Weekly Playoff Probabilities and Some Thoughts on Pulling the Goalie
This week in addition to posting the updated weekly playoff probabilities I want to address a question often asked, "When is the best time to pull the goalie?" But first let's take a look at the predicted final standings, with some additional notes, and address that goalie question after the jump.
Tables sortable, click headers to sort columns.
Although the playoff probabilities weren't posted last week I ran the sim to get the movement in the last column which represents the change in playoff probability from 2/11. Big movement for PHX, CGY, and NSH in west, while LA, COL, and DAL lost some big ground. OTT made a huge jump (up 19.5%!), and WPG is looking like they're going to put up a good fight for that last playoff spot. That last spot right now is up for grabs as TOR, WPG, and WSH all have around a 43% chance of making the playoffs. It looks as though PDO will play a big factor in deciding that last spot.
The question of when to pull that goalie has been discussed quite often, as far back as some dudes writing in an operations journal in the mid 70s. Most recently Beaudoin and Swartz, a couple of Canadian statistical professors, detailed the most extensive model I've seen, and came to the conclusion that an average team down 1 goal to an average team should pull their goalie much sooner (somewhere around 3 minutes), and pull their goalie when down 2 with a ton of time left (somewhere around 6 minutes). Because their database is proprietary we can't access it and get all graph happy with it. Instead I used a simplified version on their model; a simple Poisson distribution that neglects special teams. The graph below shows the inflection point at which it makes more sense for the road team down 1 to pull their goalie. (Note my data suggest pulling a little bit sooner).
For a detailed explanation of expected points, which is essentially the average "standings points" teams acquire at a certain point in the game, see here.
The perfect example is last night's game against DET. The sharks, like most team's behind 2 goals, were out shooting DET late in the game. However as the graph above indicates, coming up with 2 goals in a short amount of time in the 3rd is improbable. As one might expect the sharks were able to claw to 1 goal behind with 4:44 left. But that lone goal was all they were able to muster. As you can probably guess where I'm going with this, a more aggressive strategy, at least in theory, would have given them a better shot at tieing the game.
If we specifically look at the "down 2 goals" data we can see where the sharks might have opted to take a more aggressive approach. As one might deduce, the risk/reward ratio starts to shift heavily late in the 3rd. A team down 2 that pulls their goalie is more likely to be scored on, but increases (approximately doubles) their chance scoring. Usually they will get scored on, but on occasion they will tie up the game. Around the 6-8 minute mark, a team that pulls their goalie will tie the game up more often than a team that continues to play at even strength.
A word of caution before you go screaming to your local HS hockey coach to pull the goalie in the 2nd period. These statistics are based on teams that are likely to lose. In fact, the strategy of pulling the goalie earlier when down 1 will only net you about 2-3 points over the course of the entire season, and less than 1 point while down 2. So although these statistics argue for pulling the goalie earlier, the return isn't amazing (like what's been argued for going for it on 4th down), and putting up with all the media crap for pulling your goalie with 6min left in the third down 2 definitely isn't worth it. If I was a head coach the extra couple points in the long run for pulling the goalie earlier when down 1 might be worth looking at though.
I'll save methods for the comments section, but please ask away if you have any questions or comments.
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Basically you’re asking if in higher scoring games teams should pull their goalie later? In theory yes. But what I think this draws attention to more importantly is why it changes. The fact that more goals have been scored previously doesn’t really matter. The only thing that matters is how likely a trailing team is to score 5v5, and how likely they are to score 6v5 (and/or the opposing team to give up a goal).
The model is based on an average team’s Goals/Game, but better teams are more likely to score with greater frequency. This allows them to keep their goalie in longer, as the chance they score with the time that remains in the game is greater. In last night’s game, one could argue that DET and SJ are evenly matched, and we can assume things will play out similar to the graph above. But if SJ was playing CLB things would shift. They could wait longer to take the goalie out because they are more likely to score sooner 5v5.
If we increase the trailing team scoring rate by 20%, which is approximately adjusting for an elite team vs. one of the worst. My data shows a movement from pulling the goalie with about 4:16 left to play, vs 2:16 left to play when down 1. This shows that even if the best team is playing the worst team, it still appears teams wait too long to pull the goalie by about a minute.
Thanks, great work as usual.
A feature that might be worth adding would be % of winning division. In the pacific division, you have the Sharks, Kings and Coyotes who could all possibly slot to a 3 seed or be in 6-8 range because of the division. Then in the SE you have Florida up just one point on Winnipeg and two on Washington and those last two teams are currently sitting 9th and 10th. So for a handful of teams the way they get in might make a big difference.
Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines
I usually post the spreadsheet will all that information in the post, but for some reason I didn’t. You can follow that link to the 2nd set of data (below the first, row 35) which shows cumulative probabilities.
FLA, WSH, and WPG win the division 47%, 24%, 23% respectively, so its very close right now. Clearly for the SE winning the division is more important than any other division, as that may be the key to a playoff birth. The Sharks take the division in 78% of sims, which isn’t a man-handle, but they’re clearly in the driver seat.
This is fantastic stuff
I’m a researcher here for the State of Illinois (criminal justice stuff), and we use these predictive models pretty frequently. We’re actually planning on getting some training on Poisson models in the near future. These are the kinds of stats I like to see, ones that actually tell you how to proceed in the future, as opposed to what a player has done retrospectively. One of these days I’d love to throw some numbers in a logistic regression and see what factors play into winning a cup. Good work Snark.
glad your enjoying it
Yea, I’m always talking about the difference between predictive and descriptive statistics. With hockey it’s difficult because the immediate results (winning a game) is heavily influenced by the descriptive statistics. Hockey and soccer are perfect for poisson models, you might find Jared’s article over at Copper&Blue pretty fascinating, he’s doing some great work with poisson-esque stuff as well.
Thanks Snark.
Great stuff. The possession numbers seem to highlight the disparity between the conferences – just two Eastern Conference teams are 52% score-adjusted Fenwick or higher while five teams in the West are. At least one terrific team is going to get knocked out of the first round in the Western Conference.

by 

























