Absurdity 101

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Here's proof it's a useless stat: Dubinsky, Anisimov et al have a higher goal per minute ratio than Rick Nash.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    That might've been a good dig if you were even remotely accurate with your assertion. Last season Nash scored a goal every 52 minutes skated. Anisimov scored every a goal every 76 minutes skated. It took Dubinsky 125 minutes to score each goal.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Disagree. Playing with more talented linemates ? Playing against the other teams best checkers ? Playing on teams that deploy better offensive systems ? Playing for a losing team that does not have the puck as much as the opponent ? Amongst other reasons why this stat is not useful . Things are not always equal when it comes to comparing players from different teams just by using this stat.
    Posted by Chowdahkid-[/QUOTE]

    I assume you know this, but I find it especially bothersome when people doubt how potent statistical analysis can be.

    For example stats such as  quality of opponent and quality of teamate, are all readily available on behindthenet.ca (explained here http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/10/8/1076586/frequently-asked-question-2)

    you can also use statistics to quantify defensive play:

    • % of shifts that start in the offensive zone vs. defensive zone (a sign that the coach is putting you into positions with poor offensive prospects)
    • % of shifts that end in the offensive zone vs. defensive zone (where you can see if the player contributed to an advancement of the puck)
    • quality of opponent(referenced above)
    • +/- per 60 minutes
    • Absolute value of shots directed towards your net per shift vs shots directed towards your opponents net per shift
    • Scoring chance +/-
    I personally think it goes without saying that Rick Nash is an offensive force brought in to score goals.. Therefore, I find points per minute to be a reasonable performance indicator.

    Just to clarify: I personally made the argument that the rangers got the better end of the deal, and OatesCam protested by saying the Jackets got the equivalent production (in terms of total points). I pointed out that it was an illusion because those three players had significantly more ice-time than Nash did, so they were less effective at producing offense... seems like an air-tight use of stats to illustrate a point.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Thin skinned and paranoid is no way to go through life, son. -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]
    Forgive me for not taking advice from someone who's dumb enough to think they have insight into another's personality based solely upon a paragraph written on a public forum. Good luck with your war against Tim Thomas. Keep it up. You're really making a difference. BTW, that "grease" was another incredibly weak effort on your part.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : I assume you know this, but I find it especially bothersome when people doubt how potent statistical analysis can be.
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    It is for baseball.  It doesn't fly for hockey.  Baseball is a very individualistic game.  If a guy can hit a fastball, he can hit a fastball.  If a guy is good at tracking fly balls, he's good at tracking fly balls.

    It does not translate to hockey.  Never is a player's success or failure based solely upon his own actions.  The closest you can come is the shootout and even then, the goaltender takes responsibility for the outcome. 

    Hockey has too many variables for any of these super-stats to be legit.  Hockey players can be evaluated statistically on goals and assists...and not really even assists until they remove the secondary.

    For everything else, you have to watch the games to know.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Almost any stat can be rendered meaningless if not applied in the proper context. Horton is a great example of when goals per minute skated can be somewhat meaningful. Upon first glance, his goal scoring was down after leaving the Panthers although his goals per minutes skated was actually up. My eyes supported what the stat already told me. Horton came in and did exactly what he was brought in to do. Of course Bergeron (the Selke winner) isn't a good guy to apply the stat to because defensive play is such a big part of his game. A guy like Nash though, what else does he do on the ice but score goals? If a guy is a pure goal scorer then the stat can definitely be useful.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    LOL
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : A guy like Nash though, what else does he do on the ice but score goals? If a guy is a pure goal scorer then the stat can definitely be useful.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    With 47% of his points coming from assists, I'd say he's pretty good at passing the puck.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpBsSoxFan. Show jpBsSoxFan's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : I think Nash puts the Rangers over. Thats a real good team that just added Rick Nash. look at how many tight games they play, you think adding someone of Nashs' calibur won't make a difference? I wouldnt call him a cry baby or accuse him of bailing on his team. Do you feel the same way about Ray Bourque? He did the same thing. I've followed Nash throughout his whole career and not once did he complain. He asked to be traded. Can you blame him? If Howson just traded him and didnt mention that Nash requested the trade, none of us fans would know. He is a stud of a hockey player, like I've said before, going to NYR he'll net 35-40 goals easliy,  with 7 or 8 of them being game winners and he'll win a few shootouts for them as well. He will have to make some adjustments because of Tortorella, but he'll thrive there and after the first year, i say he flirts with 50 for the rest of his time there, if not more.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
    Kel, Nash & Bourque shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence ! Bourque gave his heart & soul to the Bruins for 20 plus seasons which included 2 trips to the finals where they fell short to the much more powerful Oilers both times. Bourque was a class act & didn't bail on a contract with multiple years left on it. Hard to blame a guy for wanting a chance to play for a Stanley Cup after 20 years. Let's not forget on Bourque's day with the cup, he brought it to Boston to share with the fans in the city that he played for 20 years. Bourque will always have my respect. Mr. Nash has a long way to go before you can compare the 2 situations. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : LOL
    Posted by JWensink[/QUOTE]
    That's one of your more insightful posts regarding hockey. Well done.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : With 47% of his points coming from assists, I'd say he's pretty good at passing the puck.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    Nash and Bergeron have the same number of assists but Bergeron has played in 137 fewer games to do it. Nash is a real passing machine. No wonder he's been paid like a top 5 player for so long. It's hard to believe he gets statistically destoyed by everyone else in his pay grade.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 :  It does not translate to hockey.  Never is a player's success or failure based solely upon his own actions.  The closest you can come is the shootout and even then, the goaltender takes responsibility for the outcome.  Hockey has too many variables for any of these super-stats to be legit.  Hockey players can be evaluated statistically on goals and assists...and not really even assists until they remove the secondary. For everything else, you have to watch the games to know. Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Guys like Parise, Nash and Kovalchuk score more goals than say Bergeron and Lucic because they are better during 5 on 5, 1 on 1 battles and can get off precise shots in close with defensman draped over them.

    You need to explain to me "Never is a player's success or failure based soley on his own actions". The players I mentioned don't rely on having a great center to create their own offense. What variables help separate a great passer to an average passing center ?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Guys like Parise, Nash and Kovalchuk score more goals than say Bergeron and Lucic because they are better during 5 on 5, 1 on 1 battles and can get off precise shots in close with defensman draped over them. You need to explain to me "Never is a player's success or failure based soley on his own actions". The players I mentioned don't rely on having a great center to create their own offense. What variables help separate a great passer to an average passing center ?
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    A few of the variables:

    Who is the left winger?
    Who is the right winger?
    Who is left defenseman?
    Who is the right defenseman?
    Who is the left winger on the opposing team?
    Who is the center on the opposing team?
    Who is the right winger on the opposing team?
    Who is the left defenseman on the opposing team?
    Who is the right defenseman on the opposing team?
    Who is the goaltender on the opposing team?
    Can the left winger score well on one timers?
    Can the right winger score well on one timers?
    Can the left defenseman score well on one timers?
    Can the right defenseman score well on one timers?
    Can the left winger pass well?  (second assists)
    Can the right winger ''
    Can the left defenseman ''
    Can the right defenseman ''
    Can the left winger break free from coverage to get open?
    Can the right ''
    Does the left defenseman have a booming shot that gets through?
    Does the right ''
    What offensive zone scheme does the coach run?
    Do the opposing players block a lot of shots?
    What defensive zone scheme is the opposing coach running?
    Is the goaltender easy to beat between the legs?
    Is the goaltender easy to beat up high?
    Is the goaltender easy to beat down low?
    Does the left winger generally shoot high?
    Does the left winger generally shoot low?
    Does the left winger pick the five-hole?
    Right wing ''
    Left D ''
    Right D ''

    There are so many variables, it's insane.

    None of these variables show up on any stat sheet, but all are factors.

    In baseball, which is a stop action sport, you can say that Player A hits .xxx when the score is x-x with x runners on base facing a x handed pitcher.  No matter what happens in baseball, a counted at bat is never more than a pitcher and a ball vs. a hitter and a bat.

    In hockey, you can't say that Player A gets x assists in x period when the score is x-x.

    Sabermetrics works for baseball.  It does not work in hockey.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE] Sabermetrics works for baseball.  It does not work in hockey.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Again, many of those variables you listed are quantified in the QualComp, Qualteamate metric.

