I write this post pretty much every year and really should begin the series with it. Reasonable expectations seems like a pretty clear goal. Pull back the bias, the performances in short tournaments, the huge moments (good or bad) that might sway the view.
We have to be able to agree that reasonable expectations are right in the middle, halfway between "he's been in a car accident" and "that's Warren Young with his 40th of the season."
In the last two posts (below) the comments section if full of discussions about exactly what reasonable means in terms of projecting the Edmonton Oilers. I thought it might be an idea (probably a bad one) to give you some insight into the process behind my reasonable expectations series.
Most of this stuff is pretty obvious: I take a three year average, account for age, injury and opportunity, then throw in Desjardins number where needed and then stare at the number for a time to see if it fits. That's it, that's all.
Except. Except that hockey is like baseball ("oh here we go") in that one team can do more with 27 outs than another team. When I make a note about a player in terms of their "time on ice" it is used like an at-bat (or to be more precise a plate appearance); some teams are going to have many more appearances at the plate per 27 outs than other teams. Make sense? They're in the offensive scoring zone miles longer than a weaker team.
It is identical in hockey, although our methods of measurement are far less precise than baseball (the ultimate math game). When considering the current Edmonton Oilers, we must let more air out of the tires in terms of offensive sorties because they won't have the puck as much as the other team most nights. I know, Tom Renney is coach but this isn't going to be an easy season for him. Just as many had a different view of MacT this spring, Oiler fans could look back wistfully at the coaching year of Pat Quinn next summer.
The idea of reasonable expectations isn't to pick favourites or push some obscure agenda, it is genuine attempt to find the reasonable expectation. If your player does better than expected, we can be more certain the player delivered a quality season.
At bats come in a pretty predictable order, quality scoring chances aren't so much. If Eberle gets 100 good chances all year and pots 15, is that better than getting 50 chances and scoring 10?
ReplyDeleteI think the expectations need to be qualified really directly by the team playing around the player. Bet MPS would do better in SJ than Edmonton (given equal TOI).
Or, if Renney runs Eberle with Gagner and Hall for 15 minutes a night, compared to matching him with Storts and smac for 7, we're going to end up with two really different expectations.
Still, I'll probably again draft the Oiler component of my fantasy team with your projections clear in mind.
But LT, you aren't accounting for clutch. Shame on you.
ReplyDeleteClutch, so that we are all reminded, was Mark Lemke in the '91 World Series and '92 playoff series. Best clutch hitter in the playoffs.
Never you mind what happened after that.
Oh, and stop discounting heart. And character. And general fanaticism.
What gets me is that most of the arguments are from guys who were here for the last two rounds of REs.
ReplyDeleteWhy are we still arguing the definition?
I'd rather be talking about whether Eberle will get more TOI than MPS because of the depth on their respective wings than why you are nicking Desjardins numbers.
About whether a 5C can be our 3C and whether this leaves an opening for Vande Velde/Lander. How big of a hill is management going to make these rookies climb?
Coach:
ReplyDeleteLowetide doesn't believe in clutch.
Vishcosity, he isn't talking about scoring chances, he's talking about TOI, both ES and PP. And quality of linemates a little bit as well.
ReplyDeleteHunter: Coach doesn't believe in it either.
ReplyDeleteWonder if Tambellini will be in on Bill Sweatt when he becomes UFA tomorrow. Leafs couldn't sign him. Kid can skate and has a little offensive touch. Maybe we stick him in OKC and have a Cogs replacement in a year or two. We might be a good fit for him too.
ReplyDeleteHere's his numbers:
04–05 U.S. U-18 41 7 9 16
05–06 U.S. U-18 17 10 15 25
06–07 Colorado Col. 30 9 17 26
07–08 Colorado Col. 37 10 17 27
08–09 Colorado Col. 37 12 11 23
09–10 Colorado Col. 39 15 18 33
Clutch
ReplyDeleteHow can you guys not believe?
Ever try to shift a 63 GMC without one?
I want to see a Kid Line, a real one this time.
