The Official 5,000 Posts for a Flyers Stanley Cup in 2015!

[Cobiemonster]

I'm sure people will just brush this off as 'old traditionalist', but I really think the analytics BS is overblown. Is it helpful? Probably. Is it worth hiring a full time dude to do analytics, probably not. And it's certainly not worth having an analytics department like some teams are starting to do.

For every stat in a team sport that's as rooted in team play and bang-bang situations, there's a reason it's bull shit. I think the analytics craze is just a bunch of stuff for guys to write about because people who don't watch the game will read it so they can try to talk about hockey intelligently.

Yeah I agree - I think analytics help for sure but it's not the end all be all - I think it's a joke that guys like Tyler Dellow end up getting a major role with the Edmonton Oilers - guys like him act like assholes because they think they know everything and they come across as arrogant

 

[awaz]

Yeah I agree - I think analytics help for sure but it's not the end all be all - I think it's a joke that guys like Tyler Dellow end up getting a major role with the Edmonton Oilers - guys like him act like assholes because they think they know everything and they come across as arrogant

couldn't agree more. bothers me to no end when people try to tell me grabovski (i think he's one of them) is a shitty player because his possession numbers suck. dude puts points on the board. he's not a 1st line center, but he's a useful top 6/9 player.

 

[JBM73]

The Blackhawks (2010, 2013), Kings (2012, 2014) and Bruins (2011) all embrace analytics. End of story.

 

[Cobiemonster]

The Blackhawks (2010, 2013), Kings (2012, 2014) and Bruins (2011) all embrace analytics. End of story.

Without a doubt, but the difference between them and other teams who have analytical people is that teams like LA/CHI/BOS don't gloat about it, you don't hear about those guys names - but with teams like the Leafs/Oilers/etc you hear their names because people make a big deal about them thinking they're going to single handedly change the organization because they finally have analytical people

At the end of the day, you need super star players to win(LA/CHI/BOS has that) - until teams like the Leafs and Oilers get super star players at key positions, it won't matter about who's the analytical person(s) in their organizations

You can't be all in with one area of the spectrum, you need to have a little bit of both - we don't need analytical stuff to know that the top guys on Chicago, LA and Boston are great - analytics are used to determine how lower tier players are and whether they are worth being on the team - a monkey could figure out that Jonathan Toews or Anze Kopitar are great players, without needing analytics - analytics is just another tool in the arsenal but it doesn't need to be the end all be all for anyone

 

[awaz]

The Blackhawks (2010, 2013), Kings (2012, 2014) and Bruins (2011) all embrace analytics. End of story.

Completely disagree. They've also drafted:

Jonathan Toews
Patrick Kane
Duncan Keith
Brent Seabrook
Brandon Saad
Corey Crawford
Anze Kopitar
Drew Doughty
Jonathan Quick
Brad Marchand
Patrice Bergeron
Tuuka Rask
David Krejci
Milan Lucic

Show me they used these relatively new analytics in their decision to take those guys, and I might give the analytics junkies a little more credit.

Like I said, it's fine to use analytics, they're probably helpful. but they're not the end all be all. The Bruins/Kings/Hawks haven't been dominating the NHL because they use analytics. They've been dominating the league because they've drafted extremely well over the past 5-10 years.

 

[Cobiemonster]

couldn't agree more. bothers me to no end when people try to tell me grabovski (i think he's one of them) is a shitty player because his possession numbers suck. dude puts points on the board. he's not a 1st line center, but he's a useful top 6/9 player.

Yeah that whole thing is a joke - but actually I thought in this case with Grabo it was the other way around - I remember Tyler Dellow arguing in favor of Grabo and Steve Simmons was against him

 

[JBM73]

Without a doubt, but the difference between them and other teams who have analytical people is that teams like LA/CHI/BOS don't gloat about it, you don't hear about those guys names - but with teams like the Leafs/Oilers/etc you hear their names because people make a big deal about them thinking they're going to single handedly change the organization because they finally have analytical people

At the end of the day, you need super star players to win(LA/CHI/BOS has that) - until teams like the Leafs and Oilers get super star players at key positions, it won't matter about who's the analytical person(s) in their organizations

You can't be all in with one area of the spectrum, you need to have a little bit of both - we don't need analytical stuff to know that the top guys on Chicago, LA and Boston are great - analytics are used to determine how lower tier players are and whether they are worth being on the team - a monkey could figure out that Jonathan Toews or Anze Kopitar is a great player, without needing analytics - analytics is just another tool in the arsenal but it doesn't need to be the end all be all for anyone

Of course it isn't the be all and end all, but part of the reason that those teams are so stocked with talent is BECAUSE of the use of analytics in player personnel decisions, both in drafting and in trades. That's the whole point.

 

[awaz]

Yeah that whole thing is a joke - but actually I thought in this case with Grabo it was the other way around - I remember Tyler Dellow arguing in favor of Grabo and Steve Simmons was against him

ah damn. messed up the example . you got what I meant though

 

[awaz]

Without a doubt, but the difference between them and other teams who have analytical people is that teams like LA/CHI/BOS don't gloat about it, you don't hear about those guys names - but with teams like the Leafs/Oilers/etc you hear their names because people make a big deal about them thinking they're going to single handedly change the organization because they finally have analytical people

At the end of the day, you need super star players to win(LA/CHI/BOS has that) - until teams like the Leafs and Oilers get super star players at key positions, it won't matter about who's the analytical person(s) in their organizations

You can't be all in with one area of the spectrum, you need to have a little bit of both - we don't need analytical stuff to know that the top guys on Chicago, LA and Boston are great - analytics are used to determine how lower tier players are and whether they are worth being on the team - a monkey could figure out that Jonathan Toews or Anze Kopitar are great players, without needing analytics - analytics is just another tool in the arsenal but it doesn't need to be the end all be all for anyone

I think the bold might be one of the best summaries of how I feel about analytics. It can make the difference on the lower lines. When building your bottom 9 and bottom pair. Often times you're wading through 6-7 options of who to put in your lineup that are nearly identical to the naked eye. That's where advanced analytics can come in to play. It can take a great team, and put them over the edge, or a good team and get them a few more wins. It's not the difference between a bad team and a good team. (which is how i think a lot of people seem to be viewing analytics at this stage)

 

[Cobiemonster]

I think the bold might be one of the best summaries of how I feel about analytics. It can make the difference on the lower lines. When building your bottom 9 and bottom pair. Often times you're wading through 6-7 options of who to put in your lineup that are nearly identical to the naked eye. That's where advanced analytics can come in to play. It can take a great team, and put them over the edge, or a good team and get them a few more wins. It's not the difference between a bad team and a good team. (which is how i think a lot of people seem to be viewing analytics at this stage)

To me that's why the Kings have been so good, their 3rd and 4th lines do so many good things - look at the Bruins this past season, they got eliminated in the second round partly because their fourth line was nowhere near as good as it was in previous seasons

This is one of things that I think can make a big difference for the Flyers and maybe this is where the analytics come into play - the Flyers fourth line hasn't done much offensively the last few years and I think a bit of a change could be coming as far as how they view what a fourth line should be - out goes guys like Zac Rinaldo and Jay Rosehill and in comes the likes of Scott Laughton, etc etc - Flyers fourth line gets manhandled offensively by other teams fourth lines and that's a problem - usually the top guys get canceled out in series so the 3rd and 4th lines are the difference makers

 

[Cobiemonster]

ah damn. messed up the example . you got what I meant though

I do think there is a disconnect though in that some people think Grabo is a really good player and others think he's terrible - I don't know if it's an European factor where people think that if he's not physical, than he's not good enough or whatever but there always seems to be a disconnect in opinions about Grabo

I thought if Grabo stayed healthy, the Caps might have squeezed into the playoffs - but that's purely an opinion more than anything

 

[awaz]

I do think there is a disconnect though in that some people think Grabo is a really good player and others think he's terrible - I don't know if it's an European factor where people think that if he's not physical, than he's not good enough or whatever but there always seems to be a disconnect in opinions about Grabo

I thought if Grabo stayed healthy, the Caps might have squeezed into the playoffs - but that's purely an opinion more than anything

ya I personally like him, but you're right, he definitely seems to divide people. I think he's a very useful 2/3 center, people just expected him to be the #1 guy in Toronto and he's probably not the player that can 1. put up the points necessary to be a #1 center, and 2. Keep the masses in Toronto happy

 

[Cobiemonster]

ya I personally like him, but you're right, he definitely seems to divide people. I think he's a very useful 2/3 center, people just expected him to be the #1 guy in Toronto and he's probably not the player that can 1. put up the points necessary to be a #1 center, and 2. Keep the masses in Toronto happy

Yeah it's funny how it works up there - they pump their players up and then when they remotely aren't close to those expectations they get broken down - and then people there wonder why players don't like playing there and why that team continues to be mediocre

 

[mall3013]

Awaz loves it but I agree with you on soccer cant watch a match like the world cup final where the German goalie played 120 minutes and had 1 save boring as can be. Baseball not the most exciting sport but for me definitely better than soccer at least we got football back and college football starts real soon.

I'm a Georgia Bulldog fan, I know Mall is an Ohio St fan and Awaz loves his V Tech who else wants to give their team a shout out .

Lol. Glad you brought CFB up Las. I want to have a friendly little bet with awaz. His Hokies play my Buckeyes this season prime time national tv. Awaz come on out buddy. How do the Hokies look this season? Brax is injured, but I hope he will be ready after the Navy game.

 

[JBM73]

couldn't agree more. bothers me to no end when people try to tell me grabovski (i think he's one of them) is a shitty player because his possession numbers suck. dude puts points on the board. he's not a 1st line center, but he's a useful top 6/9 player.

This is a perfect example of the problem with the misinterpretation of the statistics that leads to doubt about their effectiveness. Yes, Grabovski had relatively poor possession numbers last year, but just looking at that stat alone doesn't tell the whole story. For example, despite the poor possession numbers the Capitals actually had a positive shot differential with Grabovski on the ice. 3rd highest on the team, in fact. Also, his numbers alone are meaningless unless you compare how he played with different linemates. It's very possible that one or both wingers he played with drug him down, not the other way around. What about the average quality of competition he was matched up against? That plays a big role in reading these stats as well. In this case, he was pretty much just middle-of-the-road on the Caps, but it had the potential to seriously skew the statistics.

The point is that any stat in isolation is meaningless, and not many writers who are trying to sound like they know what they're talking about actually get the whole picture.

The real problem with analytics is that we have no statistical measure that can determine whether or not players will actually have chemistry on the ice. Without chemistry, no matter how good two/three forwards may be they likely won't be successful on the ice TOGETHER.

 

[awaz]

This is a perfect example of the problem with the misinterpretation of the statistics that leads to doubt about their effectiveness. Yes, Grabovski had relatively poor possession numbers last year, but just looking at that stat alone doesn't tell the whole story. For example, despite the poor possession numbers the Capitals actually had a positive shot differential with Grabovski on the ice. 3rd highest on the team, in fact. Also, his numbers alone are meaningless unless you compare how he played with different linemates. It's very possible that one or both wingers he played with drug him down, not the other way around. What about the average quality of competition he was matched up against? That plays a big role in reading these stats as well. In this case, he was pretty much just middle-of-the-road on the Caps, but it had the potential to seriously skew the statistics.

The point is that any stat in isolation is meaningless, and not many writers who are trying to sound like they know what they're talking about actually get the whole picture.

The real problem with analytics is that we have no statistical measure that can determine whether or not players will actually have chemistry on the ice. Without chemistry, no matter how good two/three forwards may be they likely won't be successful on the ice TOGETHER.

The two bolds is why I say there's no replacing watching the actual game. You can see when you watch a game if there's an anchor on a line, and which player it is, and you can see what type of competition they're playing against. Then of course you can see what type of chemistry a line has.

That's why I say these advanced stats have a role, but not nearly the role some people make it out to be. An analytics guy on staff, sure. A whole department though? IMO that's just wasting money you could be paying to scouts instead. I would trust the opinion of one of my scouts who watched a guy play, over what an analytics junkie told me if the two did not agree.

 

[JBM73]

The two bolds is why I say there's no replacing watching the actual game. You can see when you watch a game if there's an anchor on a line, and which player it is, and you can see what type of competition they're playing against. Then of course you can see what type of chemistry a line has.

That's why I say these advanced stats have a role, but not nearly the role some people make it out to be. An analytics guy on staff, sure. A whole department though? IMO that's just wasting money you could be paying to scouts instead. I would trust the opinion of one of my scouts who watched a guy play, over what an analytics junkie told me if the two did not agree.

Well, there actually are stats available that measure quality of competition and performance with and without each linemate. But, I think your last sentence is the million dollar question. Certainly each has a role, but when the two clash which one should be given priority? How well do you trust your scouting department, or the particular scout in question? Has he provided solid guidance in the past? Do you truly have enough stats available to make an informed analytical decision?

I certainly don't have the answers. If I did I'd be in a GM role somewhere. Hopefully whichever way the Flyers go it's the right way. I trust Hextall to make that decision much more than I ever would with Holmgren.

 

[awaz]

Well, there actually are stats available that measure quality of competition and performance with and without each linemate. But, I think your last sentence is the million dollar question. Certainly each has a role, but when the two clash which one should be given priority? How well do you trust your scouting department, or the particular scout in question? Has he provided solid guidance in the past? Do you truly have enough stats available to make an informed analytical decision?

I certainly don't have the answers. If I did I'd be in a GM role somewhere. Hopefully whichever way the Flyers go it's the right way. I trust Hextall to make that decision much more than I ever would with Holmgren.

Very true on all accounts. And how awesome would it be to be a GM haha.

I think if you doubt your scouts enough that you think analytics have the better answer, I think you need to find new scouts. Even if you're scout is a hockey god and knows everything, it's silly to have scouts on staff that you don't trust over analytics IMO.

 

[JBM73]

Very true on all accounts. And how awesome would it be to be a GM haha.

I think if you doubt your scouts enough that you think analytics have the better answer, I think you need to find new scouts. Even if you're scout is a hockey god and knows everything, it's silly to have scouts on staff that you don't trust over analytics IMO.

Haha, not sure I'd enjoy the sleepless nights and ridiculously long work weeks, though!!

I don't know. How often do we argue on these boards in terms of seeing the same play or player 2, 3, 4 different ways? You can't watch every player all the time. You're bound to miss things, or just see part of the play and not something that led to it developing. For example, most on here talked about Timonen having clearly lost a step last year, myself included, but that wasn't borne out by the analytics which showed he performed overall very much on par with the season before.

Let's just agree that each has a role and that neither is the perfect answer.

 

[awaz]

Haha, not sure I'd enjoy the sleepless nights and ridiculously long work weeks, though!!

I don't know. How often do we argue on these boards in terms of seeing the same play or player 2, 3, 4 different ways? You can't watch every player all the time. You're bound to miss things, or just see part of the play and not something that led to it developing. For example, most on here talked about Timonen having clearly lost a step last year, myself included, but that wasn't borne out by the analytics which showed he performed overall very much on par with the season before.

Let's just agree that each has a role and that neither is the perfect answer.

I can agree to that!