Hockey Analytics

[North Buffalo]

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.

Wow a lot to digest and what about defensemen? Edited March 24, 2017 by North Buffalo

[Taro T]

Effin 'A.

 

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

We all knew the last 2 years of that deal will be monster overpayment. As long as it doesn't turn into a Moulson-ish 5 years of overpayment, we should be good. ;)

[That Aud Smell]

Lots of good discussion here.

 

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/shots-fired-ex-oilers-winger-blasts-analytics-guys-for-undervaluing-intimidation

 

Tidbits worth noting: The Concept of Kassian makes several appearances. Also, some anti-stats shade thrown at Pouliot.

[LGR4GM]

The concept of Kassian lives on.

[TrueBlueGED]

(Almost) everything ever written on hockey analytics: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pniKHduqK88OAQ5Fb0erJFkULHUy8P3WZ46JZ8F4eTo/edit

[WildCard]

(Almost) everything ever written on hockey analytics: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pniKHduqK88OAQ5Fb0erJFkULHUy8P3WZ46JZ8F4eTo/edit

And there goes my Sunday night. Very nice

[rakish]

(Almost) everything ever written on hockey analytics: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pniKHduqK88OAQ5Fb0erJFkULHUy8P3WZ46JZ8F4eTo/edit

 

Could you recommend one? I try this each year, and I stop reading when someone says something like 'All shot percentages are the same, therefore...'

[LGR4GM]

Zone entries and why they matter... 

https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/08/10/measuring-the-importance-of-individual-player-zone-entry-creation/

 

Tulsky determined that “controlled” entries (those that came with possession of the puck) resulted in more than twice the number of average shots than “uncontrolled” entries, a key finding that provided concrete direction for additional research on the topic...

 

 

...One way to address this issue is to use the framework of the Entries/60 stat, but weigh each entry based on the expected shot-based outcome. Per Sznajder’s tracking in 2013-14, the league average outcome for a controlled entry was an average 0.66 unblocked shot attempts, while uncontrolled entries created about 0.29 unblocked shots. The result is a new metric, which I’ve dubbed “Weighted Entries per 60” or wE/60. The straightforward formula is as follows:

(((Number of Controlled Entries * 0.66) + (Number of Uncontrolled Entries * 0.29))*60) / Total TOI

 

 

Edited August 10, 2017 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

Well since no one commented, I hope that this becomes standard like Corsi or Fenwick. It gives you another tool to evaluate a player. 

I'd like to see them inverse it for defenders. How many wE/60 against do they allow. 

[pi2000]

Zone entries and why they matter... 

https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/08/10/measuring-the-importance-of-individual-player-zone-entry-creation/

 

Tulsky determined that “controlled” entries (those that came with possession of the puck) resulted in more than twice the number of average shots than “uncontrolled” entries, a key finding that provided concrete direction for additional research on the topic...

 

There's a flaw in this reasoning....    controlled zone entries occur when you have the opportunity to carry the puck in.    If you don't have that opportunity, then you dump it in and get after it.     Of course, controlled entries result in more shots because you maintain possession... but it's not the smart play if the defense is setup such that you don't have the opportunity for a controlled entry.    In these cases, if you attempt to maintain possession (instead of dumping it), a turnover is likely.    Turnover's at the blue-line (either one) are big nono's which often result in high quality scoring chances going the other direction.    

 

So for this study to say that controlled entries result in many more shots... yeah, of course they do, but the type of entry is dictated by the defense, not the offense.

[LGR4GM]

There's a flaw in this reasoning....    controlled zone entries occur when you have the opportunity to carry the puck in.    If you don't have that opportunity, then you dump it in and get after it.     Of course, controlled entries result in more shots because you maintain possession... but it's not the smart play if the defense is setup such that you don't have the opportunity for a controlled entry.    In these cases, if you attempt to maintain possession (instead of dumping it), a turnover is likely.    Turnover's at the blue-line (either one) are big nono's which often result in high quality scoring chances going the other direction.    

 

So for this study to say that controlled entries result in many more shots... yeah, of course they do, but the type of entry is dictated by the defense, not the offense.

That is only half true. Jack Eichel sometimes when going 1v1 will pass or dump, other times he does what he wants (carries). 

 

I would say that failed zone entries should be added to the formula or an additional formula. I think tracking zone entries and giving them value though is a good use of a stat.