Hockey Analytics

[SwampD]

An example of some of the microstat tracking out there, conveniently from the Sabres/Canes game: https://theenergyline.wordpress.com/2017/01/14/car-5-buf-3-1172013/

 

Note the zone entry stats, and how much more likely Carolina was to carry it in compared to us:

 

 

Anyone really want to tell me that Ryan O'Reilly isn't talented enough to carry it in more frequently than Brett Pesce?

That's cool.

 

I admit that the number of dump-ins last night bothered me.

 

In past games I thought they were warranted because guys weren't skating and the puck carrier didn't really have the option of carrying it in (if you are going to lose the puck, better to cause a 50/50 on the end boards and lose it, than to try to beat three guys at their blue line. and lose it). Last night though, they had puck support in the neutral zone and still dumped it in. It was maddening. And ROR was one of the main culprits.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

What motivates the analytics bloggers? Looking for a job in the NHL? Trying to change how the game is played? Just a hobby? A fad? Something else?

 

They can't be getting many dates.

 

Chicks dig scars, not fancystats.

 

#Iknow :flirt:

That's cool.

 

I admit that the number of dump-ins last night bothered me.

 

In past games I thought they were warranted because guys weren't skating and the puck carrier didn't really have the option of carrying it in (if you are going to lose the puck, better to cause a 50/50 on the end boards and lose it, than to try to beat three guys at their blue line. and lose it). Last night though, they had puck support in the neutral zone and still dumped it in. It was maddening. And ROR was one of the main culprits.

 

SwampD, say it aint so.

 

You didn't go over to the dark side, right?

[TrueBlueGED]

What motivates the analytics bloggers? Looking for a job in the NHL? Trying to change how the game is played? Just a hobby? A fad? Something else?

 

While certainly many who start now are interested in making a career out of it be it with a team or as a writer (and hell, colleges are even creating sports analytics programs), it was very much just a hobby for the pioneers. Hell, a lot of it didn't even start out on blogs--a bunch of early "writers" were just posters on a hockey forum asking questions and looking for answers, bouncing ideas off one another.

They can't be getting many dates.

 

Chicks dig scars, not fancystats.

 

#Iknow :flirt:

 

Hey, geeky numbers chicks do exist, ya know! Sure, maybe there's three of them, BUT THEY EXIST! :p

[drnkirishone]

While certainly many who start now are interested in making a career out of it be it with a team or as a writer (and hell, colleges are even creating sports analytics programs), it was very much just a hobby for the pioneers. Hell, a lot of it didn't even start out on blogs--a bunch of early "writers" were just posters on a hockey forum asking questions and looking for answers, bouncing ideas off one another.

 

Hey, geeky numbers chicks do exist, ya know! Sure, maybe there's three of them, BUT THEY EXIST! :P

statistically speaking... sure they exist. in the same way Matt Eillis had a chance to score a goal when he stepped out on the ice.

[Taro T]

Interesting that Zemgus was carrying the puck in second most on the team and had fewer dump ins then Jack and Sam. Maybe Zemgus is on to something by not being adaptable to Dreary Dan's System?

Yes, to an extent. But even last year, Z was one of the VERY few besides Eichel that would carry the puck into the zone. Maybe thats part of his typically being in the dog house. He doesn't have the pedigree to justify being the guy bringing the puck into the zone. (In Dan's world) Which is another knock against the coach.

[PASabreFan]

Yes, to an extent. But even last year, Z was one of the VERY few besides Eichel that would carry the puck into the zone. Maybe thats part of his typically being in the dog house. He doesn't have the pedigree to justify being the guy bringing the puck into the zone. (In Dan's world) Which is another knock against the coach.

There is no greater smoking gun evidence against Dan than the chalk-outlined body of Zemgus Girgensons. He was Eichel before we got Eichel, people were that high on him. And he showed enough flashes under Ted Nolan to not tamp down much of that talk.

[SwampD]

 

SwampD, say it aint so.

 

You didn't go over to the dark side, right?

Well, from what I've heard, they do have cookies.

 

I'll also add that, just like +/-, it's not the whole story.

 

How many of the dump ins were when they needed a line change?

How many of the dump ins were with/without puck support in the neutral zone?

How many dumps were when they had another player on the far boards and they knew they would get there first?

 

Again, FSs only part of the picture, but still interesting.

 

FTR, I have no problem with those ratios for Okposo or Kane, or even Gionta. They are pretty good at getting it back and none of them are stick-handling through 2 D and a F at the blueline.

[TrueBlueGED]

Well, from what I've heard, they do have cookies.

 

I'll also add that, just like +/-, it's not the whole story.

 

How many of the dump ins were when they needed a line change?

How many of the dump ins were with/without puck support in the neutral zone?

How many dumps were when they had another player on the far boards and they knew they would get there first?

 

Again, FSs only part of the picture, but still interesting.

 

FTR, I have no problem with those ratios for Okposo or Kane, or even Gionta. They are pretty good at getting it back and none of them are stick-handling through 2 D and a F at the blueline.

