• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Advanced Stats Thread

worm said:
What do they use for advance stats in soccer?
Click to expand...

For the most part, they use completed / attempted passes and shots on targets / shots directed towards goal. There are some big stats companies that do track actual possession of the ball as well.

I actually think passes attempted / completed gives you a more accurate picture of possession than shots because every team/player is different when it comes to when/where they shoot. I'm just guessing, but I'd bet a lot that the Leafs rank very high in terms of passes attempted/completed -- which isn't factored into fenwick.
 
James Mirtle ‏ Leafs exec Dave Poulin says on @TSN1050Radio he's "amused" by newer possession stats. "We've looked a number of models in my four years."

Dave Poulin: "If you're just possessing it on the perimeter, I'll let you do that all day."
 
James Mirtle @mirtle
Leafs exec Dave Poulin says on @TSN1050Radio he's "amused" by newer possession stats. "We've looked a number of models in my four years."

James Mirtle @mirtle
Dave Poulin: "If you're just possessing it on the perimeter, I'll let you do that all day."
 
In soccer, they actually put more emphasis on possession in the attacking zone. Which makes sense. Kicking the ball around in your own half doesn't do much for you.

In hockey, possession in certain areas (goal scoring areas), is key.
 
PlayerToBeNamedLater said:
In soccer, they actually put more emphasis on possession in the attacking zone. Which makes sense. Kicking the ball around in your own half doesn't do much for you.

In hockey, possession in certain areas (goal scoring areas), is key.
Click to expand...

I would need a lot more time to expand on it, but it was extremely telling over the 11 games worth of shot charts I looked at that every Leafs goal came from within a dangerous attacking zone and all but a handful of opposition goals were similar. The game is won and lost from the goal line to the high slot, in between the dots.
 
I'd like to see passes attempted / completed combined with shots directed towards goal.

Teams that make that extra pass (and don't just shoot from anywhere) wouldn't be at a disadvantage in these stats.
 
Phaneuf leads the league in QoC by a long shot. His +3.9 rating is well ahead of everyone not named Gunnarsson his defensive partner (who is 2nd). Chara is 3rd at +3.1, Pietrangelo/Bouwmeester 4th/5th at +2.8. Despite the toughest comp in the league, Phaneuf has still posted a positive Corsi on a poor Corsi team.
 
PlayerToBeNamedLater said:
Phaneuf leads the league in QoC by a long shot. His +3.9 rating is well ahead of everyone not named Gunnarsson his defensive partner (who is 2nd). Chara is 3rd at +3.1, Pietrangelo/Bouwmeester 4th/5th at +2.8. Despite the toughest comp in the league, Phaneuf has still posted a positive Corsi on a poor Corsi team.
Click to expand...

He's really, really, good.

Kind of ironic in a sense how the mediots will rely on advanced stats to discount the Leafs play as a team, but refuse to recognize how favourably they make a player like Phaneuf look.
 
13/14:
S Weber: 12 gms, 3 gls, 5 pts, 16 pim, 26:15 TOI, 26 hits, 30 blocks, +1.8 QoC, +12.7 Rel Corsi
D Phaneuf: 12 gms, 2 gls, 6 pts, 14 pim, 24:30 TOI, 35 hits, 24 blocks, +3.9 QoC, +1.6 Rel Corsi
 
Mirtle was incredulous on twitter yesterday at the fact that Bolland had somehow gone from being an "awful" possession player in Chicago to a "great" possession player in Toronto.

of course, this didn't lead him to question the possession stats at all.

nor did he mention that grabovski has mysteriously gone from being a possesion god in toronto to an awful possesion player in washington.


The more I look at the numbers, the more I realize that they almost completely break down at the individual level. The advanced stats community has used the team metrics to convinced themselves that shots for/against are by far the best "true talent" indicator for the team, but it is almost impossible to get a decent read on any individual player's "true talent" level by this definition.

It's bad enough trying to get consistent individual corsi ratings from year to year on the same team - but as far as I can tell it's utterly impossible to predict a player's corsi when moving from one team to another.

Which as far as I can tell would pretty much discredit the notion that corsi indicates "true talent" at all.

I'm gonna have to take a closer look at individual corsi consistency from year to year and team to team, I think. But **** is it a lot of work.
 
Top 5 all-around dmen in hockey: Weber, Phaneuf, Ekman-Larsson, Chara and Suter.

Playing around with a little formula where I weighted points at 25%, minutes played at 25%, corsi at 25% and QoC at 25% and these guys come out on top.
 
PlayerToBeNamedLater said:
13/14:
S Weber: 12 gms, 3 gls, 5 pts, 16 pim, 26:15 TOI, 26 hits, 30 blocks, +1.8 QoC, +12.7 Rel Corsi
D Phaneuf: 12 gms, 2 gls, 6 pts, 14 pim, 24:30 TOI, 35 hits, 24 blocks, +3.9 QoC, +1.6 Rel Corsi
Click to expand...


Any chance you'd be willing to do 2 or 3 year splits comparing them?......just had a friend suggest Phaneuf wasn't worth a penny over $5.75 million. Heh.
 
zeke said:
Mirtle was incredulous on twitter yesterday at the fact that Bolland had somehow gone from being an "awful" possession player in Chicago to a "great" possession player in Toronto.

of course, this didn't lead him to question the possession stats at all.

nor did he mention that grabovski has mysteriously gone from being a possesion god in toronto to an awful possesion player in washington.


The more I look at the numbers, the more I realize that they almost completely break down at the individual level. The advanced stats community has used the team metrics to convinced themselves that shots for/against are by far the best "true talent" indicator for the team, but it is almost impossible to get a decent read on any individual player's "true talent" level by this definition.

It's bad enough trying to get consistent individual corsi ratings from year to year on the same team - but as far as I can tell it's utterly impossible to predict a player's corsi when moving from one team to another.

Which as far as I can tell would pretty much discredit the notion that corsi indicates "true talent" at all.

I'm gonna have to take a closer look at individual corsi consistency from year to year and team to team, I think. But **** is it a lot of work.
Click to expand...


Corsi is tied to quality of teammates. That plays a huge factor.

In Toronto, Bolland's quality of teammates is +0.6, in Chicago last year it was -4.8 which was one of the worst on the team. Only natual Bolland's number would rise playing with better linemates.

Grabovski's quality of teammates in Toronto was poor and it's been even worse in Washinton. In 12/13, Grabo had a -3.1 QoT / +1.0 Corsi Rel. In 13/14, Grabo has a -6.6 QoT / -5.2 Corsi Rel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top