(For those unfamiliar with the metric a player is awarded a chance anytime someone on the ice has a chance to score. He is awarded with a “chance for” if someone on his team has a chance and awarded with a “chance against” if someone on the opposing team has a chance to score. The results are broken down into three game states, EV (even strength), PP (Power Play) and SH (Short-Handed). The players are all organized according to their jersey numbers.)
Games One to Sixty-Eight, October 12 to March 14
Missing Games 22 at St. Louis, 33 at Vancouver and 40 vs San Jose
21=Potulny and *21=Kotalik
Thanks again to Coach for helping things look a tad more professional and making things a whole lot easier to read. Thanks also goes to Dennis for being the Boxer of the Oilogosphere. Work harder man! I may go back and edit the charts into my other posts since I still have them all on hand.
14 comments:
Yet another underlying stat pointing the right way for the fattest, laziest, worst signing of all time, my man Penner. Are there any underliers that point negative outside of zone shift?
Also, those Gagner numbers are pretty impressive.
Given Cogliano's numbers, how badly is he being pulled down by Moreau?
Moreau stinks - these numbers are brutal.
I may go back and edit the charts into my other posts since I still have them all on hand.
I should have suggested this sooner. Now I have to re-read those entries!
Yeah Coach, Penner does look really good with scoring chances. The only potential negative for Penner is that he is on a short leash so whenever MacT perceives him to be playing poorly he yanks him. I don't doubt that sometimes he really is playing poorly when he gets yanked so it prevents him from racking up many big minuses.
Cogliano had his worst ten game segment of the season playing with Moreau (the last one) so he's getting dragged down some I would say.
But if he's playing poorly and gets the yank, that means he doesn't have a chance to play well, right? :)
I think trying to get into that detail is going to be a bit presumptuous.
It's just one more number that points to him being a very good player.
Vishnovsky's numbers are pretty amazing as well.
The last two posts are really good info, thanks Scott.
Discouraging to see Hemsky slip into the negative at EV SC. He's supposed to be one of the positive drivers on this club, and his game has been heading south since the All-Star Game for (at least) the second year in a row. He was +19 for EV SC at the time I did the SC/TOI summary over at MC79 during the ASB; since then he's -20.
Among regulars, only Visnovsky (+51), Grebs (+33), Penner (+28) and Nilsson (+2) have held their heads above water by this metric. Yet somehow the team continues to outscore the bad guys at evens. Is that all 1) goaltending? 2) rattling dice? 3) confirmation that scoring chances, like shots, are not created equal?
Cogliano had his worst ten game segment of the season playing with Moreau (the last one) so he's getting dragged down some I would say.
Scott: Have you been tracking players by ten game segments? I think that would be really interesting info. Care to post it after, say, Game 70?
Oops, pardon me, I missed Gagner at +27, which is a very ENcouraging number.
Bruce,
With regard to the metric I think Dennis himself said that it tracks most closely to Corsi since the shots just need to be directed at net rather than necessarily result in a goal or save. It's intuitive that some scoring chances will be of higher quality than others so there is some of your first point in there. The last time I checked the Oilers had been getting very good EV goaltending from Roloson since the ASB and there's probably some luck mixed in as well. Some mixture of all three of your points I think.
As for the game segments, I've broken them into ten game segments on the blog. The next segment will come up in three more games. To get the old ones just hit the scoring chances tab and they should all come up.
Some mixture of all three of your points I think.
Agreed. The truth is most often found somewhere in the middle.
As for the game segments, I've broken them into ten game segments on the blog.
Look at that, so they are! *blushes* Obviously I have some catching up to do.
Is there any one place where you have all the segments summarized in one place? Your newfound spreadsheet posting skills might come in handy here. To me even strength is by far the most interesting one; if there was some way of posting a summary where a given cell contains GP, SC+/SC- for each player for each segment would be wonderful. But that may be a pile o' work. As it stands, I can scan through your previous thread to look for trends.
Thanks for all your work here, Scott, both you and Dennis.
The first shot is ES Chances per 15 minutes differential. It would be nice to start to correlate this to zoneshift at some point later. Over at LT's joint, Traktor is always on about 18 dragging 13 down. I think he's onto something.
The two whipping boys acquit themselves really nicely and Gagner looks extremely solid, though he has the benefit of never starting in his own zone. Considering the OZone to Dzone ratio that Horcoff is taking, I think his chances numbers are stellar, and Brodziak isn't too far behind.
Peckham didn't do so hot in his time here.
At the bottom are two throwaways, Potulny and Schremp. Interesting numbers even with extremely limited sample size.
Next up is PP Chances per 4 minutes. Unsurprisingly to most of the 'sphere, Penner is leading the team in this category. What is obvious to the eye is backed by the numbers -- Penner makes the power play better.
I threw Pouliot in there just as a comp for 12, 13 and 89.
Lastly is SH Chances Against per 4 minutes. The bulk of the PK is up top, the passengers are at the bottom. How does Pouliot only garner 11 minutes of time this year, and Pisani and Horcoff are half the men they used to be. In fact, all of those guys fell off of a cliff - is it an entire personnel group or the system/coach?
Overall, the scoring chances bode well for Penner and Gagner and Moreau and Staios look pretty terrible. Vishnovsky is amazing.
Lastly is Here is the raw data.
***There may be some minor errors due to transposition and the like.
Outstanding stuff, Coach. This is the same sort of data I have taken some trouble to sort out at two intervals during the season, so I know how much work went into it. I like your methodology, and your units of per 15 and per 4 approximates the amount of per game ice time a first unit player is apt to see in a typical game. The main thing is that the "per" unit is standardized so that all the players' numbers are relative to the same standard and therefore, each other. Whether the "norm" is 2.xxx or 30.xx is of secondary importance as to who's at what end of the list.
It is extremely curious to note the "passengers" on the PK unit have a much better record, both individually and as a group, then the regulars. Fully 5 part-timers have a better rating than the top regular. How can this be??!!
Bruce, I'm doing the easy work on the backs of Dennis and Scott.
You're exactly right on the 15 mins of ES and 4 for ST as those are the per game units that a top end player will get during the course of a game. There is some juicy info in there.
As to the "other" penalty killers, my initial guess was based around qualcomp, but Desjardins doesn't support that. So I'm going to go with collectively small sample size.
Thanks for doing all of that Coach. Factoring in the ice time is always good. Schremp's numbers are interesting but they're also heavily influenced by the one kicking he took in San Jose so it's not as bad as it seems.
The PP and PK stats are going to be kind of wonky. At least some of the year the 5v3's were all included which means that Souray, Staios and Horcoff especially will have deflated stats on the PK and probably Gilbert and Brodziak as well to a lesser extent. The same thing goes with the PP where I'd imagine it's the first unit guys getting the cherry time.
The only things we need added to that are some BTN compliments; qual comp, opp and the pure Plus/minus.
Early on, though, it seems like 12 and 89 have had some bad luck and the same for 26. And it looks like the contracts for 18-24-34 are as bad as we thought they were/
Post a Comment