Coach Stats vs. GM Stats

Last week the National Post published a story centered on the Leafs Jay McClement and in it McClement referenced some of the stats that the coaching staffs tracks and utilizes. After pointing it out as an interesting tool I received some replies that said it was basically a useless waste of time. I couldn’t disagree more. As someone who coaches hockey I consider some of the things the Leafs coaching staff tracks to be useful as a teaching mechanism for my players, and if I had access to those stats for my team I would use them all the time to breakdown plays, consistencies, weaknesses, strengths, etc.  The thing is, most of these stats are not great indicators of long-term sustainability with the ability to project the future well. Herein lays the key fact of the matter that there are differences between coaching stats and GM stats and those different stats have different values depending on your position and what you’re trying to achieve.

My goal here isn’t to breakdown all the stats and assign them labels as a “coach stat” or “GM stat;” what I’m really trying to do is discuss how stats have various strengths and weaknesses, and how they can help or hurt our judgement depending on how we are viewing the game.

A good place to start would be discussing the stats in question that the Leafs used. There were only two named and they were tracking turnovers-takeaway ratios, and tracking hitting location, both of which I’d say are fairly peripheral for a GM but can be important for a coach to use.

We already know how the Leafs breakdown turnovers, because they’ve told us. Carlyle records turnovers in three categories: 1- Guy is playing as an individual, 2- Offensive player takes chance 3- 'Brain-dead.’ What that really means when it comes to the Leafs tracking turnovers is that they want to erase “3.” You can show a player his CORSI and it will mean absolutely nothing and have no effect on his game whatsoever, but if you’re breaking down his turnovers with him maybe that leads to a swing of shots on net against, to a few more shots for.

A player such as Lupul, for example, is encouraged to try and create offense so while you of course never want to see him turn the puck over, it will obviously happen. As an offensive player you can live with him taking a chance, it not working, and losing the puck. If you don’t encourage him to try things he isn’t going to produce to his full capabilities. However, a player like Lupul has also been known to turn the puck over in his own zone and that’s the stuff you need to work with him on. If you tell a player he turns the puck over too much that’s not going to do anything, but if you sit with him and breakdown where he is making his mistakes specifically and what the problems are, you can use that to teach and instruct.

Furthermore, that turnover description can also be broken down through player roles. Yes the Leafs let Phil Kessel take chances (and again, I’m just using the Leafs as an example here but this applies to every team really), because he’s in a scoring role and that’s what they ask him to do. However, a player like Jay McClement is in a grinding role so the Leafs aren’t as comfortable with him falling under the “1” category. If McClement loses the puck once or twice a game because he’s tried to beat a defenseman one-on-one, that’s probably not acceptable because that’s not his role. I’d wager a guess that they would ask him to chip and chase, or pass the puck to the trailer, instead of deking.

Showing players the type of turnovers they make and what they can and can’t do is how you preach puck management. You can’t just show a player his possession stats and think that’s going to change anything; you need to look into what’s causing that and how you change that. Specifically breaking down turnovers is one way that can be done.

That takes us to tracking hits. Hits have some, little, or no value at all depending on your beliefs, but knowing where a guy is making his hits can be valuable in maximizing a player’s efficiency. Regardless of where you stand on the value of a hit, the ability to hit a guy, separate him from the puck, and retrieve it for possession is important and valuable for any player to have. If player X and player Y both throw 100 hits, and X has 25 hits that change possession while Y has 35, player Y is obviously more valuable physically and I’d like to see the breakdown of X’s hits to see why he’s being physical yet not able to change possession as much.  Although Dustin Brown is a much better player than Cal Clutterbuck, I would compare their hitting styles (as their hit counts are usually similar) and guess that Brown is much more effective at hitting on the forecheck and getting the puck versus Cal Clutterbuck who more so finishes a lot of his checks. As a coach you can’t just shrug and say “well I have Cal Clutterbuck who hits a lot but isn’t very effective at doing so to turn the puck over,” you actually need to try and find ways to maximize his skillset. That’s what good coaches do.

Basically, if I’m a GM am I taking a player who throws a lot of hits that don’t really do anything and hope he changes? No. But if I’m coaching said player because he’s already on my roster, it might (hopefully) be beneficial to track his hit location and try to coach him on how to better use his physicality. Because the Leafs are the team in question who use this stat, I would look at Nik Kulemin and suggest he’s excellent at hitting to get the puck back. The Leafs just brought David Clarkson in and he is a physical player, but if his hit totals aren’t leading to anything that changes puck possession, Nikolai Kulemin is a player that I would use as a model for him to try and use his physicality as (note: this is an example, not a fact; from what I’ve seen Clarkson is great at dumping the puck in and retrieving it physically).

A more appropriate example would be using hit location to track defensive positioning. If the opponent has the puck in the offensive zone corner, passes it off, and then the defenseman on my team goes out of his way to finish his check, he isn’t helping my team and more often than not he’s just putting himself out of position. It would be more appropriate (at least in my view), for the defenseman to locate where the puck is going and get into proper position rather than taking a few additional strides and seconds to finish that type of minimal hit.

There’s no doubt that this is a little thing, but if a coach get a forward who hits a lot to throw 20 more hits over the course of the year that cause a change in possession and that leads to say, two extra goals, while also showing his defensemen when to finish hits in the D-zone and when not to, and that leads to getting into position better and preventing three goals against that otherwise probably would have happened, then that’s a win. A coach can only use what he has –something that is too often forgotten online—so if he’s getting players to be just a little more effective than usual that’s a win.

A lot of the stats used on the internet now are rather ineffective for a coach to use. Are you going to tell a player he has a high or low PDO? What’s that going to change? If a player isn’t scoring but has a lot of chances, he knows to keep going because they will eventually go in. We hear players say that all the time, they don’t need to know their PDO. But should a GM understand that stat to help decide if a player had a career year? Yes. If you’re telling a player to cross the blueline and throw the puck on net to help his CORSI, that’s probably going to make him even worse and make his shooting percentage a wasteland. Yes these stats are sometimes able to help us predict the future, but in terms of using them to teach a player how to make adjustments and correct these stats in and of themselves, they really do just about nothing.

Even in Moneyball, we see the staff talking to players about things such as “if you take a first pitch strike, your batting average drops ___ for the rest of the at bat” versus telling a player “your OBP is too low, now you know, so change that.” Is OBP useful in baseball? Of course. Is it useful in terms of teaching a player how to self-improve though? Not really.

What it really boils down to is coaches use certain stats to cover the nuances of the game, and the GM uses overarching stats that look at the big picture to ask “what’s all this work really producing?” There are many ways to use analytics to help a hockey team and just because something doesn’t directly incorporate shot-counts or goal counts doesn’t mean it’s useless. Getting more shots and more goals is always the goal of anyone working in hockey, but part of the process is breaking down actual gameplay into singular events and seeing where improvements can be made.

This is why, I believe, many coaches are terrible GMs. Mike Keenan (Luongo trade) and Darryl Sutter (Phaneuf trade) immediately come to mind. Being a GM takes a certain mind frame where you always project the future, work within the parameters of the cap, juggle expiring veteran contracts with the rookies in your organization and so on. The best GMs are ones that can properly analyze and predict the future and when to buy low and sell high.

Whereas coaches look at players and see “I like this size in my line-up” or “I want that guy because he wins a lot of battles.” It’s a completely different thought process.

So next time you see an organization discuss how a stat they use, really take a second to consider how they might be using that stat before you instantly criticize it simply because you don’t agree with it. 

Too Long for Twitter- September 4th

1. Prior to this season Niklas Kronwall had 17 points in the 19 career games he had played in without Niklas Lidstrom. In his first full season without Lidstrom Kronwall threw up 29 points in 48 games which prorates to roughly 50 points (a point below his career high). No Lidstrom has translated into over a minute more of power play ice time per game than Kronwall is used to and that caused him to have his second highest power play point season behind that 51 point career year. Amazing what opportunity can do.
2. Went under the radar but it’s neat that days before the draft Preds GM David Poile said that if Seth Jones dropped to four he would take him, and that he’s the best player available in the draft. Lots of times after the fact we hear teams pump up their picks and say “we had him rated higher than where we got him,” but there was Poile saying it beforehand. The Preds have seven D under contract and don’t appear interested in signing any of the remaining UFA D-men so it will be interesting to see first round picks Ryan Ellis and Jones battle for ice time with fourth rounder Mattias Ekholm and undrafted Viktor Bartley. 
3. Was going through my twitter favourites and found this little gem courtesy dobber hockey: “Over last 3 yrs when Nathan Horton was out of lineup, Krejci had 29 points in 47 gmes (0.62).Otherwise he had 128 in 154 (0.83).” That doesn’t include playoffs. David Johnson also wrote a bit on Horton increasing his linemates shooting percentages.  Iginla figures to replace Horton and he’s been really effective as a scorer the last two years (100 points in 126 games), but how will Krejci, and Lucic, do without him?
4. After 48 games in the 2011-2012 season, Malkin led the league in scoring with 67 points. During the 48 game 2013 season Marty St. Louis won the scoring title with 60 points (which was what the 2011-2012 number two scorer, Giroux, had after 48 games). Stamkos had 32 goals at the 48 game threshold which was what Ovechkin won the Rocket with this season. Phoenix was the only team not to be in a playoff spot after 48 games and make it (then they went on a run to the conference finals). I don’t know how much stock to put into last year’s 48 game season, but it’s funny how it’s all pretty relative.
5. Found two tweets about 10^th overall pick Valerie Nichushkin from earlier in the year that I think are interesting. The first is "Talked to an NHL Euro scout today: "If Nichushkin isn't selected either first or second overall, it's only because of the Russian factor." The second is “I asked top Euro #nhldraft prospect Valeri Nichushkin how confident he is that he'll be playing in the NHL next yr- "100 percent sure." Those are two eyebrow raising things to say. If Nichushkin is what some from across the pond think he is, Dallas could have a formidable top six forward group with he, Jamie Benn, Tyler Seguin, Ray Whitney, Erik Cole and one of Rich Peverley or Cody Eakin. If he struggles this is the kind of thing scouts and management teams will remember that drop Russian’s stocks.
6. In 2007-2008 the Tampa Bay Lightning had 40% of their cap space tied into Lecavalier, Richards and St. Louis. If it weren’t for the Bobby Ryan trade the Ducks would have had 34% tied into Getzlaf, Perry and Ryan in 2013-2014. After this season the Penguins will have over $25 million committed to Crosby, Malkin and Letang. How long is that going to last? The Lightning and Ducks were both adamant that they weren’t going to break up their big three’s either, and each team had won Cups with pretty well all those guys (save for Ryan really) as key components to those Cups.
7. Of all things Leafs fans have complained about when it comes to Franson and Kadri being unsigned, I’m surprised not much has been made about the general thought process of the Leafs originally giving Franson a one year deal to begin with. Obviously hindsight is 20-20, but the Leafs gave Franson a one year, one million dollar deal right after the lockout and really made things tough on them more than anything. Even if you give Franson a little more money to make it a two year deal, he’s still moveable if he struggles again. Someone would take a chance on a 6’5, right handed D-man if he had a year remaining on even a $2M cap hit because he still oozes potential. Instead, a quick 48 games on a shortened season later Franson lit up the league and now wants to be paid. The only way the Leafs would have been smart to sign Franson to that deal was if he struggled so that they could have easily cut ties afterwards. Just always seemed like a weird deal to me, and now it’s come back to bite them. The lesson is that you don’t handout one year bridge contracts.
8. Corey Crawford has a career .913sv% in 152 games on what’s been a very good Blackhawks team, is that worth $6M a season for a guy turning 30 when it kicks in? I don’t think so. The crazy thing, though, is looking around at the goalie market and seeing who else makes over $5M- Carey Price (career .915), Cam Ward (consistently hurt), Sergei Bobrovsky (one great year), Mike Smith (up and down career with one amazing season), along with some truly established goalies such as Jonathon Quick, Pekka Rinne, Ryan Miller and Henrik Lundqvist. Goaltending has to be the hardest position to pay for because it’s so up and down and there really are only a handful of consistently elite goalies. When it comes to Crawford specifically I guess my main thought is that I think there are at least 15 other goalies they could have won the Cup with this year, and I don’t think it was a coincidence Ray Emery looked amazing in Chicago, so to me you don’t pay high end money for that. In Chicago’s defense, they don’t have any major players that need contracts until Toews and Kane are both UFAs two years from now.
9. The longer the Derek Stepan contract holdout goes, the more it hurts the Rangers. Considering Ryan Callahan and Carl Hagelin are both out to start the year as they recover from surgeries, the Rangers can’t really afford to not have Stepan either as that’s literally half of their top six gone. Sather’s notoriously a tough negotiator with his own players, but if things really hit the fan Stepan can easily sit back and watch the Rangers struggle without him, Callahan, and Hagelin for at least a month. This seems like the remaining RFA negotiation that could get the ugliest.
10. I didn't think Florida would make the playoffs last year but most people note it as a lack of possession regression and I think that’s a little too simplistic. Weiss and Versteeg, 2/3rds of their top line, were basically out/useless for the year and they lost their second best defenseman Jason Garrison. They also lost their seventh leading scorer Mikael Samuelsson and key grinder Sean Bergenheim didn’t play a game this year, and Theodore was dreadful compared to the playoff season. That's a lot to lose. Who did they replace those key guys with? Filip Kuba, Peter Mueller, Alex Kovalev and Jonathan Huberdeau to start, and other than Huberdeau everyone was pretty bad. 48 games later, Florida looks like they are back to rebuilding. Funny how quickly things change.
11. The second point to Florida’s reversal is that they did nothing to build on their playoff season. Tallon couldn’t have predicted Weiss and Versteeg would be no-shows on the year, but replacing Garrison with Kuba was always going to be a disaster plus he never added quality depth. This is one reason I’ll be interested to see how the Leafs do this year in comparison to the Habs. You can say what you want about the Leafs offseason, but Clarkson is better than MacArthur, Bolland is a more appropriate shutdown center than Grabovski and some youth should stick full-time now in Colborne and Gardiner which will make them better. They should also get good goaltending. The point is that they’ve generated some momentum with their moves and made them to fill their holes and play their style. Conversely, the Habs added an aging Briere, George Parros and an extremely limited Douglas Murray. Montreal still has a good team, but they didn’t really add much to it so I’m curious to see how the contrast in off seasons plays out.
12. Also, the news of Emelin being out until at least Christmas is massive. He was a force on the Habs defense last year and when he was out they looked noticeably softer and their defense really missed his presence. Douglas Murray does nothing to replace him, either. For Montreal’s sake Tinordi better be ready for full-time duty.
13. Last year Carolina had a lot of hype then obviously struggled as a lot of things went wrong. Their defense is still weak, but Sekera helps them as he joins Faulk and Gleason as legit top four defensemen on the team. Ward obviously needs to stay healthy but a healthy Tuomo Ruutu makes a difference and if they sign Brendan Morrow as rumoured, they might even have some depth at forward. I think they will start living up to their promise a bit this year.
14. I remember when the Isles were mocked for promoting Jack Capuano (who the hell is that?!?! Was the general consensus) but man what a job he’s done. Besides the actual team success, how about getting veterans Nabokov and Visnovsky to not only buy into the program but sign extensions, when both vehemently tried to fight going there? He might be the most underrated coach in the league right now.
15. On the note of underrated, I was trying to think of some under the radar media members or bloggers worth reading regularly and kind of blanked. Would appreciate some names or links that are worth checking out beyond the obvious ones. 

Too Long for Twitter

Sometimes 140 characters just isn't enough to put out talking points, so I'm hoping to develop this feature to be almost a weekly thing where I write 15 or so points that I wanted to elaborate on more than Twitter allows without destroying your feed. Hope you enjoy. 

1. Ray Whitney signed with Dallas because they were willing to give him two years while other teams weren't. He threw up 29 points in 32 games last year and though he is pricey at $4.5M, how many teams that need scoring wouldn't want him right now? 
2. It's funny now to think that Phoenix was trying to pry David Krejci out of Boston with a possible Keith Yandle swap not even two years ago in part because the Bruins had young Seguin waiting for a bigger role. So many people talk about sample sizes but hockey decision makers seem to make moves based on very little. 
3. Dug up this old gem from a 30 Thoughts blog in July 2012: "Have to believe that, yes, Toronto's inquired about Jonathan Bernier. Brian Burke isn't doing his job if he doesn't. But there are doubts Burke is incredibly serious about him. Was he serious about Martin Brodeur? Yes. Is he more serious than he lets on about Luongo? Yes. Bernier doesn't really fit Toronto's stated criteria of a veteran in goal." 
4. One other quick Leaf thought: When the Jets drafted Mark Scheifele seventh overall it caught quite a few people off guard (teams were trying to get into the top 15 to draft him, as opposed to the top 10, apparently).  The rationale at the time was that Scheifele was in junior B the year before and had a large development curve. Now, relate that to the Leafs first round pick this year Frederick Gauthier and you see the similarities as a guy who got drafted after his first season in the CHL, except he was coming from AAA midget hockey. I’m not saying Gauthier will develop into a high-end prospect like Scheifele based on a severe learning curve, but to be able to step into the CHL coming off a season at a significantly lower level and play at a high level to be drafted in the first round is impressive. This is how you draft steals.
5. In the old days the NHL used to be all about signing veterans and having the young kids really bide their time. Nowadays, it's completely reversed. Why else are guys like Brenden Morrow, Damien Brunner, Ron Hainsey, Mason Raymond, and so on still unsigned? They all want a little more money because they are proven, and they've all probably maxed out their production rates at this point (maybe not Brunner, but he's the exception here). It seems teams would rather swing for the fences with their own drafted kids.
6. When Detroit acquired Todd Bertuzzi from Florida the Panthers wanted Cory Emmerton but the Wings insisted on Shawn Matthias. I think Detroit did them a favour.
7. Another interesting 30 Thoughts point from the past to read now: "GMs didn't have many complaints with Tyler Myers getting $38 million. "He had 48 points two years ago and 37 in what was supposedly a down year for him [last season]," one said. "You figure he'll get better and in arbitration, that's what those guys get." However, these same GMs would like to see Buffalo stop cutting $10 million cheques for signing bonuses." That contract is ugly right now, to say the least, and we're only seeing more of them getting signed now by younger and younger players (Eberle, Landeskog, even Henrique to a degree). 
8. In that same blog Friedman points out a lesser-known prospect that looked good in the Traverse prospect tournament. His name? Brandon Dillon. If you still don't know who he is, look him up. Was awesome in Dallas last year. 
9. One of the most confusing things of this offseason was San Jose getting serious attention for tracking CORSI to draft CHL players. The Sharks have had exactly one player drafted over the last four drafts (not including this year's for obvious reasons) play an NHL game. One. In fairness, the player (Charlie Coyle) was the only first round pick other than Thomas Hertl so they haven’t been drafting high; Hertl is also expected to make the team this year so there’s that. But one player is still awful. Not one surprise pick late has mustered even one NHL game yet and we’re supposed to be excited/care how they scout players? Results need to be there to justify that and I’ll be very interested to see what this year’s and the next few drafts produce (for the record I think Mueller is going to be solid). If they revolutionize scouting somehow and start churning out NHLers with their picks then this is a different story and I’ll gladly note that. Right now though, it’s just another team using a method that they think is best and it really shouldn’t be that noteworthy.
10. Everyone is talking about how great Detroit looks on paper and I really feel like I’m missing something here. Swapping Brunner, Cleary (for now), and Filppula with Alfredsson and Weiss sure looks great in name value, but actual value? Brunner and Alfredsson actually had the same amount of points last year, but only one of them is rounding into his prime while the other is far past his. Then there’s swapping Filppula with Weiss- Weiss is obviously the better player but he better be healthy and that wrist better be okay because he’s 30 now and just missed a large amount of his last season. At least Filppula is generally healthy, and as the saying goes “stick with the devil you know, not the devil you don’t.” Plus Cleary was a valuable depth guy that I assume they’ll replace internally with Bertuzzi/Samuelsson returning (not sure either is as versatile as Cleary at this point). I guess what I’m saying is that Detroit looks more different as opposed to better to me. I think Detroit will improve because Nyquist, DeKeyser and Tatar are all really good young players more than anything else.
11. Every year when the draft rolls around high profile prospects drop due to stereotypes that most fans roll their eyes at. A few years ago fans were rolling their eyes at Ryan Ellis and then Ryan Murphy dropping because they were studs in the OHL, but were very small defensemen. Ellis is expected to make Nashville this year while Murphy should at least push for a spot on Carolina, but I can’t say I’d be dying to have either prospect in my organization right now. It’s way too early to draw any sort of conclusion on either player, but I always have my eyes on them because their lack of height generated a lot of noise and I’m extremely interested to see how it all unfolds.
12. I have no idea how Finland picks 3/5 of Rask, Rinne, Lehtonen, Niemi and Backstrom to some degree, let alone decide who the starter is going to be. If I had to pick today, I’d go with Rinne, but you can see how unbelievably important getting off to a good start will be for each of these goalies. The separation between the five will literally come down to who is playing hot to start the year and of course, health.
13. Can’t believe team Canada is trying to sell people on their downfall in 2006 as a follow-up to 2002 gold was in part due to being too loyal to the gold medal winning team. Here are the players who played on both squads: Pronger, Sakic, Blake, Foote, Gagne, Iginla, Smyth and Brodeur. Now, do you think the problem was those players, or the fact that the 2006 team had, on international ice, Kris Draper, Shane Doan, Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan McCabe, Robyn Regehr and even big guys that were elite at that time but struggled to move quickly in Lecalvier and Thornton? Canada needs to respect the big ice and the real difference that it is. The players can downplay it all they want (I think they don’t want to admit they aren’t as good as usual on it, personally) but it’s real. What this really means is that players who are unbelievable skaters have to be valued maybe a little higher than they would be on NHL ice and vice versa; that means guys like Taylor Hall, Matt Duchene, and even Brian Campbell should really get pushed to see if they can play with Canada's best. Yeah I think Canada needs to stick to their physical roots, but they need to be able to flat out out-skate teams too.
14. The only RFA contract dispute that I can remember in recent memory that actually got ugly which forced a trade/loss of said RFA was Kyle Turris and Phoenix. However, that marriage was doomed for quite some time before then and Turris was trying to force himself out from the beginning of that contract negotiation by asking for crazy money. If there are similar disputes that I’m misremembering I’ll be happy to hear them, but either way I am enjoying fans freaking out about unsigned RFAs right now.
15. I’m not excited for the prospect tournaments to start just because I want to see the puck drop and some hockey played; I’m genuinely excited to see prospects team together and really battle. It’s a time to show off, to make good impressions, to go all-out. If you are able to watch any prospect tournaments, make sure you do. It’s good hockey.