OILERS NO. 1 PROSPECT (winter 2015): CONNOR MCDAVID

by Lowetide

It was a sunny April afternoon in Northern Alberta, one of those days where going inside and watching television seems contrary to logic and reason. That morning, I wrote the following:

  • Light a candle. Send a message heavenward to the God who’ll listen, find some instant karma and think good thoughts. People will tell you the Edmonton Oilers don’t deserve McDavid, I say diddly squat. Edmonton Oilers fans have earned the right to have two lottery picks and win the day, and perhaps the hockey Gods have been beating fans senseless these years in order for us to earn our reward. Source

As I sat down to watch the draft lottery, I swear to God the idea of winning the thing never crossed my mind. I had written a post in the early morning hours of the day—a mock draft that I quickly and clumsily had to revise later—and had resigned myself to McDavid heading to Buffalo.

dorito

There are no words, rhymes or chimes to truly describe it, beyond the universal line we all share in historic moments: “Where we you?” and that’s about all there is to say about it. I was in my easy chair, stone cold shocked and spilling my wine. I’m still a little that way about it.

oilers lottery

PREVIOUSLY NO. 1 ON THE WINTER LIST

  • December 2005: G Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers
  • December 2006: L Viacheslav Trukhno
  • December 2007: C Sam Gagner
  • December 2008: C Riley Nash
  • December 2009: L Magnus Paajarvi
  • December 2010: L Taylor Hall
  • December 2011: C Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
  • December 2012: R Nail Yakupov
  • December 2013: D Darnell Nurse
  • December 2014: C Leon Draisaitl

McDavid continues a recent run of centers, Edmonton’s depth at the position now is (or will be) the strongest since the Stanley teams. Some day, out in the future, the Oilers could have a top 3C of Connor McDavid, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Leon Draisaitl. Two acquired with No. 1 overall selections, the other inside the top five overall—all of this in a five-year period. Now that’s a cluster!

mcdavid capture chels

WHAT THEY SAID ON DRAFT DAY

  • Ranked No. 1 across the board. This is a generational player.
  • Craig Button, TSN: Two words; unprecedented speed. Skating speed, hand quickness and mental processing that he executes simultaneously to threaten defenders and create opportunities. He would be the first pick at every draft since Sidney Crosby in 2005, perhaps even in Crosby’s draft year. Source.
  • Red Line: Dynamic speed and acceleration forces dmen to back off the blue line. Has a top end separation gear that’s a blur.
  • ISS: An intelligent, creative player that can wait for the play to come to him or create something out of nothing. A natural playmaker that is not afraid to go to the middle of the ice to make plays and makes those around him better. Has elite hockey IQ and knows where to be on the ice at all times.
  • McKeens: Explodes up the ice in one stride and can blow by a defender before he even has time to pivot .. incredibly balanced and strong on his skates – tough to knock down despite countless attempts by the opposition.
  • Future Considerations: An offensive threat with tremendous speed, McDavid is lethal in transition and makes opponents step back because of his ability to burn them quickly.
  • Black Book: Connor possesses electrifying speed and acceleration. He gets his feet moving instantaneously and gets everything out of his stride, allowing him to pull away from good skaters quickly. At least once per game you would think he has a turbo button for his skates. His vision is outstanding and he always seems to know who’s around him and what his best option is. He combines these two skills to create plays for his
    linemates.
  • “If there is any player in the NHL that I would like to become, it’s Pavel Datysuk. He has amazing offensive skills but is also someone that the coach can put on in the last 30 seconds in a one goal game because he is also very defensive minded. He is the complete 2-way player”.Connor McDavid, when asked if there was anyone in the NHL he looks at and says ‘that’s the player I’d like to become’? (2012 interview)

oilers mcdavid tsn

  • Connor McDavid about his combine interview with the Oilers: “It was exciting and obviously that’s the kind of team you want to be with if you are drafted No. 1. [Chiarelli] was saying all the right things. He was intense and he’s definitely looking to win. He’s not going to settle for mediocrity. I just want to make an impression with teams I talk to, make sure they understand what kind of guy I am and what I can bring to their team. Other than that I just want to make sure they know I’m doing all the right things, working hard in the gym, and maybe they’ll put together a decent score for me.” Source

mcdavid calgary two

2015-16

Connor McDavid’s rookie season started slowly, but he smashed through by game five; there were two games in his first 13 I’ll remember a long time. The first one came at the Saddledome, where points go to die for the Oilers. The young man seemed quiet early, taking everything in, then proceeded to cut through Flames with ease, scoring two goals and adding an assist. The second game I’ll remember forever, it was against the Habs and McDavid was on another planet in terms of hockey acumen. I’m an emotional person, and hockey is an emotional game when done right. That night against Montreal chills ran down my spine and I could not sit still for love nor money. Whatever powers from the Gods he summoned that night, I thank them kindly and the 18-year old along with it. It was beautiful—0-3 to 4-3 before you could get to the second corner in Cournoyer. Unforgettable. The good kind, the Nat King Cole kind.

  • Corey Pronman: “He will be on the Oilers top 6F right away and there’s a non-zero chance he passes Ryan Nugent-Hopkins on the depth chart by the end of the season. Once he skates in his first NHL game in October he’ll be in the upper echelon of the NHL in terms of his speed and skill. It’s just a matter of his physical game and what he does this summer to get ready for the physical grind and much bigger, stronger players facing him.”
  • Taylor Hall: “He’s got a lot of foot speed. He seems to glide faster than most guys skate in full speed. It’s fun to be out here with him, fun to hang around him and hopefully make him feel more comfortable for what he’s got in store.” Source
  • Todd McLellan: “We all focus on his offense, but he’s responsible [defensively].  I felt good about his penalty-killing. I didn’t know I was going to use him, but as the night went on, we used him and he was good positionally. When you have legs like that, you can recover from errors a lot quicker, and he has the ability to do that. But he’s not flying all over the place in the D zone, he stops, he slows down, he understands he can get back to full speed quickly. He was very responsible defensively tonight. We’ll see where it goes from there.”
  • Jeff Chapman, Copper & Blue: “Connor McDavid, will you marry me?”
  • Alan Hull, Copper & Blue: “McDavid is better than I thought possible.”
  • Benoit Pouliot: “With his speed, with his strength, with his hands, he’s never out of the play. I’m a big fan right now.”
  • McDavid on beating the Habs: “We have been finding ways to lose. To do it the other way around feels pretty special.”
  • Brian King (PDO): “How many times will anyone make Subban look that bad? McDavid has completely taken this game over.”
  • Heather Marginet: “McDavid makes Subban look like a junior dman!”
  • Dave Lumley: “I came, I saw, I believe.”
  • Todd McLellan: “Connor has met our expectations so far. Perhaps one of the things that his impressed me so far is his ability to handle pressure, both at the rink and away from it. He’s a tremendous young man.”
  • Lowetide post-game notes after Detroit game: Connor McDavid has this habit of sussing out the situation before impacting a game. He was effective but not impactful early in the game, and then late in the first period did a blue bayou past a shocked Detroit defender. After that, it was golden, like he’d proven it to himself and he crashed through whatever false ceiling held him back. From that point on, he was breathtaking. The goal was sensational, the backchecking a sublime chaser, and the play where he somehow avoided a check and still kept possession? I’ll call that one impossible.
  • Justin Cuthbert: Dreger said he was told that McDavid’s labrum was fully intact as surgeons repaired a “clean” break of the collarbone, and hypothesized that the best-case scenario for his return is seven-to-eight weeks. Source

  • 5×5 points per 60: 2.94 No. 2 among forwards
  • 5×4 points per 60: 5.05 No. 4 among forwards
  • Qual Comp: No. 3 among C’s
  • Qual Team: No. 2 among C’s
  • Corsi Rel: 12.5 No. 3 among F’s
  • Corsi for % 5×5: 51.6
  • Zone Start: 60.4
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 24/20.8
  • Boxcars: 13GP, 5-7-12 (before injury, on pace for 32-44-76)

MCDAVID WOWY

mcdavid wowy

McDavid is 3.48/60 with Nail Yakupov (and Benoit Pouliot) this season, that’s the kind of chemistry that can make an enormous difference. We’re going to miss him like mad until he returns, but those baker’s dozen games were an absolute treat.

THE FUTURE

Well, it’s going to be awhile, months instead of weeks. We probably should let go of the Calder idea, but to hell with that noise I’ll keep a candle lit and curse the hockey Gods. No matter how long he is out, Connor McDavid is a splendid, incredible talent who does in fact make an enormous difference to the Edmonton Oilers—today. Dave Lumley said it all.

THE 2015 ENTRY DRAFT

  • Connor McDavid No. 1 overall and a generational talent. It’s an amazing time in team history, delayed. No. 1 prospect.
  • Caleb Jones No. 117 overall and a more substantial prospect than we assumed on draft day. Currently 16GP, 4-9-13 in the WHL and a prospect of interest. A candidate for the Winter Top 20.
  • Ethan Bear No. 124 overall and he’s as good as the numbers I was looking at before the draft. Nice two-way ability and he’s 17GP, 4-13-17 in Seattle of the WHL so far this season. Inside the Winter Top 20.
  • John Marino No. 154 overall and a solid combination of speed and skill. At 6.02, 185 he has what scouts call a ‘projectable frame’ and offensively (13GP, 1-9-10) he’s probably in the range or a little shy of Jones and Bear. A candidate for the Winter Top 20.
  • Miroslav Svoboda No. 208 overall and a reasonable bet on draft day. He’s playing in the Czech 2 league and is 8GP, 4.51 .866. A candidate for the Winter Top 20.
  • Ziyat Paigin No. 209 overall and an interesting prospect. He’s 11GP, 0-3-3 (his goal was changed to an assist) and playing more after the trade to Sochi. 6.06, 210, I don’t know if that’s a projectable frame or an actual structure but he’s a player of interest. A candidate for the Winter Top 20.