But you're painting a false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be one of them against 2-3 opposing players--zone entries should be designed so that multiple guys are going to the zone together so there are options and the other team just can't collapse onto the puck carrier.

[PASabreFan]

The whole thing is soul-less. It's treating sports, a performance art, as an industrial process of some kind that can be quantified and made perfectly efficient. A sign of the times?

 

What I was getting at with my question about motivates these people is the idea of someone sitting down and charting zone entries and exits. It's not marking down entries vs. carries. I think I could do that. Look at the chart and how involved it is. These people must be recording the games and stopping and starting their DVRs constantly. How many hours of work for each game? Are these people fans of the game? Why would they voluntarily surrender that experience of being a fan?

 

Is it because the game is so dreadfully boring? Am I/are we one to talk? We participate in this board in part because just following the team is not enough to float our boats. I look at it, however, as value-added to being a fan. I don't see what participating in data-gathering does for these people, but I guess to each his own.

[qwksndmonster]

I don't understand calling statistical analysis soulless or boring. I track zone entries on a piece of paper when I watch the Sabres. It's how people who love hockey are trying to understand it better.

 

I go down to the same level on movies or tv shows as well. How are the shots cut together and what sort of style do the combination of cuts make? There's a technical side to everthing beautiful and human.

[PASabreFan]

I don't understand calling statistical analysis soulless or boring. I track zone entries on a piece of paper when I watch the Sabres. It's how people who love hockey are trying to understand it better.

 

I go down to the same level on movies or tv shows as well. How are the shots cut together and what sort of style do the combination of cuts make? There's a technical side to everthing beautiful and human.

I honestly don't think what the analytics crowd in hockey does is about love of the sport or an attempt at understanding. I think these people want power and influence. They've had a taste of it and they want more. They want to change the game. They want a revolution.

[WildCard]

I honestly don't think what the analytics crowd in hockey does is about love of the sport or an attempt at understanding. I think these people want power and influence. They've had a taste of it and they want more. They want to change the game. They want a revolution.

I think you're way off base here

[qwksndmonster]

I honestly don't think what the analytics crowd in hockey does is about love of the sport or an attempt at understanding. I think these people want power and influence. They've had a taste of it and they want more. They want to change the game. They want a revolution.

I feel like some people might think like that, but the vast majority of number crunchers are like True or Flagg.

 

And frankly, maybe a revolution is exactly what hockey needs.

[TrueBlueGED]

I honestly don't think what the analytics crowd in hockey does is about love of the sport or an attempt at understanding. I think these people want power and influence. They've had a taste of it and they want more. They want to change the game. They want a revolution.

Yea, you're really not even close. For the vast majority, it's a labor of love. Have you really never been intellectually stimulated by something, causing you to want to take a deep dive to figuring it all out? That's what this is. It's a hobby fueled by passion and interest.

 

Part of me thinks you want it to be all about money or a hockey revolution so you feel more justified in your abject hatred of the entire enterprise.

[PASabreFan]

Yea, you're really not even close. For the vast majority, it's a labor of love. Have you really never been intellectually stimulated by something, causing you to want to take a deep dive to figuring it all out? That's what this is. It's a hobby fueled by passion and interest.

 

Part of me thinks you want it to be all about money or a hockey revolution so you feel more justified in your abject hatred of the entire enterprise.

Abject hatred is pretty strong. It's a great phrase though. I also sometimes turn to words that I like that are a bit over the top. Anywho... at least I'm giving it enough thought to try and figure it what's behind the movement. I guess I don't see hockey as something that can or should be figured out. Trying to reduce it to x number of plays that can be quantified and modified to reach a desired result... no. This isn't football or baseball, thank God. I've often said on here that hockey is jazz. It's improvised so much of the time, especialy when it's at its best. It's not an orchestra that someone can conduct. I'm sure there's science or math behind jazz, but who in their right mind would want to try and solve that equation?

I feel like some people might think like that, but the vast majority of number crunchers are like True or Flagg.

 

And frankly, maybe a revolution is exactly what hockey needs.

Flagg too? Oh jeez. I didn't know.

 

Welp, analytics has strongly taken hold in hockey. Is it becoming better, more watchable? Having said that, I think we Sabres fans do have a jaundiced eye toward the sport. It's probably better in cities where the NHL has a franchise.

[Randall Flagg]

I feel like some people might think like that, but the vast majority of number crunchers are like True or Flagg.

 

And frankly, maybe a revolution is exactly what hockey needs.

Oh, I'm not a number cruncher. I like having data available to help with team and player evaluation, but I'm a complete novice when it comes to the stuff. 

[That Aud Smell]

There is no greater smoking gun evidence against Dan than the chalk-outlined body of Zemgus Girgensons. He was Eichel before we got Eichel, people were that high on him. And he showed enough flashes under Ted Nolan to not tamp down much of that talk.

 

The Zemgus/Eichel talk is a bit over the top, but I agree with this sentiment. Zemgus should be a very useful middle 6 player on a good team. He's shown sustained glimpses of becoming that over the last 20 games or so. Maybe he can still come around under Dreary Hot Daniel?

