HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > By The Numbers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

By The Numbers Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Corsi, shot quality, and the Toronto Maple Leafs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-13-2013, 02:55 PM
  #376
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 38,050
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalupa Batman View Post
Who are you defining as "the advanced stats crowd"?

Most of us view CORSI as an indicator, just like many other things. And none of us view stats as a replacement for watching games.
There are plenty of people who use only corsi/fenwick to predict future success/failure of teams, based on small samples (20 games). And it's not only with open and shut cases as Leafs, but for teams that's much closer to the median when it comes to shot based statistics.

Of course there are plenty of people who like advanced stats who have a more robust statistical background and know the strengths and weaknesses of these stats. They are less likely to make any definitive statements of teams and players and are more careful of making any predictions.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 03:06 PM
  #377
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Windsor
Posts: 4,429
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
There are plenty of people who use only corsi/fenwick to predict future success/failure of teams, based on small samples (20 games). And it's not only with open and shut cases as Leafs, but for teams that's much closer to the median when it comes to shot based statistics.
I wouldn't call those the "advanced stats crowd".

I'd call those people who see something interesting and misunderstand it (and those folks aren't unique to the "stats" community - there are plenty of them in the "I watch the games" community as well).

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 03:08 PM
  #378
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
There are plenty of people who use only corsi/fenwick to predict future success/failure of teams, based on small samples (20 games). And it's not only with open and shut cases as Leafs, but for teams that's much closer to the median when it comes to shot based statistics.

Of course there are plenty of people who like advanced stats who have a more robust statistical background and know the strengths and weaknesses of these stats. They are less likely to make any definitive statements of teams and players and are more careful of making any predictions.
Personally I think they have played pretty awful most of the year and that was apparent to anyone watching the games. However, they continued to defy the odds and have up until recently.

The Leafs have played even worse since they have been down two of their top three centers imo and the coincides with their recent swoon.

And then the last couple games add in missing Phaneuf and is it really much of a prediction at that point?

Secondly as a general question: how do the people pushing stats as a predictor handle the changing of personnel both year to year and within a year? Ignore it and say it averages out in the end?

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 03:16 PM
  #379
Manny*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,200
vCash: 500
The advanced statistics and analytics endeavor should be about the pursuit of truth. Too much wrong/right, not enough true/false.

Manny* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 03:26 PM
  #380
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Line View Post
The advanced statistics and analytics endeavor should be about the pursuit of truth. Too much wrong/right, not enough true/false.


"If it's truth you're interested in, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall."

―Indiana Jones




I couldn't resist.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 05:15 PM
  #381
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Rather convenient? Do you seriously believe that the advanced stats crowd were the lone voices having doubts about Leafs and they now are triumphantly proven right?

Pretty much everyone with the exception of some Leafs faithful knew it's unsustainable to be outplayed night in and night out and rely on goaltenders to get wins. Predicting them would lose more than they did initially is as bold as predicting Buffalo will have a rough year.
I have to ask in a completely non facetious way, have you actually watched them play both when they were winning and now that they're losing?

I ask because it's night and day watching them. This isn't a case of "the goaltending has come back down to earth" or "the offence is not longer scoring at an unsustainable rate". It's a case of a team that was playing it's system well to begin the season and a team that has completely fell off the rails since. Utter domination of late.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 05:33 PM
  #382
Diatomic
WHAT A MOVE, SCORES!
 
Diatomic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Air Canada Centre
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,176
vCash: 500
Adv stats is right

Diatomic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 05:34 PM
  #383
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
 
SmellOfVictory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,410
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
I have to ask in a completely non facetious way, have you actually watched them play both when they were winning and now that they're losing?

I ask because it's night and day watching them. This isn't a case of "the goaltending has come back down to earth" or "the offence is not longer scoring at an unsustainable rate". It's a case of a team that was playing it's system well to begin the season and a team that has completely fell off the rails since. Utter domination of late.
It's very easy for a lucky team to look good, and an unlucky team to look bad, to the eye. When every pass hits, when the puck is consistently moved past opposing players with no bobbles, when "seeing eye shots" go in with aplomb, when the goaltender is standing on his head, these can all be indicative of a team on a hot (lucky) streak. But it also makes it look like a team is "clicking" or whatever; and maybe they are "clicking" better than normal, but it's still normally unsustainable. Luck isn't purely random shots bouncing off some guy's ass and into the net, or a goalie making a save without any idea of where the puck actually is.

SmellOfVictory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2013, 05:41 PM
  #384
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
It's very easy for a lucky team to look good, and an unlucky team to look bad, to the eye. When every pass hits, when the puck is consistently moved past opposing players with no bobbles, when "seeing eye shots" go in with aplomb, when the goaltender is standing on his head, these can all be indicative of a team on a hot (lucky) streak. But it also makes it look like a team is "clicking" or whatever; and maybe they are "clicking" better than normal, but it's still normally unsustainable. Luck isn't purely random shots bouncing off some guy's ass and into the net, or a goalie making a save without any idea of where the puck actually is.
Understand that completely and there has definitely been cases of bad luck during this stretch and good luck when they were winning. But it's not a case of the same looking team now losing games they were winning. Whether it's the injuries, the coaching... whatever.. the team for a good month now has looked terrible, far worse than they did before to better describe it.

Last night was a good example.. the Blues scored from quality scoring chances aplomb whereas Kadri scored on a shot that shouldn't have gone in from where it was shot. The Leafs in theory could win a game like that and that wouldn't be sustainable. But that's not what was happening before.. the exact opposite in fact. Other teams were shooting from bad locations and the Leafs weren't and the shot differential didn't show that. Right now the shot differential is showing the lopsided numbers, but what we again aren't seeing is where those shots are taken and it isn't pretty right now.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2013, 02:54 AM
  #385
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
Understand that completely and there has definitely been cases of bad luck during this stretch and good luck when they were winning. But it's not a case of the same looking team now losing games they were winning. Whether it's the injuries, the coaching... whatever.. the team for a good month now has looked terrible, far worse than they did before to better describe it.

Last night was a good example.. the Blues scored from quality scoring chances aplomb whereas Kadri scored on a shot that shouldn't have gone in from where it was shot. The Leafs in theory could win a game like that and that wouldn't be sustainable. But that's not what was happening before.. the exact opposite in fact. Other teams were shooting from bad locations and the Leafs weren't and the shot differential didn't show that. Right now the shot differential is showing the lopsided numbers, but what we again aren't seeing is where those shots are taken and it isn't pretty right now.
Any evidence to support this (scoring chance data? Shot location data)?

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2013, 10:58 AM
  #386
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master_Of_Districts View Post
Any evidence to support this (scoring chance data? Shot location data)?
As of late, no but I'm sure it'll verify what I've seen.

When they were winning, yes there were several links posted including some of my own which showed them having shots within 10 feet of the goal just as often as all the top teams but allowing far more shots from outside 20 feet than pretty much everyone worth talking about and taking far less themselves.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2013, 02:30 PM
  #387
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
As of late, no but I'm sure it'll verify what I've seen.

When they were winning, yes there were several links posted including some of my own which showed them having shots within 10 feet of the goal just as often as all the top teams but allowing far more shots from outside 20 feet than pretty much everyone worth talking about and taking far less themselves.
There was an article posted by the poster Poignant Discussion on November 6, when the Leafs were still well over .500.

At that point, the Leafs had taken 124 shots within 20 feet of the net, and allowed 141.

That translates to a percentage of 0.467. Which is not good.

Sure - 0.467 was better than their overall shot percentage, which was something like 0.410 at the same point in time.

Still, though, if their shot quality differential has diminished since that time - as you claim it has - that should tell you something important about the sustainability of this type of thing.

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2013, 06:02 PM
  #388
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master_Of_Districts View Post
There was an article posted by the poster Poignant Discussion on November 6, when the Leafs were still well over .500.

At that point, the Leafs had taken 124 shots within 20 feet of the net, and allowed 141.

That translates to a percentage of 0.467. Which is not good.

Sure - 0.467 was better than their overall shot percentage, which was something like 0.410 at the same point in time.

Still, though, if their shot quality differential has diminished since that time - as you claim it has - that should tell you something important about the sustainability of this type of thing.
I posted the stats. Their ratio within 10 feet was on par with LA and Pitts. It was outside 20 feet that became terrible for them

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2013, 03:19 AM
  #389
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
I posted the stats. Their ratio within 10 feet was on par with LA and Pitts. It was outside 20 feet that became terrible for them
Yeah.

40 - 70 shots is a great sample size.

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2013, 05:30 AM
  #390
matnor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Boston
Country: Sweden
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Not exactly what you're looking for, but this article goes through a couple different stats and their predictive ability.
Thanks!

matnor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2013, 11:03 AM
  #391
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master_Of_Districts View Post
Yeah.

40 - 70 shots is a great sample size.
In the NHL, not many shots are allowed from within 10 feet despite the majority of goals coming from there. I posted the stats well into the season, it wasn't game 5.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2013, 02:02 PM
  #392
Micklebot
I bee-beard'lieve
 
Micklebot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
In the NHL, not many shots are allowed from within 10 feet despite the majority of goals coming from there. I posted the stats well into the season, it wasn't game 5.
About 9.5% so far this year have been from within 10 feet, while 20% of goals are from within that range. Toronto currently has 11-12% of their shots coming from within 10 feet and 21% of their goals, so they are above average, though I haven't taken the time to look at the distribution across the league.

That said, had they been getting the average percentage of shots from within 10 ft, they'd only have about 20 fewer shots from within 10 feet, which is less than one per game. So the question is, is that .75 extra shot per game within 10 feet worth whatever they are sacrificing to get it?

Micklebot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-18-2013, 08:06 AM
  #393
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
In the NHL, not many shots are allowed from within 10 feet despite the majority of goals coming from there. I posted the stats well into the season, it wasn't game 5.
Well, with a longer season thats declined to about even, 83 for and 86 against. Meanwhile they are getting slaughtered at every other distance.

Maybe they did have a nifty system to increase their extra close shots and decrease their opponents. But I've heard the brilliant system argument before and if it is a real thing, it would seem that in the modern NHL, SH% boosting systems are fragile and don't last compared to the long term viability of shot volume/possession control.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2013, 08:46 AM
  #394
JackJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
How long have people been chanting the regression was inevitable mantra for the Leafs? All of last season and up until 5 games ago when the Leafs go into a bad stretch with a depleted team and now it is time for the "I told you so".
With this franchise it was only a matter of time until they imploded.

JackJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2013, 09:19 AM
  #395
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,229
vCash: 50
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Interestingly enough, during this 13 game stretch the Leafs shot numbers have been better than they were before.

Average shot deficit in the last 13 games is -7.1 per game compared to -9.7 prior. If you exclude 3 games against Dallas, Ottawa and Pittsburgh in which they were outshot by 24, 26 and 19 but went 2-0-1 that average rises to -2.3 but their record in those 10 games is a terrible 1-8-1

Obviously we're dealing with odd sample size issues when looking at stretches that small, but it's entertaining nonetheless.

__________________
Come join us on the By The Numbers forum. Take a look at our introduction post if you're new. If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.
hatterson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2013, 09:30 AM
  #396
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackJ View Post
With this franchise it was only a matter of time until they imploded.
So the broken record keeps saying..

I'll be more interested to see how they do when Bozak and Bolland are both back and healthy.

They are still by no means a very good team but Bolland was playing very well before he was hurt and I really believe that the Leafs paper thin center ice position is the biggest problem they have.

Even when healthy their C depth is mediocre.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 05:03 PM
  #397
Micklebot
I bee-beard'lieve
 
Micklebot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatterson View Post
Interestingly enough, during this 13 game stretch the Leafs shot numbers have been better than they were before.

Average shot deficit in the last 13 games is -7.1 per game compared to -9.7 prior. If you exclude 3 games against Dallas, Ottawa and Pittsburgh in which they were outshot by 24, 26 and 19 but went 2-0-1 that average rises to -2.3 but their record in those 10 games is a terrible 1-8-1

Obviously we're dealing with odd sample size issues when looking at stretches that small, but it's entertaining nonetheless.
Without looking into it at all, my first guess is score effect; If they're down, especially by 2 or more goals, the other team slows down, and they push offensively.

Micklebot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2013, 09:50 AM
  #398
Cap'n Flavour
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Romania
Posts: 3,443
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Cap'n Flavour Send a message via MSN to Cap'n Flavour
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
I have to ask in a completely non facetious way, have you actually watched them play both when they were winning and now that they're losing?

I ask because it's night and day watching them. This isn't a case of "the goaltending has come back down to earth" or "the offence is not longer scoring at an unsustainable rate". It's a case of a team that was playing it's system well to begin the season and a team that has completely fell off the rails since. Utter domination of late.
I did and they were playing terrible hockey during the hot streak and have been playing just as badly since then. You can count on one hand the number of games the Leafs have soundly outplayed their opponents this season and they were not all at the beginning of the season (in fact two were not long ago, the 7-3 win vs Chicago and the unfortunate 3-1 loss against LA).

Cap'n Flavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2013, 01:48 PM
  #399
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cap'n Flavour View Post
I did and they were playing terrible hockey during the hot streak and have been playing just as badly since then. You can count on one hand the number of games the Leafs have soundly outplayed their opponents this season and they were not all at the beginning of the season (in fact two were not long ago, the 7-3 win vs Chicago and the unfortunate 3-1 loss against LA).
You could say the same about the cup winning devils too. Outplaying is a very subjective term... The way I see it teams can skate around with the puck all they want but if they're not able to get quality chances it doesn't really matter.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2013, 04:02 PM
  #400
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Do you guys think if Scotty Bowman would have been hired instead of Brian Burke things would have been different or about the same.About 5or 6 yrs ago Bowman wanted job but one of the bosses said no way

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.