• Chances for/against: at Vancouver, Oct 25th

    by Dennis • October 30, 2008 • Uncategorized • 5 Comments

    1st period:

    PP  Edm  18:05  89-12-13-37-77

    PP  Edm   17:46     ”         ”

    SH  Edm   16:44   27-51-71-44

    GOAL PP  Van             89-10-37-77

    Edm   15:36   83-12-10-44-71

    Van    14:59   78-18-26-37-77

    Edm   14:01    83-12-10-44-71

    PP  Van    10:01    27-10-44-24

    PP  Van      9:51        ”       ”

    PP  Van      8:53    51-13-37-77

    Van      8:36    24-71-10-83-12

    Van      8:06       ”        ”

    PP  Edm     7:49     71-44-26-10-83

    PP  Edm     7:40        ”         ”
    PP  Edm     6:53        ”         ”

    PP  Van      1:45      89-51-44-24

    PP  Van        :40        ”         ”

    Summary: 9-8 Edm; 3-2 Edm at EV; 6-6 ST

    2nd period:

    GOAL    Edm    19:07  12-83-10-37-77

    Edm    18:47  26-18-78-44-71

    Edm    18:18       ”         ”

    Edm    18:17       ”         ”

    Van     17:35    13-89-27-37-24

    Van     16:30     83-10-12-44-71

    Van     16:15        ”            ”

    Edm    16:05      26-18-78-71-24

    PP  Van     12:40      51-27-71-24

    GOAL PP Van    12:16        ”          ”
    GOAL     Van     11:27      37-77-10-12-83

    Edm       8:22      12-13-89-37-77

    Van       7:45       ”          ”

    VAn      6:54        78-18-51-77-44

    GOAL      Edm     6:30        12-83-10-71-44

    GOAL      EDm    3:48         24-44-13-89-27

    Edm     3:16          71-77-12-10-83

    Edm     2:18         PS: 24-44-18-89-78

    Edm     1:59          51-13-89-44-24

    Edm      1:50             ”             ”

    Van        :40           37-71-10-12-83

    Summary: 11-10 Van; 10-7 EV; 4-0 ST

    3rd period:

    PP    Van 77-37-27-18

    GOAL PP  Van 24-44-18-51

    PP    Edm 15:55   71-44-10-27-83

    PP    Edm  15:42       ”          ”

    SH   Van   14:52  13-12-27-37-77

    GOAL    Van; No scoring chances logged

    Edm    8:33   89-13-51-44-77

    GOAL PP  Van            83-10-24-44

    Edm     2:33   37-77-27-78-18

    Van      1:12   37-77=78-46-33

    Summary: 5-4 Van; 2-2 EV; 3-2 Van at ST

    Overall: 24-23 Van; 15-11 Edm at EV; 13-8 Van ST

    Individual:

    10 – +5/-5; +5; -4
    12 – +6/-4; +2/-1;

    83 – +5/-4; +5;  -1
    13 – +2/-2; +2/-1; -1
    89 – +4/-1; +2;     -3
    27 – +2/-2; +2/-1: +1/-6
    78 – +6/-2

    18 – +5/-3:         :     /-3
    51 – +2/-1;       ; +1/-6

    46 –    /-1

    33 –   /-1

    26 -  +4/-1;  +3

    43 -

    24 – +6/-3;       ;    -8
    44 – +11/-4; +5; +1/-7

    71 – +8/-3; +5;   +1/-2

    37 – +3/-6; +2/-1;  /-3
    77 – +5/-6; +2/-1;  /-4

    Quick conclusion: Get Brodziak and Penner off the PK and perhaps try to mix in Pouliot.

    5 Responses to Chances for/against: at Vancouver, Oct 25th

    1. October 30, 2008 at

      You’re moving quick today Dennis.

      Two entries ago I was going to post something about the correlation of Corsi+ to scoring-chances-for: A whopping r=.82 BTW, the chances of that happening by coincidence alone are abolutely staggering, hundreds of thousands to one. This unlike “errors”, where a randomly guessing monkey should be expected to create a better predictor 49 times out of 100. An element of subjectivity is the ONLY thing these metrics have in common, though surely you knew that.

      And the Corsi- to scoring-chances against was correlated r=.87.

      Then I come back in a bit and you’ve added another game. And the correlations go up to .88+ and .89-. And you pay for every inch of Pearson correlation once you’re up in these lofty numbers.

      Then you add another game and it’s +.92 and .92-.

      There’s no stopping it. It’s just insane. Whatever you’re doing, keep reasonable with it, stay the same. You’re adding a hell of a lot more value to this part of the internet than I ever have.

      Fuck me, I always thought that Buffalo (Corsi’s team) canned all their scouts in favour of video review because they thought they could do it cheaper counting scoring chances, Roger Neilson style. I’ve posted that theory at Lowetide’s, here, IOF and other places.

      It’s starting to look a hell of a lot like you could just bring in some interns, at no cost, and have them record who was on the ice for every shot directed at net, one way or the other. A monkey could do that, and at no cost there at all, it’s free with using the interns that line up outside pro sports team’s offices every spring. And I’d bet with them against Gare Joyce every time. Though I’d rather not, I like Gare. But money be money.

      You’d have to have a sense who which guys can consistently create high quality chances and which guys can finish them, but that isn’t tough once you’ve narrowed the field and pegged the guys who are vastly overrated and underrated because of the bounces.

      Damn.

      All of this just at evens of course. We’ll need a lot more games with scoring chances on special teams to make any sort of sense of that, I suspect.

    2. October 30, 2008 at

      Thanks, Vic.

      The numbers at BTN are ever moving but there has to be some way to grab the scripts and record them at some certain time, right?

      I’d really appreciate it if someone did it after the game in Car on Sat; that’s Game 10 and if we took all of his date per/60 etc, etc, and then combined it with my individual +/- for SC’s, then I’d think we’d have a pretty good idea of who’s driving the bus, who shouldn’t be behind the wheel and who’s seeing too much love and who’s seeing not enough.

      Anyway, I appreciate that you appreciate the effort. I had four games shoved on one tape and I logged three of them last night — I have the first period done of the game vs Bos and I’m hoping to get that and tonight’s game done and posted by tomorrow — and I was getting bogged down a bit and it was getting to be less and less fun.

      But I imagine that as the sample size gets bigger and bigger, it will get more rewarding.

    3. Scott
      October 30, 2008 at

      I must say Dennis that I’ve got to thank you for all the work that you’re doing. I’m really excited about the numbers coming up after the first ten game sample.

      Thanks again for all the grunt work.

    4. October 31, 2008 at

      Great stuff Dennis.

    5. December 5, 2008 at

      Totals (Player, GP, EV, PP, SH):

      05 – 3 – 08/10 – 00/00 – 00/00
      10 – 7 – 26/27 – 17/03 – 00/11
      12 – 7 – 29/22 – 08/03 – 00/00
      13 – 7 – 23/20 – 09/03 – 00/02
      18 – 7 – 22/30 – 00/00 – 02/15
      24 – 5 – 19/19 – 00/00 – 01/17
      26 – 7 – 21/23 – 16/03 – 00/00
      27 – 7 – 17/24 – 03/02 – 01/13
      33 – 5 – 03/05 – 00/00 – 00/00
      34 – 5 – 19/15 – 00/01 – 00/05
      37 – 7 – 32/31 – 09/03 – 00/13
      43 – 7 – 22/20 – 00/00 – 02/06
      44 – 6 – 25/28 – 15/03 – 02/13
      46 – 5 – 02/07 – 00/00 – 00/00
      51 – 7 – 18/19 – 00/00 – 02/13
      71 – 7 – 37/29 – 19/03 – 01/05
      77 – 7 – 29/34 – 09/03 – 00/14
      78 – 7 – 24/17 – 00/00 – 00/01
      83 – 7 – 22/25 – 17/03 – 00/01
      89 – 6 – 25/18 – 07/02 – 01/04

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *