|
myron_cope posted:Do any of the fancy "new" hockey stats somehow quantify, say, how a goal was scored? And by that I mean if a goalie gives up a 5-on-5 goal to a 3-on-0 that's a hell of a lot different than if he gives up a laugher or lets in a 5-on-3 goal, etc. the new stats tend to try to quantify a player's effect on possession and chances - a player who drives through the entire team but doesn't get a shot on net didn't do anything, and when they do get a shot, how often is it better than a chance generated from a forecheck or cycle? a red-line laugher doesn't actually count as a chance because it's not shot from a close enough distance and would show up on some things (corsi, for instance) but not others I don't think you can start actually taking things like defensive errors into account, but in a very roundabout way they already are - defencemen who are prone to making horrible errors like falling over all the time will generally have a terrible corsi (a measure of shot differential) and, as far as i know, be considered low quality competition. a player who is always being put up against retards will have a low quality of competition and you can take that into account. I don't think there's much more you can do besides analyzing every single goal scored by players and doing qualitative analysis edit: i spend far too much of my day fiddling with advanced hockey statistics and i still feel retarded and uncomfortable trying to explain it to people because every time i figure OK I GOT THIS something confuses me  but i'm pretty sure what i said there is correctLook Around You posted:I don't know if they do but I do know that nhl.com started tracking how goals were scored. "15ft wrist shot" "1ft tip in", etc. Well they don't show distance on the nhl site but at least it's recorded somewhere because the espn iphone app tells you the distance when it gives you a score update. someone should make a program that collects all of this data and organizes it so we can see who has the most of any type of goal or whatever
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2012 13:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
CobwebMustardseed posted:I guess that stats are not considered as important in hockey as they are in baseball. If we were discussing a baseball player and someone said to ignore his stats because they won’t give you an accurate picture of him and instead just watch him play, I would probably think that person is foolish. I guess this stems from hockey being a much more team-oriented sport (which makes it hard to evaluate individuals accurately) than baseball is. Anybody who tells you to completely ignore all stats of hockey players is also kinda stupid - there are very few players that are qualitatively excellent players that also don't produce something. My favorite example that has come up recently is Manny Malhotra (albeit, this example is sort of opposite situation of what I just said) - he's a checking/defensive centre with little offensive talent that played a huge role on the Canucks last year until he took a puck in the eye. He lost a lot of his vision, and spent the entire summer rehabbing it and getting it operated on, and essentially lost a lot of his offseason training time. Fast forward to next year and he starts the season tentatively, gets tired easily and generally plays badly for about 20 games. Over the next 30 or so, while his play looks a little better, some people are noticing that A: his line is constantly in the defensive zone B: he's not scoring at all C: dude takes like 5 second shifts before getting off the ice D: his line is letting up way more chances than they are generating offensively All of this, and yet the coach loves him and continues to give him important draws/responsibilities, much to the chagrin of the fans ("I love Manny and I feel bad for him, but fire him right now!" Turns out the reason he was getting destroyed in possession, wasn't scoring and why he was always defending was because he literally never started in the offensive zone. The average defensive centre (lets take Dave Bolland, for example), starts in the offensive zone maybe 35% of the time. Manny was starting there less than 13% of the time. Zone starts don't happen to be an official stat that is tracked (although it's recorded in the sheets that the guy above me so conveniently posted - thanks guy!) and graded, so nobody was aware that this was happening. On top of that, even though he starts there 13% of the time, he's ending there almost 40% of the time, meaning there's a huge shift in the position of the puck when he finishes a shift. Of course, only the most ridiculous statheads were looking for this (and even understand it) so you will still, despite being profoundly wrong, hear good hockey minds that are good at watching and analyzing the game say that he's underperforming. edit: i typed all this out and realized its more hockey 103 and isnt super appropriate but i just spent like 20 minutes typing it out instead of sleeping so deal with the huge wall of text edit2: if there's anything confusing in here please dont hesitate to ask and i will definitely try to clarify when i wake up
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2012 13:50
|
|
|
add more sirens to the start where it says ASK ANY QUESTION edit: also add a link to timeonice.com under shots where you have Shots Attempted because its tracked by that site maybe this site too because the dude that made time on ice hasn't actually made links or documentation on what the website can do Verviticus fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Mar 3, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2012 22:11
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:Do guys coming out of retirement/back to the NHL (Selanne, Sundin, Radulov, etc.) require much adjustment or time to get their legs back under them for the NHL game? The reason I ask is I'm looking at picking up Radulov in a Fantasy league, but don't know if it'll be a wasted roster spot if he may not do much while re-adjusting to the Preds system. Radulov has been fully active for the entire time he's been out and has played a few years on an NHL rink - he's about as ready as a guy can be without having been in an NHL lineup for this year. He also doesn't suffer old man syndrome like Sundin and theoretically Selanne (who was recently confirmed to be ageless). Without knowing what kind of league it is, I'd still probably pick him up.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
Vigilance posted:Puckdaddy is good for it's ability to gather together in one place a bunch of links to quality hockey sites/news, etc, just don't bother reading any of their opinion articles, as they are almost universally bad. they mostly just state the obvious, that's not really that bad
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 11:09
|
|
|
its mostly just poo poo-talking during points of non-action. it really has little to no bearing on the game but people make a big deal out of it because since they are fully incapable of understanding the simplest of hockey strategy, they have to make a big deal out of something that they do understand or people will understand how little they really know. everybody understands swearing and namecalling, so it becomes a thing
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2012 10:43
|
|
|
CobwebMustardseed posted:Wow, that's really comprehensive, thanks! http://www.capgeek.com/players/display.php?id=2221 lol
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:How do rights work with retirement? Are they ended, or do the player's rights remain with the team until the length of the contract? the contract exists unless the team suspends or destroys it or whatever. if its an under 35 contract i'm sure a player retiring and refusing to report relieves them of their obligation both in salary and salary cap, if its above 35, nobody loving cares eat the cap hit anyways idiots
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 02:37
|
|
|
the boston (at least hockey) media also has a special 8th circle of hell reserved for their unmitigated poo poo fountains that write "articles" and that can be obnoxious too
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 05:37
|
|
|
ElwoodCuse posted:A non-goalie closing his hand on the puck in the crease is an automatic penalty shot No, the he's right. You can't use any body part to cover the puck in the crease, the hand just happens to be the most common one.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Which is the dumbest rule on the planet. The only person in existence who knows for sure what was intentional or not is certainly not going to incriminate himself by saying it was intentional. So anyone else who says otherwise is just guessing. It's not really intentional, its just that the player needs to make some sort of gathering or smothering or whatever. "...falls on the puck, holds the puck, picks up the puck, or gathers the puck into his body or hands from the ice in the goal crease area...
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
Look Around You posted:The penalized team chooses a player who was on the ice when the penalty happened to serve the time. what would they do if there was a bad line change and nobody got back on the ice and then the goalie flipped the puck out of play in a panic that his team is really dumb!! what then
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2012 10:14
|
|
|
It's because the compensation in the middle brackets is bullshit for the players that can sign at that amount. Kesler signed for 5@5 - if he hit RFA and a team offered 6.27, the Canucks would be looking at overpaying him by a bunch or getting what, a 1st/2nd/3rd? If that's Boston or Detroit or whomever, that's a ripoff either way. Imagine if someone had offersheeted TJ Oshie at 3m last year. Either the blues end up paying him another mil/year or they lose a good young player for a 2nd. Either way they get hosed. That's not to say that there aren't fair offer sheets but their primary use, if you wanted to be a dick, would be to gently caress over every team that hasn't signed their RFA or gone to arbitration.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2012 01:01
|
|
|
Dangerllama posted:Seems like 10 years of cost certainty is better than the prospect of losing at least half a season's pay again in five years. it works backwards really - unless they sell, the owners are really the only people that will be guaranteed to be here in ten years. it's a lot easier to stomach losing 40 games out of every 820 than it is to lose 40 out of 410 in their pattern of bleeding the nhlpa dry
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
aw yiss posted:Canucks - i dunno why I am drawn to them but I really am and their old logo owns. it seems like they might not be that good in the coming years though i dunno? they own + they will remain owning. Watch Canucks Hockey
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2013 10:43
|
|
|
the game was like 5-1 when they made the switch and i remember the canucks just stepping off the gas after the switch. it was kind of frustrating to watch the rest of the game just wasted because they didn't want to embarass the kid 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2013 05:14
|
|
|
MonsterWalk posted:Any good general hockey blogs/news aggregator I should know about? Any blue jacket blogs worth checking out. for your team specifically hfboards is great to wake up to if you only read stuff thats got CONFIRMED WITH LINK on it. usually someone rehashing twitter will have posted it just dont take their opinions seriously or make direct eye contact
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 12:10
|
|
|
nature6pk posted:There are no bad questions here friend why is pk subban so Disrespectful??
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2013 05:07
|
|
|
CobwebMustardseed posted:What is the etiquette for wearing a jersey to a game in which that team isn't playing? I'm going to the Predators/Flames game on Thursday in Nashville. Is it okay to wear my Pens jersey? NO THATS SILLY (do whatever the gently caress you want)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
note that the reason teams tend to have defensive third lines and grindy 4th lines is because it's cheaper to pay someone to clog up the game and slow things down than it is to pay them to score and it's cheaper still to pay someone who doesn't play hockey well but will punch someone in the face. the hierarchy on most hockey teams is because money, talent and cap space dont permit you to have four lines of scoring players. unless you draft 4 or 5 good scorers who are all on ELCs in one or two drafts you aren't going to have the ability to run a scoring fourth line other than that, pretty much any depth of team is successful in some way. the ducks are doing alright this year with a top heavy low depth team and the blues are a good team comprised almost entirely of 2nd liners. good hockey players on good contracts will trump dedicated roles for lines easily
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
some boards have smart people that watch, evaluate and follow the players and you should probably listen to them, and then a whole whack of people that follow them and then somehow say the same information, but everything is wrong, and you should not listen to them i dunno about your team in particular. there are 3-4 people on the canucks that watch every wolves game and give some nice info. you could also tweet @coreypronman he likes talking about prospects
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
ThinkTank posted:Playoff beards are as late as humanly possible before the first game. Beard length (or lack thereof) should exactly match your team's success. chris higgins disagrees 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
i don't think so. there have been incidents (nate thompson) where the visor just shattered after being hit and the shards cut up his face
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
nope, no good reason
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Tagra posted:I thought the official line was you couldn't have a cage because it posed a danger to the other players because of how hard it is. Although they use them at lower levels don't they? yes, you can't have a cage unless you have an injury that warrants it. it's too dangerous to use unless you might get further hurt and then its not dangerous at all  sellouts posted:I love you xzzy but after playing without one more often now I disagree. I wear a cage because I play with a bunch of assholes but in my upper level leagues I've started to wear just a half shield and it is so much better. "See the puck just drat fine" isn't really true when the game is moving at a good speed. they manage just fine in the ncaa
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
im pretty sure if you were just motionless and they shoot it into you its not a penalty
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
vancouver is also ok i guess. someone forgot it
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
ThinkTank posted:I agree 100%. There have been faster north south players than Neidermayer (Bure springs to mind...), but no one comes close to his ability to be everywhere on the ice at once and change lanes at will. There were coincidental minors in OT in a Canucks/Ducks game a few years ago and I've never seen a player dominate like Nieds did in that 3 on 3 situation. He played the full thing to my recollection, managed to switch between leading the rush and playing defence with alarming ease. There were a couple situations where I thought he'd be for sure trapped down low, but somehow he managed to be in perfect position to break up the play going the other way. He was so quick to where he needed to be it seemed like he teleported most of the time. The puck was always on his stick, and he casually skated around every player the Canucks sent out against him (including an in his prime Kesler who was at the time one of the quickest players in the league). The Ducks won, but honestly it was such a joy to watch that I didn't mind in the slightest. I remember this exact thing. I was in a hotel lobby in Boston and yelled loudly at a 2 on 1? 0? that consisted of nieds and selanne. gently caress
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 03:54
|
|