View Single Post
04-24-2013, 05:37 PM
hella rights
Registered User
hella rights's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by schuckers View Post
If you look at the THoR model, it credits players for their effect in exactly this way.
Well I'll be damned, so it does! Maybe you can help clarify a few things for me:
1) Don't understand why the NP20 value is the probability that an event lead to goal after 20s for the home team minus the probability for the away team. Wouldn't a high NP20 just mean that a player was on ice for more events that led to goals in home games? BTW, I wonder what the results would look like if instead of the NP20 value being home probability - away probability it was goal for probability - goal against probability.
2) Maybe I missed it but was it coded anywhere whether the goal that was scored 20s after the event was for or against for each player on the ice?
3) When you say "The exceptions to this valuation of events are shots, goals and penalties" does it it mean there was a significant probability that a goal was scored 20s after a goal? Wasn't 'goal' the dependent?
4) Do you have any descriptive statistics? For instance, which players were on the ice for the most events that led to goals for or against?

Hope you don't mind the interrogation, I think it's a really interesting paper.

hella rights is offline   Reply With Quote