Behind the Numbers: Scientific Progress and Diminishing Returns in Hockey Statistics

Every once-in-a-while I will rant on the concepts and ideas behind what numbers suggest in a series called Behind the Numbers, as a tip of the hat to the website that brought me into hockey analytics: Behind the Net.

As the hockey analytics community pushes for validation of current metrics and their value, I think it is sometimes lost that we do understand these statistics have their weaknesses. We do wish and try to improve upon these weaknesses.

I also think an often underlooked fact is that each incremental improvement diminishes the potential value from every subsequent improvement.

Let’s take a look at what I mean…

Continue reading

Garret’s look back at VanHAC

article_0b66810f-7cc0-4a3b-8614-a64c327f0119.jpg

Hello all,

Josh and I want to off the top thank everyone for making VanHAC17 such a wonderful success. The Vancouver Canucks for hosting, catering, and supplying so much support and resources. Our financial sponsors Canucks Army and HockeyData. Our helpful registration desk volunteers. Our panelists Dan Murphy and Dimitri Filipovic. Our presenters (more on them below). And a huge applause and thank you to our wonderful keynote speaker: Meghan Chayka.

Let me break down how this conference and the weekend surrounding it went from my perspective.

Continue reading

Behind the Numbers: The issues with binning, QoC, and scoring chances

sc1

Every once-in-a-while I will rant on the concepts and ideas behind what numbers suggest in a series called Behind the Numbers, as a tip of the hat to the website that brought me into hockey analytics: Behind the Net.

Almost weekly, you will see a “quant” or “math” type complain about some of the binning going on (usually with Quality of Competition or scoring chances).

But the reason may not seem intuitive, so I’ll use scoring chances as an example and explain the issues with binning continuous data.

Continue reading

Friday Quick Graphs: Marginal Gains for Defenders

Screen Shot 2017-01-20 at 6.59.49 PM.png

Last Friday we asked how many goals is improving a team’s first line worth versus their fourth line? What about defenders?

The above graph shows the number of goals over a season a team should expect in improving their player’s shot differential talent, here described in percentiles of talent.

The blue line is first pair with 2nd, 3rd, pairs falling next with red and yellow.

The blue line is the steepest, suggesting that moving from a 55th percentile player to 60th percentile player on the top pair will improve a team’s goal differential more so than a second or third pairing player. (This is not to be confused with improving from a 55% Corsi player to a 60% Corsi player)

Notice how the difference between the top and middle pair is pretty negligible. Improving from an average (median, 50th percentile) to the absolute best in both top and middle pair defenders is only about half a goal difference in improvement. This effect may be due to the fact that teams often place their second best defender on the second pair, whether that may be due to strategy and design or due to handedness “forcing” the team’s hand.

A reminder that the coefficients we found for forwards were 0.24, 0.12, 0.12, and 0.06. This may seem to suggest improvement should be concentrated for top forward line, followed by the top-four defenders, and then middle-six forwards with the bottom pair. However, our method is agnostic of usage and who drives shot differentials more, forwards or defenders.

Friday Quick Graphs: Marginal Gains for Forwards

Screen Shot 2017-01-19 at 1.30.05 PM.png

How many goals is improving a team’s first line worth versus your fourth line?

The above graph shows the number of goals over a season a team should expect in improving their player’s shot differential talent, here described in percentiles of talent.

The blue line is first liners with 2nd, 3rd, and 4th liners falling next with red, yellow, and green.

The blue line is the steepest, suggesting that moving from a 55th percentile player to 60th percentile player on the top line will improve a team’s goal differential by about twice that of a 2nd or 3rd line player. (This is not to be confused with improving from a 55% Corsi player to a 60% Corsi player)

What is interesting is that the marginal gains in improving a 2nd line player and 3rd line player is about equal.

The next question one should ask is: what are the costs in salary and cap hit for making said improvements?

Method:

  1. All forwards over all available full seasons were sorted by 5v5 TOI/GP
  2. Players binned into four groups of equal number of games played
  3. Each bin then sorted by Corsi%, and binned into percentiles
  4. Goal differentials are extrapolated to full season given average TOI per season for each line (so differing rates in injuries and pressbox banishment is being included)

Behind the Numbers: Scoring first and conditional probability

Every once-in-a-while I will rant on the concepts and ideas behind what numbers suggest in a series called Behind the Numbers, as a tip of the hat to the website that brought me into hockey analytics: Behind the Net.

Not long ago Jason Gregor tweeted about the value of scoring first.

It may be a bit controversial and difficult to get right away, but the value of scoring first is not special. Long ago, Mr. Eric Tulsky, now of the Carolina Hurricanes, showed that the value of scoring first equals the value of any other goal.

Continue reading

Behind the Numbers: Why Plus/Minus is the worst statistic in hockey and should be abolished

Every once-in-a-while I will rant on the concepts and ideas behind what numbers suggest in a series called Behind the Numbers, as a tip of the hat to the website that brought me into hockey analytics: Behind the Net.

Hockey’s plus/minus may be the worst statistic in hockey, although there is some debate with goalie statistics not based off of save percentage (like GAA or Win% that just adds a team component to a goalie’s save percentage). It could even be in contention for just the worst statistic in sport.

Now, some people may read that and think I’m simply saying this because I value shot metrics over goal metrics in player evaluations. While I do feel that way, it is only one of a few reasons that that plus/minus fails in being useful.

Continue reading

Hockey Graphs and Vancouver Canucks Co-Host Vancouver Hockey Analytics Conference 2017

 

cvoxhjuueaa8rh1-jpg-large

Hockey Graphs is excited to announce that we will be co-hosting the Vancouver Hockey Analytics Conference (#VanHAC) with the Vancouver Canucks along with HockeyData and Canucks Army.

Date: Saturday, March 11th, 2017

Location: Rogers Arena, Vancouver, Canada

Website: HockeyGraphs.com/VanHAC

The call for speakers is currently open with a deadline of January 10th, 2017.  See the website for more details or go here to submit your submission.  

Registration has yet to open as we tabulate the final costs to host the venue, among other factors. Check back here or on Twitter for more information when it will open. (Note: Expect participants to be capped at around 100 people.)

Watch the VanHAC page for updates as they are released!

Behind The Numbers: On the World Cup and Team Canada’s domination

Team Canada won the cup. Team Canada went undefeated. They were the favourites going in, and they came out the winner. Not only did they win, but they went about it in dominant fashion. They rarely trailed and they controlled nearly every facet of the game.

It wouldn’t be surprising for many to hear that the team also dominated in the shots column… but they were not the most effective team in every aspect, which raises some interesting questions.

Continue reading