12/21/24
February 26, 2004
I'm going to start a new Strat-O-Matic hockey league (2002-2003) with my friends. The twist is, I wrote a program to generate the cards. But I haven't really been following teams other than the Oilers for the last several years. I'd like some critiques on the numbers I came up with for the players, and also on my formulas. Anyone game?
posted by alex_reno to navel gazing at 02:21 AM - 7 comments
Sure.
posted by grum@work at 11:21 AM on February 26, 2004
Also, to add, I'm sure you could check out EA's NHL 2004 or SEGA's ESPN NHL HOCKEY 2004 and see what player rankings they use. They tend to be reasonably accurate.
posted by mkn at 12:15 PM on February 26, 2004
TSN Player rankings: http://tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=8978 Chara first? eh
posted by mkn at 02:57 PM on February 27, 2004
Thanks all. An Excel 97 file may be found here. For the skaters, the key is: Off - Offence (Also use this number for breakaway/penetration) Def - Defence Pass - passing (1 = no successful passing numbers on card, 4 = 3 good pass numbers) In - Inside shot In+ - PP Inside shot Skate & Break - Shorthanded skating Int - Intimidation Pen - Penalty Rating For the shot, the number is the number of goalie ratings (or goal 1-10) on the card. A player with a 10 might have goalie ratings on 7, 4, and 2. For goalies, the two important numbers are: Goal - number of goals on card Reb. - number of rebounds on card Anyone know where to get stats of goalie rebounds? I've never seen them, so I use shots faced. This, as you can imagine, makes goalies who play for defensive teams get low rebound numbers.
posted by alex_reno at 03:22 PM on February 29, 2004
For the shot, the number is the number of goalie ratings (or goal 1-10) on the card. A player with a 10 might have goalie ratings on 7, 4, and 2. I assume you mean: two dice rolls, summed together...a "7" comes up 6 different ways, "4" three different ways and "2" comes up just one way. 6+3+1 = 10. So that means there is a 10 in 36 chance of getting a "goalie rating", right? Am I correct in this assumption? (but then why does Corey Schwab have a rebound rating of "-1"?)
posted by grum@work at 11:48 PM on February 29, 2004
So that means there is a 10 in 36 chance of getting a "goalie rating", right? Exactly. Sorry, my explanation could probably have been more explicit. I've been playing strat-o-mania almost 20 years now, so a method of determining a player's shot precisely seems second nature. (but then why does Corey Schwab have a rebound rating of "-1"?) Because those formulae were made around 94, and hockey has changed since then. Shots per game are down overall, would be my guess. Also, apparently Jersey really bucked up when Schwab played, and he had a lower goals against, shots faced per game, and better save percentage than Brodeur. Certainly, comparing the two goalies I know, Jussi and Salo, they end up being the same in my system, which sounds about right. Jussi was slightly better last year, but not really by much. At least I can do the cheap thing and move the qualification levels after running the numbers. Cory Schwab has been made illegal.
posted by alex_reno at 01:59 AM on March 01, 2004
Sure.