WildCard Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Alex probably never should have seen Rochester last season. Why? That's exactly where he should have been Chychrun is and will be better. Not a chance You'll be utterly shocked to know that I disagree with you, pi. Chychrun : Bogosian as MCavoy : Josi FTFY Chychrun is a physical beast who has incredibly limited hockey sense, McAvoy was already the best defenseman for a team in a six game NHL playoff series, with hockey sense and puck moving abilities off the charts for a teenager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Chychrun is a physical beast who has incredibly limited hockey sense, McAvoy was already the best defenseman for a team in a six game NHL playoff series, with hockey sense and puck moving abilities off the charts for a teenager. We'll see how a full season treats him. I don't want to compare him to the likes of Marc-Andre Gragnani since their prospect status is incredibly different. But we've seen several cases where an unknown* young d-man steps into a playoff role and thrives, only to falter when more was expected of them in a full time role. There's a long road to travel from here. I can say that BU fans weren't all that thrilled with how he filled that #1 d-man role. Granted, I think a lot of that falls on the unfair expectation fans at that level build up for anyone drafted so highly. *By unknown, I mean a guy who hasn't had much, if any time at the NHL level at that point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 We'll see how a full season treats him. I don't want to compare him to the likes of Marc-Andre Gragnani since their prospect status is incredibly different. But we've seen several cases where an unknown* young d-man steps into a playoff role and thrives, only to falter when more was expected of them in a full time role. There's a long road to travel from here. I can say that BU fans weren't all that thrilled with how he filled that #1 d-man role. Granted, I think a lot of that falls on the unfair expectation fans at that level build up for anyone drafted so highly. *By unknown, I mean a guy who hasn't had much, if any time at the NHL level at that point Oh, you're absolutely right. But given the person I'm discussing this with, hyperbole and being extremely confident in predictions that will take years to play out is essential. In actuality, I like Charlie a lot more than Jake but I wouldn't put money on it or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Last I looked this was a Sabres prospect thread. It would be great to discuss D, but other then Guhle we don't have any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Last I looked this was a Sabres prospect thread. It would be great to discuss D, but other then Guhle we don't have any. Guhle looked good at dev camp. He is faster than he was last year and stronger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Guhle looked good at dev camp. He is faster than he was last year and stronger. I still think he starts in Rochester with Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching, Erod, Malone, etc... They really really want to build a winner there and that can only happen if their best prospects are getting big minutes there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Chychrun is a physical beast who has incredibly limited hockey sense, McAvoy was already the best defenseman for a team in a six game NHL playoff series, with hockey sense and puck moving abilities off the charts for a teenager. Did you watch the Bruins series? McAvoy was a turnover waiting to happen, he was a minus player on a playoff team. He's a nice prospect, but I don't see much upside. Sure Chychrun was a -14, but on a team that had a -63 goal differential, which is a relative team adjusted +/- of +4. He also saw nearly 17min/gm of ice time. Maybe it's regional bias as I saw Chychrun play up close here a few times, he reminds me of a young Duncan Kieth. Look up any 2016 redraft and you'll find him in the top 7-8 picks for good reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 PI be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 PI be Care to chime in on this one, 11? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 It is shameful what some parents will do to their children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Did you watch the Bruins series? McAvoy was a turnover waiting to happen, he was a minus player on a playoff team. He's a nice prospect, but I don't see much upside. Sure Chychrun was a -14, but on a team that had a -63 goal differential, which is a relative team adjusted +/- of +4. He also saw nearly 17min/gm of ice time. Maybe it's regional bias as I saw Chychrun play up close here a few times, he reminds me of a young Duncan Kieth. Look up any 2016 redraft and you'll find him in the top 7-8 picks for good reason. "Relative team adjusted +/-" lmfao go home pi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 "Relative team adjusted +/-" lmfao go home pi I was between teeing off on his 'relative team adjusted +/-' and just find a trolling gif. Went with the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 I was between teeing off on his 'relative team adjusted +/-' and just find a trolling gif. Went with the latter. I wonder if he wants to do the math to figure out Risto's 'relative team adjusted' +/-? No, I didn't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 The amazing thing is that there is still no context applied as far as the usage of the players goes, even after we've stopped comparing +/- between players on different teams. If someone were to apply all the necessary context to +/- I'd be totally willing to read it, but I've never seen pi do that. If it happened, I'd just stop because by the time all of the context is fleshed out, you've already analyzed about 10 different stats that say far more about a player than the +/- does and have all the information you could ever need. Stats that actually have predictive value and have been shown statistically to do so, unlike +/-, which has a horrendous track value at making predictions about future performance for obvious reasons. OEL's relative team adjusted plus minus is -15. He's literally twice as bad defensively as Jakob Chychrun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 I wonder if he wants to do the math to figure out Risto's 'relative team adjusted' +/-? No, I didn't think so. Bingo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) The amazing thing is that there is still no context applied as far as the usage of the players goes, even after we've stopped comparing +/- between players on different teams. If someone were to apply all the necessary context to +/- I'd be totally willing to read it, but I've never seen pi do that. If it happened, I'd just stop because by the time all of the context is fleshed out, you've already analyzed about 10 different stats that say far more about a player than the +/- does and have all the information you could ever need. Stats that actually have predictive value and have been shown statistically to do so, unlike +/-, which has a horrendous track value at making predictions about future performance for obvious reasons. OEL's relative team adjusted plus minus is -15. He's literally twice as bad defensively as Jakob Chychrun. here's my formula for team adjusted plus minus.... x = player's avg toi y = team even strength goal differential; includes shorthanded goals scored and allowed (which count towards +/-); does not include PP goals for or PK goals against) z = +/- x * 100 / 60 = % of minutes played (x/60) * y = expected +/- (based on y) eg, if your team loses 10-0 (all goals at even strength), and you're on the ice for 30min, your expected +/- is -5. ((x/60) * y) - z = team relative +/- The difference of your actual +/- and your expected +/- tells you how well you're performing relative to the team. The obvious drawback with the plus/minus stat is that if you're on a bad team, then your plus/minus will always look terrible. However the team relative +/- shows how well you're performing wrt your teammates, so you can't blame a bad team for poor team relative +/-. The Ristolainen example below is a good indicator, he's actually a plus player this season when taking the team into context. Chychrun was a team relative -1, not bad for a rookie D averaging about 17min/gm. Chychrun: x = 16.66 y = -48 z = -14 % of minutes played = 27.8% expected +/- = -13 team relative +/- = -1 Ristolainen: x = 26.5 y = -37 z = -9 % of minutes played = 44.2% expected +/- = -16 team relative +/- = +7 Ristolainen 2014-15 (second year, first full NHL season): x = 20.6 y = -77 z = -32 % of minutes played = 34.3% expected +/- = -26 team relative +/- = -6 That said, when talking low single digits for team relative +/-, it's not a very telling stat. It's when your team relative +/- gets into the double digits that signals you're either significantly contributing to your teams success, or hindering it. Edited July 13, 2017 by pi2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 :unsure: <_< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Can someone else go through that and debunk it for me if it's wrong? So lazy if nobody else does I'm just going to believe him and say +/- works Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Can mods make a +/- thread, so we can get this outta here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Can someone else go through that and debunk it for me if it's wrong? So lazy if nobody else does I'm just going to believe him and say +/- works Let's say your beer league team loses a game 10-0... you played every other shift (30min) and were on the ice for 2 goals against, you're a -2.... that sucks, but you feel like you played a good game since you were on the ice for just 2 goals against when your team was clearly outclassed. Wildcard: x = 30min TOI y = -10 (team goal differential at even strength, etc) z = -2 (your actual +/-) % of minutes played = 50% expected +/- = -5 team relative +/- = +3 !!! Yeah Wildcard nice game bud! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 shorthanded goals scored and allowed (which count towards +/-); does not include PP goals for or PK goals against) Are these not the same thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) here's my formula for team adjusted plus minus.... x = player's avg toi y = team even strength goal differential; includes shorthanded goals scored and allowed (which count towards +/-); does not include PP goals for or PK goals against) z = +/- x * 100 / 60 = % of minutes played (x/60) * y = expected +/- (based on y) eg, if your team loses 10-0 (all goals at even strength), and you're on the ice for 30min, your expected +/- is -5. ((x/60) * y) - z = team relative +/- The difference of your actual +/- and your expected +/- tells you how well you're performing relative to the team. The obvious drawback with the plus/minus stat is that if you're on a bad team, then your plus/minus will always look terrible. However the team relative +/- shows how well you're performing wrt your teammates, so you can't blame a bad team for poor team relative +/-. The Ristolainen example below is a good indicator, he's actually a plus player this season when taking the team into context. Chychrun was a team relative -1, not bad for a rookie D averaging about 17min/gm. Chychrun: x = 16.66 y = -48 z = -14 % of minutes played = 27.8% expected +/- = -13 team relative +/- = -1 Ristolainen: x = 26.5 y = -37 z = -9 % of minutes played = 44.2% expected +/- = -16 team relative +/- = +7 Ristolainen 2014-15 (second year, first full NHL season): x = 20.6 y = -77 z = -32 % of minutes played = 34.3% expected +/- = -26 team relative +/- = -6 That said, when talking low single digits for team relative +/-, it's not a very telling stat. It's when your team relative +/- gets into the double digits that signals you're either significantly contributing to your teams success, or hindering it. For the bold/red/underlined, is this ES+SH ice time? Did you take power play time out of this, since you don't count power play goals (rightly so)? Edited July 13, 2017 by Randall Flagg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 Can mods make a +/- thread, so we can get this outta here? Another example, lets say Flagg's roller team wins 16-4. He played every other shift (30min); was on the ice for all 4 goals against, and 5 of the 16 goals for. The team won big, and he logged a +1... good game right? Not so fast... Flagg: x = 30min TOI y = +12 z = +1 % of minutes played = 50% expected +/- = +6 team relative +/- = -5 Booo, Flagg you suck! haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 shorthanded goals scored and allowed (which count towards +/-); does not include PP goals for or PK goals against) Are these not the same thing? Just stop it will ya? He's rollin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 13, 2017 Report Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) Pi, when you use fraction of 60 minutes per game with time that includes power play time (both the 60 and the ATOI do), your numbers which only tally ES/SH goals are going to be a little different than the value you'd want. I'm not sure it makes a huge difference in the long run, so I'm going to ignore it and try to go through a few things. Edited July 13, 2017 by Randall Flagg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.