Greg Shepherd was in the booth with Frank and Doug during yesterday's Sunday matinee between Minnesota and Michigan Tech, in a move that was bound to end in disaster. One thing in particular caught my attention though. No, not that he repeated that ridiculous line about video being the officials worst enemy--because clearly, the biggest problem here was that someone filmed it. Not the terribly put assertion that the league didn't really care about fans when deciding to call 50 penalties a game--technically a good decision, but from a PR standpoint, he made it sound as terrible as possible, and Frank had to awkwardly try to clean up his mess. Not even the Freudian slip about how officials would stop calling games this way as soon as the calendar rolled over to December.
No, what stuck out to me the most was the assertion that the stricter rules enforcement wasn't that big of a deal because so far, it had only meant an extra two powerplays per team, per game. Much like the Pairwise rankings, this is the magical combination of math and poor logic.
First issue: Is that even true?
Last season, there was a total of 1229 powerplays over the course of 140 WCHA league games. That works out to an average of 8.77 powerplays per game, meaning each team is getting roughly 4.385 powerplays per game. After 39 league games this season, there have been a total of 543 powerplays. Again, going to the averages, that's 13.92 powerplays per game, or 6.96 powerplays per team, per game.
So 4.385 vs. 6.96, a difference of 2.575 powerplays per team, per game . Technically, his assertion is close to true, though stretched by about a powerplay per game.
Second, more important issue: Is that a big deal?
This is a little tougher to argue since it's a matter of opinion, but I'm pretty sure it is.
The number only looks small because it's been divided enough times until you get a small number. You may as well say, "Hey, it's only an extra .858 powerplays per period!" or "That's only an extra .032 powerplays per shift!"
The problem is that if you go in the other direction, the numbers tend to look worse. This is a little speculative on my part, since there are no concrete numbers on actual PP time, but let's assume that the average powerplay lasts 1:30 due to either powerplay goals or overlapping penalties. That means that last season there was approximately 12:23 of powerplay time per game, which is 21% of a hockey game. This year, there is approxmiately 20:53 of powerplay time per game, which is 35% of the game. I think most people would argue that 14% of a hockey game is a pretty big deal.
Third Issue: Does this mean the officials are in the wrong?
Not necessarily. In theory, I love the idea of cleaning up some of the obstruction in the game and making it faster and more exciting. The problem is putting faith in the practitioners of that theory, and frankly, there's never been much reason to put that faith in the WCHA's officials, and even less reason with a number of officials having been recently promoted from linesman out of necessity rather than performance.
The issues this causes are the same as what happened during the checking-from-behind craze of a few years ago. Game-changing decisions are being put in the hands of the officials and their calls are frustratingly inconsistent and frustratingly questionable. Some of that is just the nature of officiating. Two biased parties are going to see the same thing very differently. But I also think that more calls this group has to make, the greater the chance of them making very poor calls. And that's been the biggest complaint so far this season. It's not that a team is going shorthanded an extra five times per weekend. It's that they're going shorthanded on calls that never should have been made.
Fourth Issue: What's the Solution?
Sadly, it may just be waiting until December when officials stop calling--er, I mean, players "adjust" to the new rules. It seems to have worked for the NHL, so maybe it will work in college. In the meantime, it's up to the fans to adjust to watching a different game.
Showing posts with label statistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label statistics. Show all posts
Monday, November 17, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Sad Stats
Heading into tonight's game against Nebraska-Omaha, Northern Michigan has a grand total of 2 goals from their defenseman this year, both of which are on the powerplay. That makes Northern Michigan the only team in the CCHA or WCHA without an even strength goal from a defenseman this season.
In fact, Michigan, Denver, Michigan Tech, and St. Cloud are the only teams that don't have an individual defenseman with more than 2 goals on the season.
In fact, Michigan, Denver, Michigan Tech, and St. Cloud are the only teams that don't have an individual defenseman with more than 2 goals on the season.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Where'd the Goals Go?
The WCHA's recent offensive slowdown has even worked its way to the Minnesota Golden Gophers.
Minnesota only scored three goals last weekend in their series against Duluth, yet managed to not lose either game, a feat, that TNABACG points out, hasn't happened that often in Gopher hockey history.
Minnesota only scored three goals last weekend in their series against Duluth, yet managed to not lose either game, a feat, that TNABACG points out, hasn't happened that often in Gopher hockey history.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
It's A Start
It's mostly been a season of small moral victories for Western Michigan so far this season, mainly because there haven't been many real wins to celebrate.
One such small moral victory for the Broncos came on Saturday night in Ann Arbor. Sure, the Broncos lost to Michigan 5-1, thus completing Michigan's sweep. And sure, the Broncos were outscored by a total of 11-2 on the weekend. But there was one stat in Western Michigan's favor. The Broncos had a total of 6 powerplay opportunities on the night, compared to Michigan's four(Though Michigan had 3 powerplay goals to Western's one).
That may not seem that important, but it was for the Broncos, since, in their 22nd game of the season, it was the first game in which Western Michigan had more powerplay opportunities than their opponent. Four times this season, Western finished a game with an equal number of powerplay opportunities, but in the other 17 games, Western had a powerplay deficit, including their game at Notre Dame on November 16th, when Notre Dame received 11 powerplay opportunities to Western Michigan's 1.
One such small moral victory for the Broncos came on Saturday night in Ann Arbor. Sure, the Broncos lost to Michigan 5-1, thus completing Michigan's sweep. And sure, the Broncos were outscored by a total of 11-2 on the weekend. But there was one stat in Western Michigan's favor. The Broncos had a total of 6 powerplay opportunities on the night, compared to Michigan's four(Though Michigan had 3 powerplay goals to Western's one).
That may not seem that important, but it was for the Broncos, since, in their 22nd game of the season, it was the first game in which Western Michigan had more powerplay opportunities than their opponent. Four times this season, Western finished a game with an equal number of powerplay opportunities, but in the other 17 games, Western had a powerplay deficit, including their game at Notre Dame on November 16th, when Notre Dame received 11 powerplay opportunities to Western Michigan's 1.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Good Times in Colorado
Denver completed a sweep of Alaska-Anchorage last weekend, while Colorado College split with St. Cloud, ending the first half of the WCHA regular season for each team, and so far, the WCHA's two Colorado teams are running away with the league. They've opened up a 9-point lead over third place Minnesota-Duluth(North Dakota has games in hand and could climb to within 6 points). It's even more impressive when you look at how they've done it.
CC and Denver are first and second respectively in the league in scoring offense. The Tigers score 3.29 goals per WCHA game, while the Pioneers average 3.21 goals per game. There's a slight drop-off to third place with North Dakota at 3.08 and St. Cloud at 2.92, and then the rest of the league is under 2.50 goals per game.
The numbers are similar when it comes to scoring defense as well. Denver and Colorado College are tied for first in the league with only 1.86 goals allowed per game. North Dakota is the next best defense, giving up 2.42 goals per game.
They're also at the top of the league in Special Teams Net(PP goals for + SH goals for - (PP goals against + SH goals against)). Colorado College is a +8 and Denver is a + 6. St. Cloud at +4 and UMD at +1 are the only two other teams in the league with a positive figure.
What's even more surprising is that Colorado College and Denver are the only two teams in the league with a winning record in conference. In a year where everyone else is so equal, it's amazing how much Denver and CC are standing out from the pack.
CC and Denver are first and second respectively in the league in scoring offense. The Tigers score 3.29 goals per WCHA game, while the Pioneers average 3.21 goals per game. There's a slight drop-off to third place with North Dakota at 3.08 and St. Cloud at 2.92, and then the rest of the league is under 2.50 goals per game.
The numbers are similar when it comes to scoring defense as well. Denver and Colorado College are tied for first in the league with only 1.86 goals allowed per game. North Dakota is the next best defense, giving up 2.42 goals per game.
They're also at the top of the league in Special Teams Net(PP goals for + SH goals for - (PP goals against + SH goals against)). Colorado College is a +8 and Denver is a + 6. St. Cloud at +4 and UMD at +1 are the only two other teams in the league with a positive figure.
What's even more surprising is that Colorado College and Denver are the only two teams in the league with a winning record in conference. In a year where everyone else is so equal, it's amazing how much Denver and CC are standing out from the pack.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Weird Stats
Two things pretty amazing things stuck out to me after Minnesota State's 2-0 win over Alaska-Anchorage late Saturday night.
First of all, Mike Zacharias' shutout was the first time MSU recorded a shutout on the road since Jason Jensen shut out North Dakota 6-0 on December 1st, 2001 to complete a weekend sweep at the brand-new Ralph Englestad Arena. If you're a North Dakota fan, you may remember that has the year that sucked.
Second, when Mick Berge scored MSU's second goal, midway through the second period, he was the first upperclassmen on MSU's team to register a point on the season. That means that the Mavericks, who had only scored 4 goals prior to that point, had gone 209 minutes and 26 seconds without an offensive contribution from a junior or senior. The good news for the Mavericks is that four different freshmen and five different sophomores have already found their way onto the scoresheet.
First of all, Mike Zacharias' shutout was the first time MSU recorded a shutout on the road since Jason Jensen shut out North Dakota 6-0 on December 1st, 2001 to complete a weekend sweep at the brand-new Ralph Englestad Arena. If you're a North Dakota fan, you may remember that has the year that sucked.
Second, when Mick Berge scored MSU's second goal, midway through the second period, he was the first upperclassmen on MSU's team to register a point on the season. That means that the Mavericks, who had only scored 4 goals prior to that point, had gone 209 minutes and 26 seconds without an offensive contribution from a junior or senior. The good news for the Mavericks is that four different freshmen and five different sophomores have already found their way onto the scoresheet.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Weight For It
Next up on my stat kick, I thought I'd take a look at weighted goals. The theory behind weighted goals is that goals scored in a tight game are more important than goals scored when the score isn't that close. There may be a few exceptions to that logic, but for the most part, it makes sense. For more info on it, check out this article from Marc Foster and Chris Apple.
