[Signing] Flames sign Chris Tanev (4 years, $4.5 million AAV)

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Bingo

They definitely have their own data / models and are not using public information (maybe they do as a double check).

So yeah I'd love to believe that Calgary now has a leg up with their own data, and will crush it going forward.

But the guy was hired in 2011, it would take time to get all that data up and running, but the team brought in Troy Brouwer and James Neal with him in the office.

Faulty model? Wasn't listened to?

We will never know I would assume.

That's true, but they also went out and got rid of them as well. I wonder how much the analytics side played into those decisions? I know Treliving was wanting to bring Jankowski back (without taking the risk in qualifying him) - I think his first 2 seasons were solid, followed-up by a terrible one. I wonder what the numbers were on Jankowski to make him fall into 'too big of a risk to qualify'. He was a first round pick for this organization after-all, and did have two very promising years to start his career.


Seems that these stats are still finding it difficult to eliminate the 'noise' in reliably measuring a player's ability.



I wonder if Giordano has really lost that big of a step, or if playing with Andersson just isn't a good fit?



Maybe it would be worthwhile to try Tanev beside him for a stretch and see if Giordano stabilizes a bit more, and if it does, switch back and see if the issue is Andersson's play style and fit with Giordano.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

The chart in that article about zone entries / entry defense is such a shame. As much as I disliked Gulutzan, we were among the top of the league in those categories when he was here. Now it seems we don't even have a neutral zone plan.

Those stats certainly match the eye test so far. The Flames have an awful time carrying the puck both out of our zone and into the attacking zone.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

Does Tanev chew gum when he plays?

Yes. I’ve been noticing this more and more in pro sports. Cam Newton is another example IIRC

[YYC in LAX]

Great signing Tanev!

[Chingas]

My wife laughs whenever she sees Tanev. He reminds her of this old russian cartoon lol. I have to say that the resemblance is pretty funny.

[Southern_Canuck]

Originally Posted by Southern_Canuck

Just wanted to say congrats to Flames fans getting Tanev - I think you will be happy with this UFA signing.

I've watched him for years, and he is an extremely reliable player. He may not be flashy, but he consistently makes good decisions with and without the puck, and frees his defensive partner to be more aggressive on offense.

He never shies away from retrieving the puck in the corner on dump-ins, and as a result he gets hit often - however it also means he gets there first and nullifies the opposing team. Also takes the hit to make a pass or just dump it out if there are no options.

Excellent defenseman, and excellent person. He's going to elevate whichever LD he plays with - spent a lot of this last season with Hughes.

S_C

Told ya.

S_C

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

Originally Posted by handgroen

Yes. I’ve been noticing this more and more in pro sports. Cam Newton is another example IIRC

Sounds dangerous to me.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

Sounds dangerous to me.

I chewed gum playing sports all the time. Kept the pasties away.

[Red]

Just read that article. They kind of lost me when they said that Tanev had a rough season last year.

He was a huge part of a team that had an unexpectedly successful season. He put a rookie defenseman who does not play defence on a calder and norris trophy map.

Outside of looking at these stats, was anyone actually complaining about his poor season? I heard nothing but praise.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Southern_Canuck

Just wanted to say congrats to Flames fans getting Tanev - I think you will be happy with this UFA signing.

I've watched him for years, and he is an extremely reliable player. He may not be flashy, but he consistently makes good decisions with and without the puck, and frees his defensive partner to be more aggressive on offense.

He never shies away from retrieving the puck in the corner on dump-ins, and as a result he gets hit often - however it also means he gets there first and nullifies the opposing team. Also takes the hit to make a pass or just dump it out if there are no options.

Excellent defenseman, and excellent person. He's going to elevate whichever LD he plays with - spent a lot of this last season with Hughes.

S_C

Thanks for sharing. Last night Hughes basically alluded to missing Tanev

We have a competitive group, guys want to win, no one wants to lose – including myself. It sucks. We lost some pretty good players last year, so we're trying to figure it out together. Tonight we were close to that.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, the Flames have their own data. No doubt every team has their own proprietary analytics.

As someone who has lived a career of trying to develop better analytics, to compete with others who are doing the same thing, I would suggest that it is pretty unlikely that theirs are significantly better than other teams'.

This.

