HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Do advanced stats really tell the story?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-30-2013, 11:24 AM
  #76
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
You clearly don't understand what I am trying to say and I don't have the energy to bother trying to further explain myself. You are drawing irrational parallels that are leading to even more irrational conclusions.

I do suspect that we are closer in beliefs than our correspondence would indicate but semantics has reared it's ugly head in this thread and has resulted in some potential miscommunication.....let's just leave it at that
Call it irrational, call it semantics, and call it psychological momentum if the distinction helps the cause. As someone who has experienced it as a member of countless sports teams, I won't be psycho-babbled out of the belief that certain chains of events which can simultaneously deflate one team and encourage another team to the point that "regular" execution of both teams' systems results in an observably different game flow than "normal", or before the event(s). We know that players hold their sticks tighter than normal, get rid of pucks quicker than normal in the face of forechecks, and hold onto pucks longer than normal trying to make perfect shots/passes, when facing the pressure that comes with fighting against another team's surge in momentum.

I mean, everyone has heard commentators say something along the lines of "they're really pressing now", or "Team X is really back on their heels now", or something referring to "pressure". Why weren't these professional players ALWAYS trying that hard, or why are they having so much harder of a time now? Why does the play look so different all of a sudden? Confidence? Confidence impacts execution, and simultaneous (related) improvement of execution on one side and worsening of execution on the other can fuel something that could be defined as momentum one way, as far as I'm concerned. Heavy emphasis on the word can.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 11:32 AM
  #77
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
Really? I've played enough to know that any "momentum" shift is due to coaching strategy or opposition over-confidence (sitting back on a lead) or luck. Usually a combination.

But if you want to believe that momentum is some sort of metaphysical ubiquitous force that teams can collectively tap at will like some sort of mass epiphany...
It's enough collective confidence to temporarily stem/reverse the immediately preceding flow of the game, and it's not that difficult, nebulous, or metaphysical a concept. And why would you assume that anyone would describe it as something that could be "collectively tapped"? The entire idea of momentum is that it CAN'T be called upon, and is observed, rather, in the difference in results whatever the method(s) or strategy, but obviously stemming from difference in confidence (-> execution) levels on different sides of the ice.

But I'm noticing that there's a greater comfort using the word "confidence", so am I to assume that there is a scientific method for measuring confidence (or its impact), predicting/controlling it's manifestation, or "tapping it at will"?

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 11:33 AM
  #78
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
The problem is that the players coaches GM's and pretty much everyone professionally associated with the game disagrees with them, yet they still cling to their extreme minority position and beleive it to be true. I find the advanced stats people are in the same camp, compile a bunch of facile metrics and then assert that this gives you some deep fundamental understanding of the game that is hidden from to the majority of fans ( who just use their eyes) or the coaches and GM's. I dont think that being good at excel makes you a hockey savant.
What makes you think that coaches and GMs don't use stats?


"We use RinkNet but RinkNet is a system that you can design to package for yourself, for your own team. So we have made a real big change in the last two years in how we identify players, how we grade them and we're moving even farther ahead of that. We have now the Corsi system we use and for people in the NHL, probably Corsi is used almost exclusively for NHL players. We're using Corsi for junior players."
http://www.fearthefin.com/2013/7/31/...ller-analytics

"We do our own analytics, and we're not going to give our ammunition away, but of course we do that," McPhee said. "There's lots of things to look at. There's [the analytics] and what your eyeballs tell you, and then you talk to people who have worked with him, whether it is teammates or managers or coaches, and you put it all together and try to make the best decision you can."
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=681220


Last edited by Roulin: 08-30-2013 at 12:01 PM.
Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 11:45 AM
  #79
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Call it irrational, call it semantics, and call it psychological momentum if the distinction helps the cause. As someone who has experienced it as a member of countless sports teams, I won't be psycho-babbled out of the belief that certain chains of events which can simultaneously deflate one team and encourage another team to the point that "regular" execution of both teams' systems results in an observably different game flow than "normal", or before the event(s). We know that players hold their sticks tighter than normal, get rid of pucks quicker than normal in the face of forechecks, and hold onto pucks longer than normal trying to make perfect shots/passes, when facing the pressure that comes with fighting against another team's surge in momentum.

I mean, everyone has heard commentators say something along the lines of "they're really pressing now", or "Team X is really back on their heels now", or something referring to "pressure". Why weren't these professional players ALWAYS trying that hard, or why are they having so much harder of a time now? Why does the play look so different all of a sudden? Confidence? Confidence impacts execution, and simultaneous (related) improvement of execution on one side and worsening of execution on the other can fuel something that could be defined as momentum one way, as far as I'm concerned. Heavy emphasis on the word can.
You are basically supporting my claim but won't let go of the term "momentum". I have acknowledged that a phenomenon exists and have clearly explained and defined it for you. Your adherence to this word doesn't appear to be very rational.

Momentum is defined as p= m(v). It is implied within the definition that momentum must have mass and must be in motion. Because we can not assign any physical metrics to a term that requires physical traits to be measured....it does not appear to exist following any rational thought process. At best it is simply a slang term used to describe shifts in the product of confidence between two opposing forces.

You can call it momentum, you can call it Shirley....it doesn't matter because it is just a meaningless term that is being used to describe a known phenomenon.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 11:54 AM
  #80
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
You are basically supporting my claim but won't let go of the term "momentum". I have acknowledged that a phenomenon exists and have clearly explained and defined it for you. Your adherence to this word doesn't appear to be very rational.

Momentum is defined as p= m(v). It is implied within the definition that momentum must have mass and must be in motion. Because we can not assign any physical metrics to a term that requires physical traits to be measured....it does not appear to exist following any rational thought process. At best it is simply a slang term used to describe shifts in the product of confidence between two opposing forces.

You can call it momentum, you can call it Shirley....it doesn't matter because it is just a meaningless term that is being used to describe a known phenomenon.
As someone with a degree in Physics, you can spare me the definition of momentum. But if you want to develop p=mv, if something happens that makes players play "bigger" (change in "psychological mass"), and makes players play/execute with less hesitation than their opponents (change in "psychological velocity" - even if only relatively), how could the result NOT be expressed as a change in "psychological momentum"? But I obviously digress...

You can't win a game psychologically with confidence alone. It has to manifest itself physically in some way to impact the actual game flow, and that's why I submit that the way "momentum" is used in this context precludes relegation to "slang" level by overly linear thinkers who think they've got it figured out better by referring to it with the nebulous definition of a "phenomenon related in some way to confidence".

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 12:03 PM
  #81
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
I call BS. Momentum is nothing more than a team's ability to exploit the weaknesses of their opponent. Those with little understanding of the finer nuances of the game call it momentum.
There are many headlines in sports where Team X defeats the favored Team Y and its called an upset. When you look closely at those games, you can see the turning point of the game. Momentum changed.

Talent and skill is important. So are the intangibles like momentum.

SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 12:10 PM
  #82
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
As someone with a degree in Physics, you can spare me the definition of momentum. But if you want to develop p=mv, if something happens that makes players play "bigger" (change in "psychological mass"), and makes players play/execute with less hesitation than their opponents (change in "psychological velocity" - even if only relatively), how could the result NOT be expressed as a change in "psychological momentum"? But I obviously digress...

You can't win a game psychologically with confidence alone. It has to manifest itself physically in some way to impact the actual game flow, and that's why I submit that the way "momentum" is used in this context precludes relegation to "slang" level by overly linear thinkers who think they've got it figured out better by referring to it with the nebulous definition of a "phenomenon related in some way to confidence".
Your argument is self defeating when you base it on fictional terms such as "psychological mass" and "psychological velocity".

As someone with a degree in physics I would expect you to apply the scientific method to your theory.....

