems that have plagued Oil Country since the early 90's. I commend them on their sticktoitiveness.

Avatar
#40 ubermiguel
July 24 2014, 05:13PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

And isn't that the rub, it's not the stats themselves, but the meaning people get from the stats. And that can be subjective. With human nature being what it is people tend to see what they want to see. Some people are better at remaining objective than others.

As in your example you have came to the conclusion that Handzus is just not good at the NHL level. But Clarkson's decline may be due to other reasons. It's not the stats themselves but the meaning you get out of them.

Stats are just one way to interpret reality and create meaning. The thing about any stat is they usually require more investigation. Willis did a great job with Handzus and I will agree with the conclusion that he is no longer an NHL calibre scorer (age 37 and low scoring were are also factors).

For Clarkson I was just repeating a few possible theories that explain the change in Corsi. The question then becomes "how do I test my theory?" We could look at TOI, quality of competition, injuries, quality of line-mates etc.

Avatar
#41 Reg Dunlop
July 24 2014, 08:23PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
The Last Big Bear wrote:

There's no one stat that best describes a player's performance.

Vollman's player usage diagrams are a very good start for forwards. I don't really think there's much benefit when evaluating a forward in going beyond his box stats, his PP/PK/EV breakdown, and his Vollman diagram. Corsi Rel is good too, but loses a lot of value if the guy plays for a really good or really crap team.

I think the best metric for judging defencemen is "Time On Ice". This is obviously just a way of saying stats are no good for defencemen, and deferring judgement to an expert (ie an NHL head coach). I don't think there is any advanced stat that provides information above and beyond a defenceman's ice time breakdown, and maybe his points totals.

I never understood people using Wins and GAA to assess goalies. EV sv% pretty much covers goalies, I think.

So, grading a tender on whether he wins or loses makes no sense to you? I admit, I always thought that winning was the purpose of sport. I STAND CORRECTED.

Avatar
#42 Serious Gord
July 24 2014, 10:38PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Spydyr wrote:

You can break the game down as much as you like.Say he scores on more two on ones on a Tuesday when the moon is full than any other time.

There is no stat that shows a guy took a puck to the face and came back to score the winning goal.

At the the end of the day the only stat that matters is did you score more goals than the other team at the end of the game.

In baseball - which is essentially a group of individual athletes doing individual tasks - statistical analysis Can be highly effective at determining who is the better player. And that has been the case for decades. And as the advent of computers and more granular stats has grown, so too have the stats and the accuracy and preciseness of the analysis.

That has now spilled over into hockey which is much more of a team sport where the actions of one or more players impacts the success or failure of other players and there are very very few repeated events as compared to baseball where eighty or ninety percent of the time a pitch is not hit into fair territory. Thus the accuracy and preciseness of the analysis will never be remotely as good as in baseball

That said the analysis has become very good at separating good players from bad and is getting better all of the time. As a strategic tool they are already proving their worth and tactical benefits are next.

A war analogy would be dropping regular iron bombs from a plane over a target using a bombardier and an eyesight versus using a laser pointer and a smart bomb released 60000 feet in the air fifteen miles away from that target.

The nhl has moved into a tech war era. Teams that don't adopt the latest statistic analysis are going to get beaten more than those that do. I have no idea where the oil are in this war but if I understand stauffer correctly, they definitely are making changes in the right direction.

And fans who wager without the benefit of these new technologies are going to lose a lot of money.

Avatar
#43 Pat
July 25 2014, 04:43AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

Until I see results in the Oiler organization that can be attributed to advanced stats then I remain unconvinced. When you have incompetent and/or inexperienced coaches and management you introduce variables that can affect player outcomes.

Case in point, certain bean counters said Hemsky was dead weight and was effectively done. He gets traded to a better team with a topline center and suddenly gets productive for another organization.

Advanced stats in the wrong hands are the next thing to reading tea leaves and soothsaying. This is not something I'm willing to take on faith. Show me....

Avatar
#44 Serious Gord
July 25 2014, 07:51AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Pat wrote:

Until I see results in the Oiler organization that can be attributed to advanced stats then I remain unconvinced. When you have incompetent and/or inexperienced coaches and management you introduce variables that can affect player outcomes.

Case in point, certain bean counters said Hemsky was dead weight and was effectively done. He gets traded to a better team with a topline center and suddenly gets productive for another organization.

Advanced stats in the wrong hands are the next thing to reading tea leaves and soothsaying. This is not something I'm willing to take on faith. Show me....

I and many others wanted hemsky gone - not because he wasn't a good player but because his skill set was in surplus on the oil and this he was being out o. Lines and given ice time that was inappropriate/mismatched to those skills. Once traded to a team that had a need to him his play and stats blossomed (for now, I do question how long he can sustain it).

But you do touch on an aspect where stats in hockey are not as nor can they be as definitive as they are in baseball - the impact of the play of other players on ones play is far greater in hockey and thus that has to be taken into consideration when making conclusions.

Avatar
#45 blue31
July 25 2014, 07:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

But advanced stats are akin to knowing when that beast last ate.

As long as you can separate the berries from the crap.

Avatar
#46 Serious Gord
July 25 2014, 07:46AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
blue31 wrote:

As long as you can separate the berries from the crap.

Well done.

Avatar
#47 Jayz
July 24 2014, 05:12PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@ubermiguel

So my question was corsi rel/ qualcomp is the stat that best depicts a players impact on any given system, and corsi is a stat that has more to do with the coach/system?

Avatar
#48 Serious Gord
July 24 2014, 10:08PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

That's a fair comment in a lot of ways.

The one thing I'd add is with regard to the really complex stats. I wouldn't trust something too complex to be explained to the average fan - if there's value there, it should be demonstrable.

Then why did the leafs hire the guy? Complex stats, just like complex engineering formulas are highly beneficial in the right hands - you trust them every time you turn on the lights or start your car.

But in both cases it is the trustworthiness of the analyst that matters - and that's the point of the quote of Leonard Courtney.

Avatar
#49 Serious Gord
July 24 2014, 10:14PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
@Oilanderp wrote:
Stats are just one way to interpret reality and create meaning.

This is patently false. Properly collected statistics are not opinions. They are not relativistic interpretations. They are recorded factual observations of actual real events.

That you may use these facts to reach an incorrect conclusion is your fault, not the fault of the statistics.

Consider, for example a car accident insurance investigator. The investigator notices after hundreds of incidents that in 98.7% of the cases there are police cars at the scene. She then concludes that police cars cause accidents and procedes to recommend a policy of banning police cars.

The number of police cars is not in dispute, not up for debate, and most importantly not relevant to the goal at hand.

Exactly.

Avatar
#50 Serious Gord
July 24 2014, 10:18PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
The Last Big Bear wrote:

There's no one stat that best describes a player's performance.

Vollman's player usage diagrams are a very good start for forwards. I don't really think there's much benefit when evaluating a forward in going beyond his box stats, his PP/PK/EV breakdown, and his Vollman diagram. Corsi Rel is good too, but loses a lot of value if the guy plays for a really good or really crap team.

I think the best metric for judging defencemen is "Time On Ice". This is obviously just a way of saying stats are no good for defencemen, and deferring judgement to an expert (ie an NHL head coach). I don't think there is any advanced stat that provides information above and beyond a defenceman's ice time breakdown, and maybe his points totals.

I never understood people using Wins and GAA to assess goalies. EV sv% pretty much covers goalies, I think.

EV sv% helps but certainly isn't perfect - the way defensemen play in front of a goalie can have a huge impact.

And some goalies are far more clutch than others - dubnyk versus cheevers.

Comments are closed for this article.