Average Numbers from Top Positional Players

[Maaaasquito]

Here's the excel file of the numbers from the Kessel thread.

Basically I looked at the averages, gave it a green if it was a +5 more than the average, if it was a minimal difference < 5 and >-5, I gave it a yellow, and if was < -5 it was a red...

It's generally believed that RW are much weaker than C and LW from an overall perspective (3rd LW is generally a better producer than a 3rd RW), but what's interesting is the variation between the tiers of RW aren't all that much.

Eg.) If I went with Iggy (Yahoo! ADP of 37th) instead of Kessel (ADP of 18th), I'm essentially getting the same thing, but a round or two later...

*A couple of downfalls of what I did, dual eligible players mucked up the averages a bit, so Malkin in C and RW could have skewed the numbers a bit. Also injured players, I took the totals from what they posted last season regardless of games missed, which once again could have skewed the numbers, Crosby's numbers would have brought the average down and made a player like Sedin look slightly better...

Have at er!

[Skin Blues]

I'd suggest using z-scores rather than raw totals. Puts everything on the same scale. 5 PPP are much more significant than 5 SOG. It then becomes easy to just sum the z-score totals for each player to get an idea of the talent at the top of each position. You can also run a few iterations on the whole pool of players and find out who the best 14 are at each position rather than just using the top 14 drafted, which are almost always not the best 14 players.

Z-scores are calculated as ("X" - Average)/Standard Deviation. It's a really simple calculation and gives much better insight into the numbers. Also, you can do conditional formatting and colour-code everything at once since they're all on the same scale.

Generally all forward positions should be treated the same, especially if there is a utility spot. Replacement level for LW, RW, and C is almost certain to be the exact same. If your league mates are putting extra value on RW or something, I'd suggest to zig when they zag, and grab the elite guys at the so-called "deep" positions, and settle for the lower tiered players at "shallow" positions. If your'e in a really shallow league like 10 teams and only 6 forwards per team with no util spots, then you start to run into position scarcity, but I get the feeling most people doing this type of analysis are in deeper leagues like 12+ teams with 9+ forwards per team.

[Pengwin7]

Players should always be placed at the weakest position for analysis.
For this year, I've judged the following:

C/LW is a LW
C/RW is a RW
LW/RW is a RW
RW/D is a D

So... THIS year, RWs are as strong as ever.
When/if the statistical providers ever get their positional act together, then guys like Malkin, Giroux, and Backes should all be C only. Guys like Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Benn, M.Richards, Ott should also be C only (not C/LW).

Here is a link to all dual Yahoo! guys for this year 2012-2013.

Also, when I was tracking player-for-player, I used multiple counters to sum the total players at any forward position and also sum them in my preferred position (per above).
That thread is here... but it never took off.

[notoriousjim]

a few things that surprised me:
centers are better at SOG that i expected. I guess i assume the prototype C is H Sedin. Great assist and power play numbers, but weaker in goals and SOG. I guess the prototype is further from sedin and moving closer to a guy who shoots as much as he sets up.

Aside from Z score, you should also look at average stats, or stats over 82 games. Centers look weak with a short crosby season. Also i would go by last season rank. Skinner and a few others had down years, but are getting drafted based on upside rather than who they are.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

Just as a little plug, rather than have Ma come in to the rescue to dig up the data all the time (), this exact output is generated as part of the League Breakdown tool on FHG.

The League Breakdown takes the population of owned players based on the league size, and generates tables summarizing both the average player at each position and the lowest owned (ie waiver replacement-level).

For each player with multiple eligibility, they are included in the calculation for the position where they are more valuable.

It doesn't give a player-by-player approach, but that's what our rankings are for -- values are based on standard score (z-score) in each category when compared against the replacement player at their position. Using this valuation approach systematically maximizes overall value on your team, though you still need to manage for your individual categories.

End plug!

[ericdaoust]

Originally Posted by fantasyhockeygeek

Just as a little plug, rather than have Ma come in to the rescue to dig up the data all the time (), this exact output is generated as part of the League Breakdown tool on FHG.

The League Breakdown takes the population of owned players based on the league size, and generates tables summarizing both the average player at each position and the lowest owned (ie waiver replacement-level).

For each player with multiple eligibility, they are included in the calculation for the position where they are more valuable.

It doesn't give a player-by-player approach, but that's what our rankings are for -- values are based on standard score (z-score) in each category when compared against the replacement player at their position. Using this valuation approach systematically maximizes overall value on your team, though you still need to manage for your individual categories.

End plug!

I'll keep the plug going. This stuff is awesome. That is all.

[Dakkster]

Originally Posted by Pengwin7

Players should always be placed at the weakest position for analysis.
For this year, I've judged the following:

C/LW is a LW
C/RW is a RW
LW/RW is a RW
RW/D is a D

So... THIS year, RWs are as strong as ever.
When/if the statistical providers ever get their positional act together, then guys like Malkin, Giroux, and Backes should all be C only. Guys like Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Benn, M.Richards, Ott should also be C only (not C/LW).

Here is a link to all dual Yahoo! guys for this year 2012-2013.

Also, when I was tracking player-for-player, I used multiple counters to sum the total players at any forward position and also sum them in my preferred position (per above).
That thread is here... but it never took off.

Small thing, but Ott is a leftwinger, not a center. He just takes faceoffs.

[Maaaasquito]

I thought about using z-scores, but the thing with adding up of z-scores, the problem is if you have 1 very very negative stat that could completely change the numbers.

Eg.) if you have +1 G, +1 A, +1 PPP, +1 SOG, but they have very terrible +/- and PIM numbers, they would be painted very negatively, which is kinda what FHG does, cause it punishes for negative scores. So even though Kessel is great for 4 out of 6 stats, but when you factor in the negative factor for +/- and PIM, he slides down to 76th... That's the downside with z-scores.

[Maaaasquito]

Originally Posted by Skin Blues

You can also run a few iterations on the whole pool of players and find out who the best 14 are at each position rather than just using the top 14 drafted, which are almost always not the best 14 players.

Yeah the only problem is because everyone's draft lists are different, so coming up with the top best 14 at each position, might not actually end up that way. What generally wins pools is getting players well below their draft value, but they end up producing top-tier numbers. Eg.) Landing Karlsson last year with a mid-round pick, was the difference maker in most leagues, or Perry the season prior.

So I kinda just went with the Yahoo! ADP instead, generally speaking the top-14 drafted players at each position is relatively stable, it's just a matter of who ends up where?

But you are right there are multiple ways of looking at things, I just went with the ADP route.

[Maaaasquito]

Originally Posted by fantasyhockeygeek

Just as a little plug, rather than have Ma come in to the rescue to dig up the data all the time (), this exact output is generated as part of the League Breakdown tool on FHG.

The League Breakdown takes the population of owned players based on the league size, and generates tables summarizing both the average player at each position and the lowest owned (ie waiver replacement-level).

For each player with multiple eligibility, they are included in the calculation for the position where they are more valuable.

It doesn't give a player-by-player approach, but that's what our rankings are for -- values are based on standard score (z-score) in each category when compared against the replacement player at their position. Using this valuation approach systematically maximizes overall value on your team, though you still need to manage for your individual categories.

End plug!

I could be wrong, but when I was playing around with the tool, I only got the average numbers per position, so all of the RW, or all C, but there wasn't a way to distinguish a #1 RW from a #3 RW... So using the average numbers of the RW position is ok, but the numbers I want from my #1 RW is different than the numbers I'd expect from my #3 RW.

Is there a way to break it down per position? Like top 10-14 RW, then next 10-14 RW then bottom 10-14 RW?