AVALANCHE AT OILERS, G80 13-14

I’d like to talk a little this morning about progress. Sometimes in life you have a difference of opinion with someone, or you and others find a group of people with a different view, and it becomes personal for one reason or another. I believe that’s happened with ‘saw him good versus advanced stats’ and very much doubt we’ll get this thing resolved in my lifetime. Why? There is a stubborn streak on both sides that would impress 1,000 mules.

However, there ARE signs of progress.

conversationFor me, this is progress. Two sides discussing the problem and coming at it from differing points of view, but without the “you idiot” stance so many (from both worlds) take in these conversations.

I think it comes down to this: smart math people drill down on concepts, discover this stuff works and has predictive power, and then become frustrated that it doesn’t get adopted universally. These individuals, wonderful learners but poor teachers, treat every new set of ears as though they are one large idiot, begin to lash out at these individuals in an effort to hurry along the process. “How thick are you?” is not an effective teaching tool, and yet from my experience that’s the approach many in the math group take. The exchange above represents progress. Congrats to all in the thread, and thanks for giving me some faith that defensiveness will one day wash away and leave the conversation to grow and manifest new directions.

If you’ve read this far, I’m sure part of you is saying “dammit Lowetide, THEY started it with the cheesies in the basement and do you watch the games crap!?!!” and you’re right as rain. The mainstream media has for the most part been very slow to respond, and doesn’t trust it. I suspect it has to do with having to think about strongly held views that are central to the way one sees the game. When Tyler Dellow showed me Grant Fuhr was not in fact the greatest goalie of his generation it pissed me off royally. The internet has (thankfully) washed away my rage, and I’ve come to my own view about Fuhr and his place in history.

I think the math folks have to realize three things. First, whips are a terrible teacher. Second, what took them relatively little time to suss out takes us normal humans a long time, because math and because you’re attacking our Fuhr’s. That’s going to get some pushback, but that’s also a sign that you’re engaging the other side. Finally, the MSM has the power to keep their distance for a long time, and for older gents like myself that means we’ll not be around when the good stuff arrives.

I am not pointing fingers this morning, I am thanking Ryan Batty, Alan Hull and Ryan Rishaug for engaging without anger.  Thank you, from the cheap seats.

 THE CONVERSATION IN THE COACH’S ROOM

  • Eakins on having a hammer: “I can easily stand here and argue “Yes, we need that.” We’ve got a guy back there that’s more than willing to fill the role  with Mark Fraser and, uh, one side of me says “absolutely, we need the toughness up front, we need it on our back end.”
  • Final portion: “But, Mark [Spector], I… and that’s the honest to God’s truth, there’s one side of me that says: “Yes, we need to old school it and we’ve got to have those guys.” And, then there’s another side of me looking at how teams are, some other teams are building and… I’m not sure.”

This is Dallas Eakins talking about the Rishaug and Hull/Batty argument going on in his brain. This conversation is happening all across the NHL (except Toronto) and the blogs and people who read and have read this one have been along for some or all of the ride. That’s wonderful, this is the good stuff!

Ladies, it’s a simple thing. If you care about the other man’s opinion, and believe in the strength of your argument, you need to respect both with your words and your actions. Only then, when the defenses are down and smart people are free to express complex and simple without the shackles of pettiness or the fear of the crowd, will the true value of this new toy be realized.

Let it be.

MY OPINION

I have stated forever my opinion on this but one final time. When I was a lad, the Montreal Canadiens employed a “policeman” named John Ferguson. He fought and speared and intimidated, basically all the things we see Milan Lucic do today. Ferguson did this alongside Jean Beliveau and Yvan Cournoyer (among others), meaning he had to keep up, take and make a pass (the most underrated skill in the sport) and endure the burning legs that came with keeping up to the Roadrunner.

ALL of the Flyers 70′s team could play. ALL OF THEM.

Somewhere along the way, NHL managers came to the idea that “enforcers” meant “fighters” and we are here. You cannot—as Eakins brain expressed above—have it both ways UNLESS your big man can play the game.

It’s always been thus. ALWAYS. This is a modern era issue, no one in the previous 50 years of the game would have been foolish enough to risk it. What does that tell us about the modern game? Well, it suggests coaching staffs value their top 9 forwards and that the bottom three are the ‘ad-libs’ in the group. It tells us that some teams employ a fourth line as though it was a backup third line and others employ a line designed to ward off demons.

It tells us the conversation Dallas Eakins is having with himself has yet to find a victor. It tells us the conversations we’ve had on this blog and others are also an issue in the boardrooms and the backrooms. It tells us we have answers that will eventually be adopted by the game we love.

How quickly do we want this to happen? How much do we want to be a part of it? How much do we respect the game? The people who are in it but need time and time and time to reach their own conclusions?

As always, questions are the fire that fuels ideas and solutions. Sometimes, when they’re especially volatile, the way these ideas are introduced impacts the adoption timeline.

Let it bleed.

eakins smiling

There are a lot of people saying the Oilers have been passed by the Colorado Avalanche, but to my eye the Avs are built on a house of cards.

CORSI FOR %, 5X5

corsi for by team

Their record in one-goal games is not sustainable, and the fact that Patrick Roy is being crowned king of the world will make this fall rather sweet. Will it come during the playoffs? Next season? Both?

FRIEDMAN

  • 30. Another follow-up from the last blog: the NCAA defenceman Edmonton targeted was the one they got, Jordan Oesterle. They were trying hard to keep it quiet, because other pursuers were thinking he might go back to college. Someday, I’m going to write a book on all of the things teams and agents accuse each other of doing when it comes to recruiting NCAA free agents. It’s hilarious.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

GARNER SMILE
A busy day on TSN 1260, 10 this morning. Scheduled to appear:
  • Alan Hull, Copper and Blue. We’ll discuss the ideas presented above, Hull’s opinion on the issue, and how to launch a new tomorrow.
  • Travis Yost, Hockeybuzz. The Senators season is over. What the hell happened?
  • Corey Graham, Oil Kings PBP. The OK’s keep on keeping on.
  • Michael Parkatti, Boys on the Bus. We’ll talk about Hall’s place in the game, and about the blue.
  • Pauline Hughes, Edmonton Rush. What a season! We’ll talk playoffs!
  • Darring Bauming, TSN 1290 Winnipeg. The Jets have some questions this offseason. Kane, Buff, will they do something mad?

10-1260 via text, @Lowetide_ on twitter. See you on the radio!

written by

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

250 Responses to "AVALANCHE AT OILERS, G80 13-14"

« Older Comments
  1. Pouzar says:

    Jezzuz MacKinnon is fast

  2. fuzzy muppet says:

    Pouzar,

    Eberle is a helped immensely by Hall and his ability to gain the zone. WHen he’s away from Hall, he’s not nearly as effective.

    Hall is the bus driver. I see that in Yakupov also. His potential should not be given up on.

    Eberle would net the greatest return to fill the holes.

    Trading Yakupov at his lowest point would be pure folly.

  3. DeadmanWaking says:

    icecastles:
    It’s about how we use, ignore and selectively ignore facts not to form our opinions, but to reinforce the ones we already hold.

    This particular field of psychological research has a mixed reputation these days.

    Scientific method: Statistical errors
    Robert Kurzban: P-Hacking and the Replication Crisis

    The problem is this: psychwonk-wannabees have discovered an inexhaustible mine shaft to engage in quasi-legitimate p-hacking.

    Here’s the thing: humans are sticky. It’s considered good experimental protocol to give the subjects the least amount of instruction possible, least this interaction taint the results. However, I’ve become convinced that it’s a fact of human nature that paucity of interaction causes the experimental subject to panic-and-pick-one. We always resolve social ambiguity to an available narrative thread. We always treat strange instructions as a social interaction poised to leave us standing there naked in public. It’s a solid human instinct to suspect the man or woman in the white coat of attempting to steal your trousers. What makes this any different than other modes of confidence tricksters? That they promise to return your pants before you leave the building?

    Has anyone else around here noticed that narrative frames are sticky, or that it takes the least imagined provocation to trigger a standard deluge?

    Just about any oddly sparse experimental interaction is likely to generate a reliable p-score. Guaranteed paper, every time. The p-score fundamentally tests against the random hypothesis. Humans are not random. Whenever slightly confused, we latch onto our favorite tried-and-true narrative garment.

    I stared hard at that four-element matrix and I just went WTF? First of all, the majority column pretty much has to be “no definite change” in any valid experiment. I’ve got a bit of a patch myself. It cycles between red, dry, and flaky. It’s been exposed to nearly every steroid known to man over the past fifteen years. I gave up. If it gets to cracked and bleeding, then I haul out my box of steroid creams and give it a lather. This always causes prompt skin loss, followed by the cracks closing up (good), followed by the patch becoming thick, leathery, and bright red. Not the best outcome for enjoying a swim at the local pool, but actually pretty good for not catching a social disease when compared against cracked and bleeding (I’m not speaking here of social diseases of the tropical zone).

    If the outward cosmetics as considered from 20 paces are the decision criteria of merit then all treatments make it worse rather than better. But more generally, my point is that better/worse is no trivial judgment, and that anyone in a long relationship with a skin rash knows that 90% of what superficially appears to change is just a red herring. Many creams, lotions, unguents, and fido-licks induce a short-term quiescence, but the effect never lasts.

    I guess we’re supposed to presume that this rash is some kind of allergic rash or poison ivy, rather than some form of tenacious psoriasis.

    I guess we’re supposed to presume that this particular lab has cracked the code on whether a rash gets better or worse, to the extent that no rash ever sits on the fence. What &*#@!@^! rash it that? Not one I’ve ever had, and I’ve had a few. Missed a week of school once after visiting a farm where I ended up playing cops and robbers wading around in a barley silo with the farm boys in residence. We had a blast. The myriad pimple outbreak that followed–covering 80% of my body–not so much (if “myriad” is construed as the specific value 10,000 then my usage borders on literal). When I was actually tested as an adult, a pin-prick of June grass gave me a hard white welt the size of a quarter, all of 30 minutes after exposure.

    Because patients do not always complete studies, the total number of patients in each two groups is not exactly the same, but this does not prevent assessment of the results.

    Uh, sorry there Stanley Milgram. Just because I’ve been told that this is part of the allowable protocol, doesn’t mean I’m going to believe you. Whatever ridiculous p-hacking universe allows you to put that statement forward is not ever going to find itself on my personal A-list.

    Browse: Home / 2011 / February / 14 / Modern Science and the Bayesian-Frequentist Controversy Modern Science and the Bayesian-Frequentist Controversy by John Myles White who captions his blog He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense:

    To me, it’s amazing how similar the ambiguous regions of behavioral decision theory are to the major questions of theoretical statistics: people seem largely unable to systematically decide whether they want to be minimaxing (which seems very close to Efron’s vision of frequentist thought as stated here) or whether they want to be minimizing expected risk (which is closer to my own vision of Bayesian thinking). My own sense is that we learn as a global culture, over time, which error functions are least erroneous — and we do so largely by trial and error.

    Most interesting to me is to consider individual differences in the error functions people effectively use: I suspect political preferences correlate with a propensity to focus on worst case thinking rather than average case thinking. Also, I’m fascinated by the way that a single person switches between worst case and average case thinking: I suspect there’s as much to be learned here as there was in understanding what drives risk seeking behavior and what drives risk average behavior.

    Nice post. I just typed “Bayesian controversy” into Google and this came up as the top link.

    So, like we didn’t already know about the philosophical problem of Bayesian priors and how it might influence those with mathematical aptitude to not go along with how the experimenter wishes his query to be received? If the priming in the attitudes experiment was as sparse and philosophically barren as this “rash” example, well they got an outcome they could publish, but one only a muddler could love.

    Why did he pick “rash” for his example, in the first place. Freudian slip? Sneaky priming effect? Or is it his view that the human mind is so brilliantly quarantined that “rash” and “rash judgment” never copulate? Not according to Daniel Kahneman, a researcher who actually gets it right.

    System 1: Fast, automatic, frequent, emotional, stereotypic, subconscious
    System 2: Slow, effortful, infrequent, logical, calculating, conscious

    It’s well known that System 1 operates in parallel and that a very large number of associations are stirred up for practically any input, relevant or not. However, System 2 isn’t always aware of this. System 2 is a bit of dunce about this, actually. For example, System 2 is rather easily persuaded that milk comes from cartons. (That’s a bit of a joke; in modern society, both systems are prone to this error.) It was my System 1, however, that also contemplated “milk chocolate” (need to stop eating so much of those treats which I should go and get now) and the odd factoid that in many Palaeolithic societies, the word for “semen” is some variation on “men’s milk” in their native language. System 1 dredges all of that, every time. It’s a jungle down there.

    The reason why we always map mysterious social interactions onto some (often arbitrary) narrative frame is so that we’re primed and ready when Act III of the British comedy of errors finally rounds the bend: our justifications, pretexts, and excuses are primed and ready. Humans orient themselves to the available escape hatches of social spin the same way squirrels orient themselves with respect to the nearest tree. And we do this well before grandma wolf makes her surprise appearance.

    If a middle-aged man invites an unknown fourteen-year-old girl into his passenger seat, she had better be in urgent need of emergency medical care, and the fellow had better drive along the most direct route to the nearest of all competent facilities, and the injury had better be highly visible right from the outset. That kind of thing. Nearest available tree.

    If you put a squirrel into a room with no trees–a room lined with small cat doors–and then start asking the squirrel to reveal his honest opinion by standing on square A or B on different sides of the room, there’s a pretty good chance he chooses A or B furthest from the cat door that most resembles the scariest ambush he barely survived in his formative squirrel youth.

    Humans are no different, but mainly we fear social ambush.

    I wouldn’t wish to be caught dead picking either of those rash outcomes by any thinker I truly respect. “Hey, Richard, you invented time travel. What a surprise!” as I madly try to close the incriminating screen. Richard was a harsh judge.

    Judging Books by Their Covers

    “John and his father go out to look at the stars. John sees two blue stars and a red star. His father sees a green star, a violet star, and two yellow stars. What is the total temperature of the stars seen by John and his father?”

    So Bruce, any guesses? Correct for Hubble expansion, nebular dust clouds, and gravitational lensing as you wish.

    Let’s try this example again, with stars replaced by people.

    Blue – kind, conscientious, caring, authentic, optimistic
    Green – analytical, data-driven, planners, achievers
    Orange – impulsive, energetic, make decisions based on their “gut”, like attention
    Gold – organized, stabilizing, detail-oriented

    I don’t know the answer numerically, but right now I’m pretty sure both Green+Gold and Copper+Orange are at low biorhythm ebbs.

    Here is the pertinent remark from that post:

    GREEN: “They need to feel competent. However, their definition of competence far exceeds that of any other temperament.”

    No shit Sherlock!

    The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.

          Richard Feynman

    If psoriasis is the body attacking itself …

    So it turns out that this Green personality group with their enormous investment in honing their Bayesian priors is harder to deflect from their global inclinations on the basis of a 2×2 matrix of poorly adduced experimental evidence buttressed with some Milgramesque lab-coat authority rendered in the fine print that “this does not prevent assessment of the results”.

    Nice p-value, buddy.

    When the human animal decides to replace an existing narrative frame with a new-improved narrative frame, there’s a dicey operation of crossing a busy highway populated by friends, peers, and family members (and various other factions of ill regard). When you’re halfway between narratives, you’ve got one leg in the old spin, and one leg in the new spin, you’re a deer in the headlights if your midnight scrabble across the blacktop is poorly judged.

    My brother nearly struck a deer the other night. Where he lives, there’s an hour after dusk where the deer almost seem to outnumber the mosquitoes. My brother commented “to a deer, asphalt is ice, any day of the year”. As my brother leaned on the ABS, the deer did a frantic fast-forward moonwalk in the center of his lane. Poorly judged.

    For the human animal, changing one’s opinion is social ice, every day of the year. You’re exposed and vulnerable until all four feet are firmly planted on the other side.

    Recently I watched Tess (Polanski) and Barry Lyndon (Kubrick) more or less back to back. Both movies give the vicissitudes of received opinion a pretty harsh rogering, Polanski more from System 1 and Kubrick more from System 2.

    In the first movie, the key line from Tess is this: “Once a victim, always a victim”.

    In horrible Hardy, the scene reads like this:

    She too had sprung up, but she sank down again. “Now, punish me!” she said, turning up her eyes to him with the hopeless defiance of the sparrow’s gaze before its captor twists its neck. “Whip me, crush me; you need not mind those people under the rick! I shall not cry out. Once victim, always victim–that’s the law!”

    “O no, no, Tess,” he said blandly. “I can make full allowance for this. Yet you most unjustly forget one thing, that I would have married you if you had not put it out of my power to do so. Did I not ask you flatly to be my wife–hey? Answer me.”

    Being rather more burly than Tess, the rake had once made her a proposal she couldn’t refuse in a secluded forest on the ruse of whisking her off to safety, which–fatal flaw–she rather stubbornly refused to wear in the messy Victorian-era aftermath of having become a ruined woman.

    James Flynn: Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents:

    Now let me give you a sample of some of his interviews. He talked to the head man of a person in rural Russia. They’d only had, as people had in 1900, about four years of schooling. And he asked that particular person, what do crows and fish have in common? And the fellow said, “Absolutely nothing. You know, I can eat a fish. I can’t eat a crow. A crow can peck at a fish. A fish can’t do anything to a crow.” And Luria said, “But aren’t they both animals?” And he said, “Of course not. One’s a fish. The other is a bird.” And he was interested, effectively, in what he could do with those concrete objects.

    And then Luria went to another person, and he said to them, “There are no camels in Germany. Hamburg is a city in Germany. Are there camels in Hamburg?” And the fellow said, “Well, if it’s large enough, there ought to be camels there.” And Luria said, “But what do my words imply?” And he said, “Well, maybe it’s a small village, and there’s no room for camels.” In other words, he was unwilling to treat this as anything but a concrete problem, and he was used to camels being in villages, and he was quite unable to use the hypothetical, to ask himself what if there were no camels in Germany.

    A third interview was conducted with someone about the North Pole. And Luria said, “At the North Pole, there is always snow. Wherever there is always snow, the bears are white. What color are the bears at the North Pole?” And the response was, “Such a thing is to be settled by testimony. If a wise person came from the North Pole and told me the bears were white, I might believe him, but every bear that I have seen is a brown bear.” Now you see again, this person has rejected going beyond the concrete world and analyzing it through everyday experience, and it was important to that person what color bears were — that is, they had to hunt bears. They weren’t willing to engage in this. One of them said to Luria, “How can we solve things that aren’t real problems? None of these problems are real. How can we address them?

    In other words, they were fixed in the concrete mores and attitudes they had inherited. They would not take the hypothetical seriously, and without the hypothetical, it’s very difficult to get moral argument off the ground.

    What you have then, is the greenest Green’s baulking at the pathetic 2×2 statistical matrix, and all the other colours refusing–to varying degrees, according to their hue–to fully entertain the instructed hypothetical upon which the experiment turns.

    Tip of the iceberg synopsis: Beware of experimental psychologists who procure their CV from the p-value corner store.

    The larger, submerged portion of my iceberg pertains to persuasion and resistance to persuasion, and I suppose I could calve at it with exploding harpoons until the ray-traced Atari hubcap shows up to evict me from the arcade, but this post is already long enough.

  4. Derek says:

    Seriously. Colorado is going out in 5 or less, they can only play EJ and Hejda against one line.

  5. Pouzar says:

    fuzzy muppet:
    Pouzar,

    Eberle is a helped immensely by Hall and his ability to gain the zone.WHen he’s away from Hall, he’s not nearly as effective.

    Hall is the bus driver.I see that in Yakupov also.His potential should not be given up on.

    Eberle would net the greatest return to fill the holes.

    Trading Yakupov at his lowest point would be pure folly.

    Gawd this narrative is so frickin tiresome I can’t even put into words.

    1. Hall is the Oilers best player. He pushes the river. I get it.
    BUT
    This year Eberle CF% is the higher than Hall’s
    and
    his CF% is higher without Hall. Eberle also makes Hall better. Sweet synergy.

    2. The Perry reference was used to make a point. Oh….and he plays with a guy named Getzlaf.

    3. We don’t score goals. You want to trade a guy who creates goals and scores them for what? We already gave away our 2nd best RWer and Corgi leader for magic beans.

    4. 17th man……17th in the NHL the last 3 years…that is excellent!

  6. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxpZTBbN7MY

    found that little gem.

    man I miss those late 90s teams. LT was even talking about Grier today.

    The Oilers should bring him back for that “Always an Oiler” deal.

    ————–
    I really hope MacT isn’t sour on Petry and Marincin. Eakins the other day and the amount of TOI Marincin’s getting tell the real story here… probably… but it sucks that you will always have some lingering doubts about a team that so two-sided in its thinking.

  7. Suntory Hanzo says:

    I watch the majority of games with the away team’s feed, and some of the broadcasts are very fair and enlightening hearing another perspective on your team.

    I always expect some bias, seeing as who is paying the announcers and who the target market is.

    It gets reallt tiresome always hearing the Avs broadcasters be baffled at how the Oilers could even possibly keep up wiwth their team. Every missed opportunity is “a goal that should have gone in” and most Oiler goals are usually only a lucky break (first goal exception…) or missed coverage – never a pieve of skill by the opposition.

    Any one else find this?

  8. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I really hope MacT isn’t sour on Petry and Marincin

    Didn’t sound like he was sour on Marincin. Just wasn’t as glowing as his review of Klefbom.

  9. Rebilled says:

    That Sportsnet guy was pretty emphatic about the Canucks not hiring Linden as GM.

    From one team to another, I’m really hoping they do it.

  10. Pouzar says:

    Suntory Hanzo,

    It’s 2-1 and I just realized Smyth is on the 2nd line with a comatose Gagner and we have Larsen on the 4th line. Reinforcements are on the way my friend!

  11. striatic says:

    Any one else find this?

    I’ve found that the East Coast broadcasts are very upbeat on the Oilers. The American ones anyway. Like, surprisingly so. I saw a NESN broadcast where they had a fan poll about which bottom dwelling team had the brightest future and the Oilers won that poll by a mile. Many times I’ve turned to my wife and said “boy they really must not watch any Oilers games” after hearing an East Coast American commentator compliment the Oilers and focus on the future. Just so alien compared to what the HNIC commentariat does in terms of maligning the Oilers.

    Probably an “if you can’t say anything nice” situation, but the NESN Bawston boys take other east coast teams back behind the woodshed repeatedly, along with the Canucks of course, so I’m not sure that’s the whole story.

