HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Notices

Islanders were a day one winner

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-02-2011, 09:22 PM
  #1
jdr016
Registered User
 
jdr016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,130
vCash: 500
Islanders were a day one winner

Along with Carolina and Chicago.

Quote:
Islanders GM Garth Snow made the right move in looking to upgrade at third-line center over C Zenon Konopka, who despite the league's fourth-best faceoff percentage (57.7 percent) was really a fourth-liner pressed into a checking-line role. While C Marty Reasoner is likewise one of the NHL's best in the faceoff circle (54.5 percent, and better by advanced metrics), the 34-year-old veteran provides an all-around game. Signing at a reasonable two years, $2.7 million, the journeyman is an instant upgrade for the Islanders' bottom six, and an incremental improvement for a young, talented team that's set to compete for a playoff berth next season.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/insid...3fid%3d6732723


Last edited by Homeland Security: 07-02-2011 at 10:43 PM. Reason: Added link
jdr016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 09:25 PM
  #2
M Moulson Ale
Vanek to the rescue!
 
M Moulson Ale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 2,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdr016 View Post
Along with Carolina and Chicago.
ESPN was right that they a winners but they still don't know **** about the isles
They upgraded the fourth line not the third
Kenopka didn't even play the third line

M Moulson Ale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 09:43 PM
  #3
PWJunior
Moderator
Beware the POOP!
 
PWJunior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Watertown, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 12,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Moulson Ale View Post
ESPN was right that they a winners but they still don't know **** about the isles
They upgraded the fourth line not the third
Kenopka didn't even play the third line
At least we're being noticed by ESPN in a positive manner. It's a refreshing change.

PWJunior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 10:42 PM
  #4
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
What advanced metrics say Reasoner is better at faceoffs than Konopka? I am curious

Edit: I suppose an Elo Rating system for faceoffs would be way more accurate than pure %, since it would take into account the skill of the opponent. It would also be nice to see an Elo Rating system for faceoffs broken down by standard categories, like offensive zone vs. defensive zone, late game situation, etc. I would also expect Face-off Won % to be distorted if one player takes more short-handed face-offs than another, relative to their total faceoffs each, since winning short-handed face-offs is much, much harder to do.


Last edited by Brain Hemorrhage: 07-02-2011 at 10:49 PM.
Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 10:49 PM
  #5
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brain Hemorrhage View Post
What advanced metrics say Reasoner is better at faceoffs than Konopka? I am curious

Edit: I suppose an Elo Rating system for faceoffs would be way more accurate than pure %, since it would take into account the skill of the opponent. It would also be nice to see an Elo Rating system for faceoffs broken down by standard categories, like offensive zone vs. defensive zone, late game situation, etc.
I haven't seen anyone say or write that Reasoner has better faceoff numbers, or is better at faceoffs.

While we're at it, I will say that if ZK has a 57-60 FO win percentage while Reasoner has a 54 FO win percentage, the all-round game and 25 points you get from Reasoner would seem to outweigh what Kenopka can do on the ice as a player and make that difference in FO success rather minor...

Throw in the fact that Haley can take over Kenopka's fighting role and I see this as an upgrade to our fourth line.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 10:52 PM
  #6
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Chapn,

You did not read that anywhere?

Then you did NOT read the quote in the original post of this thread!

It clearly says Reasoner, although having worse FO% according to normal definition, has better FO% when using advanced metrics.

Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 10:58 PM
  #7
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brain Hemorrhage View Post
Chapn,

You did not read that anywhere?

Then you did NOT read the quote in the original post of this thread!

It clearly says Reasoner, although having worse FO% according to normal definition, has better FO% when using advanced metrics.
I read through it four times.

I don't think it's saying his faceoff percentage is better than Konopka's using advanced metrics, but that it is better than 54.5% using advanced metrics.

Nonetheless, I don't know what advanced metrics even means in this case.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 11:07 PM
  #8
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
For what it's worth, here are our centers FO stats the past few years, and progress/regression in that area:

John Tavares 10-11 693 wins, 626 losses, 1319 faceoffs, 52.5 %
Zenon Konpoka 10-11, 620 wins, 455 losses, 1075 faceoffs, 57.7 %
Frans Nielsen 10-11, 446 wins, 519 losses, 965 faceoffs, 46.2 %
Josh Bailey 10-11, 273 wins, 342 losses, 615 faceoffs, 44.4 %

John Tavares 09-10, 536 wins, 593, losses, 1129 faceoffs, 47.5 %
Frans Nielsen 09-10, 583 wins, 582 losses, 1165 faceoffs, 50.0 %
Josh Bailey 09-10, 171 wins, 255 losses, 426 faceoffs, 40.1 %
Richard Park 09-10, 536 wins, 504 losses, 1040 faceoffs, 51.5 %

Richard Park 08-09, 396 wins, 413 losses, 809 faceoffs, 49.0 %
Josh Bailey 08-09, 332 wins, 475 losses, 807 faceoffs, 41.1 %
Frans Nielsen 08-09, 358 wins, 400 losses, 758 faceoffs, 47.2 %
Doug Weight 08-09, 306 wins, 373 losses, 679 faceoffs, 45.1 %

To explain a bit further for those too lazy to check Wikipedia, an Elo Rating system is a standard rating system based on a Normal Distribution ("Bell Curve") and was originally designed for rating the quality of chess players. The idea is to rate the quality of a win vs. the quality of a loss. The same idea can apply to faceoffs. (Chess has since switched to a different rating system but still refers to the rating system as an Elo Rating system in honor of its originator.) Baseball sabrmetrics researchers have applied Elo Rating systems to baseball players as well.

By the way, a Golf Handicap... do you have any idea how naive that is? All it does is measure your "potential" by basing it on 80% of your score.


Last edited by Brain Hemorrhage: 07-02-2011 at 11:17 PM. Reason: Misspelled Doug Weight as Dough Weight
Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 11:16 PM
  #9
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chapin Landvogt View Post
I don't think it's saying his faceoff percentage is better than Konopka's using advanced metrics, but that it is better than 54.5% using advanced metrics.
Uh, ok. In English, it says his ability to win faceoffs relative to the rest of the league is actually better than Konopka.

Simple comparison, Reasoner to Konopka:

09-10, Shorthanded:
Reasoner 142 wins, 201 losses
Konopka 8 wins, 2 losses

10-11, Shorthanded:
Reasoner 130 wins, 146 losses
Konopka 137 wins, 125 losses


To me, there is no contest: Konopka is a much better faceoff man. But I must be missing something.

(Still like the Reasoner signing, but I think we will miss having a guy who can steal draws.)

Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 11:16 PM
  #10
Isles Junkie
Registered User
 
Isles Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,845
vCash: 500
ESPN doesn't know a damn thing about hockey.

Isles Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 11:21 PM
  #11
Isles Junkie
Registered User
 
Isles Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,845
vCash: 500
Advanced Metrics in hockey can get the puck out right now

Isles Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 11:35 PM
  #12
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brain Hemorrhage View Post
Uh, ok. In English, it says his ability to win faceoffs relative to the rest of the league is actually better than Konopka.
The shorthanded stats you provide are interesting. Alone how many faceoffs Reasoner has taken shorthanded already jumps out at me..

Still, what you write above... I don't know how you can possibly infer that from the statement quoted by the OP.

The statement again:
>>>
Islanders GM Garth Snow made the right move in looking to upgrade at third-line center over C Zenon Konopka, who despite the league's fourth-best faceoff percentage (57.7 percent) was really a fourth-liner pressed into a checking-line role. While C Marty Reasoner is likewise one of the NHL's best in the faceoff circle (54.5 percent, and better by advanced metrics), the 34-year-old veteran provides an all-around game. Signing at a reasonable two years, $2.7 million, the journeyman is an instant upgrade for the Islanders' bottom six, and an incremental improvement for a young, talented team that's set to compete for a playoff berth next season.
<<<

I've read it repeatedly... in English, it is saying that his 54.5 percent is better by advanced metrics (thus, when advanced metrics are applied), not better than Konopka's faceoff percentage.

If your interpretation of that statement is what the author is trying to say, then he's gotta be a LOT clearer than what he actually wrote.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 01:04 AM
  #13
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 4,669
vCash: 500
Here's the biggest difference between ZK and MR in the faceoff circle.

Late in the game, down a goal with the faceoff in the offensive zone. You can put Reasoner out there for a faceoff and not have to rush him off the ice after he wins it. The upgrade he brings after the faceoff is won, far outweighs the small difference in FO% between the two.

Jester9881 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 03:54 AM
  #14
IslesNorway
Registered User
 
IslesNorway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Norway
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 500
Reasoner scored 14 goals last season and has put up similar goal numbers every year for a long time. Konopka had two goals last season. Now ZK may be a better faceoff guy by a small margin but the points and skill that Reasoner brings compared to ZK makes this team better!

I daresay that if Reasoner can score 14 goals for the Isles next season then they will have a few more points and edge a bit closer to the playoffs.

IslesNorway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 05:42 AM
  #15
Hipster Doofus
Registered User
 
Hipster Doofus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 6,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isle Junkie View Post
Advanced Metrics in hockey can get the puck out right now
It was Kukla's Korner stat that originally started the Frans Nielsen appreciation movement around the league.

Hipster Doofus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 07:07 AM
  #16
Disgraced Cosmonaut
Registered User
 
Disgraced Cosmonaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,380
vCash: 500
reasoner will not probably score in the teens for our team. if he hits double digits i'll be somewhat shocked. i'm glad to see some info on his FO% ability. he's clearly better than others on the team- though JT's improvement YOY was impressive. he's the one to watch IMO b/c he's such a student of the game. the more i learn about him, the more i like him- even if he's no sidney or alex o.

i would hire the all time % leader for a tutorial in August. do it garth. or at least get some guru like this:

64+%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021004508.html

Disgraced Cosmonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 07:32 AM
  #17
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Great article. That raises another way to judge faceoff men:


What makes Steckel so dominant, teammates and coaches said, is a combination of strength, technique and study. Unlike many centers, Steckel's motion is nearly identical on either side of the ice, a powerful downward movement that sends the puck straight back between his legs rather than to the side, eliminating concerns about putting the puck toward his own net. While, at 6 feet 5, he is often taller than his opponents, Steckel can get low to the ice without sacrificing balance or power, which is generated from the legs, back and abdomen.

