Friedman's 30 thoughts - analytics say Oilers' luck should turn

[djsFlames]

Not gonna lie,

"Corsi" is becoming as annoying as "Truculence" around here these days.

[Hot_Flatus]

I really expect better from someone like Friedman.

Bringing luck into the conversation as anything more then a throw in for a perennial losing team like the Oilers is garbage......its clearly not the problem as they haven't simply been unlucky for the last five years. Of course a joke of a team is going to have a terrible save% and probably even worse shooting%.

If he doesn't have anything concise to say about the situation up North he should leave the analysis to people who actually want to analyze the situation properly. Throwing out advanced stats in this manner is exactly what leads fans to feel they are absolutely useless.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Not gonna lie,

"Corsi" is becoming as annoying as "Truculence" around here these days.

What about 'Butter?'

Where does that rank?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Actually contrarily I'm a huge proponent of the advanced stats in baseball, because they are actually beneficial and more indicative of the true talent of the player.



These stats, while helpful to a limited extent are flawed each in their own ways and don't account for the talent of players like the ones in baseball do. That's why the good teams always seem to outperform their underlying stats. It also doesn't help to pick out which areas that the player is skilled in. There is no creativity index in order to generate offensive chances, just that chances are being created. How is it being accomplished. I liken it to batting average in baseball. It's helpful to tell how good of a hitter the batter is, but it isn't OPS or anything that might tell you if they are getting hits are they doubles or all squeaker base hits. A player like Backlund gets highlighted as being a great corsi player, yet he doesn't generate enough points to account for his excellent #'s. He's basically a singles hitter. It's useful as he's great in that regard, but it's also limited as he can't drive the runs in (score 25+ goals 50+ points). Any stat should be able to provide context as well as a simple guideline. Unfortunately Corsi/Fenwick only provide the guideline without the context.



Also in baseball, it's virtually impossible to rig the stats in your favour. In hockey though, if you just start shooting from everywhere regardless of positioning or context, then you'll be better in those stats. Basically this is what Edmonton has done.



There are just too many variables unaccounted for with them. They are a step in the right direction though, and hopefully there are new stats that can provide the context of the players' talent in addition to their efficiency. We don't have that now.

Baseball stats are based on what the players actually did - they got on base or they didn't, they got zero to 4 bases each at bat - so stats are more meaningful.

[united]

I've read and heard that advanced stats say the Oilers are good but I don't see it. Where is this stuff coming from?

Score-adjusted shot attempts %: 22nd (11th in West)
Even-strength goal %: 29th (14th West)
Even-strength save %: 30th (14th West)
Even-strength shot %: 26th (13th West)

As others have said, everyone except the most extremist "advanced" stats advocates recognizes PDO isn't equal and good teams will have a higher PDO than baseline and bad teams will have a lower PDO than baseline.

I think in the Oilers' case their goaltending is right where you would expect them at, hovering at .900 (even strength). Their shooting will probably increase a bit; 6.7% is low for their talent in my opinion. However, even if you assumed they shot with league average accuracy they still gain only 5 goals this season so far, bringing their goal different to 47%. Good for a rise to 24th overall (13th West). Still terrible.

The Oilers suck by all metrics available, conventional or "advanced".

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by united

I've read and heard that advanced stats say the Oilers are good but I don't see it. Where is this stuff coming from?

Score-adjusted shot attempts %: 22nd (11th in West)
Even-strength goal %: 29th (14th West)
Even-strength save %: 30th (14th West)
Even-strength shot %: 26th (13th West)

As others have said, everyone except the most extremist "advanced" stats advocates recognizes PDO isn't equal and good teams will have a higher PDO than baseline and bad teams will have a lower PDO than baseline.

I think in the Oilers' case their goaltending is right where you would expect them at, hovering at .900 (even strength). Their shooting will probably increase a bit; 6.7% is low for their talent in my opinion. However, even if you assumed they shot with league average accuracy they still only gain 5 goals this season so far, bringing their goal different to 47%. Good for a rise to 24th overall (13th West). Still terrible.

The Oilers suck by all metrics available conventional or "advanced".

I've been wondering the same. The only metric they're bad but not awful is 5v5 Corsi for%, but that ignores score effect

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

I would like to better understand these analytics. Could someone who is well versed in them be kind enough to find where I can read about how they were developed, and read the actual empirical data? I'm interested in the magnitude of the correlation r values and various other metrics on wins and other outcomes.

[Fan in Exile]

The advanced stats advocates are drinking the same koolaid as Lowe and McTavish:

Another article yesterday from IJay Palansky in The Toronto Star:

In one recent example, Sportsnet ran an article on Nov. 20 headlined “Flames and Oilers Heading In Opposite Directions.” The headline is the one thing we can agree on.

Calgary and Edmonton are indeed two teams heading in opposite directions, but it’s not the directions the author and most other people think.

The writer contrasted Calgary’s surprising 12-6-2 start at the time with Edmonton’s disappointing 6-11-2, and marvelled at the Flames’ “character” and “courage,” and delicately declaring that “Calgary has more guts than a killing floor.”

Fortunately, analytics gives us much better metrics for gauging performance. Twenty games isn’t a huge sample, but there’s enough to get a sense of what’s going on.

And what’s going on is that, despite its uncanny ability to give up prime scoring chances with disturbing regularity, Edmonton is a better team than Calgary.

Much like the Leafs’ early success last season, Calgary’s start this year is smoke and mirrors.

I guess there's no arguing, right? The "advanced stats" say the Oilers are better than the Flames so goals for and against, records and head-to-head results be damned; they ARE a better team. The circular reasoning employed here reminds me of the reasoning of a religious fanatic.

I hope the Oilers hire this guy. They deserve each other.

You know what the PDOs and advanced stats when read together with more important stats like goals for and against and actual records indicate to me?

The Flames are a good team that can still stand to grow and improve and the Oilers are a bad team that are playing about as well as they can.

[Ozy_Flame]

"Create your own luck" - Harvey Dent

[troutman]

Shallow men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Locke]

Looking back on this after today's events is kind of funny.

The Oilers' had better hope that their luck changes because nothing else is going to.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

The circular reasoning employed here reminds me of the reasoning of a religious fanatic.

I thanked your post, but I take exception to this. Religious fanatics, after a certain amount of failure, usually wind up blaming themselves for letting their god down. Narcissists never think of blaming themselves, and consequently can go round and round in that rut of circular reasoning forever.

[Roughneck]

'The harder I work, the luckier I get'