shrader Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Not luck driven, but often meaningless. Paul Byron has 2 goals and is shooting 100% Joel Ward is shooting 34%. Zucharello is shooting 28% They just don't mean anything. Oh they mean something. Those players have scored on 100%, 34%, and 28% of shots they have taken SO FAR. That doesn't necessarily mean is is predictive of their future shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Oh they mean something. Those players have scored on 100%, 34%, and 28% of shots they have taken SO FAR. That doesn't necessarily mean is is predictive of their future shots. :lol: I'll rephrase......there is very little utility in knowing those numbers as percentages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 :lol: I'll rephrase......there is very little utility in knowing those numbers as percentages. I'm out of touch with the rest of the league so far. I had no idea those guys had that many goals already. I wouldn't have expected to see them near the top of the list. I know, I know, small sample sizes, it's early, blah blah blah. But still, I figured all three in your list would have similar goal totals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I'm out of touch with the rest of the league so far. I had no idea those guys had that many goals already. I wouldn't have expected to see them near the top of the list. I know, I know, small sample sizes, it's early, blah blah blah. But still, I figured all three in your list would have similar goal totals. Really I am delighted Paul Byron is shooting 100 percent. Sure it means something, it is kind of like the old NL baseball cards where a set-up reliever batted 5 times all season and got 2 hits and batted .400 for the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Variation in shooting percentage most definitely is. Unless, of course, you think Crosby's shot has suddenly become Matt Ellis-like. Thanks for that. I'm really just trying to learn here. Not luck driven, but often meaningless. Paul Byron has 2 goals and is shooting 100% Joel Ward is shooting 34%. Zucharello is shooting 28% They just don't mean anything. Meaningless? Interesting. One of the #fancystat gurus says that PDO is arguably the most valuable #fancystat there is. Would you say that those percentages are meaningless over the course of, say, 150 games or 2500-3000 minutes of play? From my perspective, I think those percentages are telling me something (I'm just not sure what): Anaheim has been shockingly god-awful so far this year. As a team, they are shooting 4.12% - the league lowest. That SH% seems to suggest that, if their play otherwise remains constant (or otherwise improves), they are likely to improve in terms of results. Is there not value in that sort of analysis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 McDavid is shooting at 23% so far, which seems too high to continue. Luckily, however, that number is exactly his career average, so I fully expect him to continue at his PPG pace. Am I doing this right? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 (edited) McDavid is shooting at 23% so far, which seems too high to continue. Edited November 2, 2015 by That Aud Smell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Damn fancy stats.... Damn them to bloody hell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 https://twitter.com/StapeNewsday/status/661230668412788736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Arthur Staple Verified account @StapeNewsday Capuano: Tavares still very sick, getting checked out again today. "I don't expect him here for a little bit." Is this guy being careless, or is JT really "very sick"? That's really concerning, don't they usually just say it's the flu or mono if it's one of those things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Variation in shooting percentage most definitely is. Unless, of course, you think Crosby's shot has suddenly become Matt Ellis-like. Variation is primarily luck driven. For instance Drew Stafford's little hat trick palooza was luck driven. Not luck driven, but often meaningless. Paul Byron has 2 goals and is shooting 100% Joel Ward is shooting 34%. Zucharello is shooting 28% They just don't mean anything. Oh they mean something. Those players have scored on 100%, 34%, and 28% of shots they have taken SO FAR. That doesn't necessarily mean is is predictive of their future shots. Those don't but they are measure against their average. :lol: I'll rephrase......there is very little utility in knowing those numbers as percentages. There is a ton of info in those numbers. We can safely predict that those players will regress. Knowing how far they will regress is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 There is a ton of info in those numbers. We can safely predict that those players will regress. Knowing how far they will regress is important. I'm chuckling a little at this. If something can be safely predicted, I'm not sure how much use it is. Paul Byron is shooting 100% He will probably regress 85% over a season. While safe, I'm not going to say that one is particularly important. Shooting percentage measures the shots that hit net. He could miss the net the next 300 shots and still be shooting 100% and never regress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 McDavid looks like Bieber 100% of the time, which I think is probably a high percentage to keep up for the next few years. But I think he'll do it. I really do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 So Byron needs to shot more? Yes? As long as I don't have to read his poetry, I don't care what he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Toronto beating Dallas tonight, that can't make Lindy too happy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Toronto beating Dallas tonight, that can't make Lindy too happy He's 9-3 with an average roster. LINDY WILL BE FINE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 As long as I don't have to read his poetry, I don't care what he does. Sod him, and Shelley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 He's 9-3 with an average roster. LINDY WILL BE FINE. Average roster eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Average roster eh? For every Jamie, there's a Jordy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 I'm chuckling a little at this. If something can be safely predicted, I'm not sure how much use it is. Paul Byron is shooting 100% He will probably regress 85% over a season. While safe, I'm not going to say that one is particularly important. Shooting percentage measures the shots that hit net. He could miss the net the next 300 shots and still be shooting 100% and never regress. I'm unclear on what you're saying, or the extent to which you're joking. The scenario you lay out above is, of course, poppycock. You're a veritable sage around here, but your apparent intransigence on this point is confusing. A team sits atop the division. Their possession numbers are just so so. They have the league's best SH% and a no-name goalie playing out of his mind. Is there any predictive value there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 (edited) I'm unclear on what you're saying, or the extent to which you're joking. The scenario you lay out above is, of course, poppycock. You're a veritable sage around here, but your apparent intransigence on this point is confusing. A team sits atop the division. Their possession numbers are just so so. They have the league's best SH% and a no-name goalie playing out of his mind. Is there any predictive value there? Let me clarify. I don't think individual shooting percentages mean much at all. They might tell something,but for the life of me, I can't think they are used much. Unlike say, basketball, when a player shoots, it is a shot (even if it is an airball). But shooting percentage in the NHL is is goals/shots on goal not goals/shots attempted.....so there are no missed shots, blocked shots, or fanned shots in the arithmetic. A Paul Cyr might have had a lifetime 13% shooting percentage or something, but not factored in to that were the 150 shots a year that never hit net and wounded happy fans from Angola, West Seneca, and Lewis-ton over the glass. I just don't think it S% is a very helpful number, or a very good comparable stat. between players. Corsi is much better. Edited November 3, 2015 by X. Benedict Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Understood. That is helpful. A team's aggregate seems to present a different matter. If the recent historical league-wide SH% is X% - that includes 1000s of games, blocked shots, wide shots, bad shots, great shots - and your team is shooting .5X, or 2X, that is a predictor (albeit imperfect) that the team's luck is apt to improve or run out. I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Corsi is better, but tossing out shot percentage all together seems nuts to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 I'm still looking for a #fancystat that tracks how many shots-wide are associated with goalies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 I'm still looking for a #fancystat that tracks how many shots-wide are associated with goalies. I want a fancy stat that somehow combines shooting percentage with saved shots that are put in the net on the rebound. I'm sure something's out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 I want a fancy stat that somehow combines shooting percentage with saved shots that are put in the net on the rebound. I'm sure something's out there. I would like a stat for assists that are off of shot rebounds. I like your idea too. We could actually figure out who is driving production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts