Patmac40
BESTPOSTERINTHEGAME
My name is Pat, I'm 20. Currently studying to become a chartered accountant. Always have been strong in math including statistical analysis in university. I look forward to all the interesting studies put together.
Introduce yourself!
- Thread starter Bear of Bad News
- Start date
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
I'm danishh, i'm a sens fan and a mod here. I spend time on the business board and am quite interested in CBA issues and team business issues.
Though i am currently studying physiology, I wrote my IB extended essay in economics (on the effect of the NHL lockout on the economy, specifically a few local businesses (bars/pubs in ottawa both near and far from the arena).
I have a passing interest in hockey player performance metrics but if i contribute here it will likely be more on the team/business side of things, maybe looking at payroll vs performance, market size/type vs attendance or profit, that sort of thing. It was said that BTN will be a board somewhere in between HoH and BoH, and i'll fall closer to the BoH line.
Though i am currently studying physiology, I wrote my IB extended essay in economics (on the effect of the NHL lockout on the economy, specifically a few local businesses (bars/pubs in ottawa both near and far from the arena).
I have a passing interest in hockey player performance metrics but if i contribute here it will likely be more on the team/business side of things, maybe looking at payroll vs performance, market size/type vs attendance or profit, that sort of thing. It was said that BTN will be a board somewhere in between HoH and BoH, and i'll fall closer to the BoH line.
Patmac40
BESTPOSTERINTHEGAME
theoil
Registered User
I don't think this is quite correct. Abandonment would presuppose the presence of the skill at some point in the past. Although this is undoubtedly correct in the broadest sense it does not take into account skill levels. We can all broad jump - invitations to perform that skill at the Olympics uses a more selective process.
This isn't meant to be sarcastic or condescending to anybody. I just think it needed to be said.
Just as everybody has a certain level of mathematical skills that abandon them as the situation takes on more complexity or requires mastery of certain axioms or formulations so too does logic fall prey to similar difficulties. Those you refer to as refusing to logic are not refusing - they simply aren't very good at it.
Nobody has had more time to reflect on this than long suffering Oilers' fans who were first on this board to feel the onslaught of statistical analysis from those neither qualified in mathematics nor logic. That board was invaded by the psuedo statisticians as early as 2003 - the PDO referred to in another thread is the creation of one of the posters from that board as was the aberration performed on Corsi and its subsequent permutations. We were the 'By the Numbers' board for many long years and Oilers' blogs are still the breeding ground for much of the discussion.
This is an introduction thread, however, so I should introduce myself. I am an old, retired fart who did his graduate work in philosophy. Political Philosophy to be more specific.
I have a strong interest and skepticism in numerical analysis and its predictive abilities as applied to hockey. I am hoping to learn things here.
Czech Your Math
I am lizard king
Yes, I may have not used proper logic when talking about people's ability to use logic.
I guess I think people should be able to use basic logic more than basic math. Math relies on basic logic, but logic does not really rely on math. Maybe I'm wrong about this as well, but that's my perspective.
My main point is this: You don't need to have advanced math skills to contribute to this topic in some way. If you want to do a study of some kind, or be part of the discussion, don't limit yourself by your perceived ability. You don't need anything more than basic algebra for the vast majority of studies presented here, and nothing more than basic stats for many others. Also, if you still don't believe your skills are up to task, don't be afraid to make a post in the "Ideas for future studies thread" or do something similar to that. If you do so, it's likely someone will provide you with some input that may assist you in selecting a good approach to the study, including specific methodologies or calculations necessary to complete it. If not, at least someone may take the ball and run with it at some later time.
theoil
Registered User
Hehe. That might be where your frustration finds its source. It is almost certainly the other way around. Logic relies on reasoning powers. That is much rarer than basic math skills.
Trust me on this.
kdb209
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2005
- 14,870
- 6
I might as well join the party.
I'm a hardware engineer with an EE/CS degree. I've been interested in sports statistical analyses since reading the Bill James' Baseball Abstracts way back when.
I stumbled upon hfboards BoH board during the Lockout (I had occassionally looked at the Hockeys Future stuff for prospect & draft info) - and I've been trapped there ever since.
Ohh - and I can't resist the opportunity to make a totally gratuitous Python reference.
I'm a hardware engineer with an EE/CS degree. I've been interested in sports statistical analyses since reading the Bill James' Baseball Abstracts way back when.
I stumbled upon hfboards BoH board during the Lockout (I had occassionally looked at the Hockeys Future stuff for prospect & draft info) - and I've been trapped there ever since.
Ohh - and I can't resist the opportunity to make a totally gratuitous Python reference.
I fully agree with this and it seems broadly related to this (IMO) seminal piece: Irreverent Oiler Fans 2010/01
As for an introduction, my name isn't really Barney. I was an accountant and then I was abducted by people who told me I needed more formal math and economics training to have a career at a research university. So there I am.
Hello, just noticed this new forum, cool idea. I'm an accounting and finance major, I've only taken 2 university-level statistic courses so I'm far from an expert, but I do have most of the required knowledge to do hockey-based advanced statistics analysis - at least I like to believe so.
Being a big fan of Karlsson and a big defender of his alleged "bad defensive play", most of my analysis has (will) focus on the best defensemen in the NHL.
Being a big fan of Karlsson and a big defender of his alleged "bad defensive play", most of my analysis has (will) focus on the best defensemen in the NHL.
Dalton
Registered User
Great forum. I've enjoyed using math on sports since the time when calculators were larger than today's cell phones. Mine had a standard deviation button to go along with basic operations, pi, square root and memory keys. Before that I used a pencil and many large erasors.
I love cosmology and earned a degree in pure math. Along the way I found an interest in the history of math and cosmology. My interests are mostly on theory but I have been known to get obsessive compulsive towards calculations.
IMHO this kind of forum represents the Internet at it's best, reflective of it's roots perhaps. I look forward to lurking and throwing in my two cents from time to time.
One big question: How does one get hockey stats onto one's own computer? Do I have to copy and paste year by year? Is it possible to have a database (for spread sheet use) available for download to users of this forum?
ATM I'm interested in player stats. I want every player's goals and assists. If we can't dl then maybe we can contribute to a project to compile them here. I believe this would greatly enhance outcomes in this forum. TY
And thanks to all those responsible for creating this forum.
I love cosmology and earned a degree in pure math. Along the way I found an interest in the history of math and cosmology. My interests are mostly on theory but I have been known to get obsessive compulsive towards calculations.
IMHO this kind of forum represents the Internet at it's best, reflective of it's roots perhaps. I look forward to lurking and throwing in my two cents from time to time.
One big question: How does one get hockey stats onto one's own computer? Do I have to copy and paste year by year? Is it possible to have a database (for spread sheet use) available for download to users of this forum?
ATM I'm interested in player stats. I want every player's goals and assists. If we can't dl then maybe we can contribute to a project to compile them here. I believe this would greatly enhance outcomes in this forum. TY
And thanks to all those responsible for creating this forum.
Hello all, occasional HF lurker myself but I thought I'd put in my two cents.
My name is Patrick and I hold a Ph.D. in Statistics and work for the federal government. My main work relates to problems in surveys specifically using "small area estimation" but I'm still young so I'm more at the "any port in the storm and whatever gets me a paper". I'm more of a modeler than a sampling-based estimation person.
My main research involve "small area" (hierarchical) models, Bayesian methods and techniques (I'm more of a pragmatist), with some knowledge and interest (waning) in spatial methodologies, and profess an interest in generalized linear models (Poisson, Binomial, etc.) So, in principle, I am more of a generalist... which I've been told isn't useful. Tough being a researcher who is more interested in product dev and getting useful stuff done. But I suppose researchers aren't supposed to be useful.
I don't spend much time doing recreational sport statistics unless somebody poses me a really good problem and I want to work on it. I'd rather be working on my post-Ph.D. life... I worked to have fun... my turn.
I'm usually a good sounding board for things but as a Ph.D. statistician I'm not a fan of canned analysis or doing stuff because you can. Just because you have a chainsaw doesn't mean you should use it to build a birdbath.
The main sources of issues in sports analytics is data access. A lot of gate keepers out there and many of them want $$$. After all, if you can give somebody a competitive edge somebody will want to do something with it.
I've got some toy problems I wouldn't mind working up just as a matter of pushing the question but nothing I would consider hard and sound analysis. For instance, presume a Poisson model and assume its correct (yes, assumptions... they're needed) then when do you pull the goalie? I've programmed this one up before and the question is a bit more open-ended than one would think... but I think I'm not the only one who has come to this conclusion. On the other hand, nobody has tied the bow on it and presented it... I think... I'm behind on my reading of JQAS. Nevertheless, simplistic engineered exercises can sometimes tip the worldview.
My opinion is those who will push the problems along will be a person good at data processing working with somebody who has a measured hand at analytics. Keep things simple and don't promise the world.
i think there's a few good opportunities for high-level bachelors or masters students to work on a toy problem or two. Don't expect the world out of it, but use it as a vehicle to get better at operating with data and programming statistical mathematics (SAS, R, C, Fortran, or otherwise...).
Keep it a healthy hobby. Nobody should try to expect to recreate Shakespeare. If you do, don't try to go through peer review... and don't call it shakespeare. Especially if it isn't. Which reminds me... I have a referee report to submit.
My name is Patrick and I hold a Ph.D. in Statistics and work for the federal government. My main work relates to problems in surveys specifically using "small area estimation" but I'm still young so I'm more at the "any port in the storm and whatever gets me a paper". I'm more of a modeler than a sampling-based estimation person.
My main research involve "small area" (hierarchical) models, Bayesian methods and techniques (I'm more of a pragmatist), with some knowledge and interest (waning) in spatial methodologies, and profess an interest in generalized linear models (Poisson, Binomial, etc.) So, in principle, I am more of a generalist... which I've been told isn't useful. Tough being a researcher who is more interested in product dev and getting useful stuff done. But I suppose researchers aren't supposed to be useful.
I don't spend much time doing recreational sport statistics unless somebody poses me a really good problem and I want to work on it. I'd rather be working on my post-Ph.D. life... I worked to have fun... my turn.
I'm usually a good sounding board for things but as a Ph.D. statistician I'm not a fan of canned analysis or doing stuff because you can. Just because you have a chainsaw doesn't mean you should use it to build a birdbath.
The main sources of issues in sports analytics is data access. A lot of gate keepers out there and many of them want $$$. After all, if you can give somebody a competitive edge somebody will want to do something with it.
I've got some toy problems I wouldn't mind working up just as a matter of pushing the question but nothing I would consider hard and sound analysis. For instance, presume a Poisson model and assume its correct (yes, assumptions... they're needed) then when do you pull the goalie? I've programmed this one up before and the question is a bit more open-ended than one would think... but I think I'm not the only one who has come to this conclusion. On the other hand, nobody has tied the bow on it and presented it... I think... I'm behind on my reading of JQAS. Nevertheless, simplistic engineered exercises can sometimes tip the worldview.
My opinion is those who will push the problems along will be a person good at data processing working with somebody who has a measured hand at analytics. Keep things simple and don't promise the world.
i think there's a few good opportunities for high-level bachelors or masters students to work on a toy problem or two. Don't expect the world out of it, but use it as a vehicle to get better at operating with data and programming statistical mathematics (SAS, R, C, Fortran, or otherwise...).
Keep it a healthy hobby. Nobody should try to expect to recreate Shakespeare. If you do, don't try to go through peer review... and don't call it shakespeare. Especially if it isn't. Which reminds me... I have a referee report to submit.
ted2019
History of Hockey
ted2019
History of Hockey
I love Math & stats, but find it hard to figure out formulas and what formulas to use. A lot of this stuff is very confusing to Me and I still have a hard time wrapping My head around certain analytics.
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,521
- 27,024
I never did do this way back when...
I have a doctorate in mathematics (optimization theory), and played goaltender at the ACHA level in graduate school.
Now I try to combine those two characteristics in my research at http://hockeygoalies.org.
I have a doctorate in mathematics (optimization theory), and played goaltender at the ACHA level in graduate school.
Now I try to combine those two characteristics in my research at http://hockeygoalies.org.
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
Hi folks,
I pop in here the odd time if something catches my eye. Mathematics beyond grade 9 was never my strong suit. In fact when I was in grade 12 grinding out a 59, my brother was in grade 11 cruising to a 99. We both had the same teacher. I'm not a huge fan of possibilities, probabilities or adjusted stats, but I believe in taking in alternative perspectives to enhance my understanding/knowledge. Some of it is still very interesting. I worked in social services for years, experienced burnout and now I cut greens on a golf course. If you've read any of my posts, at times I try to bring in alternative perspectives from my base of knowledge. My love for the game dwindled in the late 90's early 00's, but has since rekindled with the rule changes, mostly because of the way the refs are calling the game. I am a purist at heart though and wish for the NHL to rethink its use of technology particularly in equipment and sticks. I also think we should do something like this in the history section since so many of us post regularly there. I really enjoyed learning about the other members. Love that quote on logic from Czech Your Math.
Cheers,
LBD
I pop in here the odd time if something catches my eye. Mathematics beyond grade 9 was never my strong suit. In fact when I was in grade 12 grinding out a 59, my brother was in grade 11 cruising to a 99. We both had the same teacher. I'm not a huge fan of possibilities, probabilities or adjusted stats, but I believe in taking in alternative perspectives to enhance my understanding/knowledge. Some of it is still very interesting. I worked in social services for years, experienced burnout and now I cut greens on a golf course. If you've read any of my posts, at times I try to bring in alternative perspectives from my base of knowledge. My love for the game dwindled in the late 90's early 00's, but has since rekindled with the rule changes, mostly because of the way the refs are calling the game. I am a purist at heart though and wish for the NHL to rethink its use of technology particularly in equipment and sticks. I also think we should do something like this in the history section since so many of us post regularly there. I really enjoyed learning about the other members. Love that quote on logic from Czech Your Math.
Cheers,
LBD
Hey guys, I'm Jack.
I currently work for the media department of an NHL team and write a weekly (more or less) column which sometimes uses advanced stats to examine player performance. Usually the articles are more player-centric and history-driven than the kind of analysis on the good online blogs (and I read them all), that's to make it a bit more accessible to the casual fan.
I don't have a math background but did study economics and business stats in university back in the day. What I find really interesting is how numbers can be used to revisit traditional narratives and project for future outcomes.
I currently work for the media department of an NHL team and write a weekly (more or less) column which sometimes uses advanced stats to examine player performance. Usually the articles are more player-centric and history-driven than the kind of analysis on the good online blogs (and I read them all), that's to make it a bit more accessible to the casual fan.
I don't have a math background but did study economics and business stats in university back in the day. What I find really interesting is how numbers can be used to revisit traditional narratives and project for future outcomes.
Last edited:
Hi everyone,
I'm not too familiar with advanced stats but I do find the growing use of analytics to be interesting. I have a PhD in economics and currently have a post-doc where I also teach econometrics at the undergraduate level. As someone who mostly do applied microeconometric research, I have limited knowledge of how to model predictions, which seems to be the type of models that most people doing advanced stats are interested in. I do wonder whether the next step in advanced stats will be to switch focus to estimation of causal effects (just as applied econometric research was revolutionized in the late '90s). For instance, there is a lot discussion of the predictive nature of CORSI, but as far as I know, no attempts to estimate whether it would be beneficial for teams to adapt their strategy to focus on outshooting their opponents.
I'm not too familiar with advanced stats but I do find the growing use of analytics to be interesting. I have a PhD in economics and currently have a post-doc where I also teach econometrics at the undergraduate level. As someone who mostly do applied microeconometric research, I have limited knowledge of how to model predictions, which seems to be the type of models that most people doing advanced stats are interested in. I do wonder whether the next step in advanced stats will be to switch focus to estimation of causal effects (just as applied econometric research was revolutionized in the late '90s). For instance, there is a lot discussion of the predictive nature of CORSI, but as far as I know, no attempts to estimate whether it would be beneficial for teams to adapt their strategy to focus on outshooting their opponents.
My name is Michael. I'm a stats prof at a US college with a PhD in stats. I've done some analyses on hockey data and these can be found HERE
I read this site about once a week.
I'm a believer that analytics/statistics alone is a non-starter but that analytics can provide insight that watching a game cannot. In large part this is because our brains are not wired to process well 'events that don't happen'. Faceoff wins that don't lead to goals, for example. Best read on this topic is Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow which should be required reading for anyone who wants to comment, pro or con, on analytics in any field.
I read this site about once a week.
I'm a believer that analytics/statistics alone is a non-starter but that analytics can provide insight that watching a game cannot. In large part this is because our brains are not wired to process well 'events that don't happen'. Faceoff wins that don't lead to goals, for example. Best read on this topic is Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow which should be required reading for anyone who wants to comment, pro or con, on analytics in any field.
hatterson
Registered User
Hmm, apparently I never did this.
I'm Hatterson, I have a BS in mathematics and computer science and am currently one of the local mods. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the forums, feel free to send me a message and I'll do what I can to help.
I'm far from an expert in the world of advanced stats, merely an avid follower. I, like the vast majority, don't believe that stats can ever tell the entire story, and that a basic understanding of the game is required to even know where to begin looking at things. However, stats do a decent job of eliminating the bias that our brains can add to things, confirmation bias being one of the biggest ones in sports.
I'm Hatterson, I have a BS in mathematics and computer science and am currently one of the local mods. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the forums, feel free to send me a message and I'll do what I can to help.
I'm far from an expert in the world of advanced stats, merely an avid follower. I, like the vast majority, don't believe that stats can ever tell the entire story, and that a basic understanding of the game is required to even know where to begin looking at things. However, stats do a decent job of eliminating the bias that our brains can add to things, confirmation bias being one of the biggest ones in sports.
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,521
- 27,024
Couldn't agree more on this point (and several around here are probably tired of hearing my proselytizing on the subject
).
DoobeeDoobeeDoo
The Doobster
- Jul 3, 2013
- 1,509
- 9
I love to quantify things as much as possible, but with a sport like ice hockey, which is so dynamic, it's sort of hard to do. I do enjoy seeing what types of stats come from the analysis tho. Always makes for a great conversation IMO.
Stu here. Longtime lurker - just signed up. I generally research raw data from years gone by. Started the HSP back in 2001. Current project involves compiling SOG stats from 1927-28 season from the official game sheets. Cheers!
