That's insane. When I was in management I asked outloud how old the earth was ( I think we were talking about the ice age or something) and one of the underlings said something like 3000 years. My first response was to ask if she was retarded but I stopped myself because of that whole employer respecting people rights to their own religious beliefs malarkey the unions put in place a few years ago.

It took everything I had to zip it, nod, and politely excuse myself.
- Larsson_fan

So glad you don't have those same inabitions on the Buzzzzzzzzzzz!

The reference to analytics taking on larger sample sizes is the real problem with those results. Some want the analytics to give you a 'Good picture' of a players ability over a broad range, but the only thing in my opinion it gives is an average. What's wrong with taking on a single seasons results? Surely the latest data on a player will give you a better understanding of what he will be like now? Who gives a (frank) what he did a year ago - or even 2?

Going to be interesting seeing how your group comes together this season - this is it punters, window is now wide open. Win now mode has been selected!!!

Anything less than a cup final will be failure!
- Aussiepenguin

Analytics used as you suggest are tools to evaluate that player over that single season. They can be used as you suggest but their scope is limited. The reason those who use them most often prefer multi-season samples is because using them as a predictive tool first and an evaluation tool second.

Put simply, your suggestion is akin to saying "I wanna see how Player X performed last season" while the multi-season preference of many is akin to saying "I wanna see how Player X performed last season, see it relative to his performance in recent seasons and thereby get a picture of how he's trending which in turn might offer me a clearer picture on what to expect in his near future". Its simply an aim for more information.

Besides, it's not like single season results don't exist or aren't used. It's just that more information is needed for a true predictive model- like HERO Charts.

Analytics used as you suggest are tools to evaluate that player over that single season. They can be used as you suggest but their scope is limited. The reason those who use them most often prefer multi-season samples is because using them as a predictive tool first and an evaluation tool second.

Put simply, your suggestion is akin to saying "I wanna see how Player X performed last season" while the multi-season preference of many is akin to saying "I wanna see how Player X performed last season, see it relative to his performance in recent seasons and thereby get a picture of how he's trending which in turn might offer me a clearer picture on what to expect in his near future". Its simply an aim for more information.

Besides, it's not like single season results don't exist or aren't used. It's just that more information is needed for a true predictive model- like HERO Charts.
- MaximumBone

I think I've heard once or twice analytics isn't a predictive tool. I agree with that. I see what you are saying, but if you look at it in an overall informative outcome you are looking at an average for that player in my opinion. I hate going back into why I dislike current (before the micro stats), data totals however they are formulated, but I will say in any event where multiple individuals are compared, there needs to be a stability in the 'test' environments. In short, you cannot compare games as they can be so different. Hockey is such a dynamic environment that is never the same. Hence my opinion that the best you can get is an average of what that player 'has' given you. Trending or not, you have no idea what state a player is in at any given time, & to use Toews as an example, rumoured to have played with an injury most of the past season, what is expected from him next season? A 'bounce' back season or further decline? Playing with an old friend may give him added confidence that won't be shown on any analytical chart. It might not make any difference.

Going to your man, I'd rather see what he did last year or even the last half of the season & playoffs than compare that to his fist season. But that's just moi.

I think I've heard once or twice analytics isn't a predictive tool. I agree with that. I see what you are saying, but if you look at it in an overall informative outcome you are looking at an average for that player in my opinion. I hate going back into why I dislike current (before the micro stats), data totals however they are formulated, but I will say in any event where multiple individuals are compared, there needs to be a stability in the 'test' environments. In short, you cannot compare games as they can be so different. Hockey is such a dynamic environment that is never the same. Hence my opinion that the best you can get is an average of what that player 'has' given you. Trending or not, you have no idea what state a player is in at any given time, & to use Toews as an example, rumoured to have played with an injury most of the past season, what is expected from him next season? A 'bounce' back season or further decline? Playing with an old friend may give him added confidence that won't be shown on any analytical chart. It might not make any difference.

Going to your man, I'd rather see what he did last year or even the last half of the season & playoffs than compare that to his fist season. But that's just moi.
- Aussiepenguin

From who have you heard that? That's pretty much the purpose for their creation and continued evolution. They're the pursuit of a method with which a team or person could use to accurately predict future results based on the past.

You're only looking at an "average" if you factor each season featured in the analysis as equal when in reality, most multi-season models weigh their results to give more significance to more recent seasons. Something like a HERO Chart might have the past season worth 55%, the season prior worth 30 and one season further worth 10%.

More to the point, I think the key point you're neglecting is that you seem to think that people who utilize these statistics don't also consider the possibility of intangible factors having an impact. That's completely untrue of most of those who drive the evolution of stats. These factors aren't included in statistical models not because they don't exist, but because they are intangible.

As an example, a statistician can't prove that McDavid prefers Maroon as a linemate and a person to Pouliot because he's not in his head nor can he say without any doubt that McDavid will produce better results with Maroon over Pouliot due to his preference. Therefore, these factors can't be included in a statistical model but they can still be mentioned as an aside to any results or predictions. Looking at your example, is it possible that Saad's return could spark more offense out of Toews? Of course. Is it also possible that neither will see any notable jumps in production as a result of one another's presence as neither have really been THAT far off their respective scoring paces? Also yes.

Stats aren't an attempt to undercut or devalue the less tangible elements of evaluation or prediction; they're an attempt to work with as much tangible information as we have to come to as reasonable of a predictive conclusion as possible. Context still matters and anyone that uses stats should know that and should include mention of such in their analysis'. If they're not, they're ignoring the unpredictable, human element of the game.

From who have you heard that? That's pretty much the purpose for their creation and continued evolution. They're the pursuit of a method with which a team or person could use to accurately predict future results based on the past.

You're only looking at an "average" if you factor each season featured in the analysis as equal when in reality, most multi-season models weigh their results to give more significance to more recent seasons. Something like a HERO Chart might have the past season worth 55%, the season prior worth 30 and one season further worth 10%.

More to the point, I think the key point you're neglecting is that you seem to think that people who utilize these statistics don't also consider the possibility of intangible factors having an impact. That's completely untrue of most of those who drive the evolution of stats. These factors aren't included in statistical models not because they don't exist, but because they are intangible.

As an example, a statistician can't prove that McDavid prefers Maroon as a linemate and a person to Pouliot because he's not in his head nor can he say without any doubt that McDavid will produce better results with Maroon over Pouliot due to his preference. Therefore, these factors can't be included in a statistical model but they can still be mentioned as an aside to any results or predictions. Looking at your example, is it possible that Saad's return could spark more offense out of Toews? Of course. Is it also possible that neither will see any notable jumps in production as a result of one another's presence as neither have really been THAT far off their respective scoring paces? Also yes.

Stats aren't an attempt to undercut or devalue the less tangible elements of evaluation or prediction; they're an attempt to work with as much tangible information as we have to come to as reasonable of a predictive conclusion as possible. Context still matters and anyone that uses stats should know that and should include mention of such in their analysis'. If they're not, they're ignoring the unpredictable, human element of the game.
- MaximumBone

Without writing essays that get boring, let's stick to the Toews example as there's no connection to either of our teams.

To say they are both (Saad) close to their scoring totals (which you imply), that in itself isn't accurate at all. What is their scoring paces as you say? What is the reference you use to determine that? And what do you consider 'far off'? What conditions are considered when you have a total? Are they the 'past' totals or 'future predicted' with analytics? If Toews was injured last season how did that impact his scoring totals? If Toews scored 'round abouts' or 'near' something that we can call his 'pace', wouldn't that also be called an 'average' based on 'conditions' through his seasons? If Hossa had a better year & been on his wing the whole year he 'may' have scored more - so now WOWY stats are considered but still, how does that change his perceived 'pace' due to other players abilities? Heres where The Saad question is very relevant. Will it based on analytics make a difference to Toews? 'Round abouts ' & 'not that far off' aren't used as specifics & are a general statement that suggests a lot of grey. Stats should be black & white.

I've asked a few times for analytics guys in threads to 'predict' a few games with their data, none have accepted the challenge as yet (probably moved on & forgot ). So if you want to throw up a few groups of games next season to see how your 'predictive' data will go, I'd actually like someone to do it. Not just win loss, but actual goal scorers, assists & shot on goal numbers would be a simple start.

I don't dislike stats, in fact I love using them in my sport. But I can't see them as anything other than a history lesson as hockey is so unpredictable.

Without writing essays that get boring, let's stick to the Toews example as there's no connection to either of our teams.

To say they are both (Saad) close to their scoring totals (which you imply), that in itself isn't accurate at all. What is their scoring paces as you say? What is the reference you use to determine that? And what do you consider 'far off'? What conditions are considered when you have a total? Are they the 'past' totals or 'future predicted' with analytics? If Toews was injured last season how did that impact his scoring totals? If Toews scored 'round abouts' or 'near' something that we can call his 'pace', wouldn't that also be called an 'average' based on 'conditions' through his seasons? If Hossa had a better year & been on his wing the whole year he 'may' have scored more - so now WOWY stats are considered but still, how does that change his perceived 'pace' due to other players abilities? Heres where The Saad question is very relevant. Will it based on analytics make a difference to Toews? 'Round abouts ' & 'not that far off' aren't used as specifics & are a general statement that suggests a lot of grey. Stats should be black & white.

I've asked a few times for analytics guys in threads to 'predict' a few games with their data, none have accepted the challenge as yet (probably moved on & forgot ). So if you want to throw up a few groups of games next season to see how your 'predictive' data will go, I'd actually like someone to do it. Not just win loss, but actual goal scorers, assists & shot on goal numbers would be a simple start.

I don't dislike stats, in fact I love using them in my sport. But I can't see them as anything other than a history lesson as hockey is so unpredictable.
- Aussiepenguin

There's the rub; it's not for the micro level so much as the macro level. Individual games vary so much that it's nigh impossible to predict (as of now) due to countless factors. That being said, there exist high-end statisticians doing this type of thing for individual games. I don't know how they're doing as it's likely that we'd hear nothing about it regardless of their results.

The effectiveness of these stats is more in predicting season-wide or even month-wide results for both players and teams are where they bring value. The recognition of trends and how those could change (scoring slumps and breakthroughs) can often be found using even simple methods. It's how those plugs that play fantasy sports for a living do it.

However, hockey IS the major sport that skews most towards unpredictability as a result so it's less common among statisticians. Part of the beauty of the best sport in the world

You work with Iggy?
- DDM-Coga

- DDM-Coga

Except he is 4 years younger and was on pace for 9 goals and 20 points this season which would of put him beside fellow draft mate Josh Morrissey in points but if you think Morrissey is on Chiarots level...
- Vanillaface

Chiarot blows. That said, Nurse isn't close to Morrissey defensively.

Chiarot blows. That said, Nurse isn't close to Morrissey defensively.
- Rexypoo

Morrissey must have improve tremendously since junior, cause I watched him many times with the Rockets and he wasn't even the best defender there. Strictly pp specialist!

(frank) me...Avs invited Cowen to camp on a PTO
Now I will have to deal with (frank)boy Alfies Salad telling me how hes still a good dman

(frank) me...Avs invited Cowen to camp on a PTO
Now I will have to deal with (frank)boy Alfies Salad telling me how hes still a good dman
- DDM-Coga

Just treat him like JB and tell him to (frank) OFF.....they are most likely the same person anyways.

I think that the Oilers are in an enviable position if Nurse develops into what his talents are capable of. Klefbom could be the Lidstrom to Nurse's Kronwall.

Despite Lidstrom being the smarter, and obviously better, defenseman Kronwall (for about 5 years) and Stuart were the actual shutdown D-tandem.

Klefbom and Nurse have the potential to be 1A and 1B. Klefbom will always be better offensively and smarter but Nurse, at his highest potential, has the capability to create a matchup nightmare defensively.

Trade RNH and Lucic to FLA for Ekblad:

Klefbom - Larsson
Nurse - Ekblad

Instantly the best Top-4 in the game...

I think that the Oilers are in an enviable position if Nurse develops into what his talents are capable of. Klefbom could be the Lidstrom to Nurse's Kronwall.

Despite Lidstrom being the smarter, and obviously better, defenseman Kronwall (for about 5 years) and Stuart were the actual shutdown D-tandem.

Klefbom and Nurse have the potential to be 1A and 1B. Klefbom will always be better offensively and smarter but Nurse, at his highest potential, has the capability to create a matchup nightmare defensively.

Trade RNH and Lucic to FLA for Ekblad:

Klefbom - Larsson
Nurse - Ekblad

Instantly the best Top-4 in the game...
- DARKSEID

Yes, because that's how trades work in real life...

Yes, because that's how trades work in real life...
- MaximumBone

I wish.

I think that the Oilers are in an enviable position if Nurse develops into what his talents are capable of. Klefbom could be the Lidstrom to Nurse's Kronwall.

Despite Lidstrom being the smarter, and obviously better, defenseman Kronwall (for about 5 years) and Stuart were the actual shutdown D-tandem.

Klefbom and Nurse have the potential to be 1A and 1B. Klefbom will always be better offensively and smarter but Nurse, at his highest potential, has the capability to create a matchup nightmare defensively.

Trade RNH and Lucic to FLA for Ekblad:

Klefbom - Larsson
Nurse - Ekblad

Instantly the best Top-4 in the game...
- DARKSEID

You sure that's enough for an old, slow, Looch and a defensive centre?
Buddy! I wish!

You sure that's enough for an old, slow, Looch and a defensive centre?
Buddy! I wish!
- K-man25

A lady can dream.

Yes, because that's how trades work in real life...
- MaximumBone

Not to mention Ekblads brains are scrambled eggs now.

I think that the Oilers are in an enviable position if Nurse develops into what his talents are capable of. Klefbom could be the Lidstrom to Nurse's Kronwall.

Despite Lidstrom being the smarter, and obviously better, defenseman Kronwall (for about 5 years) and Stuart were the actual shutdown D-tandem.

Klefbom and Nurse have the potential to be 1A and 1B. Klefbom will always be better offensively and smarter but Nurse, at his highest potential, has the capability to create a matchup nightmare defensively.

Trade RNH and Lucic to FLA for Ekblad:

Klefbom - Larsson
Nurse - Ekblad

Instantly the best Top-4 in the game...
- DARKSEID

No...it is not.

No...it is not.

- Larsson_fan

What? You mean the BBC doesn't make a d-core top 4 in the league?

What? You mean the BBC doesn't make a d-core top 4 in the league?
- leonkennedy

Jero is racist

(frank) me...Avs invited Cowen to camp on a PTO
Now I will have to deal with (frank)boy Alfies Salad telling me how hes still a good dman
- DDM-Coga

There was talk the Oilers were looking at him

Jero is racist
- LittleRickyV2

You say that like it's a bad thing.

You say that like it's a bad thing.
- Lahey

It's one of his few redeeming qualities

I think that the Oilers are in an enviable position if Nurse develops into what his talents are capable of. Klefbom could be the Lidstrom to Nurse's Kronwall.

Despite Lidstrom being the smarter, and obviously better, defenseman Kronwall (for about 5 years) and Stuart were the actual shutdown D-tandem.

Klefbom and Nurse have the potential to be 1A and 1B. Klefbom will always be better offensively and smarter but Nurse, at his highest potential, has the capability to create a matchup nightmare defensively.

Trade RNH and Lucic to FLA for Ekblad:

Klefbom - Larsson
Nurse - Ekblad

Instantly the best Top-4 in the game...
- DARKSEID

Your controller should be charged by now. Get back to playing NHL 17.