Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] One simple graph points clear off-season winners, losers. (Note: Canucks rated 9th)


Recommended Posts

Quote

One simple graph points clear off-season winners, losers.

PUBLISHED ON JULY 9TH 2017

 

The off-season is one of the most important point in a NHL year. During those quick months, you have to trade players, sign new prospects and extend or let go guys set to become UFA. A lot of decisions have to be made and it's obviously not easy to do. That's why the managers get the dollars. 

 

However, a Twitter analyst made a very simple and clear graph showing who were the clear winners and losers of this post season. 

 

 

 

To be sure, the Goal Above Replacement is not the best statistic in the world, but it still tells a story. It basically computes how many goals on average you will gain or lose by replacing a player with another. For example, let's say you replace a 30 goals scorer by a 35 goals guy, you get a +5 rating. 

 

This year, the Hurricanes came out strongly on top, vastly ahead of their peers. Adding Justin Williams adds a lot of goals and having Scott Darling between the pipes will help remove some negative goals. 

 

On the contrary, both the Capitals and the Blackhawks are far behind with this differential. Moving guys like Panarin, Hjalmarsson, Williams and Johansson will hurt with that statistic, a lot. 

 

Interestingly, the Devils and the Canadiens, to name only them, were pretty active on the market and pretty much stayed at the same place as they were before. 

 

All in all, the stats only tell a little part of the whole story and next season will show who was the true winner in the process! 

 

Source: https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/one-simple-graph-points-clear-post-season-winners-losers/?ref=David

 

Looks like the Canucks are rated 9th on this list. It's only a Twitter report posted on Hockey Feed, so this should probably be taken with a grain of salt, but I believe it speaks to the great off-season so far by Benning & Co.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i suppose when you score the fewest goals in the league its not that hard to find players that can do better.... but Dallas is pretty interesting. They may have had the biggest changes of any team, and they did it without coughing up a 1st round pick in 2018 like Calgary did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

preds bolts oil blues jackets  flyers sabres    should be way higher  capitals still have decent core they are still  gonna have a good team       but av kings jets bruins wings havent really done much  dont see an improvement leafs got way older as well not sure thats a good trend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the Van fans, the train started rollin' at TDL. Then Boeser came up. Some nice waiver/freebie-signings(eg: Molino). Then a great draft, pretty much unanimously-assessed.

 

Wrap that up with 5 freebie FA's, so we don't rush the youngins'.

 

Don't know how we can measure all that comparatively, but the fanbase sure needed that 4 or 5 month stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Washington had a +84 (!?!?!?) goal differential last year (261GF // 177GA). Even with their alleged -30 drop, if you split that between GF and GA that would still have them at 246GF // 192GA with a +54 goal differential.

 

The Canucks (178GF // 241GA) are expected to improve upon their -63 differential by what looks like 5 goals so we'll split that and call it 180GF // 238 GA for a -58 goal differential.

 

Not that I hold any weight to these strange stats as it doesn't account for team specific situations such as player growth, but what I think we're seeing is just regression to the norm for a (surprise) overachieving regular season Washington team.

 

Don't mean to be a naysayer. I'm quite excited with JB's offseason signings and look forward to seeing the new core develop over the next few seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How come the Leafs are so high?  Didn't they spend a huge Cap dollar on a 37 year old, and for three seasons?  He's only going to make the stay in the middle, and draft terrible.  The Leafs should always be LAST in every way.  IMHAO, of course:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because a graph is clear, doesn't mean it's right. One of the biggest problems is not only goals for, but goals against. A chart like that doesn't seem to address if you picked up say 3 solid defensemen, your goals against could drop. The Canucks will be a lot more competitive if they can cut the goals against per game by just 1 goal every two games. If Carolina is radically improved by Scott Darling and Justin Williams, then I think the methodology is wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This graph underlies the problem with 'analytics' to a certain degree imo - Panarin is a perimeter player who dissappeared in the playoffs and the 'hard' games during the regular season.  Williams will be 36yo when the season starts next year, has a LOT of hard playoff minutes on his aging body in recent years, and is joining a significantly weaker team than he left - he will inevitably decline in production.   How does 'analytics' directly measure these intangibles?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Just because a graph is clear, doesn't mean it's right. One of the biggest problems is not only goals for, but goals against. A chart like that doesn't seem to address if you picked up say 3 solid defensemen, your goals against could drop. The Canucks will be a lot more competitive if they can cut the goals against per game by just 1 goal every two games. If Carolina is radically improved by Scott Darling and Justin Williams, then I think the methodology is wrong. 

GAR actually takes into account goals against. It tracks the expected differential in goals, not just the goals that individual player will score. That is why adding a good goalie can improve your GAR. That goalie obviously isn't adding any goals for, so his GAR is entirely composed of the reduction in goals against. Picking up three solid defensemen WILL improve your teams GAR, and it will be shown on a chart like this. 

 

It definitely isn't a perfect system, but it is getting there slowly. Baseball has narrowed it down to an extremely accurate number, which shows that it is at least somewhat possible to improve it significantly if you fiddle with the formula enough (albeit in another sport with a lot less variables).  

 

I wonder how much of Carolina's increase was actually getting RID of Lack. For a while there he had the lowest save percentage of any goalie playing last year. He must have had a terrible GAR, even playing backup minutes. Dropping him might have increased their numbers more than adding the other two. I hope Eddie bounces back, I like that guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sygvard said:

GAR actually takes into account goals against. It tracks the expected differential in goals, not just the goals that individual player will score. That is why adding a good goalie can improve your GAR. That goalie obviously isn't adding any goals for, so his GAR is entirely composed of the reduction in goals against. Picking up three solid defensemen WILL improve your teams GAR, and it will be shown on a chart like this. 

 

It definitely isn't a perfect system, but it is getting there slowly. Baseball has narrowed it down to an extremely accurate number, which shows that it is at least somewhat possible to improve it significantly if you fiddle with the formula enough (albeit in another sport with a lot less variables).  

 

I wonder how much of Carolina's increase was actually getting RID of Lack. For a while there he had the lowest save percentage of any goalie playing last year. He must have had a terrible GAR, even playing backup minutes. Dropping him might have increased their numbers more than adding the other two. I hope Eddie bounces back, I like that guy. 

 

I don't think we can ever see the same kind of accuracy on an individual basis in hockey like they have in baseball. Its very easy to evaluate individual performance in baseball, even when guys move from team to team if they stay in the same league they usually perform in a similar way. But in hockey we see players move from team to team or even to different lines with big swings in their performance. I don't see how the current approach to stats in the NHL can account for that kind of thing, at least not yet.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

 

Looks like the Canucks are rated 9th on this list. It's only a Twitter report posted on Hockey Feed, so this should probably be taken with a grain of salt, but I believe it speaks to the great off-season so far by Benning & Co.

 

Thoughts?

Only on Hockey Feed?  The Leafs are 3rd on the list so it's a matter of time before Sportsnet and/or TSN pick up on it.  Before they post it they'll have to tweak the analytics so that the Leafs are bumped up a spot or 2 while the Canucks dip down 20 or so spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats are interesting but can be used to make something you want to see look like that is happening - right?   In this case, seems like a reach to read too much into it unless your team was grossly out of whack with the zero line - in other words it likely only really matters to a few teams and, like most of such items, the Leafs are definitely near the top (lol).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...