I can't wait until the NHL starts tracking players on the ice with the new tech. I think it is going to revolutionize counting stats and provide a heck of a lot more insight into players.
Right now, I dislike these stats because:
1) There is simply too much 'noise' around them
2) Annoying people try and use them incorrectly to support their biases, rather than use them to remove biases
3) They don't discern nearly enough by the quality of each chance
I love these stats because:
1) They are, for the most part, simply counting stats and are thus more or less irrefutable
2) They do help to remove biases
3) They do offer further insight into players and the game overall
When all that fancy tracking tech gets implemented, I wonder how much more accurate they will be? I wonder what brand new statistical concepts will materialize? I also think it will further impact the game in terms of coaching strategies and systems. Like it or not, there are some teams that have admitted to playing for CORSI - Edmonton for sure under Eakins according to Eberle and (IIRC) Hall.
What is also funny is that Gulutzan's system aligned with (most) of the advanced metrics that the analytics community at large deem noteworthy. Peters' system also seems aligned with it. Hartley's system was misaligned terribly with what the metrics were stating until his last year. I really do feel that between these 3 coaching strategies/systems, the currently popularized set of numbers has missed something noteworthy. Hartley had a fairly crap roster but still found SUSTAINED success lasting 1.5 seasons, right up until the goalies pooped in the crease. When Ramo was again average-above average, the Flames experienced an uptick in success that lasted until Ramo was injured. I really believe that Hartley's system wasn't all 'luck'. Ramo wasn't stealing every game.
I am actually really excited for these metrics to further evolve. I think it is really going to impact the game as how it is currently played over time.
|