SnuggaRUDE
Registered User
- Apr 5, 2013
- 8,947
- 6,480
After reading recent posts.. Im interested now w the above line of thinking .. Sucks ( to be interested) .. Anyway.. I bet each team has secret complicated metrics that pertain to each team .. Each line they face.. Every time variables like switching one player in and metric difference based on toi against certain lines.. Any idea if this is true and public only gets certain results of older algorithms..
I'd like to believe this is true. I think the data exists today. We know opposition by minutes for a player right? So we should be able to make an xGA blend by multiplying Opp_xGF/60 * minutes matched. Using a xGoalDiff blend would be even better.
The data will be noisy, but over a season you should get an idea of who's being leveraged correctly. Maybe plotting these by year will give us some interesting insights in to how players age, or are deployed as they age.
If you secretly value a player and no one understands the nuance.. You win..and its cheap.. How is this not picked up by eye test.. Like hitting forecheck hesitation factor etc against/ for..
The eye test is flawed for two reasons:
1. Observational biases - too many events are happening and subconsciously we filter out or highlight things which may not be relevant. And those which we don't filter we still may be assigning them incorrect weights.
2. The eye test is based upon events triggered in no small part due to skill prominence. It can be hard to tell the difference between a two super lines cancelling themselves or two mediocre lines doing the same. Against similarly skilled opposition you still need to use the same set of safe tactics, you don't mega dangle Barkov.