View Single Post
04-26-2013, 09:44 PM
Registered User
Mathletic's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,426
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by schuckers View Post
Indeed one can think of this as like Corsi in that it puts emphasis on shots and shot differential. We do that because we're tying events to the probability they lead to a goal. But unlike Corsi we give some weight to shots by location (x,y) and type of shot according to their probability of being a goal. (Before I get hammered on RTSS and shots, we adjust shot location by rink and then we break the O zone in to ~50 grids to get our probabilities of a goal.)

As Scott Cullen has noted we don't give credit for scoring a goal and that over long periods that seems to matter. We're thinking about ways to account for this that give credit for scoring but also recognize short term fluctuation in scoring rates.
Hello Mr. Schuckers! I wasn't aware you were a member of the board.

Been a fan of yours at the MIT conference the past couple years. Not to mention Milbury and Burke were complete dicks with you last year. I like your idea behind your DIGR stat as well. Much more representative of a goalie efficiency than the various point shares stats.

Keep up the good work, don't forget that "creative people must be stopped" as coined by David Owens.

Mathletic is offline   Reply With Quote