Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger
How did you get the expected goals number? Is that an advanced stat you pulled from somewhere?
|
It is a statistic from corsica.hockey. Here is the formal definition:
Quote:
xG stats are by-products of assigning goal expectancy to shots. In my mind, this ability to assess shot quality is most important, though supplying information with which to devise better evaluative metrics is a welcome benefit. The model is similar in nature to that of @DTMAboutHeart,3 with some important distinctions. The most important difference is his inclusion of regressed shooting talent. I chose to exclude shooter talent not because it isn’t an important factor, but rather because I fear players may unfairly benefit or suffer from their linemates’ aptitude. Here’s what my model does account for:
Shot type (Wrist shot, slap shot, deflection, etc.)
Shot distance (Adjusted4 distance from net)
Shot angle (Angle in absolute degrees from the central line normal to the goal line)
Rebounds (Boolean – Whether or not the shot was a rebound)
Rush shots (Boolean – Whether or not the shot was a rush shot)
Strength state (Boolean – Whether or not the shot was taken on the powerplay)5
|
Quote:
|
And if so, how is that calculated? Shots vs avg shooting pct league wide or something? Does it account for the quality of shots?
|
In a nutshell, yes, but you can read up more on it here:
http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/...d-goals-part-i