Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Worst Team Ever Projected?

Ales Hemsky - WOWY Analysis Part Two

Soon after we learned Ales Hemsky was done for the year I did a "WOWY" analysis ("With Or Without You") that tried to discern how much of an impact Hemsky's injury would have on the team going forward.  At the time I concluded that Hemsky's injury would have a significant impact on the Oilers going forward. Both Bruce and "He Who Shall Not Be Named" (Ender) raised some good objections to the analysis.  Neither of them suggested that the team was better off without Hemsky but both of them suggested that the method itself had some serious flaws.  One of the objections was that there are so many variables flying around that, even if Hemsky is isolated as the "constant" we can't be confident (let alone sure) that he's the one driving any difference in results.  This is a good point. 

What I'm doing today is trying to modify the WOWY method (first introduced to me by Tom Tango and Gabe Desjardins) so that it will do a better job of taking this into consideration.  I have still isolated Ales Hemsky as the variable.  The "without" sample is unchanged in that I've looked at every game that Hemsky hasn't appeared in with the Oilers post-lockout (there are a total of 59).  However, for the "with" sample I've only looked at the 59 games that are in closest proximity to the games Hemsky missed.  Previously I had looked at all of the games.  For example, in 2008-09 Hemsky missed ten consecutive games in the middle of the season.  I used those ten games for my "without" sample.  For my "with" sample I used the five games before and the five games after Hemsky was out of the lineup.  Whenever there was an odd number of games I prioritized the "after his return" portion when possible.

Last time, I looked only at goal differential (no shootout goals included but empty-net goals are).  This time I've looked at both goal differential (no shootout goals included, empty-netters are) and shot differential (all situations) to hopefully give us a slightly better look.  The results after the jump.

Star-divide

The first graph represents goal differential for the Oilers with Hemsky in the lineup and without him in the lineup.  The second graph is the same for shot differential.

Wowy_analysis_goals_medium

Wowy_analysis_shots_medium

In the first piece I measured Hemsky's impact by the difference in overall goal differential.  At that time the difference in goal differential was 0.25 per game.  In this analysis the number is... similar.  Projected over an 82 game season this would suggest Hemsky is worth 20.5 goals above his actual replacements.  If we assume that 6 goal differential is equal to one win Hemsky's contribution is 3.4 wins above his replacements which is a big number, one that suggests he's more than worth his contract.

But here's the thing.  The really interesting graph is the second one.  The Oilers are actually worse at outshooting their opponents with Hemsky in than they are with Hemsky out.  Now, in each of the three previous seasons the team was better at outshooting with Hemsky in the lineup.  This season, the team is much better at outshooting with Hemsky out of the lineup.  The superior goal differential this season is coming on the back of some pretty terrible save percentage by the Oiler rookie goaltending tandem that was only in place once Hemsky went down.  On the other hand, when Hemsky was in the lineup this season several other players were ill or injured.

So what of the method?  To be totally honest, it looks like Bruce and He Who Shall Not Be Named may have been right.  There's just too much going on to really isolate Hemsky as a variable even when we try to isolate him, especially because of just how much variance there's going to be over a 59-game sample.  And that's too bad in this case since those goal differential numbers would imply a very good player.

Comment 3 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Scott said: So what of the method? To be totally honest, it looks like Bruce and He Who Shall Not Be Named may have been right. There’s just too much going on to really isolate Hemsky as a variable even when we try to isolate him, especially because of just how much variance there’s going to be over a 59-game sample.

Yeah, that’s an honest conclusion, Scott. Perhaps over a full career, and using underlying numbers … might have some value. I have some WOWY scripts for underlying numbers at timeonice.com, I could dig them up if you’re really keen. That works much better. Still, the enormous issue, beyond old fashioned luck, is the coinciding circumstances (other guys out or playing injured, sked difficulty over that stretch, etc.)

Still, it does seem to work better with hockey than baseball. Of course the NHL isn’t quite as luck-soaked as MLB. Hell, Tyler has demonstrated the luck component of EV shooting precentage several times, but it’s about the same as OBP in that regard. And EV shooting% is directly related to scoring goals by definition.

By the by, some terrific posts on here by you and Zona lately. I can’t imagine why either of you would give a toss about my opinion, but I thought I’d throw out props anyways. Good stuff.

by Vic Ferrari on Jan 11, 2010 7:29 PM MST reply actions  

Well thanks very much Vic. It’s always good to hear from you. I’d certainly be interested in doing some further WOWY stuff. How far back does it go? It would be interesting to do it for a guy like Marian Gaborik in his time with the Wild post-lockout. He missed 121 games (though 65 in one season) in that span so he seems like a pretty good candidate in terms of sample size, though even there we’re only talking about the equivalent of 1.5 seasons of data.

by Scott Reynolds on Jan 12, 2010 2:37 AM MST up reply actions  

Good stuff, Scott. Unfortunately, yes, it was the method not the player that I was having an issue with. An interesting experiment and perhaps there are ways of refining it as you have attempted here, but it is always going to be exceptionally difficult to nail down the contributions of a single individual in such a Multi-variable environment as a hockey game.

I’m working on a different methodology which could roughly be described as Before You After You (see: the graph in my recent Martin Brodeur post, with more to come), but it too is going to be tainted/corrupted by all those variables. There’s no way measuring player contribution will ever be an exact science.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Jan 12, 2010 1:12 PM MST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

Northwest Standings

GP W L OTL PT
Vancouver 54 34 15 5 73
Minnesota 54 25 21 8 58
Calgary 55 25 22 8 58
Colorado 55 27 25 3 57
Edmonton 54 21 28 5 47

(updated 2.10.2012 at 1:26 AM MST)

21 - 28 - 5

Lost 2

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (23-7, .767)
  2. San Jose Sharks (13-5, .722)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (17-7, .708)
  4. St. Louis Blues (12-6, .667)
  5. Chicago Blackhawks (16-12, .571)
  6. Los Angeles Kings (10-9, .526)
  7. Nashville Predators (11-10, .524)
  8. Phoenix Coyotes (12-12, .500)
  9. Dallas Stars (11-15, .423)
  10. Anaheim Ducks (10-14, .417)
  11. Colorado Avalanche (9-13, .409)
  12. Edmonton Oilers (11-16, .407)
  13. Calgary Flames (9-15, .375)
  14. Minnesota Wild (7-13,.350)
  15. Columbus Blue Jackets (5-19, .208)

Eastern Conference

  1. Boston Bruins (21-4, .840)
  2. New York Rangers (18-8, .692)
  3. Pittsburgh Penguins (16-9, .640)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (14-11, .560)
  5. Toronto Maple Leafs (14-12, .538)
  6. Washington Capitals (14-13, .519)
  7. Montreal Canadiens (11-11, .500)
  8. New Jersey Devils (10-12, .455)
  9. Ottawa Senators (10-13, .435)
  10. Winnipeg Jets (10-14, .417)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (9-13, .409)
  12. Florida Panthers (7-12, .368)
  13. Buffalo Sabres (8-14, .364)
  14. Tampa Bay Lightning (9-20, .310)
  15. New York Islanders (6-14, .300)

Division Standings

  1. Central (52-39, .571)
  2. Northeast (49-39, .557)
  3. Atlantic (45-37, .549)
  4. Pacific (37-36, .507)
  5. Northwest (34-45, .430)
  6. Southeast (33-54, .379)


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Okc_shoulder_small Eric Rodgers

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Contributors

Newtwitter2_small Jonathan Willis

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL