HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Player Effectiveness Ratings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-27-2010, 11:06 AM
  #1
worstfaceoffmanever
What's the Pred say?
 
worstfaceoffmanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,415
vCash: 500
Player Effectiveness Ratings

Having spent the last few months covering basketball (and following the sport seriously at any level for the first time since the Jordan Era Bulls), I've been fascinated by the Player Efficiency Rating, which summarizes what kind of season a player is having (and over a prolonged period, how good a player is) in a neat, simple math formula.

Over the last few weeks, I've been mulling over the idea of a similar statistic for hockey (although I'm sure something like this has been tried in the past), and over the last few days, I've actually been constructing one. The math isn't really all that complex:

[(Goals + Assists + [(Goals For - Goals Against) * 0.5]+ [(Faceoffs Won - Faceoffs Lost) * 0.25] + (Hits * 0.5) + (Shots * 0.5) + (Blocked Shots * 0.5) + [(Takeaways - Giveaways) * 0.5] + (Power Play Goals + Power Play Assists + Shorthanded Goals + Shorthanded Assists)) - ((Missed Shots * 0.5) + (Minor Penalties * 2) + (Game Miscondutcs * 10)) / (Minutes Played/60)] * 0.1

Goals For and Goals Against are the total goals for and against that the player is on the ice for, including special teams (because the mark of an effective penalty killer is the ability to keep goals off the board, and an effective power play specialist to generate goals).

Faceoffs were originally valued at the same level as the other statistics, but centers that took large numbers of faceoffs had their ratings balloon astronomically higher than most wingers.

Goals, Assists, and the special teams numbers are not devalued at all because they are, frankly, the most important statistics on the score sheet, and special teams production is critical to team success and the sign of an effective player. A good defensive player can compensate for a lack of offensive productivity with high volumes of hits, blocked shots, and a low number of total goals conceded, but he cannot fully overcome that lack of offensive production that a more versatile player might possess (say, Jay McClement as opposed to Patrice Bergeron).

Minor Penalties are counted twice because not only does it seem natural to count a minor penalty for its duration, and not only is every minute a player spends in the box another minute he can't be on the ice, thereby hindering his team, but also because of simple necessity; players could take large numbers of penalties and not really be penalized for it.

I also, as you may have noticed, excluded major penalties. This is mainly due to potential positive results from a major penalty, particularly a fighting major (for example, if a guy starts a fight to energize his team, and they come from behind to win the game, then it was a good penalty to take), whereas minor penalties are generally more cut-and-dry (player x was out of position/lazy/etc. and took a penalty). I'm trying to find a way around this.

Towards the end of the formula construction, I had noticed that these numbers tend to be cumulative, so it's not a great tool for small sample sizes. In determining single-game effectiveness, one can (and should) also drop the 0.1 factor on the end of the equation.

So, with all of that said, here are the results. I've worked out a lot of the kinks, but keep in mind that this formula isn't quite perfect, which is part of why I'm creating this thread (hoping for some additional input).

First, the Predators, using numbers prior to the Phoenix game on 3/25.

PlayerEffectiveness Rating
Weber27.2
Hornqvist23.9
Arnott18.8
Suter18.2
Hamhuis17.1
Erat16.2
Bouillon16
Ward15.7
Legwand13.6
Boyd*13.8
Goc13.4
Sullivan13.1
Dumont12.9
Klein12.5
Franson11.2
Smithson9.8
Tootoo8
Wilson5.3
O'Reilly3
x-Jones8.1
x-Thuresson3.7
x-Scatchard2.7
x-Mi. Santorelli2.3
x-Spaling1.8
x-Laakso0.4

x - No longer on Nashville's NHL roster.
*Includes time with Calgary. In Boyd's time with Nashville, his effectiveness rating is an even 3.0.

To get a sense of what numbers are good and bad, I took a sampling of several different types of players. The first place I looked was the NHL's scoring leaders. Here they are, sorted by point total, through 3/24:

PlayerPER
H. Sedin22.9
Ovechkin40.3
Crosby34.8
Backstrom30.9
St. Louis26.8
Stamkos28.2
Thornton27.2
B. Richards26.1
Kane25.7
Gaborik26.7

Also, a selection of other players of varying caliber, sorted alphabetically:

PlayerPER
Bergeron25.2
Doan27
Fiddler15.9
Marchant14.7
McClement12.1
Penner20.4

And finally, defensemen:

PlayerPER
Green30.5
Pronger28.1
Keith26.1
Phaneuf*25.7
Seabrook24.6
Chara24.2
Girardi20.5
Bouwmeester16.8

*Includes time with Calgary. In Phaneuf's time with Toronto, this number is in the 11 range.



That's what I've got. Any constructive input would be greatly appreciated.


Last edited by worstfaceoffmanever: 03-27-2010 at 09:00 PM. Reason: Minor typos.
worstfaceoffmanever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2010, 01:00 PM
  #2
Predsrule
Registered User
 
Predsrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,537
vCash: 500
Miscondutcs rewared?
Hornqvist > H. Sedin ?

I dont this is a true value at all..
Got to tae in to account role on the team money made and things of that nature as well

Predsrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2010, 01:13 PM
  #3
BigFatCat999
I love GoOoOlD
 
BigFatCat999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Campbell, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predsrule View Post
Miscondutcs rewared?
Hornqvist > H. Sedin ?

I dont this is a true value at all..
Got to tae in to account role on the team money made and things of that nature as well
This is a value chart for ON the field performance, not value by contract. Intresting concept.

BigFatCat999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2010, 05:32 AM
  #4
worstfaceoffmanever
What's the Pred say?
 
worstfaceoffmanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFatCat999 View Post
This is a value chart for ON the field performance, not value by contract. Intresting concept.
That's pretty much what I was going for: not determining a player's value so much as his ability to perform on the ice (which can, if one wishes, then be taken and placed against his contract value to see if it holds up). It's a formula that, much like the NBA's PER, rewards versatility. Ovechkin, for example, has a much higher effectiveness rating than Sedin largely due to his 169 hits to Sedin's 13. Of the players surveyed, only Seabrook (180) and Phaneuf (174) had more hits than AO.

worstfaceoffmanever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2010, 10:51 AM
  #5
Webersmashpuck
Registered User
 
Webersmashpuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Spring Hill
Country: United States
Posts: 1,124
vCash: 1088
Perhaps change the weight for goals and assists. Surely they are worth more than a hit or shot. Otherwise good job it seems to be a good system with a few blips.

Webersmashpuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2010, 12:02 PM
  #6
shootthepuck
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tuscaloosa AL
Country: United States
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
Interesting concept, suprised to see Legwand ahead of Goc and Suter and Weber being so much different.

shootthepuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2010, 01:20 PM
  #7
oreilly22
Registered User
 
oreilly22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Oahu
Country: United States
Posts: 334
vCash: 500
I think the corsi rating system is a more accurate way of measuring an nhl player's effectiveness. Kudos to Slake for showing us that one. This system is interesting, but should probably be tweaked a little like add more value for points. No way should Hornqvist be ahead of Henrik Sedin. The Sedin's have developed their cycle game to an art. Nobody can dominate a shift like those guys.

oreilly22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2010, 02:23 PM
  #8
101st_fan
I taught Yoda
 
101st_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Some Army fort
Country: United States
Posts: 5,460
vCash: 500
Corsi is a good stat .... GVT is another pretty good one.

101st_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2010, 02:02 AM
  #9
steve141
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by worstfaceoffmanever View Post
To get a sense of what numbers are good and bad, I took a sampling of several different types of players. The first place I looked was the NHL's scoring leaders. Here they are, sorted by point total, through 3/24:

PlayerPER
H. Sedin22.9
Ovechkin40.3
Crosby34.8
Backstrom30.9
St. Louis26.8
Stamkos28.2
Thornton27.2
B. Richards26.1
Kane25.7
Gaborik26.7

Also, a selection of other players of varying caliber, sorted alphabetically:

PlayerPER
Bergeron25.2
Doan27
Fiddler15.9
Marchant14.7
McClement12.1
Penner20.4

And finally, defensemen:

PlayerPER
Green30.5
Pronger28.1
Keith26.1
Phaneuf*25.7
Seabrook24.6
Chara24.2
Girardi20.5
Bouwmeester16.8

*Includes time with Calgary. In Phaneuf's time with Toronto, this number is in the 11 range.



That's what I've got. Any constructive input would be greatly appreciated.
Interesting. Could you do:

* Lidstrom
* Malkin
* Datsyuk

steve141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2011, 04:16 PM
  #10
worstfaceoffmanever
What's the Pred say?
 
worstfaceoffmanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,415
vCash: 500
Thought I would dig this thread up...

The performance of Halischuk over his first three games with us got me to thinking about this old system again. My biggest issue was that the PERs were always cumulative. Even simply dividing by games played didn't fix the issue. I don't know what I did or how I did it, but I started tinkering with the formula last night and got something that works on the same level as the NBA's player efficiency rating (although the scores are lower).

I've crunched the numbers from this year and last, and the results surprised me a bit. First, 2009-10:

PlayerPER
Arnott6.2
Hornqvist6.0
Weber5.6
Erat4.9
Dumont4.4
Ward4.3
Sullivan4.2
Suter4.1
Goc3.9
Franson3.8
Boyd3.6
Wilson3.5
Hamhuis3.3
Scatchard3.2
Legwand3.2
Jones3.1
O'Reilly2.6
Tootoo2.5
Bouillon2.1
Thuresson2.1
Smithson2.1
Klein1.8
Spaling1.3
Santorelli1.2
Sulzer0.9
Guite0.9*
Belak0.9
Grant0.6*


And now this year:
PlayerPER
Halischuk7.5*
Weber6.7
Hornqvist6.1
Suter5.4
Erat5.1
Goc4.5
Sullivan4.4
Svatos4.2*
Wilson4.1
Kostitsyn4.1
Legwand4.0
Bouillon3.8
O'Reilly3.8
Franson3.6
Dumont3.3
Klein3.3
Mueller3.1
Smithson3.0
Tootoo2.8
Ward2.8
Spaling2.1
O'Brien2.1
Lombardi1.6*
Sulzer1.4
Thuresson1.0*
Begin0.5*
Belak0.5
Klasen-0.1*

*Denotes less than ten games played.


I'm hoping to be able to get a lot of work done on this in the next few weeks or so. I'm taking a light course load and the network has some down time during the week, so hopefully this is something I can apply both vertically (throughout our history) and horizontally (league-wide). Since the NHL has stats going back to 98-99, I should be able to go back and get data from those years, as well.

I also have some other stats I'm working on: assist/turnover ratio (straight port from basketball), turnover percentage (also straight port from basketball) and shot percentage (something I've derived from my work with basketball stats).

I can see why people do this for a living. This is a TON of fun.


Last edited by worstfaceoffmanever: 01-21-2011 at 04:21 PM.
worstfaceoffmanever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2011, 05:26 PM
  #11
Top 6 Spaling
Registered User
 
Top 6 Spaling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Smashville
Country: United States
Posts: 10,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webersmashpuck View Post
Perhaps change the weight for goals and assists. Surely they are worth more than a hit or shot. Otherwise good job it seems to be a good system with a few blips.
I totally agree, with this would greatly raise the forwards above the defensemen. I know this is dangerous, but should D men and forwards have different formulas?

All in all, great work worst!. I wish I had the time/determination/attention span to put something like this together, and I'm pumped you did

Top 6 Spaling 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 05:16 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.