Jump to content


kipwinger's Photo

kipwinger

Member Since 31 May 2011
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 08:52 PM
****-

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Official 2016 Detroit Red Wings Offseason Thread

Yesterday, 08:16 PM

Ok, no ott or miller....still have helm.

Tatar - Nielson - Vanek
Zetterberg - Larkin - Abdelkader
Jurco - AA - Nyquist
Helm - Sheahan - Glendening
Frk since he has no exemptions & Tangradi maybe

I'd much rather have Mantha up and no helm as well. Plus I'm still hoping Nyquist gets dealt in a D trade....but...

 

What are the parameters here?  No Ott and Miller.  That's easy.

 

Tatar-Larkin-Abby

Z-Neilsen-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Glendening-Helm-Sheahan

Frk

Jurco

 

Dekeyser-Green

Smith-Markenko

Kronwall-Sproul

Ericsson

 

With this lineup we'd only have scrubs like Helm, Glendening, Abby, Sheahan, and Neilsen to kill penalties instead of Miller and Ott so we might be in real trouble lol.


In Topic: Fixing this mess....

Yesterday, 07:45 PM

I respect these advanced stats but my problem with these charts that pop up is they seem badly annotated to me. ...or I am an idiot. I'm open to that possibillity.

 

It says "deviation from NHL avg by line". and the colours show which line their getting compared to. 

 

WIth that, my reading of those charts are:

 

- Glendening is being compared to the average 2nd liner in the 2nd chart? No wonder he's lower than the average. Especially since the chart shows he's being giving "buried" zone starts, which I assume means defensive starts. Of course a guy getting a majority of defensive zone starts will have a lower corsi than the average second line player who probably doesn't. Also, the 2nd chart says "all situations," so they're comparing his corsi including penalty killing time to the average 2nd liner, who probably doesn't PK and might be on the PP.

- Then, Tatar is being compared to 4th liners in the 1st chart? If so, no wonder he looks good. The biggest thing that tells me is we have to play Tatar more 5v5 than the average 4th liner. 

 

I know the line classification is probably due to how much ice time they get, but it should be kept in mind.

 

The chart has buried and Sheltered as the labels for zone starts. I assume Sheltered means they get offensive starts, but getting defensive zone shouldn't be considered "buried." Glendening was one of our only guys could win faceoffs so he got the D zone starts. Since he apparently got 2nd line minutes, that hardly sounds buried to me.

 

If those are the perameters of the chart, I would question the conclusions of whether a player is struggling vs. thriving.

 

If I read it wrong, apologies, and feel free to correct me.

 

Well you did read it wrong, but you're right that it is badly annotated. 

 

Glendening and Tatar and everybody else's icetime is being compared to NHL line averages to determine whether their TOI is similar to the average 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th liner.  The 300+ and 500+ designations are only indicating that for the one graph they were showing all forwards who played 300+ minutes at 5 on 5, while the other shows all forward who played 500+ minutes in all situations.  In this particular graph they adjust for zone starts as well (labeled there as "sheltered" vs "buried") to further contextualize the data. 

 

So for example, the graph shows that Luke Glendening gets more minutes than the average fourth liner, but many of those minutes are in the defensive zone.  In any case his production (measured by shot generation for Detroit) is pretty bad.  Conversely, Tatar gets sheltered third line minutes, but has the best shot generation on the team because of it.  Tatar's numbers are impressive because while his icetime indicates that he's roughly in line with a third line player, he's generating more shots than our first and second line guys.  His production per TOI is the best on the team.  Glendening's is the opposite.  He gets the ice time of a 3-4th line tweener, but he struggles.


In Topic: Fixing this mess....

24 July 2016 - 08:45 PM

More evidence that Tomas Tatar should NOT be traded.  Dude's a stud.

 

CoKD0DjUEAAigaL.jpg

 

CoKD1bwUIAECrBl.jpg


In Topic: Hall of Fame Worthy

24 July 2016 - 08:37 PM

D

 

Kickazz...Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not top 10 scorers for a decade.  Each of them finished top 10 only 2 times in their careers.  Datsyuk finishing 4th twice and Z finishing 9th and 8th.  That said, I do think Datsyuk has a good chance at the HOF due to Selke's....point totals are low though.  Guy Carbaneau (sp?) has the Selke's and decent point totals, but not enough and he hasn't gotten in so far.

 

Datsyuk will get in because he's flashy.  And people go ga ga for flashy players.


In Topic: Brad Richards Retires

24 July 2016 - 03:18 PM

No he didnt win selke he won a Lady Byng

 

Yep, you're right.  I read that wrong.  I got that wrong in another thread as well.  Well I stand corrected.