Fancy stat guys - should I be excited yet??

[Curt]

1 hour ago, erickompositör72 said:

I think you're reading it incorrectly. It says they are more "good" than "lucky."

The further right is not more "lucky," it just illustrates how many goals they've scored. "Up" is good, "down" is lucky.

Their xG differential is about 0.2.  Their actual G differential is about 1.3.

Their goal differential is much higher than you would expect based on the shots they are taking and giving up.  That’s considered luck.

They have been both good and lucky, but more lucky than good.

This is why I don’t like charts with words in the corners, it’s confusing.

After last night Rangers game, I would expect those G and xG differential numbers to be closer together.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Curt

[That Aud Smell]

49 minutes ago, dudacek said:

According to #fancystats, if the Sabres continue to play like they did last night, the wins should pile up, right?

I'm not yet sure. The SAT share was good, but I haven't seen the shot maps. My sense from watching was that the Sabres needlessly surrendered several very high quality chances. You can dominate in Corsi and lose most games if you're gonna do that.

[Curt]

2 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

They've been somewhat lucky. But there's also a part of that "luck" that they have created -- with quality chances and sometimes keeping the other team's shots to the perimeter.

This is incorporated into the xG stat.  

It’s how many goals you should expect to score, or surrender, based on the number AND quality of the shots taken, with average shooting and save percentages.  

So it’s generally going to undervalue guys who have elite shot releases, who are scoring at a higher than normal rate on their shots.  It also does not account for goaltending by design.

Its a measure of how the team is playing overall, but elite shooters/goaltending can create goals/make saves that had no business happening, and that can overcome poor team play at times.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Curt

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

This is incorporated into the xG stat.  

Word. I think it's why it's becoming such a go-to #fancystat.

Btw, I saw an xG graph today (pasted below). Skinner's right there near the top. So is McDavid. No sign of Eichel, obviously.  (/ducks, runs)

Also, I do not understand the colours of those bars, nor what ixG is. [EDIT: Wait, is that just "individual"? Anyway, I don't understand the colours.]

Edited October 25, 2019 by That Aud Smell

[darksabre]

9 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Word. I think it's why it's becoming such a go-to #fancystat.

Btw, I saw an xG graph today (pasted below). Skinner's right there near the top. So is McDavid. No sign of Eichel, obviously.  (/ducks, runs)

Also, I do not understand the colors of those bars, nor what ixG is.

I wish they would put UNITS on these charts. ixG of 5 doesn't mean anything to me. 5 what. ixG60 makes sense, that's just expected goals per 60 minutes of ice time.

[Curt]

1 minute ago, darksabre said:

I wish they would put UNITS on these charts. ixG of 5 doesn't mean anything to me. 5 what. ixG60 makes sense, that's just expected goals per 60 minutes of ice time.

I think the units are just goals.

[darksabre]

2 minutes ago, Curt said:

I think the units are just goals.

That doesn't make any sense. Alex Ovechkin is predicted to get 6 goals.

Edited October 25, 2019 by darksabre

[Curt]

Just now, darksabre said:

That doesn't make any sense. Alex Ovechkin is predicted to get 6 goals.

It’s not a prediction, it’s the season results so far.

[darksabre]

Just now, Curt said:

It’s not a prediction, it’s the season results so far.

That's not what ixG is.

[Curt]

2 minutes ago, darksabre said:

That's not what ixG is.

ixG is the expected goals for an individual player.

The graph is showing how many expected goals the players have accumulated so far this season.

[darksabre]

9 minutes ago, Curt said:

ixG is the expected goals for an individual player.

The graph is showing how many expected goals the players have accumulated so far this season.

That's not ixG. That's just G. Ovi has 6 5v5 goals this year, but this chart shows his ixG as being over 6. JVR has 1 5v5 goal but his ixG is 4.25ish. JVR certainly hasn't accumulated any of his expected 5v5 goals yet...

[darksabre]

If the idea here is to use ixG in a predictive way, then it would be nice to see the actual results along side it to see which players are on track, ahead of the track, or behind it. Ovi is essentially right on track, McDavid is a little behind, Draisaitl is well ahead, Jeff Skinner is ahead...

[That Aud Smell]

17 minutes ago, darksabre said:

If the idea here is to use ixG in a predictive way, then it would be nice to see the actual results along side it to see which players are on track, ahead of the track, or behind it. Ovi is essentially right on track, McDavid is a little behind, Draisaitl is well ahead, Jeff Skinner is ahead...

That’s what the colouring is for, I think?

[darksabre]

9 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

That’s what the colouring is for, I think?

Nah. That's just ixG per 60, which is more of the same. 

[That Aud Smell]

Yeah. I don't understand that chart. What's the length represent? The colour(s)?

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

Yeah. I don't understand that chart. What's the length represent? The colour(s)?

If I'm understanding it right, the horizontal scale is the player's expected goals at even strength through the games played thus far. This may or may not match their actual goals scored at even strength so far, but that isn't indicated anywhere on the chart.

The coloring is defined by the little key on the right, which is individual expected goals per 60 minutes played (in all usage situations I think?).

So a player like JVR has a high expected goals per 60, and a high expected goals through each game played so far. Even though he isn't actually hitting those marks yet, it looks like his S% being in the toilet is something that theoretically shouldn't last?

[Curt]

1 hour ago, darksabre said:

That's not ixG. That's just G. Ovi has 6 5v5 goals this year, but this chart shows his ixG as being over 6. JVR has 1 5v5 goal but his ixG is 4.25ish. JVR certainly hasn't accumulated any of his expected 5v5 goals yet...

What?  ixG is not individual expected goals?  I’m not understanding you.

[That Aud Smell]

Dahlin in the 3rd against Coyotes.
Wyd, kid.

 

 

[Taro T]

45 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Dahlin in the 3rd against Coyotes.
Wyd, kid.

 

 

Interesting.  Via eye test, really thought (except for the misplay on the 2 on 2 rush against with a smidge over 2 minutes left) he looked the best that period that he had out of at least the last 5.  He had a good scoring chance following the Eichel rush that must got blocked enough to go wide and actually wasn't dropping to the ice defending, didn't have any pucks roll off his stick, and made some nice crisp tape to tape passes that had seemingly been slipping out of his repertoire.

Really thought that was 1 he could build off of for Friday's game.

[That Aud Smell]

I tubed in for the third. He didn’t look good to me, but I was surprised at how badly the stats shook out.

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

I tubed in for the third. He didn’t look good to me, but I was surprised at how badly the stats shook out.

Not saying he looked like he was at the top of his game, but that a lot of the little 'why is everything moving so fast' moments (except the 2v2 play, which was better than earlier) were gone.

He was finally hitting passes tape to tape, even under duress, which wasn't the case earlier in the game nor the past couple.

[...]

11 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I tubed in for the third. He didn’t look good to me, but I was surprised at how badly the stats shook out.

Take heart, if you look at the chart, they all sucked in the third, not just Dahlin.

[That Aud Smell]

They gotta get better, and soon. 

[bunomatic]

Fancy Stats lead me here

[That Aud Smell]

 

 

 

I really, really want to see this team emerge with a winning style of hockey. If they keep up with the play that's brought them to this point, they will, I predict, skid into a being a non-playoff team.