RE 12-13: RYAN JONES

Ryan Jones has carved out a role on the Edmonton Oilers and delivered solid offense outside a top 6F role. He’s done it twice. Can he sustain it?

RE 12-13: 70, 12-8-20

  1. What role will he play? I think Jones will start the season on the Horcoff-Smyth line and play there for much of the season. I do see a period–say in the new year–where he loses some playing time and gets bounced down to the Belanger line.
  2. So he’ll lose his job no matter what? If Yakupov, Paajarvi and Hartikainen all perform well someone is going to lose at-bats. I think this season is going to impact some veterans up front, and not just Jones.
  3. Who else? You might see Smyth sit for a game, or Horcoff, Belanger or Eager.
  4. And Petrell is out? No, Petrell is next.
  5. Back to Jones. Why do you hate him? I don’t hate Jones. I would say that until this past season my feeling was that he was a “right place, right time” complementary player.
  6. And now? I still feel that way, but the Vollman sledgehammer puts Jones in a very good light. I’m left with personal bias, and the idea of RE is to rid yourself of it.
  7. Not good enough to expand on his job? We’ll see. Hall, Eberle, Yakupov and Hemsky have the top 4 wing jobs, leaving 4 for the rest among the group that includes Smyth, Jones, Eager, Hartikainen, Paajarvi, Hordichuk, Petrell. That’s more than 4.
  8. Is there backup for Vollman’s Sledgehammer? Sure. Jonathan Willis wrote about Jones here and said “this year, he played much more of a feature role, frequently playing against good players (seventh-toughest quality of competition, toughest zone-start for a winger on the team) and yet managed to improve both in terms of on-ice scoring chances and in terms of on-ice shots for and against.”
  9. So then how does he lose his job? First, I’m not certain he will–if you look at Jones, Hartikainen and Paajarvi’s REs you can clearly see I’m hedging bets all over hell’s half acre–but in the same article from Willis he states “he was a healthy scratch for three consecutive games in late-February after a stretch where he went 23 games with one goal, four assists and a minus-7 rating.  In late March, he had a six-game stretch where he picked up six points playing left wing on a line with Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Jordan Eberle.”
  10. So, inconsistent? I don’t know that he’s more inconsistent that Hartikainen or Paajarvi, but if he slumps then one of the other two will be in there like a dirty shirt.
  11. So this is kind of a matter of luck and timing? And the hockey Gods, yes.
  12. What does Jones have going for him? Well, he appears to be a great teammate, he has helped mentor these kids and clearly has become part of the group. That’s a big item.
  13. What else? Shooting percentage is a strength, I expect he’s shown enough at this point for us to assume that 12% is about right for him. So even if he plays less (as I’ve suggested in the RE) Jones should still score goals.
  14. What does he have going against him? The Oilers keep filling up all the wing positions with number 1 overall selections.
  15. No, seriously. What’s the problem? THAT’S the problem! Since 2010 summer–and Jones had played 8 games as an Oiler by that time–Edmonton has graduated Taylor Hall, Jordan Eberle, Magnus Paajarvi, Linus Omark, Teemu Hartikainen and soon Nail Yakupov. That’s a lot of firepower.
  16. So, it’s a matter of time? I think so. Jones is 28 now, Edmonton won’t be in contention for anything important before his 30th birthday. If he remains a regular through the next two seasons, he’ll have passed 375 games in the NHL. That is extremely likely to be well beyond the halfway point of his career.
  17. Says who? History. Dave Lumley 390 before 30,  47 after. Seems a reasonable comparable.
  18. That’s old timey numbers. Players last longer now.  We’ll see. Jones career began later so maybe he’ll have some miles after his 30th birthday that don’t look obvious now. I’d suggest that Paajarvi and Hartikainen will get every chance to prove themselves and if they do Jones is going to be trade bait.
  19. At the 2013  deadline? Likely.
  20. Oilers will be adding. If Jones is on the 4line at that time he’ll be expendable. It’ll mean that Yakupov is doing well, and one of Hartikainen or Paajarvi has moved past him on the depth chart.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

44 Responses to "RE 12-13: RYAN JONES"

  1. leadfarmer says:

    Ahhh, there’s my fix. Feel much better now. Thank you LT.

  2. Lowetide says:

    You’re welcome! After the Eberle RE and online reaction, I’m hoping for genuinely nasty comments!

  3. leadfarmer says:

    Do you think that the oil are not addressing the goalies or d intentionally to get one more high draft pick. After all this is year 3 of the five year rebuild and too many young forwards on the team to seriously compete.

  4. leadfarmer says:

    I like your conservative estimates, young players are hard to project and often have wild swings from year to year. Our poor defense also makes our breakout clunky and slow and the forwards often dont hit the center ice with speed. Also, as the team gets better other teams will focus more on us and adjust their defense on stopping our forwards better.

  5. Lowetide says:

    I think they are waiting for the new number for cap under the 2012 cba. It should mean a lot of players shake loose from rosters that are near the cap. Also, there are some rfa’s unsigned and that might be something too.

    I don’t think the Oilers would offer sheet Subban but a team that does may have an extra D.

  6. Dipstick says:

    If both PRV and Harty earn the spots, are Hemsky and Jones likely to be dealt at the deadline?

  7. BrazilianOil says:

    leadfarmer,
    i don’t think so. Just doing the things step by step. IMO they will no make the big effort until they feel the kids be ready to do big things. NK will be gone next summer and we will have a better idea of what expect from DD. Then they can look for a starter or a backup.

    If this year we finish close to the 8th the next summer will be innteresting. If we don’t see to much improvment i’m affraid the wait will be longer.

  8. Lowetide says:

    Dipstick:
    If both PRV and Harty earn the spots, are Hemsky and Jones likely to be dealt at the deadline?

    I think Hemsky is in for the next 1.5 years at least. Maybe deadline 2014 they deal him, but the top 4 wingers (Hall, Hemsky, Yakupov, Eberle) should be set. After that it’s a long list of guys trying to make themselves valuable. I don’t think there’s really a way to see how this ends, especially with a new coach.

  9. DSF says:

    Looks like the Canucks are going to sign Arnott.

  10. Lowetide says:

    A good pickup. Gillis has made a lot of good moves since arriving.

  11. DSF says:

    Lowetide:
    A good pickup. Gillis has made a lot of good moves since arriving.

    They also seem to be the leading candidate for Doan.

    Should be interesting to see how they manage the cap.

    Keith Ballard anyone?

  12. Lowetide says:

    How will their lines look, DSF?

  13. DSF says:

    Lowetide:
    How will their lines look, DSF?

    Well, Kesler is likely out until November so Arnott is just a replacement.

    If Doan signs…my speculation

    Sedin-Sedin-Doan

    Booth-Arnott-Burrows

    Hansen-Lapierre-Raymond/Jensen

    Weise-Malhotra-Kassian

    When Kesler returns, Arnott bumps Lapierre down a line to play wing.

    I’m guessing if Doan signs they move Mason Raymond to make some cap space.

    What complicates all of this is the Luongo situation.

    Gillis apparently wants Nick Bjugstad from Florida and, if successful in that endeavour, things could change although Bjudstad, a 6’6″ 215 pound centre with great hands could blow things up.

  14. DSF says:

    Forgot Chris Higgins.

    He’ll be in the running with either Booth on the second line or Raymond/Jensen on the third line.

  15. Bar_Qu says:

    I would say that until this past season my feeling was that he was a “right place, right time” complementary player.

    The ironic thing is, if Jones was two years younger, he would be the perfect complementary piece for all the high powered young guys in their playoff run. All the teams in the finals have guys just like him in their bottom six who seem to get more than their share of press (marginal or bad corsi, occasional goal/assist, lots of hustle and good in the room). This is what will make him valuable at the trade deadline – he’s next season’s Colin Fraser (and next year, teams will be looking for the cast-off Oilers, to better emulate the LA model).

  16. LP says:

    I’ll say this: Jones may not have the skills like the other kids but I remember thinking in 2011-2012 his physical play and hustle were a breath of fresh air on more than 1 occasion.

    I too think he’ll be traded, perhaps sooner than later.

    LT, I meant to ask you: are your RE series equivalent to predictions? I’ve been reading your blog since 2006 and my take is that the RE aren’t predictions. But what are then? @DavidStaples was basically saying these were your predictions (ie Eberle). I wanted to reply but couldn’t…

    Cheers

  17. jb says:

    DSF: Well, Kesler is likely out until November so Arnott is just a replacement.

    If Doan signs…my speculation

    Sedin-Sedin-Doan

    Booth-Arnott-Burrows

    Hansen-Lapierre-Raymond/Jensen

    Weise-Malhotra-Kassian

    When Kesler returns, Arnott bumps Lapierre down a line to play wing.

    I’m guessing if Doan signs they move Mason Raymond to make some cap space.

    What complicates all of this is the Luongo situation.

    Gillis apparently wants Nick Bjugstad from Florida and, if successful in that endeavour, things could change although Bjudstad, a 6’6″ 215 pound centre with great hands could blow things up.

    Tin-man team… Where’s the heart? Bounced in the first round again! Bet on it.

    p.s your stuck with Luongo forever, and Shane Doan just wanted a free lunch while vacationing in Vancouver.

  18. Gerta Rauss says:

    http://www.630ched.com/Podcasts/Episodes.aspx?PID=2254

    Ryan Whitney talks with OilersNow…it would be a stretch to say the interview was overly positive re: his ankle…I guess we’ll see where he’s at when he starts skating.

  19. russ99 says:

    LT: Seems you’re a bit off here. Jones is the only 3rd-4th liner who can consistently score goals. He’s a lock for his usual 17-18 goals, and if Horcoff can bounce back even a little with less tough competition, I’d give him 40+ points

    I can’t see Petrell having even remotely close to the same impact on both ends of the ice than Jones. Both in numbers and saw-him-good, and Renney gave him every chance to do so last season.

    As for trading, I’d prefer the Oilers can deal away some of the 4th line deadweight before selling Jones, a guy who can help them every night.

  20. dessert1111 says:

    I am a bit worried that they will trade Jones because of his perceived value relative to what his ceiling/playing ability might be. I am against trading him because since he has been an Oiler, he has improved quite a bit and been a very good to excellent role player for a team that struggles to get good bottom six players. As long as he doesn’t demand more than 1.5 mil/y for his next contract, I hope he sticks around as a 4th liner who could play #1 or 2 PK, chip in some goals, forecheck and move up in the line-up if necessary. This is exactly the type of guy the Oil need to get that extra much-needed goal some nights and help them thru injuries and a long playoff run in the next few years. You run the risk of losing some value if you wait a few years before trading him, but I think by that time the team will be able to attract good role-playing free agents and will be able to trade prospects and picks for a replacement if need be. Or, there is someone in the system to take Jones’ spot. The guy has played well and I hope the team stops trading its good role players for once, though I do recognize the point about high value.

    Your RE may very well be accurate, but I think something like 70, 16-14-30 would be a bit more accurate. Have him decrease one goal per year. I doubt his assignments get much tougher this year than last and his linemates will be as good or better, hopefully.

  21. Lowetide says:

    LP:
    I’ll say this: Jones may not have the skills like the other kids but I remember thinking in 2011-2012 his physical play and hustle were a breath of fresh air on more than 1 occasion.

    I too think he’ll be traded, perhaps sooner than later.

    LT, I meant to ask you: are your RE series equivalent to predictions? I’ve been reading your blog since 2006 and my take is that the RE aren’t predictions. But what are then?@DavidStaples was basically saying these were your predictions (ie Eberle).I wanted to reply but couldn’t…

    Cheers

    No, I don’t consider the RE series to be “predictions” per se. David Staples suggested in his original article that the Eberle number was a prediction and Jason Gregor picked up on it yesterday. But if we were in a ‘dobber hockey’ hockey pool then 55 points might be a little low.

    ‘Reasonable expectations’ is designed to create a line in the sand that says “this is the reasonable spot.” Lower would be a disappointment, higher would be a thrill!

    The idea comes from Bill James, who always said that you couldn’t really establish a level of ability for a specific player until you had three years of somewhat similar ability.

    My reasons for moving Eberle down from 76 points a year ago to 55 this season as an estimate include:

    1. 3.08 5×5/60, ranking him 2nd in the NHL. He’s a fine young player, but it is not reasonable to expect the same performance next season. He was tied for 7th in the entire NHL in even strength points.
    2. His zone start was 60%. We can’t assume he’ll get the same treatment this coming season. What if Yakupov gets the push on a line without Eberle? It could happen.
    3. Eberle’s shooting percentage was a huge leap from his rookie year. It is not reasonable to assume he can sustain it.
    4. The PP. He went 10-10-20 on the PP. With Hemsky healthy and Yakupov’s shot also available, we can’t assume Eberle will score at that level this coming season. Eberle was tied for 43rd in PP points this past season.

    The thing I would like to put out there is that Eberle’s RE isn’t meant as a putdown or an attempt to tarnish the guy’s reputation. It’s meant to serve as a warning to fans: don’t expect another 76 point season.

    I’m sincere in saying that if he scores 60 points this season we should all be thrilled. Seriously.

  22. Henry says:

    Lowetide,

    That’s a good explanation of the exercise and why reasonable expectations differ from the possible numbers of the talented bunch.

    I come up with 55 goals total from the right wings (with Petrell to come). Is that the reasonable expectation for that side of the ice or are there games taken away from players due to reasonable injury etc accounted for by players to come?

    Basically, how many goals will it be reasonable to expect from the Oilers this year and will a lot of them come from the port side?

  23. leadfarmer says:

    DSF,

    Of course he wants Bjugstad, I’m sure most teams want Bjugstadl. The kid is good and one of the few bright spots on an otherwise mediocre U of Minn squad. I don’t think Florida will trade him for anything other then a serious overpayment.

  24. Ribs says:

    The nice thing about Jones is that you can plug him into any of the lines and he’ll do just fine. It’s much better to have a guy like this than trying to make JF Jacques keep up with your top lines when you need to mix things up or when injuries come.

    I think the 12-17 Goals range is pretty fair for him and would mark a successful year.

  25. LP says:

    Excellent! Thanks LT!

  26. Cactus says:

    Lowetide,

    This is exactly why I started reading your blog a few years ago LT. I got tired of reading about how Cogliano was finally going to get 25 goals, without any evidence of it. We’d all like it if Stauffer turned out to be right and Eberle got 80 points, but these things usually don’t work in such an optimistically straight line. Keep fighting the good fight.

    leadfarmer:
    DSF,

    Of course he wants Bjugstad, I’m sure most teams want Bjugstadl.The kid is good and one of the few bright spots on an otherwise mediocre U of Minn squad.I don’t think Florida will trade him for anything other then a serious overpayment.

    All the word out of Florida says that Bjugstad isn’t on the table.

    Even more than with Columbus’ trade of Nash, Vancouver is really trying to trade two things:
    1) A top 10 NHL goalie (this is a plus)
    2) A very long, very expensive contract (this is a minus)

    The value of Luongo is based on how each team weights these two factors. Judging by the lack of a bidding frenzy, it seems that the latter is currently more important than the former.

  27. rickithebear says:

    Ryan jones: in given situation
    79GM – 12EVmin – 14EVG – 13EVA – 133 Hits – 59 BLK
    3rd comp – (-2.9 Rel Cor) – 44.6 %ZNST – 48.6% ZNFN – (+4.0 ZN)
    Pk 13th best winger in league.
    PP 2.35G/60

    Wayne Simmonds
    82GM – 12.5 EVmin – 15EVG – 15EVA – 130 hits – 30 BLK
    3rd comp – (-3.5 Rel cor) – 57.7% ZNST – 47% ZNFN – (-10.7% ZN)
    No PK
    PP 2.31 G/60

  28. VOR says:

    The juxtaposition of Paajarvi and then Jones along with Ribs comment made me suddenly wonder. What if Jones is James Wexford Roberts. Jimmy. Captain of the NHL all ugly team. Loved by his young teammates. Prepared to do whatever the coach wants, play whatever role he is given. A decent penalty killer who hangs on in the NHL against all the odds.

    Is a smart coach about to demote him to the fourth line and give him the busted first rounder, Paajarvi to play on his left wing? Think how perfect the symmetry is Roberts guy was taken 8th OV, blazing fast, 6’2″ 200 lbs, will never master the step in, never be the scoring power forward he was drafted to be, great on international ice services where he looks like a world beater. At the height of his career he will go 12 14 26 -3 with 32 penalty minutes. They’ve tried playing him with the future hall of fame taelnt guys. It is clear he is odd man out, not a goon, not a skill player, most likely to be traded away from a talented core group of young players.

    The other piece Jimmy Roberts was saddled with is waiting in the Oilers farm system. Failed second rounder, center with supposed defensive skills, great team leader, character guy, a fish out of water in his rookie season, no offense at the NHL level, never will have any. Another busted draft choice. The center had some serious chemistry with the left winger but it wasn’t clear how that would ever help the team since neither guy could score.

    The coach had a problem. His talent guys were doing too much of the heavy lifting. His best center was playing massive minutes killing penalties, power play, EVs. The story goes that the coach, who was a master manipulator and sarcastic, said to Jimmy Roberts, “teach those two clowns how to kill penalties.” Like everything a coach had ever asked him to do Roberts put his whole heart into teaching his linemates to kill penalties.

    So now we come to DSF’s comments about how there is nothing wrong with a busted first rounder turning into a useful 3rd liner except you can pick those guys up for nothing in free agency. Roberts took a busted first round left winger and a busted second round center on to the fourth line with him and did magic happen? Did the guys cover there draft bet? Could you just go out and pick players like them up in free ageny every year?

    I don’t know. All I can tell you is long after Jimmy Roberts had retired Doug Jarvis and Bob Gainey would be proving that scoring isn’t all there is to playing forward in the NHL. Both would say that Roberts taught them how to re-define themselves and be effective role players. The fit is so eerily perfect, right down to the young puck rushing d-man, and the giraffe goaltender that I am thinking maybe Jones is our Roberts.

  29. Moosemess says:

    I like Jones if for no other reason than that he irritates the slide rule fans.

    The evolving narrative on this player really demonstrates how difficult it is to shake an inherent bias.

    The initial complaint was that his shot % was unsustainable.

    Then the goalposts moved to his poor corsi.

    Now that the sledgehammer shows him in a better light, I guess that leaves his awkward skating style or hockey hair?

    What does one do when objective data simply doesn’t support the conclusion our bias so wants us to believe, for example that Linus Omark is a more productive hockey player than Ryan Jones? How do we reconcile it when the lunchpail ‘saw him good’ fans predict Jones will score more goals than Hemsky last season and then he does?

    As much as it’s easy to decry the value of being ‘good in the room,’ the dynastic teams of old always had their share of characters, players very reminiscent of Ryan Jones. Guys that would do whatever task they were handed to help the team win and were greatly appreciated by their teammates for it.

    Unless you’re the 76 Canadians or the 85 Oilers, I think you’ll be hard pressed to find a squad where math loves every player on the team. Did math appreciate Dave Lumley or Kevin McLelland or Don Jackson or Craig Muni? Doubtful. Did their teammates? Undeniably. Ironically, the thankless jobs are called that for a reason.

    The Oil still have a lot of holes to fill in the bottom 6 and more to come with Smytty and Horcoff set to offer diminishing returns in the near future. Fortunately, Ryan Jones isn’t part of the problem. He’s part of the solution.

  30. rickithebear says:

    Eberle played in a 3rd comp 60% zone start role. 2.50EVP/60 average. he was 23% over production.

    Eberle was most successful Offensively and outscoring playing with Smyth and gagner.
    Gagner showed he was ready for a move to 1/2nd and eberle crushed soft 2nd.
    he plays with them he is facing lower 1st and upper 2nd in a 50-52% zone start role.
    An exoected 2.1EVP/60 @ 123 % he sees the same 14 min @ even. with 0.6EVP/60 less.
    With equal PP production and tougher efven play a 30G 36A season with 16% shooting %

    A move to avergae for the even role and we get a 26G 34A player.

    looking At wowy and Comp ihistoric math says
    Hall-Horc-XXX
    Smyth-Gagner-Eberle
    in 1st/2nd Comp 50% zone start. that should destroy @ even.

  31. rickithebear says:

    Wholly crap!

    I found a document from Allan Ryder published in 2004:

    He created a shot scoring probability curves relative to distance and type. then assigned a cumulative value to shots given up to establish an expected GA for teams and Expected Sv% for teams.

    But this process can be fine tuned to individual players. presented as volmer charts for given Comp zone start situations. A situational measure of every player.

    Thank you allan ryder.

    http://hockeyanalytics.com/Research_files/Shot_Quality.pdf

  32. VOR says:

    Actually moosemess, we don’t know what the math would have said about those guys. Or for that matter Roberts, Gainey and Jarvis. I am betting Gainey was a serious Corsi out play and Jarvis killed D-zone faceoffs in the last minute of 1 goal games. But we can’t be sure.

    The idea that the math didn’t support Jones was based most of all on the assumption (not inherent in the data) that his shooting% was unsustainable – as you said yourself. Lowetide has pointed out repeatedly that his expectations are based on an established level of performance. Jones didn’t have that. Many people expected a reversion to the mean.

    I argued last year that the math loved Jones in many ways. This year’s Vollman graph shows the same thing. I didn’t get the hate then and I don’t get it now. The guy is value for money. My response to the argument for reversion was we weren’t taking into account where the guy shoots (and scores) from. He was a garbage artist in college and remains one in the NHL. There is, I believe, a valid statistical argument to be made that if you play Jones’ style of game you will have a higher scoring% than a player who stays on the outside. Our database wasn’t diversified enough to make valid predictions for Jones (or this year Eberle) re shooting%.

    As I said in the last thread, the evidence is overwhelming that what we see is very often wrong. Statistics can help tell us if that is what is happening. Can we use the math to enforce our delusions? Sure. Can we use the math to enrich our understanding? Sure. The choice is ours. What is happening here, and on many sports blogs, is fans are saying our eyes trump the math rather than challenging how the math is being used.

    If I am right about there being a problem with how we use SP data it doesn’t invalidate the math. It simply points out yet another statistic we need to learn how to generate and evaluate. Meanwhile, our eyes will continue to deceive us.

  33. franksterra says:

    I probably see fewer NHL gakmes than anyone on here, so what really fascinates me is the many ways posters evaluate players. Phrases like “he’s not part of the problem, he’s part of the solution” cut across the math v. eye binary. It moves us into gut. Of the current anticipated 23 man roster, who are part of the problem? You could in effect argue “no one”. Every player arguably can be effective with a number of qualifications. Here are few off the top of my head:

    - ice time matches their age and wear and tear level
    - given ‘the right’ line mates
    - given appropriate special teams time to both be effective now and to develop future competence
    - clearly told their role and coached to meet those expectations
    - given the zone starts and opposition that will maximise their effectiveness (given the above)

    The players you want to use (and develop) are those who require the fewest qualifiers to be effective – those players who require the least specialised tending, minding, managing. The reason there is wide spread ambivalence about Gagner is that he seems to require a fair amount of tending (esp. items 2 and 5, big ones, and 3 seems to be a question mark). A ‘specialist’ like Hordi also requires serious tending, hence the ambivalence by some about the whole 5 min enforcer role.

    Jones numbers, streaks and benching tell me he is mid-range in the ‘needs tending’ area, perhaps a bit too much so for his age and lack of high-end specialist skills that compensate. At this stage he’s not part of the problem, but i would never say he is part of the solution – if the problem we’re solving is Cup Absence.

  34. Moosemess says:

    Agreed VOR. I guess the corollary point I’m making here is that these inherent biases contribute to making the visual conclusions being reached so unreliable. And they go both ways. The math boys are just as guilty of inherent biases as are the saw him good lads. When you want to dislike Ryan Jones or Tom Gilbert for that matter, I suspect it’s easy to adjust your accumulation of qualitative analysis to suit that argument.

    Like you, I’ve never understood the wont to tear down Jones. The hardest thing to do in the NHL is score goals and this is a player that was 2 goals away from being the 3rd leading goal scorer on the team last season! One wonders how many goals Jones would have to score to finally get the math boys on his side? 30? 40? 50?

    Production matters and it can’t all be written off as opportunism. Even if it is, isn’t opportunism a key factor in goal production? Gretzky was the biggest goal suck of all time. Fortunately, he was also the GOAT.

    With LT for instance, I won’t presume to conclude why the bias exists (e.g. Omark over Jones) but I will feel free to speculate. lol

    Like many of us who grew up with the firewagon hockey the Oil played in the 80′s, I suspect LT likes his women pretty and his hockey even prettier. Thus there’s a tendency to overrate players like Omark and Hemsky who are esthetically pleasing while underrating production provided by players who are not as pleasing to the eye but nevertheless effective.

    A good example of this type of bias is Ali vs Frazier. How could a superbly skilled boxer like Ali ever lose to a shuffling brawler like Frazier?

    Or how is that the splendid execution of Air Coryell’s Chargers never translated into a Super Bowl?

    There’s likely a part of our brain that wants to believe that for something to be done well, it needs to look good as well.

    The reality is, in sports, there’s room for both approaches. Sometimes it’s the transcendent artistry of Gretzky and sometimes it’s the blunt force trauma of Mark Messier. Both can get the job done.

  35. VOR says:

    Rikki,

    I love Alan and his work. However, you do understand that entire paper is a classic example of the excluded middle? Alan assumes shot quality matters rather than proving it.

    He does a brilliant job of building a model of shot quality from a given distance. Then he ranks the teams on that metric. Next he says that he can now say that if your goaltender faced more high quality shots his goaltending performance was undervalued relative to SV%. Also, if a team gives up fewer quality shots as a % of all shots they are better defensively.

    I am going to ignore the flaws in that for a moment. The key problem is he never proved that if a offensive team shoots more quality shots they score more goals. He assumed that was inherent in his data and excluded the middle. If teams don’t gain an advantage by shooting better quality shots then the defence shouldn’t get credit for reducing shot quality and the goaltender shouldn’t be bumped up because the shots he was facing were tougher. I urge you to try re-ordering the data that way, by impact on offence, and then see if you are still excited.

  36. Moosemess says:

    franksterra:

    Jones numbers, streaks and benching tell me he is mid-range in the ‘needs tending’ area, perhaps a bit too much so for his age and lack of high-end specialist skills that compensate.At this stage he’s not part of the problem, but i would never say he is part of the solution – if the problem we’re solving is Cup Absence.

    I like and agreed with the vast majority of your post, but I’m hard pressed to visualize a scenario or roster composition whereby Ryan Jones is the sole difference between winning or losing a Cup.

    From a devil’s advocate pov, I think one could argue the very fact that he is ‘benchable’ and will move up and down the lineup without complaint while still producing makes him more versatile than it does high maintenance.

  37. Mr DeBakey says:

    he irritates the slide rule fans

    Decimal Point Divas if you plese.
    I’ve never been one to complain about this Fanboy Favourite.
    If Jones is a problem, he’s a much smaller one than a few other guys I could name.
    And he clearly has plusses to balance out the Awfuls.

    The initial complaint was that his shot % was unsustainable.

    Well, his shooting percentage did drop last season. A trend?

    Then the goalposts moved to his poor corsi

    I don’t think anything moved anywhere, his WOWY scoring chances were appalling.
    Everybody spent less time in their own zone when they weren’t playing with Jones.

    Jones isn’t part of the problem. He’s part of the solution.i>

    He’s UFA after this season.

  38. Mr DeBakey says:

    I tried to go in and fix my typos above.
    I was told that i wasn’t authorized.
    Damn
    Yet more proof that
    Word processors are your friend

  39. rickithebear says:

    Vor:

    His data is not shot Quality. that is some mythical value. Ryder has identified clear factors in the SUCESS of the shot. if we can break shots in to clearly influenced groups. you get a true measure of expected shot success.
    quality is Bullshit.
    goal scoring is situational.

    Allan presents success rate by :
    1. Type
    2. Distance
    3. Even/PP
    4. 1st shot/rebound
    All clear factors in the shots results.

    when looking at sports accademial looks at the how close to the mean as a measure of affect.
    Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!
    The larger the data scater the more affect.

    what excites me : you are building different curves relative to those 4 factors. each group captures a portion of the Scatter. To come up with expectations for that shot.

    CBS last year had an intresting gametracker.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/gametracker/live/NHL_20120606_NJ@LA

    In this they present an elevation view of the shot. by location in 5 areas. to give a further influence of the shot. i would break it up into
    1. over left shoulder
    2. Head
    3. over right shoulder
    4. chest area
    5. shoiulder-blocker arm swing
    6. Shoulder -glove arm swing
    7. block side non-arms swing area above pads.
    8. glove side non-arm swing area above pads.
    9. left pad side
    10. five hols
    11. right pad side.
    There are 74,000 shots in the season.

    I would like to know the general success rate for
    A even back hand 13ft on the rebound above the goalies pads under the blocker arm.

    the one factor that would be missing is that shot taken as the goalie is
    1. square to the position.
    2. sliding across on pads.
    3. diving across.
    Diffrent types of elevations (pitch charts) the home plate is moving.
    Better ad in Pitch er shot speed.

    Quality of shot?
    Situational success of shots and what is best to give relative to our players.
    There you go.

    Now is there anyone out there retired or hobyist who wants to look at 74,000 shots a year? post lockout.

    5 people per team to come to a value for each shot 120 shots per night
    21,584 man nights to get caught up. Anyone? Anyone?

  40. rickithebear says:

    Now as we know ev/pp player is more about the the defended shooting lane. so i would inlude path odf shot as well.

  41. jonrmcleod says:

    Regarding point #1: that’s quite a specific forecast. I’ll be looking for that period–will it be the second or third period?

  42. VOR says:

    Ricki,

    You do know you just said that when plotting the relationship between two variables the more random the data points the more closely correlated those two variables are?

  43. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Oilers goal-scoring leaders, last two seasons:

    EVG
    ===
    1. Eberle 36
    2. Hall 28
    3. Jones 27
    4. Gagner 23
    5. Hemsky 21
    (6. Smyth 15)
    (6. RNH 15)
    8. Paajarvi 14
    9. Horcoff 12
    (10. Cogliano 10)

    SHG
    ===
    1. Jones 3
    2. Eberle 2
    7 tied with 1

    PPG
    ===
    1. Hall 21
    2. Eberle 14
    3. Horcoff 10
    4. Gagner 9
    5. Jones 5
    (6. Smyth 4)
    7. Paajarvi 3
    8. Hemsky 2
    5 tied with 1

    Total
    =====
    1. Eberle 52
    2. Hall 49
    3. Jones 35
    4. Gagner 33
    5. Hemsky 24
    6. Horcoff 22
    (7. Smyth 19)
    (8. RNH 18)
    9. Paajarvi 17
    (10. Cogliano 11)

  44. Moosemess says:

    One of the interesting aspects of the advanced stats debate in hockey for me is the parallels it shares with evolution in the field of market research and analytics.

    Much like the current advanced stats junkies, marketeers have long sought those elusive silver bullet metrics that will help solve the age old dilemma of allocation for brand building vs direct response. The problem however, much as it is in hockey, is the limitations of the available data, and more specifically those limitations that are inherent to the nature of the mediums themselves (or to further the parallel with hockey, that are specific to the fluid nature of the game itself).

    Advertising on television for instance is much like the conclusions drawn from the ‘saw him good crowd.’ Rating systems are notoriously flawed and skewed in favour of the vendor, it’s intrinsically flawed as a direct response medium, and it requires a disproportionate amount of spend in relation to other media. It’s a bit like signing Brad Richards as a UFA on the basis of standard plus/minus alone!

    And yet, there is a massive amount of anecdotal, qualitative and correlative evidence to support the hypothesis that it is an extremely cost effective medium particularly for brands hoping to engender consumer trust. Which is why so many Fortune 500 companies (folks not known for overlooking quantitative shortcomings) continue to invest in the medium despite the fractured media landscape and dominant growth of the web.

    Why would they do this when the web represents the field of dreams for the data-driven marketer, a medium that offers the ability to allocate, quantify and optimize marketing spend vs. ROI in REAL TIME?!!! Think shot quality data to the extreme being discussed today and you’ll get my drift : )

    The short answer is that there are times when ‘gut’ and ‘proven history’ have value in this world despite the absence of bulletproof quantification.

    Advanced stats ARE the future but given the fluid nature of hockey wherein multiple decision variables are occuring on a second-by-second basis, the data capture is nowhere near where it needs to be for people to be citing absolute truths on the basis of the available data. And yet, we see posters doing this on a daily basis. In almost everyone one of these instances, data is either cherry picked to support a hypothesis or massive factors of influence and context germane to the final hypothesis are ignored or overlooked.

    On the basis of the boxcars (i.e. that time worn and proven data), I’m willing to consider the possibilty that Ryan Jones is a sufficient Bottom 6 option. I’m also open to arguments that his goal production comes at the expense of other shortcomings in his game though I’ve yet to see those shortcomings being definitively quantified, particularly as they apply to impact on the final game result (i.e. Jones’ ROI).

    And therein lies the rub. IMO, riding the fence on these conclusions (much like maintaining a diversified marketing mix) is the only reasonable approach given the overall shortcomings of the data available. That said, in marketing, best practices dictate that you stick with your cash cows and in sports, that cash cow is goal production. Which is why I feel comfortable in stating that having Ryan Jones on the team at this time is better than not having him. Goals scored are a good thing despite whatever nebulous argument we can make against the player creating them.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca