Flames players analytics data

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Good News: Sutter's teams In LA were spectacular fancy stats, the top 1 or 2 in the league for his SC, won 2 rounds, SC 3 year run

Bad News: Sutter's teams In LA were spectacular fancy stats the top 1 or 2 in the league for his Miss the playoffs, out in round one, miss the playoffs and get fired 3 year run

Things to think about:

In 2017-18 where the Flames finished 17th in the league they were #5 in SAT% and #5 in USAT% (the base shot counting that drives all fancy stats that NHL.com reports on)

In 2018-19 where the Flames were tied for 2nd in the league they were 5/6 in the fancy stats

In 2019-20 where Flames were tied for 18th in the league they were 15/18 in fancy stats

In 2020-21 where the Flames were tied for 20th in the league the Flames were 7/8 in the fancy stats.

Hard to find a correlation between fancy stats and winning hockey games in both Sutter's personal record and the recent Flames history.

Out playing the opposition isn't a guarantee that you win. Happens in all aspects of life.

This argument gets so old.

Last season 8 of the top 10 teams in xGF% 5on5 were in the playoffs
Year before 8 out of 10
Year before that 9 out of 10

Teams that out play the opposition tend to do well, but if a team lacks the quality to finish, or doesn't have the goaltending to meet the average expected performance they can get in trouble.

If you don't have all world talent, not a bad idea to have a coach that can get the most out of what you have.

Under Sutter the Flames were 3rd in 5on5 xGF%, a great number but their 5on5 save percentage was 25th. If Markstrom struggles again this year (injuries etc) than I don't think they have the fire power to out score below average goaltending. If he's above average though (or even average honestly) they likely can generate enough to be a playoff team, maybe even better.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Out playing the opposition isn't a guarantee that you win. Happens in all aspects of life.

This argument gets so old.

Last season 8 of the top 10 teams in xGF% 5on5 were in the playoffs
Year before 8 out of 10
Year before that 9 out of 10

Teams that out play the opposition tend to do well, but if a team lacks the quality to finish, or doesn't have the goaltending to meet the average expected performance they can get in trouble.

If you don't have all world talent, not a bad idea to have a coach that can get the most out of what you have.

Under Sutter the Flames were 3rd in 5on5 xGF%, a great number but their 5on5 save percentage was 25th. If Markstrom struggles again this year (injuries etc) than I don't think they have the fire power to out score below average goaltending. If he's above average though (or even average honestly) they likely can generate enough to be a playoff team, maybe even better.

Sutter always had top five xGF% in LA as well.

His team's spot in the standings always lagged the xGF%. Usually by quite a bit.

He got mostly great results but also missed the playoffs twice (granted one miss was with 95 points).

Maybe Sutter's coaching style does something to skew the xGF% stat a bit because you wouldn't expect it to outperform standings placement every single season.

Will be an interesting thing to watch this season.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Sutter always had top five xGF% in LA as well.

His team's spot in the standings always lagged the xGF%. Usually by quite a bit.

He got mostly great results but also missed the playoffs twice (granted one miss was with 95 points).

Maybe Sutter's coaching style does something to skew the xGF% stat a bit because you wouldn't expect it to outperform standings placement every single season.

Will be an interesting thing to watch this season.

In the sixteen seasons that Darryl has started and finished the season, as HC with an NHL team, those two seasons with LA are the ONLY seasons he has missed the playoffs. Also won 2 SCs with LA.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon

https://twitter.com/user/status/1430715895844950018

Goddam, Johnny is elite actually.

I hope Monahan bounces back. Those two guys can do some special things when they are playing well and confident.

I'm betting Monahan has a great year under Sutter.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

i find it hilarious that we consider simple ratios 'fancy stats'

The German Tank Problem would flummox all the fancy staters.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Sutter always had top five xGF% in LA as well.

His team's spot in the standings always lagged the xGF%. Usually by quite a bit.

He got mostly great results but also missed the playoffs twice (granted one miss was with 95 points).

Maybe Sutter's coaching style does something to skew the xGF% stat a bit because you wouldn't expect it to outperform standings placement every single season.

Will be an interesting thing to watch this season.

You can't skew a stat like that.

It can be redefined or refined, but as it stands you just get more and better shots from dangerous areas. Always a good thing in hockey.

Sutter's coached some teams with limited talent though, so if you don't have the horses to finish when you get more chances than the opposition you can still get limited results.

[Bingo]

JFresh standings prediction ....

Calgary tied with Seattle for 2nd, Oilers 4th

https://twitter.com/user/status/1433093328741052424

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Bingo

JFresh standings prediction ....

Calgary tied with Seattle for 2nd, Oilers 4th

https://twitter.com/user/status/1433093328741052424

Has JFresh done this in years past? How close has it been to what has transpired if so?

Edit: Managed to google my way into an answer, behold last season vs actual standings:

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Has JFresh done this in years past? How close has it been to what has transpired if so?

He offered this remark:

Remember that even the best standings point projections (eye test or predictive model) tend to be around 7 points off on average. So if team x is above team y by 2 points, I would recommend not freaking out.

I view it as just a model. Probably a lot of teams will be pretty close but there also will be some significant outliers

I’m sure any model would have had the 2018-19 Flames lower, and 2019-20 Flames higher than they achieved

[GioforPM]

Metro is the only weird one to my eye.

[Vansmack]

The Metro is just insanely compact. A very tough division with a lot of teams close to each other. The individual rankings seem a little strange, but 1st to 7th is a 7 point difference which I would generally agree with.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You can't skew a stat like that.

It can be redefined or refined, but as it stands you just get more and better shots from dangerous areas. Always a good thing in hockey.

Sutter's coached some teams with limited talent though, so if you don't have the horses to finish when you get more chances than the opposition you can still get limited results.

I'm just looking at Sutter's time with the Kings here. I don't think you can say a two time Cup winner has limited talent.

Also, star/talented players don't necessarily finish at a higher rate than other middle six players, they just create more chances. I mean some do, but some don't. I believe the stats guys found that on the whole, most players convert 5 on 5 chances at relatively the same rate.

Look at Crosby for example. His 5 on 5 shooting % was 149th in the league last year and Ovechkin has always been low in terms of shooting percentage.

I think what is probably happening here is that XGF% overvalues something that Sutter teams are good at, and undervalues something they are less good at.

Maybe Sutter teams create more goal mouth scrambles but attempt and convert on fewer passes across the royal road. Hard to say really, but if you have six years of data that shows a team's actual GF% never exceeding their XGF% its very unlikely to be luck at that point.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that having a high XGF% is very good, but its odd that Sutter teams always have a higher XGF% than actual GF%. If I was the creator of the stat, I'd be looking at what is driving that phenomenon.

[Enoch Root]

Last year's projections are actually pretty accurate. Missed FLA, but otherwise, nothing too far off.

The Pacific had a 3 pt spread on 5 teams, which I think was accurate at the start of the season. CGY and VAN had poor seasons and underperformed where they should have been.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I'm just looking at Sutter's time with the Kings here. I don't think you can say a two time Cup winner has limited talent.

Also, star/talented players don't necessarily finish at a higher rate than other middle six players, they just create more chances. I mean some do, but some don't. I believe the stats guys found that on the whole, most players convert 5 on 5 chances at relatively the same rate.

Look at Crosby for example. His 5 on 5 shooting % was 149th in the league last year and Ovechkin has always been low in terms of shooting percentage.

I think what is probably happening here is that XGF% overvalues something that Sutter teams are good at, and undervalues something they are less good at.

Maybe Sutter teams create more goal mouth scrambles but attempt and convert on fewer passes across the royal road. Hard to say really, but if you have six years of data that shows a team's actual GF% never exceeding their XGF% its very unlikely to be luck at that point.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that having a high XGF% is very good, but its odd that Sutter teams always have a higher XGF% than actual GF%. If I was the creator of the stat, I'd be looking at what is driving that phenomenon.

For sure.

His teams could simply have a high frequency of a type of scoring chance that is deemed a high danger chance in today's definition, but really isn't all that dangerous.

Disagree on finishing though.

If you look at on ice shooting percentage and not shooting percentage I think you get a better feel for a top player's impact. Ovechkin shoots a lot for example so his shooting percentage can be low, but his on ice shooting percentage high because of the rebounds he creates.

Top on ice shooting percentage forwards from the last three years ...

Kuznetsov
Vrana
Pettersson
Panarin
Draisaitl
Boeser
McDavid
Kucherov
Ovechkin
Marner
Point
Kane


That's a pretty good group.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Has JFresh done this in years past? How close has it been to what has transpired if so?

Edit: Managed to google my way into an answer, behold last season vs actual standings:

He got 11/16 of the playoff teams correct in 20/21. I wonder how that stacks up?
The Anaheim playoff prediction in particular stands out as super weird.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/ea-s...2020-21-season
The EA Sports Simulator got 10/16.

https://www.nhl.com/news/stanley-cup...21/c-320040646

15 writers/editors from nhl.com

Amalie Benjamin: 12/16
Tim Campbell: 12/16
Brian Compton: 10/16
Nicholas J Cotsonika: 12/16
William Douglas: 12/16
Tom Gulitti: 11/16
Pete Jensen: 10/16
Adam Kimelman: 10/16
Tracey Myers: 12/16
Mike G Morreale: 11/16
Bill Price: 10/16
Shawn P Roarke: 12/16
Dan Rosen: 11/16
Dave Stubbs: 12/16
Mike Zeisberger: 12/16

So he beat the other number cruncher EA Sports Sim.
However JFresh only out predicted 4 out of 15 random hockey fans, the majority of whom were probably just going with their gut.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For sure.

His teams could simply have a high frequency of a type of scoring chance that is deemed a high danger chance in today's definition, but really isn't all that dangerous.

Disagree on finishing though.

If you look at on ice shooting percentage and not shooting percentage I think you get a better feel for a top player's impact. Ovechkin shoots a lot for example so his shooting percentage can be low, but his on ice shooting percentage high because of the rebounds he creates.

Top on ice shooting percentage forwards from the last three years ...

Kuznetsov
Vrana
Pettersson
Panarin
Draisaitl
Boeser
McDavid
Kucherov
Ovechkin
Marner
Point
Kane


That's a pretty good group.

Yeah, but you removed some guys. There are some guys at the top you wouldn't expect to see if pure talent dictated shooting %. With on ice Shooting % you also get into the issue of one high shooting% line mate influencing another line mate's on-ice %.

Which kind of leads me to taking so many of these stats with a grain of salt as everything and everyone, is influenced by everything and everyone else.

1 Evgeny Kuznetsov
2 Carson Soucy
3 Jakub Vrana
4 Travis Boyd
5 Elias Pettersson
6 Artemi Panarin
7 Michal Kempny
8 Brock Boeser
9 Leon Draisaitl
10 Connor McDavid
11 Nikita Kucherov
12 John Carlson
13 Alex Ovechkin
14 Brayden Point
15 Mitchell Marner
16 Cale Makar
17 Patrick Kane
18 Chris Kreider
19 Joel Farabee
20 Patrice Bergeron

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Yeah, but you removed some guys. There are some guys at the top you wouldn't expect to see if pure talent dictated shooting %. With on ice Shooting % you also get into the issue of one high shooting% line mate influencing another line mate's on-ice %.

Which kind of leads me to taking so many of these stats with a grain of salt as everything and everyone, is influenced by everything and everyone else.

1 Evgeny Kuznetsov
2 Carson Soucy
3 Jakub Vrana
4 Travis Boyd
5 Elias Pettersson
6 Artemi Panarin
7 Michal Kempny
8 Brock Boeser
9 Leon Draisaitl
10 Connor McDavid
11 Nikita Kucherov
12 John Carlson
13 Alex Ovechkin
14 Brayden Point
15 Mitchell Marner
16 Cale Makar
17 Patrick Kane
18 Chris Kreider
19 Joel Farabee
20 Patrice Bergeron

I didn't remove anyone.

I just had a 1500 minutes requirement in the last three years and then literally typed out the top 10 or so.

You have defensemen too.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

He got 11/16 of the playoff teams correct in 20/21. I wonder how that stacks up?
The Anaheim playoff prediction in particular stands out as super weird.

I think the Anaheim example is actually a good one for showing off why he was right and close. Anaheim in his WAR model was only 1-2 points above the Coyotes and the Wild, both of whom over performed relative to expectation last year. Of course the wild made the playoffs. So he wasn't far off. Anaheim also dealt with significant injuries last season to weigh them down.

Calgary, Philly, and Nashville were the other big blemishes. But all were significant underperforming teams compared to expectations across the board, resulting in loud calls from respective fan bases to mix it up big time. Nashville and Philly connected to do that already.

[Ashasx]

Adding to the JFreshHockey thread

https://twitter.com/user/status/1435662353060843523

[GioforPM]

Interesting that only 4 players are positive.