One of the long-running problems with the Montreal Canadiens is the franchise's impossible association with its past. 24 championships from a time where championships were easier to come by has come again and again to haunt the organization throughout.
Not least among the component problems there is that players once part of such championships take on the belief that championships are easy, and if everyone would just take their advice, they'd tell the team how to get back at multi-year runs. I'm not sure if that comes from honest belief or verbal diarrhea, but whatever it is, RDS's fatal requirement for 12 daily hours of hockey commentary leads the conversation to places that are not useful for the current group of players trying to deal with games every other day.
Showing posts with label goals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label goals. Show all posts
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Lion of December
The Real Player of the Month
It won't necessarily be pretty, but they'll be handing out the returning Canadiens the player of the month award tonight at the Bell Centre. If the team stays true to fan voting, then it could be close. I can't find the total ballots as I did last season (maybe the team is trying to conceal the fact that only 200 people vote a game), but based on fan stars, Price (on a so-so season for him) will continue the sweep.
The fans chose Price first star twice, second star once and third star twice over his 13 starts. Next best was Erik Cole who got three seconds and a third. The NHL version of events has Price with his two first, but a less generous one third to go with. Cole on the other hand got a first star nod from the experts and three seconds. By conventional scoring Cole wins media.
It's always hard to choose the best player over a bad month. The Habs this month turned 14 games into 11 points by going 4-7-3. This meant even with the serious bias of Canadiens fans, they still only awarded stars to 25 of a possible 42 recipients.
I think this month was poor enough that consideration should also be given to those players who played well in losing efforts as well as wins. Thus we look to other elements.
This should be painful: Lion of the Month.
Cole
Let's start with conventional stats. He scored 9 goals in 14 games. He assisted on 4 others. He scored those goals in 9 different games, so it's not like we're overvaluing the Ottawa game here.
In terms of goals created, we assessed that Cole created 6.00 goals on his own. This may not sound like much, but consider that means we think he is responsible for 1/6th of the offensive output for the whole team over a month. Noting that he could only ever be 1/6th of the team on at most goalscoring times, even if he played every minute. Exceptional, in other words. He's doing things on and off the puck to make his line a threat most of the time.
Cole was on the ice for 99 chances in December, including 29 of his own. Both clear highs for a forward on the team. Is it sustainable? Perhaps not the goal completion rate, but for the rest he's shown it's just part of the way he plays -- I'd say yes.
Price
If you look purely on the dome/no dome dichotomy Price did enough to win this nod. I wonder though, did he just do enough enough times, however?
We awarded him the player of the game 4 time in his 13 starts. In those games, Price had a 2-1-1 record with a 1.97 GAA and a 0.935 SV%. Good, but the best in the league post this as their average performance. The flip side were his other 9 games where he was 2-5-2 with a 3.19 GAA and an 0.897 SV%.
It's always hard to fault a goalie and often we give the benefit of the doubt to the player in the last line of defence who has been left to fend for himself. Witness 8 domes for that record in 9 games above. Yet, averages are informative because they help us to spot trends and importantly start to compare against other goalies or past performance.
A crude measure of shot quality is shot location. As you know, Olivier of En Attendant les Nordiques goes far to track this aspect with his scoring chance data. When we filter out missed shots we get high quality shots (or at least shots from high quality locations). This year, I have been doing this and finding that of the shots Price faces, about 42% are of this higher quality. Unfortunately I didn't do this last season, but going on the proportion of missed shots that make the scoring chance record this season (76%), this number is up from last season when he was facing about 36% shots from quality areas. All last season, he'd have been saving about 79% of these shots, identical to this December as it happens.
So, to be absolutely fair to Carey, the evidence is mounting that the Habs have been hanging out to dry.
Diaz
A bit of an honourable mention, perhaps. Diaz, 20-odd games into an NHL career has had a month of great growth actually.
Diaz claimed 6 domes from a possible 12, and tied for the most of any defenceman. We do recall that sometimes this was for not being totally awful, but that is on a par with Price, isn't it?
What specifically drew my eye to Diaz were a few little stats. +2 - Diaz has been rather stingy at ES, a team-leading 1.71. This may be due in part to Carey's heroism or luck when he's been on, but it still stands out. As does his ability to keep chances on net off target (misses or blocks) more than others.
He's also been a big cog on the still putrid (but improving PP). The Habs scored 9 PP goals in December on 55ish PPs. It's not a good percentage, but it's better than before. Diaz's increasing comfort at the point is part of that. It's a shame he can't score, but he does have 6.18 Pts/60 for December, a team high. While he was on, the team scored 9.27 goals per 60 minutes of time as well (or about double the team rate), which was also a team high. Obviously one can't do this conversion and take it seriously, but for fun, this goal rate might convert to a 27.8% efficiency rating (based on an avg PP length of 1:48, or 9 minutes over 5 PPs to score 1 goal).
Lion of November: Erik Cole
Diaz wasn't really in the league of the other two, but that speaks volumes about the team as a whole, doesn't it?
I give the nod to Erik Cole. Price had a good month, but you'd always want to add the words "considering the circumstances" after that statement. Cole just had a good month, even an exceptional one. While team tightening and sways in luck will see this future battle likely go to Price as it did in November, one can't just ignore 9 important goals.
As I've aid, this month's battle was a huge disappointment. Diaz, the legitimate #3 is nowhere near vying for this honour. The two realistic contenders are the same two as November. One must start asking where the rest of the team is.
Cole has very good been individually, but his ability to lead or stir his teammates must come next. Desharnais is producing more than he should/would, but Cole has to be used to somehow now re-infect Plekanec, Pacioretty, Kostitsyn, Cammalleri, Eller, Darche, Moen and eventually Gionta to be something better than average at peak performance.
It's a lot to ask of the free agent Hab, but he'll be doing it for himself. That's because if he wants playoff hockey over this contract, the Habs current group with some fire look the better bet than his old mates in Carolina.
The fans chose Price first star twice, second star once and third star twice over his 13 starts. Next best was Erik Cole who got three seconds and a third. The NHL version of events has Price with his two first, but a less generous one third to go with. Cole on the other hand got a first star nod from the experts and three seconds. By conventional scoring Cole wins media.
It's always hard to choose the best player over a bad month. The Habs this month turned 14 games into 11 points by going 4-7-3. This meant even with the serious bias of Canadiens fans, they still only awarded stars to 25 of a possible 42 recipients.
I think this month was poor enough that consideration should also be given to those players who played well in losing efforts as well as wins. Thus we look to other elements.
This should be painful: Lion of the Month.
Cole
Let's start with conventional stats. He scored 9 goals in 14 games. He assisted on 4 others. He scored those goals in 9 different games, so it's not like we're overvaluing the Ottawa game here.
In terms of goals created, we assessed that Cole created 6.00 goals on his own. This may not sound like much, but consider that means we think he is responsible for 1/6th of the offensive output for the whole team over a month. Noting that he could only ever be 1/6th of the team on at most goalscoring times, even if he played every minute. Exceptional, in other words. He's doing things on and off the puck to make his line a threat most of the time.
Cole was on the ice for 99 chances in December, including 29 of his own. Both clear highs for a forward on the team. Is it sustainable? Perhaps not the goal completion rate, but for the rest he's shown it's just part of the way he plays -- I'd say yes.
Price
If you look purely on the dome/no dome dichotomy Price did enough to win this nod. I wonder though, did he just do enough enough times, however?
We awarded him the player of the game 4 time in his 13 starts. In those games, Price had a 2-1-1 record with a 1.97 GAA and a 0.935 SV%. Good, but the best in the league post this as their average performance. The flip side were his other 9 games where he was 2-5-2 with a 3.19 GAA and an 0.897 SV%.
It's always hard to fault a goalie and often we give the benefit of the doubt to the player in the last line of defence who has been left to fend for himself. Witness 8 domes for that record in 9 games above. Yet, averages are informative because they help us to spot trends and importantly start to compare against other goalies or past performance.
A crude measure of shot quality is shot location. As you know, Olivier of En Attendant les Nordiques goes far to track this aspect with his scoring chance data. When we filter out missed shots we get high quality shots (or at least shots from high quality locations). This year, I have been doing this and finding that of the shots Price faces, about 42% are of this higher quality. Unfortunately I didn't do this last season, but going on the proportion of missed shots that make the scoring chance record this season (76%), this number is up from last season when he was facing about 36% shots from quality areas. All last season, he'd have been saving about 79% of these shots, identical to this December as it happens.
So, to be absolutely fair to Carey, the evidence is mounting that the Habs have been hanging out to dry.
Diaz
A bit of an honourable mention, perhaps. Diaz, 20-odd games into an NHL career has had a month of great growth actually.
Diaz claimed 6 domes from a possible 12, and tied for the most of any defenceman. We do recall that sometimes this was for not being totally awful, but that is on a par with Price, isn't it?
What specifically drew my eye to Diaz were a few little stats. +2 - Diaz has been rather stingy at ES, a team-leading 1.71. This may be due in part to Carey's heroism or luck when he's been on, but it still stands out. As does his ability to keep chances on net off target (misses or blocks) more than others.
He's also been a big cog on the still putrid (but improving PP). The Habs scored 9 PP goals in December on 55ish PPs. It's not a good percentage, but it's better than before. Diaz's increasing comfort at the point is part of that. It's a shame he can't score, but he does have 6.18 Pts/60 for December, a team high. While he was on, the team scored 9.27 goals per 60 minutes of time as well (or about double the team rate), which was also a team high. Obviously one can't do this conversion and take it seriously, but for fun, this goal rate might convert to a 27.8% efficiency rating (based on an avg PP length of 1:48, or 9 minutes over 5 PPs to score 1 goal).
Lion of November: Erik Cole
Diaz wasn't really in the league of the other two, but that speaks volumes about the team as a whole, doesn't it?
I give the nod to Erik Cole. Price had a good month, but you'd always want to add the words "considering the circumstances" after that statement. Cole just had a good month, even an exceptional one. While team tightening and sways in luck will see this future battle likely go to Price as it did in November, one can't just ignore 9 important goals.
As I've aid, this month's battle was a huge disappointment. Diaz, the legitimate #3 is nowhere near vying for this honour. The two realistic contenders are the same two as November. One must start asking where the rest of the team is.
Cole has very good been individually, but his ability to lead or stir his teammates must come next. Desharnais is producing more than he should/would, but Cole has to be used to somehow now re-infect Plekanec, Pacioretty, Kostitsyn, Cammalleri, Eller, Darche, Moen and eventually Gionta to be something better than average at peak performance.
It's a lot to ask of the free agent Hab, but he'll be doing it for himself. That's because if he wants playoff hockey over this contract, the Habs current group with some fire look the better bet than his old mates in Carolina.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Markov No Saviour, But...
A very good article was posted today by JT at "The H Does Not Stand For Habs" that addresses the issue of expectation in Habsburg (thank Dennis Kane).
The article stresses some important points for us fans who eagerly await the return of Andrei Markov, the primary message that a lot of time off will have caused rust that will take some time to shake. I fully agree, but there's a but isn't there.
The but of course is that the Canadiens have been managing this season on the back line with essentially three rookies and a sophomore. When Gill was out it was three rookies, a sophomore and an AHLer.
All of them have been doing a formidable job considering the circumstances, but Markov rust or not is nearly guaranteed to offer a better option than one or two of that crew (and I think nearly makes that statement very conservative).
It's easy to forget what Andrei Markov does. It's been easy because it's been so long that we've really had our memories jogged. The notion remains that the Habs win more when he is in the line up (which I think used to be true, but not for his most recent half season), but the forgotten bit is why and how.
Did you know for instance that during his last half season (2009-10) Markov was on the ice for 3.89 GF/60, which given his minutes played was well over a goal per game? Only Pacioretty can match that level of prolific production (about the same this year and last) and Markov's closest peer (Subban) as good as he's been has been clipping closer to 2.75 GF/60 the past two years.
That season, where there was rust to be shaken as well (severed tendons), he paced the PP to nearly 10 GF/60 during his half season with the team. Last season, a good PP had several members who fit in the 8 to 9 GF/60 range on the PP (helpful to have a QB like Wisniewski), but this season the highest achievers are punching about 5-6 GF/60.
Markov was involved in 44 goals in 2009-10 in 53 games all told. This on a Canadiens team is forward level offensive contribution.
While I think there will be rust for Markov, I think it will affect certain areas of his game more than others.
Defensive coverage? I'm not really looking forward to seeing him paired against the top lines right away.
Skating? I'd be surprised if a few hearty practices bring his legs to full game shape.
But knowing when to send a pass across the middle to an open Cammalleri? Or not employing a pump fake and 180 degree wind up for every PP manoeuvre? Andrei's ability to make crisp cross zone breakout passes and quick reversals on the PP don't come from his superior skating ability or stickhandling or anything physical. Rather they come from his instincts for the game and his propensity to see a pass before the receiver often does. These instincts are things I'm confident his shaky knees will not affect, these instincts have been trained over many years to reach this expert level.
Oh sure, it won't be first PP, first game. But I don't think we'll have to wait too long to notice the difference in PP danger following Andrei's return.
There's more good news
I've focused on Andrei Markov's offensive contributions on purpose. That's where I believe the rust will affect him least, and that's where I believe his talent is truly unique.
But there's another good reason. Since Markov's extended hiatus began, the Canadiens have built a fairly solid defensive system, manned ably by the defencemen in it and Carey Price. Subban, I'll never get tired of saying, stands out more in the defensive zone than any. Hal Gill has little use anywhere but the defensive zone, but there he uses his talents well. Josh Gorges has grown without Markov and plays like a star in some of his functions.
The Canadiens this year have managed to put together an astounding success on the PK. More than anything this stands out as the team's main strength.
This is good news for the team, of course, but also for Andrei Markov.
IN the old days, Markov played in every situation, PP, ES, PK. He shone in all facets of play, but if there was a weaker point, I might have pointed to PK. The team he steps back onto should allow for him to ease back into his NHL life mostly free from PK for a while, perhaps for a long time, to concentrate on being the link between puck recovery and dangerous breakout. This is no longer a team pretending Mike Komisarek or Sheldon Souray or Mathieu Dandenault can be his partners, this is a team that gives him more licence to explore those offensive instincts.
I don't think Markov will change the season for the Habs in 5 minutes. But I do think he'll change the dynamic of the team significantly within a few games of return.
I think other teams will have to re-evaluate the ways they approach Habs games, and perhaps even the freedom with which they are willing to use illegal play and risk penalty. I think all will benefit from a shift of responsibility to Markov, what each does best in better balance.
I look forward to it.
The article stresses some important points for us fans who eagerly await the return of Andrei Markov, the primary message that a lot of time off will have caused rust that will take some time to shake. I fully agree, but there's a but isn't there.
The but of course is that the Canadiens have been managing this season on the back line with essentially three rookies and a sophomore. When Gill was out it was three rookies, a sophomore and an AHLer.
All of them have been doing a formidable job considering the circumstances, but Markov rust or not is nearly guaranteed to offer a better option than one or two of that crew (and I think nearly makes that statement very conservative).
It's easy to forget what Andrei Markov does. It's been easy because it's been so long that we've really had our memories jogged. The notion remains that the Habs win more when he is in the line up (which I think used to be true, but not for his most recent half season), but the forgotten bit is why and how.
Did you know for instance that during his last half season (2009-10) Markov was on the ice for 3.89 GF/60, which given his minutes played was well over a goal per game? Only Pacioretty can match that level of prolific production (about the same this year and last) and Markov's closest peer (Subban) as good as he's been has been clipping closer to 2.75 GF/60 the past two years.
That season, where there was rust to be shaken as well (severed tendons), he paced the PP to nearly 10 GF/60 during his half season with the team. Last season, a good PP had several members who fit in the 8 to 9 GF/60 range on the PP (helpful to have a QB like Wisniewski), but this season the highest achievers are punching about 5-6 GF/60.
Markov was involved in 44 goals in 2009-10 in 53 games all told. This on a Canadiens team is forward level offensive contribution.
While I think there will be rust for Markov, I think it will affect certain areas of his game more than others.
Defensive coverage? I'm not really looking forward to seeing him paired against the top lines right away.
Skating? I'd be surprised if a few hearty practices bring his legs to full game shape.
But knowing when to send a pass across the middle to an open Cammalleri? Or not employing a pump fake and 180 degree wind up for every PP manoeuvre? Andrei's ability to make crisp cross zone breakout passes and quick reversals on the PP don't come from his superior skating ability or stickhandling or anything physical. Rather they come from his instincts for the game and his propensity to see a pass before the receiver often does. These instincts are things I'm confident his shaky knees will not affect, these instincts have been trained over many years to reach this expert level.
Oh sure, it won't be first PP, first game. But I don't think we'll have to wait too long to notice the difference in PP danger following Andrei's return.
There's more good news
I've focused on Andrei Markov's offensive contributions on purpose. That's where I believe the rust will affect him least, and that's where I believe his talent is truly unique.
But there's another good reason. Since Markov's extended hiatus began, the Canadiens have built a fairly solid defensive system, manned ably by the defencemen in it and Carey Price. Subban, I'll never get tired of saying, stands out more in the defensive zone than any. Hal Gill has little use anywhere but the defensive zone, but there he uses his talents well. Josh Gorges has grown without Markov and plays like a star in some of his functions.
The Canadiens this year have managed to put together an astounding success on the PK. More than anything this stands out as the team's main strength.
This is good news for the team, of course, but also for Andrei Markov.
IN the old days, Markov played in every situation, PP, ES, PK. He shone in all facets of play, but if there was a weaker point, I might have pointed to PK. The team he steps back onto should allow for him to ease back into his NHL life mostly free from PK for a while, perhaps for a long time, to concentrate on being the link between puck recovery and dangerous breakout. This is no longer a team pretending Mike Komisarek or Sheldon Souray or Mathieu Dandenault can be his partners, this is a team that gives him more licence to explore those offensive instincts.
I don't think Markov will change the season for the Habs in 5 minutes. But I do think he'll change the dynamic of the team significantly within a few games of return.
I think other teams will have to re-evaluate the ways they approach Habs games, and perhaps even the freedom with which they are willing to use illegal play and risk penalty. I think all will benefit from a shift of responsibility to Markov, what each does best in better balance.
I look forward to it.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Meet The First Line
They've taken matters into their own hands. If the coaches won't put them on a "scoring line", they're determined to just be the scoring line.
Prior to the season, all the talk was about which of the forwards would miss out on the top 6. One of the top line was consensus out, and the two others were regular candidates in the discussions.
Well they've gone and turned all that on its head by simply playing better than those whose places were deemed to be certain. And because of that, the past two games, Pacioretty-Desharnais-Kostitsyn has been the number one unit called by the coaches at ES and overall. The Captain and his unit have been bumped to third line minutes.
Why has it turned out this way? A very small sample and viewing tells us the following:
Max Pacioretty
Max Pacioretty seems to have the most to prove of anyone this year. At least that's the way he's carrying himself. He's been desperate to create his own space and putting up big effort in the offensive zone. He already leads the team in shots by a country mile (27 to the nearest 19) and has done to the same in chances too (13 to 11).
David Desharnais
He'd never be your choice to shutdown Toews or Getzlaf, but it's hard to deny the guy has a vision for what he'd like to see happen in the offensive zone. He's shifty and importantly has been the center that so far has broken away most from that frustrating behind the net first approach to offence. It's been borne out in the number of chances he's been on the ice for (38). Thus far he's been the beneficiary of Pacioretty's finishing a little bit, but it would be selling him short to not at least acknowledge the fact he's potentiated that.
Andrei Kostitsyn
It's a minor miracle he found his way onto this line given his usage in the first couple of games. He's been a key part of the line the past two games, critical in setting up two of the more spectacular goals. Funny when you watch the goal celebration, being the big brother on the line seems to make Andrei happy.
Chemistry
The unheralded fourth member of the line is the chemistry and understanding these players already seem to have. A shared wavelength on how goals can be made, even with tight defences. A good spot to keep them together to experiment further with how this partnership might go.
These three guys are looking good because they are putting effort into the things that matter. They may not be the first line for very many more games. But recognition is deserved for three guys who have at least allayed the fears of those who wondered if there'd be any goals outside Winnipeg after three games.
Prior to the season, all the talk was about which of the forwards would miss out on the top 6. One of the top line was consensus out, and the two others were regular candidates in the discussions.
Well they've gone and turned all that on its head by simply playing better than those whose places were deemed to be certain. And because of that, the past two games, Pacioretty-Desharnais-Kostitsyn has been the number one unit called by the coaches at ES and overall. The Captain and his unit have been bumped to third line minutes.
Why has it turned out this way? A very small sample and viewing tells us the following:
Max Pacioretty
Max Pacioretty seems to have the most to prove of anyone this year. At least that's the way he's carrying himself. He's been desperate to create his own space and putting up big effort in the offensive zone. He already leads the team in shots by a country mile (27 to the nearest 19) and has done to the same in chances too (13 to 11).
David Desharnais
He'd never be your choice to shutdown Toews or Getzlaf, but it's hard to deny the guy has a vision for what he'd like to see happen in the offensive zone. He's shifty and importantly has been the center that so far has broken away most from that frustrating behind the net first approach to offence. It's been borne out in the number of chances he's been on the ice for (38). Thus far he's been the beneficiary of Pacioretty's finishing a little bit, but it would be selling him short to not at least acknowledge the fact he's potentiated that.
Andrei Kostitsyn
It's a minor miracle he found his way onto this line given his usage in the first couple of games. He's been a key part of the line the past two games, critical in setting up two of the more spectacular goals. Funny when you watch the goal celebration, being the big brother on the line seems to make Andrei happy.
Chemistry
The unheralded fourth member of the line is the chemistry and understanding these players already seem to have. A shared wavelength on how goals can be made, even with tight defences. A good spot to keep them together to experiment further with how this partnership might go.
These three guys are looking good because they are putting effort into the things that matter. They may not be the first line for very many more games. But recognition is deserved for three guys who have at least allayed the fears of those who wondered if there'd be any goals outside Winnipeg after three games.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
The Habs By Numbers
Goals Created
Prior to this season, we at Lions in Winter decided to conduct a little experiment and gather some statistics of our own. As a start, we decided to take on the offensive part of the game and take a deeper look into the value of goals and assists, and to keep a record of how each goal scored by a member of the Canadiens was created over the course of the season.
Midway through the season, we have come up with some interesting results. Interesting enough at this point that we wanted to start sharing them with you.
Goals created
Anyone who has ever tried to argue for the value of an offensive player will know the strengths and weaknesses of goals and assists. Points, and the scoring leaders, give equal value to assists and goals, more frustratingly to second assists and goals.
Having watched my fair share of hockey, I can tell you I've seen second assists that were equally as important or more important than the goalscoring act in creating the open net; however, I think you'd all agree this is the exception rather than the rule. The same applies to first assists, though to a much lesser degree really (as we're finding).
Our desire to paint a clearer picture of goals created was born of this dissatisfaction.
Those of you who follow the new wave in NHL statistics will know that goals created has been tracked and analyzed before this. In most circles, Allan Ryder gets credit for doing the pioneering work on this. Tom Awad, who is now the darling of Behind the Net for his GVT numbers, also uses goals created as a way to discern offensive contribution. Hockey Reference, a more mainstream statistical site, has a column called goals created on its player pages as well.
In deciding how we would proceed with our own project, we did a careful search of the backstory on this statistic. Much of what we found was exactly in line with our own thinking – the reasoning for wanting to record and promote this statistic, for example. But there was a let-down, a gap if you like. All the methods that had been proposed in the past, and indeed, those being used in the present are based on factors. In all cases, these numbers were picked out of the air. Allan Ryder bases his calculations on the assumption that goalscoring is 50% of goal creation, with one or two assists making up the other 50%. Tom Awad has decided that a goal is worth 1.5 times an assist. Hockey reference, like Ryder thinks an assist is half a goal.
All of these assumptions are fine, and the calculations do drive a different list of offensive players to the top. And, since the list seems intuitive (at the top, anyway), the statisticians are pleased with their assumptions.
There are obvious limits to what it can tell you, though; especially in the cases where these calculations are just applied to every goal (unassisted to two assister) equally by using compiled scoring stats across the league. In fact, in these cases, I found that it told me absolutely nothing new. Once I got used to how the factors shuffled goals and assists, I could pick out who was the winner from the scoring leaders simply based on their goal:assist balance. It might as well be called G + 0.5A.
The Lions in Winter Approach
With our grasp on what we liked from the established models and what we didn't like, we took some (indirect) advice from Allan Ryder and began to sort out our new method:
That was the easy part. The next part was the important bit. We needed to create a way to actually break free of the NHL's record to add more data, more richness of information. The way we do it is by scoring the goals individually, by allocating points (an equal amount are available for each goal) to as many players as are involved. Importantly, this is a collaboration, so this isn't just what Topham saw, but what multiple people saw (averaged to give the score).
Now there's an obvious objection to this method: that it's subjective. It's something that can't be denied. But I have some thoughts on that:
1) The NHL already uses subjective statistics (hits, shots, giveaways, etc.) and we're perfectly happy with these, because we can appreciate the value while recognizing their limits.
2) Scientific research quantifies qualitative data like this all the time. Frankly, if it's good enough for the scientific papers I edit for healthcare decision makers, then it's good enough for a fun statistic in hockey.
3) There are many people who want more than goals, assists, PIM to spice up their reading and arguments. The league is already recording most "factual" events (with the notable exception of possession time), and sites like behindthenet.ca are mining just about as much as can be mined. Our goals created adds another category (albeit only for the Habs for now). Those who are satisfied with scoring leaders won't have that taken away from them, they will just have an extra stat to hold up beside that.
In taking things in this direction, we have taken that good advice seriously by losing nothing from what we had already, but have also added richness by capturing how a panel of evaluators thought contributions to each goal were made.
This gives our finding novelty (nobody has done this in this way before) and relevance, in that we are recording what happened, not what the NHL recorded multiplied by an imagined factor.
By products of the LIW approach
Strangely, our method also has something for those who promise to be it's biggest critics. By attaching value to goal contributions we have also accumulated a wealth of data on the average value of a goal and an assist. What's more, because we have recorded the data diligently, we can further sub-divide this by situation and category. So, for those who want to stick with a factor, we will at least be providing a better factor. We couldn't have designed the study much better had we only wanted to look for the value of assists, to be honest.
In addition, our approach can also be translated much more simply. For example, we can see who we rewarded extra assists to on a goal (beyond two) and we can see those assists that were just fluke touches and didn't enter into our contribution tally. We can see how many goals a player made a contribution on, and how many they didn't. We can see how many they were the major force behind a goal and how many times they were bit-part players.
So you see, even if don't believe in the number beside Cammalleri or Plekanec (though be open-minded, you can), you can believe in the value of the data...
Goals created on the Canadiens
Without further ado then, a taster on this data. I promise we will publish more, and do more with this as the season goes on...
Goals created leaders (Games 1-47)
As you can see, Cammalleri is a beast. And this looks less impressive after his mini slump these last few games. He and Plekanec account for 30% of all offensive production together. On game winning goals, they account for 45%. Incredible to think where we'd be without that signing and the accompanied turnaround.
Habs fan contributions
As we've said this is a collaborative project, so we are always open to more collaborators. If you are interested in helping us with ideas or by inputing your assessment of goals, get in touch via liwblog@gmail.com.
Midway through the season, we have come up with some interesting results. Interesting enough at this point that we wanted to start sharing them with you.
Goals created
Anyone who has ever tried to argue for the value of an offensive player will know the strengths and weaknesses of goals and assists. Points, and the scoring leaders, give equal value to assists and goals, more frustratingly to second assists and goals.
Having watched my fair share of hockey, I can tell you I've seen second assists that were equally as important or more important than the goalscoring act in creating the open net; however, I think you'd all agree this is the exception rather than the rule. The same applies to first assists, though to a much lesser degree really (as we're finding).
Our desire to paint a clearer picture of goals created was born of this dissatisfaction.
Those of you who follow the new wave in NHL statistics will know that goals created has been tracked and analyzed before this. In most circles, Allan Ryder gets credit for doing the pioneering work on this. Tom Awad, who is now the darling of Behind the Net for his GVT numbers, also uses goals created as a way to discern offensive contribution. Hockey Reference, a more mainstream statistical site, has a column called goals created on its player pages as well.
In deciding how we would proceed with our own project, we did a careful search of the backstory on this statistic. Much of what we found was exactly in line with our own thinking – the reasoning for wanting to record and promote this statistic, for example. But there was a let-down, a gap if you like. All the methods that had been proposed in the past, and indeed, those being used in the present are based on factors. In all cases, these numbers were picked out of the air. Allan Ryder bases his calculations on the assumption that goalscoring is 50% of goal creation, with one or two assists making up the other 50%. Tom Awad has decided that a goal is worth 1.5 times an assist. Hockey reference, like Ryder thinks an assist is half a goal.
All of these assumptions are fine, and the calculations do drive a different list of offensive players to the top. And, since the list seems intuitive (at the top, anyway), the statisticians are pleased with their assumptions.
There are obvious limits to what it can tell you, though; especially in the cases where these calculations are just applied to every goal (unassisted to two assister) equally by using compiled scoring stats across the league. In fact, in these cases, I found that it told me absolutely nothing new. Once I got used to how the factors shuffled goals and assists, I could pick out who was the winner from the scoring leaders simply based on their goal:assist balance. It might as well be called G + 0.5A.
The Lions in Winter Approach
With our grasp on what we liked from the established models and what we didn't like, we took some (indirect) advice from Allan Ryder and began to sort out our new method:
"A good statistic captures a great deal of data without destroying too much information."The first condition in our new approach is that we would be recording everything about each goal. This included when it was scored, at what strength, against whom, and who contributed. In addition, we recorded (in parallel) how the NHL scored the goal (number of assists).
That was the easy part. The next part was the important bit. We needed to create a way to actually break free of the NHL's record to add more data, more richness of information. The way we do it is by scoring the goals individually, by allocating points (an equal amount are available for each goal) to as many players as are involved. Importantly, this is a collaboration, so this isn't just what Topham saw, but what multiple people saw (averaged to give the score).
Now there's an obvious objection to this method: that it's subjective. It's something that can't be denied. But I have some thoughts on that:
1) The NHL already uses subjective statistics (hits, shots, giveaways, etc.) and we're perfectly happy with these, because we can appreciate the value while recognizing their limits.
2) Scientific research quantifies qualitative data like this all the time. Frankly, if it's good enough for the scientific papers I edit for healthcare decision makers, then it's good enough for a fun statistic in hockey.
3) There are many people who want more than goals, assists, PIM to spice up their reading and arguments. The league is already recording most "factual" events (with the notable exception of possession time), and sites like behindthenet.ca are mining just about as much as can be mined. Our goals created adds another category (albeit only for the Habs for now). Those who are satisfied with scoring leaders won't have that taken away from them, they will just have an extra stat to hold up beside that.
In taking things in this direction, we have taken that good advice seriously by losing nothing from what we had already, but have also added richness by capturing how a panel of evaluators thought contributions to each goal were made.
This gives our finding novelty (nobody has done this in this way before) and relevance, in that we are recording what happened, not what the NHL recorded multiplied by an imagined factor.
By products of the LIW approach
Strangely, our method also has something for those who promise to be it's biggest critics. By attaching value to goal contributions we have also accumulated a wealth of data on the average value of a goal and an assist. What's more, because we have recorded the data diligently, we can further sub-divide this by situation and category. So, for those who want to stick with a factor, we will at least be providing a better factor. We couldn't have designed the study much better had we only wanted to look for the value of assists, to be honest.
In addition, our approach can also be translated much more simply. For example, we can see who we rewarded extra assists to on a goal (beyond two) and we can see those assists that were just fluke touches and didn't enter into our contribution tally. We can see how many goals a player made a contribution on, and how many they didn't. We can see how many they were the major force behind a goal and how many times they were bit-part players.
So you see, even if don't believe in the number beside Cammalleri or Plekanec (though be open-minded, you can), you can believe in the value of the data...
Goals created on the Canadiens
Without further ado then, a taster on this data. I promise we will publish more, and do more with this as the season goes on...
Goals created leaders (Games 1-47)
| Player | G | A1 | A2 | LIW GC | % team total |
| Cammalleri | 20 | 14 | 3 | 18.4 | 16% |
| Plekanec | 10 | 19 | 17 | 15.8 | 14% |
| Gomez | 6 | 15 | 9 | 11.7 | 10% |
| A Kostitsyn | 12 | 9 | 4 | 10.6 | 9% |
| Bergeron | 10 | 4 | 9 | 8.6 | 8% |
| Metropolit | 10 | 5 | 5 | 7.1 | 6% |
| Gionta | 10 | 3 | 5 | 7.0 | 6% |
| Hamrlik | 5 | 8 | 3 | 5.1 | 4% |
| Moen | 7 | 1 | 2 | 4.5 | 4% |
| Markov | 3 | 6 | 4 | 4.5 | 4% |
As you can see, Cammalleri is a beast. And this looks less impressive after his mini slump these last few games. He and Plekanec account for 30% of all offensive production together. On game winning goals, they account for 45%. Incredible to think where we'd be without that signing and the accompanied turnaround.
Habs fan contributions
As we've said this is a collaborative project, so we are always open to more collaborators. If you are interested in helping us with ideas or by inputing your assessment of goals, get in touch via liwblog@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)