rakish

So what's a better metric?

This shows much better what you are trying to say. This is the Power Play Time of forwards they play with 5-5, including themselves, so it's the opposite of the list I've been posting in the other thread. 9 KANE9.20 15 EICHEL8.91 90 O'REILLY7.92 29 POMINVILLE7.76 21 OKPOSO7.74 55 RISTOLAINEN7.17 6 SCANDELLA7.06 23 REINHART7.02 67 POULIOT6.51 31 JOHNSON6.33 47 BOGOSIAN6.31 41 FALK6.31 40 Lehner6.3 15 TENNYSON6.29 27 FEDUN6.22 71 RODRIGUES6.16 82 BEAULIEU6.07 19 MCCABE5.96 93 ANTIPIN5.7 24 GORGES5.47 95 BAILEY5.36 24 FASCHING5.30 38 REDMOND4.37 28 GIRGENSONS4.26 26 MOULSON4.15 20 WILSON3.12 13 BAPTISTE2.97 25 GRIFFITH2.87 22 LARSSON2.63 10 JOSEFSON2.60 17 NOLAN2.35 51 CRISCUOLO1.74

Huh.... my charts aren't close to that. I got Eichel and Kane for 20% as a trio, 33% either Eichel or Kane, O'Reilly and Pouliot maybe 12% together, 33% either O'Reilly and Pouliot. Looking at it more closely, you data is bad. There is no way that Reinhart has been on only 6 line combinations, but those 6, according to frozenpool, account for 100% of Reinharts 5-5 play.

You missed the outrageous trade the Islanders made, he went to Edmonton for 2 picks.

Boston 3-0 in Buffalo 6 SCANDELLA7.95 55 RISTOLAINEN7.55 67 POULIOT7.18 21 OKPOSO6.80 90 O'REILLY6.53 22 LARSSON6.34 40 Lehner5.70 29 POMINVILLE5.20 28 GIRGENSONS5.04 82 BEAULIEU5.02 15 EICHEL4.97 17 NOLAN4.90 9 KANE4.76 23 REINHART4.64 71 RODRIGUES4.63 10 JOSEFSON4.46 47 BOGOSIAN4.38 93 ANTIPIN4.00 19 MCCABE3.77

I think the kid in Toronto is good, but interestingly, I think he got pushed aside. Arizona hasn't shown it yet, but I think they draft reasonably well. New Jersey hired a famous poker player to analytic their draft (not sure he's still there), it only takes a success or two to look good, but right now they look good. I used to think Tampa was good, but I've changed my mind and have put them into the lucky category. I had thought CSS was a compilation of scouts assessment. My memory is they hire 9 scouts, or 6 scouts, I forget. Their results are terrible. I wrote about it a couple years ago on my blog. http://45b.us/hockey/6.html

I want to talk a little about Murray's strategy in drafting. Let's start with 2016. Someone posted the Sabres draft board a couple weeks ago, it looked like, if I remember right: Juolevi Nylander Sergachev Now lets look at Bob's McKenzie's (which I think has supplanted CSS because it doesn't separate into North America and Europe) list: 6: Juolevi 7: Nylander 8: Keller 9: Sergachev So what Murray did was remove the undersized player (Keller) and went with McKenzie's list, which was a terrible plan. Imagine Vancouver's prospects had they chosen Keller instead of Juolevi, because Pettersson will be very good, and there's someone else, I forget. So let's look at 2014: Murray takes the 33rd McKenzie ranked Lemieux ahead of the 23rd ranked Barbashev because he's heavy. Murray takes the 41st McKenzie ranked Cornel 44th, the 45th ranked Martin 74th, the 47th ranked Karabecek 49th. You could say, like LTS says above, that Murray drafted well because he drafted (pretty much) who scouts told him to. Unfortunately, that process doesn't work. If you draft the best player available by McKenzie's draft list, you will end up with the worst team in hockey. I understand this concept is non-intuitive, so you'll need to test it. Since there isn't space on TSN's servers for Bob's old predictions, you can use CSS, it's basically the same process. You can find the last 20 years at thedraftanalyst.com. For what it's worth, there are, occasionally, star players that ended up being the best available player on the scouting boards, one was Getzlaf, which was how it seems Murray gained this reputation. I can't get on Murray for missing players that got better, missing Dvorak changed my thinking on how better to do this. Missing Montour, Arvidsson, and Olofsson has helped me recognize the importance of drafting overagers. What Murray believes is wrong, go test it.

Today is the 100th anniversary. The start time was to acknowledge that.

No, he didn't. Hanzel, White, and a 4th in 2017 were traded for a 1st (2017), a 2nd(2018) and a conditional 4th(2019) The condition on the 4th is that it moved if Minnesota lost in the first round, which occurred. The conditional 4th in 2019 is worth a lot less then a 4th in 2017, agreed? So part of the 2nd pick value has to be attributed to the swap of 4ths. Let's say the 2nd and conditional 4th was worth the 4th and a 3rd, thus if we remove the two 4ths, it leaves us with Hanzel, White, for a 1st and a 3rd. What's Ryan White worth, maybe a 3rd? That leaves us with Hanzel for a first, somewhere between 23rd if they lose in the first round, and 31st, if they had won the cup. I think it's true that Kane will return more than Hanzel, but let's not start making up what Hanzel brought back.

Carolina 5-4 in Buffalo, certainly a new strategy from Housley. 15 EICHEL6.97 47 BOGOSIAN6.92 22 LARSSON6.91 82 BEAULIEU6.84 20 WILSON6.81 19 MCCABE6.75 93 ANTIPIN6.74 67 POULIOT6.74 71 RODRIGUES6.65 9 KANE6.60 24 FASCHING6.54 29 POMINVILLE6.54 23 REINHART6.44 31 JOHNSON6.31 55 RISTOLAINEN5.66 90 O'REILLY5.60 6 SCANDELLA5.55 28 GIRGENSONS5.48 21 OKPOSO5.45

Philadelphia 2 Buffalo 1, in Philly 29 POMINVILLE9.46 67 POULIOT9.07 15 EICHEL9.02 55 RISTOLAINEN8.96 6 SCANDELLA8.81 90 O'REILLY7.55 28 GIRGENSONS7.49 21 OKPOSO7.47 40 Lehner 6.77 19 MCCABE5.74 47 BOGOSIAN5.64 4 GORGES5.56 41 FALK5.24 9 KANE5.16 71 RODRIGUES4.77 22 LARSSON4.65 17 NOLAN4.56 23 REINHART4.38 20 WILSON4.21

24.2 Procedure - The Referee shall ask to have announced over the public address system the name of the player designated by him or selected by the team entitled to take the shot (as appropriate). He shall then place the puck on the center face -off spot and the player taking the shot will, on the instruction of the Referee (by blowing his whistle), play the puck from there and shall attempt to score on the goalkeeper. The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete. No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind (an exception being the puck off the goal post or crossbar, then the goalkeeper and then directly into the goal), and any time the puck crosses the goal line or comes to a complete stop, the shot shall be considered complete.

Buffalo 3, Ottawa 2 at home 71 RODRIGUES10.21 55 RISTOLAINEN9.80 6 SCANDELLA9.72 21 OKPOSO9.32 9 KANE9.21 90 O'REILLY8.70 29 POMINVILLE8.70 67 POULIOT8.66 40 Lehner 8.65 28 GIRGENSONS8.53 23 REINHART8.48 15 EICHEL8.46 47 BOGOSIAN8.06 19 MCCABE8.04 22 LARSSON7.95 41 FALK7.73 4 GORGES7.46 20 WILSON7.32 17 NOLAN6.81

What I got before this year started: Hughes Stephens Lafferty Evans Sikura Pinho Hickey Pope Prapervassis (sp?) Amarosa Eiserman Glover 45b.us/hockey/2.php?year=2013,2013,2013,2014,2014,2014,2014,2014,2014,2014,2016,2015&pick=109,132,174,64,69,100,105,113,207,178,125,165 The top 2 I have north of Vesey, roughly the top 5 north of Kerfoot and Butcher, but both Kerfoot and Butcher have been better than I expected, so take that with grain of salt. Haven't ran charts for this year yet, hope to over Christmas.

St Louis 3-2 in OT, in St Louis 28 GIRGENSONS7.88 21 OKPOSO7.70 6 SCANDELLA7.69 55 RISTOLAINEN7.67 90 O'REILLY7.61 67 POULIOT7.04 40 Lehner 6.65 15 EICHEL6.60 24 FASCHING6.48 47 BOGOSIAN6.45 19 MCCABE6.40 29 POMINVILLE6.29 9 KANE6.20 20 WILSON6.01 71 RODRIGUES5.69 22 LARSSON5.60 41 FALK5.11 23 REINHART4.8 64 GORGES4.68

Darling in 2016: What I have is that he was on the ice for 51 (even strength) goals. Based upon the distance of each shot, he should have given up 73 goals. So he saved the team (using this metric) 22 goals in 24 games worth of even strength play (1447 min) Why this metric doesn't really work is that I believe the Blackhawks are good at not giving up odd man rushes, that a shot from 10 feet being harassed by a defenseman is much safer than a 2-1 with the pass going across, even though it results in a 10 ft shot. So this year in Carolina he sees more odd man rushes, more dangerous shots, even though they don't look more dangerous on the shot-distance map.

I think I'm being consistent. Bylsma (like Teds) was more worried about the quality of the shot than the quantity. It makes your corsi numbers look bad and your goaltender look good. The Sabres moved from that style to become more interested in shot differential, thus the number of shots against a goaltender go down, but the difficulty tends to go up.

JT, the last time you complained about not finding data, I tried to text you that I uploaded my data so everything is current, but SS told me I couldn't text you. I decided to not take it personally. I can tell you the save percentage based upon the distance of the shot, but even that is highly contextual. Take Scott Darling. Last season, using that stat, he was the best goaltender in hockey, saving the Blackhawks, in even strength play, .91 goals each 60 min. This year, being traded to a team that takes the opposite approach (tries to outshoot you), Darling saves the team .13 goals each 60 min. Same player, different context, totally different statistical result. My view is that Lehner is having an OK to good season, despite moving from shooting percentage analytic (Bylsma) (.23) to a shot differential analytic (Housley) (.54), his numbers are better (using my method). The save percentage drop (.920 to .910) is a lot less than I had expected, I had expected Lehner's save percentage numbers to look like Johnson's.

Bailey wasn't in the box score last night https://lscluster.hockeytech.com/game_reports/official-game-report.php?lang_id=1&client_code=ahl&game_id=1017467

Chicago 3-2 OT in Chicago 20 WILSON9.92 71 RODRIGUES9.90 90 O'REILLY9.43 21 OKPOSO9.27 67 POULIOT8.98 19 MCCABE8.69 6 SCANDELLA8.58 55 RISTOLAINEN8.25 24 FASCHING8.25 40 Lehner 8.07 47 BOGOSIAN8.04 15 EICHEL7.7 19 KANE7.66 29 POMINVILLE7.27 23 REINHART6.70 41 FALK6.65 22 LARSSON6.60 93 ANTIPIN6.33 17 NOLAN5.83

Rasmussvärd

Not rankings, time. When Risto was on the ice, his opponent forwards played on the power play the most, in his case an average of 9.61 playing even strength. Colorado Average PP time BERNIER7.67 VARLAMOV7.34 RANTANEN5.06 MACKINNON4.88 BARRIE4.73 LANDESKOG4.66 KERFOOT4.00 GIRARD3.15 ANDRIGHETTO3.09 WILSON2.62 DUCHENE2.34 YAKUPOV2.31 JOHNSON2.30 SODERBERG2.21 COMPHER2.13 JOST0.86 BIGRAS0.44 GREER0.42 GRIMALDI0.37 BOURQUE0.08 BARBERIO0.07 LINDHOLM0.07 NIETO0.07 COMEAU0.05 ZADOROV0.04 TONINATO0.03 NEMETH0.01 So if Risto's on the ice against Rantenen (5.06), MacKinnon (4.88), and Landeskog (4.66), his total for that segment would be roughly 14.5, total up all the segments, multply by the time of the segment, divide by total seconds on ice at even strength, gives Risto his number

Tried to change the thread name, couldn't figure it out Buffalo 4 Colorado 2, in Colorado RISTOLAINEN9.61 WILSON8.93 SCANDELLA8.93 LARSSON8.69 RODRIGUES8.41 MCCABE8.36 EICHEL8.26 POULIOT8.10 Lehner 7.88 POMINVILLE7.86 KANE7.78 REINHART7.73 FASCHING7.64 O'REILLY7.63 NOLAN7.42 BOGOSIAN7.21 FALK5.52 OKPOSO5.40 ANTIPIN5.05

Thanks Potato

Nah, I want you to sway judgments on a message board