HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > By The Numbers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

By The Numbers Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Advanced Stats and Win/Loss Predictions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-23-2014, 05:23 PM
  #1
Menzinger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Calgary/Toronto
Country: England
Posts: 8,842
vCash: 500
Advanced Stats and Win/Loss Predictions

Hi all,

I'm a recent convert to advanced stats, as a leafs fan, last season I used to roll my eyes at all the analytical doom and gloom predictions, but let's just say since then I've become a believer.

I've recently came across this article though, and was wondering if some of the more quantitatively inclined of you would be able to deconstruct it? Or just have any general thoughts towards it?

http://rinkstats.blogspot.se/2013/12...re-bad-at.html

Quote:
When you think about it, none of my findings should as a surprise to anybody. Fenwick and Corsi incorporate plays which, by definition, won't help you to win games. The best consequence of a missed or blocked shot is your team retrieving possession of the puck, putting you right back where you were before you attempted the shot. At worst, you're conceding possession to the other team. This doesn't mean that teams shouldn't take lots of shot attempts, since you don't know whether an attempt will be a shot, miss, or block. It does mean that analysts should think hard about using Corsi or Fenwick as an indication of how well a team is playing. You're taking a stat (shots on goal) that could directly influence the outcome of games, and adding plays (missed and blocked shots) to it which, by definition, cannot help a team win the game since they cannot directly put points on the board.

Menzinger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2014, 09:36 PM
  #2
soireeculturelle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
The author does a pretty thorough job, but as the comments mentioned, he doesnt not account for score effects. essentially, when many teams go into a lead, they start getting outshot by their opponents 1) because they start playing safer and 2) their opponents become more offensively-minded in their play. lets say a team outshoots their opponents 10-5 and scores 2 quick goals in the first period, they may sit back, win 2-0 and end up getting outshot 20-30. stats like corsi/fenwick close only looks at 5vs5 shots when the score is tied or with either team up by 1 goal.

soireeculturelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2014, 04:42 PM
  #3
Menzinger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Calgary/Toronto
Country: England
Posts: 8,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by soireeculturelle View Post
The author does a pretty thorough job, but as the comments mentioned, he doesnt not account for score effects. essentially, when many teams go into a lead, they start getting outshot by their opponents 1) because they start playing safer and 2) their opponents become more offensively-minded in their play. lets say a team outshoots their opponents 10-5 and scores 2 quick goals in the first period, they may sit back, win 2-0 and end up getting outshot 20-30. stats like corsi/fenwick close only looks at 5vs5 shots when the score is tied or with either team up by 1 goal.
Cheers!

Menzinger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2014, 03:36 PM
  #4
stephenp
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1
vCash: 500
Thought you all might be interested in my new post about the predictive value of Corsi and Fenwick: http://rinkstats.blogspot.com/2014/0...we-should.html

stephenp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2014, 05:25 PM
  #5
plusandminus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 980
vCash: 500
Good points made. We just don't know what effect missed shots have. Sometimes a player intentionally shoots beside the goal, in order to make the puck bounce in front of the goal where a forward might put it into net. Sometimes missed shots ends up around the corner, and goes up into neutral zone where opponents can counter attack.

Correct also regarding shots taken. Hockey is about outscoring the opponents, not outshooting them. In itself, outshooting them means nothing of value. If a shot at goal results in an offensive face off, then it's good, but that can be tracked instead by the offensive/defensive zone finishes.

Previous studies also have shown that they more shots a goal faces within a game, the better save percentage he tends to have. Goalies usually has nothing against facing shots from certain areas or distances, and a good defence contributes to getting the opponents to shoot from those "easier" areas.
This probably also applies to teams leading, who can "control the game" and make the opponents shoot from "safe" areas. The opposite regards to the team trailing. The trailing team might shoot more, but when their own goalie is facing shots it might be on dangerous counter attacks (including two-on-one situations).

plusandminus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2014, 10:05 PM
  #6
rosemount289
Registered User
 
rosemount289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
One thing that..............?

One thing that Corsi and Fenwick cannot and will not be able to produce..........is to predict a hot, hot goaltender.........that teams face in a regular season game or especially in the playoffs...........so those stats will go out the door.

rosemount289 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2014, 10:24 PM
  #7
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Angeles
Posts: 4,272
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosemount289 View Post
One thing that Corsi and Fenwick cannot and will not be able to produce..........is to predict a hot, hot goaltender.........that teams face in a regular season game or especially in the playoffs...........so those stats will go out the door.
No statistic (or combination of statistics) is ever going to predict a single game (or even a seven-game series) with certainty (or even near certainty). That doesn't mean that Corsi or Fenwick need to go "out the door".

And I'd like to see some evidence that "hot goaltending" is a real phenomenon, and not just something ascribed after the fact.

EDIT: The latter is something that I can now test with my database. I'll add it to my list, although there are some things ahead of it.

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2014, 01:45 AM
  #8
The Imp
5-14-6-1
 
The Imp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,751
vCash: 50
Would "hot goaltending" not be identifiable through a significant positive deviation in the PDO numbers of the team with the hot goalie? I realize that the team's shooting percentage is in there, too, but there has to be some correlation.

And of course, there is a cognitive bias in PDO, about regression to the mean.

The Imp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2014, 08:11 AM
  #9
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Angeles
Posts: 4,272
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Imp View Post
Would "hot goaltending" not be identifiable through a significant positive deviation in the PDO numbers of the team with the hot goalie? I realize that the team's shooting percentage is in there, too, but there has to be some correlation.
What I'm thinking of doing would be based off of the framework that I've developed to measure above-average starts, average starts, and below-average starts.

For instance, if a goaltender has a game where he's 2 standard deviations above what was expected, what is his expected performance (and distribution of performance) in the following game? If he has two straight games like this, expected performance (and distribution of performance) in the following game? Things like that.

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2014, 01:39 PM
  #10
BrooksBets
Registered User
 
BrooksBets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
You can make a small fortune using advanced stats for predictions.

BrooksBets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:11 PM
  #11
Thirty One
k.
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,981
vCash: 420
Yeah that was a pretty silly argument made there.

Read this and tell me it doesn't matter. http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/20...ide-to-fenwick

Thirty One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:11 PM
  #12
rosemount289
Registered User
 
rosemount289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
Are you..............???

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooksBets View Post
You can make a small fortune using advanced stats for predictions.
If you are serious...........show us please???

rosemount289 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:14 PM
  #13
Thirty One
k.
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,981
vCash: 420
In case any one's interested, I developed a simple forecasting tool based on three variables (shots for/against per game, and average save percentage).

Excel file:

http://rangersunlimited.com/wp-conte.../forecast.xlsx

edit: I'm not sure if this relates to the topic, but the title made me think of it.

Thirty One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:23 PM
  #14
BrooksBets
Registered User
 
BrooksBets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosemount289 View Post
If you are serious...........show us please???
Just create better power rankings than Vegas does (not that difficult) and you'll see where to take advantage.

A good example is where they ranked the Kings/Rangers before the playoffs started.

LA was 14-1 and NYR 26-1. They were both the most underrated in their respective conference, and anyone paying attention to advanced stats this year would've seen the glaring discrepancy. Advanced stats don't make up all of a team's power ranking, but it's a big chunk.

During the regular season, there are opportunities on a nightly basis. Vegas is kinda dumb when it comes to hockey.

BrooksBets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:35 PM
  #15
Thirty One
k.
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,981
vCash: 420
I don't have a foolproof method or anything, but I should end up pretty profitable at the end of the playoffs just making bets with the principles of advanced stats in mind.


Thirty One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 02:36 PM
  #16
rosemount289
Registered User
 
rosemount289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
Can you give us...............???

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooksBets View Post
Just create better power rankings than Vegas does (not that difficult) and you'll see where to take advantage.

A good example is where they ranked the Kings/Rangers before the playoffs started.

LA was 14-1 and NYR 26-1. They were both the most underrated in their respective conference, and anyone paying attention to advanced stats this year would've seen the glaring discrepancy. Advanced stats don't make up all of a team's power ranking, but it's a big chunk.

During the regular season, there are opportunities on a nightly basis. Vegas is kinda dumb when it comes to hockey.

Can you give us a detail example?.......cause I still don't know what you are talking about?


Last edited by rosemount289: 05-31-2014 at 02:37 PM. Reason: more info
rosemount289 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 03:02 PM
  #17
BrooksBets
Registered User
 
BrooksBets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosemount289 View Post
Can you give us a detail example?.......cause I still don't know what you are talking about?
Not sure what kind of detail you're looking for.

Basically Vegas creates odds on who will win the cup, and prices on each game/series, etc. They base it on their own internal power rankings, money wagered, home/road, injuries, public perception, and so on.

No one has a more vested interest in ranking teams accurately than Vegas. Be wrong on a team, and they pay for it. Fans and "analysts" can be wrong all day everyday with their predictions and nobody cares.

The problem for Vegas is they don't incorporate advanced stats into their evaluations of teams, so there is a pretty sizable mismatch between the prices they offer and the real price it should be. At one point in February/March they actually had the Leafs at 20-1 to win the cup, which is absurd.

The other major factor is that hockey is just a niche sport for Vegas and there isn't a whole lot of $$ being wagered on it, so their incentive to make accurate prices is low compared to other major sports like soccer, NFL, NBA, MLB etc. You can be sure that Vegas is aware of advanced stats/Sabremetrics in those sports.

But advanced stats for hockey are relatively new and still developing, so the opportunity to make a lot of money is there. Sooner or later Vegas will catch on, but they haven't yet.

It's so easy to make money that even casual bettors can make money on basic advanced stats...

Quote:
@TravisHeHateMe

Is it a bad time to remind everyone that Score-Adjusted Fenwick% last twenty is 9-3 picking playoff winners this year, 70-31 since '07?

BrooksBets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2014, 03:43 PM
  #18
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Angeles
Posts: 4,272
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooksBets View Post
The problem for Vegas is they don't incorporate advanced stats into their evaluations of teams, so there is a pretty sizable mismatch between the prices they offer and the real price it should be. At one point in February/March they actually had the Leafs at 20-1 to win the cup, which is absurd.
A lot of that is because Vegas primarily cares about bettors' expectations, and less about what the actual odds are (of course, in many sports these align closely).

If the true Toronto odds were 50-1, but 20-1 balances the books (*), then it's going to show as 20-1.

(*) Hence the name "bookie".

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2014, 11:41 AM
  #19
BrooksBets
Registered User
 
BrooksBets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalupa Batman View Post
A lot of that is because Vegas primarily cares about bettors' expectations, and less about what the actual odds are (of course, in many sports these align closely).

If the true Toronto odds were 50-1, but 20-1 balances the books (*), then it's going to show as 20-1.

(*) Hence the name "bookie".
Yes and no. That Toronto line was definitely set with squares in mind, but for the most part they have to contend with sharp money on opening lines. That is where most of the discrepancies are.

BrooksBets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2014, 11:53 AM
  #20
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Angeles
Posts: 4,272
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooksBets View Post
Yes and no. That Toronto line was definitely set with squares in mind, but for the most part they have to contend with sharp money on opening lines. That is where most of the discrepancies are.
Well, yes and yes. Part of balancing the books is understanding what you just described.

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2014, 12:08 PM
  #21
BrooksBets
Registered User
 
BrooksBets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalupa Batman View Post
Well, yes and yes. Part of balancing the books is understanding what you just described.
Yea, they make enough back on squares that they profit regardless. I imagine that the public will become more savvy in the next year or two as advanced stats become more and more mainstream. Next year will be interesting..

BrooksBets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2014, 10:14 AM
  #22
Stephen Goalbert
Puck Don't Lie
 
Stephen Goalbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,079
vCash: 500
It's no wonder that the SCF is the #1 FenClose team against the #6 FenClose team, and that all the teams they beat on the road to the SCF were ranked behind them, I'll just say that. Predicting based on Fenwick would have given a fantastic bracket this year with the exception of Montreal.

Of course, this one postseason is a small sample size, though.

Stephen Goalbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2014, 05:41 PM
  #23
Thirty One
k.
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,981
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago Made Punk View Post
It's no wonder that the SCF is the #1 FenClose team against the #6 FenClose team, and that all the teams they beat on the road to the SCF were ranked behind them, I'll just say that. Predicting based on Fenwick would have given a fantastic bracket this year with the exception of Montreal.

Of course, this one postseason is a small sample size, though.
Long-term it's done well, too.

Thirty One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2014, 12:23 AM
  #24
Signed
Registered User
 
Signed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 8,405
vCash: 540
If they had set the Toronto numbers at 10-1 they would have made more money. Most fans see the odds and back away from long shots. Leafs have a huge fanbase and putting it at 10-1 is actually stroking the Leaf fans egos.

Signed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 10:55 PM
  #25
OCSportsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 890
vCash: 500
I am not a 100% supporter of Advanced stats, but do think there is some validity to them, just like some other stats.

What i agree with
1) Over the long run if you are able to take more shots, you have more opportunity to score, and should be in possession of the puck for more time. You should have a better chance to win.
2) Zone starts and finish really show the good players in my opinion when taking shots into account.

What I don't agree with
1) Shot percentage is different with every team, and a high shot percentage can be sustainable, just like a low one. If for example 75% of your shots come from Forwards within 20 feet of the goal, you will have a higher percentage than if 50% of your shots come from Defenders throwing the puck at the net from just inside the blue line. If you could weigh the shots depending on the distance from the goal (or quality of player), it would help.
2) Save percentage is less sustainable, but to pretend every goalie and defense should have the same save percentage is just silly. There are better goalies and better defenses that prevent the high percentage shots.

In a few years, I am sure there will be some technology out there that will take this advanced stats to another level, but at the moment I just don't think it is as accurate as people hope. It is a Chicken and the Egg, are the Kings good because they take a lot of shots and don't give up many, or are they good because they are the deep down the middle and have a great Defense, and as a result have the puck most of the game.

I bet the Kings to win the SC because of how deep of a team they were (matching player to player), not because they out shot the other teams.

OCSportsfan is offline   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 12:23 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.