By The NumbersHockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.
Have there been studies done on HOI? It seems like bookies put a huge emphasis on HOI, but I'm not so sure it's warranted. Obviously you could look at the winning % of teams at home vs on the road, but has anyone looked into it more than that?
I did see the thread on players with the greatest +/- difference at home vs on the road.
I have a feeling a given team's coach's tendency to match lines will impact home vs road winning %.
Let me know if anybody knows of any other studies, or I will look into it further myself.
Have there been studies done on HOI? It seems like bookies put a huge emphasis on HOI, but I'm not so sure it's warranted. Obviously you could look at the winning % of teams at home vs on the road, but has anyone looked into it more than that?
I did see the thread on players with the greatest +/- difference at home vs on the road.
I have a feeling a given team's coach's tendency to match lines will impact home vs road winning %.
Let me know if anybody knows of any other studies, or I will look into it further myself.
Yes, teams play better at home than away. I'm not sure what type of study you are looking for. All you need to realize is that the vast majority of teams are better at home than away.
Yes, teams play better at home than away. I'm not sure what type of study you are looking for. All you need to realize is that the vast majority of teams are better at home than away.
Knowing that "the vast majority of teams are better at home than away" certainly isn't "all you need to realize", especially if you're looking for an edge over others.
Knowing that "the vast majority of teams are better at home than away" certainly isn't "all you need to realize", especially if you're looking for an edge over others.
There are two built in rules that help teams at home
1) Last change
2) Face-off advantage
Number 2 is likely only a minor advantage, however number 2 is a major advantage.
His initial question was that he questioned whether or not bookies putting significance into home field advantage was warranted. The W/L totals of teams home and away are all that you need to determine that it is. Since teams clearly play better at home it is also probably a fair expectation that all the success indicators are higher at home too.
In this forum, I would think that we'd be able to take it a bit further.
How advantageous is the home ice advantage?
Which teams are more equipped to do well at home? Young teams? Old teams? Teams with good goaltending? Teams playing divisional rivals? Teams with star players, or teams with depth?
In this forum, I would think that we'd be able to take it a bit further.
How advantageous is the home ice advantage?
Which teams are more equipped to do well at home? Young teams? Old teams? Teams with good goaltending? Teams playing divisional rivals? Teams with star players, or teams with depth?
They discuss this subject in Scorecasting: Hidden Influences Behind Sports. One of the main reasons for home advantage would be refreeing. Of course factors like, last change and whatnot will have an effect, but home field advantage exists in every sport, so we have to digg a little deeper.
As you may have noticed this fall. NFL refrees went on strike or were locked out, not sure which one. It just so happened that over 60% of the games, the hom team won against the spread. That is, bookmakers undervalued homefield advantage. Refrees on the whole distributed as many penalties but more were directed towards the visiting teams. Also, a lot of close calls, like the fiasco in the Green Bay vs. Seattle game, went in favor of the home team.
That said, I haven't made too much research on the subject and can't confirm whether or not their research was done throughly, but I'd suspect there's a part of truth in that. After all, people are subject to the effect of crowds.
It is also to be noted that home field advantage is greater in inferior leagues. For instance, home field advantage is greater in the NCAA BB than it is in the NBA and so on.
I liked the treatment in Scorecasting, although I'd like to see an independent derivation (since I've seen a few articles disputing some of the non-hockey conclusions in that tome).
At the very least, that book makes one think (which is always a good outcome).
Just skimming through the nhl site, seems like it's pretty even. One thing that will always stand out is the fact that it seems to make difference when a team is elite. Teams like Chicago,Boston,Anaheim etc win at home and away while the mediocre teams do good at home and are meh when they aren't. The best team usually wins, I don't really buy into the "home ice advantage".
Yes, teams play better at home than away. I'm not sure what type of study you are looking for. All you need to realize is that the vast majority of teams are better at home than away.
Taking all games from 2005-2011 into account - there is no team that has a better record on the road vs. home. The difference in winning percentage (wins/games) over 8,323 games is 10.3% between home and away.
Just skimming through the nhl site, seems like it's pretty even. One thing that will always stand out is the fact that it seems to make difference when a team is elite. Teams like Chicago,Boston,Anaheim etc win at home and away while the mediocre teams do good at home and are meh when they aren't. The best team usually wins, I don't really buy into the "home ice advantage".
You're wrong - the relative advantage is the same for all teams.
You're wrong - the relative advantage is the same for all teams.
Not necessarily. Many teams used to build their team to the strengths of their unique rink characteristics. The extent to which that is successfully done would influence the "relative advantage".
Even today, why couldn't there be teams that take better advantage of having two periods with the bench in their own zone? Or teams that know their rink quirks and deformities better than other teams? Or have a minor-league affiliate closer to their home rink (making call-ups easier in an emergency)?
To say "it's the same for all teams", without the requisite proof, is sloppy.
Thank you to those of you who took my comment seriously. Taco, you make some excellent points.
I was wondering if there was a way to quantify how often a coach matches lines, and see if that gives him team a greater home ice advantage.
Coaches always match lines. Sometimes it's a hard matchup (getting line X or player X out there every time player Y or line Z is out there) and sometimes it's a soft matchup (getting certain personnel groups out there for certain situations, ie. line X out there for an offensive zone draw).
Coaches always match lines. Sometimes it's a hard matchup (getting line X or player X out there every time player Y or line Z is out there) and sometimes it's a soft matchup (getting certain personnel groups out there for certain situations, ie. line X out there for an offensive zone draw).
That would be a perfect thing to look at in my proposed "study." At home, a hard matchup would be possible because the home team gets last change. On the road, the opposing coach could block a hard matchup basically every time.
That would be a perfect thing to look at in my proposed "study." At home, a hard matchup would be possible because the home team gets last change. On the road, the opposing coach could block a hard matchup basically every time.
Sometimes you don't want to have a hard matchup though. It's not like you always have a specific "counter" for each of their lines or their individual players. Sometimes it's best to just balance and make them match you with depth. Sometimes you want to stack and overpower a balanced lineup. It depends on individual personnel groups. Ie. the home team does not always want to be the one looking for a hard matchup game so it's not necessarily an advantage to have that option available
Not necessarily. Many teams used to build their team to the strengths of their unique rink characteristics. The extent to which that is successfully done would influence the "relative advantage".
Even today, why couldn't there be teams that take better advantage of having two periods with the bench in their own zone? Or teams that know their rink quirks and deformities better than other teams? Or have a minor-league affiliate closer to their home rink (making call-ups easier in an emergency)?
To say "it's the same for all teams", without the requisite proof, is sloppy.
It was sloppy of me - I'll admit that.
But I'm still right - there's no repeat in [home PTS% minus road PTS%] from one year to the next among NHL teams. And there's no split half correlation within individual seasons for the same stat either. In other words, all of the variation appears to be random.
Are you saying: that there's no repeatability in home-ice advantage from year to year (that is, Team X's home-ice advantage in year N+1 is not correlated to Team X's home-ice advantage in year N), or are you saying that Team X and Team Y's home-ice advantage differences in the same season are not statistically significant?
Are you saying: that there's no repeatability in home-ice advantage from year to year (that is, Team X's home-ice advantage in year N+1 is not correlated to Team X's home-ice advantage in year N), or are you saying that Team X and Team Y's home-ice advantage differences in the same season are not statistically significant?
If I've understood you correctly, I'm making both claims.
I would like to see the numbers on home ive vs. away ice faceoff percentages... as one of the "advantages" is away player must put his stick down first. DOes this actually have a statistical significant advantage?