There are studies of the stock market that directly relate confidence to momentum. In these studies mass = volume and velocity = rate of change. You will find that this is a very clear parallel to the relation between confidence and "momentum" in the sporting world. The effect is almost identical as "momentum" can spiral out of control in direct relation to confidence or the lack thereof. This only changes when there is an event to change the buyers/sellers confidence in the company........sound familiar?

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 12:16 PM
  #83
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
There are many headlines in sports where Team X defeats the favored Team Y and its called an upset. When you look closely at those games, you can see the turning point of the game. Momentum changed.

Talent and skill is important. So are the intangibles like momentum.
Momentum does not exist in a metaphysical sense.....that would be the primary reason that it is not an intangible that occurs in a sporting event.

Remember that the burden is on you to prove that it exists if you are going to continue to refer to it.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 01:03 PM
  #84
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
What makes you think that coaches and GMs don't use stats?


"We use RinkNet but RinkNet is a system that you can design to package for yourself, for your own team. So we have made a real big change in the last two years in how we identify players, how we grade them and we're moving even farther ahead of that. We have now the Corsi system we use and for people in the NHL, probably Corsi is used almost exclusively for NHL players. We're using Corsi for junior players."
http://www.fearthefin.com/2013/7/31/...ller-analytics

"We do our own analytics, and we're not going to give our ammunition away, but of course we do that," McPhee said. "There's lots of things to look at. There's [the analytics] and what your eyeballs tell you, and then you talk to people who have worked with him, whether it is teammates or managers or coaches, and you put it all together and try to make the best decision you can."
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=681220
I never said that they were not used, I said that they if they have any value its in post facto analyses and that the likelihood that they affect on ice decisions in real time is essentially nil.

If teams are using advanced stats, they are not doing it with off the shelf components and its unlikely that any two teams evaluate their players in exactly the same manner. If, in the event that there are infinite ways to evaluate players you cant say that these types of analyses are of any value unless you can determine WHICH analyses have predictive value ( the gold standard and the ultimate goal of these types of analyses). what you are doing is akin to the horoscope, 99 % of the time people dismiss it and the one time it fits into your pre-conceived notions ( ripe with personal biases as well) you declare some sort of diving insight into the game.

I am sure that there is likely some type of formula that could conceivably have this level of predictive power. But I suspect you dont have it ( not do I think anyone else does) and saying that because it could exist and that is is likely a solution that could be group with your solution ( however tentatively) that your models are better is nonsensical.

People who are universally considered hockey experts or savants, people who are paid to bring their own insights to the game largely acquired this experience through observation. If you want to think yourself or any other advanced statter to be their equivalents becuase you can run macros in excel, be my guest. The day a head coach call upstairs to figure out if any of the players corsi numbers have changed in order to adjust the lines is WAY in the future, if it comes at all.

I'm all for reductionalism to an extent, but beyond that it becomes nothing more than self supporting of implicit or explicit biases, which is no different than the eyeball test.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 01:17 PM
  #85
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
I never said that they were not used, I said that they if they have any value its in post facto analyses and that the likelihood that they affect on ice decisions in real time is essentially nil.

If teams are using advanced stats, they are not doing it with off the shelf components and its unlikely that any two teams evaluate their players in exactly the same manner. If, in the event that there are infinite ways to evaluate players you cant say that these types of analyses are of any value unless you can determine WHICH analyses have predictive value ( the gold standard and the ultimate goal of these types of analyses). what you are doing is akin to the horoscope, 99 % of the time people dismiss it and the one time it fits into your pre-conceived notions ( ripe with personal biases as well) you declare some sort of diving insight into the game.

I am sure that there is likely some type of formula that could conceivably have this level of predictive power. But I suspect you dont have it ( not do I think anyone else does) and saying that because it could exist and that is is likely a solution that could be group with your solution ( however tentatively) that your models are better is nonsensical.

People who are universally considered hockey experts or savants, people who are paid to bring their own insights to the game largely acquired this experience through observation. If you want to think yourself or any other advanced statter to be their equivalents becuase you can run macros in excel, be my guest. The day a head coach call upstairs to figure out if any of the players corsi numbers have changed in order to adjust the lines is WAY in the future, if it comes at all.

I'm all for reductionalism to an extent, but beyond that it becomes nothing more than self supporting of implicit or explicit biases, which is no different than the eyeball test.
Very well said!!

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 01:26 PM
  #86
JaymzB
Registered User
 
JaymzB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 2,550
vCash: 500
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...entum-football

JaymzB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 02:06 PM
  #87
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Momentum does not exist in a metaphysical sense.....that would be the primary reason that it is not an intangible that occurs in a sporting event.

Remember that the burden is on you to prove that it exists if you are going to continue to refer to it.
Prove? On an internet message board?

I'll just continue to sit on my couch and watch hockey and enjoy the game. When I see a change in the game, I will agree with the announcer who says that there has been a change in momentum (or Shirley )

I'll leave the nuances to you guys.

SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 12:34 AM
  #88
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Prove? On an internet message board?

I'll just continue to sit on my couch and watch hockey and enjoy the game. When I see a change in the game, I will agree with the announcer who says that there has been a change in momentum (or Shirley )

I'll leave the nuances to you guys.
I do not intend to aggressively pursue people and force them to explain their beliefs but if you try and refute my claim I would expect you to provide evidence to support your claim.

If you just want to believe things that aren't true then that is absolutely your right. If you don't want to discuss those beliefs......then don't discuss them.

Anyways........enjoy the games, it is the one thing that all of us on this board actually have in common

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 12:54 AM
  #89
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaymzB View Post
My favourite part was: "I can't prove that momentum does or does not exist in sports..."

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 01:15 AM
  #90
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
My favourite part was: "I can't prove that momentum does or does not exist in sports..."
No doubt........

You also can not prove whether an invisible flying spaghetti monster exists in a hockey game either. Doesn't make the claim any less absurd.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 01:53 AM
  #91
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
No doubt........

You also can not prove whether an invisible flying spaghetti monster exists in a hockey game either. Doesn't make the claim any less absurd.
Aside from that part where an experienced observer, or casual dan for that matter, actually sees "momentum" shifting in a game.

It's the great flaw of the religion of science to forget that, as sound as the method is, at its heart it remains "the best we have", not the objective truth the zealots in lab coats believe it to be.

There is a piece of human experience that remains firmly outside the realm of measurable/tested/quantifiable "truth"... Ignorance if its existence doesn't negate it any more than juvenile comparisons.

Besides, if you could see what I see, you'd know that the spaghetti monsters steer clear of impacting the game for fear of being eaten by the Zombie mafia who patrol the invisible sports world realm...

And here I thought this site was supposed to be an outlet to the make believe world of my 4-year old...

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:08 AM
  #92
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Aside from that part where an experienced observer, or casual dan for that matter, actually sees "momentum" shifting in a game.

It's the great flaw of the religion of science to forget that, as sound as the method is, at its heart it remains "the best we have", not the objective truth the zealots in lab coats believe it to be.

There is a piece of human experience that remains firmly outside the realm of measurable/tested/quantifiable "truth"... Ignorance if its existence doesn't negate it any more than juvenile comparisons.

Besides, if you could see what I see, you'd know that the spaghetti monsters steer clear of impacting the game for fear of being eaten by the Zombie mafia who patrol the invisible sports world realm...

And here I thought this site was supposed to be an outlet to the make believe world of my 4-year old...
There is no flaw in the scientific method......"zealots in lab coats"?????, "Besides, if you could see what I see" really Somebody here is living in a make believe world and he isn't 4 years old....


I think we can all see where you are about to take this discussion and I am going to bow out before I get myself in trouble. I respect your right to your beliefs but a hockey message board isn't the forum to espouse them.

Good day sir

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:12 AM
  #93
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
It's the great flaw of the religion of science to forget that, as sound as the method is, at its heart it remains "the best we have", not the objective truth the zealots in lab coats believe it to be.

There is a piece of human experience that remains firmly outside the realm of measurable/tested/quantifiable "truth"... Ignorance if its existence doesn't negate it any more than juvenile comparisons.

Besides, if you could see what I see, you'd know that the spaghetti monsters steer clear of impacting the game for fear of being eaten by the Zombie mafia who patrol the invisible sports world realm...
I reject your claim. There are at least two flaws in your claim:

1) Hockey statistics has not demonstrated that it is a "science". At best, it closer to economics and "political science" than it is to physics or chemistry.
2) Many of us who work with data and theory for a living, probably most, recognise that there is a difference between that which is known and that which can be known. "Momentum" has at this point not been measured, apparently. That does not imply that it will never be measured, nor does it imply that it does not exist. It just means that the crude methods employed by Sabremetrics people have not convincingly isolated the momentum factor.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:13 AM
  #94
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
There is no flaw in the scientific method......"zealots in lab coats"?????, "Besides, if you could see what I see" really Somebody here is living in a make believe world and he isn't 4 years old....


I think we can all see where you are about to take this discussion and I am going to bow out before I get myself in trouble. I respect your right to your beliefs but a hockey message board isn't the forum to espouse them.

Good day sir
Same blindness that sees night as day is at work in your takes on the sports world I see...

Take a bow, it's long overdue...

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:19 AM
  #95
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I reject your claim. There are at least two flaws in your claim:

1) Hockey statistics has not demonstrated that it is a "science". At best, it closer to economics and "political science" than it is to physics or chemistry.
2) Many of us who work with data and theory for a living, probably most, recognise that there is a difference between that which is known and that which can be known. "Momentum" has at this point not been measured, apparently. That does not imply that it will never be measured, nor does it imply that it does not exist. It just means that the crude methods employed by Sabremetrics people have not convincingly isolated the momentum factor.
It is human arrogance and ego which believes that we can or will eventually "know it all".

Understandably uncomfortable for such egos to accept or make peace with being unable or incapable of ever being the omnipotent god created by the very same collective ego...

Funny thing is that the true experts in this realm understand better than anyone that at its highest levels, human performance is always ultimately subject to a degree of "chance" no calculation can predict. Control what you can and find peace with what you can't... A simple wisdom that weak egos are unable to comprehend.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:30 AM
  #96
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I reject your claim. There are at least two flaws in your claim:

1) Hockey statistics has not demonstrated that it is a "science". At best, it closer to economics and "political science" than it is to physics or chemistry.
2) Many of us who work with data and theory for a living, probably most, recognise that there is a difference between that which is known and that which can be known. "Momentum" has at this point not been measured, apparently. That does not imply that it will never be measured, nor does it imply that it does not exist. It just means that the crude methods employed by Sabremetrics people have not convincingly isolated the momentum factor.
Good post!

It should also be stated that while some theories could possibly be true in the absence of evidence it conversely allows for the possibility that that these same theories are completely false. When there are alternative explanations that are more plausible and there is measureable evidence supporting them the premise with no support/evidence becomes less plausible.

Momentum in a metaphysical sense is an abstract idea which by nature is virtually impossible to prove or disprove as it does not have a concrete definition. It is simply a term commonly used to describe a phenomenon that all of the data points to being the product of confidence or the lack thereof.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:44 AM
  #97
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
It is human arrogance and ego which believes that we can or will eventually "know it all".

Understandably uncomfortable for such egos to accept or make peace with being unable or incapable of ever being the omnipotent god created by the very same collective ego....
I'm not saying that we can eventually "know it all". Maybe we will one day understand momentum, or not. However, you seem to be saying that momentum is:

1) Real
2) Will never be understood.

I don't see that as very rational or justified. There are a lot of other possibilities, such as momentum is an illusion, or momentum is real and will be better understood in 25 years.

There is no "arrogance" here. We are discussing the issue of momentum in hockey, not the existence of God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Funny thing is that the true experts in this realm understand better than anyone that at its highest levels, human performance is always ultimately subject to a degree of "chance" no calculation can predict. Control what you can and find peace with what you can't... A simple wisdom that weak egos are unable to comprehend.
Chance can be modelled quite effectively, there's a field of math call probability, and another, related field called statistics.

There's obviously a lot of chance in hockey. If you have a 50% faceoff guy going up against a 50% faceoff guy, your best model to predict what happens next, to predict who wins the faceoff, is the coin toss.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:49 AM
  #98
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Good post!

It should also be stated that while some theories could possibly be true in the absence of evidence it conversely allows for the possibility that that these same theories are completely false. When there are alternative explanations that are more plausible and there is measureable evidence supporting them the premise with no support/evidence becomes less plausible.

Momentum in a metaphysical sense is an abstract idea which by nature is virtually impossible to prove or disprove as it does not have a concrete definition. It is simply a term commonly used to describe a phenomenon that all of the data points to being the product of confidence or the lack thereof.
Good post.

You know what bugs me? Hockey commentators often point out the importance of getting the first goal. You'll hear something like "When Team X has scoresd the first goal, they win 76% of their games". What the talking heads try to imply by that statistic, is that by scoring the first goal the team has more confidence, is more laid back and happy, and they end up playing a better game and winning.

That is most likely the wrong interpretation. More likely, when you score the 1st goal at the 15 minute mark, you only need to tie the game in the remaining 45 minutes to win the game. Whereas if you allow the first goal, you need to win by 2 goals in the remaining 45 minutes to win the game. The latter is much harder, independent of "momentum". The issue is simply one of conditional probability.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 03:00 AM
  #99
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Good post.

You know what bugs me? Hockey commentators often point out the importance of getting the first goal. You'll hear something like "When Team X has scoresd the first goal, they win 76% of their games". What the talking heads try to imply by that statistic, is that by scoring the first goal the team has more confidence, is more laid back and happy, and they end up playing a better game and winning.

That is most likely the wrong interpretation. More likely, when you score the 1st goal at the 15 minute mark, you only need to tie the game in the remaining 45 minutes to win the game. Whereas if you allow the first goal, you need to win by 2 goals in the remaining 45 minutes to win the game. The latter is much harder, independent of "momentum". The issue is simply one of conditional probability.
I am starting to like you more and more lol

I have always thought the exact same thing. I despise announcers of all of the major sports as they are typically mindless sheep that spew these ridiculous truisms.

Football commentator's might be the worst as they always refer to the teams that run the ball for x number of yards usually win the game. The truth is that more often than not they run the ball so much because they are already winning. Simple cause and effect that NONE of them can seem to grasp.

Critical thinking needs to be taught aggressively in our schools in order to weed out these irrational thought processes. I have been diligent with my children in building this skill, but sometimes have to reel them in as they can become too vocal and end up insulting some nice people who just happen to have ignorant views.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 06:50 AM
  #100
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
I am starting to like you more and more lol

I have always thought the exact same thing. I despise announcers of all of the major sports as they are typically mindless sheep that spew these ridiculous truisms.

Football commentator's might be the worst as they always refer to the teams that run the ball for x number of yards usually win the game. The truth is that more often than not they run the ball so much because they are already winning. Simple cause and effect that NONE of them can seem to grasp.

Critical thinking needs to be taught aggressively in our schools in order to weed out these irrational thought processes. I have been diligent with my children in building this skill, but sometimes have to reel them in as they can become too vocal and end up insulting some nice people who just happen to have ignorant views.
the guys who hired them should be ashamed (and ideally fired), how dare they hire a sport anouncer without an important scientific background!

ECWHSWI is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:46 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.