• Big Oilers Data IV

    by Tyler Dellow • May 2, 2013 • Hockey • 35 Comments

    This is part of a series looking for reasons for the Oilers Corsi% collapse in 2012-13 by examining things on a shift-by-shift basis. Part 1 can be found here. Part 2 can be found here. Part 3 can be found here.

    I want to provide a bit of a roadmap as far as where I’m going from here. This is the fourth in a series of posts trying to obtain some insight into what went wrong with the Oilers this year by examining their play on a shift-by-shift basis. To date, I have looked at Shot Attempts Against (SAA) for both forwards and defencemen and examined Shots Attempts For (SAF) for defencemen. This post is going to get into SAF for forwards.

    The three preceding posts and this one have been an attempt to kind of gain some high level perspective on this stuff as it pertains to the Edmonton Oilers of the last two years and sort of isolate some things as far as where things changed last year. To get beyond “Well, the Corsi went in the tank” or “They need to get bigger.” To me, talking about solutions before we’re entirely sure why things went so bad is kind of missing a link in the chain. From here, I expect to try and put some numbers on the changes that I’ve isolated in terms of their impact and explore a few other issues before moving into asking, in more detail, why these things might have occurred.

    This post is, in my opinion, the most interesting of the four to date because there are some really startling changes in the numbers for a few key people. With that said, let’s get into the numbers. Up first, I’ll look at the percentage of shifts on which Oilers forwards got at least one SAF. There are 14 forwards who played at least 100 shifts in 2011-12 and 2012-13 and I’ve sorted them from the biggest increase in the rate of shifts with at least one SAF to the biggest decrease.

    As I referenced in the previous thread, the spreads in 2011-12 and 2012-13, from best to worst, are a lot larger than they are with the Oilers defencemen. The inference that I draw from that is that the forwards tend to drive this more than the defencemen do.

    The guys listed in this first graph didn’t do too badly in 2012-13 relative to 2011-12. Hall/Eberle/RNH all saw their rate of shifts with at least one SAF increase, as did Lander, albeit in a pretty small sample. Paajarvi, Gagner and Petrell all experienced declines, but they were pretty small – 1.7 percentage points to 1.9 percentage points. Let’s put that into some context. Sam Gagner played 919 5v5 shifts in 2012-13. The Oilers had a SAF on 373 of them. If he’d achieved an SAF at the same rate that he did last year, they would have recorded an SAF on 390 of them. Difference of 17 shifts with an SAF, or about one every 2.76 games. It’s not nothing but I don’t know that it’s the sort of thing that the naked eye would catch.

    Let’s move on to the more significant decreases in this metric amongst returnees.

    There’s kind of three groups that emerge here: Eager (-3.0 percentage points) and Hemsky (-3.7), Jones (-4.4), Hartikainen (-4.7) and Horcoff (-5.0) and then Smyth (-6.3) and Belanger (-7!).

    A little bit of perspective is needed here, I think. First of all, Hemsky’s number, although down, is still not that bad. He led the forwards by this metric last season and was fifth this season (Hall, Eberle, RNH, Gagner, Hemsky). The decline is troubling but, on an absolute level, he still wasn’t that bad. It’s still like he basically had one shift every game and a half in which he had an SAF evaporate though.

    Belanger’s decline is just astonishing. He averaged 16.7 5v5 shifts a night this year. If he was experiencing shifts with at least one SAF as frequently as he did last year, he’d have had 165 shifts with an SAF. Instead, he had 134 shifts with an SAF – he had more than one of those shifts per night disappear from his game. Sadly for him, it seems unlikely that he’ll get to be part of that third year that had Steve Tambellini so touched when Belanger told him that he believed int the rebuild. He’ll have to satisfy himself with the fact that he’ll get at least 2/3 of the money owed on that third year. Cold comfort, I’m sure – it was being part of the third year that he really wanted.

    Here are the guys who didn’t play 100 shifts in each year:

    No real surprises there. Amongst the guys who you could imagine being on the roster in the fall, Yak’s respectable relative to his peers and Mike Brown and Jerred Smithson aren’t. Let’s move on and look at the multi-SAF shifts as a percentage of SAF shifts.

    Two things leap out at me in this set of information. First, the players with the best numbers at this aren’t the same as the ones with the best numbers at generating a single SAF. I suspect that this is because we’re kind of cutting out some of the skill that differentiates a player like Taylor Hall from a player like Eric Belanger. By using shifts with an SAF as the denominator in this fraction, we’re looking at situations in which we know that the puck has already been taken into the offensive zone and the defence beaten enough to permit an SAF. The chaos of offence has already sort of triumped over the regimentation of defence. Part of Hall’s genius is that he makes so much offensive chaos; we’re removing that advantage from him when we look at things this way.

    As for the second thing: OH MY GOD what happened to Gagner and Hemsky?!? The changes in this figure from year to year were pretty small for 9/14 players. Lander experienced a big jump (in a small sample), Petrell went from terrible to less terrible and Eager had a very poor year at this. Then you see Gagner, and it’s eye popping and then you see Hemsky and it’s stunning. Put in raw terms, if Hemsky achieved multi-SAF shifts at the same rate he did last year, he would have had 103 of them. Instead he had 68. One shift per game that was multi-SAF, turned into a single SAF shift.

    I’m getting ahead of myself here but there’s a significant knock on effect here. The Oilers got out-Corsid 367-466 with Hemsky on the ice this year, which comes out to 44.1% of the Corsis, which is really, really bad. Last year, on shifts on which Hemsky got at least one SAF, 62.3% of the shifts saw one SAF, 26.6% of them saw two SAF, 7.8% saw three SAF, 1.8% saw four SAF and about 1% were five or more SAF. If you were to distribute his shifts on which the Oilers got at least one SAF this year the same way, you end up with 418 SAF, which is of course 418 Corsi For, instead of 367. That alone would move the needle for Hemsky’s Corsi% from 44.1% to 47.3%.

    This is a very specific and curious problem. It’s so large that I tend to think that it’s outside the range of changes that might occur just through chance – as I noted, most of the Oilers who played significant amounts in both 2011-12 and 2012-13 put up numbers that were very similar year over year. I can’t see how this is a defensive zone thing – we’re looking purely at shifts in which we know that there’s an SAF.

    As I pointed out when I wrote about this earlier in the season, Hemsky and Gagner had a good track record together coming into this season. (As I’ve alluded to a few times – I suspect that there’s a very strong relationship between these metrics and Corsi, because we’re basically looking into the places where Corsi happen.) Hemsky’s numbers showed a massive decline at generating multi-SAF shifts even before the shot to the foot in Detroit.

    What does that leave us with? There are four possibilities that I can see. First, this is all just random noise. I don’t really find that compelling because of the size of the decline that Hemsky experienced relative to other players. Second, Hemsky himself has entered a massive decline as a hockey player. If you look at this data, you see that the really crappy players, the Lennart Petrells and the Darcy Hordichuks, do seem to be worse than the rest at turning SAF situations into multi-SAF situations. The thing is…Hemsky was still reasonably good at being on the ice for single SAF situations – they just stopped turning into multi-SAF situations. If he had entered some sort of massive decline, wouldn’t this have shown up there? I would think so and I just don’t see it.

    Third, there’s the possibility that Hemsky ended up playing with significantly different players this year and that this somehow affected the numbers that he put up. Let’s look into that.

    I don’t really see anything in that. He did really well with Tom Gilbert last year but I’d have trouble accepting an argument that Tom Gilbert is responsible for his loss of multi-SAF shifts this year. He played more with Gagner this year and less with Horcoff but, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, he and Gagner were just fine last year. I don’t see it.

    That leaves one possibility (other than an unknown unknown, an always terrifying prospect): there was something happening in the offensive zone that was different this year than last year which led to this falling apart. If I was the Oilers and I wanted an answer to this – I would want an answer, even if I planned to put Hemsky on the first bus out of town – I’d be digging into video. There was a great article that Tom Tango linked to a little while back talking about the video package that teams use to link data and video:

    At age 24, Snow’s task as director of hockey operations was to find a way to incorporate new technology and analytics into the organization.

    He teamed with Syndex Sports, the creator of the baseball software BATS, and with input from the Boston Bruins helped create the software PUCKS.

    It was a risky play six seasons ago. Now, almost two-thirds of the league uses PUCKS. The other third uses a rival software called Thunder.

    They essentially do the same thing.

    They are software databases that allow users to pull up a player’s stats with matching video. Take faceoffs. Users can look at the overall record of a player on the draw. Each win and loss has a link for video of that faceoff.

    I believe that the Oilers are using one of these systems – I recall seeing some video in one of the Oil Change episodes that showed Tom Renney sitting in front of it looking at breakouts and in the most recent episode, you could see a computer that was modified to let a video coach mark spots in a video when something of note happened. Here’s a screen shot of it:

    You can see from the keyboard that there are keys marked to enable the noting of chances, goals, fights, play in various zones of the ice and which pair/line is on the ice. The game gets broken down pretty ruthlessly with video. It seems to me like it’d be nothing for a video coach to sit down for a day and work his way through Hemsky’s shifts with at least one SAF, this year and last, and figure it out. A video coach armed with specific knowledge of what the Oilers were trying to do in the offensive zone in 2011-12 and what they were trying to do in 2012-13 might find this even easier to accomplish. If it’s something related to a change in how they played this year, I’d want to know what happened.

    I am assuming that they were never able to pinpoint a cause for this change during the season because surely to God they would have fixed it on the spot if they had – wanting to play a system is great, wanting to play a system that neuters one of your best offensive players is insane. Move the guy and get someone who fits if you’re that dedicated to your system. In the short term, you might be better off altering your system to match the players you have.

    Moving on…here’s the data for multi-SAF shifts as a percentage of shifts with at least one SAF for guys who weren’t with the Oilers for 2011-12 and 2012-13.

    Kind of surprising that Yakupov’s numbers are so low and (I checked) there’s no real difference in the first and second half of the season. I assume that he’ll figure this out as things go on with him. Mike Brown is terrible – no real surprise there either. He’s not a very good hockey player.

    I don’t have a lot to say about the data for multi-SAF shifts per shift taken; as I’ve explained previously, I think the previous two sets of graphs kind of show the same information and identify changes and issues more discretely. That being said, I’m nothing if not a slave to tradition, so here it is:

    So…big picture. To me, the decline in Hemsky and multi-SAF shifts kind of dwarfs everything else that’s contained in this information and has to be considered a major factor in why the Oilers were so bad possession-wise this year. As I move forward, I’ll be coming back to this.

    Email Tyler Dellow at mc79hockey@gmail.com

    About Tyler Dellow

    35 Responses to Big Oilers Data IV

    1. Lloyd B.
      May 2, 2013 at

      This is very interesting. I am just getting into this advanced stats stuff and can’t imagine how much work this has got to be. I’m going to throw out a thought on Hemsky and Gagner. the first 35 – 40 games last year Ryan Smyth played largely on the second line and was so full of adreneline that he posted really crooked numbers relative to the time since. When his play fell off last year and further this year he was REMOVED from the second line. It has been a veritable blender of left wings since. Jones, Hartikainen, Eager, and a few others. Looking at the information provided these three (and others) had much worse numbers this year ~5% and they weren’t that great to start with. Is it possible that the drop off has more to do with the left winger than either Gagner or Hemsky?

      One other thing that comes to mind and have absolutely no data to confirm but know it is readily available. If I recall, correctly ( memory is one of the first things to go) last season Petry and Smid primarily played defence with the second line. With the change their numbers as well as a change of main defence partners to shultz and Shultz and corresponding drop of all of them this year over last is it again possible that outside influences have a greater impact on Gagner and Hemsky’s number?

      • Woodguy
        May 2, 2013 at

        Lloyd,

        RE: Ryan Smyth

        Here are Hemsky’s 4 most common wing mates last year (11/12)

        TOI and Shot Attempt % with Hemsky
        HALL, TAYLOR 352:02:00 54.9
        SMYTH, RYAN 213:29:00 51.2
        HARTIKAINEN, TEEMU 107:06:00 42.7
        PAAJARVI, MAGNUS 89:32:00 51.6

        TOI and Shot Attempt % for Hemksy Without indicated team mate
        HALL, TAYLOR 655:25:00 47.9
        SMYTH, RYAN 793:58:00 50.1
        HARTIKAINEN, TEEMU 900:21:00 51.2
        PAAJARVI, MAGNUS 917:55:00 50.3

        TOI and Shot Attempt % for Team mate Without Hemsky
        HALL, TAYLOR 522:20:00 50.4
        SMYTH, RYAN 905:41:00 45.3
        HARTIKAINEN, TEEMU 112:10:00 43.5
        PAAJARVI, MAGNUS 387:25:00 50.8

        While 94 and 83 did very well together, Hemsky didn’t fall off a cliff when apart.

        Hemsky more fell down without Hall (like everyone else in the know world would except maybe corsi King Justin WIlliams)

        Whatever was going on this year, doesn’t seem to be last year… at with this type of look at it.

        FWIW

        2012/13

        Hall and Hemsky together 128:20 45.5%
        Hemsky without Hall 334:17 43.4%
        Hall without Hemsky 522:49 51.5%

    2. Tyler Dellow
      May 2, 2013 at

      Good suggestion Lloyd – I’ll look into this.

    3. kevin hj
      May 2, 2013 at

      After reading these 4 posts, I keep thinking the same thing. I’m completely uneducated in hockey but it seems to me the defenceman’s ability to hold the blue line and keep pucks in would be a big factor in turning SAF into multi SAF shifts, but you keep saying you feel the defence are not driving this stat.

      Again, I don’t know much about any of this, but watching games it seems other team’s defencemen pinch and keep cycles alive more thank the Oilers’ do. When they do it often leads to another shot on net. If it’s a different system the coaches are asking defencemen to play it wouldn’t show up on any one player. Maybe Gagner and Hemsky just haven’t adapted well to it??

      • May 3, 2013 at

        I’ve been wondering the same thing, with regard to defensemen and multi-SAF shifts. Forwards bring the puck up and generate an initial shot. If they do not score, either the goalie freezes the puck (shift ends) or the goalie allows a rebound (or the puck is otherwise loose). With a loose puck, you have the following general outcomes:

        A – Defense controls the puck, attempts to clear
        1 -> Successful clear
        1 —> Shift Ends
        2 -> Puck is held in (usually by defense)
        2 —> Shift (and Shot Attempts) continue

        B – Offense controls the puck
        1 -> Attempt another shot on net
        1 —> Shift ends (puck is frozen or goal is scored)
        2 -> Pass and start cycle to generate a new shot attempt (uses defensemen)
        2 —> Shift ends (shots generated until puck is frozen, goal is scored, or possession is lost)

        C – Fight for the puck
        1 -> Offense wins
        1 —> Go to B
        2 -> Defense wins
        2 —> Go to A

        Basically, on the initial shot, defensemen are behind the play and unimportant. If Yakupov or Hall is on the rush, it doesn’t matter who is coming up behind him, he’s likely going to work more with his wings than his defensemen in generating a shot on this initial rush. After establishing a shot attempt, your defensemen have caught up to the play, they’re helping hold the puck in, they’re becoming part of a cycle, they’re an outlet on a puck battle, and they’re taking shots themselves. The result of that is that defensemen are a non factor on shifts in which a single SAF is generated, but they become a factor on shifts in which multiple SAF are generated.

        Maybe I’m overthinking it, but that seems right. I don’t know about your Oilers, but watching the Red Wings for 15+ years now, I know that they certainly used the defense as a significant part of the cycle in the offensive zone, both on 5v4 and 5v5. I feel like that has stayed the same, even as the blue line has become significantly less talented.

    4. Woodguy
      May 2, 2013 at

      I am applauding you Tyler.

      You are taking the shot attempt differential to a new level with this type of analysis.

      Its like figuring out there are molecules and now looking at the atoms that make up the molecules.

      This type of indepth look at what comprises shot attempt differential should now become the norm.

      If you want to set up a site that auto-grinds this info I’d be in for some $ to pay for the time to get it going.

      Very well done sir.

      I really appreciate people who ask “why:” and then try to figure it out.

      Also,

      Alas Poor Ales!

      I knew him Tyler

      A fellow of infinite skill

      Of most excellent hands

      He hath excited us fans a thousand times

      and now how abhorred in my imagination it is!

      my memories stained by this

      Here hung those shoulders that were crushed i know not how oft

      Where are your dangles now? You moves, your flashes of brilliance that set the crowd on a roar?

      Not one now, to mock your body language? Chap quite injured?

    5. Trenton L.
      May 2, 2013 at

      very strange.

      Looking quickly at time on ice (last year%/current year%) Hemsky played about the same with Petry (33/37) and Smid (36/35); and Whitney (24/24).
      Nick Schultz was way up (10/33) and Gilbert (20) and Potter (27/17) time went to J.Schultz (36%).
      Hemsky played ~25% with some combo of Peckham/Sutton/Barker/Teubert last year and 8% with Fistric/Peckham this year.

      So unless Gilbert/Potter are way better than J.Schultz offensively or N.Schultz is way worse than the likes of Peckham/Sutton/Barker/Teuber i dont think it has to do with the D on the ice.

      As Tyler mentioned center doesnt appear to be the problem with Hemsky as he was fine with Gagner last year. But he went Gagner (45/65) Horcoff (38/21) and Nuge (16/11). Essentially Horc time went to Gagner.

      On the other wing he lost a little time with Hall (35/28) and Hartikainen (11/6), lots with Smyth (21/5) that went to Yak (31%) and Paajarvi (9/22).

      Paajarvi is known for not going to the net, until a little run this year where he produced and Yak typically finds the prime shooting spot to unleash his rocket. Seems like Hall/Hartikainen/Smyth are more the type to crash the net and pick up the garbage/rebounds than Paajarvi or Yakupov.

      My guess is Gagner/Hemsky need the presence in front of the net to cause some havoc.

    6. Sliderule
      May 2, 2013 at

      I have worked with numbers since graduation.

      You are a lawyer but you should have taken engineering with your bent.

      I have to say I am confused as to conclusions .

      I happen to agree with part of Dereks view that the defensive system they are playing leaves the opposition unmarked.

      The last half of the season I have concentrated on watching the wingers and they just seem to float in no mans land and never support the play even when it’s only a few feet away.

    7. Mark-LW
      May 2, 2013 at

      I had a thought about single SAF turning into multi SAF, and it may be insignificant in the grand scheme of things but I want to mention it anyway.

      Would it be worthwhile to filter out goals scored on single SAF shifts? Yak’s performance on % of shifts that turned were multi SAF made me think about it. In his case he had a shooting percentage of 21. So up to 21% (or even higher I suppose, since it’s not counting just his goals but everyone on his line) of his single SAF shifts could never turn into multi SAF shifts (that is THE extreme example of course).

      Like I said, it may not mean much and I haven’t thought it through fully but it seems to me, if you are really trying to tease out information as precisely as possible, that this could be something to keep in mind.

      • May 2, 2013 at

        Don’t forget that Tyler is talking about all shot attempts here and not just shots on goal. That doesn’t invalidate your recommendation to filter out the shifts ending in goals, but it will make the impact significantly smaller, definitely less than 10% of the SAF when he was on the ice.

        • Mark-LW
          May 2, 2013 at

          You’re right, and I actually thought about that right after I posted. I was definitely thinking more along the lines of just shots.

    8. Tubes
      May 2, 2013 at

      Excellent stuff. Way to think waaay outside the box.

      You would think shifts with multiple SAF would be where the majority of the goals are scored right? What about the area’s of the ice where the goals come from? There is an area where a fair percentage of goals are scored from and I wonder if the players even get to the “scoring zone” on shifts with one SAF…

      • Woodguy
        May 2, 2013 at

        You would think shifts with multiple SAF would be where the majority of the goals are scored right?

        I’d guess that too.

        Would be really, really interesting to see what the actual ratios are in term of goals per 1SAF, 2SAF, 3SAF etc.

        My guess is that it would peak as a percentage at 3.

        Care to take a crack at this Tyler?

        I don’t have your excel skills or knowledge on how to start.

        • Tyler Dellow
          May 2, 2013 at

          I’ll add it to the list. There’s enough stuff here to keep us fixed for things to talk about for a while.

          • dave
            May 4, 2013 at

            Tyler your good with numbers. Can you tell me why there are so many sons of ex NHL players in today’s NHL. Old boys club looking after their off spring the numbers would indicate to me. I’d guess if not related to an ex player it’s near impossible to get into the big league yet if related they take you first? Your thoughts?

            Is Sam Ganger the worst center in the NHL?

    9. RMGS
      May 2, 2013 at

      Great stuff. I’ll echo WG’s praise.

      Is an o-zone frame by frame comparative analysis coming up (just in case you don’t have enough to do!)? I foresee shots of the crazy D pinches we witnessed all year coupled with the difference in how the forwards reacted.

