Jump to content

The Official "2012 Playoffs Excitement" Thread


Colin226

Recommended Posts

Yeah this is a pretty fair criticism actually. Luck is another word in stats for "unexplained by the model." Much of what could be attributed to luck could actually be attributed to some factor that we have not measured or are completely ignoring. This is why people work so hard on developing better models to minimize the amount of "luck" inherent in predicting outcomes.

The point is all of this stat analysis is a marked improvement over analysis like looking at the regular season point total/seeds. Or just going based on what you see with your naked eye. It's useful and should not be ignored just because one doesn't understand it, or it isn't perfect.

I understand it just fine, just don't see it as valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck doesnt take every individual play into consideration, it is ratios that are unsustainable. You look at the big picture.

Yeah, the BIG picture, which is not going to be valid over a short series. What you are doing when using Fenwic, corsi, whatever other numbers you want to use to apply it to a short series (even after the fact) is along the lines of saying, "Out of 10million random Americans of legal voting age polled, 55% said they plan to vote or Obama in the next election. With that in mind, We expect Obama to recieve 55% of the vote in Westfield, NJ." The stats fail to take into account, as was pointed out earlier, the match-ups, the coaching, the strategy and style of play, and of course when it comes to hockey, the hot goaltender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most people can't think stochastically. Predicting one team will win 60% of the time means the other 40% of the time, the other team wins.

'Advanced' NHL stats really can't predict that much because NHL games have an incredible amount of uncertainty (like that Bryzgalov play). They can still predict much more than looking at things like goals for, goals against, points, etc.

THANK YOU. Predict more, maybe. MUCH more? Disagree. Not sure how Dan Girardi hitting the glass with his shot 10 times a game helps the Rangers win long-term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im confused. Did briere take someon'es stick? Out of context this video makes me scratch my head. Lol

Briere tried to sneak a spear into Carter's gut as he's going to the bench there. The Flyers have been doing this for a very, very long time now (and getting away with it), and Briere in particular is one of the worst offenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Advanced' NHL stats really can't predict that much because NHL games have an incredible amount of uncertainty (like that Bryzgalov play). They can still predict much more than looking at things like goals for, goals against, points, etc.

Isn't the purpose of advanced stats more to determine a player's value rather than to predict the outcome of games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the kings are living pretty charmed right now but the team that wins the cup goes through adversity and the ups and downs of a long playoff run. the devils, rangers and capitals all have. phoenix has, too. i just think the kings as good as they've played and have looked we haven't seen what will happen with them if they hit any kind of adversity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THANK YOU. Predict more, maybe. MUCH more? Disagree. Not sure how Dan Girardi hitting the glass with his shot 10 times a game helps the Rangers win long-term.

I'm not always a big stat guy either, but I think the point goes something like this:

It's not so much that Girardi taking shots and missing the net helps the rangers win, it's that the fact that (for that shift, at least) if he's shooting it means the other team isn't shooting, which means the other team isn't scoring, which helps the rangers win.

The transitive property at its finest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im confused. Did briere take someon'es stick? Out of context this video makes me scratch my head. Lol

I dont know what is funnier. Carter saying "Well I'll just take that since you don't know how to use it properly" or Hartnell throwing a fit...again. :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not always a big stat guy either, but I think the point goes something like this:

It's not so much that Girardi taking shots and missing the net helps the rangers win, it's that the fact that (for that shift, at least) if he's shooting it means the other team isn't shooting, which means the other team isn't scoring, which helps the rangers win.

The transitive property at its finest.

Yeah, this explains it really well. A 'missed shot' isn't, in itself, a positive outcome, unless it's in Detroit and Pierre McGuire is working himself into mania describing how great it is that Detroit players occasionally shoot wide on purpose to set up a teammate. But that missed shot tells you where the puck was. We use shots as a proxy for puck possession - having the puck more means getting more chances to score and therefore more chances to win.

Just checked - didn't know this data was available - Detroit had a 63.4% Fenwick tied in the 2007-08 playoffs. They are definitely overlooked as one of the greatest teams of all time, but I think they're right up there. I imagine the 2000 Devils numbers are similar.

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.