Jump to content

Advanced Metrics show Sabres probably should have a better record than what they did...positive Corsi for first time in a long time.


matter2003

Recommended Posts

Sabres finished 14th in the NHL in Corsi, at 50.24%(all strengths), the first time they have been over 50% in this stat since 2009-2010(granted 2010-2011 they were at 49.99%, but still). This is a good sign and a move in the right direction from last year where they finished 21st in the NHL, and in fact the highest they have finished since the stat began being tracked in 2007-2008 where they finished 50.21%.

 

Even better is the young players on the team are the Relative Corsi leaders(meaning we get more chances than we give up when they are on the ice).  

Relative Corsi leaders:

Olafsson 7.5

Nylander 5.0

Monour 4.9

Dahlin 4.5

Skinner 3.7

Eichel 2.9

Reinhart 2.9

Pilut 2.5

Nelson 2.3

Rodrigues 2.0

 

In addition, the advanced metrics showed the Sabres had a -12 expected goal differential, meaning based on league averages, they should have scored 12 more goals than what they did. Combine this with the advanced metrics showing the goaltenders saved a combined 9 goals fewer than expected and this is a 21 goal swing which could have gone a long way to getting us into the mid 80's point wise if not closer to 90.

The law of averages tends to say this should balance out season to season, meaning that while we certainly didn't play up to our capabilities, some of this might be attributable to bad luck too.

 

 

Edited by matter2003
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WildCard said:

I looked at these the other day. The Corsi is fine, true, but I'm pretty sure the heat map was garbage. We just through ***** from the point and hopped it worked

Right. Our high danger percentage was poop, which is part of the reason our PDO was so low and nobody could score regularly.

Just now, WildCard said:

I looked at these the other day. The Corsi is fine, true, but I'm pretty sure the heat map was garbage. We just through ***** from the point and hopped it worked

Right. Our high danger percentage was poop, which is part of the reason our PDO was so low and nobody could score regularly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

So Phil was killed by puck luck?

 

 

I'm okay with that.

No, he was killed by believing that reliance on puck luck would lead to wins so long as the volume was sufficient. In other words, he fundamentally misunderstood the statistical arguments being placed before him.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corsi makes them look better for sure, and they did have many more chances than in the previous few years but they can't finish. They don't bury those chances and as said above they just throw it towards the net and hope. This is why I question the value of over using Corsi as a measurement. Chances are not goals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

No, he was killed by believing that reliance on puck luck would lead to wins so long as the volume was sufficient. In other words, he fundamentally misunderstood the statistical arguments being placed before him.

Expected goals takes those things into account, and the Sabres still should have scored 12 more goals than they did.

In addition, the goalies should have saved 9 more goals than they did taking all factors into account.

Net swing is 21 goals...that likely equals at least 10 points in the standings.

Edited by matter2003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stat most often overlooked with the Sabres is shooting percentage. They consistently suck at it, year after year.  It’s why they don’t score enough goals, they can’t shoot. Corsi is fun to look at, nothing else matters if you can’t bury your chances when you have them. And they can’t. 

Edited by Billznut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Expected goals takes those things into account, and the Sabres still should have scored 12 more goals than they did.

In addition, the goalies should have saved 9 more goals than they did taking all factors into account.

Net swing is 21 goals...that likely equals at least 10 points in the standings.

I was just scoffing at the notion it was pure puck luck. While things certainly regress towards the expected, xG is still based on a distribution. The Sabres results weren't so far off that as to be shocking. There was more to it than just luck, such as system and usage. This is Housley's second year in a row where the goaltending was atrocious. Yet somehow Lehner is a Vezina candidate in a different system, and was (shootouts aside) perfectly serviceable under Bylsma. If you're a coach with a team consistently looking like an outlier on xG, there are probably some other underlying factors at work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Corsi makes them look better for sure, and they did have many more chances than in the previous few years but they can't finish. They don't bury those chances and as said above they just throw it towards the net and hope. This is why I question the value of over using Corsi as a measurement. Chances are not goals

Yeah i agree, analytics & stats like Corsi only tell you so much

Those chances turn into goals when your roster is filled with more players who can finish, like if we had Draisatl here instead of Okposo, ROR instead of Sobotka. That style could work if you have the talent at forward to put those pucks in the net. Otherwise you get what we had this year, tons of games where imo we outworked & outshot the opposition, only to lose the game because the puck just wasnt going in the net.

Later in the season PH shouldve adjusted the scheme once it became clear that style wasn't working for us. But on another team with more forwards that can finish, I think that system can be pretty effective. Perhaps thats why many of us argued whether the issue was with PH or with the roster JBots assembled. Kind of like the chicken or the egg debate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those chances also turn into gold when they are coming from high danger areas in tight.  Most of the time this team wasn't playing to get chances in tight.  And I don't think that was a Housley thing.  Players weren't getting to the net and Housley talked about the need to do so. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Weave said:

Those chances also turn into gold when they are coming from high danger areas in tight.  Most of the time this team wasn't playing to get chances in tight.  And I don't think that was a Housley thing.  Players weren't getting to the net and Housley talked about the need to do so. 

He did talk about it. Doesn't mean he knew how to coach to facilitate it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

He did talk about it. Doesn't mean he knew how to coach to facilitate it. 

They aren't getting through elite levels of hockey without knowing that.  I don't think they need to be coached into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MillerVaive said:

Later in the season PH shouldve adjusted the scheme once it became clear that style wasn't working for us. But on another team with more forwards that can finish, I think that system can be pretty effective. Perhaps thats why many of us argued whether the issue was with PH or with the roster JBots assembled. Kind of like the chicken or the egg debate

I think the answer is simple. It's both. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Weave said:

They aren't getting through elite levels of hockey without knowing that.  I don't think they need to be coached into it.

I think the system a coach implements matters. And it's not limited to the Sabres. Darryl Sutter won two Cups in LA and that team was regularly a possession monster, but they were also a very low shooting percentage team during his tenure. Don't think it could be said that they lacked talent. 

Expanding on this a little, the Sabres were 16th in the league in high danger shot generation over the course of Bylsma's 2 seasons. Housley's 2 season? They were 29th. Only the Canucks and Kings were worse. They were going to the right areas at least at a mediocre level, then Housley came in, and it tanked. I might not be able to break down a system like Flagg, but I do think they matter for what players do on the ice.

Edited by TrueBlueGED
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I think the system a coach implements matters. And it's not limited to the Sabres. Darryl Sutter won two Cups in LA and that team was regularly a possession monster, but they were also a very low shooting percentage team during his tenure. Don't think it could be said that they lacked talent. 

Expanding on this a little, the Sabres were 16th in the league in high danger shot generation over the course of Bylsma's 2 seasons. Housley's 2 season? They were 29th. Only the Canucks and Kings were worse. They were going to the right areas at least at a mediocre level, then Housley came in, and it tanked. I might not be able to break down a system like Flagg, but I do think they matter for what players do on the ice.

I miss Flagg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...