Sharktistical Analysis: SER 2, Electric Boogaloo
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 9:48 AM PST
in Statistical Analysis
24 comments
If there's one thing I know, it's stats. If there's another thing I know, it's Fear the Fin readers. You are hungry for more Sharktistical Analysis...starving even.
It's ok. Mamma bird is here. I've chewed up some new Skater Efficiency Rating information for you, and I'm ready to regurgitate and fee...
Ok, I think that analogy is getting pretty thin/disgusting. But I do have a new and improved SER sheet that does almost exactly what I want it to. The last sheet put too heavy of an emphasis on punishing players for taking penalties, which is fixed. All in all, it's pretty perfect.
Since the Sharks have a few days off, I thought it would be a good time to compute each player's SER... so I did.
Remember, the SER calculates a player’s efficiency per minute per game, and does not measure intangibles. I think that we would all agree that Murray, Staubitz, and Shelley bring more to the table than pure stats, but so far I’ve been unable to assign a value to kickin’ ass. Here are the current rankings.
| SER | |
| Jamie McGinn* | 34.52* |
| Dan Boyle | 16.03 |
| Patrick Marleau | 13.25 |
| Devin Setoguchi | 12.52 |
| Ryane Clowe | 10.39 |
| Joe Thornton | 10.09 |
| Milan Michalek | 10.02 |
| Joe Pavelski | 9.83 |
| Chrstian Erhoff | 9.72 |
| Marc-Edouard Vlasic | 7.90 |
| Jonathan Cheechoo | 7.28 |
| Thomas Plihal | 6.45 |
| Lukas Kaspar | 6.33 |
| Mike Grier | 5.99 |
| Rob Blake | 5.18 |
| Jody Shelley | 4.03 |
| Marcel Goc | 3.02 |
| Brad Lukowich | 2.48 |
| Jeremy Roenick | 1.01 |
| Doug Murray | 0.74 |
| Alexei Seminov | -0.63 |
| Brad Staubitz |
-1.06 |
*Sample Size: 5 G, 5:40 ATOI
Note that McGinn's number is high due to the relatively low minutes he played over his 5 games with the big club. He most likely wouldn't be able to sustain that kind of production over a season. That being said... DAMN! He sure was good in his limited minutes here.
I was surprised that Dan Boyle was in the lead when I first computed the values, but looking at his play it really seems as if he has been the heart and soul of the team so far (with stong supporting roles played by Patty and the Goochmaster).
If you disagree with the rankings, let me know. Feel free to comment, I appreciate your (polite) feedback. For anyone who is wondering, a league-average player sits in the 4-6 point range.
To any who received version 1.0, 2.0 is on the way. I know, I'm awesome.
0 recs |
24 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Weight?
Maybe I’m the only other stat geek here, but after looking at the spreadsheet, I notice you are weighting certain stats more than others. SHG are worth more than PPG, but SHA and PPA are worth the same. Can you explain how you arrived at these numbers?
by mepex on Nov 19, 2008 10:58 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Weight
Weight is only applicable to those two stats and it is based on frequency. As PPG’s occur more often based on league averages, they should therefore be worth less. Although it may seem like I used abritrary numbers in the spreadsheet, the weighting took the longest out of everything and was eliminated from the calculations (i.e. I hard keyed the equation results in after rounding). It wasn’t the easiest thing to come by.
With the SHG weighting, I also wanted to attempt to assign some sort of premium to playing on the PK. That also was used in the frequency calculations. In a perfect world, I would use the Goals Created statistics as I did with even strength goals. With the PPG and SHG, I did the work on a general basis and added them in later. It’s crude, I know, but without being able to automatically pull stats (off of websites etc.) it becomes alot of work for the common fan to use the spreadsheet. I also used basic NHL fantasy methods to play into the weighting overall. It comes down to being the best possible number that involves the least amount of work. Hope that answered your question… I’m out of breath.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Correction, first sentence...
*worth less than SHG.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like you are also weight GWG highly, which is a bit dubious IMHO. As far as PPG and SHG, you are also using regular G, so in essense you are rating PPGs higher than even strength goals, and SHG higher still. I’m not saying that weighting these stats one way or another doesn’t make sense, but it does seem to be the pivot upon which players are rated.
by mepex on Nov 19, 2008 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Understood...
but bear with me in the fact that I didn’t just throw this out there without doing research first. Hollinger (the NBA analyist) wrote a whole book about his PER, and in no way was I going to go as in depth. As much as I would like it to be, FTF isn’t a full time job for me and I can’t devote the time it would take to put together something that would be the end all be all of statistical analysis. I provided you with the spreadsheet to share my work, if you would like to alter it, feel free. I analyzed most every team in the league while testing it, and the results made sense. That’s all I needed.
I did rate PPG and SHG higher for a reason. If they weren’t rated higher, the minutes spent on the powerplay would actually decrease a players rating. Example: if Setoguchi and Plihal both scored 8 goals, yet Setoguchi was on the powerplay and therefore played more minutes, he would have a LOWER SER than Plihal even though he was worth more to the team. Same with shorthanded situations. If you look at the numbers that come out of the equations, the Goals Created caclation still carries the heaviest weight.
GWG are weigted most highly, and this can be an undestandable point of contention. However, here’s the thing. Without that goal, the team is still tied. I took the idea of the weight from something called player point share which I came across a while ago. Also, if were looking at statiscial categories and effect on team play, what is more telling than GWG’s – It’s kind of the “clutch” stat.
Again, it’s not perfect. I simply said that it was a way to compare players based on the aggregate of their stats. I’m happy with the results, and although people can disagree with almost everything about it, I think that the results given make sense.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 2:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
I don’t mean for this to be a specific critique on your method. I think we share the sentiment that most NHL stats are woefully inadequate, and your method, even with whatever minor peccadillo I or anyone else might have with it, it still a step in the right direction. I just like discussing/arguing about this sort of thing.
by mepex on Nov 19, 2008 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No problem dude...
You were nice about it and I welcome your comments. The only way this thing is going to get better is through use and criticism… We’ll try to revamp it again later in the year.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The numbers line up pretty well with my preconceived notions, so I will accept it as gospel.
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on Nov 19, 2008 11:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Great Program
I really like what you’ve done. I agree speakly solely stats, this program is quite accurate. Awsome work
by M.Nicks on Nov 19, 2008 11:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
A gun-toting hillbilly has an appreciation for numbers? Who would have known……
;)
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Remember, the SER calculates a player’s efficiency per minute per game, and does not measure intangibles. I think that we would all agree that Murray, Staubitz, and Shelley bring more to the table than pure stats, but so far I’ve been unable to assign a value to kickin’ ass.
That’s the only problem I can see- the focus on offensive numbers.
Other than that, what jumps out at me is Ryane Clowe’s relatively high SER, especially compared to Thornton and Pavelski. I would assume that will drop off in the next twenty games (considering he gets no PK time etc.).
I’ll take a look at the spreadsheet tonight. Excellent work!
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 12:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That's an issue I'm going to be working on...
But it’s not going to work for everyone. I’m pretty content with that fact that it only measures offensive stats, because it would be hard to mash offensive and defensive stats together. I was thinking about using hits, but that stat is so hard to measure accurately.
If we settle for it being accepted to calculate offensive numbers only, i think it would be useful.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh it definitely has its place, and one I think is very applicable to analyzing the team.
The only thing I could think of (in terms of measuring the “worth” of a defensive player) would be shots for and against when on the ice along with goals for and against.
Hits is sort of an arbitrary stat for these purposes- it’s possible to lay out a guy but take yourself out of the play, and therefore negate the positive affect of the hit.
Time spent on the penalty kill is a good indicator but it sorts of speaks for itself.
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and that mama bird analogy definitely needs to be retired. None of this Brett Favre back and forth either.
Lay that one to rest ;)
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 12:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It shall never be used again...
doesn’t mean I won’t find another equally horrible one to break out.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's A Stat For Ya
The average human has one breast and one testicle.
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 3:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I still can't believe
you didn’t like the mamma bird mental picture.
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 3:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Do I really have to explain why you regurgitating food into our mouths is unappealing?
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 3:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Gawsh,
It was in a statistical sense!
by That'll Cheech You on Nov 19, 2008 3:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who knows
It might age like a fine wine. Only time will tell.
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 19, 2008 4:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A little slurry wine…..mmmmmmm
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on Nov 19, 2008 5:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Fear The Fin
Related FanShots on Fear The Fin
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
