Teams jumping on the advanced stats bandwagon

[DragonfromTO]

I don't mind analytics, but it bothers me when they are used as a crux to denigrate people whose lives are too busy to familiarize themselves with them. Like, sorry but you can't talk about hockey anymore because you don't know how to calculate a QOT. That isn't fun for anybody and just makes people look like enormous dbags.

In the reporting world, James Mirtle can suck a fat one. Telling me once a night on twitter that the Leafs' possession numbers are bad is enough. He literally reminds you every 5 minutes and is a hero to the analytics folks.

This seems to be the new narrative now, "it's not that I hate stats but the people that support them are so mean about it!". Yeah, because it's totally not the enormous and "established" ranks of the mainstream media that have been dismissive, it's probably the handful of guys with virtually no power trying to promote new ideas.

And I'm sorry, but if you're interested in hockey and you've got time to spend following and discussing it in detail (and I'm assuming you were talking about casual fans and not media members up there... the latter have no excuse), then you're probably not too busy to try and understand some of the new information that's out there. You make it sound like you have to be crunching numbers all night yourself to have a basic understanding of what some of this stuff might (and might not) mean and what conclusions they can help inform. You don't need to be or to study as much as Albert Einstein to have a working knowledge of physics. Do you think that guys like Billy Beane or Masai Ujiri are particularly mathematically inclined and/or spending much of their time crunching numbers?

I suspect that some of the reason that Mirtle mentions possession so much is that possession is very very important and yet almost no one else doing his job talks about it in any detail, other than maybe an occasional vague statement that Team A needs to improve their puck possession (and I feel like half the time this is just presented as a quote from Team A's coaching staff anyway, once again with no real or specific detail). Of all the objectionable things going on in "the reporting world", I would think that James Mirtle should be way down your list. The dude at least tries to throw light on things rather than just sharing a few quotes from team personnel and calling it a day.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Advanced stats have a place, but this fact right here is why you can never trust them fully.

Autopilot is great until that mountain is approaching fast and your GPS thinks it's 2 miles to the right.


One of my sporting heroes, former Orioles manager Earl Weaver was one of the early adopters of what has morphed into advanced stats. He had a room full of binders and notebooks on every player in the league (including minors) and what each batter did against each pitcher. That's it. How successful was guy a vs guy b. And it led him to pinch hit some guy like Lenn Sakata because he was 4-5 against some stud pitcher 10 years ago when they both played in the grapefruit league.

And it always worked.

That's what stats should be for. How do people match up. Not so announcers can talk about how a guy plays on the third Sunday following a waxing crescent moon when his team wears white socks against a team with a mascot who is primarily grey.

Some shit don't matter.

 

[dash]

I think Mirtle is one of the best guys out there for explaining advanced stats while at the same time not being preachy about it. Granted, I don't follow him on twitter, but I've read several of his Globe articles.

 

[forty_three]

Nah. It's more hyperbole.

 

[pixburgher66]

I sort of get why a lot of the stats "geeks" were mean or jackass-ish...they were the front runners of these stats, and their opinions were dismissed and viewed as lesser simply because a lot of the mainstream media and a lot of the ol' boys club refused to budge from "the way" (SEE: Baseball, Major League). However, now that they're part of the "cool kids", they're acting fairly petulant and holier than thou. I like advanced stats quite a bit, and I won't lie: I struggle to fully understand them. I like the guys that are willing to break it down and explain the significance (Jesse Marshall, a Pens blogger is *fantastic* about this), but some are simply condescending (Dellow). There's *nothing* wrong with watching the game for face value and simply enjoying it. And if someone brings it up in an argument and you don't understand said significance, simply admit that. We're all adults. I think that it adds a fun and unique perspective on the sport. I like seeing some of these guys that were formerly regarded as "character players" being given statistical value now. In the past it was simply their grit/character, but now we can see that a lot of the reason they had such an impact was possession. So...I like stats, but not some of the condescending jerks that think you're an idiot if you don't fully grasp or buy into them.

 

[mattola]

stats are fun
fun is stats
I like stats
cause... poop

 

[mattola]

it says I need a vacation 43

 

[dash]

Corsi or Fenwick
Team possession stats are key
Watching games are fun

 

[pixburgher66]

Corsi or Fenwick
Team possession stats are key
Watching games are fun

As a non-stats head, I do feel I can still enjoy the game, unlike many of them.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I sort of get why a lot of the stats "geeks" were mean or jackass-ish...they were the front runners of these stats, and their opinions were dismissed and viewed as lesser simply because a lot of the mainstream media and a lot of the ol' boys club refused to budge from "the way" (SEE: Baseball, Major League). However, now that they're part of the "cool kids", they're acting fairly petulant and holier than thou. I like advanced stats quite a bit, and I won't lie: I struggle to fully understand them. I like the guys that are willing to break it down and explain the significance (Jesse Marshall, a Pens blogger is *fantastic* about this), but some are simply condescending (Dellow). There's *nothing* wrong with watching the game for face value and simply enjoying it. And if someone brings it up in an argument and you don't understand said significance, simply admit that. We're all adults. I think that it adds a fun and unique perspective on the sport. I like seeing some of these guys that were formerly regarded as "character players" being given statistical value now. In the past it was simply their grit/character, but now we can see that a lot of the reason they had such an impact was possession. So...I like stats, but not some of the condescending jerks that think you're an idiot if you don't fully grasp or buy into them.

What's an example?

 

[forty_three]

it says I need a vacation 43

BOOK IT

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

This seems to be the new narrative now, "it's not that I hate stats but the people that support them are so mean about it!". Yeah, because it's totally not the enormous and "established" ranks of the mainstream media that have been dismissive, it's probably the handful of guys with virtually no power trying to promote new ideas.

And I'm sorry, but if you're interested in hockey and you've got time to spend following and discussing it in detail (and I'm assuming you were talking about casual fans and not media members up there... the latter have no excuse), then you're probably not too busy to try and understand some of the new information that's out there. You make it sound like you have to be crunching numbers all night yourself to have a basic understanding of what some of this stuff might (and might not) mean and what conclusions they can help inform. You don't need to be or to study as much as Albert Einstein to have a working knowledge of physics. Do you think that guys like Billy Beane or Masai Ujiri are particularly mathematically inclined and/or spending much of their time crunching numbers?

I suspect that some of the reason that Mirtle mentions possession so much is that possession is very very important and yet almost no one else doing his job talks about it in any detail, other than maybe an occasional vague statement that Team A needs to improve their puck possession (and I feel like half the time this is just presented as a quote from Team A's coaching staff anyway, once again with no real or specific detail). Of all the objectionable things going on in "the reporting world", I would think that James Mirtle should be way down your list. The dude at least tries to throw light on things rather than just sharing a few quotes from team personnel and calling it a day.

The thing is as a casual fan I am far more interested in watching the game than I am analysing it. I follow hockey folks so I know who signs where or when trades happen, and yeah for the occasional interesting article (they are few and far between). That's me. I don't begrudge somebody for wanting to read pieces on topics more advanced than that, but I certainly won't be judged as a sports fan because I don't. As for some sort of pushing-down by the mainstream media of the poor little advanced stats guys, get a grip. It's sports. The writing has been garbage for decades, and throwing guys who can cite numbers off by heart into the fray isn't going to make sports media any more tolerable. If you are paying any attention to guys like Steve Simmons and comments like this one (mainly the first tweet), you need to find a new hobby.

As for Mirtle, I mentioned him because I obviously believe he is a capable writer and is an interesting read (or I wouldn't be following him), but it got very old having to see a reminder that Colton Orr was on the ice twenty times scrolling down my timeline while dropping a duce. His articles are decent when he can make a point without throwing ten advanced stats into a single sentence, but he beats the dead horse with an automatic hammer on twitter and that kind of exemplifies the reasons people find advanced stat nerds annoying. There are a few tolerable writers writing for the big boys these days who find the good mix and don't come off as dbags while doing so. It shouldn't be "Hey guys, look what I learned! Look! LOOK! OVER HERE! PAY ATTENTION TO THIS! GRAAAAAHHHHHHH! "

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

What's an example?

Unfortunately, Dellow's website is no longer active now that he's signed on to hear from Kevin Lowe that he's won 6 Cups everytime he disagrees with him.

 

[mooger_35]

Down Goes Brown: Signs you've hired a bad advanced stats guy

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Down Goes Brown: Signs you've hired a bad advanced stats guy

15. He thinks Ty Conklin is a better goalkeeper than Martin Brodeur.

 

[Abe Vigoda]

I sort of get why a lot of the stats "geeks" were mean or jackass-ish...they were the front runners of these stats, and their opinions were dismissed and viewed as lesser simply because a lot of the mainstream media and a lot of the ol' boys club refused to budge from "the way" (SEE: Baseball, Major League). However, now that they're part of the "cool kids", they're acting fairly petulant and holier than thou. I like advanced stats quite a bit, and I won't lie: I struggle to fully understand them. I like the guys that are willing to break it down and explain the significance (Jesse Marshall, a Pens blogger is *fantastic* about this), but some are simply condescending (Dellow). There's *nothing* wrong with watching the game for face value and simply enjoying it. And if someone brings it up in an argument and you don't understand said significance, simply admit that. We're all adults. I think that it adds a fun and unique perspective on the sport. I like seeing some of these guys that were formerly regarded as "character players" being given statistical value now. In the past it was simply their grit/character, but now we can see that a lot of the reason they had such an impact was possession. So...I like stats, but not some of the condescending jerks that think you're an idiot if you don't fully grasp or buy into them.

You make a very key point, each person has their own unique perspective. This is precisely why I cant stand the NFL anymore. The whole Fantasy shit with all these advanced numbers and Sunday Morning bobbleheads is beyond palatable. Who gives a fuck? Thats why at 1 ,4 and 8.30 each Sunday the teams enter the field and oppose each other; to see who wins. The point of me sitting on my ass in front of the t.v. on a Sunday (or Saturday night for HNIC) is to watch the game, unfortunately more often nowadays it has to be on mute because I cant stand the yammering on and on about this statistic and that. It's all great for those that want it, but why do we all have to receive it?

 

[dare2be]

One of my sporting heroes, former Orioles manager Earl Weaver was one of the early adopters of what has morphed into advanced stats. He had a room full of binders and notebooks on every player in the league (including minors) and what each batter did against each pitcher. That's it. How successful was guy a vs guy b. And it led him to pinch hit some guy like Lenn Sakata because he was 4-5 against some stud pitcher 10 years ago when they both played in the grapefruit league.

And it always worked.

Not in 1971 and 1979.

 

[DragonfromTO]

The thing is as a casual fan I am far more interested in watching the game than I am analysing it. I follow hockey folks so I know who signs where or when trades happen, and yeah for the occasional interesting article (they are few and far between). That's me. I don't begrudge somebody for wanting to read pieces on topics more advanced than that, but I certainly won't be judged as a sports fan because I don't. As for some sort of pushing-down by the mainstream media of the poor little advanced stats guys, get a grip. It's sports. The writing has been garbage for decades, and throwing guys who can cite numbers off by heart into the fray isn't going to make sports media any more tolerable. If you are paying any attention to guys like Steve Simmons and comments like this one (mainly the first tweet), you need to find a new hobby.

As for Mirtle, I mentioned him because I obviously believe he is a capable writer and is an interesting read (or I wouldn't be following him), but it got very old having to see a reminder that Colton Orr was on the ice twenty times scrolling down my timeline while dropping a duce. His articles are decent when he can make a point without throwing ten advanced stats into a single sentence, but he beats the dead horse with an automatic hammer on twitter and that kind of exemplifies the reasons people find advanced stat nerds annoying. There are a few tolerable writers writing for the big boys these days who find the good mix and don't come off as dbags while doing so. It shouldn't be "Hey guys, look what I learned! Look! LOOK! OVER HERE! PAY ATTENTION TO THIS! GRAAAAAHHHHHHH! "

That's totally fine. But when/how does this sort of thing happen to you? I would think it's the kind of thing that would be happening during hockey discussions/arguments related to analysis, and if you're not interested in analysis at all and aren't particularly up to speed in that regard, why are you bothering to take part in those discussions? I mean, I feel like I've seen you involved in plenty of discussions that involve analyzing the game/players on this very board. I find it sort of hard to believe that lots of people are just coming out of nowhere and "judging" you for no reason.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Unfortunately, Dellow's website is no longer active now that he's signed on to hear from Kevin Lowe that he's won 6 Cups everytime he disagrees with him.

Given that the comments that were made that I was responding to weren't about Dellow specifically it still shouldn't be hard to find examples if they're out there.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

That's totally fine. But when/how does this sort of thing happen to you? I would think it's the kind of thing that would be happening during hockey discussions/arguments related to analysis, and if you're not interested in analysis at all and aren't particularly up to speed in that regard, why are you bothering to take part in those discussions? I mean, I feel like I've seen you involved in plenty of discussions that involve analyzing the game/players on this very board. I find it sort of hard to believe that lots of people are just coming out of nowhere and "judging" you for no reason.

I generally won't engage over things non-Leaf related unless it's the playoffs. I just don't watch enough out-of-market games to do so.

And I'm not saying I'm being judged per sé, but to many in the advanced stats "community" people who talk hockey and don't understand advanced stats are just idiots and that is some bullshit right there.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with discussing good old goals and assists. I mean, it's not like somebody is going to pull a stat out of their asses that makes David Clarkson look good. Sometimes the old ways truly are best.