    10. striatic
      May 2, 2013 at

      is it possible that Hemsky’s foot injury had something to do with this?

      if he didn’t have the foot speed to get in and find rebounds, it would impact his line’s ability to get additional shots.

      • Tyler Dellow
        May 2, 2013 at

        I checked. He wasn’t getting it done before the foot injury either.

    11. wheatnoil
      May 3, 2013 at

      Hmmm… I’ve spent some time trying to think of explanations, but I’ve got nothing. One thing I thought of was similar to what Mark-LW mentioned above, but expanding on it. My understanding of SAF is that SAF = goals for + shots on net for + missed shots for + blocks against. So, is it possible that one of these component parts leads to a greater likelihood of an additional SAF in the same shift compared to another component?

      The obvious one is goals, which leads to no chance for an additional SAF in the same shift, however this is too rare an event to cause much change. A missed shot could result in either team recovering… is the offensive team more likely to recover a missed shot than a blocked shot, and thus lead to an additional SAF? Vice versa? What percentage of missed or blocked shots end up going out of play, thus resulting in a stoppage of play and no more SAF that shift? What about shots on goal? If you hit the net, there could be a rebound and if so, either team could recover the puck. However, there’s also a good chance the goalie stops the puck and covers it, eliminating a chance for a further SAF on the same shift.

      I thought that maybe if Hemsky / Gagner had an abnormal percentage of a specific component of SAF, that might shed light on the answer as to why they have been unable to convert single SAF to multiple SAF shifts. For example, if they had a greater number of shots on net as a percentage of SAF, then maybe there’s a greater likelihood of the goalie covering the puck and ending the shift.

      I’m pretty new to fancy stats, and so my attempts to answer these questions are rudimentary at best. I went to behindthenet.ca and looked at the data for this year for the Oilers. I’ll cut to the chase… I couldn’t find any information that answered this question for me. Using goals/60 + shots/60 + missed/60 + blocks against/60 as the denominator (i.e. total offensive corsi events/60), Hemsky did not have an abnormally high or low number of goals, shots, goals + shots, or blocks as a ratio of total offensive corsi events / 60. He did have the lowest missed shots / 60 as a ratio of total offensive corsi events / 60, but I don’t think that explains anything because Gagner was in the middle of the pack, not down with Hemsky. Also, missed shots / 60 did not correlate with increased multiple SAF/shift (Brown had the most missed shots / 60… and that certainly did not increase his likelihood of getting another SAF that shift).

      The only thing I came away with is further information that Hall is awesome and Brown sucks. Hall had a 58.7% of an offensive corsi event being a goal or a shot on net, where as Brown was the only Oiler less than 50%, at 46.6% (min. 20 games played). So not only does Hall drive corsi, when he throws the pack at the net, it’s more likely to be ON the net. When Brown throws the puck at the net (rare as it is), it’s more likely to miss or be blocked.

      (Note: there is a very high likelihood that I am not understanding the nuances of the above-mentioned stats, and if so have just wasted an hour of my time and some of yours by you reading this. If so, I apologize and any correction or clarification would be appreciated. I was curious and thought I’d play around with numbers and see what I could find, acknowledging my grasp of the concepts to be somewhat tenuous, but my interest in trying to understand is high.)

      • Tyler Dellow
        May 3, 2013 at

        This is a good idea and something I’ll look into in a future post. Thanks for the suggestion.

      • Mahonka
        May 31, 2013 at

        I guess everyone has their own opioinn, but I don’t know how anyone can like those Reebok practice jerseys. And I always thought that what hockey jerseys had on the tails and sleeves was striping, not piping. To me, piping is the ugly thin vertical lines that Reebok came up with that have nothing to do with the rest of the jersey. And apparently I’m in a minority with this opioinn, but I don’t see the point of laced collars since the collars don’t open due to the NHL logo triangle behind them. And most teams just have an untied string dangling through them. Laced collars were just a fad of the ’50s and ’60s.

    12. wheatnoil
      May 3, 2013 at

      Side comment: The sheer amount of work put into this blog (and others like it) to come up with data and provide it free of charge is amazing. I appreciate your work! It has helped me start looking at a game I love under a new lens, broadening and enriching my appreciation and understanding of it.

      • Tyler Dellow
        May 3, 2013 at

        Thanks for the kind words – glad people appreciate it.