 

The whole thing is soul-less. It's treating sports, a performance art, as an industrial process of some kind that can be quantified and made perfectly efficient. A sign of the times?

 

What I was getting at with my question about motivates these people is the idea of someone sitting down and charting zone entries and exits. It's not marking down entries vs. carries. I think I could do that. Look at the chart and how involved it is. These people must be recording the games and stopping and starting their DVRs constantly. How many hours of work for each game? Are these people fans of the game? Why would they voluntarily surrender that experience of being a fan?

 

Is it because the game is so dreadfully boring? Am I/are we one to talk? We participate in this board in part because just following the team is not enough to float our boats. I look at it, however, as value-added to being a fan. I don't see what participating in data-gathering does for these people, but I guess to each his own.

 

Soulless is unfounded. Advanced stats are not your cup of tea; they don't speak to you. That's all.

 

I follow several #fancystat blogger types on Twitter. They love the game to death -- just not in the same way I do (or many of us do). My personal favorite is Jen LC (@RegressedPDO). I can't and don't appreciate the game in the way she does, but I get a lot out of reading her work.

 

It's more than a little rough in terms of comparisons, but it calls to mind a conversation I had with a high school classmate a while back who had become a research neurologist. He'd always been an impish agnostic when it came to matters of faith. But he talked movingly about the more he understood about the brain - as more and more complicated details about it became known to him - the more and more he came to feel his own faith in a creator emerging. It's often said "the devil's in the details"; my grandmother used to say "God is in the details." 

 

I don't understand calling statistical analysis soulless or boring. I track zone entries on a piece of paper when I watch the Sabres. It's how people who love hockey are trying to understand it better.

 

I go down to the same level on movies or tv shows as well. How are the shots cut together and what sort of style do the combination of cuts make? There's a technical side to everthing beautiful and human.

 

Good comparison.

 

I honestly don't think what the analytics crowd in hockey does is about love of the sport or an attempt at understanding. I think these people want power and influence. They've had a taste of it and they want more. They want to change the game. They want a revolution.

 

Power and influence. Got it. A vast #fancystat conspiracy.

 

I think you're way off base here

 

Little bit.

 

Have you really never been intellectually stimulated by something, causing you to want to take a deep dive to figuring it all out? That's what this is. It's a hobby fueled by passion and interest.

 

Stated another way:

 

 

Abject hatred is pretty strong. It's a great phrase though. I also sometimes turn to words that I like that are a bit over the top. Anywho... at least I'm giving it enough thought to try and figure it what's behind the movement. I guess I don't see hockey as something that can or should be figured out. Trying to reduce it to x number of plays that can be quantified and modified to reach a desired result... no. This isn't football or baseball, thank God. I've often said on here that hockey is jazz. It's improvised so much of the time, especialy when it's at its best. It's not an orchestra that someone can conduct. I'm sure there's science or math behind jazz, but who in their right mind would want to try and solve that equation?

 

There is exactly nothing wrong with the way you appreciate hockey. Nor is there anything wrong with the way #fancystat types appreciate it.

 

As for the bolded, I reckon you don't want to borrow my 400+ page tome containing a series of essays from music theorists analyzing John Coltrane's "A Love Supreme."

Edited January 20, 2017 by That Aud Smell

[TrueBlueGED]

https://twitter.com/dellowhockey/status/844591189219295233

 

A piece (and subsequent tweet storm) about analytics and measuring quality of competition, and impact of. The article is about Morgan Rielly, but the logic can also apply to Risto.

 

For my money, Tyler Dellow was the best stats writer before being hired by Edmonton. He's back writing again, and may still be the best. And despite the Oilers being incompetent during his time there, I think time spent in an NHL organization probably benefitted him as an analyst.

Edited March 22, 2017 by TrueBlueGED

[That Aud Smell]

Risto not in top 20 of star time D?

[TrueBlueGED]

Risto not in top 20 of star time D?

Something something Bylsma's bench management something.

[dudacek]

Risto not in top 20 of star time D?

When you play the entire game it's hard to find enough stars to go around.

[That Aud Smell]

^

 

:w00t:  :cry:

[TrueBlueGED]

When you play the entire game it's hard to find enough stars to go around.

Joking aside, this is an astute observation. Risto's extra ~3-4 minutes per game is likely against non-star players, thus lowering his star% relative to other top pair Dmen.

[TrueBlueGED]

Giant (and terrific) article on aging in the NHL: https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/03/23/a-new-look-at-aging-curves-for-nhl-skaters-part-1/

 

TLDR: More evidence offense starts to go down in players' late-20s. Interesting support for the notion that defensive play does not follow a similar trend--it stays mostly consistent for a player's career, until ~36. 

 

Warning: You probably don't want to read this while remembering Okposo is turning 29 next month and has 6 years remaining on his contract.

[That Aud Smell]

Warning: You probably don't want to read this while remembering Okposo is turning 29 next month and has 6 years remaining on his contract.

 

Effin 'A.

 

Is that the contract that eventually makes us bust out torches and pitchforks for GM TM?