Brian Burke guest speaker at Sports Law Society (UofC)

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by looooob

I suppose but it does worry me, moneyball means different things to different people ; but dismissing it out of hand as he is doing is worrisome to me

I also call bull##### on him reading it. He obviously lied and didn't actually read it given his responses...

"Moneyball is all about working the pitch count, not about entertainment."

Not true, Moneyball is about finding and exploiting market inefficiencies.

"Who wants to see guys foul off balls?"

Answer: Fans of the batting team if the alternative is striking out. He completely missed that point, the value of fouling isn't in the act of fouling a pitch it's in not making an out. The more borderline pitches you can foul the less likely it is that you'll strike out eventually leading to a ball in play or a walk and another batter with a clean count. Drawn out battles at the plate are entertaining. Want to know what's not entertaining?... watching JP Arencibia strikeout at a ball in the dirt.

"He wants to see stolen bases and home runs."

Moneyball wants to see those too... if he'd actually read the book he'd have known that Moneyball loves homeruns and extra-base hits. It loves stolen bases too (just not as much as it hates being caught stealing)

[Freeway]

The Flames DO use analytics, but most of it is via PUCKS and looks at zone entries, puck possession and things like that. It's generally more of a targetted video analysis system rather than pure analytics. But analytics do factor into player evaluations.

And I don't disagree with Burke to an extent, in that hockey analytics are generally trying to normalize random events. Baseball analytics are simpler because there's less "noise". You don't need to worry about quality of teammates really, or quality of competition (outside of the pitcher/hitter dynamic), or zone starts or whatnot.

[btimbit]

Anybody ask him about his hair?

[Delthefunky]

This was great to read! thanks a lot !

[Stormchaser]

Fun read, thanks for writing it up!

[Joborule]

Great post. Really appreciate it.

[Major Major]

I agree with all the thanking and also thanked your post directly.

Thank you

[Trailer Fire]

I liked Burke before. I liked when Burke came to Calgary. After reading this, I love Brian Burke.

[Philly06Cup]

I'm still unsure why there is a stigma with 'advanced hockey statistics.' These analytics are trying to REDUCE noise and form a more accurate picture of the statistics. Empty-net goals should count for less. Secondary assists should count for less. Puck possession is important. Inflated shooting percentages should be discounted. Surely we can agree with most of these premises and should try to create a better model than 'GOALS, ASSISTS, PLUS/MINUS.'

I remember when NBC was trying a new way of interpreting power-play efficiency. On their screens, they would display 'one powerplay goal in --:-- of powerplay time.' This methodology is way more precise than the conventional 'powerplay goals / powerplay chances.' So many PP chances are abbreviated by another penalty; I'm still not sure how a 5 minute major penalty is counted in terms of PP chances. The previous methodology also correctly identifies that teams who score quickly on the PP are likely better at the PP than those who take 1:59 of PP time to score a goal. Alack, NBC reverted back to the antiquated PP% method.

Advanced NHL statistics are simply BETTER than current NHL statistics. That's why they're called 'advanced.'

NB -- I was the guy who asked Burke that question. (I also asked him who would win the Stanley Cup)

[endeavor]

Thanks a lot for the write-up, that was a great read.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

He did mention that moving up from 6th to 2nd to land Chris Pronger was one of the defining moves of his career. His scouts had identified Pronger as a special player, that he had an element of meanness that they really liked.

............................

It’s safe to say he’s not afraid to make a splash and I could see something splashy at this year’s draft to put his “signature trade stamp” on this team.

These two things really stood out to me.

I think Burke will try is damn hardest to swap our pick (currently #3) to get Aaron Ekblad if he is not going to be available at #3.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Oh and thanks for the write-up!

[puffnstuff]

Quoted:
I'm still unsure why there is a stigma with 'advanced hockey statistics.' These analytics are trying to REDUCE noise and form a more accurate picture of the statistics. Empty-net goals should count for less. Secondary assists should count for less. Puck possession is important. Inflated shooting percentages should be discounted. Surely we can agree with most of these premises and should try to create a better model than 'GOALS, ASSISTS, PLUS/MINUS.'

I agree that you need a better set of data to work with and discounting EN goals and a better measure than G, A and plus/minus makes sense. But I dont think you can discount the second assist as easily. I can think of a lot of occasions where that second assist is the most important play, leads to a goal and shouldnt be discounted (and occasions where it should). This is what makes it hard to generate data in the same way you can for baseball.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

I'm still unsure why there is a stigma with 'advanced hockey statistics.' These analytics are trying to REDUCE noise and form a more accurate picture of the statistics. Empty-net goals should count for less. Secondary assists should count for less. Puck possession is important. Inflated shooting percentages should be discounted. Surely we can agree with most of these premises and should try to create a better model than 'GOALS, ASSISTS, PLUS/MINUS.'

I remember when NBC was trying a new way of interpreting power-play efficiency. On their screens, they would display 'one powerplay goal in --:-- of powerplay time.' This methodology is way more precise than the conventional 'powerplay goals / powerplay chances.' So many PP chances are abbreviated by another penalty; I'm still not sure how a 5 minute major penalty is counted in terms of PP chances. The previous methodology also correctly identifies that teams who score quickly on the PP are likely better at the PP than those who take 1:59 of PP time to score a goal. Alack, NBC reverted back to the antiquated PP% method.