The way that these numbers were calculated were that goal that resulted in a tie game or one-goal lead was worth one point. Any goal that cut a lead to one goal and increased a lead to two goals was worth .75 points. A goal that cut a lead to 2 or increased a lead to 3 was worth .5 points, and all other goals were worth .25 points.(I made a slight modification to the original formula by getting rid of the .1 points for a goal that increased a 5 or more goal lead, or cut a 6 or more goal lead)
Results are presented as such: Goals Scored, Weighted Goals Scored , Percentage of Weighted Goals/Goals Scored.
I thought it'd be interesting to start by looking at some of the top Hobey Baker candidates from last season to see how they did.
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota 31 26.25 85%
Eric Ehn, Air Force 24 19.5 81%
T.J. Hensick, Michigan 24 14.5 60%
Duncan's numbers look pretty impressive there. But how do there compare to some other players? I (unscientifically) picked a few big scorers from last season to see how they compared.
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan 30 20.25 68%
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha 24 15.5 65%
Jay Barriball, Minnesota 20 16.25 82%
Travis Morin, Minnesota State 17 12.75 75%
Nathan Davis, Miami 21 15 71%
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud State 22 16.5 75%
Bryan Lerg, Michigan State 23 17 74%
Jon Kalinski, Minnesota State 17 12.75 75%
That makes the average weighted goals percentage 74%. So in comparison, Duncan's 85% looks even more impressive, while Hensick's was definitely on the low end. At the same time, you could argue that the numbers are a bit biased by league. The CCHA tended to be higher-scoring and have more lop-sided games last year, both of which hurt their players in this measure.
And because I know you're curious, I liked to make fun of Phil Kessel during his short tenure at Minnesota for scoring a lot of meaningless goals. So how did Phil do in this measure? Not too bad actually. Kessel had 18 goals and 13.25 weighted goals for a percentage of 74%. So my apologies go out to you, Phil Kessel.
The way that these numbers were calculated were that goal that resulted in a tie game or one-goal lead was worth one point. Any goal that cut a lead to one goal and increased a lead to two goals was worth .75 points. A goal that cut a lead to 2 or increased a lead to 3 was worth .5 points, and all other goals were worth .25 points.(I made a slight modification to the original formula by getting rid of the .1 points for a goal that increased a 5 or more goal lead, or cut a 6 or more goal lead)
Results are presented as such: Goals Scored, Weighted Goals Scored , Percentage of Weighted Goals/Goals Scored.
I thought it'd be interesting to start by looking at some of the top Hobey Baker candidates from last season to see how they did.
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota 31 26.25 85%
Eric Ehn, Air Force 24 19.5 81%
T.J. Hensick, Michigan 24 14.5 60%
Duncan's numbers look pretty impressive there. But how do there compare to some other players? I (unscientifically) picked a few big scorers from last season to see how they compared.
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan 30 20.25 68%
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha 24 15.5 65%
Jay Barriball, Minnesota 20 16.25 82%
Travis Morin, Minnesota State 17 12.75 75%
Nathan Davis, Miami 21 15 71%
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud State 22 16.5 75%
Bryan Lerg, Michigan State 23 17 74%
Jon Kalinski, Minnesota State 17 12.75 75%
That makes the average weighted goals percentage 74%. So in comparison, Duncan's 85% looks even more impressive, while Hensick's was definitely on the low end. At the same time, you could argue that the numbers are a bit biased by league. The CCHA tended to be higher-scoring and have more lop-sided games last year, both of which hurt their players in this measure.
And because I know you're curious, I liked to make fun of Phil Kessel during his short tenure at Minnesota for scoring a lot of meaningless goals. So how did Phil do in this measure? Not too bad actually. Kessel had 18 goals and 13.25 weighted goals for a percentage of 74%. So my apologies go out to you, Phil Kessel.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Pythagorean Records
It has always bugged me a little bit that the sport of hockey seems to be way behind other sports in the field of sabermetrics. Hockey is much more difficult to measure statistically than other sports, but there's still very little out there beside the basic stuff. College hockey is even tougher since many stats, including time on ice aren't kept during the year(though I think it's only a matter of time before TOI is kept, as it's fairly simple if you have the right software).
Anyway, Marc Foster of the Junior Hockey Blog has been ressurrecting some old columns he wrote for CNNSI called Just the Stats. Reading some of those old columns motivated me to try and calculate Pythagorean Record for last season.
Pythagorean Record uses a formula to measure a team's record against how many goals a team scored and gave up. The formula is Goals For^2/(Goals For^2 + Goals Against^2). I don't think it's a perfect system, but it's worth taking a look at. You can read more about it here.