It's also worth remembering that its extremely unlikely that stats could even exist which would somehow reliably predict Tanev being better in Calgary than in Vancouver. Statistics can only really tell you about things that have already happened, the rest is always interpretation. Stats can also only tell you what the numbers are, they can't really tell you why they're like that. There's always going to be things ypu can't measure, or don't think of as a possible explanation.

This is really the major reason why I dislike so much of the current fascination with statistical analysis; so many of the conclusions people draw about what's a good trade or bad for example are based on the fundamentally faulty premise that it's possible to reliably predict how a person will perform in a completely different situation using stats alone. It's just not what stats really do.

Decisions like "is Tanev a good signing for Calgary Flames for the 2021 season" will always in the end be an educated guess. Better stats can make that a more educated guess instead of a less educated one, but that's as far as they can take you.

Right now it seems that the Flames made a good educated guess when it came to Tanev.

It's what we pay the pro scouts for, so that's probably where the credit belongs.

[AustinL_NHL]

Yea, this is definitely a signing that myself and the analytics community has gotten badly wrong (so far). Hopefully we continue to look stupid.

Tanev has been outstanding so far and the Hanifin-Tanev pairing as a whole has been incredible and played like an elite, elite top D-pair.

The crazy thing is the difference in quality of play between playing with Hughes (where Tanev was atrocious) and playing with Hanifin (where he's been flat out incredible). I really like how the article goes into detail about why they compliment eachother so perfectly and why they work sooooo much better together than Hughes-Tanev did.

I'm happy to be looking dumb at the moment, and I hope to continue looking that way for the entirety of the contract, but I don't want to get my hopes up just yet

[Manhattanboy]

Benning really dropped the ball.

He seems like a fantastic glue guy - just the kind you want on your team.

I've been blown away as to how solid and reliable he is.

If we are going to make a run in the next year or so I could see him being a big part of it.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Itse

This.

It's also worth remembering that its extremely unlikely that stats could even exist which would somehow reliably predict Tanev being better in Calgary than in Vancouver. Statistics can only really tell you about things that have already happened, the rest is always interpretation. Stats can also only tell you what the numbers are, they can't really tell you why they're like that. There's always going to be things ypu can't measure, or don't think of as a possible explanation.

This is really the major reason why I dislike so much of the current fascination with statistical analysis; so many of the conclusions people draw about what's a good trade or bad for example are based on the fundamentally faulty premise that it's possible to reliably predict how a person will perform in a completely different situation using stats alone. It's just not what stats really do.

Decisions like "is Tanev a good signing for Calgary Flames for the 2021 season" will always in the end be an educated guess. Better stats can make that a more educated guess instead of a less educated one, but that's as far as they can take you.

Right now it seems that the Flames made a good educated guess when it came to Tanev.

It's what we pay the pro scouts for, so that's probably where the credit belongs.

Not sure I agree.

We keep hearing about proprietary models that can take goalie x and his save percentages by type, and plop him into team y and their propensity to give up a certain type of shot.

The math isn't that hard to run after you have those two sets.

So why not have that for defensemen?

"Chris Tanev is poor on the rush, and poor when stuck in his own zone for more than 65 seconds. His strengths are blocking out lanes, and taking away cross seam passes. Needs a partner to compliment that by also being strong positionally, and somewhat predictive"

Quinn Hugues and Noah Hanifin are very different. Calgary spends less time getting lit up than Vancouver did last year ... Vancouver was in the top five in many "against" categories, including shots and shot attempts. They spent a lot of time in their own zone.

So yeah I think you can have a model that would allow you to plop a certain player into a different situation.

If they don't ... it's coming.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Not sure I agree.

We keep hearing about proprietary models that can take goalie x and his save percentages by type, and plop him into team y and their propensity to give up a certain type of shot.

The math isn't that hard to run after you have those two sets.

So why not have that for defensemen?

"Chris Tanev is poor on the rush, and poor when stuck in his own zone for more than 65 seconds. His strengths are blocking out lanes, and taking away cross seam passes. Needs a partner to compliment that by also being strong positionally, and somewhat predictive"

Quinn Hugues and Noah Hanifin are very different. Calgary spends less time getting lit up than Vancouver did last year ... Vancouver was in the top five in many "against" categories, including shots and shot attempts. They spent a lot of time in their own zone.

So yeah I think you can have a model that would allow you to plop a certain player into a different situation.

If they don't ... it's coming.

Goalie activity is much more isolated and separated.

A shot from the slot, every goalie is experiencing the same way.

Cross-crease pass, every goalie will experience the same thing.

Shot from the point, same thing.

It's like baseball - isolated, one on one events lend themselves perfectly to statistical analysis.

Hockey is 5 guys, constantly in motion, against 5 other guys, constantly in motion. That makes statistical analysis extremely challenging.

[SuperMatt18]

Happy to admit I was wrong so far about the Tanev deal. Still don't love the term but he's been exactly what they've needed.

Honestly the biggest surprise to me is how noticeable he's been in terms of his skating and mobility.

The defensive stuff is as advertised but to me he actually looks more mobile than I ever recall him being in Vancouver.

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Kind of makes you wonder what an advanced stat turd like Ristolainen might look like if he ends up on a different roster in the next couple of seasons.

He already looks good this year even by advanced metrics on his pairing with McCabe.

A gap in advanced stats right now is how it analyzes top pairing d-men, that play minutes against tough opposition, on bad teams. Those d-men will always generally look better on a different team in a role more suited to their skill set lower down the lineup.

The opposite is also true in that advanced stats tend to overrate bottom pairing d-men that are getting sheltered minutes against low quality of competition.

[ricosuave]

I also love that this and the Markstron signing has weakened a divisional rival!

[Domoic]

Originally Posted by ricosuave

I also love that this and the Markstron signing has weakened a divisional rival!

Yeah, the Oilers.

[868904]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Happy to admit I was wrong so far about the Tanev deal. Still don't love the term but he's been exactly what they've needed.

Honestly the biggest surprise to me is how noticeable he's been in terms of his skating and mobility.

The defensive stuff is as advertised but to me he actually looks more mobile than I ever recall him being in Vancouver.



He already looks good this year even by advanced metrics on his pairing with McCabe.

A gap in advanced stats right now is how it analyzes top pairing d-men, that play minutes against tough opposition, on bad teams. Those d-men will always generally look better on a different team in a role more suited to their skill set lower down the lineup.

The opposite is also true in that advanced stats tend to overrate bottom pairing d-men that are getting sheltered minutes against low quality of competition.

This is probably just bias because Tanev has always been known as a very good skater. His brother is also a very good skater. I never understood the negative comments from haters at the time of the signing about Tanev's poor skating. Hate on him for being injured but not for his strength.

Tanev and Markstrom's biggest problem is staying healthy. I'm hoping the injuries were a function of the Canucks travel, medical and physio teams and not because they are injury prone.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Not sure I agree.

We keep hearing about proprietary models that can take goalie x and his save percentages by type, and plop him into team y and their propensity to give up a certain type of shot.

The math isn't that hard to run after you have those two sets.

So why not have that for defensemen?

"Chris Tanev is poor on the rush, and poor when stuck in his own zone for more than 65 seconds. His strengths are blocking out lanes, and taking away cross seam passes. Needs a partner to compliment that by also being strong positionally, and somewhat predictive"

Quinn Hugues and Noah Hanifin are very different. Calgary spends less time getting lit up than Vancouver did last year ... Vancouver was in the top five in many "against" categories, including shots and shot attempts. They spent a lot of time in their own zone.

So yeah I think you can have a model that would allow you to plop a certain player into a different situation.

If they don't ... it's coming.

If those models for goalies were reliable, everyone would use them and no one would sign a goalie that doesn't work out or find a hidden gem or keep the wrong goalie.

The idea that you can accurately predict the future by mathematically analyzing the past is ages old and supposed breakthroughs have so often been just around the corner.

Baseball is a much better sport for stats based predictions and they've been on this a lot longer. Same with football. Soccer has been studied at the university level for a long time in Europe. Yet somehow the number of bad signings or hidden gems popping up hasn't really changed that much.

People are not frictionless objects moving in a vacuum. Hockey is complicated. People are complicated. The number of potentially significant variables is infinite. No matter how good you become at measuring some things, you will never run out of things you can't measure or just didn't think to consider in that instance, and when things go wrong, it's often impossible to know for sure what you missed.

People are also constantly changing. How do you know when Tanev is going to lose that one step too many?

It's always going to be an educated guess.