Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Just to be clear. You are the person claiming that the data is unreliable. That's the claim. I haven't made any besides insinuating that criticising stats generally comes with a lack of understanding them. So far you seem to be supporting that. If there is a systemic bias in the data then we should observe issues with it in the analysis. So back up your claim. What are the problems with it? I'm not saying it's above reproach, I just want more than platitudes like some guy named New Era on the internet knows that the data is biased or incomplete.
|
This is pretty simple stuff, even for the Stats 101 set. If statistics are not gathered the same way, using the same criteria for evaluating an action, and maintaining the same level of integrity in judging events, the data then becomes unreliable. I see all sorts of differences in what is considered a shot in the same game let alone different buildings and different data collectors.
When the league can't train its on and off ice personnel to consistently identify what a particular penalty is, and enforce that with any consistency, how can you honestly sit there and smuggly say that off ice officials are also not using similar subjectivity to collect stats? There is no consistency in data collection. Just closely watch one game and compare the stats you collect versus that presented during the broadcast and in the box score afterwards. A great example was last night's game between Edmonton and Phoenix. The Coyotes spent a good minute in the offensive zone and had several close in shots on goal than were never registered on the shot clock. On the other side of the ice a dump in ended up on net was judged a shot on goal. Sure makes those Corsi stats look good for the Oilers! Also makes the advanced stats look bogus. And that is just one game in one building in the league. The same thing happens all over the league, affecting every stat. That is why regular stats are questionable, but when you start making inferences adding multiple stats together to make another statistical category, well the data errors are compounded and the data becomes useless.
To believe that the statistics are meaningful means you have to believe the data collection is accurate and consistent, which has been a problem for as long as hockey has been around, let alone now where teams are hiring these advanced stats guys to dream up new and improved ways to prove their teams are better than they really are. When guys like Mudcrutch, who have made some of the dumbest claims in the history of the game (and has the stats to back himself up) are hired by NHL teams, well, the system is wide open for abuse. I think last nights game was another example of this abuse in action and is a shining example of why these advanced stats are garbage.