Here are the results for the CCHA and WCHA. I only looked at conference play, because that makes the schedules a little more insular. The results are listed as such: Team, Winning %, Pythagorean Win %, and Difference Between Percentages. Theoretically, a team with a positive difference over-achieved, while a team with a negative difference under-achieved.
The CCHA
Notre Dame .804 .757 .047
Michigan .661 .662 -.001
Miami .643 .638 .005
Michigan State .589 .608 -.019
Nebraska-Omaha .536 .581 -.045
Western Michigan .518 .455 .063
Ohio State .500 .517 -.017
Lake Superior .446 .436 .010
Ferris State .393 .367 .026
Northern Michigan .375 .405 -.030
Alaska .339 .377 -.027
Bowling Green .196 .223 -.027
The WCHA
Minnesota .694 .648 .046
St. Cloud .625 .618 .007
North Dakota .554 .606 -.052
Denver .536 .500 .036
Colorado College .518 .533 -.015
Wisconsin .482 .553 -.071
Michigan Tech .482 .538 -.056
Minnesota State .440 .401 .039
Minnesota-Duluth .357 .367 -.010
Alaska-Anchorage .304 .274 .030
So what conclusions can be drawn from this? I'm not really sure. I'll let people take from this what they will. I think it's pretty obvious that Western Michigan was one of the biggest over-achievers last season, while Wisconsin was one of the bigger under-achievers. I also think it's interesting that both teams that ran away with their conference did so well in this metric. In all, however, I'm not seeing any consistent, major trends here. It's still interesting to see though.
Anyway, Marc Foster of the Junior Hockey Blog has been ressurrecting some old columns he wrote for CNNSI called Just the Stats. Reading some of those old columns motivated me to try and calculate Pythagorean Record for last season.
Pythagorean Record uses a formula to measure a team's record against how many goals a team scored and gave up. The formula is Goals For^2/(Goals For^2 + Goals Against^2). I don't think it's a perfect system, but it's worth taking a look at. You can read more about it here.
Here are the results for the CCHA and WCHA. I only looked at conference play, because that makes the schedules a little more insular. The results are listed as such: Team, Winning %, Pythagorean Win %, and Difference Between Percentages. Theoretically, a team with a positive difference over-achieved, while a team with a negative difference under-achieved.
The CCHA
Notre Dame .804 .757 .047
Michigan .661 .662 -.001
Miami .643 .638 .005
Michigan State .589 .608 -.019
Nebraska-Omaha .536 .581 -.045
Western Michigan .518 .455 .063
Ohio State .500 .517 -.017
Lake Superior .446 .436 .010
Ferris State .393 .367 .026
Northern Michigan .375 .405 -.030
Alaska .339 .377 -.027
Bowling Green .196 .223 -.027
The WCHA
Minnesota .694 .648 .046
St. Cloud .625 .618 .007
North Dakota .554 .606 -.052
Denver .536 .500 .036
Colorado College .518 .533 -.015
Wisconsin .482 .553 -.071
Michigan Tech .482 .538 -.056
Minnesota State .440 .401 .039
Minnesota-Duluth .357 .367 -.010
Alaska-Anchorage .304 .274 .030
So what conclusions can be drawn from this? I'm not really sure. I'll let people take from this what they will. I think it's pretty obvious that Western Michigan was one of the biggest over-achievers last season, while Wisconsin was one of the bigger under-achievers. I also think it's interesting that both teams that ran away with their conference did so well in this metric. In all, however, I'm not seeing any consistent, major trends here. It's still interesting to see though.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Jutting and His "Peers"
Runnin' with the Dogs had a tour de force post that discussed, among other things, Minnesota State, the WCHA, and fan expectations.
The genesis of the article was the contract extension of Minnesota State coach Troy Jutting, which was at least in part based on the idea that Minnesota State has competed well against their "peer group" in the WCHA, despite not having a lot of overall success in the league.
The theory is that it is difficult for a program the size of Minnesota State to beat much larger, much more established programs like Minnesota and North Dakota on a consistent basis. The conventional wisdom is that Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Denver, and Colorado College are the "Haves" of the WCHA, while St. Cloud, Minnesota State, Minnesota-Duluth, Michigan Tech, and Alaska-Anchorage are the "Have-Nots".
But does that logic hold up to the facts?
Click here to read the rest.
The genesis of the article was the contract extension of Minnesota State coach Troy Jutting, which was at least in part based on the idea that Minnesota State has competed well against their "peer group" in the WCHA, despite not having a lot of overall success in the league.
The theory is that it is difficult for a program the size of Minnesota State to beat much larger, much more established programs like Minnesota and North Dakota on a consistent basis. The conventional wisdom is that Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Denver, and Colorado College are the "Haves" of the WCHA, while St. Cloud, Minnesota State, Minnesota-Duluth, Michigan Tech, and Alaska-Anchorage are the "Have-Nots".
But does that logic hold up to the facts?
Click here to read the rest.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Fun With Numbers
I decided to leave the names out of this post, since it is irrelevant which team I'm talking about(it isn't their fault who gets assigned to their games or how those games are called), and I don't feel like naming the official. Instead, I'll just call them Team X and Ref Y. It isn't about the names anyway, it's about the numbers.
Ref Y officiated 8 of Team X's games this season. In total, Team X got 58 powerplay opportunities in those 8 games, while their opponents got 28 powerplay opportunities. A difference for 30 opportunities.
In itself, that isn't that damning. But then I compared those 8 games to Team X's other 34 games. In those other 34 games, Team X had 195 powerplay opportunities, while their opponents had 179 opportunities. A difference of only 16 opportunities.
The outliers are interesting as well. Team X reached double digits in powerplay opportunities twice in the 8 games officiated by Ref Y, but only once in their other 34 games. Team X's opponents got 2 or fewer powerplay opportunities in 3 of the games officiated by Ref Y, but only once in the other 34 games.
I don't think this some sort of conspiracy for Team X. I don't even think this is something intentional on the part of Ref Y. I just think it looks odd that 65% of a team's advantage in total powerplay opportunities came in a certain 20% of their games. So the question I will ask is this: If you were a head coach and your team was playing Team X, would you want to see Ref Y be assigned to that game?
Ref Y officiated 8 of Team X's games this season. In total, Team X got 58 powerplay opportunities in those 8 games, while their opponents got 28 powerplay opportunities. A difference for 30 opportunities.
In itself, that isn't that damning. But then I compared those 8 games to Team X's other 34 games. In those other 34 games, Team X had 195 powerplay opportunities, while their opponents had 179 opportunities. A difference of only 16 opportunities.
The outliers are interesting as well. Team X reached double digits in powerplay opportunities twice in the 8 games officiated by Ref Y, but only once in their other 34 games. Team X's opponents got 2 or fewer powerplay opportunities in 3 of the games officiated by Ref Y, but only once in the other 34 games.
I don't think this some sort of conspiracy for Team X. I don't even think this is something intentional on the part of Ref Y. I just think it looks odd that 65% of a team's advantage in total powerplay opportunities came in a certain 20% of their games. So the question I will ask is this: If you were a head coach and your team was playing Team X, would you want to see Ref Y be assigned to that game?
Monday, February 12, 2007
Weighted Scoring Stats as of 2/12
I'm sticking with the formula of points per game multiplied by RPI strength of schedule. Here's what the numbers are for the top 35 scorers in the country, including all games prior to Tuesday night.
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: .81408
Kevin Porter, Michigan: .78336
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: .740074
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: .731816
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: .731816
Eric Ehn, Air Force: .707928
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: .690414
Ted Cook, Niagara: .6825
Les Reaney, Niagara: .6825
Andrew Cogliano, Michigan: .67072
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: .668782
Sean Bentivoglio, Niagara: .648375
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: .643625
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: .636651
Nathan Davis, Miami: .634788
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: .622976
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: .62061
Teddy Purcell, Maine: .601614
Erik Condra, North Dame: .594405
Steve Pinnizotto, RIT: .59436
Kyle Greentree, Alaska: .59172
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart: .59098
Andrew Wong, Quinnipiac: .583713
Alex Nikiforuk, Nebraska-Omaha: .575345
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: .575156
Paul Szczechura, Western Michigan: .566469
T.J. Fox, Union: .564435
Chad Kolarik, Michigan: .55808
Brock Trotter, Denver: .557242
Tyler Burton, Colgate: .554265
Chris Moran, Niagara: .550875
Simon Lambert, RIT: .54864
Bear Trapp, Sacred Heart: .531882
Andrew Ramsey, Air Force: .530946
Ryan Jones, Miami: .518914
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: .81408
Kevin Porter, Michigan: .78336
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: .740074
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: .731816
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: .731816
Eric Ehn, Air Force: .707928
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: .690414
Ted Cook, Niagara: .6825
Les Reaney, Niagara: .6825
Andrew Cogliano, Michigan: .67072
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: .668782
Sean Bentivoglio, Niagara: .648375
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: .643625
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: .636651
Nathan Davis, Miami: .634788
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: .622976
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: .62061
Teddy Purcell, Maine: .601614
Erik Condra, North Dame: .594405
Steve Pinnizotto, RIT: .59436
Kyle Greentree, Alaska: .59172
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart: .59098
Andrew Wong, Quinnipiac: .583713
Alex Nikiforuk, Nebraska-Omaha: .575345
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: .575156
Paul Szczechura, Western Michigan: .566469
T.J. Fox, Union: .564435
Chad Kolarik, Michigan: .55808
Brock Trotter, Denver: .557242
Tyler Burton, Colgate: .554265
Chris Moran, Niagara: .550875
Simon Lambert, RIT: .54864
Bear Trapp, Sacred Heart: .531882
Andrew Ramsey, Air Force: .530946
Ryan Jones, Miami: .518914
Sunday, February 04, 2007
Weighted Scoring Stats
Ok, here's take two. The idea is the same as the first time, but with two tweaks. First, instead of using straight points, I'll be using points per game average, and instead of using KRACH's strength of schedule, I'll be multiplying it by using the RPI's Strength of Schedule because there is less of a disparity between the toughest and easiest schedule. I've picked the top 20 scorers, as well as few other names.
Here's the breakdown:
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: .854873
Kevin Porter, Michigan: .81904
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: .74727
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: .74727
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: .729708
Eric Ehn, Air Force: .708698
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: .69918
Ted Cook, Niagara: .68278
Les Reaney, Niagara: .68278
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: .672465
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: .666864
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: .658241
Nathan Davis, Miami: .657751
Kyle Okposo, Minnesota: .654652
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: .648934
Sean Bentivoglio, Niagara: .648641
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: .642432
Steve Pinizotto, RIT: .62016
Kyle Greentree, Alaska: .617625
Alex Nikiforuk, Nebraska-Omaha: .610572
Erik Condra, Notre Dame: .59604
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart: .587079
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: .58315
Brock Trotter, Denver: .574539
Alex Goligoski, Minnesota: .552698
Tyler Burton, Colgate: .546449
Here's the breakdown:
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: .854873
Kevin Porter, Michigan: .81904
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: .74727
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: .74727
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: .729708
Eric Ehn, Air Force: .708698
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: .69918
Ted Cook, Niagara: .68278
Les Reaney, Niagara: .68278
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: .672465
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: .666864
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: .658241
Nathan Davis, Miami: .657751
Kyle Okposo, Minnesota: .654652
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: .648934
Sean Bentivoglio, Niagara: .648641
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: .642432
Steve Pinizotto, RIT: .62016
Kyle Greentree, Alaska: .617625
Alex Nikiforuk, Nebraska-Omaha: .610572
Erik Condra, Notre Dame: .59604
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart: .587079
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: .58315
Brock Trotter, Denver: .574539
Alex Goligoski, Minnesota: .552698
Tyler Burton, Colgate: .546449
Saturday, February 03, 2007
A Few Stats
T.J. Hensick is making an incredibly strong case for himself as the Hobey Baker front-runner. He had his second four point night in three games on Friday when Michigan beat Western Michigan 7-4.
What's interesting, however, is that this was the fourth conference game Michigan has played in where 11 or more goals were scored in the game. For comparison, there have only been four WCHA conference games with 11+ goals all season. Hockey East and the ECACHL only have one 11+ goal conference game apiece. Should Hensick be punished because Western Michigan threw in two goals in the third period when he wasn't out on the ice to make the game a little closer? I don't think so. But it is important to remember that different conferences have different styles of play, and more wide-open style of hockey doesn't necessarily equate to better hockey.
If this blog lacks one thing, it's nerdy statistics. That being the case, I decided to try and weigh player points by taking the point totals of some of the top players in the country, and multiplying that by their strength of schedule according to the KRACH Ratings.
And here's what it looked like...
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: 8773
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: 8598
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: 8525
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: 8525
Brock Trotter, Denver: 7088
T.J. Oshie, North Dakota: 7067
Alex Goligoski, Minnesota: 6954
Kyle Okposo, Minnesota: 6954
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: 6940
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: 6817
Kevin Porter, Michgian: 6524
Nathan Davis, Miami: 5128
Andrew Joudrey, Wisconsin: 5100
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: 5055
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: 4884
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: 4488
Teddy Purcell, Maine: 4455
Erik Condra, Notre Dame: 4129
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: 3992
Ted Cook, Niagara: 3597
Les Reaney, Niagara: 3597
Nick Dodge, Clarkson: 3561
Kyle Greentree, Alasak: 3425
Eric Ehn, Air Force: 1411
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: 1025
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart 1012
What's interesting, however, is that this was the fourth conference game Michigan has played in where 11 or more goals were scored in the game. For comparison, there have only been four WCHA conference games with 11+ goals all season. Hockey East and the ECACHL only have one 11+ goal conference game apiece. Should Hensick be punished because Western Michigan threw in two goals in the third period when he wasn't out on the ice to make the game a little closer? I don't think so. But it is important to remember that different conferences have different styles of play, and more wide-open style of hockey doesn't necessarily equate to better hockey.
If this blog lacks one thing, it's nerdy statistics. That being the case, I decided to try and weigh player points by taking the point totals of some of the top players in the country, and multiplying that by their strength of schedule according to the KRACH Ratings.
And here's what it looked like...
Ryan Duncan, North Dakota: 8773
Travis Morin, Minnesota State: 8598
Andrew Gordon, St. Cloud: 8525
Andreas Nodl, St. Cloud: 8525
Brock Trotter, Denver: 7088
T.J. Oshie, North Dakota: 7067
Alex Goligoski, Minnesota: 6954
Kyle Okposo, Minnesota: 6954
T.J. Hensick, Michigan: 6940
Mason Raymond, Minnesota-Duluth: 6817
Kevin Porter, Michgian: 6524
Nathan Davis, Miami: 5128
Andrew Joudrey, Wisconsin: 5100
Mike Santorelli, Northern Michigan: 5055
Trevor Smith, New Hampshire: 4884
Scott Parse, Nebraska-Omaha: 4488
Teddy Purcell, Maine: 4455
Erik Condra, Notre Dame: 4129
Mark Letestu, Western Michigan: 3992
Ted Cook, Niagara: 3597
Les Reaney, Niagara: 3597
Nick Dodge, Clarkson: 3561
Kyle Greentree, Alasak: 3425
Eric Ehn, Air Force: 1411
James Sixsmith, Holy Cross: 1025
Pierre-Luc O'Brien, Sacred Heart 1012
Friday, January 19, 2007
By the Numbers: Mason Raymond
Most people are familiar with the struggles that Minnesota-Duluth had in the first part of the season. But the Bulldogs have been turning things around recently, winning 4 of their last 5, including 3 of their last 4 in the WCHA. There's probably a multitude of reasons that the Bulldogs are playing better now, but one reason is the team's leading scorer, Mason Raymond.
Raymond leads the Bulldogs in scoring with a respectable 26 points in 25 games. But out of those 25 games, 14 of those points came in Duluth's 7 non-conference games, meaning Raymond has scored just 12 points in 18 WCHA league games. That may not seem too out of line, but keep in mind that Raymond has scored six points in the past two weekends, after scoring just 6 points in the first half of the WCHA.
So Raymond scored 6 points in the first half of the WCHA season, and Duluth only earned a dismal 6 points in the conference standings. Through the first two weekends of the second half, Raymond has scored six points, and the Bulldogs have earned six points in the standings.
If Raymond continues to score at a similar pace, perhaps it's possible that Duluth could keep winning and moving up the WCHA standings.
Raymond leads the Bulldogs in scoring with a respectable 26 points in 25 games. But out of those 25 games, 14 of those points came in Duluth's 7 non-conference games, meaning Raymond has scored just 12 points in 18 WCHA league games. That may not seem too out of line, but keep in mind that Raymond has scored six points in the past two weekends, after scoring just 6 points in the first half of the WCHA.
So Raymond scored 6 points in the first half of the WCHA season, and Duluth only earned a dismal 6 points in the conference standings. Through the first two weekends of the second half, Raymond has scored six points, and the Bulldogs have earned six points in the standings.
If Raymond continues to score at a similar pace, perhaps it's possible that Duluth could keep winning and moving up the WCHA standings.
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Power Outage
In a bit of an oddity, eight different teams got shutout last night, including both St. Cloud and Mankato, when their game ended in a 0-0 tie.
Friday, January 12, 2007
So Close, Yet So Far
Everybody knows that the CCHA is a hard league to pick. The preseason polls always look way off by the end of the season. I took my own stab at it before the season.
I was checking out the standings the other day, and I noticed something interesting. It turns out all five of the teams I picked to finish in the top five in the league actually are in the top five of the league. That's pretty good.
And then on closer inspection, I realized my top five was exactly opposite to the current top five. Technically Notre Dame and Miami are tied for first, but Notre Dame has games in hand. Same with Lake Superior having a game on hand over Michigan State. On the plus side, I totally nailed Michigan being in third place. Go me.
So I guess this means I at least have some idea of who will be good. I just have no clue about how good they will be.
I was checking out the standings the other day, and I noticed something interesting. It turns out all five of the teams I picked to finish in the top five in the league actually are in the top five of the league. That's pretty good.
And then on closer inspection, I realized my top five was exactly opposite to the current top five. Technically Notre Dame and Miami are tied for first, but Notre Dame has games in hand. Same with Lake Superior having a game on hand over Michigan State. On the plus side, I totally nailed Michigan being in third place. Go me.
So I guess this means I at least have some idea of who will be good. I just have no clue about how good they will be.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Tax Numbers
Junior Hockey Blog has an interesting post on looking at the tax returns for the CCHA, WCHA, and various other leagues. I can't find anything earth-shattering in there, but since I can still fill out at a 1040EZ, most of that stuff doesn't mean much to me.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Statistical Craziness
In three starts so far in the month of December, Lake Superior goalie Jeff Jakaitis has faced 124 shots(which works out to 41.3 shots per game), and has only allowed 2 goals. That means that Jakaitis has a goals against average of 0.66 and save percentage of 98.4% so far in December. His season totals are almost as impressive, as he has a 1.57 GAA and .956 save percentage.
The Lakers, who were picked by both the coaches and the media to finish 10th in the league, currently sit in 5th place in the CCHA, and are only two points behind third place Michigan, with one game in hand on the Wolverines. That's due in large part to only allowing 26 goals in conference play so far this season. Only Notre Dame has allowed fewer goals in league play.
Jakaitis won't get an opportunity to continue his hot streak until after Christmas when the Lakers travel to Madison to play in the Badger Showdown, where he could meet up with another great goalie in Wisconsin's Brian Elliott in the final.
Jakaitis is a player that is definitely worthy of Hobey Baker consideration. Whether or not he will get it is another question. Lake Superior has flown under the radar this season, but Jakaitis continues to play at the level that he has been, and Lake Superior finds a way to get into NCAA tournament consideration, he should definitely be a finalist for the award.
The Lakers, who were picked by both the coaches and the media to finish 10th in the league, currently sit in 5th place in the CCHA, and are only two points behind third place Michigan, with one game in hand on the Wolverines. That's due in large part to only allowing 26 goals in conference play so far this season. Only Notre Dame has allowed fewer goals in league play.
Jakaitis won't get an opportunity to continue his hot streak until after Christmas when the Lakers travel to Madison to play in the Badger Showdown, where he could meet up with another great goalie in Wisconsin's Brian Elliott in the final.
Jakaitis is a player that is definitely worthy of Hobey Baker consideration. Whether or not he will get it is another question. Lake Superior has flown under the radar this season, but Jakaitis continues to play at the level that he has been, and Lake Superior finds a way to get into NCAA tournament consideration, he should definitely be a finalist for the award.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Statistical Craziness
Minnesota State's Travis Morin and Steve Wagner were busy guys last Saturday against Minnesota. Like just about every college team, the Mavericks don't keep track of ice time, but on Monday, one of Minnesota State's coaches estimated that Wagner played 32 minutes, while Morin played 28 minutes. Those numbers are incredibly impressive as they are, and I think they may even be a tad on the conservative side.
Morin was rewarded for his efforts with the rare honor of being selected as one of the three stars of the game, despite not registering a point for only the third time this season. Wagner has quietly developed into one of the most dependable and versatile defenseman in the WCHA.
Morin was rewarded for his efforts with the rare honor of being selected as one of the three stars of the game, despite not registering a point for only the third time this season. Wagner has quietly developed into one of the most dependable and versatile defenseman in the WCHA.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Hensick's Assault on the Record Book
One story that I really haven't seen much about, and probably should be getting more attention, is the extremely impressive numbers Michigan forward T.J. Hensick has put up. Hensick has put up 7 goals and 21 assists this season, including four straight two-point games, which puts him tied for third in the country in scoring. Those are very good numbers, but what's much more impressive is the numbers that Hensick has put up over his career.
Hensick came into this season as the only college player with over 150 career points, and his great year this year means he will finish in pretty rare territory. His four points last weekend moved him to 181 career points, passing penalty killing whiz John Madden for 17th on Michigan's all-time career scoring list. If Hensick continues to score at the same rate he has so far this season, he'll finish with approximately 230 career points, which would be good for 6th on Michigan's all-time scoring list.
It's probably not realistic that Hensick could reach the top 5 in all-time scoring(Dave Debol is 5th with 246 points), but his numbers are extremely remarkable given the era he has played in. In the post-Brendan Morrison era at Michigan, which has mostly been known for a series of early departures every summer, the next highest career scorer at Michigan is Mark Kosick with only 146 points.
The 200 point plateau is something that could become extremely rare in college hockey, especially at major colleges. With NHL teams willing to make big contract offers to any player that has a great year, it's unlikely that many college players will stick around long enough to reach that mark. And for the few that do, it's still an extremely difficult mark to reach. Omaha's Scott Parse is the closest, but he is on pace to come up about 10 points shy, unless he picks up his scoring pace a little bit.
Hensick came into this season as the only college player with over 150 career points, and his great year this year means he will finish in pretty rare territory. His four points last weekend moved him to 181 career points, passing penalty killing whiz John Madden for 17th on Michigan's all-time career scoring list. If Hensick continues to score at the same rate he has so far this season, he'll finish with approximately 230 career points, which would be good for 6th on Michigan's all-time scoring list.
It's probably not realistic that Hensick could reach the top 5 in all-time scoring(Dave Debol is 5th with 246 points), but his numbers are extremely remarkable given the era he has played in. In the post-Brendan Morrison era at Michigan, which has mostly been known for a series of early departures every summer, the next highest career scorer at Michigan is Mark Kosick with only 146 points.
The 200 point plateau is something that could become extremely rare in college hockey, especially at major colleges. With NHL teams willing to make big contract offers to any player that has a great year, it's unlikely that many college players will stick around long enough to reach that mark. And for the few that do, it's still an extremely difficult mark to reach. Omaha's Scott Parse is the closest, but he is on pace to come up about 10 points shy, unless he picks up his scoring pace a little bit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
