Edited Aug. 17, 2022 at 11:47 a.m.
Where analytics can be used very effectively is when they align with a coach/scout's opinion about a player and they can now provide objective measurement for the coach to manage the players perofrmance. Just like in any industry/organization, using objective criteria helps both parties focus on the solution and not the "feelings".
A) Coach Bednar to Andre Burakovsky: "C'mon Burky, you're turning the puck over too much in the neutral zone, you need to fix that. Extra practice time for you big guy".
B) Coach Bednar to Andre Burakovsky: "We've analyzed the neutral zone possession numbers and you rank last on the forwards at maintaining possession in the neutral zone and have the lowest giveaway/takeaway ratio; the video coaches have a film package to review with you and then we'll hit the ice and practice it".
I know that's not how it really goes; but you get the idea.
The thing about 3rd party analytics that we all get to see and use; we don't know what the coaches were expecting that player to do in each situation. This is a huge variable. What if a 3rd line player is fully expected to just dump it in as soon as he hits the red line. He does. Job done. But in the analytics his possession numbers aren't going to look too good; will his zone entry without possession be counted in any positive way?
I think these are big issues that don't get acknowledged enough by the public analytics community and so it creates the rift that traditional hockey fans, former players/coaches have about the conversation around analytics. It's not about the analytics attempt; just the way it gets broadcasted/used.