James Tanner: The Old "Eye Test" and Why It's Ridiculous Why what you see is not always what happened.

You roll with the times and get up to speed with what's happening in today's world or you become a dinosaur and find yourself out of a job quickly!! See John Tortorella for details.

Yep.

Great read with a lot of great points. I think Nolans comments are strange because here you have a Sabres organization putting an unprecedented amount of money in their hockey department. Their staff size has tripled from previous ownership(including an analytics department) and they view themselves as being very progressive. Then the coach says he doesn't beleive in any of that.

You're also dead on, if this was Toronto people was be all over this.

Interesting blog,thought provoking and agree completely.

And, 'seeing' is clearly subjective, and as you intimated, open to interpretation to whomever is processing the game. Case in point to illustrate: Dale Weise.
John Tortarella saw a five-minute-a-night 'ankle bender' (love that term, thanks Biz) whereas Michel Therrian saw and interpreted his play much differently, put him in a different role with bigger minutes, and ta-da! Frighteningly clutch. Not that this supports advanced stats as much as what science has already proved: visual proof is the weakest proof of all.

The Sabres are aggressively pursuing McDavid/Eichel. Their coaching situation makes complete sense.

Lastly, while I am a new participant to HB, I am hardly a new reader. From what I can tell, you James Tanner, are one of the few bloggers to re-weigh in on your own posts, which is kind of cool.
People appreciate being 'talked with' more than 'talked to', in my experience.

The Sabres are aggressively pursuing McDavid/Eichel. Their coaching situation makes complete sense.
- Ryan_Wilson

It does make complete sense. He is here to change the stale culture left by Lindy Ruff. He will get more out of the little talent we have than most coaches would.

A coach on the Buffalo Sabres does not need to worry about analytics. He was right, get better players, see better results. End of story

Lastly, while I am a new participant to HB, I am hardly a new reader. From what I can tell, you James Tanner, are one of the few bloggers to re-weigh in on your own posts, which is kind of cool.
People appreciate being 'talked with' more than 'talked to', in my experience.
- roland_hazard

The Sabres are aggressively pursuing McDavid/Eichel. Their coaching situation makes complete sense.
- Ryan_Wilson

It proves they are "letting" Nolan coach the Sabres as a makeup for screwing him in the late 90's. His values and abilities don't match the Sabres ambition.

I remember reading about an actual eye test years ago that was predictive of a players success. I think it had much to do with rapid eye movement.

A good read and thanks for pointing out, 'confirmation bias'. I think Dan Bylsma had it for some lower tier players who turned the puck over regularly. He even used the same bad players on the PK, over and over and, well you get the point. You need to be objective when assessing performance.

Lastly, while I am a new participant to HB, I am hardly a new reader. From what I can tell, you James Tanner, are one of the few bloggers to re-weigh in on your own posts, which is kind of cool.
People appreciate being 'talked with' more than 'talked to', in my experience.
- roland_hazard

A lot of the normal guys do. Meaning, the guys who don't do this for a living. Ironically, they are generally the best bloggers.

Doesn't this go both ways though:

"As anyone who has taken an Intro to Psych course knows, eye witness accounts are very unreliable. Take ten people who witness something and you will get ten different accounts. Mood, attention, context, adrenaline and fear are just some of the things that can affect how we view something. "


The people recording these stats (shots on goal, hits, giveaways vs takeaways, etc) hold some sway in what the results end up being as well.

Not dismissing anything you wrote, just adding another human factor into it all.

James, this is the best thing you've written thus far.

Great work.

why would he risk not knowing even 1% of the time when there's a tool that is guaranteed to be accurate. (Please note that advanced stats are only predictive in the aggregate, and that anomalies will always occur.)

Talk about a contradiction...Why would you say it's 100% accurate and then immediately say...but of course there are anomalies.

What are you Ron Burgandy? It works 60% of the time, 100% of the time.

Just knit picking...other than that, I enjoyed it.

It does make complete sense. He is here to change the stale culture left by Lindy Ruff. He will get more out of the little talent we have than most coaches would.

A coach on the Buffalo Sabres does not need to worry about analytics. He was right, get better players, see better results. End of story
- sbroads24

I've actually liked Lindy a bunch. You guys had me scared that he wasn't going to play our young guys or get along with the young guys. Been the exact opposite.

Lastly, while I am a new participant to HB, I am hardly a new reader. From what I can tell, you James Tanner, are one of the few bloggers to re-weigh in on your own posts, which is kind of cool.
People appreciate being 'talked with' more than 'talked to', in my experience.
- roland_hazard

Hey thanks, I make a point of doing it because it's fun, but also because when you get talking to people, you are bound to revise or completely change your mind/opinion.

Occasionally I get frustrated when I think I'm not getting a fair shake, but even then, it pays to remember that people are not always going to think the way you do, which in turn lets you try to find new ways and/or angles to talk about things. For example, it's easy to just assume that people are starting out with the same knowledge you have, and thus you start your argument at point B or C, instead of A.

Finally, it keeps me from going too far up my own......head and keeps me on my toes. I love that anyone would read what I had to say, so if they wanna argue about it, talk about it, or even call me names, I am (usually!) cool with that.

I've actually liked Lindy a bunch. You guys had me scared that he wasn't going to play our young guys or get along with the young guys. Been the exact opposite.
- NoobasaurusRex

There's a significant difference between the young guys on Dallas and the young guys that were in Buffalo near the end of Lindy's tenure.

Dallas has players perfectly suited for nearly every forward position.

I've actually liked Lindy a bunch. You guys had me scared that he wasn't going to play our young guys or get along with the young guys. Been the exact opposite.
- NoobasaurusRex

Because he hasn't been there for 15 years.

Ruff is a good coach. Coaches shouldn't have endless leashes. He lost the team at the end.

Doesn't this go both ways though:

"As anyone who has taken an Intro to Psych course knows, eye witness accounts are very unreliable. Take ten people who witness something and you will get ten different accounts. Mood, attention, context, adrenaline and fear are just some of the things that can affect how we view something. "


The people recording these stats (shots on goal, hits, giveaways vs takeaways, etc) hold some sway in what the results end up being as well.

Not dismissing anything you wrote, just adding another human factor into it all.
- stashu

No you're right on. This will be a topic I explore next slow news day. The fact is, you can manipulate numbers anyway you want to, so making factual statements based of them can be dangerous. Context is hugely important.

Also, numbers are not repeatable. There being so many variables to any given season, player or situation that you can't just look at one guy and say his stats mean everything.

This is why scouting reports are so important. A players talent and age are probably more transferable year to year and indicative of what he can do that just numbers.

But this is why a balance is needed. I do mean to say with this blog that stats are superior to watching the game and knowing your players strengths and weaknesses , only that you need to be aware of the shortcomings of human psychology as it pertains to experience and supplement that with stats.

James, this is the best thing you've written thus far.

Great work.


- BINGO!

Hey thanks, and I just wanted to say that I greatly enjoyed your work in the Nightmare board games.

Doesn't this go both ways though:

"As anyone who has taken an Intro to Psych course knows, eye witness accounts are very unreliable. Take ten people who witness something and you will get ten different accounts. Mood, attention, context, adrenaline and fear are just some of the things that can affect how we view something. "


The people recording these stats (shots on goal, hits, giveaways vs takeaways, etc) hold some sway in what the results end up being as well.

Not dismissing anything you wrote, just adding another human factor into it all.
- stashu

that makes no sense at all, a shot is a shot, a give away is a give away, no amount of bias is going to change those numbers...

why would he risk not knowing even 1% of the time when there's a tool that is guaranteed to be accurate. (Please note that advanced stats are only predictive in the aggregate, and that anomalies will always occur.)

Talk about a contradiction...Why would you say it's 100% accurate and then immediately say...but of course there are anomalies.

What are you Ron Burgandy? It works 60% of the time, 100% of the time.

Just knit picking...other than that, I enjoyed it.
- RickJames77

Well, what I am trying to do is avoid absolutes. It would be stupid to think that you can predict everything. I admittedly use this example a lot, but if you had said in 2007 that you thought Jose Bautista was going to be a top 3, elite player in MLB for the next six years, you would have been laughed off the block, and with good reason, because the stats show that players who are 27 and not starters on their team almost never suddenly become super-stars. And yet, that is exactly what happened - Jose went from a guy who looked like a AAA star and MLB zero to a truly elite star.

Or to use a poker example, it is never a bad idea to get your money in the pot with AA - but a guy with 2-3 still stands a fair chance of beating you once in a while - he could flop 2-2-3 and now if you don't hit an A you lose, even though you made the right decision to challenge him.

Or, you could win the lottery, but odds are you won't and would have more money if you put $2 away and saved it every time the urge to gamble struck you.

Hopefully this illustrates my point. Which is that you can account for how things are likely to go, but there is always the chance something crazy will happen.

Perhaps a compass was just a bad example. Although, it could be magnetically interfered with, though unlikely, and even knowing that, it's still better than guessing. So maybe not so bad? I dunno!!!!

Hey thanks, and I just wanted to say that I greatly enjoyed your work in the Nightmare board games.
- James_Tanner