Adjusted Even-Strength Plus-minus 1968-2008
View Single Post
08-22-2011, 10:36 AM
Join Date: Mar 2011
I don't know why you are so against calculating GF/GA ratios. They shouldn't be used randomly, but in this case they are the primary basis of the pythagorean win% calculation, so of great importance.
I'll try to explain.
If I was asked to rank the following seasonal ES stats for players, without paying any attention at all to context, I would rank them as follow (with a tie for 2nd best):
GD=GF-GA (goal difference). GS=GF+GA (goal sum).
1. The guy with a GF/GA of 3.000 looks far too good compared to the others.
2. The lower numbers, the more extreme GF/GA. (It's a bit like pts per game. The fewer games played, the more extreme points per game.)
That's why I generally think one should be careful with using GF/GA.
3. Player ice time share during ES vary a lot between players. So does the amount time the player was not on the ice. No matter if one use real ice times, or take GF+GA, the differences are big.
4. Thus, when comparing "with" and "without", we would be comparing for example a GF/GA based on very low numbers, with a GF/GA based on very high numbers.
I'm not convinced yet regarding how good the win formula, and other formulas are at handling the things I mentioned above. Maybe they are great.
Originally Posted by
Czech Your Math
I'm not sure ice time is so important. If a player is on ice for a much higher % of ES GF+GA than his % of his ice time, that's okay. If he's able to perform at or above the GF/GA ratio of the team as a whole, then the more volume the better for the team. If he's at a worse GF/GA level, then the high volume will negatively effect the player portion of the metric even more.
The above seems based a lot on GF/GA, and I think GF/GA can "lie".
Let's say we have a 2-3 result without player on ice (GF/GA=0.400).
Player on ice doing 5-3 will make his team win 7-6, despite GF/GA=1.667.
Player on ice doing 2-1will only make his team draw 4-4, despite GF/GA of 2.00.
As I said, maybe the win formula and other formulas have methods to guard for such contradictions.
Whether 60/50 or 50/40 is better may depend most on context (all other things being equal). On a bad team, the extra 10/10 might be helpful, while on a good team, it may be hurtful.
By themselves, I think both are equal. Context may make one look better, but I'm not sure GF/GA is the best way to determine that.
I may be wrong.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by plusandminus