Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

  1. #1
    Wfactor's Avatar
    Wfactor is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,648
    Rep Power
    21

    Dobber Sports Stud

    Default Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    I decided on Orpik because I knew he will be a solid producer of blocks for the Washington Capitals
    Orpik - 1119(SATA) - 793(USATA) - removing the blocked shots from the SATA total can give you an interesting look into a player who could be a decent block shot candidate if your league consists of that particular category. It shows the correlation of a shot against that does not make it through to the net due to an opposing player successfully blocking it and your fantasy player being on the ice at the same time. To sum up for you, your defensemen and defensive forwards if they have a high amount of SATA opportunities while on the ice they have a higher chance of getting a Blocked Shot out of the deal compared to a team that has a higher percentage of shot attempts for aka pushing possession over .500.
    Orpik has had the opportunity to block up to 326 shots that the opposing team fired against his net while he and his line-mates are on the ice that did not get to the net itself due to his team blocking it. Orpik is up to 151 blocked shots himself according to Fantrax.com and has taken advantage of 46% of his team’s chances to block a shot while on the ice. The percentage shows how economical a defenseman is in blocking shots for his team while he is on ice.
    IE. Also note that this is a team driven stat, so try to follow the teams that tend to give up the highest chances of blocks to the defenders, by not moving the puck around enough to get the defenders out of position which causes the lanes to clog up making it easier to block the shot and by having a higher number of shot attempts against (SATA) as a whole. (A good example of the latter is Maple leafs who had struggle mightily in terms of limiting SATA. Have 854 blocks total
    I believe the USATF + USATA /USAT stat is the most likely to replace an unnecessary category like, the dreaded Plus Minus category. USAT has a more personal feeling to it, since it does not penalize a player for being on for a goal against even if they did nothing to contribute toward the other team scoring a goal against instead it rewards/penalizes for shot attempts for and against while on the ice which is an indicator of a complete hockey skillset, i.e.: able to limit shots against, and increase shot attempts for whenever you are on the ice.
    NFHA categories: G(25) A(25) PIM(3) Hits(2) Blocks(2) PPP(15) SHP(20) Goalie Stats: W(50) Sv(2) ShOu(100) OtL(10) ShL(10) L(-10) GA(-12)
    Cold As Ice Dynasty H2H categories: G A PIM SOG PPP +/- HIT BLK WINS GAA SV% SHO
    Starting Roster:
    Center - Giroux, Krejci, W.Karlsson
    Left Wing - Hall, Guentzel, Danault
    Right Wing - Stone, R.Smith, Compher
    Ultility Forward - Fast, Gaborik
    Defense - Klingberg, Pietrangelo, Jones, C.Miller, Phanuef, E.Johnson
    Goalie - Allen, R.Miller
    Bench - M.Foligno, Sheahan, Laughton, Glendening, Djoos, Jensen, H.Fleury
    Prospects - Kyrou, Andersson Hinostroza, Grundstrom, Roy, Timmins, Grzelcyk, Lauzon, Lindgren

  2. #2
    Location
    Prairies
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Demi-God

    Default Re: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    Good stuff.
    Sending you some REP because it's good for all of us (that love the numbers that drive fantasy hockey) to understand advanced stats and what we can do with them.

    To be honest, I haven't looked into SATA/USATA yet.
    I am a big fan of +/- (in all regards)... and do like Shots For vs. Shots Against as a good team metric of how well the coaching system & players are doing, independent of goalie performance.

    I still wouldn't use phrases like "dreaded Plus Minus" category though.
    Shots For/Against are still team driven statistics.
    Though when SF/SA +/- is available in fantasy hockey, I will prefer those over straight +/-.

    I'd guess they'd correspond by around 90% though.

    In other words, if Nicklas Lidstrom was top 2% in league +/- throughout his career... I'd bet he'd still be top 2% in SF/SA throughout his career.
    And even a middling guy who plays 1000 games and is net +0... I'd bet he'd still be near the 50% mark as SF/SA throughout his career.

    With standard +/- the current population of opponents simply argue "Oh, but JohnnyX doesn't deserve a MINUS on that play... he didn't have anything to do with that goal being scored."
    With shot based +/-, this populus of oppositions will just now re-argue "Oh, but JohnnyX doesn't deserve a SHOT AGAINST on that play... he didn't have anything to do with the shot against happening."

    The way I interpret your numbers on Orpik...
    I read them like this:
    The Caps blocked 326 shots with Orpik on the ice.
    Orpik himself blocked 151 of those... for a 46% rake of what his team DID block.
    Meh, the 46% is subjective to his team... so I struggle a bit to see what we can do with this... knowing the players may swap in/out.

    Am I missing something?
    For me, I don't see anything in these numbers to suggest his blocks could increase/decrease/were lucky/were unlucky.
    And if his block total is already high - what knowledge have we gained?

    All that said, I do look forward to the "shot based" version of +/-.
    Better than the "goal based" version of +/-.

    I'm still struggling to see what benefit we may pull out of this to FORECAST blocks.
    As the stat-crunching quest goes for us fantasy hockey mathies... the real value in analyzing stats [for fantasy hockey] is towards accuracy of projecting stats.
    This is where us numbers people strive to get.

    Great work!

  3. #3
    Wfactor's Avatar
    Wfactor is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,648
    Rep Power
    21

    Dobber Sports Stud

    Default Re: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    Pengwin
    "The way I interpret your numbers on Orpik...
    I read them like this:
    The Caps blocked 326 shots with Orpik on the ice.
    Orpik himself blocked 151 of those... for a 46% rake of what his team DID block.
    Meh, the 46% is subjective to his team... so I struggle a bit to see what we can do with this... knowing the players may swap in/out.

    Am I missing something?
    For me, I don't see anything in these numbers to suggest his blocks could increase/decrease/were lucky/were unlucky.
    And if his block total is already high - what knowledge have we gained?"

    It's not entirely for fantasy hockey I'd admit because it is very team driven. but using the data made available by the SATA/USATA stats you can have a higher knowledge of the amount of block opportunities per shift and the correlating percentage of the blocks your particular player has of the lines total. so if a team struggles with Shot attempts against the defense should have many more block chances resulting with more blocks spread out with-in your defense. while teams that push the play will have a lower amount of SAT against and a condensed upper tier of blockers due to zone starts and the resulting lower shots against from offensive zone start defenders.

    One possible fantasy asset would be to use the SATA stat to find block shots in unlikely sources not relying on your typical, Z.Michalek, Regehr, low offense guys to fill out that category.
    NFHA categories: G(25) A(25) PIM(3) Hits(2) Blocks(2) PPP(15) SHP(20) Goalie Stats: W(50) Sv(2) ShOu(100) OtL(10) ShL(10) L(-10) GA(-12)
    Cold As Ice Dynasty H2H categories: G A PIM SOG PPP +/- HIT BLK WINS GAA SV% SHO
    Starting Roster:
    Center - Giroux, Krejci, W.Karlsson
    Left Wing - Hall, Guentzel, Danault
    Right Wing - Stone, R.Smith, Compher
    Ultility Forward - Fast, Gaborik
    Defense - Klingberg, Pietrangelo, Jones, C.Miller, Phanuef, E.Johnson
    Goalie - Allen, R.Miller
    Bench - M.Foligno, Sheahan, Laughton, Glendening, Djoos, Jensen, H.Fleury
    Prospects - Kyrou, Andersson Hinostroza, Grundstrom, Roy, Timmins, Grzelcyk, Lauzon, Lindgren

  4. #4
    Location
    Pickering
    Rep Power
    40

    I...am your father.

    Default Re: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    Another nice breakdown, Wfactor. Though I believe the SAT will replace plus/minus, not the USAT (which I don't like, so I'm biased). But similar line of thinking
    The Best Fantasy Hockey Site

    15-Team Keeper, points only, best 12 fwd, 4 dman, 2 G count. Playoffs count.

    F - T. Thompson, Thomas, Nylander, Tarasenko, Arvidsson, Guentzel, Fiala, Quinn, Mittelstadt, Hagel, Zacha, Roslovic, Berggren, Brink, Ostlund
    G - Kahkonen, Vejmelka, L. Thompson, Levi, Comrie
    D - Hronek, Morrissey, Lundkvist, Girard, Brannstrom, Rathbone, Hanifin, Severson, Durzi

  5. #5
    Location
    Prairies
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Demi-God

    Default Re: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    I'm gonna catch shit from a few non-hockey-playing forum members for using the "I play hockey" card...
    but...
    I'm torn on which is better of SAT/USAT... and I'm gonna use my own hockey experience (on-ice) to put a factor on the value of the three parts of "SAT" (/Corsi)

    Technically, there are three components that go into SAT:
    *Shots on net (SOG)
    *Shots taken, but not on net.
    *Shots blocked

    These are not the same, not even close... and if advanced stats wants maximum value, they need to be broken apart... or at least redistributed differently.
    [And btw... yes, these are still Corsi... and Fenwick... but they still have steps to take, IMO, and I had thought that perhaps the steps would've been taken... and are not...]

    1. Shots on Goal (SOG).
    I would assign this a factor of 1.00.
    You can't score unless your shot is on net.
    That said, there are times where players are getting a puck on net hoping for:
    *rebound
    *goalie screen
    *stoppage of play
    [I did this several times last night, I was Bergeron-ish on the dot last night... just FTR. Have to toot my horn... I got shifted to center with a guy out and was probably about 10/15 on the draw. Had one moment where I was first forward on ice, caught a rush, and just ripped an off-angle slapper on net knowing goalie would make save and hold. Got whistle. Linemates on. Took draw, won draw, gained offensive zone pressure.]

    2. Shots taken, missing net/goal.
    I would assign this a factor of 0.90.
    At the NHL level, guys are picking corners.
    If you miss 6" inwards, the goalie may save it, no goal... perhaps a goal on a really weak/poor goalie. SOG registered - and hence this shot is officially "SOG" and gets lumped into item #1.
    If you miss 6" outwards, it is wide, no goal (no SOG registered either)... no chance of goal.
    Nicklas Lidstrom was a GREAT player to watch for this.
    If he was releasing a shot from the point, he'd intentionally miss it wide rather than putting it on a path to the goal knowing it would be blocked. (See note #3 below for more on this D-man responsibility).
    [In men's beer league hockey, I'd downgrade this to a factor of like 0.50... as some guys miss so wide it's comical... but in the NHL, shots are not nearly so off the mark and there IS unregistered value in trying to snipe a corner.]

    3. Blocked Shots.

    I would assign this a factor of 0.20.
    I'm sorry, but if you can't get a shot through... that can be worse than not even taking the shot.
    And not taking a shot - well at least you are keeping possession.
    A blocked shot usually bounces off some shin pads and the defense (more likely to be looking towards the shooter) are usually jumping on that puck first.
    I realize there are some cases where a D-man is firing a slapper from the point and knows that it may or may not get through. (And that's the only reason I even give this 0.20)
    But in hockey, not getting a puck past a defender is a big no-no, usually means loss of possesion, and can sometimes result in turn of play the other way.


    For me, I think USAT is a better indicator of value... mostly because I don't want blocked shots contributing to a player's value... I just don't see value in having your shot blocked (as a player of almost 30 years now).
    I'd be all for a modified stat SAT(Corsi)/USAT(Fenwick) that keeps parts 1 (SOG) and part 2 (shots wide of net).
    But a blocked shot, IMO, has very little "telling value"... it's a very weak inclusion towards the sum... so I don't think it should be counted in any metric that weights a players value.

    My 2 cents.

  6. #6
    Wfactor's Avatar
    Wfactor is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,648
    Rep Power
    21

    Dobber Sports Stud

    Default Re: Analyzing the Enhanced Stat, Using (SATA) and (USATA) to determine Block opportunities

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    I'm gonna catch shit from a few non-hockey-playing forum members for using the "I play hockey" card...
    but...
    I'm torn on which is better of SAT/USAT... and I'm gonna use my own hockey experience (on-ice) to put a factor on the value of the three parts of "SAT" (/Corsi)

    Technically, there are three components that go into SAT:
    *Shots on net (SOG)
    *Shots taken, but not on net.
    *Shots blocked

    These are not the same, not even close... and if advanced stats wants maximum value, they need to be broken apart... or at least redistributed differently.
    [And btw... yes, these are still Corsi... and Fenwick... but they still have steps to take, IMO, and I had thought that perhaps the steps would've been taken... and are not...]

    1. Shots on Goal (SOG).
    I would assign this a factor of 1.00.
    You can't score unless your shot is on net.
    That said, there are times where players are getting a puck on net hoping for:
    *rebound
    *goalie screen
    *stoppage of play
    [I did this several times last night, I was Bergeron-ish on the dot last night... just FTR. Have to toot my horn... I got shifted to center with a guy out and was probably about 10/15 on the draw. Had one moment where I was first forward on ice, caught a rush, and just ripped an off-angle slapper on net knowing goalie would make save and hold. Got whistle. Linemates on. Took draw, won draw, gained offensive zone pressure.]

    2. Shots taken, missing net/goal.
    I would assign this a factor of 0.90.
    At the NHL level, guys are picking corners.
    If you miss 6" inwards, the goalie may save it, no goal... perhaps a goal on a really weak/poor goalie. SOG registered - and hence this shot is officially "SOG" and gets lumped into item #1.
    If you miss 6" outwards, it is wide, no goal (no SOG registered either)... no chance of goal.
    Nicklas Lidstrom was a GREAT player to watch for this.
    If he was releasing a shot from the point, he'd intentionally miss it wide rather than putting it on a path to the goal knowing it would be blocked. (See note #3 below for more on this D-man responsibility).
    [In men's beer league hockey, I'd downgrade this to a factor of like 0.50... as some guys miss so wide it's comical... but in the NHL, shots are not nearly so off the mark and there IS unregistered value in trying to snipe a corner.]

    3. Blocked Shots.

    I would assign this a factor of 0.20.
    I'm sorry, but if you can't get a shot through... that can be worse than not even taking the shot.
    And not taking a shot - well at least you are keeping possession.
    A blocked shot usually bounces off some shin pads and the defense (more likely to be looking towards the shooter) are usually jumping on that puck first.
    I realize there are some cases where a D-man is firing a slapper from the point and knows that it may or may not get through. (And that's the only reason I even give this 0.20)
    But in hockey, not getting a puck past a defender is a big no-no, usually means loss of possesion, and can sometimes result in turn of play the other way.


    For me, I think USAT is a better indicator of value... mostly because I don't want blocked shots contributing to a player's value... I just don't see value in having your shot blocked (as a player of almost 30 years now).
    I'd be all for a modified stat SAT(Corsi)/USAT(Fenwick) that keeps parts 1 (SOG) and part 2 (shots wide of net).
    But a blocked shot, IMO, has very little "telling value"... it's a very weak inclusion towards the sum... so I don't think it should be counted in any metric that weights a players value.

    My 2 cents.
    Nice breakdown and I agree USAT is the more conclusive of an offensive chance, which is what a SAT is a chance to create a goal. The easy way to break it down would be to look at baseball, a hit counts as a chance to score a run. a walk is the exact same, a chance for your team to score a run. now sure you need to get to home plate to score said run but without the hits/walks they would never happen. Now a blocked shot in hockey is what a groundball is for baseball, you might hit into a double play or maybe the only play is to first but either way it really does not help your team unless you get lucky enough to advance the runner (called a sacrifice).
    NFHA categories: G(25) A(25) PIM(3) Hits(2) Blocks(2) PPP(15) SHP(20) Goalie Stats: W(50) Sv(2) ShOu(100) OtL(10) ShL(10) L(-10) GA(-12)
    Cold As Ice Dynasty H2H categories: G A PIM SOG PPP +/- HIT BLK WINS GAA SV% SHO
    Starting Roster:
    Center - Giroux, Krejci, W.Karlsson
    Left Wing - Hall, Guentzel, Danault
    Right Wing - Stone, R.Smith, Compher
    Ultility Forward - Fast, Gaborik
    Defense - Klingberg, Pietrangelo, Jones, C.Miller, Phanuef, E.Johnson
    Goalie - Allen, R.Miller
    Bench - M.Foligno, Sheahan, Laughton, Glendening, Djoos, Jensen, H.Fleury
    Prospects - Kyrou, Andersson Hinostroza, Grundstrom, Roy, Timmins, Grzelcyk, Lauzon, Lindgren

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •