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

Advanced Stats Thread

Here's something on which both sides can agree: If you're even vaguely interested in the ongoing debate over the future of hockey metrics, the 2013-14 Toronto Maple Leafs are the test case you've been waiting for. They are the canary in the advanced-stats mine shaft. And that makes them this season's most fascinating team.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. If the Leafs can continue to have team success despite the advanced stats, it'd be awfully hard to keep saying it's just luck after 130 games.
 
I already don't like how this is being framed. If the Leafs are successful this season despite unflattering Corsi numbers, it won't show that 'advanced' stats are useless, simply that the current accepted thoughts in the hockey stats community on it's usefulness is wrong.

I'm strongly, strongly leaning towards the "it's part possession, part efficiency" (sv% & shot%) camp. I agree that there's a lot of people who are misusing possession stats to make claims that they simply can't support on their own.
 
I just hope the Corsi number takes off so Jim Corsi can get a promotion from his current gig as goaltending coach in Buffalo.

Jim_Corsi_110x156.jpg
 
MindzEye said:
I already don't like how this is being framed. If the Leafs are successful this season despite unflattering Corsi numbers, it won't show that 'advanced' stats are useless, simply that the current accepted thoughts in the hockey stats community on it's usefulness is wrong.

I'm strongly, strongly leaning towards the "it's part possession, part efficiency" (sv% & shot%) camp. I agree that there's a lot of people who are misusing possession stats to make claims that they simply can't support on their own.
Click to expand...

Agreed... but people can probably stop using the word "luck" every 5 seconds to describe our team.
 
MindzEye said:
I already don't like how this is being framed. If the Leafs are successful this season despite unflattering Corsi numbers, it won't show that 'advanced' stats are useless, simply that the current accepted thoughts in the hockey stats community on it's usefulness is wrong.

I'm strongly, strongly leaning towards the "it's part possession, part efficiency" (sv% & shot%) camp. I agree that there's a lot of people who are misusing possession stats to make claims that they simply can't support on their own.
Click to expand...

This.

I'm not a fan of the idea it's "all or nothing" with fenwick/Corsi.....sv% doesn't tell us a teams going to be good or not by itself, goals scored doesn't tell us if a team is going to be good or not by itself, and Corsi/Fenwick doesn't tell us whether a team is going to be good or not by itself.

Used in proper context though, and preferably together, they can paint a pretty damn accurate picture of how good a team is, and whether they're as good or bad as their record might indicate.
 
I personally wouldn't want to be within a 50 KM radius of habsforever if the Leafs ever won the Cup.
 
Montana said:
This.

I'm not a fan of the idea it's "all or nothing" with fenwick/Corsi.....sv% doesn't tell us a teams going to be good or not by itself, goals scored doesn't tell us if a team is going to be good or not by itself, and Corsi/Fenwick doesn't tell us whether a team is going to be good or not by itself.

Used in proper context though, and preferably together, they can paint a pretty damn accurate picture of how good a team is, and whether they're as good or bad as their record might indicate.
Click to expand...

Yup.

There isn't one stat in any sport that can be used as the sole predictor of success.
 
By the way, the media has gone overboard with these giveaway stats. I know that they latch onto anything that makes the Leafs look bad, but that's what hockey is, a series of giveaways. The fact you give the puck away a lot, means you have it a lot, which is a good thing. Next to +/-, it's the most useless stat there is.
 
Last edited:
I've been thinking about it and this theory that fenwick/corsi is the basis and predictor for team success has a massive fundamental flaw that puts makes it completely worthless. They track 5 on 5. It flat out ignores special teams, which many who actually know hockey would say is the most important part of the game (besides maybe goaltending which it also completely ignores conveniently).

Didn't Scotty Bowman say you can tell how good a team is by adding its PP and PK rates together?

But these stats baffoons have rendered special teams completely worthless (and goaltending too).

5 on 5 corsi has absolutely no worth in judging or predicting the success of a team.
 
well, that's not true entirely, at least in terms of predicting future success.

They don't ignore PP/PK willy-nilly - they concentrate on 5on5 because it is a much more repeatable and consistent number from year to year, while special teams are much more variable and unpredictable.

that being said, you are right that it's obviously foolish to ignore special teams.
 
Special teams AND goaltending. If there was an equation those two would be at least 50% of it. And it would probably be a good equation.
 
This isn't anything ground breaking though........we've known from day one that no statistic singlehandedly predicts future success.




....still doesn't change the fact it's a valuable piece of a larger equation that does a damn good job at it.
 
The point was never that the stat doesn't have any value. Its that the people who are using it are doing it wrong. Really really wrong.
 
Montana said:
This isn't anything ground breaking though........we've known from day one that no statistic singlehandedly predicts future success.

....still doesn't change the fact it's a valuable piece of a larger equation that does a damn good job at it.
Click to expand...

It's weird though that for us, we not only win despite being outpossessed, we actually lose more when out-possessing our opponents.

Can't quite figure that one out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top