His EV scoring is my favorite thing about early McDavid, he compares well to some famous rookies over the years in 5×5 points-per-60.

  1. Connor McDavid 2015-16 2.94
  2. Mark Stone 2014-15 2.57
  3. Bobby Ryan 2008-09 2.55
  4. Jeff Skinner 2010-11 2.44
  5. Patrick Kane 2007-08 2.27
  6. Nicklas Backstrom 2007-08 2.25
  7. Filip Forsberg 2014-15 2.23
  8. Max Domi 2015-16 2.18
  9. Nail Yakupov 2012-13 2.14
  10. Ondrej Palat 2013-14 2.13
  11. Logan Couture 2010-11 2.10
  12. Nathan MacKinnon 2013-14 2.07
  13. Ryan Nugent-Hopkins 2011-12 1.95
  14. Johnny Gaudreau 2014-15 1.74
  15. Matt DuChene 2009-10 1.66
  16. Gabriel Laneskog 2011-12 1.63
  17. Taylor Hall 2010-11 1.57
  18. Jonathan Huberdeau 2012-13 1.53
  19. John Tavares 2009-10 1.32

That’s incredible. At 18, he’s firing at about .5 above Patrick Kane, who arrived to a much stronger NHL team. You only get one chance to make a first impression, and McDavid took a month to figure out the best league on the planet. Astonishing. If he hadn’t come along the hockey Gods would have had to invent him.

107 comments
0

You may also like

0 0 vote
Article Rating
107 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bruce McCurdy

godot10: Nobody is dividing anything by zero.And you keep on mischaracterizing my use of infinite.

A single shot is a goal or it isn’t.It is a binary outcome.One sums up a lot of binary outcomes to get a probability.

In my original post
“[Well, actually averaging discrete values of 1 and 0’s for any distance from the net and type of shot, and rescaling the probability of a goal to a different danger scale]”

What is UNCLEAR about that? Nothing is being divided by zero.

You and I have a different take on the definition of “infinite”. A binary outcome is 1 or 0, not ∞ or 0.

But I’m going to conclude that what is unclear here is my mind. You obviously have a clear grasp on things and it is me who is failing to understand. Carry on on your higher plane of understanding and I’ll try to struggle along down here.

meanashell11

G Money: Ah, hmmm, we are truly arguing some mathematical arcana now!

I would say this:

1 – practically speaking, the post priori probability of a shot being a goal is either zero or one, but we have no way of knowing what it is a priori.This is axiomatic I think, hopefully not something anyone would argue about.

2 – the modeling behind the danger rating uses the historical probability of a shot of the same type and from the same distance to estimate the a priori probability

3 – the danger rating itself is calculated as

probability of 5v5 shot of type x and distance a being a goal / probability of all 5v5 shots from all distances being goals

4 – in theory, the denominator can be arbitrarily close to zero.So in theory, the danger rating is unbounded, and therefore the range is [0,infinity]

5 – if we went through a season [or however many seasons are in the study range] with no 5v5 goals scored, the danger rating would be NaN (not a number = 0 divided by 0!)

6 – in practical terms, the actual upper bound for danger would be achieved if a single 5v5 goal was scored based on exactly one shot for that type and distance, throughout all five seasons of the estimation range.Since in a season typically 60,000 5v5 shots are taken, that single shot from that single distance would have a probability of 100%, while the total shot probability would be 1/300,000. So the practical but incredibly unlikely upper limit for danger would be about 300,000.

6a – since I take the resulting discrete data and create a smooth curve out of it, it is possible for the mathematically modelled curve to be asymptotically vertical as it approaches 0 distance, another way to approach infinity.In practice, though, distances are recorded in whole numbers > 0, so the asymptotic part of the modelled curve would never be reached.

7 – I’m not sure what Godot10 means that a single shot has a danger of either zero or infinity.I don’t think that is correct.It implies that the denominator in every case is zero, which is basically never the case.

I do not mean to scare everyone but this type of quant work was exactly what got us into trouble in finance in 2008. I don’t want to go into detail, but my career has been tied very closely to the use of quantitative analysis in finance and it was great….. until it wasn’t. I guess in hockey it’s not really going to blow up the world but I would hate to have it happen twice!

"Steve Smith"

There are no words, rhymes or chimes to truly describe it, beyond the universal line we all share in historic moments: “Where we you?”

