I like reading sports books, and I like reading economics-type books.  Which is why I was interested to read Sportscasting: The Hidden Influences Behind How Sports Are Played and Games Are Won.  Worst case, they’d have some interesting theories about sports with scarce or anecdotal data to back it up (the way some people criticize Malcom Gladwell’s work) and best case it would really shed light on some interesting sports conundrums.  So which is it?

Actually, the latter.  And in order to achieve it, the authors crunched a ton (is it tonne in Canada?) of data.  It’s not nearly as breezy as a Gladwell read, but it’s meatier.  More tables, more numbers, more statistics, more explanations and hedges about what can properly be controlled for, and what can’t.  Those who have read this site for a while and listened to our podcasts know I love that kind of thing.   A couple of long chapters of the book are setting up the dominos to answer the question- why do home teams have such a big advantage?

There’s no doubt there IS an advantage, and it’s substantial in pretty much every sport.  Soccer is the most lopsided, with well over 60% of games being won by the home team (they calculated the numbers for MLS, EPL, Serie A, La Liga, and others).  Basketball is next, with the NBA home teams winning 62.7% (they even calculate WNBA and college).  The NHL is next, with 59% percent of home teams winning, and football (57.8%) and baseball (54.1%) bringing up the rear.

So, some things that are interesting about this discussion, the first being obvious, the others not (but backed up by the data).

1. Home teams win the majority of games, sometimes a significant majority.
2. This winning percentage is constant across time.  The winning percentage of home teams was about the same 50 years ago as it was 10 years ago, or now.
3. The winning percentage is directly related to the sport itself.  Japanese baseball home teams have about the same winning percentage as MLB home teams.  Arena football the same as the NFL.

I’ve never thought about this too much before, but even #1 is really remarkable.  Why do home teams win so much, and so consistently?  There has been no NHL season where away teams won more games than home teams. As watchers of plenty of NHL games, I’m sure we all think of several reasons why this is.  One is the home crowds- the home players play better when you’re cheering them rather than booing them.  Another is travel- away teams have to deal with hotels, unfamiliar surroundings, and jetlag.

Incredibly, the authors make very good cases that both of these are myths.  It’s really hard to control for home crowds, because there are so many other interactions going on.  But here’s one feat in hockey that’s essentially isolated from all those player and referee interactions- the shootout.  It’s basically an interaction between two players and the crowd.  So if the crowd were a factor in home player’s effort and performance, you expect the shootout to have a home-rink advantage the way the rest of the game does, right?  Well, it doesn’t.  Since the shootout started, away teams won the shootout 50.6% of the time.  The home-rink advantage just doesn’t exist in the shootout.

And, amazing, they manage to control for travel as well.  How could you do that? Well, what about teams that are really close together, like the Devils, Rangers, and Islanders?  You’d expect less home advantage when those teams play each other, because they don’t have to really go anywhere- just drive a bit further.  But if you look at those games, the home advantage is exactly the same as all the other games.  They found there is a small effect with back-to-back games, which in most sports occur more often on the road.  But that’s not nearly enough to explain it all.

So what the hell is it?  I’m going to put a break here in the post, because some people might actually want to read the book and not get the spoiler.  I’ve condensed many pages into this post, and believe me, it’s worthwhile to read all the other support the authors have come up with.  Or, more likely, you just want to bail out because there’s too many words reading sux zzzzz…..

(more…)

I just had a desire to do some photoshopping, and I figured this was appropriate.

Know Huskins, know hope. No Huskins, no hope.

Because of scheduling conflicts, Doug and I figured we’d do the podcast immediately following the Caps game on Thursday, which we’ll be attending in person.  Then we can talk about that game as well as the Nashville game.  Plus the rumor mill is really heating up, and we’ll talk about some Crazy Trades.  Get your emails in (or tweet @dudesonhockey, I’m trying to be better at twitter these days) if you have any topic ideas or questions.

No Pronger, No Nieds, No Service.

Ian White is eating Cracker Barrel in the backwoods of Carolina.

James Wisniewski – Montreal, s’il vous plait.

Francois Beauchemin – Back to Anaheim where the Hills are Alive with the Sound of Selanne.

Our streak of picking available d-men to get moved  continues to be golden today as the Toronto Maple Leafs traded veteran blueliner Francois Beauchemin back to the Anaheim Ducks for forward Joffrey Lupul, former 2008 first round pick Jake Gardiner and a future 2013 4th round pick. This leaves one less impact defensemen on the open market for Doug Wilson to target in the coming weeks, but Toronto’s asking price (a top three prospect) is too high for my taste.

Jake Gardiner is the jewel of this deal, an unsigned college defensemen currently in his junior year at the University of Wisconsin and fresh off a three assist and +9 performance for the United States at the World Junior tournament in 2011. Gardiner was the Ducks first round pick in 2008 (when the Sharks went fishing for the Daniels twins from Northeastern University – we profile them this week in our podcast posted below) and he has real solid potential to be a very good professional hockey player and he could surface in the NHL as soon as next year next to Luke Schenn, if he signs an ETL at the end of the year. In order to get Gardiner, the Leafs had to give up a solid blueliner in Francois – but they also had to take out a bit of Bob Murray’s trash in the bloated contract of Joffrey Lupul and his 4.25M cap hit until 2012-13. Lupul is a solid 2nd line forward when healthy, but he has only suited up for 49 games since 2009 and has a disappointing 27 points in that span. Is it worth it to get Gardiner? In my opinion, yes. If you’re the Leafs, you invest in your future and Gardiner could be a major player on that team in the next three years. Burke is fully aware of Gardiner and his skills, he did draft the kid after all when he was GM of the Ducks in the summer of 2008.

So, we can imagine that Brian Burke told DW he wanted  something like Devin Setoguchi, Justin Braun or Charlie Coyle and a 4th round pick for Beauchemin. A hefty price for the French-Canadian d-man and a move I’m frankly shocked to see the Ducks make. Do they really think they have the horses, especially on their 2nd thru 4th forward lines, to make real noise in the playoffs? Nah. I think Bob Murray just made another boo boo and got taken by his former boss. Why break up the chance to have Gardiner, Fowler and Sbisa running around the Pacific Division for years to get a veteran guy who is better served on a Cup contender? With Murray, it’s not too surprising. “Stupid is as Stupid Does.” Just look at the Jason Blake deal (33 points in 78 games as a Duck while making 4M). Good job Bob. Throw another chair, just don’t hit my laptop.

Make sure to listen to the podcast this week and take part in the listener poll and let us know how you consume the Dudes on Hockey podcast. Mike loves stats and will spend hours pouring over the data as the Dudes continue their quest for Podcast Domination.

Join us next week when Joni Pitkanen gets traded to…somewhere else.

It’s not like me to use a lot of puns in post titles, but it’s early in the morning, and I’m at San Jose airport waiting for a flight.  Instead of paying $8 for a cup of water, I decided to use the free wifi and do something productive.

The Sharks, through 44 games, are 21-18-5, with 47 points.  Last year at this point, they were 28-9-7 (63).  That’s quite the dropoff.  Instead of going into the myriad reasons why this is so (Mark Purdy’s got a pretty decent theory) I want to compare with some other teams in recent history to see where they might end up at the end of the year.

One is the Philadelphia Flyers.  At this time last year, the veteran Flyers were 22-19-3 (47 points).  They had changed their coach a month before, in early December 2009, and promptly went on a 2-8 tear.  They righted the ship a bit after that, going 6-2 before getting to the 44-game mark.  Of course, we know how the season ends up.  They won on the last day of the season against the Rangers to squeak into the playoffs, and had a historic series against Boston en route to the Stanley Cup Finals, where they lost to the Hawks in six games.

The other is the 2010 St. Louis Blues.  This team of young upstarts that made the playoffs in 09-10 skid the first half of 2010, going 18-19-7 (44) in their first 44 games.  Despite decent years from youngsters Perron, Oshie, and Backes, their best player the year before, Brad Boyes, fell off the table, going from 33 goals to 14.  They stayed inconsistent the rest of the year, and finished five points out of the postseason.

So will the Sharks turn it around a la Flyers (perhaps with a new coach, as some fans are already calling for), or struggle with mediocrity the rest of the year, as the Blues did?  I certainly think the Sharks have much more in common with last years’ Flyers than the Blues.  This isn’t a young team trying to find its footing- it’s a veteran team, like Philly, that just couldn’t find a clear path the first half of the year.  That’s not much consolation for Sharks fans at this point, nor is it any sort of guarantee San Jose will get their heads out of their asses and get this thing going the right direction.  But it’s interesting to know the full gambit of options is still available to the Sharks, using only last year as a guide- postseason success is still attainable, but so is crushing disappointment.

Since I just got back from NYC and I haven’t had time to watch all the games yet, I won’t go into a long discussion about them.  But it certainly seems like the lessons supposedly learned in the 4-game winning streak before Christmas were quickly forgotten.  Here’s a quick snapshot of the stuff Doug and I were up to while we were out:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXkRMYJFGxE[/youtube]

Have a great New Year, and don’t forget to watch the Winter Classic tomorrow.  I hope you all have been watching the HBO series, it’s the best hockey show I’ve ever seen.  I had to say ‘show’ because if I said ‘thing’, I would have to stack it up against “The Love Guru”.

Sharks well on their way to another disappointing loss, and they wake up again.  I think I need a mood stabilizer.  I shut off the TV a couple of times in anger during the game, then the Sharks roar back, get a couple of decent calls, have the clock expire literally hundredths of a second before the puck goes in, and then show up Bobrovsky in overtime.  Two fantastic moves by Clowe and Couture, both going to their “bread and butter”- deke to the backhand.  Clowe goes for the roof, Couture the five hole.

Again I’m impressed by the Sharks mettle.  And again I’m disappointed they have to get their butts kicked for a while before they figure out what to do.  On a road trip, against a Stanley Cup finalist, I’ll give them a little more latitude.  But I still feel the same way about tomorrow as I did about tonight- the Sharks could get murdered, we just have to wait and see.

Don’t forget to listen to the podcast.

I wasn”t aware the Sharks’ new goal was not to reduce the inconsistency, but to decrease its period.  The Sharks went from their worst performance of the year to their best during an intermission.  What I would give to have been a fly on the wall for that ‘Rudy’ speech.  Whatever was said, it worked.  I imagine it was this:

T-Mac : Hey guys, just a thought.  TRY PLAYING HARD.

Joe Thornton : <takes shirt off> hmm yeah.

Patrick Marleau : Oh yes.  Absolutely.  Try hard.  Uh huh.

Dan Boyle : Jeez, we suck.  We can play better than this.

Ryane Clowe : Dude, I gotta shave this mustache off.  It’s getting ridiculous.

Niclas Wallin :  Hamburgers.

Trent Yawney : THAT’S IT!  YOU WIN, YOU ALL GET HAMBURGERS!

Sharks : YEAAAAHHHHHH!

Podcast tomorrow.

The win-loss-win-loss train rolls on, this time the Sharks posting their first shutout of the season on Dany Heatley Princess Night in Ottawa.  Best game of the season for several players, Antti Niemi and Justin Braun among them.  I know I’ve been critical of T-Mac for his choices of when to play Niemi in the past, but last night was the right time.  Ottawa has had a bad stretch lately, and you probably want Niitty to play against Montreal on Saturday.  One thing that did amuse me last night was the ‘storyline’ that Niemi has just gotten ‘better and better this season’ (according to Drew Remenda).  I’m a Drew fan, but he got this one way wrong.  Here’s the string of Niemi’s save percentages in his last five games: .903, .878, .938, .813, 1.000.  That’s not ‘better and better’.  That’s up and down, just like the Sharks have been.

The Sharks were utterly dominant at times last night, which is encouraging for Sharks fans, but also frustrating in a way.  It’s the same or less stacked lineup than we’ve seen against recent losses against Columbus, Dallas, and Colorado, yet it was night and day the way they played.  I know I thought the Sharks might reel off some good wins after the performance at home against Chicago- I’m not nearly as confident this time.  Maybe we can get Joe Pavelski or somebody to bash Montreal as a hick town or say that poutine tastes like barf.  Then the fans will boo that player every time he takes the ice, throw flaming jerseys in effigy, and the Sharks roll to another win on the backs of the charged atmosphere.  Maybe the Sharks should plan a 30-city Disparagement Tour, finding a systematic way to infuriate the fans in every arena in order to light the fire they apparently need.

One down, 29 to go.  Although if they keep going hot and cold this way, San Jose may be added to that list without even trying.

Sorry, our schedules won’t permit it.  There literally isn’t an hour between 8am and midnight free for both of us any day this week.  As for the Wings game, it was depressing to witness first hand, but my kneejerk reaction is, how can you expect to beat the best team in the west with half of an AHL blueline?  Don’t want to beat up the new guys, but there were several times where that was readily apparent.  More later.