    Clearly, hockey is less quantifiable than baseball; however, there are plenty of insights you can gain through the use of statistics. The Boston Bruins, the Edmonton Oilers, the Minnesota Wild, Vancouver Canucks, Toronto Maple Leafs, Buffalo Sabres, Pittsburg Penguins have all embraced advanced metrics


    What Desjardins can say is that some of his recommendations led directly to teams pulling the trigger on major deals last season.

    “I've seen people use Corsi to make trades,” he said. “I'll put it that way.”

    The secrecy surrounding analytics in the NHL extends well beyond Desjardins.

    Of all the teams contacted on the subject, only the Pittsburgh Penguins were willing to talk openly about their increasing use of advanced statistics, which began in earnest last year through a partnership with a group called The Sports Analytics Institute.

    “This was the first year, this past season, that I felt we were really onto something,” said Penguins director of player personnel Dan MacKinnon, who has become the team's point man in the area. “We're getting some powerful insight into things that you just can't track with the naked eye or traditional statistics.”

    MacKinnon estimates that only five or six NHL teams are doing considerable work with analytics, with another half dozen beginning to “kick tires” and investigate some of the concepts involved.

    The rest of the league, he said, isn't going this route because “they feel hockey doesn't lend itself to analytics.”

    MacKinnon pointed to the Sabres' recent creation of a small analytics department as a sign of where things are going, adding that he wouldn't be surprised if more and more people like Desjardins are brought into the fold to offer a different perspective.

    SAI's model has introduced the Penguins to in-depth shot location analysis and goal scoring probabilities – using a statistic called predicted goals scored – that they make available after every NHL game.

    What was initially a tough sell (and remains one to many teams) has become a tool some on Pittsburgh's staff use on a daily basis.





    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/the-moneypuck-revolution/article4246911/

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    The variables cannot be quatified because the players are not robots.  Even after answering all of those questions above, there is the mistake factor, the feeling factor, the fatigue factor, the situation factor and everything else.

    Everyone who played with Mike Modano a few years ago when he was in the tank because of an off ice financial issue would have had lower stats across the board.  Is there a way to figure that into anything?

    A few teams, mostly terrible ones, are using made up stats to help with evaluating players.

    And soon, I predict that they won't be because you cannot use stats like these to judge a player's ability better than you can by watching him play.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]The variables cannot be quatified because the players are not robots.  Even after answering all of those questions above, there is the mistake factor, the feeling factor, the fatigue factor, the situation factor and everything else. Everyone who played with Mike Modano a few years ago when he was in the tank because of an off ice financial issue would have had lower stats across the board.  Is there a way to figure that into anything? A few teams, mostly terrible ones, are using made up stats to help with evaluating players. And soon, I predict that they won't be because you cannot use stats like these to judge a player's ability better than you can by watching him play.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    The stats aren't meant to replace the naked eye. They're just another tool for evaluators to use. I see no problem with gathering as much info as you can and then deciding later what it's worth. Cheers Home-Slice!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]The variables cannot be quatified because the players are not robots.  Even after answering all of those questions above, there is the mistake factor, the feeling factor, the fatigue factor, the situation factor and everything else. Everyone who played with Mike Modano a few years ago when he was in the tank because of an off ice financial issue would have had lower stats across the board.  Is there a way to figure that into anything? A few teams, mostly terrible ones, are using made up stats to help with evaluating players. And soon, I predict that they won't be because you cannot use stats like these to judge a player's ability better than you can by watching him play.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    This pretty well says it all. Smartest comment in the entire thread. And it's such a simple idea : 

    If you want to know what a player plays like. Just go watch. You don't need to look at a sheet with numbers on it. Everything happens on the ice.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : The stats aren't meant to replace the naked eye. They're just another tool for evaluators to use. I see no problem with gathering as much info as you can and then deciding later what it's worth. Cheers Home-Slice!
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Just a wild and crazy guess but I'm thinking this tool wasn't used in evaluating the players involved in the Nash trade.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Just a wild and crazy guess but I'm thinking this tool wasn't used in evaluating the players involved in the Nash trade.
    Posted by Chowdahkid-[/QUOTE]
    I'd say you're right. I look forward to seeing the results this season so I can punch them into a calculator.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : A few of the variables: None of these variables show up on any stat sheet, but all are factors. In baseball, which is a stop action sport, you can say that Player A hits .xxx when the score is x-x with x runners on base facing a x handed pitcher.  In hockey, you can't say that Player A gets x assists in x period when the score is x-x. Sabermetrics works for baseball.  It does not work in hockey. Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    I've never once brought up that baseball statistics should be applied to hockey when addressing how stats can apply but you always drag that in. Those variables you mentioned certainly are needed when players who score between 15-25 goals but not when you look at players like Crosby, Kovalchuck, Nash and Parise. These players separate themselves from the middle of the pack players and looking at 5 on 5 stats shows anyone why. +/- don't apply to defensman who play less than 20 minutes but they sure do apply to the ones are on the ice allot.

    Now as far as baseball and hockey scouts having very different views in scouting prospects absolutely agree variables apply.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    Yeah, everybody knows it's protocol in front offices across the NHL to pass off any trade decisions to "the evaluators" so the can employ "the stats tool" and wait "till later to decide what it's worth" ...

    either that or somebody's just spewing out random nonsense to make it sound as if they have a clue

    I'm going with the latter..."the evaluators"-  kid's on a roll
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]Yeah, everybody knows it's protocol in front offices across the NHL to pass off any trade decisions to "the evaluators" so the can employ "the stats tool" and wait "till later to decide what it's worth" ... either that or somebody's just spewing out random nonsense to make it sound as if they have a clue I'm going with the latter..."the evaluators"-  kid's on a roll
    Posted by JWensink[/QUOTE]
    You know you can hit reply to speak directly to someone but I suppose that wouldn't be as gutless now would it? I've got to wonder exactly what it is that leads you to believe you know anything about this game. You've shown yourself to be a dimwit on multiple occasions and have yet to offer anything substantial to a hockey debate. I suppose we could applaud your effort. At least that doesn't suck.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : You know you can hit reply to speak directly to someone but I suppose that wouldn't be as gutless now would it? I've got to wonder exactly what it is that leads you to believe you know anything about this game. You've shown yourself to be a dimwit on multiple occasions and have yet to offer anything substantial to a hockey debate yet. I suppose we could applaud your effort. At least that doesn't suck.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]


    Hey Dez

    I'm going to let an "evaluator" use the "stat tool" and "then wait" to get back to you.

    Hey, can you give me a link to evaluator.com so I can download the "stat tool"

    Maybe I can get the NHL evaluator stat tool app for my phone

    Everybody like you who knows a lot about hockey talks like that, I've got some studying to do before I can get to your level, cause I thought that scoring goals was important before I read your post stating that you have to consider using the "stat tool" if you want to be a real "evaluator", then apparently go through some waiting period before making a decision.





     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    In Response to Re: Absurdity 101:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Absurdity 101 : Hey Dez I'm going to let an "evaluator" use the "stat tool" and "then wait" to get back to you. Hey, can you give me a link to evaluator.com so I can download the "stat tool" Maybe I can get the NHL evaluator stat tool app for my phone Everybody like you who knows a lot about hockey talks like that, I've got some studying to do before I can get to your level, cause I thought that scoring goals was important before I read your post stating that you have to consider using the "stat tool" if you want to be a real "evaluator", then apparently go through some waiting period before making a decision.
    Posted by JWensink[/QUOTE]
    Again, you've added nothing but nonsense. Bravo! Do you have any idea what a scout's job entails? Forget it! It's clear you don't. I've got an idea. How about you tell us all how dumb we are or not realizing the Bruins will never win with CJ and Chara as the leaders. That always makes you look smart. It's a shame there isn't an app to give you some real insight into the game. You might not look like such a moron if that were the case. Oh well, dare to dream. BTW, nice work figuring out how to use the reply option.
    From Bruins.com
    Jim Benning is in his fifth season with the Bruins and his fourth as the club’s Assistant General Manager, as he was named to that post on July 14, 2007. In that position, he serves as an advisor to General Manager Peter Chiarelli on all matters pertaining to player evaluation, trades and free agent signings, in addition to assisting the General Manager in overseeing all individuals in their specific duties for the Bruins.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Absurdity 101

    no the thread really is gone.
     

Share