I was in Niagara Falls (on the American side) where my partner of more than ten years and I had, two days previous, reached a mutual, amicable, but nevertheless heartrending decision to call it quits.

And you know what? The weekend averaged out to “not bad”.

v4ance

http://www.tsn.ca/mondaymustread-flint-players-walk-out-after-coaching-staff-fired-1.390508

One by one, all 24 players of the OHL’s Flint Firebirds placed their sweaters on the floor in the front office and quit the team on Sunday night, shortly after owner Rolf Nilsen fired team staff.

According to reports, the coaching staff was fired by team owner Nilsen after he voiced his displeasure over a lack of playing time for his son, defenceman Hakon Nilsen. The coaching staff reportedly did not acquiesce to Nilsen, leading to their dismissal and an incensed dressing room.

Stephen Whyno ‏@SWhyno 25m25 minutes ago
Flint Firebirds release statement saying coaches have been reinstated and that team is cooperating with OHL investigation.

Crazy overly meddlesome owner is basically going to drive his kid out of hockey. All the other players will hate him for his dad’s stupidity.

Stephen Whyno ‏@SWhyno
Jim Nill expects NHL’s draft pick compensation for coaches and execs to lapse Jan. 1 after a full year. Policy had unintended consequences.

Looks like we get our 2nd rounder back for hiring Chiarelli

Also from the TSN article at the top:

Minnesota Wild GM Chuck Fletcher had a solid quip on the salary cap last week week: “We’re a steak dinner for six away from the cap, so we’ve got lots of space as long as somebody doesn’t order the baked potato,” Fletcher told the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Fletcher counted 15 teams – or half the league – either operating in the long-term injury (LTIR) exception or within $1 million of the cap. Money is tight.

The Oilers placed Connor McDavid on the long-term injury list this week to create space. For Edmonton, the tricky maneuvering this fall has been about not exceeding the performance “bonus cushion” of 7.5 per cent. With potential performance bonuses counting in full, every team must stay under $76.755 million ($71.4 plus $5.355 million). For example, McDavid would count against $3,775,000 of that number if he was on the roster. Other players also have high attainable bonuses on top of their rookie salaries: Leon Draisaitl ($2.475 million), Griffin Reinhart ($2.35M), Darnell Nurse ($850,000), Oscar Klefbom ($350,000) and Iiro Pakarinen ($82,500), according to GeneralFanager.com. The Oilers are unique in this isn’t frequently an issue for most cap teams. The bonus cushion could also offer another reason why Draisaitl began the season in the AHL: the Oilers couldn’t afford him on the roster.

Some wondered whether McDavid’s injury would prevent him from hitting 40 games this season, which would keep him a restricted free agent for one more year. Alas, each game McDavid is on the LTIR still counts as a game “on the roster.” McDavid, 18, is likely to notch 40 games played anyway this season.

So being on LTIR means Connor will use up his Calder eligiblity on what is really a half season. Tough odds but if anyone can win it in that short a time, it’s McDavid.

Since so many teams are operating on their extra LTIR bonus cushions, trades will be VERY difficult because the incoming and outgoing cap hits will need to balance for both teams in the transactions.

Bos8

Pajamah,

In Czech it would probably be Sbohem translated “With God”, or “Go with God’s blessing”.

Bruce McCurdy

G Money: Ah, hmmm, we are truly arguing some mathematical arcana now!

Yes, sorry. Like I said first principles are important, and there is something I’m not grasping here.

G Money: 4 – in theory, the denominator can be arbitrarily close to zero. So in theory, the danger rating is unbounded, and therefore the range is [0,infinity]

Ahh, I see. A probability divided by another probability. Not a probability of a given shot (= 1). The latter is my default approach. Thus the result of a given shot is either 0% or 100%, with a probability of a group of shots = [0% <X <100%]. This is the range within which we always work with hockey stats, seems to me, other than rare exceptions like the Curious Case of the Infinite Nuge.

G Money: 7 – I’m not sure what Godot10 means that a single shot has a danger of either zero or infinity. I don’t think that is correct. It implies that the denominator in every case is zero, which is basically never the case.

Thank you. It was this point that I was stumbling over. As an astronomer I have no trouble with very large finite numbers, but infinite ones literally change the equation.

dangilitis

Lowetide: Lol. I still bet on Talbot, but also at some point I think we probably have to say Dubnyk, LaBarbera, Scivens, Fasth, now Talbot and perhaps soon Nilsson…yeah, maybe it isn’t the goalie.

But how do you marry that with these goalies flubbing saveable goals at key times? Is it the goalie coaching? You can’t pin it all on the D. Yes, Davidson bobbled the puck like a hot grenade, and yes, backhanders are unpredictable, but Talbot was just unprepared at a critical time.

If Talbot makes the save on Frolik, maybe Calgary doesn’t have as much confidence right now, and maybe the Oilers are 6-9 instead of 5-10. That’s not even asking for league average goaltending with that simple request.

Pajamah

bendelson:
Interesting thoughts by Bautista today…

Highlights include:

“Let’s call it what it is. Let’s not have these loaded conversations about ‘character’ and the integrity of the game every time certain players show emotion in a big moment. That kind of thinking is not just old school. It’s just ignorant,” Bautista writes.

He also takes the opportunity to discuss the challenge Dominican players face when playing in the big leagues.

“The cultural change can be a real shock,” he writes.

“I cannot tell you how many times I’ve seen incredible players get labelled as lazy or disrespectful based on shallow assumptions like ‘body language.’

_____

Thankfully, we don’t see these issues with the NHL media…

Apt observation, comrade.

Those Czechs sure have character issues

Das vindaniya.

Factotum

rickithebear,

Even if I were to accept that HDC60 is the most important statistic to use to evaluate defensemen, the way you use it – for example, comparing Fayne at New Jersey with Nikitin at Columbus and Petry at Edmonton – is bothering me.

If one defenseman has a rate of 8.0 and another is at 9.0, it’s going to take at least 3 games for me to be able to see the difference, yes? So the HDSCA isn’t the most common event to hang our hats on.

You seem to be roughly controlling for the level of competition, but what about other confounding variables, especially comparing across teams and seasons? What is the effect of the defense partner? The team’s coaching / defensive systems / style of play? The defensive strength of the forward group? The division/conference that the team plays in?

Without controlling for at least some of these other variables, I see a lot of statistical white noise that could easily interfere with the validity and strength of your conclusions, but perhaps you can allay my concerns. If so, I’d be appreciative.

godot10

Bruce McCurdy:
GMoney, do you agree with Godot’s take on “infinite”? I parse things a bit differently as noted above, and Godot says I’m wrong. Would appreciate your take, since it’s your own danger scale that is under discussion. I usually operate on a “can not divide by zero / DO not divide by zero” imperative, but I’m just a numbers guy and certainly no Poisson. No Cantor either, for that matter. But I do like to at least grasp first principles, so kindly enlighten me.

Nobody is dividing anything by zero. And you keep on mischaracterizing my use of infinite.

A single shot is a goal or it isn’t. It is a binary outcome. One sums up a lot of binary outcomes to get a probability.

In my original post
“[Well, actually averaging discrete values of 1 and 0’s for any distance from the net and type of shot, and rescaling the probability of a goal to a different danger scale]”

What is UNCLEAR about that? Nothing is being divided by zero.

RexLibris

Bruce McCurdy: Why, yes. Yes I can.

Ha, well, fair point.

You are a boon to the rest of us, Bruce.

Godspeed, Oilers, we need respite from this never-ending maelstrom. Odysseus himself was hurled about by cruel Neptune for nearly as long as we fans have suffered at the hands of our beloved team.

LMHF#1

RexLibris: There have been far, far, far too many “nights before” to handle “mornings after”.

I can’t imagine trying to do post-mortems on this team.

FN will do game recaps and, because they are the Flames, as often as not they find something cheerful to write about.

Can anyone imagine trying to write 45 morning-after articles (rough average of losses in three of the last six seasons)?

Going on about 10 years worth. I guess it’s technically “the late evening after” for me.

Was a lot more fun in 2006.

Took a year and a half off the last couple seasons. Trying again this year.

G Money

Bruce McCurdy:
GMoney, do you agree with Godot’s take on “infinite”? I parse things a bit differently as noted above, and Godot says I’m wrong. Would appreciate your take. I usually operate on aimperative, but I’m just a numbers guy and certainly no Poisson. No Cantor either, for that matter. But I do like to at least grasp first principles, so kindly enlighten me.

Ah, hmmm, we are truly arguing some mathematical arcana now!

I would say this:

1 – practically speaking, the post priori probability of a shot being a goal is either zero or one, but we have no way of knowing what it is a priori. This is axiomatic I think, hopefully not something anyone would argue about.

2 – the modeling behind the danger rating uses the historical probability of a shot of the same type and from the same distance to estimate the a priori probability

3 – the danger rating itself is calculated as

probability of 5v5 shot of type x and distance a being a goal / probability of all 5v5 shots from all distances being goals

4 – in theory, the denominator can be arbitrarily close to zero. So in theory, the danger rating is unbounded, and therefore the range is [0,infinity]

5 – if we went through a season [or however many seasons are in the study range] with no 5v5 goals scored, the danger rating would be NaN (not a number = 0 divided by 0!)

6 – in practical terms, the actual upper bound for danger would be achieved if a single 5v5 goal was scored based on exactly one shot for that type and distance, throughout all five seasons of the estimation range. Since in a season typically 60,000 5v5 shots are taken, that single shot from that single distance would have a probability of 100%, while the total shot probability would be 1/300,000. So the practical but incredibly unlikely upper limit for danger would be about 300,000.

6a – since I take the resulting discrete data and create a smooth curve out of it, it is possible for the mathematically modelled curve to be asymptotically vertical as it approaches 0 distance, another way to approach infinity. In practice, though, distances are recorded in whole numbers > 0, so the asymptotic part of the modelled curve would never be reached.

7 – I’m not sure what Godot10 means that a single shot has a danger of either zero or infinity. I don’t think that is correct. It implies that the denominator in every case is zero, which is basically never the case.

bendelson

Interesting thoughts by Bautista today…

Highlights include:

“Let’s call it what it is. Let’s not have these loaded conversations about ‘character’ and the integrity of the game every time certain players show emotion in a big moment. That kind of thinking is not just old school. It’s just ignorant,” Bautista writes.

He also takes the opportunity to discuss the challenge Dominican players face when playing in the big leagues.

“The cultural change can be a real shock,” he writes.

“I cannot tell you how many times I’ve seen incredible players get labelled as lazy or disrespectful based on shallow assumptions like ‘body language.’

_____

Thankfully, we don’t see these issues with the NHL media…

Factotum

719: You have had sex at least 4 times? Can you please teach me your secrets?

They might have been quadruplets.

Factotum

rickithebear,

Would you please share your precise definition of “open hole”? Is it static or dynamic? If it’s static, are you using an imaginary traditional “shooter tutor” with 5 holes? A newer Datsyukian one with 2 holes? Or something else? If it’s dynamic, at what point in the flow of play do the open holes count? At the time the shot is released? At the time the puck arrives at the net? Or something else?

Let’s say the goaltender is drawn out of position and Ovechkin has a wide open net. If he scores, did he take an “open hole” shot no matter where it hit the net? In other words, does the actual position of the goalie matter?

Or if the five-hole was open at the time the shot at it was taken, but the goalie closed it before the puck got there, was that an “open hole” shot?

Or if the upper right corner of the net was covered by the goalie’s body at the time the shot at it was taken, but he went into a butterfly position and opened the corner by the time the puck got there, was that an “open hole” shot?

In other words, which holes count and when?

It would help to know what you’re thinking of when you use the term. Thanks.

Bruce McCurdy

RexLibris: There have been far, far, far too many “nights before” to handle “mornings after”.

I can’t imagine trying to do post-mortems on this team.

FN will do game recaps and, because they are the Flames, as often as not they find something cheerful to write about.

Can anyone imagine trying to write 45 morning-after articles (rough average of losses in three of the last six seasons)?

Why, yes. Yes I can.

Bruce McCurdy

G Money:
godot10,

I like the statistical cut of your jib, Mister!Very Poisson!

godot10: I said GMoney’s danger scale was on a 0 to infinite scale, but the calculation was done on goal binary goal probabilities of 0 and 1, rescaled to the danger scale of 0 to infinite.

For a single shot….
The danger is 0 or infinite.
The probability of a goal is 0 or 1.

And I made that clear in my previous post.

GMoney, do you agree with Godot’s take on “infinite”? I parse things a bit differently as noted above, and Godot says I’m wrong. Would appreciate your take, since it’s your own danger scale that is under discussion. I usually operate on a “can not divide by zero / DO not divide by zero” imperative, but I’m just a numbers guy and certainly no Poisson. No Cantor either, for that matter. But I do like to at least grasp first principles, so kindly enlighten me.

RexLibris

Lowetide: The blog isn’t set up to respond with a morning after post

There have been far, far, far too many “nights before” to handle “mornings after”.

I can’t imagine trying to do post-mortems on this team.

FN will do game recaps and, because they are the Flames, as often as not they find something cheerful to write about.

Can anyone imagine trying to write 45 morning-after articles (rough average of losses in three of the last six seasons)?

Bruce McCurdy

commonfan14: If you’re at all interested, though, I’ll just throw out there that your morning after thoughts on games when they do happen are pretty much my favourite thing to read about the team anywhere on the web during the season.

I agree with this. I always enjoy Lowetide’s morning-after dissections, even and perhaps especially after games I have worked on extensively myself doing player grades. He always has a good take.

RexLibris

G Money: …logarithmically … exponentially.

Hey! This is hockey, not scrabble! Take yer book-learning words and get lost!

719

frjohnk: Id have to look atevery game to do that.

I have a full time job, a part time business I run from May to October that some weeks is full time.

Oh yeah, and 4 wonderful kids.

I don’t have the time or the data for that.

You have had sex at least 4 times? Can you please teach me your secrets?

commonfan29

Lowetide: The blog isn’t set up to respond with a morning after post, there are times in the year when other things take precedent.

Makes total sense and I know I personally wasn’t thinking anything nefarious was afoot.

If you’re at all interested, though, I’ll just throw out there that your morning after thoughts on games when they do happen are pretty much my favourite thing to read about the team anywhere on the web during the season.

I say “pretty much” only because I don’t think that time you were posting comments 3 hours late while watching on tape delay can be topped.

godot10

Bruce McCurdy: I see your point which is a good one, but question your use of “infinite”. An individual shot has either a 0% (0/1) chance or a 100% (1/1) chance of going in.

“Infinite” implies, mathematically, 1/0, or 1 goal on 0 shots. This is not the case unless you are the Nuge in St. Louis on opening night. There was the very rare, & short-lived, case of a guy with a shooting percentage of ∞.

I said GMoney’s danger scale was on a 0 to infinite scale, but the calculation was done on goal binary goal probabilities of 0 and 1, rescaled to the danger scale of 0 to infinite.

For a single shot….
The danger is 0 or infinite.
The probability of a goal is 0 or 1.

And I made that clear in my previous post.

Bulging Twine

Interesting to probably no one other than me;

Twins Kellen and Connor Jones are in the Islanders organization this year but one is in the AHL and one is in the ECHL.

yup – true

Bruce McCurdy

godot10:
The “danger” in GMoney’s dangerous Fenwick is an aggregated stat.

The “danger” in any particular shot is 1) infinite or 2) zero from any particular shot location.So “danger”, as GMoney defines it, is a result of averaging a bunch of infinities and a bunch of zeros to get a finite number.[Well, actually averaging discrete values of 1 and 0’s for any distance from the net and type of shot, and rescaling the probability of a goal to a different danger scale] .

Over the season, Talbot would get lots of shots from that location and the danger would converge to the danger GMoney calculated from his 5-year average.But for any single shot, the danger is infinite or zero.

A single shot is saved, or it isn’t.

I see your point which is a good one, but question your use of “infinite”. An individual shot has either a 0% (0/1) chance or a 100% (1/1) chance of going in.

“Infinite” implies, mathematically, 1/0, or 1 goal on 0 shots. This is never the case unless you are the Nuge in St. Louis on opening night. There was the very rare, & short-lived, case of a guy with a shooting percentage of ∞.

Jacobo Maremoto

Lowetide,

Apologies!

blainer

rickithebear:
The one thing I took from fridays live watching was:
Draisatl’s is faster;
Physically dominate;
Starting to show an ability to find open shooting space
Allways working to get closer to the net
Surprises teamates with passes that you would nor expect to get through.

I smilled at leat 6 times from sick plays from this young man.

This. I was completely caught off guard with his improvement. I believe he thinks the game too fast for the minors.

blainer

rickithebear: Petry in Tmac’s system does not Beat out
Klefbom who faces 1st comp
I look at Sekera and Petry as a 2nd compEV Defence; pK defence; Ev productionwash!
With Sekera having shown Elite 2nd comp Numbers under Ruff (9.01) and Sutter (8.01)

Ya I am hoping its just a bit of adjusting with Sekera or maybe some lingering injury.

Jacobo Maremoto

No mention of last night? With the narrow focus on McDavid, as exemplified by today’s post, are we supposed to just sit back and let management off the hook for some of its questionable decisions (failure to address the defense, etc.) while the kid is out?

blainer

godot10: Sekera has played worse with Fayne.Klefbom has had his worst games with Fayne.Reinhart’s worst game was the one he was paired with Fayne in pre-season.

Gryba is competent in a #6D role with a #6D salary.He brings physicality.He can break the cycle.He can kill penalties.

I have a hard time figuring out what Fayne is actually good at.

Ya I get ya.. but to my eye I do like the physical play of Gryba but Jeebus he passes the puck to the wrong team too much..

Sekera and Gryba.. other examples of D moving from East to west and in over their heads so far.. Holding out hope for both though.. Gryba should be ok as a sixth D.

As for Fayne.. Whatever confidence he had is out the window now after being sat for the three games.. I bet he is playing very nervous right now..

Very very happy with the play of Nurse.

If we are trading for a D I hope it is from the west.. Nashville maybe..

G Money

rickithebear:
There wasa marked change in War on ice’s numbers.
which suggests a major change in shot definition by x,y.

Do we know the change?

What have you noticed?

Bear in mind that only shot data has actual x,y’s from the NHL, the rest (blocks, misses) are imputed. All that data is also rink bias adjusted, and as I ranted a bit yesterday, I’m not sure I’m on board with their location adjustment methodology.

It does mean that a small change in their imputation or rink adjustment calculation could change the data noticeably. Or maybe they have added another source, like ESPN or maybe Sportlogic has it.

I used war-on-ice data over the summer, but now use NHL data only, so I don’t have any basis for comparison. (they don’t make their data available in a Python friendly format in-season, so I had to re-re-write my scrapers to use pure NHL data. And now that I’ve got it, I might as well use it)

G Money

Woodguy: Thanks for the explanation G.
Another case of NHL data.
He released the shot almost parallel to the dot, which is 20ft.
He started coasting at about 27ft.

No prob.

That distance makes sense. By eye that’s what it looked like at the time. Closer than the officially marked 27ft anyway.

Danger drops logarithmically with distance … or to put it another way, danger increases exponentially as you get closer.

A 20 ft wrister is 70% more dangerous than average. Jump that up a bit for the fact that it was from the middle rather than from an angle and you’re probably looking at 80%.

vinotintazo

Bulging Twine: Freddy Chabot was hired by the Minnesota Wild in Septembe

this is a joke right?

Edit: just googled it, hes the development Goalie coach.

Bulging Twine

Devan Dubnyk has fallen off his amazing form from last season.

Freddy Chabot was hired by the Minnesota Wild in September.

hmmmm

G Money

godot10,

I like the statistical cut of your jib, Mister! Very Poisson!

vinotintazo
TheGreatMutato

woot…

SayItAin'tSo, Gretz, SayItAin'tSo!

vinotintazo,

Wasn’t aware that it was his style to stay that deep. If it is that’s fair and hopefully he adjusts

PhrankLee

Ca$h-McMoney!: Granted we’ve got new management in place, but what makes you think that signing a UFA (Franson, for example) is going to work out for us?

For me you are preaching to the choir on this one. Henderson writes a good article on this subject today in ON.

From the proper perspective I think we dodged bullets not signing Franson. I’ve watched him play a lot and he really is not very good in the NHL. Even though everything, including his age, looks like gold personified on paper.

rickithebear

The one thing I took from fridays live watching was:
Draisatl’s is faster;
Physically dominate;
Starting to show an ability to find open shooting space
Allways working to get closer to the net
Surprises teamates with passes that you would nor expect to get through.

I smilled at leat 6 times from sick plays from this young man.

Back 9

I’m going to put my vote down as mostly not the goaltender’s fault. It was mentioned at the end of the last thread (by Stush18, I think) that we’ve run through a few goalies in the last few years. It looks like our coaching carousel back there, only these goalies have a little more track at the NHL level than some of our coaches.

I really enjoy the work done by Woodguy and GMoney on tracking/identifying goalies and some of the goals against have been awful but it can’t just be a coincidence that perfectly average goalies come here to shit the bed.

So yeah, put in Nilsson until he inevitably lets in a few stinkers (I believe he already has). I’m just going off memory here but I think it was the Dallas game where he let in a wrap around goal and it was just disappointing but how much of that was on the D who should have at least slowed down the damn skater?

Then we call up LB. How long until he breaks standing behind our chaos D and starts to have a sphincter-tightening/60 that’s off the charts? And then we can rant about what a bad trade that was by LT.

PhrankLee

commonfan14: Does anyone know if any media members asked McLellan why he put Talbot back in the net after the penalty at the end of the game?

I personally wondered against putting Talbot in for that game at all with Anders playing solid the game prior to that. If not solid at least he was a “non-negative factor”… visually better, if you will.

Ca$h-McMoney!

We’re at an interesting point here for Fayne.

There are folks out there who don’t think he’s very good.

There are folks out there who want management to go out and spend money to bring in a number 1 Dmen.

There are, presumably, a number of people that subscribe to both camps. That’s fine, no judgement on this end.

For those people:

Every effort this team has made to acquire Dmen via free agency has failed miserably.

Fayne
Ference
Nikitin
Schultz (arguably)

Gryba and Sekera I’m leaving off this list due to sample size, but the start hasn’t been promissing.

If we had made 0 effort to solve our D problem via free agency over the past several years, our lineup would be:

Klefbom/Petry
Davidson/Nurse
Marincin/Reinhart

Musil
Oesterle

This is a weak lineup, for sure, super young, but it also free’s up a metric ton of cap space and allows us to keep our golden child.

Granted we’ve got new management in place, but what makes you think that signing a UFA (Franson, for example) is going to work out for us?

rickithebear

There wasa marked change in War on ice’s numbers.
which suggests a major change in shot definition by x,y.

Do we know the change?

frjohnk

rickithebear: Remeber when we discussed this 2-3 years ago.

Hinted that a site like PFF was needed.

Then WOI came along with its list of Email adresses of people doing this work for the teams.

They should break it down into open and closed when they do the work.

I have understood the volume for years.

Was teasing!

all good bud

rickithebear

frjohnk: Id have to look atevery game to do that.

I have a full time job, a part time business I run from May to October that some weeks is full time.

Oh yeah, and 4 wonderful kids.

I don’t have the time or the data for that.

Remeber when we discussed this 2-3 years ago.

Hinted that a site like PFF was needed.

Then WOI came along with its list of Email adresses of people doing this work for the teams.

They should break it down into open and closed when they do the work.

I have understood the volume for years.

Was teasing!