Quote:
Originally Posted by V
I assumed that Hits, Blocked shots and Takeaway/Giveaway differential actually defines grittiness. Silly presumption, I know, but it's somewhere to start.
I took each statistic and divided it by the total TOI for that player. This gives me a value for Hits/min, or BS/min or TGDiff/m. Then I normalized the value by prescribing it a z-value. Basically, (value - average) / stdev. This at least tells you how far off the average this player is in a certain stat. One of the biggest problems I have with his model is that hits and blocked shots and differentials are on completely different scales, yet they aren't weighted in any way at all. At least by normalizing the data I can give them a little bit of reference.
|
So in your mind:
1) hitting and blocking shots and winning or losing puck battles is a waste of effort? All hockey players should be striving to increase their shots on net and scoring stats? The team with the top two scorers (TB) should win at least most of the time. aside: only 19 of the top 30 scorers last year were on teams in the playoffs.
2) There is no statistical way to show that a player is soft relative to his peers and some players contribute to a team's effort in playing more physical?
3) the leader in the take-ways ( average of the top 30 Def - in 2012 40/yr) needs to weighted to be the equivalent of the leader in hits ( Average of the top 30 hitting D Men 190/yr) and blocked shots (top 30 average 160).
A hit, a blocked shot and a Take-away and a give away are all hockey events. Why in the world would you feel a need to make a takeaway and give away worth 5 hits? or 4 Blocked shots?
weighting for an explanation
