tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post6720553747077152939..comments2024-09-30T07:22:52.717-07:00Comments on Objective NHL: Score Effects and Minor PenaltiesJLikenshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-49314179680217060102013-05-03T14:11:02.915-07:002013-05-03T14:11:02.915-07:00I didn't expect that back would be more effect...I didn't expect that back would be more effective to place offense. it makes a interesting fact. Host Pay Per Headhttp://www.hostpph.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-3250767438937174852010-11-15T09:30:31.520-08:002010-11-15T09:30:31.520-08:00You're right - in assessing team quality in a ...You're right - in assessing team quality in a general sense, special teams necessarily factor into the equation.<br /><br />One problem, however, is that special teams performance is largely luck driven, even over the course of an entire NHL season. See, for example, <a href="http://www.behindthenethockey.com/2010/9/7/1669012/how-good-is-your-power-play" rel="nofollow">this post</a> by Gabe Desjardins, in which he finds that over half of the team-to-team variation in powerplay efficiency can be attributed to luck.<br /><br />I read your post and see that you've looked at the correlation between special teams performance (PP% + PK% - 100) and standings points. The relationship is substantial, but much of that is mediated by luck. <br /><br />If you looked at special teams performance over the 1st half of the season and how it correlated with point totals over the second half, the relationship would be mild - perhaps not even statistically significant for some years. This because the luck involved in team-to-team differences in 1st half performance doesn't sustain itself to the 2nd half of the season.JLikenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-16621971043174726492010-11-14T11:57:46.894-08:002010-11-14T11:57:46.894-08:00It would seem that Phoenix is quite a bit better t...It would seem that Phoenix is quite a bit better than its record. While the Corsi ranking can give a pretty good idea of the ability of teams, I think special teams play is an important factor as well. Click on my name for an article regarding this.Zacharyhttp://www.teenandinbetween.com/2010/11/04/special-teams-in-hockey/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-64320303296510593842010-11-05T17:05:58.256-07:002010-11-05T17:05:58.256-07:00Forechecker:
The 0.045 figure represents the adva...Forechecker:<br /><br />The 0.045 figure represents the advantage in penalty ratio enjoyed by the trailing team within the sample analyzed.<br /><br />If you look at the chart in the post, the trailing team drew 54.5% of all penalties (and therefore had an advantage of 0.045).<br /><br />If my prediction that the bias in favor of the trailing operates across the board, then the team-to-team variation in trailing penalty ratio should be the product of team differences in the ability to draw penalties and nothing more. That's why all teams received the same adjustment under the simulation.<br /><br />In terms of your second question, looking strictly at the 2007-08, there were 10084 penalties that met my definition. 3556 of those occurred with the score tied. Of the remaining 6528, the trailing team drew 3587 - some 323 more than we'd expect if there were no bias. <br /><br />Again, the effect isn't huge, but it's definitely significant in aggregate.JLikenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-1471147135588456732010-11-05T16:38:40.420-07:002010-11-05T16:38:40.420-07:00Dan:
1. As mentioned in the post, the trailing te...Dan:<br /><br />1. As mentioned in the post, the trailing team generated 55.2% of all shots directed at the net (goals + saved shots + missed shots + blocked shots) during the two seasons examined, but that's for even strength only. <br /><br />The overall figure would be slightly higher, given that the trailing team tends to draw more powerplays than the leading team.<br /><br />You would likely be able to generate a reasonable approximation using those variables (although if you're only estimating shot ratio then time trailing doesn't matter), but it's not something I've looked at specifically.<br /><br />2. The 5% figure I quoted was in reference to home ice advantage relative to neutral ice. <br /><br />3. Sample size is a concern in terms of using each team's penalty ratio with the score tied as a measure of it's ability to draw penalties. But my model took this into account by regressing each team 60% to the mean.<br /><br />3a. The degree of bias is significant, but not overwhelming - the trailing team only slightly outdraws the leading team. Also, I suspect that the effect is larger earlier in the game (and perhaps also when the score margin is greater).JLikenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-10660074753553609522010-11-05T07:08:15.967-07:002010-11-05T07:08:15.967-07:00Interesting stuff indeed. I have a couple question...Interesting stuff indeed. I have a couple questions:<br /><br />1) How did you arrive at the 0.045 "referee bias" factor? Is it just a fudge factor to resolve the gap between the derived "ability" factor and the observed deviation?<br /><br />2) Could you connect the dots from the proposed level of referee bias to an approximation of how many calls we're looking at being made over the course of a season?Dirk Hoaghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347911551821747694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-90032048880527842722010-11-04T20:20:33.861-07:002010-11-04T20:20:33.861-07:00Great sight and great analysis
1) I am not able t...Great sight and great analysis<br /><br />1) I am not able to get accurate data for when score is tied.(like you have) How much is the average effect) (i.e. Trailing teams generate what % more shots)<br />could one generate a reasonable approx. from knowing time trailing<br />and overall even strength shot rate?<br /><br /><br />2) I have Home ice at around 11-12%<br />I believe I did Pythagorean based on GF and GA over 3 years it was 55.5 % to 44.5% (just wondering how did you get your %?)<br /><br /><br />3) I appreciate why you only use data when game is tied ..however..<br />does this cause a sample size problem? <br />3a) Doesn't the type of scoring chances/shots change when a team is protecting a lead?<br />My reasoning is..even though we have had post lock out rule changes, and now you have shown referee bias for trailing team, and increased shots ..still it is very hard to come back? after 1 (26% chance) after2 (8% chance)<br />shouldn't teams come back more often?danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11047193053856110602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-53914760167062776782010-11-04T12:03:42.930-07:002010-11-04T12:03:42.930-07:00The correlation between the two variables is large...The correlation between the two variables is larger when the score is tied - 0.25 in 07-08 and 0.44 in 08-09.<br /><br />Of course, as team penalty ratio with the scored tied over the course of a single season is mostly luck based, the "true" correlation between the two variables is much stronger.<br /><br />If each team's regular season schedule consisted, for example, of 10 000 games (or any sufficiently large number) instead of 82, the correlation between the two would be 0.51 (if 0.25 is used as the attenuated value) or 0.89 (if 0.44 is used as the attenuated value).JLikenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-34420951935747284172010-11-04T12:02:40.881-07:002010-11-04T12:02:40.881-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.JLikenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02570453428274983835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299311926633621468.post-24771001450371846172010-11-03T21:28:32.271-07:002010-11-03T21:28:32.271-07:00Very cool stuff. The biggest surprise for me is t...Very cool stuff. The biggest surprise for me is that there isn't a good correlation between Corsi (i.e. zone time) and drawing penalties. Do you know if there's much correlation between the two with the score tied?Scott Reynoldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05735545121522530577noreply@blogger.com