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

Leafs' Prospect/Marlies Discussion Thread!

puckiq looks interesting in terms of doing something with qoc. Menu system could be improved but free is free.

What I'm seeing is the following numbers for Leafs toi% against elite competition (as puckiq defines it) ...

Rielly: 37.2%
Holl: 35.9%
Muzzin: 34.8%
Ceci: 34.8%
Marincin: 26.8%
Dermott: 25.2%
Barrie: 24.2%

A few things ...

- Rielly's numbers do not strike me as "WAY above his blueliner teammates"

- In fact, Rielly looks to be getting but a tad more stiff comp than Holl, Muzzin and Ceci. The rest are relatively sheltered.

- Spending a lot less than half your ice time against stiff comp suggests that you may overstate its importance in terms of affecting other metrics

- puckiq doesn't seem to use expected goals (maybe I missed it?)
 
Yeah, saw that. You need to select each individually. I just posted the elite nos. 'cause that's what we were talking about.
 
Don't recall you ever mentioning this before but okay.

I guess we'll ignore that he doesn't stand much above his teammates against stiff comp. I found that surprising given the way you like to go on about his "super-elite" toi.
 
I had to mention that we dont ignore the part of toi that they get against bad players when talking about their qoc? really?

anyways, puckiq is the last resort since corsica went down and that elite-grit number seems useful enough. you can toggle back through the years and see that he's received amongst the toughest in the league going on 5yrs now and you can compare his numbers yourself. i used to be able to combine years of data on corsica and obviously single year samples will have more anomalies

but if you're just gonna make nonsensical nitpicks I'm not gonna try and change your mind.
 
I presume the dregs is their “gritensity” menu option.

I get the following toi% for weak comp …

Dermott: 39.1
Barrie: 36.8
Holl: 31.4
Muzzin: 29.7
Ceci: 28.5
Rielly: 25.6

These differences look big on a chart that has a scale axis starting at 25% and goes up only 20 points, but this is much like elite toi% in terms of deployment differential – a few points between Rielly and the other top four (albeit slightly more than for elite toi%).
 
the chart scales the difference sensibly and to the effects they see in the stats.

I'm not going to rehash the history of whether qoc impacts the stats or not. I've done that enough times.
 
Just to give a better sense of the magnitude of the differences between Rielly and the other top four ...

elite toi% varies by 2.4 points between Rielly (most) and Ceci (least). Assuming 20 mins of ice time (which is high for 5v5), that's roughly half a minute or a shift per game. 3.8 points for weak comp toi% differential or a couple of shifts per game.
 
My question is this,
Doesn't goaltending have an effect on all defensive stats?

So if Hutchinson is in goal and let's in his usual crap, doesn't that effect the players on the ice in this evaluation?

If you have a goalie that is a top tired goalie and always holds the fort, as opposed to a Hutchinson in net, doesn't that take all the players numbers down?

Same as the defensive system used .... Islander forwards play a solid defensive system, where the leafs don't .... some of the leaf forwards don't help out much in the defensive zone.

Wouldn't these all have an effect on determining there stats?

I ask because I have never paid much attention and haven't given much study to this.

I think the stats are great, and should be used, as should all tools that could help in determining the possible future success of any player being courted or presently employed by the team.

Just trying to learn these stats ....

Excellent discussion, sorry to lower it with these infant like question's. Just trying to learn.
 
My question is this,
Doesn't goaltending have an effect on all defensive stats?

So if Hutchinson is in goal and let's in his usual crap, doesn't that effect the players on the ice in this evaluation?

If you have a goalie that is a top tired goalie and always holds the fort, as opposed to a Hutchinson in net, doesn't that take all the players numbers down?
This is precisely what happened when people used to rely on +/- and probably the main reason the advanced stats were so appealing at the start. Goaltending performance doesn't affect these stats other than in some ephemeral way like making teams play tighter if the goalie is a sieve.
 
Just to give a better sense of the magnitude of the differences between Rielly and the other top four ...

elite toi% varies by 2.4 points between Rielly (most) and Ceci (least). Assuming 20 mins of ice time (which is high for 5v5), that's roughly half a minute or a shift per game. 3.8 points for weak comp toi% differential or a couple of shifts per game.
This is the whole question I've always had about qoc -- what is the magnitude of its impact? I've never seen anything concrete to quantify this, just eyebally correlational stuff.

No idea if the data for the Leafs blueline this year can be generalized, but these data show that there's little separating top four blueliners in facing different levels of comp (generously, 2-3 shift/game). The big difference is between the bottom pair and the top four. This seems to fit with the general impact we see when blueliners step up from sheltered bottom pair to top four.
 
This is the whole question I've always had about qoc -- what is the magnitude of its impact? I've never seen anything concrete to quantify this, just eyebally correlational stuff.

No idea if the data for the Leafs blueline this year can be generalized, but these data show that there's little separating top four blueliners in facing different levels of comp (generously, 2-3 shift/game). The big difference is between the bottom pair and the top four. This seems to fit with the general impact we see when blueliners step up from sheltered bottom pair to top four.

you have chosen to believe a 20% difference in qoc cant make a 2% difference in possession.

thats your choice.
 
Back
Top