Flames players analytics data

[Bingo]

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. 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.

I wouldn't disregard his xGF/60 any more than I'd disregard Zadorov's GA/60

Both very pertinent in the discussion.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by 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!

Not sure I 100% agree here.

Neither xGF or xGA means anything specifically to any one player. A guy like Frolik always had really good numbers but didn't drive things all that much; he just helped keep them in the offensive zone with support and was excellent in his own zone.

If you have a great xGF number you're probably doing a lot of the things you are talking about but it's an on ice stat and isn't particular to the player.

ixG/60 though is what you were expected to score individually and Dube is third on the team with 0.87/60. The kid is getting chances but is somewhat snake bit.

He's also 6th in individual shot attempts/60, 5th in individual scoring chances/60 and 4th in individual high danger chances /60

Have to think the puck is going to start going in.

[GioforPM]

^^ The Dube assisted Mangiapane goal was pretty much the practical evidence of Dube’s offensive luck this year. Three great chances and nothing. Mangiapane gets the puck and manages to slide it under a dman and the goalie.

[Aarongavey]

I do not know where this stat fits in on the analytics discussion but I just read in the Eric Francis piece that Johnny Gaudreau has not been on the ice for an even strength goal against this year. That is damn impressive.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I do not know where this stat fits in on the analytics discussion but I just read in the Eric Francis piece that Johnny Gaudreau has not been on the ice for an even strength goal against this year. That is damn impressive.

5 on 5 (he’s been on for OT goals IIRC). Still impressive.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by 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!

No, it means that you have a good xGF/60. Period.

Everything else you said is your own projection.

The only thing the stat tells us is that a certain amount of offense has been generated, while that player was on the ice. The extent to which that player is involved or not involved, or whether they are driving or not driving the play, is completely unknown (and not material to the stat). How good, and effective, their line-mates were, is unknown. How good and effective at deterring offense the opposition players were, is completely unknown.

The only way to know what the xGF/60 numbers implies, for the player in question, is to watch them play, and see.

That's why (well, it's one reason) these stats are misused and misleading - they are largely team stats, and for a given player, they are impacted primarily by usage (line-mates, opportunity, and match-ups), and thus the numbers aren't as comparable between players, or as applicable to the individual, as people think they are.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No, it means that you have a good xGF/60. Period.

Everything else you said is your own projection.

The only thing the stat tells us is that a certain amount of offense has been generated, while that player was on the ice. The extent to which that player is involved or not involved, or whether they are driving or not driving the play, is completely unknown (and not material to the stat). How good, and effective, their line-mates were, is unknown. How good and effective at deterring offense the opposition players were, is completely unknown.

The only way to know what the xGF/60 numbers implies, for the player in question, is to watch them play, and see.

That's why (well, it's one reason) these stats are misused and misleading - they are largely team stats, and for a given player, they are impacted primarily by usage (line-mates, opportunity, and match-ups), and thus the numbers aren't as comparable between players, or as applicable to the individual, as people think they are.

The player was on the ice, meaning the things he does on the ice during that time has an influence on the offensive opportunities that his team has during that time. Therefore there must be a positive coorelation between a player's xGF/60 and how well he's playing offensively.

Having good linemates certainly helps, and having bad linemates definitely hurts. However, the one certain constant of every single second that a player is on the ice, is the player himself. Therefore I think you're being too dismissive of the stat.

Is it the only offensive stat that a person should look at when evaluating a player? Heck no. Many different stats must be taken into account. But this particular one should not be dismissed outright.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The player was on the ice, meaning the things he does on the ice during that time has an influence on the offensive opportunities that his team has during that time. Therefore there must be a positive coorelation between a player's xGF/60 and how well he's playing offensively.

Having good linemates certainly helps, and having bad linemates definitely hurts. However, the one certain constant of every single second that a player is on the ice, is the player himself. Therefore I think you're being too dismissive of the stat.

Is it the only offensive stat that a person should look at when evaluating a player? Heck no. Many different stats must be taken into account. But this particular one should not be dismissed outright.

Yes, there is going to be a positive correlation established, once there is enough data.

But that's all we've got - a correlation. It provides nothing with respect to the individual player's participation in, or influence over, the data. So it is a correlation to the success of the team (or at least a subset of the team, being the line he is on, the opposition they face, and the game management opportunities they are given).

[theinfinitejar]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-and-checking/

The opposition is often just trying to get their breakout going into open waters, but the Flames keep them out of the middle and on the paint, getting the puck headed back to the right half of the rink.

Flames are playing great checking hockey, not great defence.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-and-checking/





Flames are playing great checking hockey, not great defence.

I heard Sutter say that, and I took notice because I’d never thought of it that way.

[gvitaly]

Some new advanced stats for the Flames, Kylington, Mangiapane, Markstrom, and Gaudreau.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1465797969920368645

[Gaskal]

Tried my hand at making player cards for the 4th line. And Kylington, because he's insane.

[GioforPM]

Looch may only have a 56 GF% but he has a 1000% GAF%

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Tried my hand at making player cards for the 4th line. And Kylington, because he's insane.

These are awesome, keep it up!

[Canada 02]

in between snacks and drinks and dinner, not to mention no Flames hockey for 2 weeks, a little something to remember how good is Mangiapane.
Merry Christmas

https://twitter.com/user/status/1474501429498986499