Agreed LT about quality at bats with men in scoring position. Which of the kids plays 3rd line minutes? Does Brule play 2nd or 3rd? Does renney run a Penner-Horcoff-hemsky line and play them every third shift? All questions that will decide whether you were on par with your projections. There are only 6 forward spots in the top 2 PP units, and unless one of the kids plays the point on the PP (don't expect it as none ofthem have a boomer back there), then someone is getting shafted out of quality stat padding TOI.
ReplyDeleteI think the main complaint is that last year's RE were at least somewhat optimistic in places, whereas this year's have small numbers all over the place. I mean, sure, the team's probably not going to be very good, but they're not 30th with a bullet this year, either. I mean, we can't be one of the League leaders in man-games injured yet again, can we?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't take the projections terribly seriously, anyway: it's an exercise in understanding the player and their role on the team, and that's what's more interesting to me.
LT- stop dissing TheEberle™. He is the first #22 OV that will make a #1 OV better¡
ReplyDeleteI don't believe in clutch either.
LT, I have not seen what you have predicted for the team overall. Maybe you are saving it for the big pre season show where you teach math to Nick Kypryos and Pierre MaGuire.
ReplyDeleteHere is part of what I wrote at the end of the last thread:
Last year: Oilers 214 GF 284 GA
If you are high on the team, maybe you add 5% more goals, and get 224 GF (50 less than Vcr got last year). If you reduce the GA by a similar amount (although I see little reason to) you get 270 GA (still would be worst in the league last year).
In fact, a 10% reduction in GA (256) still puts them in the basement in GA - and I think in the standings.
Ducey: The final GF projected total is slightly more than a year ago.
ReplyDelete1) Results matter less than player development this year.
ReplyDeletei.e. that means one shelters Hall and Eberle on line "F", while Hemsky anchors line "D", and Penner anchors line "E".
2) The Oilers have enough players under contract. They would prefer a trade (Souray, Cogliano) to fill needs rather than to sign more guys at this point.
i.e. With Souray the Oilers have 7 defensemen plus Strudwick, and Chorney is in the AHL.
3) They aren't going to give Cogliano away, and the hand-holding days for Cogliano and Brule are over. They are likely to be given Penner to play with, and expected to handle some tougher minutes. Step-up time for both of them.
4) Tambellini is relying on competition for ice time, rather than proven performance to meet needs. On a rebuilding team, this is not necessarily a bad strategy. (And it makes all the stats guys queasy, because they want one proven guy, rather than three maybes competing for one job).
i.e. Cogliano will have Fraser breathing down his neck for the slot between Penner and Brule.
i.e. Paajarvi, Hall, Eberle, Omark, Giroux...5 players, 3 playing lineup spots.
i.e. Stortini, Jacques, SMac...3 players, one job.
i.e. Vande Velde, O'Marra, Moran...3 centres vying to be the first centre called up from OKC
i.e. Jones, Reddox, Ondrus, etc....basically fighting for one NHL job.
i.e. Dubnyk, Deslauriers, Gerber...basically fighting for the backup job.
There may be no such thing as clutch but the hockey gods did smile upon Jordan Eberle.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I am missing something but wouldn't clutch, heart, character, etc...
ReplyDeleteWould they not have all been included in prior performance results?
If so, games played, TOI and linemates are probably the three main factors that will affect this seasons results.
On a side note, I appreciate the definition of "realistic expectations" according to LT... Especially since he is the one who has put expected individual player results up for discussion.
Doogie:
ReplyDeleteMaybe they are or aren't "30th with a bullet", but which teams are they clearly better than?
Lowetide: Since you don't believe in anyone being able to ever elevate their game above and beyond, then does it follow you also don't believe players are capable of choking?
ReplyDeletehunter: You've asked me this question before and I've ignored it. Why? Because it is the slippery slope of a conversation, like "would you be against abortion if is was a brutal rape?" kind of thing.
ReplyDeleteI stand by my original post on the subject. "Clutch" and "choke" are elements we watch closely as fans, thereby increasing their importance in our reality.
You can argue Secretariat was clutch, but when you're 31 lengths ahead of the other guy there's probably another answer.
@hunter, how do you define choking? or an example?
ReplyDeletei believe that the mental game is the most difficult area to be consistent with. fatigue, preparation, execution and emotion all enter into it.
since it's a major sunday, we'll probably see some clutch/choke situations arise on chanel 21 -- different skill game, but one that's very much mental and where you see pros with colossal errors.
i think golf is a decent way to look at the clutch "phenomenom" because we can break each shot down so easily as opposed to a fast moving game like hockey.
for me, the concept of "clutch" also deals with a person's expected levels of performance. some people have huge variables (let's say lupul) while others appear to have small ones (let's say lidstrom/crosby/etc). when lupul scores 4 goals in the playoffs is he clutch, or just performing to one end of his natural dispersion of expected results?
i think the whole topic revolves around a person's consistency. other people (pisani) just catch lightning in a bottle.
my .02
also, LT...love this series every year. Derek did a nice piece at CnB about expectations for 18-20 year olds which i believe people ought to read for some recent historical perspective.
I guess I'm on an island here. I do believe that some athlete's have the ability to block out the added pressure and not focus on the media attention and therefore are able to play their normal games in the big spots. More importantly, I think there are player's who get eaten up in the big games and they can't perform to their normal athletic level. Guys like A-Rod, Roger Clemens and Keith Tkachuk seem to shrink in the spotlight.
ReplyDeletesorry...should have said, TSN, not channel 21...forgot we're not all in my living room, sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI believe in the existence of players who are clutch. I believe that the mental side to the game matters enough that it's reasonable to think some players are better capable of handling the pressure than others.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't think we see enough consistent repetition of this stuff for most players to legitimately say whether a run of good performances in big games represents a clutch player or a guy who got lucky at the right times. We aren't in these guys' heads. We can only observe the performance.
I think in the vast majority of cases, labeling guys as chokers or clutch players is based on far too few observed incidents to be likely to be accurate. It's not that the mental game is luck, it's just that it is largely indistiguishable from luck in the observed results.
lowetide,
ReplyDeleteI get your process and respect it. I also can see you are headed to us being slightly better on offence than we were last year. I also get that you think that we are going to have trouble getting the puck. That has led to you down grading the rookies in particular.
My problem is the work of scientists like Albert-Laslo Barabasi and Bruce Benito de Mesquita say change doesn't happen incrementally, which is what you are predicting. It happens in bursts. Those bursts are dependent on human behaviours and predictable. So that leads me to look at the human factors in play with the Oilers.
I think, reasonably, we can all see that this year's team is going to have a different dynamic from past seasons. On top of which, for a change, the coaching staff looks like a good fit for the team. Regression to the mean for injuries is the smart money bet as well. In other words the conditions are right for a burst, not a small incremental change. If you have a catalyst, say the emergence of Dustin Penner as a premier player, which both you and I predict, then the change will be faster and larger than you are allowing for.
I don't want to put words in your mouth but from your comments I think you see the beginning of a positive change with the Oilers. I agree with you, the seeds of change are there. I just think your REs this year are poisoned by what happened last year. I can easily see all those little changes multiplying into a burst. Especially on offence.
I think the reasonable expectation is that we are this year's Colorado. Lets ignore Craig Anderson and Peter Budjai and just look at offence as a function of being hopelessly out shot, out chanced, out manned and out experienced. Which actually describes Colorado's season.
Their offence burst. 190 goals to 237 goals, season over season. With rookies having horrible trouble getting the puck and being pushed all over the ice. At the beginning of a major rebuild.
It appears we're screaming across the Grand Canyon in hopes the other hears us.
ReplyDeleteI sincerely believe that you are at the very least skipping a year. Perhaps your burst will happen in year two, with a Chris Stewart or two having established themselves.
If someone had been predicting last season for Colorado, would their final total have been reasonable? Also, would you suggest that Colorado is a candidate to fall back in terms of performance this season?
lowetide, I find it interesting that you mentioned Secretariat in a conversation about clutchness.
ReplyDeleteIt is now well accepted in handicapping that there are horses for courses. That is because of what happened on a epically muddy track at the Kentucky Derby on May 2nd of 1970. There was this long shot, all that was really certain about him was he ran better in the mud than on dry tracks, the wonderfully named Dust Commander. Despite his history he went off at staggeringly long odds and won big. He was the horse for that course and the math was screaming it but nobody was listening. Ever since handicappers have been broadening the factors they consider in predicting performance by race horses (speed numbers for example). (By the way, I stumbled on one of the best pieces of "sports" writing ever, The Kentucky Derby is Decadent and Depraved, it is an essay by Hunter S. Thompson.)
