Monday's notes: Sea Dogs and shooters

by Dirk Hoag on May 30, 2011 9:53 AM EDT in Nashville Predators News

Here's to hoping that you enjoy this Memorial Day 2011 with family and friends, and take time to remember the sacrifice that our men and women in uniform make on a daily basis to keep our country strong and safe.

After the jump, we've got loads o' hockey news for you...

How to save money on hockey equipment during Memorial Day Weekend 2011 | Hockey Gear HQ
Need some new gear? How about some for an upcoming Father's Day gift? Take a look here before shopping...

Nashville Predators News

Hockey Night in Nashville: The season that never was
Looking back at the lost year for Matthew Lombardi.

Around the NHL

The Importance of Manny Malhotra - Houses of the Hockey
If the defensive center can actually perform in the Final like he did during the regular season, that remove a huge burden from a guy like Ryan Kesler.

Chara has become an indispensible leader - CSNNE.com
When a team does well, a certain amount of credit goes to the captain. But really, who says Chara hasn't been a good captain all along?

10 Questions: Stanley Cup finals - Cross Checks Blog - ESPN
ESPN's dynamic duo look ahead to Boston vs. Vancouver.

Red Light District: Conn Smythe Trophy Watch
5 guys to keep your eye on as the Cup Final begins on Wednesday.

Saint John wins Memorial Cup - The Globe and Mail
It looks like head coach Gerard Gallant may have an opportunity to return to the NHL after leading the Sea Dogs to junior hockey's ultimate prize.

The case for trading Jason Spezza - Silver Seven
I bet you could find an argument like this among just about every NHL fan base this summer.

Sharks should look for Penalty Kill Help during 2011 offseason - Fear The Fin
...and this San Jose fan covets Joel Ward.

Goal Rates better than Corsi/Fenwick in Player Evaluation | Hockey Analysis
Here's an example of when NOT to use correlation as a tool in statistical analysis (when the variables in question are linked by definition). David makes a bad blunder here, by looking at scoring leaders, seeing a bunch of high shooting percentages, and concluding that shooting percentage is the true "talent". The problem is that shooting percentage swings wildly from season to season, whereas shooting rates are much more consistent.

Objective NHL: Team Even Strength Shooting Talent
Jlikens parses out to what extent shooting talent (expressed as their baseline expected shooting percentage) varies from team to team, by screening out the portion attributable to random variation.

Ryan Johansen: Is It Time? - The Cannon
A look at one of Columbus' top prospects, and whether he's ready to help at the NHL level this fall.

Lowetide: Oilers Sign Jones
Does Edmonton's 2-year deal with Ryan Jones potentially block the development of young talent with more upside?

Backchecking: Commitment | Hockey Independent
Their arena situation may stink, but the Islanders are putting the pieces in place to build a better on-ice product in the years ahead.

Total Hockey launches HockeyGreen, a program to recycle composite hockey sticks | Hockey Gear HQ
Cool stuff from one online hockey equipment retailer, taking the initiative to recycle the materials in composite sticks.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

David makes a bad blunder here, by looking at scoring leaders, seeing a bunch of high shooting percentages, and concluding that shooting percentage is the true “talent”. The problem is that shooting percentage swings wildly from season to season, whereas shooting rates are much more consistent.

First off, shooting percentage and goal scoring rate (i.e. goals per 20 minutes) are not ‘linked’ any more than fenwick rate and goal rate are. Goals For per 20 minutes = Fenwick For per 20 minutes * Fenwick Shooting Percentage. If I can correlate FenF20 with GF20 then I can surely correlate FenSh% with GF20 and FenSh% is much more highly correlated, whether I use 1 year of data or 4 years of data.

Yes, shooting percentage varies widely from season to season, more so than corsi/fenwick, but that doesn’t mean it is not a ‘talent’. The variation is due to the smaller sample sizes associated with goals vs shot attempts. The question that I answered is is, how much data is needed before shooting percentage becomes the better predictor of future goal scoring? The answer I came up with was that with 2 years of data shooting percentage and fenwick rate have more or less have equal predictive value.

Finally I ask, why not just use goal scoring rate as the predictor of future goal scoring rate since goal scoring rate encompasses both the ability to generate chances (fenwick rate) and the ability to capitalize on those chances (shooting percentages). I found that the predictive value of goal scoring rate on future goal scoring rate equals or exceeds that of fenwick rate with just 1 year of data. Beyond one year of data goal scoring rate is by far the better predictor. Less than 1 year of data and corsi/fenwick is probably the better predictor.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HockeyAnalysis.com - Taking a Deeper Look at the World of Hockey

by HockeyAnalysis on May 30, 2011 1:36 PM EDT reply actions

To borrow Sam's phrase, I'll meet you halfway

1. Running a correlation between shooting percentage and goal-scoring gets befouled because by definition, a higher shooting percentage means that at least a decent amount of goals are being scored. It is impossible, for example, to have a zero goal-scoring rate with a non-zero shooting percentage. While a high shooting percentage can indeed drive results, the preponderance of evidence shows that there isn’t much variation in individual players’ ability to post a high shooting percentage from one season to the next – those wide swings are mostly noise.

2. I’m open to the idea of including shot-quality into a projection model for individual goal scoring, but I’d favor an approach more like what JLikens followed in the article linked above – by teasing out the “talent” from the noise and using that rather than the raw data.

Managing Editor of On the Forecheck, SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators, and HockeyGearHQ, a site devoted to hockey equipment. Catch me on Twitter, or join OTF on Facebook!

by Dirk Hoag on May 30, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Running a correlation between shooting percentage and goal-scoring gets befouled because by definition, a higher shooting percentage means that at least a decent amount of goals are being scored.

Does it? That’ll depend on how many shots are taken. You can have a shooting percentage of 50% but only score 1 goal if you only get 2 shots. Plus, every player I used in my study had ample ice time and a number of goals scored while they were on the ice. The minimum 1 year goal total was 6 and 99% had more than 14 and 90% had more than 22 so the zero scoring rate is a non-issue.

Anything that you require be done for shooting percentage you should require be done for fenwick rate. Remember, we are dealing with a very simple equation here:

goal rate = fenwick shooting percentage * fenwick rate

If I am allowed to correlate fenwick rate with goal rate then why must I utilize another technique for fenwick shooting percentage?

FYI, the correlation between 2007-09 (2yr) fenwick shooting percentage and 2009-11 (2yr) fenwick shooting percentage is 0.50 which is less than the 2yr vs 2yr correlation for fenwick per 20 minutes (r=0.66) but does indicate a ‘talent’.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HockeyAnalysis.com - Taking a Deeper Look at the World of Hockey

by HockeyAnalysis on May 30, 2011 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions

How to Sign Joel Ward

If the Predators got $10 from HockeyGreen for every one of Joel Ward’s broken sticks, they’d make enough to give him the raise he deserves and pocket the change.

by Hockey Hillbilly on May 30, 2011 1:55 PM EDT reply actions

Doubt we'll ever see Lombardi on the ice again

Hope Poile learned a lesson. Never EVER, EVER, sign a player you can’t get insurance on. A 1 year deal might have been worth the gamble, but 3 years for $10.5 mil is a HUGE gamble, especially for a low budget team like the Preds, on a player like Lombardi with his past injury issues. I was excited when we signed him….until I read the details. If he does come back, GREAT. But this doom and gloom pissed off Preds fan is gonna just think he’ll sit on his ass and collect his paychecks for less than 4 periods on the ice in a Preds jersey.

by SFPredsFan on May 30, 2011 3:28 PM EDT reply actions