Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LGR4GM

Advanced Stats Explained

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Very interesting.

 

This is going to be soooooooo ***** awesome. It’s going to be an amazing tool for coaches of all levels. I can’t wait to see. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, #freejame said:

This is going to be soooooooo ***** awesome. It’s going to be an amazing tool for coaches of all levels. I can’t wait to see. 

None of us are going to see any of it. They are going to sell it all to EA Sports for a $h!t ton of money to make NHL 2020 more lifelike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SwampD said:

None of us are going to see any of it. They are going to sell it all to EA Sports for a $h!t ton of money to make NHL 2020 more lifelike.

Ha as if EA gave two shits about the NHL franchise 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SwampD said:

None of us are going to see any of it. They are going to sell it all to EA Sports for a $h!t ton of money to make NHL 2020 more lifelike.

 

1 hour ago, #freejame said:

Ha as if EA gave two shits about the NHL franchise 

NHL 20 is already out.. so it'll have to be NHL 21. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Very interesting.

 

Except that yellow 1st down line was an outgrowth of the Fox Sports "glowing puck."  So, the NHL was 1st.  (Their NFL broadcast stole the robots idea from their NHL broadcast, too.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The charts below depict, in some part, what the Buffalo skaters are doing at 5v5. As I understand it, this metric is intended to express what you can expect out of a skater and various combinations when it comes to shots (on goal, I presume) over the course of 60 minutes of TOI play (as distinct from game-play time). 

It's interesting to see just how good the LOG line and its parts have been. It's also interesting to see that Eichel -- with his top-flight quality of competition -- is just getting by in terms of 5v5 shots expected.

 

BUF

5v5shots.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

The charts below depict, in some part, what the Buffalo skaters are doing at 5v5. As I understand it, this metric is intended to express what you can expect out of a skater and various combinations when it comes to shots (on goal, I presume) over the course of 60 minutes of TOI play (as distinct from game-play time). 

It's interesting to see just how good the LOG line and its parts have been. It's also interesting to see that Eichel -- with his top-flight quality of competition -- is just getting by in terms of 5v5 shots expected.

 

BUF

5v5shots.PNG

Interesting chart.  Who's that way over on the left all by himself? 😉

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2019 at 10:06 PM, SwampD said:

None of us are going to see any of it. They are going to sell it all to EA Sports for a $h!t ton of money to make NHL 2020 more lifelike.

Yeah...except teams will still average 10 shots a game too many, let in wacky goals way too much, etc...they add tons of "cool new features" but don't bother fixing things that have been broken for years, just like Madden where im sure teams are still able to return muffed punts for TDs and teams always have all 3 Timeouts at the 2 minute warning each half and all of the teams use their timeouts in the exact same way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Yeah...except teams will still average 10 shots a game too many, let in wacky goals way too much, etc...they add tons of "cool new features" but don't bother fixing things that have been broken for years, just like Madden where im sure teams are still able to return muffed punts for TDs and teams always have all 3 Timeouts at the 2 minute warning each half and all of the teams use their timeouts in the exact same way...

NHL THREEEEEEEES!!111!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On GR this morning Jeremy reported that some analytics site has final record predictions for NFL teams. The Bills are to finish 11-5. "It's math," Jeremy said, contrasting with Howard's 13-3 eye test.

Can we at least agree that it's hogwash to say math can predict a football team's record? How many smart people have gone broke thinking that way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

On GR this morning Jeremy reported that some analytics site has final record predictions for NFL teams. The Bills are to finish 11-5. "It's math," Jeremy said, contrasting with Howard's 13-3 eye test.

Can we at least agree that it's hogwash to say math can predict a football team's record? How many smart people have gone broke thinking that way?

Do you think that bookies don't use math when setting lines, including for season-long bets? 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

On GR this morning Jeremy reported that some analytics site has final record predictions for NFL teams. The Bills are to finish 11-5. "It's math," Jeremy said, contrasting with Howard's 13-3 eye test.

Can we at least agree that it's hogwash to say math can predict a football team's record? How many smart people have gone broke thinking that way?

Math can attempt to predict such things, just as anyone who watches games can.  Neither will be correct all the time.  Which will be right more often, I can’t say for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a point that needs to be made. It’s not math. Math comes up with formulas that are correct 100% of the time.

This is applied math, and it’s wrong quite often.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SwampD said:

Just a point that needs to be made. It’s not math. Math comes up with formulas that are correct 100% of the time.

This is applied math, and it’s wrong quite often.

The math is right, how people interpret it varries. It's not wrong 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

The math is right, how people interpret it varries. It's not wrong 

You are missing the point. It’s not math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, SwampD said:

You are missing the point. It’s not math.

Message/messenger. The message is (hypothetically) pure stat (which, contrary to popular belief, can still have inherent bias/failure, as with anything and everything in life). Messenger will interpret and apply as they see fit. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sports statisticians take 4% Rsq and promote it as the metric to explain everything.  Sports stats are bad.  Journalists who don't understand the basics about stats then take these things and make it even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, triumph_communes said:

Sports statisticians take 4% Rsq and promote it as the metric to explain everything.  Sports stats are bad.  Journalists who don't understand the basics about stats then take these things and make it even worse.

Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? @DarthEbriate

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, WildCard said:

The math is right, how people interpret it varries. It's not wrong 

It's not the interpretation of the result that is the problem.  So, yes, the math is right.  You punch in variables and the output is predictable.  The key point is deciding what variables and in what way they are used in any given formula.  

So, it's interpretation of information prior to the submission of that information to the formula.  

Always my biggest problem with my statistical business classes. They always focused on the output.  I get the output to say a lot of different things if I don't have to explain the inputs.  Fiddle around with numbers until you get something you like and then go.  

DISCLAIMER: I am not insinuating that analytics is that way. I understand that more work goes into verifying that the outputs of any set of statistical inputs correlates with what is happening on the ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

On GR this morning Jeremy reported that some analytics site has final record predictions for NFL teams. The Bills are to finish 11-5. "It's math," Jeremy said, contrasting with Howard's 13-3 eye test.

Can we at least agree that it's hogwash to say math can predict a football team's record? How many smart people have gone broke thinking that way?

That's not math. 11-5 is 6. That's math.

13 hours ago, Thorny said:

Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? @DarthEbriate

Fancy stats and applied math are true, from a certain point of view. They're all based in fact (hopefully), but what you do with facts and which ones you use for your analysis, and what message you want to share all shape your truth. (And the answer is: the situation and who is viewing/making a decision on the fool and the fool's follower determines who is more foolish. It's based on your point of view.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

On GR this morning Jeremy reported that some analytics site has final record predictions for NFL teams. The Bills are to finish 11-5. "It's math," Jeremy said, contrasting with Howard's 13-3 eye test.

Can we at least agree that it's hogwash to say math can predict a football team's record? How many smart people have gone broke thinking that way?

I think you've posited the question incorrectly.

I think the question is: Does a sound analytical model more accurately predict a team's future results than a sportscaster's best guess(es)?

No one has a crystal ball, obviously.

I'm also - all of a sudden - intrigued by how "small sample size" factors into NFL modeling.

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...