View Single Post
Old
10-30-2013, 03:54 PM
  #38
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,429
vCash: 874
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
If it's shown that teams have shot type distribution that differs from other teams (both for and/or against) and it is shown that different shot types have varying probability of resulting in goals (which this study seems to show), the basic corsi/fenwick assumption that all shot attempts have equal worth should be thrown to the side. This is even if it's only with one seasons worth of empiric data to show this because the evidence I've seen from the advanced stat crowd that shot quality doesn't matter is much weaker than that.
I would add an additional criteria.

As you said we must show:

1.) Teams have different shot quality on a season by season basis
2.) Shot quality matters (seems trivially obvious)

But, if 1 is true, we must also show:

3.) Teams can *control* their shot quality for or against.

The reason that I add 3 is because if teams cannot control their shot quality for or against, then their past results do not predict their future results and thus we should treat all teams the same when moving forward.

If 1 is true but 3 is not, shot quality is only useful to explain *why* teams might be doing better than but not predict if they can keep doing it.

__________________
Come join us on the By The Numbers forum. Take a look at our introduction post if you're new. If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.
hatterson is online now   Reply With Quote