  12. Pouzar says:

    striatic: I’ve found that the East Coast broadcasts are very upbeat on the Oilers. The American ones anyway. Like, surprisingly so. I saw a NESN broadcast where they had a fan poll about which bottom dwelling team had the brightest future and the Oilers won that poll by a mile. Many times I’ve turned to my wife and said “boy they really must not watch many Oilers games” after hearing an East Coast American commentator compliment the Oilers and focus on the future. Just so alien compared to what the HNIC commentariat does in terms of maligning the Oilers.

    That’s because Red Sox fans are wicked Smaht!!!!
    SOSH Rules!

  13. icecastles says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I think wood is endlessly interesting.
    If I ever met WG I’m tire him pretty quickly

    I have no words… no words.

  14. striatic says:

    Pouzar,

    Plus it isn’t too difficult to win that particular contest against the likes of Florida and Buffalo.

  15. spoiler says:

    Belov should make the honour roll tonight for that dodge.

  16. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    icecastles: I have no words… no words.

    Do you have any woods?

  17. striatic says:

    Cliche is among the most apt hockey player names.

  18. Suntory Hanzo says:

    striatic,

    To clarify, it is the between period broadcast guys that are the real culprit.

    Most away broadcasts always talk about our explosive offence and dangerous young players.

  19. icecastles says:

    striatic: Cliche is among the most apt hockey player names.

    Don’t mock him. That guy gives 110% and knows they need to get pucks to the net. He’s just happy to be there.

  20. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    icecastles: Why are you making it so hard?

    For the life of me I can’t figure out the appeal of this show.

  21. spoiler says:

    Hendricks will be seeing that in his sleep.

  22. frjohnk says:

    I think mackinnon has been the best player tonight. A pleasure to watch.

  23. "Steve Smith" says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: For the life of me I can’t figure out the appeal of this show.

    I hate that show. Hate it. DMW has yet to fully recover in my estimation from once alluding to being a fan.

  24. oliveoilers says:

    icecastles: Don’t mock him. That guy gives 110% and knows they need to get pucks to the net. He’s just happy to be there.

    He feels that his play has really turned a corner. It all comes with playing with great players and buying in. That guy gives 110%.

    4-1 visiting team. Pity that’s becoming a cliché around here….

  25. Halfwise says:

    oliveoilers: He feels that his play has really turned a corner.It all comes with playing with great players and buying in.That guy gives 110%.

    4-1 visiting team.Pity that’s becoming a cliché around here….

    We’re just going to keep things simple. Get some pucks on net and create some traffic.

    It doesn’t have to be pretty.

  26. oliveoilers says:

    So, a comedy about a group of pedantic loners, each with their own special psychological disorder, who wish to reduce everything to mathematical formulae isn’t popular on here? Who knew? ;-)

    Well, that couldn’t have been more ‘mailed in’ if Canada Post drove a delivery van onto the ice with a big neon sign saying “It’s going to be 4-1 Avs, leave now, avoid the rush.” Saw Gagner probably the worst I’ve ever seen him tonight. I like the scene in Mr. Deeds (Sandler cheated of another Oscar!) where he knocks out the footballer. “You want your bonus? Can we ask for money back if you play shit?”

  27. dangilitis says:

    http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/story/?id=448723&hubname=nhl-oilers

    Speaking of MSM, can someone please forward MacT and Eakins this list?

    I’ll drop Gazdic and Hendricks in favour of 2 of Steve Downie, Derek Mackenzie, Troy Brodie, Biz Nasy 2.0, and get rid of Fraser in favour of 1 of Engelland, McQuaid, Brookbank, Stoner.

    All these players “will just cost money,” and will be an upgrade on all the fighters the Oilers currently employ. Hendricks may be, as Gregor puts it, an “emotional leader,” but I’d prefer that he cheer lead with the Octane girls from the sidelines…

  28. G Money says:

    theres oil in virginia: Hey man, I think someone’s impostering you over at C&B.I’m pretty sure he’s a fake, because he seems to be pretty smart!He tweaked his handle (easy now) as a tip off.The article looks like it’s good and has some smart stuff in it, but I just looked at the pictures.

    Do you think that games played can account for quality?In other words, if a goalie has played 300 games, is he necessarily a pretty good goalie?If so, it looks like 60-90 is a good spot for picking one.On the other hand, if the average save% of the goalies in the 60-90 pick range is 1% lower than those in the 20-60 range, does that justify picking one earlier?You still have to pick the right one and put them on a good development track.

    Teasing aside…good work…although, you missed a word under Phil Collins’ chin…fucking amateurs.

    Here I was getting ready to talk statistics and a terrible hockey game broke out.

    Appreciate your taking the time read my FanPost!

    Good question on the games played. I took a look at what other work is out there, and the majority of ‘draft success’ approaches seem to use games played. You might suspect this would be the easy way out (it’s a high quality data series that is easy to acquire and work with), but I don’t think it is.

    Attempts to be more sophistimicated end up looking at one of the most difficult problems in hockey #fancystats: how do you compare different positions of players and try and assess their comparative ‘goodness’ in a single easily-computed easily-accessed easily-validated measure? Answer: right now, we can’t!

    So I think GP, despite its many conceivable flaws as a measure, becomes a solid fallback for this type of analysis, much like TOI is a really good measure for defensemen.

    So with that said, ultimately I was trying to achieve three things:

    - An updated data set. Most draft success data sets look to be three to four years old, which means they’re probably assessing data that ends in 2005! That’s practically ancient history. This now ends in 2009, which I think is as recent as you want to risk getting.

    - A position-specific data set. I didn’t just want to see how successful ‘third round picks were’, I wanted to see the difference (data wise and visually) between defense, forwards, and goalies. I’m pretty sure no-one else has done this (that could just be a failure of my use of The Google). I think I got this one covered pretty well though. Hence the mega-collection of charts and tables!

    - A more pick-specific data set. The success rate in the first round drops by 25% from pick 1 to pick 30, so that’s a pretty substantial range to gloss over by using a single success number! So rather than just look at success in the first round, I wanted it by a narrower pick range.

    This one’s a bit dodgier – because of the noisier sparser data, I decided to use the mathematical ‘smoothed’ curve to calculate these, rather than actual data (which is very sparse in the higher ranges, especially for goalies).

    I always prefer real data of course, but for the most part the smooth curve looks like an excellent analog for the underlying signal of the real data. (A digital analog). So now we can actually look at a defenseman like Nurse picked from 6-10 and actually say – “hey, history suggests that kind of pick has a 97% success rate, with an average of 977 games played!” And we can rest easy that the guy – from a historical draft perspective – is likely to be an outstanding player. So I think my tables have achieved that too.

    As for your other key points:
    - Must be Phil’s f*cking chin covering up the missing word
    - Maybe *I’m* the imposter? How would I know???? [panic]

  29. Hammers says:

    Colorado looks like a hell of a good team . Agree with whomever said Gags had his worst game .Is Nurse going to OKL ?

  30. Hammers says:

    fuzzy muppet:
    Pouzar,

    Eberle is a helped immensely by Hall and his ability to gain the zone.WHen he’s away from Hall, he’s not nearly as effective.

    Hall is the bus driver.I see that in Yakupov also.His potential should not be given up on.

    Eberle would net the greatest return to fill the holes.

    Trading Yakupov at his lowest point would be pure folly.

    Totally agree .

  31. Gerta Rauss says:

    Hammers:
    Is Nurse going to OKL ?

    Sure sounds like it.

    MacT was interviewed on Sportsnet between periods and he mentioned that was the intention provided the SSM Greyhounds playoffs ended tonight( it appears they lost and were eliminated)

  32. stevezie says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    “Steve Smith”,

    I am baffled by how many people confuse dumb jokes about smart topics with smart jokes. BBT is Two and a Half Men with nerds instead of douche bags,

  33. Gerta Rauss says:

    Dillon Simpson and the University of North Dakota headed to the frozen four and “then from there, hopefully being able to be a part of the Oilers organization somewhere and trying to play professional hockey will be a fun experience for me”

    http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=713459&navid=DL|EDM|home

  34. Colieo87 says:

    You guys ever read the divine comedy that’s the Edmonton Oilers.

  35. hunter1909 says:

    Colieo87:
    You guys ever read the divine comedy that’s the Edmonton Oilers.

    No, but at 2-1 the game had that moribund look about it so I tuned out. Just fired up the Commodore 64 and with a 4-1 final score I think I made the right selection.

    I feel too negative about this team to be a real fan.

  36. lance says:

    All caught up. Sleeping for me is about unplugging the wires and generally I think it is out of my control. It could also be about available energy, I spend much time In ready-to-mode. I could probably make a pie chart.

    Pie charts mostly represent rudimentary means to classify people in boxes. However, only molecules really ever fit. It’s chlorine or it’s not. My dad did a doctorate in psychology and even I’m scarred for it. But at it got me pretty clear on the reality of people boxes and statistics. Namely, whatever the box, no one fits.

    So rather than producing another drive by on how each corgi event doesn’t fit in any box, thus leading to each data point being flawed, and the corresponding collection of bad data being anything more than bad data, I’d rather expand on the reality of advanced stats getting its first real boost when real data shows it’s first sign of life. The agricultural ground crack. So instead of more on shot quality, I’m going to write a couple conclusions that would be possible if we had real data points as a launch pad:

    At 7:19 in the first period, player #64 was traveling -15 m/s, stopped in 1.6m, and in 2.7 seconds after the initial deceleration, was traveling +21 m/s. While at x,y location with a speed of 8 m/s and acceleration of 9 m/s/s, player #4 passed to 64 with a trajectory requiring 64 to accelerate to 13 m/s/s upon which time 64 was able to release a shot at 42 m/s. Because the goalie was at x,y location player would have seen the top right corner with available area of 0.32 m^2 and since 64 was able to shoot over 32 m/s, the goalie would have required reaction time under .05s with glove speed of 40 m/s/s which only Varlamov can actually do.

    Real data. In my opinion it’s not about old boys v new math, it’s a group trying to force bad data into good boxes. Some think it means lots, others think it means little, and classical science says it’s all noise.

    I know for sure that real data is possible. And that we don’t have it yet. All the algorithms in the world from box car averaging to Fourier transforms isn’t going to make bad data yield good results. Oilers give up goals when Gagner is on the ice? Bad use of incomplete data says trade the bum.

    Yakupov can turn +38 m/s in 1.4s? That’s a kid you draft first OV.

    Seriously, this technology has been in place longer than GPS. I visted MIT in 1990 and they were using satellites to track trajectories of coloured tennis balls bouncing around the parking lot. The problem is that the NHL already knows what’s best, doesn’t want my input (or they’d probably write back) and if they ever bother to put tracking technology into the skaters and pucks, they’d probably try and charge me monthly so I can see the data.

  37. Pouzar says:

    Hammers,

    I agree trading the Yak would be folly.

    :)

  38. tcho says:

    Oilers have played some good games of late. This was not one of them. It happens.

  39. theres oil in virginia says:

    fuzzy muppet:
    Pouzar,

    Eberle is a helped immensely by Hall and his ability to gain the zone.WHen he’s away from Hall, he’s not nearly as effective.

    Hall is the bus driver.I see that in Yakupov also.His potential should not be given up on.

    Eberle would net the greatest return to fill the holes.

    Trading Yakupov at his lowest point would be pure folly.

    First off, how the hell did bus driver get elevated to a position of anything but mockery?

    Second off (??), why is it even worth stating that “player X is better when playing with Hall”? If player X isn’t better when playing with Hall, then something’s up with player X. If player X is better when playing with Hall, then it’s all Hall’s doing. This statement is taken way too far, and is not useful to judge the other player’s value. Eberle (and occasionally Nuge) is the number one target for this statement. (Is it the gap in his teeth that draws people’s disrespect? I swear I’ve been hearing people down on Eberle since he was in Junior.) Eberle is an elite player in the making and his stats bear that out, even if one can’t see it with ones own eyes (time for glasses?). Lots can happen in a career to derail a player, but so far so good. A steal at #22.

    Third off, I don’t think Corsi has got anything to do with this issue (sorry Pouzar, JMO). The Oilers suck, and Corsi fluctuates wildly from game to game, and line to line, and with accompanying defensemen. Of course Eberle and Nuge are less effective without Hall; look at the dropoff from Hall to the next player. Isn’t Hall less effective without Nuge and Ebs? How good is Eberle next to Crosby? You know the answer, you don’t need to actually see it to know.

    Fourth off, if Eberle (and others) wasn’t better with Hall, then getting rid of Hall before the rest of the league catches on should be job number one.

    Fifth off, Yakupov has shown !!no signs!! of being a “river pusher”, “bus driver” or any other cliche of possession or play dominator that you want to use. So, what is it that makes Yakupov look like the “bus driver”? (Is there a bird in his hair? – haha, see video linked above.) He looks to be an elite shooter who is struggling somewhat with the transition to the NHL and a more appropriate NHL style of play under a new coach, and he plays on an awful team. He’ll find his spot. Trading him for less than a lot would certainly be stupid.

    Sixth off, Eberle (it appears) is happy to be in Edmonton and is locked up long term. He’s averaging 28 goals per season and is less than 25 years old. Good chemistry with Hall and Nuge. His centers so far during his career consist mostly of one-armed-baby Nuge, Gagner, and Horcoff. Trading him now? Wow. Trading him creates a hole while filling a hole and disrupting the chemistry of the team and missing out on his best years.

    Seventh off, why do you think other GMs keep saying things like “don’t bother calling again unless Eberle is on the table”? You don’t really think NHL GMs are bunch of idiots, do you?

  40. theres oil in virginia says:

    G Money: Here I was getting ready to talk statistics and a terrible hockey game broke out.

    Appreciate your taking the time read my FanPost!

    Good question on the games played.I took a look at what other work is out there, and the majority of ‘draft success’ approaches seem to use games played.You might suspect this would be the easy way out (it’s a high quality data series that is easy to acquire and work with), but I don’t think it is.

    Attempts to be more sophistimicated end up looking at one of the most difficult problems in hockey #fancystats: how do you compare different positions of players and try and assess their comparative ‘goodness’ in a single easily-computed easily-accessed easily-validated measure?Answer: right now, we can’t!

    So I think GP, despite its many conceivable flaws as a measure, becomes a solid fallback for this type of analysis, much like TOI is a really good measure for defensemen.

    So with that said, ultimately I was trying to achieve three things:

    - An updated data set.Most draft success data sets look to be three to four years old, which means they’re probably assessing data that ends in 2005!That’s practically ancient history.This now ends in 2009, which I think is as recent as you want to risk getting.

    - A position-specific data set.I didn’t just want to see how successful ‘third round picks were’, I wanted to see the difference (data wise and visually) between defense, forwards, and goalies.I’m pretty sure no-one else has done this (that could just be a failure of my use of The Google).I think I got this one covered pretty well though. Hence the mega-collection of charts and tables!

    - A more pick-specific data set.The success rate in the first round drops by 25% from pick 1 to pick 30, so that’s a pretty substantial range to gloss over by using a single success number! So rather than just look at success in the first round, I wanted it by a narrower pick range.

    This one’s a bit dodgier – because of the noisier sparser data, I decided to use the mathematical ‘smoothed’ curve to calculate these, rather than actual data (which is very sparse in the higher ranges, especially for goalies).

    I always prefer real data of course, but for the most part the smooth curve looks like an excellent analog for the underlying signal of the real data.(A digital analog).So now we can actually look at a defenseman like Nurse picked from 6-10 and actually say – “hey, history suggests that kind of pick has a 97% success rate, with an average of 977 games played!”And we can rest easy that the guy – from a historical draft perspective – is likely to be an outstanding player.So I think my tables have achieved that too.

    As for your other key points:
    - Must be Phil’s f*cking chin covering up the missing word
    - Maybe *I’m* the imposter?How would I know????[panic]

    I definitely think games played is a good way to do it. In fact, looking at your graphs opens up questions, which usually means you’ve done something positive. (Otherwise, you look at the results and say, “This doesn’t really tell us much and I have no idea where to go from here.”) My question is really centered on taking the next step. (More, dammit, more!) If you look at the goalies GP, you see a bunch of guys who played about 300 games, along with a bunch who were duds, from roughly picks 20-90. Then, I think you could take whatever goalie-specific stat you think discriminates best, and apply it to those goalies to make sure that there isn’t some subtle quality drop-off between the earlier and later picks. If there’s not, then why pick 2nd round, when you get the same value (historically) from 3rd round?

    Another issue is that there is still a range of years here, and it’s a relatively sparse data set by nature, so with GP, could you be getting biased by players’ # of years since draft? Could you justify normalizing the GP by GP/years since draft. Sort of GP by the player vs total GP opportunities since draft.

  41. Pouzar says:

    theres oil in virginia: First off, how the hell did bus driver get elevated to a position of anything but mockery?

    Second off (??), why is it even worth stating that “player X is better when playing with Hall”?If player X isn’t better when playing with Hall, then something’s up with player X.If player X is better when playing with Hall, then it’s all Hall’s doing.This statement is taken way too far, and is not useful to judge the other player’s value.Eberle (and occasionally Nuge) is the number one target for this statement.(Is it the gap in his teeth that draws people’s disrespect?I swear I’ve been hearing people down on Eberle since he was in Junior.)Eberle is an elite player in the making and his stats bear that out, even if one can’t see it with ones own eyes (time for glasses?).Lots can happen in a career to derail a player, but so far so good.A steal at #22.

    Third off, I don’t think Corsi has got anything to do with this issue (sorry Pouzar, JMO).The Oilers suck, and Corsi fluctuates wildly from game to game, and line to line, and with accompanying defensemen.Of course Eberle and Nuge are less effective without Hall; look at the dropoff from Hall to the next player.Isn’t Hall less effective without Nuge and Ebs?How good is Eberle next to Crosby?You know the answer, you don’t need to actually see it to know.

    Fourth off, if Eberle (and others) wasn’t better with Hall, then getting rid of Hall before the rest of the league catches on should be job number one.

    Fifth off, Yakupov has shown !!no signs!! of being a “river pusher”, “bus driver” or any other cliche of possession or play dominator that you want to use.So, what is it that makes Yakupov look like the “bus driver”?(Is there a bird in his hair? – haha, see video linked above.)He looks to be an elite shooter who is struggling somewhat with the transition to the NHL and a more appropriate NHL style of play under a new coach, and he plays on an awful team.He’ll find his spot.Trading him for less than a lot would certainly be stupid.

    Sixth off, Eberle (it appears) is happy to be in Edmonton and is locked up long term.He’s averaging 28 goals per season and is less than 25 years old.Good chemistry with Hall and Nuge.His centers so far during his career consist mostly of one-armed-baby Nuge, Gagner, and Horcoff.Trading him now?Wow.Trading him creates a hole while filling a hole and disrupting the chemistry of the team and missing out on his best years.

    Seventh off, why do you think other GMs keep saying things like “don’t bother calling again unless Eberle is on the table”?You don’t really think NHL GMs are bunch of idiots, do you?

    +1

    Perhaps an asterisk next to Eberle’s pt totals would appease the masses.

    *plays with Hall

  42. Pouzar says:

    So is there any doubt Klefbom will be joining MM on the blueline next year?

  43. lance says:

    TOIV -

    Playing with Hall also means playing against Toews. It’s one thing to score on the Gadzics ans Frasers, it’s quite another to do it against Hossa and Keith. There is so much more to player usage than simply tracking TOI or WOWY.

    No one doubts Eberle’s ability. The question is more about hen number of elite wingers that one actual contender can field. If the answer is less than 3, and the oil have 3, then necessarily one must go.

  44. theres oil in virginia says:

    Pouzar:
    So is there any doubt Klefbom will be joining MM on the blueline next year?

    Not much. It should be fine, unless Nurse also joins them. Klefbom ideally should start in the AHL, but this isn’t an ideal world. I don’t think it should come as any surprise that Klefbom is by talked about in glowing terms by MacT. This has been the case since he flew over to see him in Europe and was instantly impressed. Other than the injury concern, what’s changed? He looks pretty good to me, but I’ve been watching AHL Fraser, Hobbled Whitney, Kris Schultz’s brother, etc. If the Oilers lock up Petry and add one real-deal top pair NHL d-man, they should be fine. I don’t think they’ll get one though. Speaking of locking up Petry, do you think it’s wise for MacT to glow about Petry and then try to negotiate with him?

  45. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    oliveoilers: I like the scene in Mr. Deeds

    I like the Capra one better.

  46. theres oil in virginia says:

    lance:
    TOIV -

    Playing with Hall also means playing against Toews. It’s one thing to score on the Gadzics ans Frasers, it’s quite another to do it against Hossa and Keith.There is so much more to player usage than simply tracking TOI or WOWY.

    No one doubts Eberle’s ability. The question is more about hen number of elite wingers that one actual contender can field.If the answer is less than 3, and the oil have 3, then necessarily one must go.

    I can’t imagine that to be the case though (the max of 2). Personally, I thought there was still room for Hemsky, but you can’t keep threatening the guy with trade every off-season and trade deadline, so from that standpoint I’m glad he’s gone. Yak’s not even close yet, BTW.

  47. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    stevezie:
    Romulus Apotheosis,

    “Steve Smith”,

    I am baffled by how many people confuse dumb jokes about smart topics with smart jokes. BBT is Two and a Half Men with nerds instead of douche bags,

    It might as well be “According to Jim”

    Seriously, if you are still making sitcoms in the old style after the run of Seinfeld, Office (UK), Curb, Arrested Development, etc. you are simply wallowing in decadence.

    The medium has been excavated and eviscerated. It no longer holds any cultural value.

  48. lance says:

    Further on the trade Eberle question, Smid liked Edm and reupped. Souray liked it enough to sign. Liking the location certainly is a significant consideration. However that Eberle has been seen looking off Yak to me screams of politics and to me that gets big red flags.

    Doesn’t means Ebs is orange and yak is green (for the record I am all four) or that I advocate homogeneous personalities actually being on any cutting edge, instead i think there are plenty of good reasons to unload on a young player with clear potential to be above the NHL average for years, see Dallas and Iginla or boston and kessel for reference.

    Being in Phoenix is fine, leaving Phoenix after acclimating to that climate then heading north means I’m always freezing all the time. That is a significant consideration. Picking up Huberdeau would be fine. Doing it on October could come with very significant side effects that through improper use of statistics directly translates to MacT threw away Ebs. Lupul couldn’t handle something and bad stat usage got him a bus outta town. Welcome to mediocrity, except the Oilers aren’t even there.

  49. lance says:

    theres oil in virginia,

    Chicago runs Kane Hossa and Sharp, so three elite wingers is probably fine. Four? Idk, but hemsky’s gone so whatever. And whether Yak fits or not doesn’t so much matter to the cap because based on available evidence and because Oilers it seems that he is probably going to be paid like one. The point was about cap space, I guess.

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca