NHL Situational Plays

[JMon]

HF and oA(o:goals)<=2.52 and opo:goals>=3 and oppo:goals>=3 and opppo:goals>=3 and season>=2007

I would give the oppt. some rest

[JMon]

Any money line home favorite of between -120 to -170, that’s playing in the 2^nd half of the season, versus an opponent that has a goal per game differential of +0.3 or better, and they allowed 3-goals or more in each of their last 3-games, has gone 26-4 (86.7%) since the beginning of the 2009-2010 year.

Can anyone explain what "goal per game differential of +0.3 or better" means here? Is it saying that the average difference in goals scored per successive game at least 0.3? if so, does the following express it?

oA(pp:goals-p:goals@team and season)-tA(pp:goals-p:goals@team and season)>=0.3

I keep getting an error.

I believe goal differential is simply goals scored minus goals allowed. A team is averaging a +.3 or better goal differential on the season

oA(goals-po:goals)>=.3 and opo:goals>=3 and oppo:goals>=3 and opppo:goals>=3 and H and -170<=line<=-120 and game number>40 and 2009<=season

[emceeaye]

panthers ML

bases query on panthers ML tonight. in terms of ROI and wp, not one losing season since 2009:

p:goals=2 and op:goals=3 and H and streak<3 and o:streak<3 and day!=Friday and op:margin<3 and 4>rest - o:rest>-3 and rest - o:rest!=-1 and 0<opp:goals<6 and line<141


update:
But here's a bases one against them:

season>2009 and 0>power play goals - opower play goals>-3 and day!=Tuesday and -4-6 and month!=2 and month!=5 and month!=6 and (A or day!=Sunday) and (215>line>-212 or line>249) and penalties<10 and openalties>1 and p:shots on goal - op:shots on goal<18

no play on this game.

[JMon]

I believe goal differential is simply goals scored minus goals allowed. A team is averaging a +.3 or better goal differential on the season

oA(goals-po:goals)>=.3 and opo:goals>=3 and oppo:goals>=3 and opppo:goals>=3 and H and -170<=line<=-120 and game number>40 and 2009<=season

getting cute with the line parameter

oA(goals-po:goals)>=.3 and opo:goals>=3 and oppo:goals>=3 and opppo:goals>=3 and H and -135< line <-110 and game number>40 and 2009<=season

[emceeaye]

I would give the oppt. some rest

Beautiful Jmon! interesting--I guess when a road team is allowing more goals than its season average over the past 3 games, giving them 1 or more days rest will hurt its chances...you'd think it might help them--shows how little I know about hockey...How's this?

HF and oA(o:goals)<=2.52 and opo:goals>=3 and oppo:goals>=3 and opppo:goals>=3 and season>=2006 and o:rest>=1

[escism]

Ross Benjamin 11/1/14

AF and oS(W,N=5)>=4 and o:WP<49 and o:WP>=40

44-15 (1.34, 74.6%)	avg line: -131.2 / 120.9	on / against: +$2,451 / -$2,606	ROI: +31.6% / -44.0%
27-30-2 (0.35, 47.4%)	avg total: 5.6

Any money line road favorite, versus an opponent with a .400 to .490 money line win percentage, and that opponent has won 4 of their 5 previous games, has gone 57-18 (76%) since 1996.

Appears to be laying it on the Canucks tonight. GL2A


H and po:goals<=2 and ppo:goals<=2 and opvertime>=1 and op:W

136-108 (0.34, 55.7%)	avg line: -144.5 / 132.2	on / against: -$1,212 / +$63	ROI: -3.3% / +0.2%
84-141-19 (-0.23, 37.3%)	avg total: 5.4

Any home team (Toronto) that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their previous 2-games, versus an opponent coming off a win in overtime, has seen 74 of those 123-contests (71.8%) stay under the total during the past 5-seasons.

Taking the Hawks/Leafs Under

p:W and pp:W and 51<= WP<= 60 and o:WP<=30

30-23 (0.17, 56.6%)	avg line: -171.0 / 156.3	on / against: -$674 / +$406	ROI: -7.3% / +7.3%
12-34-7 (-0.71, 26.1%)	avg total: 5.5

Any team (St. Louis) that has won each of their last 2-games, and has a money line winning percentage of .510 to .600, versus an opponent with a money line winning percentage of .300 or less, has seen 86 of those 127-games (67.7%( go under the total since 1997.

Taking the under.

[JMon]

AF and oS(W,N=5)>=4 and o:WP<49 and o:WP>=40

44-15 (1.34, 74.6%)	avg line: -131.2 / 120.9	on / against: +$2,451 / -$2,606	ROI: +31.6% / -44.0%
27-30-2 (0.35, 47.4%)	avg total: 5.6

Any money line road favorite, versus an opponent with a .400 to .490 money line win percentage, and that opponent has won 4 of their 5 previous games, has gone 57-18 (76%) since 1996.

Appears to be laying it on the Canucks tonight. GL2A


H and po:goals<=2 and ppo:goals<=2 and opvertime>=1 and op:W

136-108 (0.34, 55.7%)	avg line: -144.5 / 132.2	on / against: -$1,212 / +$63	ROI: -3.3% / +0.2%
84-141-19 (-0.23, 37.3%)	avg total: 5.4

Any home team (Toronto) that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their previous 2-games, versus an opponent coming off a win in overtime, has seen 74 of those 123-contests (71.8%) stay under the total during the past 5-seasons.

Taking the Hawks/Leafs Under

escism nice one! Keep in mind you can always make a cleaner query by using both sides of a parameter...personal preference of course!

For instance...40<=o:WP<=49 (note: easy way to remember your symbol's 'most of the time' go in the same direction )

[escism]

escism nice one! Keep in mind you can always make a cleaner query by using both sides of a parameter...personal preference of course!

For instance...40<=o:WP<=49 (note: easy way to remember your symbol's 'most of the time' go in the same direction )

I kept trying to do that and it wasn't work for me. Then after looking at yours I realized I wasn't putting in o:WP... I feel real dumb.

[escism]

Power Play Percentage

I'm trying to decode another one of Ross's plays today:

Any road team (Ottawa) that averages 29 or more shots on goal per game, converts 17% or more of their power play opportunities, and had 30 or more shots on goal in each of their previous 5-games, has gone 43-24 (64.2%) against the money line during the past 5-seasons.

I'm having a hard time figuring out the PP%. Theoretically it should be: (The Sum of Power Play Goals / Minutes Power Play) Right? I've looked all through the Google Group and no one seems to have anything worth while on calculating this. Does any one have any insight?

[JMon]

H and po:goals<=2 and ppo:goals<=2 and opvertime>=1 and op:W

136-108 (0.34, 55.7%)	avg line: -144.5 / 132.2	on / against: -$1,212 / +$63	ROI: -3.3% / +0.2%
84-141-19 (-0.23, 37.3%)	avg total: 5.4

Any home team (Toronto) that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their previous 2-games, versus an opponent coming off a win in overtime, has seen 74 of those 123-contests (71.8%) stay under the total during the past 5-seasons.

Taking the Hawks/Leafs Under

by adding rest...this went 3-24 under last year..unreal

rest<3 and o:rest<3

[emceeaye]

AF and oS(W,N=5)>=4 and o:WP<49 and o:WP>=40

44-15 (1.34, 74.6%)	avg line: -131.2 / 120.9	on / against: +$2,451 / -$2,606	ROI: +31.6% / -44.0%
27-30-2 (0.35, 47.4%)	avg total: 5.6

Any money line road favorite, versus an opponent with a .400 to .490 money line win percentage, and that opponent has won 4 of their 5 previous games, has gone 57-18 (76%) since 1996.

Appears to be laying it on the Canucks tonight. GL2A


H and po:goals<=2 and ppo:goals<=2 and opvertime>=1 and op:W

136-108 (0.34, 55.7%)	avg line: -144.5 / 132.2	on / against: -$1,212 / +$63	ROI: -3.3% / +0.2%
84-141-19 (-0.23, 37.3%)	avg total: 5.4

Any home team (Toronto) that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their previous 2-games, versus an opponent coming off a win in overtime, has seen 74 of those 123-contests (71.8%) stay under the total during the past 5-seasons.

Taking the Hawks/Leafs Under

p:W and pp:W and 51<= WP<= 60 and o:WP<=30

30-23 (0.17, 56.6%)	avg line: -171.0 / 156.3	on / against: -$674 / +$406	ROI: -7.3% / +7.3%
12-34-7 (-0.71, 26.1%)	avg total: 5.5

Any team (St. Louis) that has won each of their last 2-games, and has a money line winning percentage of .510 to .600, versus an opponent with a money line winning percentage of .300 or less, has seen 86 of those 127-games (67.7%( go under the total since 1997.

Taking the under.

Mistake

[emceeaye]

AF and oS(W,N=5)>=4 and o:WP<49 and o:WP>=40

44-15 (1.34, 74.6%)	avg line: -131.2 / 120.9	on / against: +$2,451 / -$2,606	ROI: +31.6% / -44.0%
27-30-2 (0.35, 47.4%)	avg total: 5.6

Any money line road favorite, versus an opponent with a .400 to .490 money line win percentage, and that opponent has won 4 of their 5 previous games, has gone 57-18 (76%) since 1996.

Appears to be laying it on the Canucks tonight. GL2A


H and po:goals<=2 and ppo:goals<=2 and opvertime>=1 and op:W

136-108 (0.34, 55.7%)	avg line: -144.5 / 132.2	on / against: -$1,212 / +$63	ROI: -3.3% / +0.2%
84-141-19 (-0.23, 37.3%)	avg total: 5.4

Any home team (Toronto) that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their previous 2-games, versus an opponent coming off a win in overtime, has seen 74 of those 123-contests (71.8%) stay under the total during the past 5-seasons.

Taking the Hawks/Leafs Under

p:W and pp:W and 51<= WP<= 60 and o:WP<=30

30-23 (0.17, 56.6%)	avg line: -171.0 / 156.3	on / against: -$674 / +$406	ROI: -7.3% / +7.3%
12-34-7 (-0.71, 26.1%)	avg total: 5.5

Any team (St. Louis) that has won each of their last 2-games, and has a money line winning percentage of .510 to .600, versus an opponent with a money line winning percentage of .300 or less, has seen 86 of those 127-games (67.7%( go under the total since 1997.

Taking the under.

Yes, I saw that one too but then came across one of bases' recent consistently positive ROI queries with a high sample size favoring the oilers.

season > 2009 and 0 > power play goals - opower play goals > -3 and day != Tuesday and -4 -6 = -10 and month != 2 and month != 5 and month != 6 and (A or day != Sunday) and (215 > line > -212 or line > 249) and penalties < 10 and openalties > 1 and p:shots on goal - op:shots on goal < 18 and op:shots on goal < 43 and p:assists != 5 and 14 > op:assists > 1 and p:shifts > 326 and 83 > op:shifts - p:shifts > -75 and po:goals > 0 and rest + o:rest < 7

Even though there are clearlly omissions where it says "-4 -6" the query does appear to still have useful predictive value. What are others' thoughts on how to reconcile this conflict? I know Nash has discussed this type of situation and how to handle it, but not sure if I know how to effectively go about it, other than the way I'm doing it, which is a no play for me....

Thanks.

Update:

When you combine them, you get:
season > 2009 and o:AF and tS(W,N=5) >= 4 and WP < 49 and WP >= 40 and 0 > power play goals - opower play goals > -3 and day != Tuesday and -4 -6 = -10 and month != 2 and month != 5 and month != 6 and (A or day != Sunday) and (215 > line > -212 or line > 249) and penalties < 10 and openalties > 1 and p:shots on goal - op:shots on goal < 18 and op:shots on goal < 43 and p:assists != 5 and 14 > op:assists > 1 and p:shifts > 326 and 83 > op:shifts - p:shifts > -75 and po:goals > 0 and rest + o:rest < 7

Problem is that the sample size is too small to learn a thing...which incidentally is unlike the redwings/kings game yesterday--hen you combined both of those queries, redwings came out on top despite a low sample size....

Thiughts?

[emceeaye]

by adding rest...this went 3-24 under last year..unreal

rest<3 and o:rest<3

Nice, Escism and Jmon, I like that one too--I'm on it!

[otunj]

season > 2009 and 0 > power play goals - opower play goals > -3 and day != Tuesday and -4 -6 = -10 and month != 2 and month != 5 and month != 6 and (A or day != Sunday) and (215 > line > -212 or line > 249) and penalties < 10 and openalties > 1 and p:shots on goal - op:shots on goal < 18 and op:shots on goal < 43 and p:assists != 5 and 14 > op:assists > 1 and p:shifts > 326 and 83 > op:shifts - p:shifts > -75 and po:goals > 0 and rest + o:rest < 7

that query looks way to loaded and back fitted. Curious when that query was made. If beginning of last season and it proved itself, fine. I'm gonna watch that one

[emceeaye]

that query looks way to loaded and back fitted. Curious when that query was made. If beginning of last season and it proved itself, fine. I'm gonna watch that one

There are a lot if variables, but the beauty of bases' queries is that he maximizes the number of different factors he looks at by keeping the ranges of values for each variable wide...there's really no way to overfit a query like this with so many variables while keeping sample size so large, especially given that the NHL database only goes back to like 2006.


Btw, ROI was positive every season since 2009. In 2013 it was 18.4%

[escism]

Kings Under Today?

A and 51 <= WP <= 60 and Minimum(date@team and season and A,N=3) >= date - 5 and game number <=42

19-24 (-0.42, 44.2%)	avg line: 108.3 / -119.8	on / against: -$445 / +$217	ROI: -9.6% / +4.0%
20-16-7 (0.60, 55.6%)	avg total: 5.4

Any road team (Kings) with a money line winning percentage of .510 to .600, playing their 3^rd road game within the last 5-days, and the game is in the first half of the season, has seen 122 of those 186 (65.6%) situations stay under the total.

Not sure I'm getting the query right. Jmon, I snagged your 3rd road game in 5 days from the Group. So thanks for that. I'd love to hear feedback b/c nothing is leaning towards picking the under 5.0.

Adding o:rest=0 makes it a lot easier to lean towards the under. Just looking for some feedback. Thanks everyone.

[emceeaye]

Redwings ML

2 queries from this thread and or Ross Benjamin post earlier this year on sbr pointing to Redwings today:

pt:shots on goal / pt:goals <= 7.1 and Sum(W@team,N=3) = 2 and op:date = date -1 and HWP > o:HWP and season >= 2011

D and 150 <= line >= 100 and tA(goals) - p:goals >= .65 and po:goals >= 3 and ppo:goals >= 3 and pppo:goals >= 3 and season >= 2009

what a surprise, it's against the lowly sabres


looks to be very juiced however.

[zxqwpdbg]

just made this a few minutes ago. doesn't make a lot of sense, but im still proud.

(op:AW or op:HL) and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak!=2 and o:streak!=-2 and op:margin>=-2 and o:rest!=2 and playoffs=0

[JMon]

just made this a few minutes ago. doesn't make a lot of sense, but im still proud.

(op:AW or op:HL) and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak!=2 and o:streak!=-2 and op:margin>=-2 and o:rest!=2 and playoffs=0

nice job zxq!

[emceeaye]

just made this a few minutes ago. doesn't make a lot of sense, but im still proud.

(op:AW or op:HL) and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak!=2 and o:streak!=-2 and op:margin>=-2 and o:rest!=2 and playoffs=0

Very nice zxq!

While it doesnt seem to be consistent with +ROI every year for dogs, it does excellently year in and year out when you add line<=-125 since 2009:

(op:AW or op:HL) and season>=2009 and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak!=2 and o:streak!=-2 and op:margin>=-2 and o:rest!=2 and playoffs=0 and line<=-125

It also does ever so slightly better at least in terms of WP in 2nd half of season: game number>=42

Also adding "o:streak>-2" to replace "o:streak!=-2" helps as well:

(op:AW or op:HL) and season >= 2009 and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak != 2 and o:streak > -2 and op:margin >= -2 and o:rest != 2 and playoffs = 0 and line <= -125

[emceeaye]

Ross Benjamin post on 1/9/14:

Play on a home money line underdog that allowed 4-goals or more in their previous game, versus an opponent that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their last 5-games, has gone 47-19 (71.2%) since the beginning of the 2009-2010 year.

SDQL:
HD and po:goals>=4 and opo:goals<=2 and oppo:goals<=2 and opppo:goals<=2 and oppppo:goals<=2 and opppppo:goals<=2 and season>=2009

I'm not even getting anywhere near his posted win %. Am I missing something here? Lol

[escism]

2 Situations for Rangers/Blues Under 11/3/14

From Ross Benjamin
game number<=42 and p:HW and pp:HW and 51 <= WP <= 60

137-115 (0.23, 54.4%)	avg line: -119.4 / 107.7	on / against: +$282 / -$1,448	ROI: +0.9% / -5.0%
90-148-14 (-0.31, 37.8%)	avg total: 5.4

I pulled this one from this thread, not sure who gets credit on it.

(14 - (rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest + ppp:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest + ppp:rest + pppp:rest) <= 5) and p:goals = 0 and season >= 2010

45-43 (-0.07, 51.1%)	avg line: 100.7 / -112.1	on / against: +$302 / -$653	ROI: +2.9% / -5.9%
22-57-9 (-0.61, 27.8%)	avg total: 5.3

Good Luck if you play

[zxqwpdbg]

Ross Benjamin post on 1/9/14:

Play on a home money line underdog that allowed 4-goals or more in their previous game, versus an opponent that’s allowed 2-goals or less in each of their last 5-games, has gone 47-19 (71.2%) since the beginning of the 2009-2010 year.

SDQL:
HD and po:goals>=4 and opo:goals<=2 and oppo:goals<=2 and opppo:goals<=2 and oppppo:goals<=2 and opppppo:goals<=2 and season>=2009

I'm not even getting anywhere near his posted win %. Am I missing something here? Lol

i would assume the same thing. i looked at a few of his query's and some just never add up.

[emceeaye]

From Ross Benjamin
game number<=42 and p:HW and pp:HW and 51 <= WP <= 60

137-115 (0.23, 54.4%)	avg line: -119.4 / 107.7	on / against: +$282 / -$1,448	ROI: +0.9% / -5.0%
90-148-14 (-0.31, 37.8%)	avg total: 5.4

I pulled this one from this thread, not sure who gets credit on it.

(14 - (rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest + ppp:rest) <= 5 or 14 - (rest + p:rest + pp:rest + ppp:rest + pppp:rest) <= 5) and p:goals = 0 and season >= 2010

45-43 (-0.07, 51.1%)	avg line: 100.7 / -112.1	on / against: +$302 / -$653	ROI: +2.9% / -5.9%
22-57-9 (-0.61, 27.8%)	avg total: 5.3

Good Luck if you play

Thanks for posting..it was my attempt at rendering one of Ross Benjamin's posts with help from JMON and individuals from the google group...This was one of the bi-products of tinkering around with it that actually yielded something meaningful. I'm still undecided about what I think of this query especially since it had losing seasons in 2009 and other years...

Its been doing ok lately. Good luck if you play.

[emceeaye]

i would assume the same thing. i looked at a few of his query's and some just never add up.

Lol, I know. He's hit and miss with the description actually translating into SDQL that reflects the stated record. But sometimes, either the query that comes out of it is nice or when you play with it, you produce a new one that is nice.

[emceeaye]

zxq's query

When you use "2>o:streak>-2", the WP and ROI goes up even higher...very nice:

(op:AW or op:HL) and season = 2014 and oA(shots on goal) < opo:shots on goal -10 and o:streak != 2 and 2>o:streak > -2 and op:margin >= -2 and o:rest != 2 and playoffs = 0 and line<=-125

It looks like dogs have done well with this query until recently.

[zxqwpdbg]

trying to figure out power play % and penalty kill %. but these don't seem right.

tA(power play goals/oenalties)@team,1

tA(oower play goals/penalties)@team,1

[escism]

Man I was trying to figure this out the other day. Did you post it to the Google group? Maybe we can get some feed back from JJ there.

[emceeaye]

Here's one I just came up with. Feel free to tweak to improve WP and ROI:

HF and op:margin<=-4 and season>=2009 and 2>=o:streak>-2

[escism]

Here's one I just came up with. Feel free to tweak to improve WP and ROI:

HF and op:margin<=-4 and season>=2009 and 2>=o:streak>-2

I like it! Hopefully it comes around soon!

[emceeaye]

Ross Benjamin post 1/3/14:

SDQL:
F and op:margin=1 and opp:margin=1 and oppp:margin=1 and op:AW and opp:AW and t:date-op:date<=5

[emceeaye]

tweaked RB query

From 1/2/14 post:

Tweaked Ross Benjamin query using "tA(power play goals/oenalties)" as crude index of power play conversion rate:

H and total<=5 and tA(power play goals/oenalties)>=.13 and p:shots on goal>=30 and pp:shots on goal>=30 and ppp:shots on goal>=30 and pppp:shots on goal>=30 and ppppp:shots on goal>=30

[emceeaye]

trying to figure out power play % and penalty kill %. but these don't seem right.

tA(power play goals/oenalties)@team,1

tA(oower play goals/penalties)@team,1

How about just "tA(power play goals/oenalties)" even though the idea of using minutes power play as aore accurate index sounds appealing.

[JMon]

Here's one I just came up with. Feel free to tweak to improve WP and ROI:

HF and op:margin<=-4 and season>=2009 and 2>=o:streak>-2

Nice Emc...the only thing I can see is the 'play on' team with high losses on the season don't tend to cover, as well as the expectation of a high scoring game or high totals. Also did you see in the month of 11? Don't know much about hockey, but wanted to point it out.

[JMon]

From 1/2/14 post:

Tweaked Ross Benjamin query using "tA(power play goals/oenalties)" as crude index of power play conversion rate:

H and total<=5 and tA(power play goals/oenalties)>=.13 and p:shots on goal>=30 and pp:shots on goal>=30 and ppp:shots on goal>=30 and pppp:shots on goal>=30 and ppppp:shots on goal>=30

Did you happen to check out the Western Conf?