Breaking Down the Flyers VUKOTA Projection
Ed. Note: Much thanks to Tom Awad and Timo Seppa over at Puck Prospectus. They answered all of my questions and provided me with a lot of numbers that they didn't include in their original post. Without that, I wouldn't have been able to write this.
As posted earlier, Puck Prospectus published it's VUKOTA Projection for the Flyers yesterday, ranking them 9th in the NHL. After finishing 5th in the East last year, that might be a compliment, except that this isn't last year's team. The Flyers brought in Chris Pronger to bolster their defense, and Ray Emery to man the pipes. Improvement, right? Not so in the eyes of VUKOTA.
As mentioned in the fanshot, the Flyers are projected to get worse defensively this year despite the additions. You might ask how, and it has a lot to do with the limitations of VUKOTA.
Rather than explain each again, here's parts one, two, and three explaining GVT. In short, "it is the value of a player, in goals, above what a replacement player would have contributed." This is very similar to VORP in baseball.
One would notice that there are only three Flyers projected to get 25 goals, down from 6 last year. However, Scott Hartnell is projected to get 24. Where are Claude Giroux and Danny Briere? Well, they are victims of their shortened 08-09 campaigns. Giroux falls victim to only playing in 42 games last year, and therefore is projected to get 38 points in 52 games played this season. As Tom Awad - creator of the VUKOTA projections - explained, "Players who played about 42 games in the previous season (like Giroux) and who had his level of production would average 52 games the next year." If Giroux plays in all 82 games this season - as is expected, barring injury - the projection would then shift to a 60 point campaign. That would put him between 23 and 24 goals on the year. Then, his GVT shifts from 7.7 to 12.0.
As for Briere, the projections see him playing in 49 games, largely due to his injuries from last year. In those 49 games, he's projected to get 40 points. But if you project Briere over an 82 game season - which is less likely than Giroux's playing all 82 - he projects to get 68 points. His GVT would then shift from 6.9 to 11.6. For obvious reasons, VUKOTA can't project a full season out of Briere after being hurt for most of last year. So how many games is Briere likely to play in this year? Even eliminating Briere's rookie campaign of 5 games played in 97-98, he has averaged only 53 games played per year. He's averaged 64 GP the past 5 years, but only 56 games over the past 6 years. VUKOTA projecting 49 games this season seems completely reasonable. Until you look at what Briere has done in the year after he's been hurt. In 00-01, Briere played in 30 games. In 01-02, he played in 78. Being limited to 14 games in 02-03, Briere came back and played in all 82 the following year. In 05-06, Briere played in 48 games, but followed it up with an 81 game campaign the next year. After only playing in 29 games this past season, Briere's recent history suggests he'll come back strong this year. A 49 game projection completely understandable, but looking to the year after Briere's injuries show a guy who plays in at least 78 games.
Also of note, VUKOTA includes the trio of Lukas Kaspar, Krys Kolanos, and Jason Ward, none of which are likely to make the team. However, since Mika Pyorala and James van Riemsdyk have not played in the NHL before, there is no basis for a projection of their stats and they are therefore not included. After talking to Timo Seppa and Tom Awad, I was able to get numbers for Blair Betts. You might be surprised, but adding him to the projections and removing any of Kaspar, Kolanos, and Ward actually hurts the team's GVT. The trio is projected to play 38 games or fewer each, while Betts would project for 64 GP. In those games, Betts is projected to have 9 points, while each of the trio would get 13, 13, and 11 points respectively. Betts is seen by the projections as a replacement level player, whether we agree with that or not. More on this later.
Moving to the defense, VUKOTA is unable to project the improvement expected out of Matt Carle and Ryan Parent. Because of this, Parent projects to be the worst defender of the 8 currently trying to make the team. But his low GVT comes mostly from his poor offensive ability. He is seen as an offensive liability, but defensively he is good for a 1.4 GVT in 42 games played. Over an 82 game season, he's good for a 2.8 defensive GVT. Danny Syvret would have the worst defensive GVT at 0.9. But VUKOTA sees Syvret as playing in 28 games, registering 7 points, with a GVT of 1.3. Prorate that out to an 82 game season, and Syvret comes in at 3.9, with a defensive GVT of 2.7. For roster significance, VUKOTA still sees Randy Jones as a serviceable #5 defenseman. Over the course of an 82 game season, Jones projects to have a GVT of 6.1, with 4.2 coming on the defensive side. If Syvret and Tollefsen do in fact take Jones' job, we can easily figure out how this would effect the team. VUKOTA has Jones playing in 55 games this year, while it has OKT at 40. Neither Syvret nor OKT alone would equal Randy Jones' GVT, but having Syvret play in 82 games would see a drop off of only 2.2 GVT. When factoring in salary cap implications, and the likely addition of James van Riemsdyk with Jones' salary off the books, having a drop off of only 2.2 GVT (only 1.5 defensive GVT) seems acceptable. Making up that GVT in the VUKOTA projections, JVR would merely have to represent a 0 GVT (replacement level player) if he were to replace Riley Cote and his -2.5 GVT. I think a Syvret and JVR for Jones and Cote tradeoff would almost certainly improve this team, what about you?
Next, the goalie situation is one that needs explaining. In case you didn't see in the article, Ray Emery's GVT numbers were taken from his 2007-2008 campaign. Those numbers were atrocious. To put in perspective, Emery's -10.4 GVT for that year was similar to Marty Turco's -10.6 GVT from last year. How bad was Turco last year? He had a .898 S% and a 2.81 GAA. Emery, meanwhile, has a career .907 S% and a 2.71 GAA, which factors in his horrible 07-08 campaign. So, even if Emery maintains his career numbers this year, his GVT would be around 5. Since Emery had no stats from last year, Tim and Timo did not include his stats in the projection. So, the team's VUKOTA projection went on the assumption that the Flyers' goalies were Brian Boucher (4.1 GVT) and a replacement level goaltender in the NHL - with a GVT of 0. If Emery maintains his career numbers, the team's projection moves from a +9 GVT to a +14. Still a drop off from last year, but not nearly as bad as originally shown. From Tim Awad:
"Emery has no projection since he wasn't in the NHL last year, and projections based on 2007-08 would be atrocious. If Emery really has cleaned up his act, he could return to being the dominant goalie we saw in 2006-07 who helped the Senators to the Cup Final. A realistic projection under this scenario would be a GVT of +8 to +10."
So, using Tim's projection of a +9 GVT for Emery, the team's goals against average suddenly drops by 0.11. That translated to a new team GVT of +18, much closer to last year's +23. As if we needed any more proof that this team's chances depend on the goaltending of Ray Emery.
In conclusion, VUKOTA does a good job as a starting point for what this team can be expected to do. But since so much of the Flyers' success depends on Ray Emery, Claude Giroux, Danny Briere, and the rookies (JVR, Pyorala, and Syvret), VUKOTA simply cannot accurately predict what this team will do. If Giroux plays all 82 games, Briere continues his trend of playing 78 or more games after an injury plagued year, and Ray Emery plays at least to his career numbers, this team is already at a team GVT of +23, only three worse than last year. Replace Riley Cote's -2.5 with Blair Betts' 0.2, and that difference is all but gone. Then, the only problem is replacing Kolanos (1.8), Kaspar (1.6), and Ward (0.9) in the calculations. Combined, those three are expected to play 108 games. Any combination of those three, Mika Pyorala, JVR, Jon Kalinski, etc. playing in 108 games equaling 4.3 GVT and this team is as good as last years. And I think JVR alone could equal that. So, this team could easily be better than the VUKOTA projections.
1 recs |
15 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Just wondering.....
Is this some kind of scientific method to determine how the team will perform, or is it some guys analysis???
It’s just like they do for Baseball – using all kinds of calculations to determine what a player is likely to do this year. It’s all numbers, not personal guesses
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice work Geoff.
I’ve never really looked at these projections in the past, but what I’m gathering from this is that it seems there are a ton of variables that it can’t predict. It’s magnified by this Flyers team but it seems like the same things could be applied to most teams, and therefore the accuracy of this tool to project a teams’ success is flawed. Individual success, on the other hand, is a different story. Is that a correct assumption?
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Sep 25, 2009 2:03 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Entirely correct.
The biggest flaws are apparent with the young and fringe players, since VUKOTA can’t yet determine what kind of career these guys are going to have.
It’s just like baseball predictions, except there’s not yet a way to predict rookies. Whereas MLB numbers can be predicted based on minor league numbers, these numbers can’t yet predict based on AHL, Juniors, and College. This is the first year he’s done this, so it is very rough.
It’s also tough to calculate with the cap, since most players don’t have enough time in the NHL yet. Once players get a lot of minutes, it’s easier to calculate. As I mentioned, Giroux’s numbers are projected with only 42 games in the league. So, it’s a lot easier to predict Richards, Carter, and Pronger since they have more games and minutes to project a path they are likely to take.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
in other words worthless
There is a much greater degree in player turnover in the NHL from each year and AHL/QMJHL play does not translate to NHL as accurately as AAA baseball does for MLB. NHL players are younger and continue to develop of many NHL seasons whereas baseball players season for many years in minor league baseball providing many stats to base predictions. Also baseball is much more of a individual sport, hockey is a team game and individual statistics don’t have much of a bearing on team success. If you can predict a pitching staff Wins and Losses which is pretty straight forward you can get the teams record. I will be posting my predictions based on NHL 10 season simulation, stay tuned.
It’s not worthless. The only issues with this year’s predictions are Giroux, Briere, Emery, and what the team gets from it’s rookies. Really, how can one predict whether Briere will be healthy? How can one predict Giroux doesn’t have the dreaded sophomore slump that befalls so many? Also, no one knows what you can expect from Pyorala or Riemer, since neither have played professionally in North America. You’re right that baseball is easier, since about 98% of MLB players come from AAA or AA, which is much easier to translate to just one level up.
However, VUKOTA does a very good job with about 80% of the projections. Like I said, this is the first year they’ve done this. It is much easier to predict what the team will receive from Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Coburn, and Jones on defense. That’s 5 out of 6 (hopefully 4 out of six) of your defenseman. The numbers for Richards, Carter, Gagne, Hartnell, Betts, Carcillo, Laperriere, Cote, Asham, and Boucher are pretty solid. All of those have track record long enough to formulate a pattern. That’s a 75% rating of this year’s team (leaving out Powe, Giroux, Briere, Parent, and Emery) that will be solid predictions. Those that aren’t so solid are still decent at predicting, but it reflects a need to factor in injuries, rookies, transplants, and progressions. And most of those – Giroux, Briere, and Emery – are capable of adjusting very easily, as I did in this story. So, where VUKOTA falls short is rookies, second year players, and those expected to progress. I’d say that’s quite valuable.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
So, where VUKOTA falls short is rookies, second year players, and those expected to progress. I’d say that’s quite valuable.
For our team we are going to have 2 rookies in the starting lineup and 3 second year players, I also expect everyone under 28 to progress in some fashion not always in points scoring but in checking and turnovers thinks like that. So that adds another 8 or 9 players to list of poorly accounted for.
So all in all you have 14 players where VUKOTA might not be so accurate. That is 2/3 the roster and therefore useless in my eyes. I guess since there is nothing better to discuss this late in preseason arguing about VUKOTA predictions with my arch-nemesis on the BSH gives me something Flyers related to do before the season begins.
Arch-Nemesis? Ouch
Everyone under 28 is a rather large sample size to say they aren’t accounted for. Ryan Parent has a grand total of 54 GP in the NHL, registering 4 points while being a -1. VUKOTA sees him as playing in 42 games this year (in large part due to the fact that he’s never played in more than 31 games before) and yet still registering 8 points. That is definitely an improvement. I never said VUKOTA ignores any progression, it just falls short of taking into account the fact that Parent was hurt for over 3 months of last season – the reason he only played 31 games. Instead, in order to be more accurate, it has to look at the fact that Parent has played in 54 games across three seasons (53 in two, which is more realistic) and figure out who to compare him to. Yes, VUKOTA sees a progression, but there’s no reason to expect a formula to predict more than that.
Darroll Powe projects to score 16 points in 53 games. He was a rookie last year, and scored 11 points in 60 games. That’s a progression on the offensive side, with a decline in GP. As I said above, the GP analysis is weak since he was a rookie. So I got the numbers extrapolated over an 82 game season, and Powe projects to score 24 points. That’s most certainly an improvement over 11 in 60 GP.
Lastly, Matt Carle had 26 points in 76 GP last year between TB and PHI. VUKOTA projects him to get 23 points in 63 GP, equaling 29 points over the course of an 82 game season. Again, an improvement. Seeing as how he’s averaged 57 GP per season in his career, it’s even an improve in how many games he plays.
I put up this story to show the limitations of VUKOTA, and adjust for them. Obviously, a weakness is taking a player’s total GP without accounting for the first year he broke into the league or any years in which he had injuries, but that’s why I put this post up: to account for that. But I guess you’d rather trust the makers of EA Sports to predict the season, since their ranking of Claude Giroux as an 80, compared to Dan Carcillo’s as a 79 is MUCH more accurate.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
no offense meant
Geoff I didn’t mean to offend you in anyway with the arch-nemesis comment we just tend to disagree a lot but I do enjoy our battles. Remember Superman (me) is nothing without Lex Luther (you). LOL
haha, no offense taken. Hopefully, I didn’t offend you either. I was just surprised I was an arch-nemesis. Besides, Ben is jealous.
Like I said though, this post was to try and point out and correct the places VUKOTA fell short. If it was perfect, I wouldn’t have even posted this.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 26, 2009 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, I don’t even recall disagreeing with you often, so they’ve obviously been respectful. Disagreeing is always fun for me, so please continue.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 26, 2009 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I think, as Geoff has demonstrated with this article, Vukota is a pretty awesome system when you understand what it does. This is a great job of explaining what it does and how it should be interpretted (re: for example, Briere).
The big problem PP isn’t acknowledging is in extrapolating Vukota out to Team GVT. You can look at individual vukotas and acknowledge the variable that exist, but there are too many variables in the equation for an entire team.
Also, you guys need to realize just how crazy this Flyers team will be. Maybe Emery does have a bounceback season, but the fact is that his history of performance suggests otherwise. He had a shitty NHL season in 2007-08 and its pretty risky to think that spending a year in Russia impoved his game. Its not impossible, but its not the likely outcome.
Thr other reason people are so critical of the ratings is because of the continued inability to acknowlege just how good Marty Biron is. Timo is right to say that a big goaltending dropoff will exist, however, I don’t think he understands the facts of the instance, in as much as Marty wanted $5mil to sign.
Vukota predicts the most likely outcome and there isn’t a lot to argue with here.
Thanks for pointing out the problem with individual GVT equaling Team GVT. I should have done a better job of explaining the downfalls in doing even that. Even by bringing up Kolanos, Kaspar, and Ward, I should have argued that there’s no way to factor their individual GVT into the team GVT, since there’s no way to know the Flyers need/will use that trio for over 100 games. Even if they do, what about the contributions from Cote (more games than expected? What about less?), Maroon, JVR, Kalinski, Ross, and Nodl receive the majority of those games.
On Emery: His 07-08 was absolutely atrocious. And his career numbers, factoring in that bad year, are still acceptable. The reason his VUKOTA wasn’t incuded was because he could fall anywhere between his 07-08 or his Cup season. That’s about a 20 point swing, with no way of knowing who he’ll be. It was better they didn’t include him, but I still wanted to show what a modest expectation of him this year would equal for the team’s goaltending. And that (a 10 goaltender GVT) was still half as good as last year’s goaltending (23).
Marty and Nitty were a very good tandem last year. But one was a health risk, and the other was too expensive. Enter Suga Ray.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed to all. But a comment on Emery. If you said the same thing about any position in sports other than MLB closer and NHL goalie, I’d agree totally. But those two are positions where we historically have seen athletes drop off the face of the earth in one season and never recover. So it’s far from inconceivable that those 2007-08 numbers, which seem to be an anomaly,are actually going to hold true.
Agreed. As evidenced by Turco’s numbers last year, it’s entirely possible.
Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 25, 2009 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by 






























