HockeyPops
Registered User
- Aug 20, 2018
- 7,570
- 6,594
Goal Share Project
So, I have been working on this project for a little while and I am finally ready to share. The purpose is to provide an alternative to plus/minus (not a great stat) when looking at who is on the ice for goals for and against.
Unfortunately we don't have ice time statistics for the players, or else we could look at things like GF/60, GA/60 etc.
What I decided to do was look at Goal Share. Why Goal Share? Well, it takes into account volume since it's a percent of total goals scored while you were on the ice. Goal differential doesn't (ie. a goal differential of +3 is great if you were on for 3 goals for and 0 goals against, but just ok if it was 53 for/50 against).
Methodology. Time consuming data dump from the OHL website for this season's Greyhound games. Recorded each goal scored and who was on the ice for each. Marked whether it was even strength or PP/PK. Marked whether a goalie was pulled. For the time being, I am filtering out any goals that were not even strength or if a goalie was not in the net (at either end). My intent was to see how each player was performing at even strength after filtering out the noise.
Results
Here is a table of the results. In my opinion, anyone with a relatively high goal share percent is performing well compared to their teammates in their current usage, and is a potential candidate for more ice time or moving up the lineup to play against tougher competition. The reverse is true for low percentage. In the table below I have both the full season to date (including last night's games), as well as the last 10 games. YTD, this methodology includes 152 goals for and 155 goals against. Feel free to ask any questions or post any comments. Enjoy.
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
So, I have been working on this project for a little while and I am finally ready to share. The purpose is to provide an alternative to plus/minus (not a great stat) when looking at who is on the ice for goals for and against.
Unfortunately we don't have ice time statistics for the players, or else we could look at things like GF/60, GA/60 etc.
What I decided to do was look at Goal Share. Why Goal Share? Well, it takes into account volume since it's a percent of total goals scored while you were on the ice. Goal differential doesn't (ie. a goal differential of +3 is great if you were on for 3 goals for and 0 goals against, but just ok if it was 53 for/50 against).
Methodology. Time consuming data dump from the OHL website for this season's Greyhound games. Recorded each goal scored and who was on the ice for each. Marked whether it was even strength or PP/PK. Marked whether a goalie was pulled. For the time being, I am filtering out any goals that were not even strength or if a goalie was not in the net (at either end). My intent was to see how each player was performing at even strength after filtering out the noise.
Results
Here is a table of the results. In my opinion, anyone with a relatively high goal share percent is performing well compared to their teammates in their current usage, and is a potential candidate for more ice time or moving up the lineup to play against tougher competition. The reverse is true for low percentage. In the table below I have both the full season to date (including last night's games), as well as the last 10 games. YTD, this methodology includes 152 goals for and 155 goals against. Feel free to ask any questions or post any comments. Enjoy.
All | L10 | ||||||
F | A | GS% | F | A | GS% | ||
6 Holmes | 20 | 11 | 65% | 4 | 0 | 100% | |
37 Roth | 4 | 3 | 57% | ||||
23 Kerins | 58 | 47 | 55% | 10 | 6 | 63% | |
26 Pytlik | 49 | 40 | 55% | 3 | 12 | 20% | |
21 O'Rourke | 57 | 47 | 55% | 4 | 11 | 27% | |
12 Kartye | 53 | 45 | 54% | 8 | 14 | 36% | |
24 MacKay | 41 | 35 | 54% | 7 | 3 | 70% | |
19 Carroll | 38 | 34 | 53% | 5 | 4 | 56% | |
18 Trott | 55 | 51 | 52% | 5 | 13 | 28% | |
11 Constantinou | 47 | 45 | 51% | 9 | 10 | 47% | |
28 Watson | 8 | 8 | 50% | 3 | 0 | 100% | |
13 Boudreau | 20 | 21 | 49% | 2 | 1 | 67% | |
7 Wawrow | 28 | 30 | 48% | 3 | 2 | 60% | |
3 Wale | 32 | 35 | 48% | ||||
8 LeGuerrier | 60 | 70 | 46% | 9 | 14 | 39% | |
71 Dickinson | 34 | 42 | 45% | 6 | 5 | 55% | |
9 Calisti | 53 | 66 | 45% | 13 | 13 | 50% | |
15 Johnston | 35 | 44 | 44% | 6 | 7 | 46% | |
20 Peca | 37 | 47 | 44% | 5 | 9 | 36% | |
25 Mufarreh | 9 | 15 | 38% | 1 | 1 | 50% | |
14 McLean | 13 | 25 | 34% | 3 | 1 | 75% | |
17 Halushak | 4 | 10 | 29% | 0 | 1 | 0% |
Last edited: