Article: How the Calgary Flames are Laughing at Advanced Stats

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

A team will go through hot stretches where they score lots and dry spells when they don't.
A goaltender will get and carry a team, and then cool off.
For the most part the game is cyclical like that.

'Corsi' tends to be more stable; in large part immune to random streaks or events.
It only makes logical sense that if you out shooting and outchance the opposition, you will tend to win more. It's a fools game to argue against that.

That's how I see the pro analytics argument as completely valid.

I'm not arguing against analytics, I agree they should be used, especially by management of the team, along with many other things.

I also agree with what you said above, but does Corsi actually measure if you "outchance" your opposition? I honestly don't know, but I assumed it used shots as a proxy for chances and didn't differentiate on where the shots came from, or if a chance occurred that did not result in a shot.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I'm not arguing against analytics, I agree they should be used, especially by management of the team, along with many other things.

I also agree with what you said above, but does Corsi actually measure if you "outchance" your opposition? I honestly don't know, but I assumed it used shots as a proxy for chances and didn't differentiate on where the shots came from, or if a chance occurred that did not result in a chance.

I think we will know soon enough. There will come a point in time, soon, when analytics looks back and chuckles as what passes for advanced today.
I guess it's an evolutionary process, like any other.

[mikeecho]

The whole advanced stats debate as it pertains to the Flames this year is fairly useless (IMHO) because they're not a finished product.

It's year 2 of a rebuild that will likely take 5 years to play out completely. They're playing the kind of game that their roster and skill set can execute sufficiently to stay competitive.

It just so happens that they're doing quite well playing that way, but there's no doubt in my mind that the coaches would prefer to be a higher possession team. They just don't have the horses for that and they're making the best with what they do have.

Between now and the 5 year mark of the rebuild, the roster is going to turn over significantly and the style of play is going to change in line with the players they have to execute a game plan. By 2017-18, the Flames could be the league leader in possession, so there's no need to judge a team that is just starting out a rebuild for how they play.

That's the difference between the Flames and the Leafs of last year. That Leafs team was a (horrible) finished product. The Stars, Avs and Wild were building teams and that's why the rush to judge them over the last few years has been ridiculous.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by getbak

Burke doesn't scoff at analytics. He does scoff at calling things like Corsi and Fenwick "analytics" though.

Truthfully, I doubt he scoffs even at that.

But I think he does scoff at how myopic some of the stats guys do get at times. For instance, if we finish fourth in the division and miss the playoffs while LA finishes third, you will hear a lot of "we were right!" crowing from the usual suspects that you would not hear if we finish third instead - even though the difference either way is the entire arbitrary line of making the playoffs or not. It doesn't matter where either team finishes anymore. Corsi/Fenwick say LA should have been contending for the President's Trophy, and Calgary for Connor McDavid. Both teams are exceptions to anyone looking dispassionately. The ones who are offended by Calgary's success will be moving the goalposts.

[EldrickOnIce]

^Also applies to the Avs. They bought their own hype and added declining vets that were supposed to put them over the top.
The Flames have stayed the course (Glencross) and not tried to shortcut the rebuild.

[SanFranFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by calf

I liked this line from his season preview, linked to the OP's article:

He must have meant last place in the West PLAYOFFS!

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

^Also applies to the Avs. They bought their own hype and added declining vets that were supposed to put them over the top.
The Flames have stayed the course (Glencross) and not tried to shortcut the rebuild.

In part, yes. But lets face it, those declining vets aren't the problem this year. It's Colorado's youth that let them down. That, I think, is a lesson that should not be lost here. Some of our kids will regress next year. It's all part of the ups and downs of developing as an organization.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In part, yes. But lets face it, those declining vets aren't the problem this year. It's Colorado's youth that let them down. That, I think, is a lesson that should not be lost here. Some of our kids will regress next year. It's all part of the ups and downs of developing as an organization.

Perhaps some of the kids will regress, they should be worried if they do though. Kids like Bennett will inject a certain amount of youthful exuberance that will stem the negative impact I think. Add to the the potential addition of Poirier and Wolf (maybe), Shore and others wil hopefully keep the kids on their toes. As deep as the Avs are with skilled youth, their depth isn't on par with CGY's.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In part, yes. But lets face it, those declining vets aren't the problem this year. It's Colorado's youth that let them down. That, I think, is a lesson that should not be lost here. Some of our kids will regress next year. It's all part of the ups and downs of developing as an organization.

Not saying Flames young players may not regress. Just saying replacing a top centre in his prime with aging vets is, in no small part, a function of believing their own press from the previous season.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Just saying replacing a top centre in his prime with aging vets is, in no small part, a function of believing their own press from the previous season.

The Avs didn't choose to replace Stastny with aging vets. Stastny chose to walk, and they had to replace him with what they could get.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Property Manager DB

Quality not Quantity is more important in my opinion

If only that same idea worked for capital letters and punctuation as well.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The Avs didn't choose to replace Stastny with aging vets. Stastny chose to walk, and they had to replace him with what they could get.

Right. Like Giordano could choose to walk. But when a team sees a guy as a critical part of their immediate future its more likely they get a deal done before it comes to that, like I believe the Flames will with Giordano.
I don't think the Avs saw Stastny as critical, and so it went the way it did.

[Jay Random]

According to one story that has been repeated here on CP, the Avs offered Stastny as much money as the Blues did, but Stastny walked anyway. That suggests to me that they did intend to keep him on the team, but he chose to leave for reasons of his own that they could not accommodate.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Look, rather than have to have the same conversation over and over... all of the things people bring up in here; shot quality, reliability, reasons why there are outliers... all of these things have been discussed by analytics writers for years. Rather than speculating about them on a message board as if they're being mentioned for the first time, why not fire up google and go read up about these things for yourself? It'd save a lot of time. Someone else has already done the work to answer most questions you probably have.

[FlameZilla]

I really enjoyed this article.

If this team can go some way to discrediting advanced stats I would consider that victory in itself. I hate the idea that sports franchises are constructing teams around principles like bossing possession and shot attempts. They should be building teams around scoring goals and shutting out the opposition.

Bob Hartley has constructed his team around a classic counter-attacking philosophy. That philosophy is completely anti-Corsi and anti-Fenwick and it suits the style of the players at his disposal. For this I believe there is no better candidate for the Jack Adams.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Look, rather than have to have the same conversation over and over... all of the things people bring up in here; shot quality, reliability, reasons why there are outliers... all of these things have been discussed by analytics writers for years. Rather than speculating about them on a message board as if they're being mentioned for the first time, why not fire up google and go read up about these things for yourself? It'd save a lot of time. Someone else has already done the work to answer most questions you probably have.

but that would involve leaving CP (and work). It's much easier to ask here

[HOWITZER]

I think we need to get back on track with what OP wanted. Calgary Flames good. Hokey analytics bad.

This season has been a ride regardless of what analytics or people for that matter think. So what if the team regresses slightly next year or in the next 3 weeks? I've had fun, and I look forward to seeing the team be competitive for a long time. Sure beats the days of 10th place finishes tinkering with a broken record trying to create the next Beethoven symphony.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

but that would involve leaving CP (and work). It's much easier to ask here

Yeah but it's a pain in the ass for me or anyone else to have to explain the same things and post the same links to the same resources over and over and over.

Not to mention a lot of the people asking the questions aren't legitimately interested in answers, they just want to raise perceived (almost always nonsensical and ignorant) objections because they reject any statistic or analytical method that doesn't say good things about the team they cheer for.

If nothing else, just recognize that whatever brilliant hole you've found that totally discredits these stats, no, you are not the first person to think of it, and yes, it has been discussed and analyzed at length.

[Enoch Root]

Once again, CorsiHockeyLeague, you display an incredible overconfidence in your opinions on this matter.

Many of the posters here who question these stats have already read those articles, understand the issues, and yet - implausibly - still question and challenge the conclusions and claims.

Why? Because that is the proper way to go about something that is so far from being complete that it is still closer to complete ineffectuality.

[Enoch Root]

As for Corsi predicting approximately 70% of the playoff teams... in sports, in any given year, predicting 70% of the playoff teams is an absolute slam dunk, and should be considered the very basest of baselines.

Show me a model or metric that can predict to harder 30%, and then I will be impressed.