Post-Game Talk: Thanksgiving Holiday Massacre: The Sequel (Wild 6 Jets 1)

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well that was a hard game to watch. You could tell from the drop of the puck pretty much the entire team wasn't ready to play.

I'm not enjoying Connor’s game right now. He has some indecision and tentativeness, he's not really attacking the defense with speed.

I'm not going to beat up on the kids but Perfetti and Heinola were pretty awful. For a guy who's strengths are supposed to be passing and exits , Ville looked very Niku esque. You'd think a kid who was dissatisfied with not making the team out if TC would have a chip on his shoulder but I see someone who's still not ready for prime time.

I disagree with you wholeheartedly, which is ok.

Or purest scorer is Connor, abs he went from being snakebit, to imo losing confidence. He's not generating much. Why no pot him query the guy who helped him almost score 50?

Wheeler on the top line is an awful idea. Everything is dying with him right now

I dunno, "why no pot him query"?
Are you using @surixon 's phone?

 

[Atoyot]

I think you need to review the difference between conspiracy and bias.

Nobody here, that I recall, has ever claimed a conspiracy among referees. But there are some referees with a strong bias and if you look at the long-range statistics, it certainly shows.

And not all biases are for/against a team. There was an analysis done about a decade ago by a kid getting his master's in stats and he looked at an interesting question: after a goal is scored, which team gets the next penalty?

I don't recall the exact number - and I can't find the damn article - but in something like 80% of the time, the next penalty is called against the team that scored last. And according to the gobbledegook of the kid's thesis, this was way beyond the laws of random chance and showed a clear bias by referees.

Today we call that game mangement. But statistically it shows that referees usually show a bias. Not a conspiracy, just a bias.

I'm aware of the difference and know that game management is a thing, what was implied had nothing to do with game management.

There was also talk yesterday of the league rigging games because they've invested so much into sports betting.

 

[Jets 31]

I think you would have been very disappointed.

Up until the end of April, I was a lifetime Vancouver Canucks fan.

Hey no problem as long as you would have been cheering for the Jets too.

 

[Slimy Sculpin]

I think you need to review the difference between conspiracy and bias.

Nobody here, that I recall, has ever claimed a conspiracy among referees. But there are some referees with a strong bias and if you look at the long-range statistics, it certainly shows.

And not all biases are for/against a team. There was an analysis done about a decade ago by a kid getting his master's in stats and he looked at an interesting question: after a goal is scored, which team gets the next penalty?

I don't recall the exact number - and I can't find the damn article - but in something like 80% of the time, the next penalty is called against the team that scored last. And according to the gobbledegook of the kid's thesis, this was way beyond the laws of random chance and showed a clear bias by referees.

Today we call that game mangement. But statistically it shows that referees usually show a bias. Not a conspiracy, just a bias.

Maybe not quite what you're referring to but.... This is just the abstract. (I've got the complete paper and will peruse it.) Google Scholar can be a wonderful thing.

Reversal of fortune: a statistical analysis of penalty calls in the National Hockey League

Jason Abrevaya & Robert McCulloch

January 2014

Abstract: This paper analyzes a unique data set consisting of all penalty calls in the National Hockey League between the 1995–6 and 2001–2 seasons. The primary finding is the prevalence of “reverse calls”: if previous penalties have been on one team, then the next penalty is more likely to be on the other. This pattern is consistent with a simple behavioral rationale based on the fundamental difficulty of refereeing a National Hockey League game. Statistical modeling reveals that the identity of the next team to be penalized also depends on a variety of other factors, including the score, the time in the game, the time since last penalty, which team is at home, and whether one or two referees are calling the game. There is also evidence of differences among referees in their tendency to reverse calls.

 

[Jets 31]

Not quite. I think she got booted because the good luck wore off. There was a PC element too, but it was the losing that finished her here.

With our team last season what wasn't a losing GDT?

 

[Jet]

I mean the first goal against Carolina came off a Wheeler pass right up the gut. Last night he set up Perfetti point blank and Perfetti missed his chance. I would say that's an overly harsh criticism of Wheeler.

I'm not sure guys like Eyssimont or Axelsson-Fjallby are going to make as many plays as Wheels does. It's not like they have more talent. Puck retrieval ability is only a limited talent.

I guess if the goal is to get Connor scoring more Dubois centering him makes sense. But then Scheifele-Perfetti have generated nothing, but trouble. Seems like an inverse problem, where you might stop Scheifele from scoring by giving him the inferior winger. Perfetti doesn't create space in the offensive zone like Connor does buzzing around.

Maybe it's worth a shot though.

All valid points.

I'm usually not so critical of Wheeler but I've just seen a lot of turnovers from him recently so a bit of bias.

 

[Stumbledore]

Maybe not quite what you're referring to but.... This is just the abstract. (I've got the complete paper and will peruse it.) Google Scholar can be a wonderful thing.

Reversal of fortune: a statistical analysis of penalty calls in the National Hockey League

Jason Abrevaya & Robert McCulloch

January 2014

Abstract: This paper analyzes a unique data set consisting of all penalty calls in the National Hockey League between the 1995–6 and 2001–2 seasons. The primary finding is the prevalence of “reverse calls”: if previous penalties have been on one team, then the next penalty is more likely to be on the other. This pattern is consistent with a simple behavioral rationale based on the fundamental difficulty of refereeing a National Hockey League game. Statistical modeling reveals that the identity of the next team to be penalized also depends on a variety of other factors, including the score, the time in the game, the time since last penalty, which team is at home, and whether one or two referees are calling the game. There is also evidence of differences among referees in their tendency to reverse calls.

Wow, I'm impressed, Slimy! I think this is exactly what I was referring to, although it looks like I forgot more than half the results. Then again, it's been several years since I retired so I'm surprised my brain still retained that much.

I think what I read was an article about these guys' paper so perhaps it focussed on just one or two aspects of their results. At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Thanks again for finding this!

 

[Jets 31]

We will win tomorrow because the game isn't on Sportsnet.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

With our team last season what wasn't a losing GDT?

Sure - but we stopped getting lucky wins with those "Plain Jane" GDTs. I recall you even stating as much. Therefore you would stop doing them. Feel free to correct me if I am misremembering.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

We will win tomorrow because the game isn't on Sportsnet.

Speaking of SN ........... I almost hate to say it, but the pbp and colour men we have had for these 3 games have been OK. In the Car game I forgot who was doing it. I caught myself thinking, hey that can't be Sawyer, he is actually saying something! Then I remembered it was SN. I never did catch the name of the guy. He wasn't super outstanding or anything. Just listenable.

 

[Atoyot]

Speaking of SN ........... I almost hate to say it, but the pbp and colour men we have had for these 3 games have been OK. In the Car game I forgot who was doing it. I caught myself thinking, hey that can't be Sawyer, he is actually saying something! Then I remembered it was SN. I never did catch the name of the guy. He wasn't super outstanding or anything. Just listenable.

There were a few times that they said something, the replay showed something different, and they either stuck to their guns or made up something else. Couple examples were the Gustafsson/Foligno high stick, which I can understand missing it just fine it wasn't obvious at all, but then they were talking about how he was kicked by his own teammate and like, it's fine to just say "I'm not sure what happened there". The other was the first goal where they said multiple times that it just beat Helle and he probably wants it back, despite the replay clearly showing that Helle saved it and the rebound went off Morrissey and back in the net. The color guy also called Kaprizov Kiprusoff twice that I can remember. And he knew the second time, there was a big pause before he said the name where you just know he was trying to sort it out in his head but he never got there

But actual play by play was decent.

 

[Stumbledore]

Sure - but we stopped getting lucky wins with those "Plain Jane" GDTs. I recall you even stating as much. Therefore you would stop doing them. Feel free to correct me if I am misremembering.

It would have taken more than Plain Jane's luck to overcome the problems that the team had last year. I'd vote for bringing her back.

 

[Jets 31]

Sure - but we stopped getting lucky wins with those "Plain Jane" GDTs. I recall you even stating as much. Therefore you would stop doing them. Feel free to correct me if I am misremembering.

Ya we were losing so i agree but it was all the hubbub surrounding it by a poster that ultimately made me say file it we don't need the arguments that were happening because of it.

 

[Inanna]

I've been advocating for a "Fancy Axel" GDT in response to all the salacious comments about poster's wives being ready to cheat with him if given the chance. Maybe that could be our new good luck, and wouldn't offend against political correctness since apparently those comments about AJF were all good.

I don't think anybody was talking about cheating. It was more like banking a few memories to call up for when your libido is lagging or you want to go solo. But if posting Axel is good luck for the team, then post away. And if it turns out that he doesn't bring us any good luck, then post away.

 

[Jets 31]

I don't think anybody was talking about cheating. It was more like banking a few memories to call up for when your libido is lagging or you want to go solo. But if posting Axel is good luck for the team, then post away. And if it turns out that he doesn't bring us any good luck, then post away.

 

[SUX2BU]

Speaking of SN ........... I almost hate to say it, but the pbp and colour men we have had for these 3 games have been OK. In the Car game I forgot who was doing it. I caught myself thinking, hey that can't be Sawyer, he is actually saying something! Then I remembered it was SN. I never did catch the name of the guy. He wasn't super outstanding or anything. Just listenable.

I believe it was Jamal Mayers

 

[10Ducky10]

Speaking of SN ........... I almost hate to say it, but the pbp and colour men we have had for these 3 games have been OK. In the Car game I forgot who was doing it. I caught myself thinking, hey that can't be Sawyer, he is actually saying something! Then I remembered it was SN. I never did catch the name of the guy. He wasn't super outstanding or anything. Just listenable.

The color guy for the Canes is Tripp Tracy.

 

[Slimy Sculpin]

Wow, I'm impressed, Slimy! I think this is exactly what I was referring to, although it looks like I forgot more than half the results. Then again, it's been several years since I retired so I'm surprised my brain still retained that much.

I think what I read was an article about these guys' paper so perhaps it focussed on just one or two aspects of their results. At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Thanks again for finding this!

I've been retired for a few years, too so I can make some time to give the paper (and others if I can find them) a thorough read and report back. Not sure when though. Cheers.