        • May 3, 2013 at

          Very much appreciated – it’s fantastic reading.

      • Maylin
        May 31, 2013 at

        Simply put, the Oilers Reebok Edge jerseys were among the abluoste worst to come out of their lazy, limited template redesigns in the entire league. To rank those higher than the 1996-2007 jerseys is just plain wrong.

    13. Trentent
      May 3, 2013 at

      I don’t suppose you can put league averages up for each year as well?

      We know Mike Brown isn’t very good, but *how much* relative to the league is an interesting thought as well. Another nicety would be 1st line, 2nd line, etc.

      I know your focused on the Oilers YoY but a baseline relative to league would be nice to see too. Hemsky sunk this year but is he 3rd liner bad?

      I just think it would add an interesting perspective.

      Great work, BTW.

    14. Trenton L.
      May 3, 2013 at

      2 MacT quotes:

      “I’ve said this many times to the group since I took over; all the productivity is in that last five percent of effort, that’s where all the productivity is. Ninety percent of your goals are in that last five percent of effort.

      “I know that from playing the game myself. Amazingly when you got more reckless, worked harder, went to the tougher areas and were more committed how much more lucky you got. We need more from our group in there and they need to recognize that it is tough to have success at this level. I little more effort, responsibility and maturity along with some more beef in the lineup will go a long ways.”

      These quotes apply directly to the multiple SAF shifts.

      Also I believe MacT said something about 3 small skill guys playing together doesnt work. I had assumed he meant the kids but looking at this data he probably meant Yak/Gags/Hemsky

    15. tphillers
      May 3, 2013 at

      Really excellent work Tyler.

      I am not sure if we are at the speculation point as to why Hemsky’s multiple SAF shits have dropped off so drastically — and this comment may be irresponsible ‘naked eye’ analysis given the context — but did any one else notice Hemsky’s lack of patented around-the-back-of-the-net twirls this year? When I think of Hemsky generating offence, I think of the chaos created by that swing around move, as he would hold the puck for what seemed like forever then dish to a trailer or fire a shot toward the goal for a rebound. I found this to be noticeably absent from his game this year; instead, he attempted a play before going for that skate. This was my explanation for his drop in assists this year, anyway. But your analysis here is much more sophisticated and nuanced, and gives us a clear indication of Hemsky’s slip in generating offence this year.

      I apologize if this comment digresses from your superb statistical analysis, Tyler. Just throwing it out there as a possible reason. Really great work on this entire series.

    16. Jeremy
      May 3, 2013 at

      There seems to be almost no end to the influence teammates have on an individual player’s effect on his team. A confusing, never ending, chicken/egg argument. I commend you for your attempts. Figuring out how to sort all those influences is the route to the holy grail of an individual assessment metric.

      Someone should figure out an adjusted zone start number for the data you’ve farmed here. I’m sure it would make some players appear better/worse at what they do.

      Great work.

    17. clrkaitken
      May 3, 2013 at

      Tyler, this is simply outstanding work.

      The thing that sets this apart to me is your practical application; you have been able to take everything that you have found and presented in the charts, and relate it back to specific game situations. You’ve made a lot of micro-data completely accessible to a hockey fan no matter what level of understanding they have of these sorts of possession stats.

      Keep up the excellent work.

    18. Pierce Cunneen
      May 4, 2013 at

      Tyler, any chance I could get your email??? I realize how much work must be put into this and I would love to help out in some way. Whether that be just collecting data or other tasks, I’d be ready to assist in any way. Shoot me an email (pcunneen19@gmail.com) if your interested.

      • Pierce Cunneen
        May 4, 2013 at

        Never mind, found your email at the bottom of the post.

    19. May 24, 2013 at

      I don’t even know how I ended up right here, but I assumed this put up was once great. I do not recognize who you are however definitely you are going to a well-known blogger should you aren’t
      already. Cheers!

      • Emi
        May 31, 2013 at

        I don’t think Linus Omark will make the Oilers.I think the lineup for next year winds up lkooing something like this:Hemsky Horcoff PennerEberle Gagner HallPajaarvi-Svensson Cogliano BruleJacques/Jones/Stone Potulny StortGilbert WhitneySmid SourayChorney StrudwickKhabibulin DubnykWhich means, as painful as it will be, it’s time for Ethan Moreau to ride down the old dusty trail.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *