TrueBlueGED
-
Posts
29,076 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TrueBlueGED
-
-
8 minutes ago, dudacek said:
But then why is his def Corsi acceptable?
Corsi (technically it uses Fenwick, but whatever) is only one component of xG. Part one of this article explains the xG model.
Video would help put a specific answer to your question, but some plausible explanations are that Vesey backchecks with the ferocity of a sleeping cat, is a reasonable on-puck defender but loses his man so often it'd make Risto blush. What could result is very few shots against because the shots against are such high quality they go into the net with a high frequency.
edit: Worth noting that on his career, Vesey is in the bottom third for corsi against. So last season could be an outlier, or signs of growth. Hard to say.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, dudacek said:
So basically he’s at the bottom of the league in terms of how easy it should be to score when he’s out there, even if his defensive Corsi is average?
How do we generally account for a wide gap in Expected goals and Corsi in terms of on-ice play? Generally acceptable play for the most part, littered with an ordinate amount of particularly egregious letdowns?
My interpretation is when his team doesn't have the puck he essentially spins in circles staring at the rafters while the other team gets to the prime scoring areas.
-
36 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:
Asking, question bias, picture in time.. those that dont answer,lie.... all issues especially in politics. Wilder in VA for Governor we assumed had a 5-7 point negative in polls because of racial bias. And it played out he won if I remember by 5 points despite polls saying he was up by 13. Talking tracking polls.
A result from the 90s!?!?!?! ?
Really though, polling isn't perfect, and you're of course going to find polls where the actual result falls outside the margin of error. But that's not the norm. Polls as a whole are pretty accurate, even if not fool-proof. I also bristle at the notion that pollsters aren't methodologically rigorous and putting good-faith efforts into accuracy, though I realize that wasn't your assertion.
-
1 minute ago, Taro T said:
And you expect SHEARY to save that crew? ?
No, but I think they'd merely be the 3rd worst defensive line in the history of hockey ?
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Taro T said:
See them both as 3rd liners w/ similar flaws & differing strengths.
Though, were either to be put into the Pominville role (non-1st line player put on Eichel & Skinner's wing because it just doesn't matter as much who that 3rd player is & it frees up Reinhart & Olofsson to be useful elsewhere), my suspicion is that Vesey would be better in that role as his game is doing what Pominville did - (try to) skate hard to the net & finish.
On the other hand, if it ever comes to pass, Skinner-Eichel-Vesey might be the worst defensive line in the history of hockey ?
-
10 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Or, it could be in the middle: he has some good strengths: he has good wheels, is strong in the corner, can box out well in front of the net, is a good PKer, has a solid shot, can make a good pass when given a bit of space, he looks to join the rush, is decent pinching in & winning battles along the boards, & has good stamina; and his flaws are obvious (at least to those of us who see every game & then analyze the #### out of it):
He doesn't hold his blue line well, can get lost when the other team has a good cycle going (which compounds when Eichel & he are on the ice together, as both can lose their coverage), lets up a bit when lower quality players are on the rush, is slow recovering when beaten, & is slow to process where to move the puck to at times (most noticeable when on a long shift under pressure in his own end or when QBing the PP). But a lot of that can be mitigated by giving him a partner that doesn't have those same issues, by playing him against other than the opponent's top line, and by limiting his ice time with Eichel.
He's not a top pairing material, but should be good as a 2nd pairing guy especially if paired with a complementary partner such as Pilut or McCabe.
For the love of all that is holy, don't pair him with Dahlin or Scandella.
This is where I disagree. I don't think he's useless or among the worst defensemen in the league, but I think he fits to a T the classic 3rd pairing Dman who should run your second unit PP and get as little even strength ice as is reasonable. And for $5.4M, I need more than that.
-
10 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
I suppose I'd be happier if your statement didn't so broadly and with such certitude state that a guy who stunk for the Sabres last year was "across the board" better than a guy who is bigger, plays a tougher game and scored more goals -- especially if the difference is defensive play, and both guys played for terrible defensive teams, and Sheary's performance in your most important stat was kinda lousy, albeit less lousy than Vesey's.
Well, my across the board assertion was based on their careers to date, not just the most recent season. Sheary's defensive xG was meh, but Vesey's was horrible. You're understating the difference here. Every other metric between the two they were within the same standard deviation, so I'll happily meet in the middle and say they're approximately the same value-wise. But then you put defense into the mix, and Sheary is the clear winner. Maybe we can agree on this: the Sabres need to do better than both of them in their top-6.
-
On 7/11/2019 at 12:38 AM, Randall Flagg said:
I am dreadfully sorry for how long this is, I didn't mean it to get that way
Life as a grad student on break, right?
On 7/11/2019 at 9:19 AM, North Buffalo said:Data collection, how and by whom... ie their inherent bias is always an underrated problem that is tough to weed out and in many respects intractable because it is the only way to collect it and tough to detect flaws even when standards are applied. Part of the reason political polling is so inaccurate.
Define inaccurate. Polls aren't perfect, of course, and it also depends on what the poll is asking....but they're pretty accurate.
On 7/11/2019 at 10:05 AM, Randall Flagg said:Orders of magnitude difference there. The "error analysis" done by polling versus that done by any hockey nerd, or any real scientist, are simply not comparable from what I've seen. (I'm sure not all polls are conducted this way, I know a guy like Nate Silver is likely rigorous)
Care to expand? The major pollsters are incredibly rigorous and put a ton of effort into getting an accurate picture. Also, Nate Silver isn't a pollster, he simply uses them as the foundation of his prediction models.
-
25 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
And this is what we call "assuming away the problem."
Would you be happier if I said Vesey's offensive contributions are completely washed away by his horrible defensive play?
-
Just now, dudacek said:
Not to team results, maybe to my frustration level watching, although lackadaisical effort will make throw things at the TV just as much.
Were Vesey’s charts as a middle-sixer in New York as bad as Sheary’s in Buffalo? And if I find out Sheary had good charts in Buffalo, it will not help my affection for charts.
Neither were good last year, that's for sure. I put the most weight on xG because of its predictive value, which is where my clear judgment in favor of Sheary comes from. For whatever it's worth, everything I've read about Vesey's defensive play qualitatively backs up his abominable defensive xG in the chart.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, dudacek said:
I think there is a portion of fandom that rates hockey players solely on charts that has gained vocal dominance in the internet court of hardcore hockey nerds like us. That element tends to dismiss GMs as idiots who don’t pay attention analytics.
I think that what actually happens is most GMs pay a lot of attention to analytics, they just don’t use them as the arbiter of whether a player is good or not, any more than they used 60 goals to determine whether Dennis Maruk was elite.
Analytics show effect, not cause; they draw attention to things that conventional stats don’t. They say “this isn’t working.” But it’s still up to the GM to determine why. Is the player being used improperly? Does the system suck? Is he a bad fit for the system? Is he just bad?
And in passing that judgement, they still care whether a player can skate and shoot and pass and battle and create and defend and be relied upon to make good decisions because those are the things that decades of hockey culture have shown make a difference between winning a losing and GMs are a product of that culture. I’m willing to bet that the critics who say size is irrelevant have never been in the corner with Zdeno Chara.
Risto has value because of his age and because of his contract, but mostly because of his skill set. Before analytics, his +/- would have still drawn the critics, but he would still be regarded as a first-pairing defencemen for his size, his skill and his snarl. Analytics have devalued him in GM circles, certainly, or at least raised questions. But his skill set still holds a lot of weight.
How much weight, and with who is a fascinating study.
The flip side is that those who are drawn to Risto's physical attributes and attitude may go searching for justifications, accurate or not, to explain the poor metrics. It's not hard to imagine somebody thinking, perhaps subconsciously, "a 6'3 RHD who scores 40 with a mean streak simply has to be good, the numbers can't be right" and go from there. It's what I'm counting on when thinking of potential returns in a Risto trade.
-
2
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Is Vesey as weak on the puck as Sheary? Because this is what drives me crazy about Sheary.
I haven't watched enough to know, but I've read enough to be comfortable that any strength on the puck he may have over Sheary is completely washed out by his lack of interest involving anything resembling defense. Besides, if he's stronger on the puck but still has worse outcomes across the board, does it really matter?
-
28 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
I know these videos are just collections of snippets that can be put together to make pretty much any point that anyone wants to make -- but dear me I love them.
And these really do encapsulate Sheary's "move feet quickly, get possession and then weakly lose the puck" game to a T.
And yet some people are sure that Sheary is better than Vesey.
Well, that's because all available evidence says he is.
-
16 minutes ago, dudacek said:
That sound an awful lot like you’re OK with Risto being moved for parts. Are you? Or is it top 6 forward or bust?
I get that he was your guy (and I like him a lot too) but most observers would have looked at Newhook at nine as a reach. He went 16 and was considered good value at that slot. Cozens went right around where consensus had him as well. This is not Lehner instead of Boeser
So, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I value him as a 3rd pair Dman, which doesn't have a lot of value in a trade obviously. So from that perspective, if we snag a really good 3C type, I should be happy. On the other hand, my belief (hope?) is that there are GMs out there who value him quite a bit more than I do, and under that view, a 3C type would be a disappointing return.
-
3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
I really prefer a 2C, but if the RW is good enough, I can be talked into that.
Then we can just offer sheet Cirelli for far more than tampa is willing to pay next year ?
But I really would love a better plan B (long term) than hope Mitts or Cousins becomes one.Indeed. I want someone who can do the job, period.
-
6 minutes ago, WildCard said:
Vancouver already got their RHD in Tyler Myers
...so you're saying Benning really likes deeply flawed, expensive RHD? There's hope!!!
Although I think Risto ultimately does get moved, I do continue to have a slight worry that Botterill's set the price too high and there's a risk we get stuck keeping him.
-
1 minute ago, Weave said:
They make my point perfectly. No need to throw away multiple seasons to acquire any of them, not even initially.
Just now, WildCard said:We've been down this road so many times
Yea, I'm really not interested in relitigating this. I thought your point was that since the individual impact is less that it's not worth getting them, not that tanking to get them isn't worth it. We will never in a million years see eye to eye on that, so moving on.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Weave said:
*Looks at the St. Louis roster*
Tarasenko, Pietrangelo, and O'Reilly would like a word.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, jsb said:
They played together with Durant early in their career and they're really good friends, I think they'll work it out but you are right they both like the ball
If only the no tenders to RFA NHL GMs could take a lesson from the NBA
Yea, but that was a way different version of Harden. I think it'll be fun, just not sure I know how well it will work against the top teams in the West.
-
5 minutes ago, WildCard said:
Westbrook to Houston for CP3 and picks, and now OKC owns every draft pick until 2026
I have no idea how Westbrook and Harden are going to work together. I guess like the first year of LeBron and Wade in Miami where they essentially take turns? Regardless, the NBA offseason is so fun.
-
4 minutes ago, Weave said:
And yet we threw away multiple seasons to acquire one.
Not as impactful as in the NBA, sure, but you're still completely screwed without them.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Dahlin is the prototype, and it is definitely where you could see Henri’s game going.
Our two recent pick 31s fit that mould as do Bryson, Fitzgerald and Borgen. They have varying degrees of offence and snarl, but they all close gaps and are responsible with the puck. It’s clearly something Botterill sees as a high priority. It will take a while to trickle onto the big club though.
Maybe Montour and Miller will be less high-risk than I expect.
I think you might be unnecessarily conflating "puck moving" with "high risk." In my view, puck moving simply means they're good at transitioning the puck and flipping the ice. That doesn't necessarily mean they do it by attempting high risk plays.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, WildCard said:
Yeah but he seems better than either of them. Maybe he didn't wanna come here though
I'd definitely have taken him over Vesey, but Johansson (assuming health) is a much better middle-6 option.
-
4 hours ago, Thorny said:
If there's a single GM out there that views Risto's value currently as what we hope Krueger might be able to rehabilitate it to, Botterill will move him. Mitigates risk.
4 hours ago, Brawndo said:I really do not want my highest paid defenseman to have to be sheltered on the third pair in an attempt to maximize his value to my team.
Trade Him
This is exactly my thinking. Let him be somebody else's "maybe if" and "if only" and *what if we try..." and "perhaps we can..." A team shouldn't have to twist itself in a pretzel to maybe possibly make its $5.4M defenseman serviceable.
-
3
-
New club: Hockey Statistics -- Reference and Discussion
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by TrueBlueGED
Yea, my apologizes. I was trying to respond to both you and Flagg (who I understood to be questioning the methodological rigor of pollsters) and it got all muddled up. I've been in a hospital waiting room since 6am and my brain is slowly melting. I don't disagree with any of the challenges you just rattled off.