View Single Post
11-19-2012, 10:40 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
First two bolded quotes. Being generous you posted data that can be generously viewed as a work in progress. Now you admit that you completed it after you were caught because the data was incomplete and inaccurate. Now you admit that you had access to the additional data that would have made the post in question more complete and had the ability to complete it before posting the original incomplete and inaccurate work. Effectively you chose not to. until you were caught.
Again, you're misunderstanding what I said and what I did. The data is not complete, as originally stated, and there was also no additional data added. I didn't dig up copies of old newspapers and fill in the missing games, I agreed with your suggestion of assuming that goalies faced shots against at the same rate over their missing minutes as they did over what we have numbers for.

This is absolutely, 100% certain to be an incorrect assumption, as it does not account for the quality of competition and the numbers are going to vary much more widely over the much smaller sample of missing games than they will over the larger sample size of what is there. Yet for some reason you have no problem at all with that simplifying assumption, while at the same time portraying me as trying to mislead the rest of the panel because of my original assumption that the missing minutes were randomly distributed from the sample.

Missing information is not that unusual when you're used to dealing with Hockey Summary Project data or international goalie numbers. It is regrettably often all we have to work with.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Next two bolded quotes, evidence and subjectivity. First do you have evidence that in the 1940s and into the Ron Andrews era of statistics it was actually the job of one person to regularly track shots at the home arena?
No, because again, I'm not making a claim about shot counting in the 1940s. I pointed it out as a possible factor because I was trying to be as fair as possible to Bill Durnan. The evidence I have seen from the pre-expansion era does not suggest that scorer bias was a major issue in any of the rinks, although it is likely that numbers may have at least varied slightly depending on location.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The subjectivity issue is interesting since it seems to be raised by those who overlook the objective facts. In the 1940s Boston and Chicago had smaller rinks and both teams continued to play on the same smaller rinks into the 1990s. This is an objective and acknowledged fact, yet you never take it into account as a factor in goaltender performance either H/R or over the course of a season or multiple seasons.
I haven't seen evidence that home/road save percentage splits are greater for goalies playing on small rinks. I think that is possible that is the case, but without evidence the burden of proof is on whoever wants to make that claim to show it is meaningful.

I checked the home/road numbers for Chicago goalie with the most minutes played in each season since 1987-88, and it looks like the home/road split was greater in the team's new rink than in the old one, suggesting shot counting may have been a more significant variable than rink size:

Chicago Stadium:
1988: Pang .896 home, .884 road
1989: Pang .874 home, .864 road
1990: Chevrier .865 home, .840 road
1991: Belfour .905 home, .915 road
1992: Belfour .897 home, .891 road
1993: Belfour .903 home, .909 road
1994: Belfour .902 home, .910 road

United Center:
1995: Belfour .896 home, .916 road
1996: Belfour .899 home, .904 road
1997: Hackett .919 home, .933 road
1998: Hackett .916 home, .918 road
1999: Thibault .915 home, .895 road
2000: Thibault .896 home, .915 road
2001: Thibault .886 home, .903 road
2002: Thibault .915 home, .891 road
2003: Thibault .911 home, .918 road
2004: Leighton .916 home, .866 road
2006: Khabibulin .899 home, .871 road
2007: Khabibulin .909 home, .896 road
2008: Khabibulin .909 home, .908 road
2009: Khabibulin .917 home, .922 road
2010: Huet .906 home, .884 road
2011: Crawford .911 home, .924 road
2012: Crawford .901 home, .906 road

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Furthermore you do not take another objective fact into consideration - scheduling. The Canadiens and Leafs always played the Sunday night game on the road of the string of two weekend games, 3 games in 4 nights, 4 games in 5 nights. Often the Sunday night opponent had the Saturday off or had not played since Wednesday or Thursday. So the SOG differential would be explainable. Yet you never raise these points.
I consider it highly unlikely that the scheduling difference accounts for a SOG gap of 5.6 per game. There have been analysts that have looked at the impact of playing back-to-back, here's one example. The rested team has an advantage, but far from enough of an advantage to account for such a large gap in shots.

BM67 has also been posting home/road splits for the goalies of the '30s and '40s. Durnan actually had the lowest home/road split of any of them, with a GAA 18% higher on the road (Brimsek's was 20%, Broda's was 26%, Gardiner's was 24%). That does not suggest that an unfavourable schedule made a huge impact on his numbers.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
WWII impact - fifth bolded. Not the purpose of the thread and as I've mentioned previously, the depression effects would have to be considered as well. Interesting that you claim to be able to adjust for alleged undercounting but are incapable of supporting your claim of a WWII effect with an appropriate adjustment. If it exists the WWII effect would definitely be objective so an adjustment metric should be available. Yet it is not. Why?
In short, lack of a control variable. There is no alternate universe where players did not go to war to compare against the historical record. On the other hand, every goalie has road numbers made up from the recorded totals of scorers from a variety of rinks around the league than can be compared against their home numbers, making for a much simpler analysis.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Tom Awad. So you finally get around to crediting the source of your data. About time.
I think the GVT stat is well enough known in this forum. TDMM has used it quite a bit in his arguments as well, without citing Awad.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Very uncomfortable with your last bolded. You accept criticism after the damage of your misrepresentation has been done. No effort to delete the damage in fact you further it.
There was no "misrepresentation" and no "damage". Again, I don't know how it could possibly hurt Durnan to use a stat that is very likely to be in his favour (using GAA instead of save percentage). Do you seriously think that posters should delete posts every time somebody makes a suggestion or a comment about their results or methodology?

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The Broad Street Bully approach. Instead of doing positive advocacy for goalies up for discussion in the project, others get dragged into your trap of having to verify all of your incomplete, uncredited until forced, and inaccurate work. This delays the positive work of others and gives you a net advantage since the positive information gets surpressed or delayed while your incomplete and inaccurate data abounds and dominates.
I've done plenty of positive advocacy for goalies in this project. You have to go back all of 13 posts to find one. The only misrepresentation being done here is about my motives and the quality of my contributions.

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote