What advanced stats would you track?

[eklunds source]

Oh. Also like to see blocked shots expressed as a percentage of shots that were taken. Should better differentiate which players are actually good at throwing themselves in front of pucks, and which players just happen to allow a ****-ton of shots against and get beaned by them.

 

[tigervixxxen]

That has about a 90-95% correlation to shot attempts. People don't bother tracking it because it doesn't provide more useful information than what we already have.

Teams do track time of possession so it must have some use. If it ends up being that closely correlated then fine but I'd still like to see both. Maybe it will be better to see statistical anomalies and to try and figure out how and why those occur to have a different way of measuring the same thing.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

What I don't understand about the advanced stats is this, if to develop the stat one needs a person who understands what's going to input credible data-(i.e. # of scoring chances created-they need to understand what actually created the scoring chance) wouldn't that knowledgeable person just be documenting his eyeball test?

If the person tracking stats wasn't knowledgeable about the nuances, what good is the data?

 

[thom]

Impossible to get but coaching game plan would be best-which players are the most dangerous according to coach and how to stop them-to me that would be the best

 

[The Bob Cole]

Not sure if already done, but would love to see a study on the (one would assume increased) probability of a goal and/or penalty taken with each unsuccessful puck clear of a teams own zone. ES and SH.

 

[HockeyGuy73]

I may be in the minority, but the advanced stats are taking the fun out of the game for me, especially in baseball. I guess for coaches and the teams, they may be helpful, but I spend half my time trying to figure out what all these new stats mean, and forget to enjoy watching the game.

 

[Mr Lebowski]

All of them except the last one

 

[The Bob Cole]

Not sure if already done, but would love to see a study on the (one would assume increased) probability of a goal and/or penalty taken with each unsuccessful puck clear of a teams own zone. ES and SH.

And there ya go, OT GWG off was it, 3(?), unsuccessful clearing attempts. The eye test really makes it seem like the odds of the next shot being a goal is higher. Must be the gaps/positional play and perhaps some exposure due to fatigue that creates more openings for teams in the o-zone. But, again, could be nothing without numbers to back it up and I'm just noticing cases that 'prove' the rule and ignoring others.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

Just did my first attempt at zone entry tracking in the first two periods of tonight's Chicago-LA game.

Goodness. Seasoned zone entry trackers have my respect because this stuff is DIFFICULT.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Just did my first attempt at zone entry tracking in the first two periods of tonight's Chicago-LA game.

Goodness. Seasoned zone entry trackers have my respect because this stuff is DIFFICULT.

Agreed - especially watching on TV, it's a mental challenge.

That's why I stick to tracking the goalies - we don't move.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

Especially in real-time. Presumably, it's easier to do so when watching on online archive where if you missed something (I had plenty of "null's" because I didn't know which D threw a long pass from his own zone to the O-zone), you just go back a few seconds on the timer and problem solved.

I'll do this again and I look forward to it. If nothing else, it forces great attention to detail when watching a hockey game, which isn't the worst thing in the world.

@ShutdownLine on twitter is working on this for this past season and will make the data available when completed for a price.

In addition, this paper that was published for the Sloan Sports Conference, which includes @ShutdownLine (and @BSH_EricT, among others) is an initial abstract on the idea of controlled vs. noncontrolled zone entry dichotomy, and that controlled zone entries yield a much higher amount of scoring opportunities in the long run. Feel free to give this a read (that's anyone, not just the poster I'm quoting).

 

[supsens]

Especially in real-time. Presumably, it's easier to do so when watching on online archive where if you missed something (I had plenty of "null's" because I didn't know which D threw a long pass from his own zone to the O-zone), you just go back a few seconds on the timer and problem solved.

I'll do this again and I look forward to it. If nothing else, it forces great attention to detail when watching a hockey game, which isn't the worst thing in the world.



In addition, this paper that was published for the Sloan Sports Conference, which includes @ShutdownLine (and @BSH_EricT, among others) is an initial abstract on the idea of controlled vs. noncontrolled zone entry dichotomy, and that controlled zone entries yield a much higher amount of scoring opportunities in the long run. Feel free to give this a read (that's anyone, not just the poster I'm quoting).

Bah I can't read pdf on here. lol. Do you know if they do controlled vs noncontrolled or controlled vs dump in and get possession?

 

[Kramerica Industries]

They seem to be a bit more broad and define entries under "controlled" and "dumped in". I know that, when I did my tracking last night, I was controlled vs. noncontrolled because, to me, a dump in is where you throw the puck in from the NZ to the end board. If a non-control entry was received somewhere between the blue line and the end line, that's not really what I personally consider a dump in, myself, so I didn't make that distinction. If I may quote a passage:

The difference between carrying the puck in and dumping it in is usually clear, but the line between a pass with possession and a dump-in is occasionally tricky, as are some miscellaneous entries (e.g. when a player carries the puck back into his own zone and then turns it over). Additionally, since the goal is to assess offensive and defensive performance, plays where the offense dumps the puck in and goes for a line change without making any attempt to recover the puck were excluded, which introduces a bit more subjectivity.

I ran into some trouble with this myself early last night. There were four icing calls in the first few minutes, and I gratuitously counted those as entries, but I probably shouldn't have.

 

[soireeculturelle]

Id love to have RTSS stats (shot attempts, deployment, etc) for juniors, NCAA, AHL and european leagues. that plus some equivalence formulae would really do wonders for projecting future performance of young players.

 

[Thirty One]

Touches of the puck. Divided by areas on the ice, and how many of them are immediately followed by a shot on goal or a teammate getting a touch.