Flames players analytics data

[Mathgod]

5 on 5 xGF% numbers through 19 games. I think the numbers pretty much speak for themselves.

[Hack&Lube]

Found this on Gaskal's ATL, xGF%

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Found this on Gaskal's ATL, xGF%

Boston's best players were not their best players. Yikes. Incredible that those 3 were basically run out of their own building tonight.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Boston's best players were not their best players. Yikes. Incredible that those 3 were basically run out of their own building tonight.

Well, to be fair, they all got dinged up in and around the noggin

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

5 on 5 xGF% numbers through 19 games. I think the numbers pretty much speak for themselves.

Yup, if you don't mind numbers lying through their teeth by pretending to be significant.

The data aren't accompanied by any information about linemates, quality of opposition, usage, score effects, or any other kind of context.

A player who is put on the ice in a defensive role with fourth-line plugs is not going to have the offensive numbers that he would have in a top-six role. (Yes, I am talking about Monahan.) But you can tell something reasonably meaningful about his defensive contribution by looking at xGA and adjusting it for time on ice, because quality of opposition varies from shift to shift a lot more than quality of linemates.

So let's look at the numbers you gave, and zero in on xGA/60:

Blake Coleman     1.79
Oliver Kylington  1.82
Matthew Tkachuk   1.88
Nikita Zadorov    1.96
Elias Lindholm    1.97
Christopher Tanev 2.06
Andrew Mangiapane 2.12
Sean Monahan      2.13
Johnny Gaudreau   2.14
Mikael Backlund   2.17
Milan Lucic       2.17
Erik Gudbranson   2.22
Trevor Lewis      2.24
Rasmus Andersson  2.30
Noah Hanifin      2.34
Tyler Pitlick     2.35
Dillon Dube       2.75

Defensively, Monahan is in the middle of a pretty tight pack. His xGF/60 (2.03) is cratered partly because he's a month behind the rest of the team in getting his game together, but also because he has been given fourth-line duties with wingers such as Lewis (1.65) and Lucic (1.93).

The only really bad xGA/60 in the lot belongs to Dube, but he looks pretty good on xGF% (53.86) chiefly because, though not contributing so much offensively himself, he got a lot of minutes playing beside a red-hot Mangiapane. Since those two have been split up, his defensive shortcomings have become much more obvious, because there's no glittery offence from a linemate to mask them.

Your numbers that ‘speak for themselves’ would lead an incautious observer to believe that Dube has been clearly better than Monahan, where in fact Dube has been the weakest link on the team defensively and not a big offensive contributor.

In fact, numbers never speak for themselves. They require analysis, and the message they deliver depends entirely on who is choosing the numbers and what information that person chooses to leave out. Remember the remark that Mark Twain attributed to Disraeli, ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.’

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Boston's best players were not their best players. Yikes. Incredible that those 3 were basically run out of their own building tonight.

Our first line tuned up their first line.

[Shazam]

That was the first game I watched where Boston's first line didn't beat the crap out of Calgary. Usually they have their way with us.

[Wastedyouth]

Tkachuk, not elite and expendable, apparently.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

In fact, numbers never speak for themselves. They require analysis, and the message they deliver depends entirely on who is choosing the numbers and what information that person chooses to leave out. Remember the remark that Mark Twain attributed to Disraeli, ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.’

Amazing post overall, but in particular love the use of this quote. It is one of my father's favourites too. He worked finance in O and G for Shell for 25+ years. Numbers make the best lies; most people don't have enough grasp of the context to properly question them, and you can use them to paint many stories.

[Canada 02]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1462798031145811975

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Tkachuk, not elite and expendable, apparently.

Tkachuk is great.

Between Tkachuk, Gaudreau and Mangiapane, he’s the one you trade.

[Roof-Daddy]

I've gone from "I can't wait until they blow this pile of garbage up" to "how in the hell are we going to re-sign all these guys and keep it under the cap?" LOL

It starts and ends with Gaudreau right now. He's the UFA.

If you can get him signed then you can look at how to fit the RFAs in and look to get big trade returns for the ones you can't.

If he walks then you probably try like hell to get both Mang and Thachuk extended.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Tkachuk is great.

Between Tkachuk, Gaudreau and Mangiapane, he’s the one you trade.

Disagree

[neo45]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Found this on Gaskal's ATL, xGF%

I think that’s just the first period FWIW

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

In fact, numbers never speak for themselves. They require analysis, and the message they deliver depends entirely on who is choosing the numbers and what information that person chooses to leave out.

Analysis is important. But it's also important not to mistake spin and excuses for analysis.

I don't have time to get into it, but your what you're calling analysis here is not as complete as you think it is.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Analysis is important. But it's also important not to mistake spin and excuses for analysis.

I don't have time to get into it, but your what you're calling analysis here is not as complete as you think it is.

I don't think it's complete. I think it's a start, which is a hell of a lot more than you offer with your ‘the numbers speak for themselves’. So don't go telling me what I'm thinking, because you are no bloody good at it.

[Bingo]

I think both sets of numbers tell you something, and both add to the conversation.

JR's comment about type of player and situations certainly play into it. If you saddle a player like Monahan with muckers his job isn't to run the table offensively, but do his best to avoid getting worked defensively.

A guy like Zadorov is all defense, so his splits will never be good, but does he do a better than most job of boxing out and limiting expected goals against?

But overall generation splits (for vs against) are still the bottom line for your better players and have to be looked as well.

[Mathgod]

I just think it's rather rich to flippantly disregard Dube's great xGF/60 as "riding Mangi's coattails", then turn around and make a bunch of excuses for Monahan's lack of offensive contributions. If Monahan hasn't given the coach enough reason not to stick him on the 4th line, that's on him. The whole "month behind the team" thing just comes across as an excuse, especially for a 9 year NHL vet.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I just think it's rather rich to flippantly disregard Dube's great xGF/60 as "riding Mangi's coattails", then turn around and make a bunch of excuses for Monahan's lack of offensive contributions.

Look, xGF is not an individual stat, but an on-ice stat. By definition, it matters whom you are on the ice with. What is rich about saying that a player with linemates who are scoring will look better than his own performance warrants, and a player with linemates who don't score will look worse? I'm applying exactly the same standard in both cases.

If Monahan hasn't given the coach enough reason not to stick him on the 4th line, that's on him.

You apparently missed where Monahan is no longer on the 4th line and hasn't been for several games.

The whole "month behind the team" thing just comes across as an excuse, especially for a 9 year NHL vet.

It is an absolute fact that Monahan had major hip surgery in the off season and did not play until the very end of training camp. Darryl Sutter himself has said publicly that he was easing Monahan back into the lineup by putting him on the fourth line. These things are not excuses, they are explanations.

Just because someone doesn't hate the players you hate, doesn't mean they are making excuses.

[Mathgod]

Having a good xGF/60 means you're doing your job on the ice offensively. If you aren't scoring, you're at least skating well, being in the right places, opening up the ice and creating opportunities for your linemates to score. If a having a good xGF/60 isn't translating into good point totals, it's typically a sign that you're going through a stretch of bad luck and things will eventually even out with enough playing time.

Dube needs to be better defensively than he has been this year. No question about that. But he's not just riding the coattails of his linemates offensively, he's working well with his linemates to create chances, and if he keeps at it, the goals will come.

Expressing frustration with a player is not the same thing as hate. I don't hate Monahan - the furthest thing from it. I celebrate with a money hands image every time he scores a goal!