View Single Post
Old
08-19-2012, 01:14 AM
  #29
MAK19
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 13,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sureves View Post
I've wondered this myself, and I personally reject the premise that QoC doesn't matter at all - despite the studies people have done on it.

I do however accept the fact that the difference over 82 games in QoC between any first pairing defenseman is so negligible that it doesn't warrant adjustment.
I don't think there needs adjustment on QoC - if all defensemen are top 2 on their teams.

Karlsson, Weber, Chara, etc are all top 2 and play against top lines.

However, in the OP, Letang leads many categories, and he is 4th on his team in QoC. He doesn't/didn't face top quality opposition, just 2nd/3rd/4th lines. Therefore Letang's stats are inflated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sureves View Post
Yeah sure, sorry, what I did above is using +/- per 60 relative to team, as well as +/- per 60 relative to 10-most common teammates, as such it is a relative stat.

As such, if we are going to consider zone starts %, it needs to be relative to the team he plays on. That way, if we are going to say for instance:

Player A Team A: +0.20 per 60 relative to team, +0.25 per 60 relative to teammates, 50% o-zone starts

versus

Player B Team B: +0.20 per 60 relative to team, +0.25 per 60 relative to teammates, 50% o-zone starts

We need to know the relative o-zone starts in order to see who was the better player between the two. Perhaps Team A is in the offensive zone 80% of the time and Team B is in the offensive zone only 20% of the time. The fact that Player B has 50% o-zone starts despite the fact that his team is almost never on the attack shows he is being used in an offensive role and only getting +0.25 per 60 relative to teammates. It should be easier for him to get +/- relative to team/teammates since he's being used in a more offensive role. While Player A is playing 50% o-zone starts despite the fact that his team is almost always on the attack and as such is being used in a defensive role, and yet he still manages to be +0.25 per 60.

Player A is better in this case (all else being equal of course) and that's why you need relative o-zone starts to use in conjunction with relative (to team/teammates) +/- and not nominal o-zone starts.
Not sure about this...

Take Karlsson with his 57%. I think that means that he starts 57% of every faceoff that is not in the neutral zone in the offensive zone, and 43% in the defensive zone.

I don't think it has anything to do with the team, it's individual. If a team starts more in the defensive zone in general, then all their players will have low % offensive zone starts.





Anyway, good job. Did you steal any of my ideas, they look familiar

MAK19 is offline   Reply With Quote