Well thanks... It's not going to happen now.What if Andersen plays the 3rd game and gets a shut out?
Well thanks... It's not going to happen now.What if Andersen plays the 3rd game and gets a shut out?
Maintenance dayMedical report:
No William Nylander at practice
Has to wash his hair. LOL. Sorry, I'm not a Nylander hater but couldn't help myself.Maintenance day
That's legit.Has to wash his hair.
Well, lookie here. Andersen in. That's step 1.Well thanks... It's not going to happen now.
Plus/minus can useful but it can explained easily if it's good or bad, it can be misleading...such as Hyman having a higher rating than Connor McDavid.I know many people think +/- is crap.
It's not advanced stats but I think with a large enough sample size and under some context it gives a good indication of who some of the more effective players are at even strength.
Marner +18
Hyman +12
Matthews +10
Brodie +10
Muzzin +9
Last is Vesey -4
McD is +3
Draisaltl is +13
I'm not a huge fan of +/-, comparing players from Team A to players with Team B.Plus/minus can useful but it can explained easily if it's good or bad, it can be misleading...such as Hyman having a higher rating than Connor McDavid.
If only there was a stat to show who works hard and who is lazy...you need an observational evaluation for that.
...and I can explain that...McDavid play's against the other teams best players but more importantly he can't stop pucks.That tells you opponents score plenty of goals when McD is on the ice at even strength as well.
I'm aware of CORSI... but again if relies on players you play with and doesn't take into account who you play against...I'm not a huge fan of +/-, comparing players from Team A to players with Team B.
Players on stronger teams are more likely to have a better +/- than on lesser clubs.
Comparing +/- between teammates can be interesting, but you have to factor in strength of competition.
Which opponents does Player A spend most of his time on the ice vs., and Player B faces who?
There are statistics that show possession numbers for individual players. 'CORSI For'
As in, when Player A is on the ice, his club possesses the puck 54% of the time, Player B, 49%.
Generally speaking, when your team possesses the puck more, you're more likely to score than the opposition.
Example:
AM34, his CORSI For % at even strength is 50.8%, (anything above 50% is good,) career is 52.5%
CM97, his CORSI For % at even strength is 55.5%, career is 52.1%
JV26, his CORSI For % at even strength is 46.7%, career is 46.2%
TE63, his CORSI For % at even strength is 43.6%, career is 46.1%
There are other statistics as well that can show expected goals for/expected goals against.
The eyeball test has value, but so do statistics.
How awesome would that be. That would be a first for the analytic team.What if Andersen plays the 3rd game and gets a shut out?
I don't know what you're trying to say...Of course. Which part of +/- is not advanced stat did you miss?
The point of sample size as well is the larger the sample size the more it becomes less about anything else and more about the player.
I rephrsed the question and made it into a statement.I don't know what you're trying to say...
A larger sample size minimizes how much external variables will affect the individual's stats, the numbers will find a medium. If he plays a short stretch, the player is in a slump, his line isn't clicking, they've played a string of top teams, it will skew the numbers super negatively and not reflect the long term overall performance of the player.I don't know what you're trying to say...
McDavid gets a minus when his team gets scored on and they have shitty goaltending, it happens a lot...Marner plays against the other teams best players as well and he also is not a goalie so what's your point?