from Amazon
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Shootout = crapshoot
This part is useless:
2. Along with a student (Laura Daley), we looked at year to year correlation among players with more than 10 shots per year and none of those correlation were larger than 0.1. Thus, player performance does not seem to be related (except about the mean) from year to year.
As we know, barring systematic bias, r will approach 1 when n approaches infinity. So, if you look at players with at least 10 shots (say a mean of 20), and you get an r=0.1, that’s actually pretty good! This would imply r=.50 at shots = 180.
This part would seem to be a better way to do it:
In the poster that I presented, the result of a Bayesian probit regression was done to determine the impact of shooters and goalies simultaneously. ... Among these intervals we found one goalie whose credible interval showed evidenceof performing better than the league average. That goalie was the aforementioned Marc Denis. We found that no shooter outperformed the league average but several underperformed. Among those with more than 10 shots, the shooters that underperformed were Michael Frolik 1/11 (9.1%), Marian Gaborik 2/18 (11.1%), Martin Havlat 3/18 (16.7%), DanyHeatley 4/25 (16.0%), Tomas Plekanec 2/16 (12.5%), Alexei Ponikarovsky 1/12 (8.3%), Taylor Pyatt 1/13 (7.7%), Bobby Ryan 1/11 (9.1%), Michael Ryder 4/22 (18.2%), Stephen Weiss 4/24 (16.7%).
So, he did find skill, but not many players involved. Basically, the point is that it’s hard to find the skill because the players selected for the shootout are highly skilled, and to distinguish among them given so few shots is almost impossible.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date