Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

ernie · 11-04-2015, 08:57 AM

Advanced stats (or any stats) aren't useless. They often get misused and misunderstood but they aren't useless.

In the original post I wouldn't put a lot of stock in a 5 game stretch of what looks to be good numbers. It's just not a big enough sample size.

Now, if there is a 20+ game stretch where everything is looking good and the results aren't coming, you have to think to yourself "hmmm, I wonder why things don't seem to be lining up?". Instead, what many will say is "Advanced stats are crap!".

No they are data. And data will lead you to explanations. So...the results aren't adding up. The team in the 20+ game case should be seeing more points in the standings. Why aren't they? Well perhaps the goaltending is under performing and undoing the good the advanced stats show. For the Flames through 13 games that is certainly part of the issue and it's obvious. But you may also want to look at turnovers, prime scoring chances etc. Have those been disproportionate?

The flip side is what happened to the Leafs when everyone was pointing out the bubble was going to burst at some point because of the underlying numbers were simply not good. Instead of ignoring those numbers Leaf fans should have been looking at the reasons why the team may have been over performing. In that case, if I recall correctly, Bernier was playing stupid good with a 0.950 SV% and they had a traditionally unsustainable shooting percentage. Those aspects were going to remain and make hockey history or more likely regress at some point. They regressed.

Basically, advanced stats are useful as data and should be used to prompt thoughts as to why things may not be completely lining up with the general established trends (over a suitable sample size of course). A team can "beat" the advanced stats by, say, having Carey Price in net. Or they have potent special teams. They can even beat them for a long time for various other reasons.

They are not the end all and be all.

I think when they get brought up on message boards you get a majority of people who just dismiss them out of hand or don't dig into reasons why the results may not line up and simply crow "It'll end as the advanced stats say so!". You need to use the stats to go a step further and look for explanations as to why things deviate from what ARE established norms/trends. And above all remember that trends don't mean everything lines up nicely on the line. Outliers exist. No stat has perfect correlations.

11-04-2015, 08:57 AM	#48
ernie Franchise Player Join Date: Oct 2004 Exp:	Advanced stats (or any stats) aren't useless. They often get misused and misunderstood but they aren't useless. In the original post I wouldn't put a lot of stock in a 5 game stretch of what looks to be good numbers. It's just not a big enough sample size. Now, if there is a 20+ game stretch where everything is looking good and the results aren't coming, you have to think to yourself "hmmm, I wonder why things don't seem to be lining up?". Instead, what many will say is "Advanced stats are crap!". No they are data. And data will lead you to explanations. So...the results aren't adding up. The team in the 20+ game case should be seeing more points in the standings. Why aren't they? Well perhaps the goaltending is under performing and undoing the good the advanced stats show. For the Flames through 13 games that is certainly part of the issue and it's obvious. But you may also want to look at turnovers, prime scoring chances etc. Have those been disproportionate? The flip side is what happened to the Leafs when everyone was pointing out the bubble was going to burst at some point because of the underlying numbers were simply not good. Instead of ignoring those numbers Leaf fans should have been looking at the reasons why the team may have been over performing. In that case, if I recall correctly, Bernier was playing stupid good with a 0.950 SV% and they had a traditionally unsustainable shooting percentage. Those aspects were going to remain and make hockey history or more likely regress at some point. They regressed. Basically, advanced stats are useful as data and should be used to prompt thoughts as to why things may not be completely lining up with the general established trends (over a suitable sample size of course). A team can "beat" the advanced stats by, say, having Carey Price in net. Or they have potent special teams. They can even beat them for a long time for various other reasons. They are not the end all and be all. I think when they get brought up on message boards you get a majority of people who just dismiss them out of hand or don't dig into reasons why the results may not line up and simply crow "It'll end as the advanced stats say so!". You need to use the stats to go a step further and look for explanations as to why things deviate from what ARE established norms/trends. And above all remember that trends don't mean everything lines up nicely on the line. Outliers exist. No stat has perfect correlations. Last edited by ernie; 11-04-2015 at 09:53 AM. Reason: typos. A lot of typos.