[GDT] EDM (18-12-0) @ CGY (13-12-2). 7:00 pm on SNW and SN1.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yeah, all you have to do is look at the list of names, and the only sensible conclusion is that this stat is not accomplishing what they were hoping.

I'm not here to defend their data one way or the other but if you think about it in some ways it makes sense- the forwards who are likely to be the most deficient defensively are likely to be the players that are so good or useful offensively that this part of their game can be overlooked because overall they are still net positive players. if you are useless offensively and one of the least statistically useful player defensively you probably aren't playing in the league


of course I'm not saying that this list is definitely perfect but I can see how you could be a legit HOFer and still find your way onto a list like this

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I know they complain a lot about Wheeler's D in Winnipeg. I also know they rely a lot on their great power play to win games. What's Winnipeg's ES ratio?

Wheeler, sure (on a purely random list, you'll get some right). But Connor and Scheifele? (just sticking with the Jets). Ridiculous. Bo Horvat.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by getbak

https://twitter.com/user/status/1371532901947383810

Damn right. Oilers-schmoilers.

So funny how he just shuts down the narrative. Reporters pushing Battle of Alberta and he says it is just another game. Doesn't care about the Oilers it is all about how we play. The reporters are so stunned they don't even have a follow up question.... priceless!

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by looooob

I'm not here to defend their data one way or the other but if you think about it in some ways it makes sense- the forwards who are likely to be the most deficient defensively are likely to be the players that are so good or useful offensively that this part of their game can be overlooked because overall they are still net positive players. if you are useless offensively and one of the least statistically useful player defensively you probably aren't playing in the league


of course I'm not saying that this list is definitely perfect but I can see how you could be a legit HOFer and still find your way onto a list like this

But why aren't guys like, say, Neal, who are bad at both ends, not on there? Not enough reps to have a lot of goals against?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Wheeler, sure (on a purely random list, you'll get some right). But Connor and Scheifele? (just sticking with the Jets). Ridiculous. Bo Horvat.

Yeah, I've always thought of Scheifele as decent defensively. And Horvat of course.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by looooob

I'm not here to defend their data one way or the other but if you think about it in some ways it makes sense- the forwards who are likely to be the most deficient defensively are likely to be the players that are so good or useful offensively that this part of their game can be overlooked because overall they are still net positive players. if you are useless offensively and one of the least statistically useful player defensively you probably aren't playing in the league


of course I'm not saying that this list is definitely perfect but I can see how you could be a legit HOFer and still find your way onto a list like this

Sure you could. And some of the names probably deserve to be there. But it's only a useful list if all the names deserve to be there.

If stats aren't accurate, they are less valuable than random numbers (because people will use them, believing they are accurate)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yeah, I've always thought of Scheifele as decent defensively. And Horvat of course.

Scheifele is Backlund level defensively. Horvat is in the same camp.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Sure you could. And some of the names probably deserve to be there. But it's only a useful list if all the names deserve to be there.

If stats aren't accurate, they are less valuable than random numbers (because people will use them, believing they are accurate)

I agree with you . I don't pretend to understand their methodology so I wouldn't be able to say whether this particular list is
1. totally random (seems unlikely)
2. based partially in truth but with a lot of noise and error (unhelpful)
3. mostly a reflection of a mix of either guys who are truly useless and guys who just get a lot of icetime and are a bit deficient on the defensive side

4. completely accurate


I doubt its 1 or 4.

[Torture]

Does that go for goaltenders as well?
"There's two of 'em"


Classic.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by looooob

I agree with you . I don't pretend to understand their methodology so I wouldn't be able to say whether this particular list is
1. totally random (seems unlikely)
2. based partially in truth but with a lot of noise and error (unhelpful)
3. mostly a reflection of a mix of either guys who are truly useless and guys who just get a lot of icetime and are a bit deficient on the defensive side

4. completely accurate


I doubt its 1 or 4.

I doubt it's 1 or 4 either.

And that is the problem: with 2 or 3, users believe the data is telling them something, but there is no way to know whether or not it is accurate. But because they have data, they believe it is accurate. This is worse than having no data (and having to decide for yourself).

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

So funny how he just shuts down the narrative. Reporters pushing Battle of Alberta and he says it is just another game. Doesn't care about the Oilers it is all about how we play. The reporters are so stunned they don't even have a follow up question.... priceless!

Not just the BoA question...

Q: "So, Markstrom is starting?"
A: "We have two goalies."
Q: "Did you watch the Edmonton/Toronto games?"
A: "Nope."
Q: "How do you shut down the awesomeness of McDavid and Draisaitl?"
A: "Connor McDavid and Auston Matthews are pretty good players."

I remember tuning in to Sutter's first PC back in 2002 when he was first hired in Calgary. I obviously knew who he was, his reputation, but had never paid too much attention to him in Chicago or SJ. I came away from that media scrum feeling a little perplexed, and thinking that Sutter was maybe not a very bright guy. This really seems to be exactly what he wants you to think.

[GioforPM]

Sutter is a way smarter coach than some of the “intellectual” coaches. The most important thing is he believes in what he’s doing.

[Kovaz]

It's interesting how some players' reputation can stick around even when the results aren't there. Guys like Scheifele and Horvat have reputations as defensive forwards, but if you really look at the data?


338 forwards have played over 200 minutes so far this season. Ranked by xGA/60 (expected goals against per 60):



Mark Scheifele is 324th with 2.72 xGA/60
Bo Horvat is 317th with 2.67 xGA/60


For a comparison, Mikael Backlund is 52nd with 1.84 xGA/60


These players rank poorly because when they're on the ice their teams are giving up tons of chances. Mark Giordano also ranks quite poorly on those charts this season, and I'm sure people around the league look at that and go "Giordano? But he's good defensively!" It's not because the data is bad - Gio's had a bad year. And I'm sure the same is true of Horvat and Scheifele. Blake Wheeler and Kyle Connor are on that list because nobody in the entire NHL allows more chances than them.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Sutter is a way smarter coach than some of the “intellectual” coaches. The most important thing is he believes in what he’s doing.

I think he is actually much more "intellectual" than people give him credit, he just doesn't show it. AT. ALL. But in some of his personal interviews I recall him talking about devouring crosswords and sudoku puzzles in his spare time, and he has talked about reading a new book every day.

Sutter is seriously smart by any measure.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

It's interesting how some players' reputation can stick around even when the results aren't there. Guys like Scheifele and Horvat have reputations as defensive forwards, but if you really look at the data?


338 forwards have played over 200 minutes so far this season. Ranked by xGA/60 (expected goals against per 60):



Mark Scheifele is 324th with 2.72 xGA/60
Bo Horvat is 317th with 2.67 xGA/60


For a comparison, Mikael Backlund is 52nd with 1.84 xGA/60


These players rank poorly because when they're on the ice their teams are giving up tons of chances. Mark Giordano also ranks quite poorly on those charts this season, and I'm sure people around the league look at that and go "Giordano? But he's good defensively!" It's not because the data is bad - Gio's had a bad year. And I'm sure the same is true of Horvat and Scheifele. Blake Wheeler and Kyle Connor are on that list because nobody in the entire NHL allows more chances than them.

Do we know where Patrice Bergeron, Kopitar and Ryan O'Reilly rank on those lists?

Those are the gold standard for Selke types. They better be top 10 for this stat to mean anything.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Wheeler, sure (on a purely random list, you'll get some right). But Connor and Scheifele? (just sticking with the Jets). Ridiculous. Bo Horvat.

Connor has never been very good defensively and has been a bit of a tire fire this year at 5v5.

17 GF
24 GA

41.5 GF%
37.5 HDCF%
39.8 xGF%

Wheeler and Connor have the two worst numbers in xGA per 60 in the league. Wheeler at 3.2 GA/60, Connor at 2.95 GA/60. (Minimum 250 minutes)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by 868904

Do we know where Patrice Bergeron, Kopitar and Ryan O'Reilly rank on those lists?

Those are the gold standard for Selke types. They better be top 10 for this stat to mean anything.

I would guess that Kopitar's defensive dominance has slipped a bit in more recent years as a result of playing for some awful teams in LA. Mark Stone has probably replaced him in that time within the "gold standard."

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I would guess that Kopitar's defensive dominance has slipped a bit in more recent years as a result of playing for some awful teams in LA. Mark Stone has probably replaced him in that time within the "gold standard."

Which only makes my point.

[You Need a Thneed]

Scheifele was on the ice for the most goals against at even strength, out of all forwards last season (78). Raisaitl was 2nd (77), and McAvi was 6th (68).

Scheifele was also 2nd in EV goals for while on the ice, behind only panarin.

[You Need a Thneed]

Scheifele, Connor, and Wheeler are again #1,2,&3 in EV goals against on ice this year, once you take away players on Buffalo, Ottawa, Vancouver, and Detroit.