Advanced NHL statistics are simply BETTER than current NHL statistics. That's why they're called 'advanced.'

NB -- I was the guy who asked Burke that question. (I also asked him who would win the Stanley Cup)

The answer is super simple. Advanced stats, while valuable, are only able to tell historical data in hockey. Some people try to use advanced stats to predict trends, but because hockey is a series of random events, it's almost impossible.

Advanced stats are highly influenced by what line or team a player plays on, unlike baseball where advanced stats are not influenced by multiple other players.

It's not that advanced stats are bad, it's that they have limited value in hockey.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I also call bull##### on him reading it. He obviously lied and didn't actually read it given his responses...

"Moneyball is all about working the pitch count, not about entertainment."

Not true, Moneyball is about finding and exploiting market inefficiencies.

"Who wants to see guys foul off balls?"

Answer: Fans of the batting team if the alternative is striking out. He completely missed that point, the value of fouling isn't in the act of fouling a pitch it's in not making an out. The more borderline pitches you can foul the less likely it is that you'll strike out eventually leading to a ball in play or a walk and another batter with a clean count. Drawn out battles at the plate are entertaining. Want to know what's not entertaining?... watching JP Arencibia strikeout at a ball in the dirt.

"He wants to see stolen bases and home runs."

Moneyball wants to see those too... if he'd actually read the book he'd have known that Moneyball loves homeruns and extra-base hits. It loves stolen bases too (just not as much as it hates being caught stealing)

So then how would Moneyball apply to hockey? All you talked about was baseball.

[BEANZ]

Great post to say the least. This is what makes CP awesome!!

Burke is making me a believer.

[Badgers Nose]

Thanks Five-hole!

I guess Flames will not be acquiring Ott.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I do think that advanced metrics are hugely useful, but it isn't a replacement for scouting. I still think it helps to remove biases you may have on players.

For instance, some GMs and Scouts may favour a certain type of player - maybe they like the flash, or in Burke's case, the big truculent players. Us fans who watch 82 games a season, with the same team over and over, have different players we love, and different players we hate. We argue about them considerably at times.

Personally, when I go and look up advanced metrics on certain players that I think I hate more than I should, it often leads me to believe that this player does indeed do a few good things. Then I go and watch that player again, with an eye at what the metrics were 'proving', and often I do see it. Without the metrics, maybe I would never have seen it. On the flipside, the same goes for some of my 'favorites' - metrics sometimes shows the holes in their game that I am not seeing, and when watching the player with this in mind, I do start seeing the holes a bit better. Though the 'professionals' would of course have a way better 'eye' for talent, I would bet that advanced metrics can still somewhat help them - at least confirm what they are seeing a bit.

Don't get me wrong, I am no scout, and I am not saying people are stupid if they don't use or believe in advanced metrics. I think they are useful in conjunction with a good set of eyes, but picking between one or the other, your own eyes are much more effective of course.

Great post OP, and great writeup!

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I also call bull##### on him reading it. He obviously lied and didn't actually read it given his responses...

"Moneyball is all about working the pitch count, not about entertainment."

Not true, Moneyball is about finding and exploiting market inefficiencies.

"Who wants to see guys foul off balls?"

Answer: Fans of the batting team if the alternative is striking out. He completely missed that point, the value of fouling isn't in the act of fouling a pitch it's in not making an out. The more borderline pitches you can foul the less likely it is that you'll strike out eventually leading to a ball in play or a walk and another batter with a clean count. Drawn out battles at the plate are entertaining. Want to know what's not entertaining?... watching JP Arencibia strikeout at a ball in the dirt.

"He wants to see stolen bases and home runs."

Moneyball wants to see those too... if he'd actually read the book he'd have known that Moneyball loves homeruns and extra-base hits. It loves stolen bases too (just not as much as it hates being caught stealing)

This is false. Moneyball teams tend to strikeout tons because if you're going to see a million pitches you'll also strikeout a ton.

And to be honest... the market inefficiency thing was close to what Feaster was doing - short guys, guys from Quebec high schools and US college players.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I also call bull##### on him reading it. He obviously lied and didn't actually read it given his responses...

"Moneyball is all about working the pitch count, not about entertainment."

Not true, Moneyball is about finding and exploiting market inefficiencies.

"Who wants to see guys foul off balls?"

Answer: Fans of the batting team if the alternative is striking out. He completely missed that point, the value of fouling isn't in the act of fouling a pitch it's in not making an out. The more borderline pitches you can foul the less likely it is that you'll strike out eventually leading to a ball in play or a walk and another batter with a clean count. Drawn out battles at the plate are entertaining. Want to know what's not entertaining?... watching JP Arencibia strikeout at a ball in the dirt.

"He wants to see stolen bases and home runs."

Moneyball wants to see those too... if he'd actually read the book he'd have known that Moneyball loves homeruns and extra-base hits. It loves stolen bases too (just not as much as it hates being caught stealing)

True, however I think Burke is right in saying that using a similiar strategy or system in hockey is a completely different ball game (parden the pun). There are no full count, two out, bases loaded scenario's in hockey.