HockeyStatCards ranks every jet by average Game Score. Who surprises you?
April 12, 2024
HockeyStatCards ranks every jet by average Game Score. Who surprises you?
5 comments
I’ll be the first to say that I didn’t expect Perfetti to be this high given how often Bowness healthy scratches him. I’ve always liked what I’ve seen from him.
I’m surprised Perfetti is so high up, and that Iafalo is so low given that I don’t really see him make mistakes and can be used in a bunch of ways. Barron also seems low, but he barely sees the ice and I assume this is an overall stat, and not a per 60 mins stat.
I know who I’m not surprised by… Morrissey and Pionk
*”The stats I used are goals, primary assists, secondary assists, shots on goal, blocked shots, penalty differential, faceoffs, 5-on-5 corsi differential, 5-on-5 goal differential.*
*The second step is figuring out how to weigh each component. To keep things simple, I opted to weigh each stat by its frequency to goals and round up/down to keep the sig digs low. Initially I used derivatives of*[ *Matt Cane’s weighted shots model*](http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/from-the-ottawa-hockey-analytics-conference-looking-at-weighted-shots/)*, but opted for this route instead for simplicity and to cater more towards the individual stats versus the on-ice ones (using Cane’s weights, corsi ended up explaining more of Game Score at the game level than individual points did). Realistically, there’s many ways to go about this and I don’t doubt there’s a better way, this is simply mine.*
*I then had to scale the weights down by 75 percent in order to make Game Score roughly equal to points, so that people would be immediately familiar with what a good or bad Game Score looks like. (Corsi, blocked shots, and faceoffs were already worth very little so they weren’t scaled back any further, especially because I superficially liked the nice round numbers).*
Maybe because I look at these after every game not many shock me and it’s why I’ve been on the Perfetti bandwagon because it backs up what I’ve been seeing. I think sometimes people subconsciously form opinions based on things like size and speed which aren’t independent of their ratings. It’s not that he is thie productive but he is big/small, that big/small fast/slow are already in the data.
5 comments
I’ll be the first to say that I didn’t expect Perfetti to be this high given how often Bowness healthy scratches him. I’ve always liked what I’ve seen from him.
I’m surprised Perfetti is so high up, and that Iafalo is so low given that I don’t really see him make mistakes and can be used in a bunch of ways. Barron also seems low, but he barely sees the ice and I assume this is an overall stat, and not a per 60 mins stat.
I know who I’m not surprised by… Morrissey and Pionk
*”The stats I used are goals, primary assists, secondary assists, shots on goal, blocked shots, penalty differential, faceoffs, 5-on-5 corsi differential, 5-on-5 goal differential.*
*The second step is figuring out how to weigh each component. To keep things simple, I opted to weigh each stat by its frequency to goals and round up/down to keep the sig digs low. Initially I used derivatives of*[ *Matt Cane’s weighted shots model*](http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/from-the-ottawa-hockey-analytics-conference-looking-at-weighted-shots/)*, but opted for this route instead for simplicity and to cater more towards the individual stats versus the on-ice ones (using Cane’s weights, corsi ended up explaining more of Game Score at the game level than individual points did). Realistically, there’s many ways to go about this and I don’t doubt there’s a better way, this is simply mine.*
*I then had to scale the weights down by 75 percent in order to make Game Score roughly equal to points, so that people would be immediately familiar with what a good or bad Game Score looks like. (Corsi, blocked shots, and faceoffs were already worth very little so they weren’t scaled back any further, especially because I superficially liked the nice round numbers).*
*Here’s the formula:*
***Player Game Score = (0.75 * G) + (0.7 * A1) + (0.55 * A2) + (0.075 * SOG) + (0.05 * BLK) + (0.15 * PD) – (0.15 * PT) + (0.01 * FOW) – (0.01 * FOL) + (0.05 * CF) – (0.05 * CA) + (0.15 * GF) – (0.15* GA)”***
Maybe because I look at these after every game not many shock me and it’s why I’ve been on the Perfetti bandwagon because it backs up what I’ve been seeing. I think sometimes people subconsciously form opinions based on things like size and speed which aren’t independent of their ratings. It’s not that he is thie productive but he is big/small, that big/small fast/slow are already in the data.
Kupari is big, fast and unproductive.
Perfetti is small, slower, and productive.
It’s really only the last thing that matters.