Some coaches urge players to use a standard grip during faceoffs so they're prepared to play the puck immediately, but the left-handed Steckel increases his power by using overhand grips with both hands. And while some centers may direct the puck at angles to create scoring chances in the offensive zone, Steckel is almost always aiming to place the puck directly behind him.


That's another way I could see FO% being micro-analyzed: After winning the faceoff, does the team score? There are advanced metrics that show the relationship between puck possession and winning, but this adds another folder: Would you rather have David Steckel, or a FO specialist who can win a draw angled back to your PP triggerman? Does Steckel's "lack of creativity" affect how we should view his FO%?

Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 07:33 AM
  #18
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
Here's the biggest difference between ZK and MR in the faceoff circle.

Late in the game, down a goal with the faceoff in the offensive zone. You can put Reasoner out there for a faceoff and not have to rush him off the ice after he wins it. The upgrade he brings after the faceoff is won, far outweighs the small difference in FO% between the two.

Well, then, there should be advanced metrics that show that.

Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:32 AM
  #19
crashthenet
Registered User
 
crashthenet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hockey Falls
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
I like Z but...

I would prefer Reasoner out there in almost every situation(except against pittsburgh).

crashthenet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:39 AM
  #20
Hip Of Rick
Registered User
 
Hip Of Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,039
vCash: 500
Hard to call us a "winner" when we grab a 4th line center. Bottom 5 teams need more than a 4th line center to make a jump. I am happy with Reasoner but we need much more before opening night

Hip Of Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:45 AM
  #21
M Moulson Ale
Vanek to the rescue!
 
M Moulson Ale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 2,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hip Of Rick View Post
Hard to call us a "winner" when we grab a 4th line center. Bottom 5 teams need more than a 4th line center to make a jump. I am happy with Reasoner but we need much more before opening night
Here we go again....

M Moulson Ale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:51 AM
  #22
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
After the Insiders link was added to the original post, I saw that the ESPN author was Timo Seppa and I looked him up, and found an article this year by him called Ultimate Faceoff Percentage

After reading this article, I am shocked he presents his phony "Advanced Metric" without actually telling the reader how they can calculate it themselves. Moreover, he attributes home vs. road fo% to rink bias, and throws out all home FO stats, when the real reason players are better on home ice is due to the rules, not the rink. (Edit: See Rule 76.2: "When it is unclear as to which of the four face-off spots is the nearest, the spot that gives the home team the greatest territorial advantage in the neutral zone will be selected for the ensuing face-off." See also Rule 76.4: "The visiting player shall place his stick within the designated white area first followed immediately by the home player.")

He also throws out special teams stats as bias, arguing that opponents put their best faceoff men on the ice (without, funnily enough, providing stats to back up that assertion).

This guy needs to learn what an Elo Rating system is.

What a joke.

I hate phony statheads. Ultimate Phony-Off %!!!


Last edited by Brain Hemorrhage: 07-03-2011 at 08:59 AM.
Brain Hemorrhage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:55 AM
  #23
TennesseeJedd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brain Hemorrhage View Post
Uh, ok. In English, it says his ability to win faceoffs relative to the rest of the league is actually better than Konopka.

Simple comparison, Reasoner to Konopka:

09-10, Shorthanded:
Reasoner 142 wins, 201 losses
Konopka 8 wins, 2 losses

10-11, Shorthanded:
Reasoner 130 wins, 146 losses
Konopka 137 wins, 125 losses


To me, there is no contest: Konopka is a much better faceoff man. But I must be missing something.

(Still like the Reasoner signing, but I think we will miss having a guy who can steal draws.)
"Advanced Metrics" I'm sure takes into account that after the faceoff Reasoner can play a full shift and chip in offensively.

TennesseeJedd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 08:56 AM
  #24
Hip Of Rick
Registered User
 
Hip Of Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Moulson Ale View Post
Here we go again....
We filled a need and Reasoner should be a solid fit. We still need a top 6 forward and top 4 dman if we want to complete. A 4th line center does not make or break a team. We are not "winners" with a 4th line center

Hip Of Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 09:28 AM
  #25
Brain Hemorrhage
Registered User
 
Brain Hemorrhage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TennesseeJedd View Post
"Advanced Metrics" I'm sure takes into account that after the faceoff Reasoner can play a full shift and chip in offensively.
See my post above. Timo Seppa's Ultimate Faceoff % is full of selection bias.

Brain Hemorrhage 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 01:53 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.