Fuzzy Analytics

[saltming]

Those metrics showed that Adam Brooks was worthy of being a late first round pick in the 2016 draft.

Well then isn't that good value for a free wallet?

 

[saltming]

The stuff that we have created as human beings for military, space exploration, and lots of scientific applications is honestly amazing. The stuff that we're talking about here has existed for decades - 1980's apache helicopters had those landscape-mapping domes with very accurate targeting using motion capture/prediction, and EA has been using those motion capture setups to make the player movements look realistic in games since the early 2000's at least. It seems futuristic but really just applying stuff we've had for a long time

Would also make the stats kept much more reliable than the human being-tracked ones now too

Very nifty.
The video coach will be completely redefined.

 

[Mr Hockey*]

I think very few on here understand adv stats, all I here is shot suppression and possession from these guys

 

[Menzinger]

Things we know - the Leafs value analytics so much they established their own department AND they seem to value a combination of public stats (ie Dubas has made multi references to things like Zone Entries, Corsi, ect) AND they the team has been developing their own internal metrics using different things (Ie soon after Dubas came on board the ACC installed new player tracking camera system, ect).

However, for better or for worse not EVERY decision the team makes will be stats driven.

Polak - his stats are terrible, but I strongly suspect he was signed for his off ice/dressing room presence Han his lousy on ice play. I'd wager he go sober the season helping the young guys in the AHL.

Martin Is an interesting case too. His shot supression numbers are intriguing for the type of player he is. My theory on him is that either Lou/BBacock said "I want a physical guy for the 4th line" and the stats guys found the best one they could get (just speculation in my part).

Overall though the Leafs appear to be one of the more progressive minded teams in the league when it comes to stats analysis (they just hired a new video-stats guy today) and I doubt this team ever makes a major move without it being backed up by the numbers.

 

[Menzinger]

I think the Dubas quotes are interesting. I agree with them with how I see analytics develop. Already, and perhaps more so in the coming years, we'll see how standardized, generic metrics such as possession impact will become an integral part of how players are evaluated.

That will lead to a point where teams will attempt to find exceptions to the general rules, players that perhaps impact quality more profoundly than quantity and thus would be undervalued in a market that relies on quantity as a measurement.

That doesn't mean that possession metrics will lose their meaning, just that regardless of how complete measurement metrics and systems we come up with, teams will seek an advantage by finding those that are not evaluated accurately.

I don't believe in a formula for success. I do believe there's a formula for team-level improvement though, and I think that goes through the market inefficiencies that Dubas mention.

Yep - and as teams catch up it will be up to the forward thinking guys to come up with new stats or new uses for older stats to keep that competitive edge.

I also don't believe here is any formula for team or player success - you just need to maximize all available data and draw your conclusions case by case.

 

[saltming]

Things we know - the Leafs value analytics so much they established their own department AND they seem to value a combination of public stats (ie Dubas has made multi references to things like Zone Entries, Corsi, ect) AND they the team has been developing their own internal metrics using different things (Ie soon after Dubas came on board the ACC installed new player tracking camera system, ect).

However, for better or for worse not EVERY decision the team makes will be stats driven.

Polak - his stats are terrible, but I strongly suspect he was signed for his off ice/dressing room presence Han his lousy on ice play. I'd wager he go sober the season helping the young guys in the AHL.

Martin Is an interesting case too. His shot supression numbers are intriguing for the type of player he is. My theory on him is that either Lou/BBacock said "I want a physical guy for the 4th line" and the stats guys found the best one they could get (just speculation in my part).

Overall though the Leafs appear to be one of the more progressive minded teams in the league when it comes to stats analysis (they just hired a new video-stats guy today) and I doubt this team ever makes a major move without it being backed up by the numbers.

I did not know that.
The future is now.

 

[4thline]

I'm looking forward to the next generation of Analytics - what we currently use focuses on Correlation rather than Causality, because it's all derived from the result data of what happened when Player A was on the ice and often contrasted against what happened when they weren't. I believe within the next 5-10 years we'll see technology implemented that will actually track player actions (movements, ability to create gaps, close gaps, outcomes as a result of each player's affect on a play etc) that will help move us towards statistics that focus on Causality. Should get to be an interesting time to be an analytical fan.

This stuff and it's application is definitely in development Hockeytech has been partnered with the University of Waterloo testing and calibrating it. The wearable tech can be pretty simple, just a clip-on unit to the pants strap on the back. Down side is the shattering pucks haha

 

[Randy Randerson]

This stuff and it's application is definitely in development Hockeytech has been partnered with the University of Waterloo testing and calibrating it. The wearable tech can be pretty simple, just a clip-on unit to the pants strap on the back. Down side is the shattering pucks haha

I think they'll end up modifying the hardware to make it a little more durable and less bothersome to the players. I was thinking powered RFID tags like they use for wildlife tagging would work well, they can track whales and sharks accurately to thousands of feet of depth so that seems like it would work well. I guess the pucks are tough though because you make a void in the middle, but they'll figure it out. I can't believe they don't have this in place for calling goals yet....like visual obstruction wouldn't matter and you'd have 100% accuracy for knowing if a puck crossed the line

 

[4thline]

I think they'll end up modifying the hardware to make it a little more durable and less bothersome to the players. I was thinking powered RFID tags like they use for wildlife tagging would work well, they can track whales and sharks accurately to thousands of feet of depth so that seems like it would work well. I guess the pucks are tough though because you make a void in the middle, but they'll figure it out. I can't believe they don't have this in place for calling goals yet....like visual obstruction wouldn't matter and you'd have 100% accuracy for knowing if a puck crossed the line

Yeah the RFID is what they use, in high level implementation I'd figure that they'd be mounted semi permanently into equipment, but they wanted to put them through as many reps as possible so we'd be putting them on for intramural games and rotating two sets.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Yeah the RFID is what they use, in high level implementation I'd figure that they'd be mounted semi permanently into equipment, but they wanted to put them through as many reps as possible so we'd be putting them on for intramural games and rotating two sets.

ya that's what I thought too, just manufacture compartments into the skates, shin pads, pants, shoulder pads, helmet, elbow pads and gloves for them and use a standard size for the RFID tag. I'm sure there will be some hiccups, but this seems like such an obvious application and much more hospitable of an environment than some of the others already in use like underwater and extreme cold

That's awesome though, very excited for this to be widely available, will revolutionize analytics in pro sports and free up all that salary for stats trackers to be used on analysts

 

[Kurtz]

Players don't need to wear any chips or bracelets. Technology already exists that tracks everything you need without it. The future's already here, but few know about it.

Check out a 2 minute video that explains some of what's happening:
http://sportlogiq.com/


Whichever teams are currently using these guys have a far deeper (not to mention precise) data on every player.

 

[SEER]

Salt's mind..

My "view" of fuzzy analytics.., when I first read this..

 

[saltming]

Salt's mind..

My "view" of fuzzy analytics.., when I first read this..

Hahahaha.

Well played sir!

 

[4thline]

Players don't need to wear any chips or bracelets. Technology already exists that tracks everything you need without it. The future's already here, but few know about it.

Check out a 2 minute video that explains some of what's happening:
http://sportlogiq.com/


Whichever teams are currently using these guys have a far deeper (not to mention precise) data on every player.

That's super interesting, thanks for posting.
The fact that a team hasn't bought them out to make it proprietary or keep other teams from getting it speaks to either

A. How good our secret stuff is
B. Sportlogiq sticking to their guns and shutting the attempt down
C. A huge ****ing mistake haha

 

[saltming]

Players don't need to wear any chips or bracelets. Technology already exists that tracks everything you need without it. The future's already here, but few know about it.

Check out a 2 minute video that explains some of what's happening:
http://sportlogiq.com/


Whichever teams are currently using these guys have a far deeper (not to mention precise) data on every player.

That is crazy!!
Thanks for the link.
I hope the leafs are in on this.
Somebody tweet this to Dubas.

 

[SEER]

Hahahaha.

Well played sir!

Cheap man's humor..., while we wait for more good news..

Have a good one, Salt..

 

[saltming]

Cheap man's humor..., while we wait for more good news..

Have a good one, Salt..

A good laugh is priceless!
Thanks SEER, enjoy the days.

 

[The CyNick]

It's comical that people rely on advanced stats that are driven from data that is not consistent from arena to arena. For example, any stat involving turnovers or hits is useless.

All these fancy stats are great for water cooler stuff, or to read through while waiting for your car to be detailed. However relying on them will get to the unemployment line very quickly. Just watch games. You can tell who the good players are.

 

[Randy Randerson]

It's comical that people rely on advanced stats that are driven from data that is not consistent from arena to arena. For example, any stat involving turnovers or hits is useless.

All these fancy stats are great for water cooler stuff, or to read through while waiting for your car to be detailed. However relying on them will get to the unemployment line very quickly. Just watch games. You can tell who the good players are.

I'll agree on the inconsistent quality of data collected, though I'm sure that every effort is made for this to be as consistent as possible because the data is relied upon for decision making.

However, I think every NHL team has an analytics department, so very much disagreed that they don't perceive value from these stats.

 

[Nithoniniel]

In my own database (yes, I'm that much of a hockey nerd), I adjusted for arena bias by simply normalize using numbers away from the arena.

You were 20% more likely to get credit for a hit in Toronto compared to away from it. So I used that number to deflate Toronto's home numbers, adding them to the away numbers for an adjusted total.

And just watching the games doesn't just mean that you intentionally use less information, it also puts you completely in the hands of cognitive bias. I also think being aware and able to adjust for your bias is more or less mutually exclusive with the arrogance of thinking that your impressions is all you need to figure out the truth of things.

 

[The CyNick]

In my own database (yes, I'm that much of a hockey nerd), I adjusted for arena bias by simply normalize using numbers away from the arena.

You were 20% more likely to get credit for a hit in Toronto compared to away from it. So I used that number to deflate Toronto's home numbers, adding them to the away numbers for an adjusted total.

And just watching the games doesn't just mean that you intentionally use less information, it also puts you completely in the hands of cognitive bias. I also think being aware and able to adjust for your bias is more or less mutually exclusive with the arrogance of thinking that your impressions is all you need to figure out the truth of things.

I've been watching hockey long enough to trust my own eye vs a spreadsheet littered with untrustworthy data. I don't need a computer to tell me Peter Forsberg was a good player. I could tell by watching him dummy teams.

If you could just go by stats, you wouldn't need scouts or even GMs for that matter. You would just enter the data into a computer and it would tell you if a trade is fair or which players are the best. Everyone would have the same list and value the players the same way.

Like I said, stats are fun for us hockey nerds, but I guarantee there will be a long list of "analytics guys" on the unemployment line when they realize their faulty data led them astray.

 

[Randy Randerson]

I've been watching hockey long enough to trust my own eye vs a spreadsheet littered with untrustworthy data. I don't need a computer to tell me Peter Forsberg was a good player. I could tell by watching him dummy teams.

If you could just go by stats, you wouldn't need scouts or even GMs for that matter. You would just enter the data into a computer and it would tell you if a trade is fair or which players are the best. Everyone would have the same list and value the players the same way.

Like I said, stats are fun for us hockey nerds, but I guarantee there will be a long list of "analytics guys" on the unemployment line when they realize their faulty data led them astray.

No one needs analytics to know that dominant players are good, but how about comparing Jake Gardiner to Cam Fowler, for example? When you put the players in context, those advanced stats paint a very different picture than your eye test will give you.

I believe what you'll find is actually happening is that the "old school" mentality hockey people (scouting and Hockey Ops) are starting to go the way of the buffalo in favour of the nerds: See Dubas, Chayka

 

[Mr Hockey*]

I am an eye test guy myself but advanced stats are interesting. You can get a decent idea of how a player plays and how he is used, etc without even seeing him play.

 

[Kurtz]

I've been watching hockey long enough to trust my own eye vs a spreadsheet littered with untrustworthy data. I don't need a computer to tell me Peter Forsberg was a good player. I could tell by watching him dummy teams.

There are 2,460 NHL games during a season. What % of those do you get to watch?


Scouts do watch more games than you or I, but different scouts produce vastly different evaluations, as you well know. Hell, the same scout may produce two vastly different evaluations on the same player depending on if they or the player have had a bad day or are in a good/bad mood.

Why do team scouts regularly pick busts in the top 10 picks? Why do NHL stars regularly come out from 2nd or 5th or 7th rounds?

Scouting by eye is extremely imperfect. Stats are imperfect as well, but they are getting better.

 

[Joey Hoser]

I've been watching hockey long enough to trust my own eye vs a spreadsheet littered with untrustworthy data. I don't need a computer to tell me Peter Forsberg was a good player. I could tell by watching him dummy teams.

If you could just go by stats, you wouldn't need scouts or even GMs for that matter. You would just enter the data into a computer and it would tell you if a trade is fair or which players are the best. Everyone would have the same list and value the players the same way.

Like I said, stats are fun for us hockey nerds, but I guarantee there will be a long list of "analytics guys" on the unemployment line when they realize their faulty data led them astray.

It's really about volume of information. You might watch a guy fail to clear the puck of the zone a few times in a game when given the opportunity and conclude he handles the puck like a grenade and is a danger in his own zone. Nothing wrong with such an analysis, but you don't watch this guy play 80 games a year, looking into the data might reveal that he actually does do it well enough on a consistent basis.

It's also easy to fall into a trap where you see the make a few mistakes, and now you're looking for it every time he steps on the ice, and when it happens you're all like "yup see, knew it about this guy", when in reality it isn't much of a problem for him overall.(Phaneuf "can't hit the net" comes to mind).

There's all kinds of unavoidable subtle bias' like that which can be mitigated by looking at the numbers. If you think your opinions are "unbiased", then you don't know much about the types of bias' that exist and how they work.

I'm not into analytics, but that's just because my opinions aren't important enough to care. I'm not making any decisions for any teams. If I were, I would check ALL my work, because that's kinda what GM's do for a living. Anyone can watch a game and say this guy is good and this guy sucks, but you aren't going to improve or get better than the next guy by doing that.