Sportsnet - Top 20 Centers. The List you Will Love to Hate

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Yeah, and?

Quality depth, especially at the blue line is always in high demand for a team that sees themselves as contenders at the deadline. That doesn't change a thing. The trade deadline is also a bit of a crazy bubble year to year, one year Mike Cammalleri is only offered a third round, next year guys like him are flying for good value and it leaves you frustrated about the year before.

You're honestly all over the place here. Advanced stats have a place, from the outside teams place minimal value in it, Flames included. Chris Snow has value but he's low down the totem pole of voices Treliving listens on it seems. It's just more information, but it's hardly the bible itself. Not even close.

I don't have a clue where exactly Chris Snow sits on the proverbial totem pole, but Treliving does in fact listen to what he has to say. There has been a couple of interviews with Treliving where he spoke about advanced stats, and how he uses them quite a lot - but it is the Flames own in-house metrics and NOT CORSI, so you are indeed mostly right.

I think the future of advanced metrics is NOT going to be where advanced metrics started from - from casual fans trying to put numbers on what they are seeing. Teams are hiring math geniuses (mostly Actuarial Science backgrounds I bet) to develop metrics and track them. It is a process, and that is another reason as why we should all point and laugh at the Oilers and their hiring of whatever his name was, and Eakins started telling his players to shoot more to increase the CORSI (remember Eberle leaking that out in an interview?).

I am really interested in what metrics the NHL and all 30 teams end up with down the road - should be interesting and something else to follow. Until then, I give CORSI just a casual look at best, as it seems all it is will be a temporary placeholder until real metrics are developed and get leaked out.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I guarantee I'm older than you.

Not something I read on a message board very often. Anyway Pittsburgh having the top two best forwards just doesn't seem fair.

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

While we are on it... how about my favorite of the useless stats - PDO. Hey, just listen to this guy tell you how important it is:
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2011/...-nhl-statistic

I am being completely tongue-in-cheek with PDO. I couldn't agree less that it is the most important stat - or that it is a good one. So you are telling me this is luck-driven statistic that should come down (or up) to an average of 1.00? Hogwash.

If a team is fielding a strong defence, with strong goalies, and playing a sound defensive system, I would expect that SV% to be better than a team with a poor one, no? Also, if my team has a few of the best players in the game - especially snipers who can pick corners and have the speed to beat defencemen, and who employ defencemen who are good passers and have bombs from the point causing chaos in front of the net - I would anticipate that their shooting percentage is higher, no? Wouldn't the best teams overall simply have a better PDO.. you know.. because they are better, and not just 'lucky'?

This is exactly what I've wondered for a while as well.

Last year the Flames goaltending was atrocious, but our shooting was pretty good. This year we've upgraded our goaltending. So according to PDO our shooting should go... down? Simply because we've upgraded our goaltending? There's no direct correlation there.

I get what PDO is trying to say overall. Yes, the combined average of all shot and save percentages across the league will equal 1.00, but that doesn't mean anything above or believe that is luck. You're just taking too much data together.

That would be like saying league wide the average team ranks 15th in standings. Anything above or below that is just luck.

[Imported_Aussie]

Barkov is the guy I would have taken #1 in that draft. Over MacKinnon. And for my money, he will end up the best overall player in that draft class.


The only way MacKinnon and Scheifle are over Monahan would have to be based on the sample used. If it was most recent 2 seasons, Monahan has come on great, just had the up and down rookie season. MacKinnon started better, but I feel Monahan has overtaken him.

If someone said I could have on my team any of those 3 mentioned above, I pick Monahan 7 days a week and twice on Sundays. But I would take Barkov for Monahan in a heartbeat.

Most of the list is OK to me. The problem with any of these lists that rely on a selected number of stats is that what is selected can seem arbitrary when looking at specific cases - such as Toews scoring low on defence, based on the rating placing emphasis on hits, shot blocks - its almost RGI in how he has done this.


It is one way of looking at a ranking of players, but the arbitrary sample and criteria used will irk people, as the "eye test" could tell you that Toews is a better defensive centre than most on this list, despite his ranking being middle of this pack

[Weitz]

Advanced stats have their place and can be used for certain situations. Hell, I know some guys who play NHL DFS and are not hockey fans and don't watch games, yet they win good money by examining advanced stats and other stats to develop game scripts and opinions to build line ups.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by JerryUnderscore

This is exactly what I've wondered for a while as well.

Last year the Flames goaltending was atrocious, but our shooting was pretty good. This year we've upgraded our goaltending. So according to PDO our shooting should go... down? Simply because we've upgraded our goaltending? There's no direct correlation there.

I get what PDO is trying to say overall. Yes, the combined average of all shot and save percentages across the league will equal 1.00, but that doesn't mean anything above or believe that is luck. You're just taking too much data together.

That would be like saying league wide the average team ranks 15th in standings. Anything above or below that is just luck.

Except that isn't exactly how it works, nor should anyone use it like that. The numbers are always simply what they are. Some may choose to try and interpret more from them than is warranted.
1 is simply the mean, and it has to be because every shot is a goal or a save. Good teams will usually have higher PDO, bad teams lower. But there is a range under which the vast majority of teams will fall, above and below that.
To call it the most important statistic is silly. I think it might be most valuable in interpreting streaks over smaller sample sizes.
For example, any 10 game stretch might provide some insight. Have a 7-2-1 record with incredibly high PDO, and it would seem unlikely to continue. You were 'lucky'. The team shot 15%, or your goaltending was. 950. Or both. But it is highly unlikely to continue.
It can simply be a way to statistically suggest why a team might be having hot and cold streaks, or whether one might expect good or bad results to continue.
Or something like that...

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Except that isn't exactly how it works, nor should anyone use it like that. The numbers are always simply what they are. Some may choose to try and interpret more from them than is warranted.
1 is simply the mean, and it has to be because every shot is a goal or a save. Good teams will usually have higher PDO, bad teams lower. But there is a range under which the vast majority of teams will fall, above and below that.
To call it the most important statistic is silly. I think it might be most valuable in interpreting streaks over smaller sample sizes.
For example, any 10 game stretch might provide some insight. Have a 7-2-1 record with incredibly high PDO, and it would seem unlikely to continue. You were 'lucky'. The team shot 15%, or your goaltending was. 950. Or both. But it is highly unlikely to continue.
It can simply be a way to statistically suggest why a team might be having hot and cold streaks, or whether one might expect good or bad results to continue.
Or something like that...

But if you team went 7-2-1 over a 10 game streak of course it's because your PDO was high. How does that automatically mean it's not likely to continue?

Shouldn't a team with skaters that can shoot well and a goalie that can stop more than the average number of pucks typically have a high PDO?

In which case, wouldn't it be better to start each season by taking all the players on a team combining their career shooting percentage 5v5 and added it to the career 5v5 save percentage of our goalies? That way, each team would have a "personalize" PDO that reflected the reasonable expectations of that combination of players?

In which case you could look at a team like Calgary and say "They're over/under performing their .975 PDO" or look at Edmonton and say "They're underperforming their already atrocious PDO of .632".

[EldrickOnIce]

It wouldn't necessarily be high.
You average out shooting you opponents 32-24 through that stretch, get league average shooting and save %, and you could go 7-2-1. No 'luck' involved here.
But get out shot 32-24 through those games, go 7-2-1, and your PDO would be very high. So you have probably gone through a pretty 'lucky' (or maybe hot?) stretch.
Like a lot of 'advanced' stats, I don't see that there is much advanced about it. It's just numbers telling some part of the story, maybe.

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

It wouldn't necessarily be high.
You average out shooting you opponents 32-24 through that stretch, get league average shooting and save %, and you could go 7-2-1. No 'luck' involved here.
But get out shot 32-24 through those games, go 7-2-1, and your PDO would be very high. So you have probably gone through a pretty 'lucky' (or maybe hot?) stretch.
Like a lot of 'advanced' stats, I don't see that there is much advanced about it. It's just numbers telling some part of the story, maybe.

Okay, that's a fair point. Thanks for the clarification.

I guess it's always been presented to me as "all but the best goalies stop roughly 91.5% of shots and all except the best skaters shoot at about 8.5% therefore all but the best teams have a PDO of 100".

But taking in shot differential helps somewhat.

[codynw]

Coming from someone who really supports the use of "advanced" stats, PDO is beyond stupid.

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by codynw

Coming from someone who really supports the use of "advanced" stats, PDO is beyond stupid.

I'm probably coming off as someone who doesn't have any love for advanced stats at all, but I generally like them. There are a ton that can show useful information.

However, people are inherently subjective and tend to create narratives about good and bad players. Then we find the "data" to back up what we already believe.

[Strange Brew]

I find the Mackinnon/Monahan debate pretty interesting. Mackinnon is flashier, was a monster in the playoffs the only time he was there and he looked exceptional in the World Cup. So maybe he is a big stage player? Monahan has been more consistent and seems to be improving every year. And he scores goals. Maybe not an advanced stat but an important one.

Could any of Mackinnon's performance last two years be attributed to Roy's coaching? Right or wrong, I still feel he might have a higher ceiling than Monahan.

[corporatejay]

Sorry but saw him last night at the Raptors game and he is definitely #1 in lettuce. That thing is just gorgeous.

[Mister Yamoto]

That list is garbage. No Flames. Can't we find a stat that the Flames came in ninth or something.

Why doesn't the greatest 26th place team get more respect around the league?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Mister Yamoto

That list is garbage. No Flames. Can't we find a stat that the Flames came in ninth or something.

Why doesn't the greatest 26th place team get more respect around the league?

My beef with advanced stats is that they can be out right invented to make some players look better than others. There are just too many moving parts to make conclusions about them more of the time.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by codynw

Coming from someone who really supports the use of "advanced" stats, PDO is beyond stupid.

Why do you say that? I mean, all it's really used as is a quick reference point to see if a team's short term results are in line with usual performance.