2016-17 Centennial Leafs General Team Discussion

[herman]

I like GF% better than possession, too.

Why?

 

[TBLeafer]

I like GF% better than possession, too.

Why?

Because I find it a more quantifiable comparable, directly attributable to win%, followed closely by SCF% and thirdly CF% and FF%. They all relate to each other fairly closely, though. 

 

[herman]

Because I find it a more quantifiable comparable, directly attributable to win%, followed closely by SCF% and thirdly CF% and FF%. They all relate to each other fairly closely, though.

Of course GF% relates to Win%, because GF% counts goals for vs goals against. It is essentially a glorified +/- for 5v5. It is a descriptive stat, and does not predict future performance and is highly susceptible to luck effects.

Predictive stats rely on larger samples of data that are relatively consistent over several seasons.

 

[bustaheims]

Or they don't find anything that ends up being to their liking and they end up keeping JVR around for 5 or 6 more years...

Considering all the factors that surround keeping JvR past his current contract, I'd say that's the 2nd least likely of all the possible options - coming in just ahead of letting him walk for nothing as a UFA.

 

[Frank E]

Or they don't find anything that ends up being to their liking and they end up keeping JVR around for 5 or 6 more years...

Considering all the factors that surround keeping JvR past his current contract, I'd say that's the 2nd least likely of all the possible options - coming in just ahead of letting him walk for nothing as a UFA.

Isn't the only other option trading him?

 

[TBLeafer]

Because I find it a more quantifiable comparable, directly attributable to win%, followed closely by SCF% and thirdly CF% and FF%. They all relate to each other fairly closely, though.

Of course GF% relates to Win%, because GF% counts goals for vs goals against. It is essentially a glorified +/- for 5v5. It is a descriptive stat, and does not predict future performance and is highly susceptible to luck effects.

Predictive stats rely on larger samples of data that are relatively consistent over several seasons.

Well not Overall GF%, just ESGF%.  Specifically for me, when 'predicting' the long term sustainability of a defenceman as it relates to helping the team win, I first look at their all situations GF%.  How many overall goals is the team scoring vs allowing when that defence is on the ice.  Then I go to how many scoring chances is the team getting vs giving up when he is on the ice.  Thirdly I look at Corsi and Fenwick.  Why?  because their primary function is preventing goals, not scoring them.

I do the opposite for forwards, because the main job of a forward line is to drive offensive possession. Different parameters for different positions. So the argument of the Leafs will be a worse team because JVR has a better possession rating than Tanev, doesn't immediately hold water for me, without considering other variables.

 

[bustaheims]

Isn't the only other option trading him?

Sure, but, there's a lot of different options as to when they'll focus on trading him. This deadline? The 2017 draft? The 2018 deadline? His UFA rights at the 2018 draft? All are viable options.

 

[TBLeafer]

Or they don't find anything that ends up being to their liking and they end up keeping JVR around for 5 or 6 more years...

Considering all the factors that surround keeping JvR past his current contract, I'd say that's the 2nd least likely of all the possible options - coming in just ahead of letting him walk for nothing as a UFA.

Isn't the only other option trading him?

No.  But I can't see them waiving him. 

 

[Kin]

How many overall goals is the team scoring vs allowing when that defence is on the ice.

I'm pretty sure that's the exact definition of +/-

 

[TBLeafer]

.  How many overall goals is the team scoring vs allowing when that defence is on the ice.  Then I go to how many scoring chances is the team getting vs giving up when he is on the ice.

I'm pretty sure that's the exact definition of +/-

Not exactly.  +/- is ES + 1 or 2 man disadvantage goals for or ES + 1 or 2 man advantage goals against.

 

[Kin]

Not exactly.  +/- is ES + 1 or 2 man disadvantage goals for or ES + 1 or 2 man advantage goals against.

Right, so it's +/- but without shorthanded goals. Which, given the relative scarcity of shorthanded goals, is really just +/-.

 

[TBLeafer]

Not exactly.  +/- is ES + 1 or 2 man disadvantage goals for or ES + 1 or 2 man advantage goals against.

Right, so it's +/- but without shorthanded goals. Which, given the relative scarcity of shorthanded goals, is really just +/-.

Only if you're talking ESGF%.  GF% to me, means all situations including the PP does it not, or is that known as ASGF%? If so, ASGF% is what I'm talking about.

 

[herman]

Not exactly.  +/- is ES + 1 or 2 man disadvantage goals for or ES + 1 or 2 man advantage goals against.

Right, so it's +/- but without shorthanded goals. Which, given the relative scarcity of shorthanded goals, is really just +/-.

Only if you're talking ESGF%.  GF% to me, means all situations including the PP does it not, or is that known as ASGF%? If so, ASGF% is what I'm talking about.

All situations +/- is still +/-.

 

[bustaheims]

All situations +/- is still +/-.

It's actually even less valuable. Numbers will be skewed for guys with heavy PP time but low PK time, or vice versa. It's completely devoid of context. At least +/- is even-strength focused.

 

[TBLeafer]

Not exactly.  +/- is ES + 1 or 2 man disadvantage goals for or ES + 1 or 2 man advantage goals against.

Right, so it's +/- but without shorthanded goals. Which, given the relative scarcity of shorthanded goals, is really just +/-.

Only if you're talking ESGF%.  GF% to me, means all situations including the PP does it not, or is that known as ASGF%? If so, ASGF% is what I'm talking about.

All situations +/- is still +/-.

Lol and all situations shot attempts are still shot attempts.

 

[TBLeafer]

All situations +/- is still +/-.

It's actually even less valuable. Numbers will be skewed for guys with heavy PP time but low PK time, or vice versa. It's completely devoid of context. At least +/- is even-strength focused.

Or you can just look at that PP time as a perk for a player who can score to begin with.

 

[herman]

The whole point of analytics is to examine the game beyond counting goals, because the difference between a shot going in or staying out is such a luck-driven event that the picture of a player or team are too skewed to be accurate in the long run. Relying on a stat that is just counting goals with a percentage symbol is not a very accurate measure of a player or team's actual capabilities and worth.

 

[TBLeafer]

The whole point of analytics is to examine the game beyond counting goals, because the difference between a shot going in or staying out is such a luck-driven event that the picture of a player or team are too skewed to be accurate in the long run. Relying on a stat that is just counting goals with a percentage symbol is not a very accurate measure of a player or team's actual capabilities and worth.

My point is that I hold forwards and defence to different standards relative to their position.

 

[Rebel_1812]

Following the NHL would probably be boring if teams did what we fans think is logical all the time, so you could be right.

I was trying to figure out which teams that are in the mix this year that might be looking to inject some scoring on the wing...I thought maybe our old buddy Anaheim for one of their studs.

LA looks to need some scoring help there too, and some people seem to like Jake Muzzin...27 years old and $4 mil cap hit until he's 30.  San Jose is another one that probably only has a few years left with the current bunch, and could use a little scoring, but I have no idea what kind of d-man they'd have that's interesting.

Nik mentioned this a few times in the actual Armchair GM thread, that because of the market set by Hall-Larsson, getting good value in a JvR for defenseman trade will be slim pickings (one team was already burned pretty good trading away JvR for a defenseman). Seems more likely we will get prospects/picks that we can then turn around into something else.

Anaheim has some attractive pieces with an aging core still in contention (and their coach is familiar with JvR, who sort of thrived in his system). Nashville is another, as is Minnesota (less compelling). Maybe Philly tires of semi-regular healthy scratch Gostisbehere (typed this out first try, no lie), or St. Louis does a U-turn and extends Shattenkirk to trade Parayko like a crazy team...

Thats the thing.  If the return will be similar or worse to what the Leafs got for Kessel or Phaneuf; then it isn't worthwhile.  30 goal scorers don't grow on trees.  It would be better to keep him then to ship him out for a draft picks and prospects.

 

[sneakyray]

Why is the hall larsson trade setting the market?  Why cant jones johanson set the market.  A much better hockey trade.