Yet we have trouble accepting that there might be humans who love a particular set of circumstances and perform better when those circumstances exist. This hobbles our ability to predict individual perfromances.
I don't think it is unreasonable to acknowledge that Jordan Eberle seems to like games that are close late. I'm not saying he is clutch there, just happier than other players who might get just a bit uptight in those circumstances. So if we think the Oilers are a)going to play a lot of games that are close in the last few minutes and b)Jordan Eberle is getting a regular shift then he is probably going to do better than he would if the Oilers were already our of it by the start of the 3rd period or he was annealed to the bench by a coach who penalizes mistakes.
As for your questions, I would say that the typical pattern of human events is a burst followed by some regression to the mean. So yes, unequivocally I would predict Colorado is going to revert to the mean of their talent this year, ie. regress in total offence. Say 225 as an RE. Worse for them, it appears, or at least Jonathon has convinced me it appears, that by the end of last year Anderson was reverting and Budjai's long term history would suggest his sv% isn't sustainable either. I think they are in deep trouble.
As for would I have predicted 237 for them as a RE? No, absolutely not. It was like my maximum upside prediction for Spolier last night, everything went right for them all at once. I would however, for some of the same reasons I am predicting it happening to the Oilers this year, have predicted a burst last year. I would have predicted 210 for Colorado last year as an RE.
what bothers me about this year is last years team, obviously. for the most part, a bunch of eeyore's that put their heads down when hemsky and m.v.p. went down.
ReplyDeletehemsky will likely be back in form this year.
d.u.i. is questionable to say the least.
where does that leave us?
with no goalie and me yelling at the tv all year.
that locker room cancer black plague herpes was pretty strong last year. whitney noticed it right off the bat. hopefully they sprayed that place down and renney has all these ziggy's holding hands this year. no moreau's or o'dully's in the circle to start for the kids sake. i hope they play as a team they want to be proud of. a team with a captain? that doesn't condone getting loaded in calgary during the season. at least go some place good.
linnaeus: I would argue a muddy track would qualify as "ballpark effects." Certainly some players would benefit from a larger ice surface, but the NHL doesn't have those massive difference that benefit/hurt specific things like righty/lefty.
ReplyDeleteOn the clutch thing:
ReplyDeletePatrick Roy's Regular season save % : ,910
Patrick Roy's Playoff save % ,918
His playoffs totals equal to three full NHL seasons or 4 seasons of normal play for a starter (60 games).
It is not a sample size, he faced better teams than in the regular seasons and yet his save % went up a full 8 points. Usually the difference between the average goalie and the star.
And we're off.....
ReplyDeleteLT: I'm not that into believing clutch, just the way you reject it. You (All of 'em) don't proove anything, just cast it aside as being ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteThey're Humans not robots, not all handle the stress perfectly.
i don't believe in clutch, but i believe in the yips.
ReplyDelete"Clutch...Oh, and stop discounting heart. And character. And general fanaticism."
ReplyDeleteDon't forget "money player," "intangibles," "veteran presence," and "leader."
In all seriousness, I think what the media commonly refer to as "clutch" is really "statistical variation based on small sample size," or "fluke" in layman's terms.
ReplyDeleteJohn Druce was not clutch. Nor was Fred Pisani. They boned off a couple of weeks at an opportune time.
Ryan Smyth is clutch. Not everybody can lose half his chicklets, get sewn up, and come back to set up a series-turning OT goal.
Speeds: I don't know, honestly. I don't know if there's any way to realistically say. There's too many kids coming in, too many good players were out or playing hurt, and too many weird coaching decisions last year to use that as the basis for predicting the team performance this year. I'm not convinced this is a last-place team, but I also couldn't tell you who the last-place team is, because I haven't sat down and looked at everything in aggregate. I'm pretty sure Anaheim's D is weaker than ours at this point, but then I trust Jonas Hiller a lot more than I trust any of our motley crew in the crease.
ReplyDeleteIt's a shitty answer, I know, but it wasn't even my own point I was trying to make, so...
=====
As for clutch/choke, I'll reiterate what I said on C&B a couple of weeks ago: if it were sustainable, it wouldn't be clutch/choke, it would be good/bad at hockey. It's perfectly plausible to me, and even perfectly likely, that some of what we chalk up to luck/bounces is upstairs, depending on the situation. We don't know what that is -- we can't know what that is -- because we're not in the room and we don't know who's having a run of bad luck versus a run of poor confidence or nerves versus a run of secretly broken ankle. That's the trouble with sportscasters talking about confidence and good-in-the-room and shit like that: other than maybe the long-time beat writers, they don't know any more than we do. They're guessing, and they tend to fall back on platitudes when they don't have a better answer. That's why it all sounds so stupid and flaky.
Put another way, the dice may have no memory or emotion, but the players do, and that has to weigh how they fall. Over time, it all smooths out anyway, but in small sample sizes, it's relevant.
Doogie: And if it doesn't even out and the player has a sustainable amout of playoffs games?
ReplyDeleteWhat do we call that?
Maybe a bit off topic... but is there any possibility that Tambellini is one of the suitors for Kaberle? Notwithstanding Burke's usual blustery media whore behavior as we approach Kaberle's deadline, could there be a Cogliano (and maybe Souray) deal in the mix?
ReplyDeleteLowetide, I think your frame of reference for what this team does with its at-bats is based on last year's team. That may be justified. But is it possible to imagine by replacing O'Sullivan, Nilsson and Pisani with Eberle, Hall and Paajarvi, that this team might be significantly better at taking away the puck from the other team, as well as just as bad or worse at keeping the puck away from them? In other words, could this be a team that's as high event in their own zone as last year's team, but more high event in the opponent's zone?
ReplyDeleteI guess a lot depends on the defence, and how healthy is remains. It'd be nice to see another veteran in that group to round out the depth, but I do like Belle a lot as a call-up, and I don't know if the Oilers had a player like him last year, so perhaps they're more injury resistant than they were a year ago (not having to rely on Souray or Staios being healthy does help). If they have Gilbert, Whitney and Foster moving the puck all season, they might give the forwards a chance to play enough in the offensive zone to post some decent numbers.
As a fan, I'm certainly hoping that Hall will post sixty points, Eberle, Paajarvi and Omark will all post north of forty, and the scores will all be 5-3. Is it reasonable? Well, it's hard to imagine a group less able to recover the puck than last year's.
Lowetide, I think your frame of reference for what this team does with its at-bats is based on last year's team. That may be justified. But is it possible to imagine by replacing O'Sullivan, Nilsson and Pisani with Eberle, Hall and Paajarvi, that this team might be significantly better at taking away the puck from the other team, as well as just as bad or worse at keeping the puck away from them? In other words, could this be a team that's as high event in their own zone as last year's team, but more high event in the opponent's zone?
ReplyDeleteI guess a lot depends on the defence, and how healthy is remains. It'd be nice to see another veteran in that group to round out the depth, but I do like Belle a lot as a call-up, and I don't know if the Oilers had a player like him last year, so perhaps they're more injury resistant than they were a year ago (not having to rely on Souray or Staios being healthy does help). If they have Gilbert, Whitney and Foster moving the puck all season, they might give the forwards a chance to play enough in the offensive zone to post some decent numbers.
As a fan, I'm certainly hoping that Hall will post sixty points, Eberle, Paajarvi and Omark will all post north of forty, and the scores will all be 5-3. Is it reasonable? Well, it's hard to imagine a group less able to recover the puck than last year's.
@linnaeus...
ReplyDeleteyou posted:
"My problem is the work of scientists like Albert-Laslo Barabasi and Bruce Benito de Mesquita say change doesn't happen incrementally, which is what you are predicting. It happens in bursts. "
i think the first "non-incremental" change is the jump from junior (SEL) to the NHL. i think the next burst happens once they are used to that first bump. i think all three players will improve this year, but i don't think that necessarily translates to NHL success (in terms of points). i agree with LT that you're a year early.
you always bring a wealth of info to your posts, and i enjoy them.
I think as an RE we can expect that one of the 3 rookies will overachieve, one will meet expectations and one will not.
ReplyDeleteLooking at the Oilers top 6 at least one of the kids will get top 6 minutes and we'll most likely see all 3 there at some point.
If Penner can continue to "drive the bus uphill" like he did last year there is no need to put him on the same line with Horcoff and Hemsky.
Someone is going to get their chances. It's just a question of who. Does Penner face the tough defensive units or does Hemsky. If Hall is riding shotgun with Hemsky he'll get his fair share. If Eberle is on Penner's opposite wing with Brule in the middle they'll get their fair share as well.
I'm thinking Hall probably meets or exceeds his Desjardins number. Eberle and MPS will duke it out to see who will meet their Desjardins numbers.
Expecting the team to reproduce last year's abysmal offensive and defensive prodoction is unreasonable.
Everyone in the Oilogosphere was dreadfully wrong about the strength of the blueline. On paper this year's unit isn't as sexy but might be better.
The goaltending can not get worse than it was last year.
O'Sullivan was a funnel. Hemsky was out Horcoff was hurt. Geez the list goes on.
I think it's reasonable to expect this team to score at least 15-20 goals more than last year and they should be able to cut down the goals against by that much as well.
Clutch
ReplyDeleteHow can you guys not believe?
Ever try to shift a 63 GMC without one?
It's between you and Slipper for the title of favorite 'sphere commenter.
LOL is so overused, but I laughed at this. Wife wanted to know what was so funny. She didn't find this funny at all.
Clearly you all just don't understand clutch. Ruslan Fedotenko was regarded as the clutchiest player in the history of clutch.
ReplyDeleteIn 2004, he gathered all of his heart and courage, he blocked out all of the loud fans, and he focused harder than the other players, and he was less afraid of choking and he believed harder than even the fans and he scored 12 goals in 22 games. One of the biggest clutch performances ever.
The rest of his playoff career is marked by .13 GPG, nearly half as bad as his career average of .22 GPG, and even if you add in his '04 performance, his playoff average is .24 GPG. Look how he raises his game!
Or something asinine like that.
CoachPB: A good amout of players have with large playoff aperearances have been performing over theyr season numbers.
ReplyDelete(I already Posted Roy and Mariano Rivera)
I agree that those obscure heroes are due much more to circumstances than any other thing (Rj Umberger turned into god in 2008). But there's players with a good amount of games who shown they stepped up theyr game, VS logically better teams than regular season.
(In this case conserving your season's total would be considered ''Clutch'' since you face better teams)
A LOT of players don't go even near theyr season numbers. (Hossa, Hawerchuk etc)
FPV, there's probably a good reason why his sv% went up in the playoffs (for the record his career playoff sv% is .921).
ReplyDeleteHe has 247 GP in the NHL playoffs.
He has 1029 GP in the NHL regular season.
Of those 247 playoff GP, 133 of those games were in the defensive era of the NHL (53.8%).
Of those 1029 regular season GP, 500 of them were played in the defensive era of the NHL (48.6%).
It's a lot easier to come back from 2 playoff series where you post a .873 sv% and a .890 sv% (6 and 8 games respectively) than when you post a .875 and .892 (46 and 45 games respectively).
His 86-87/87-88 regular seasons and playoffs were nearly identical, except when you have a shitty playoffs it only hurts you for a couple of games (before you are eliminated). A shitty regular season tends to tack on a few more GP to your total.
Dawgbone: Well the ''defensive era'' would only affect the number of shots and not it's quality?
ReplyDeleteI think the save % numbers we're pretty equal to those now.
I read this blog everyday.
ReplyDeleteHave for 4 years.
And there is nobody out there who will ever convince me that hockey is like baseball.
n-evar!
Interesting post.
ReplyDeleteSeems obvious that you're being more reasonable and unbiased than any of us as fans would ever be.
My only retort for your pre-season projections is with guys like Hemsky who are still in their prime years, and yet every year it's assumed they can't match or exceed their career highs.
I don't know if that's an indictment of the player's overall quality, health, his linemates or the coaching staff.
But guys with talent will break out eventually.
If clutch exists, isn't a bit of a backhanded compliment to a guy?
ReplyDeleteLike "yeah, you're good in the regular season, but if you actually tried harder you could be so much better!"
You're kinda calling a guy lazy, no? Saying it's possible for him to raise his game at will... but then he's only doing it at certain times? Why not raise his game ALL the time and just be a better fucking hockey player?