The goal is to provide data in a format that can be used to run
queries, aid in research, etc.  For example, someone might want to
make a list of players who have had 300 career goals without having a
30 goal season, or the top Boston Bruins leaders in assists, or
defencemen who have had 20 goal seasons, or whatever.  As far as I
know, these queries can not be done at hockeydb.com or any other web
site, and they certainly can't be done with printed sources.  Is there
value added here?  I certainly think so.

A second goal is to make data available in a form that is as
historically accurate as possible.  Printed sources inevitably contain
errors - and this database undoubtedly does as well - but it's much
easier to correct a database and issue a new release than to put out a
new edition of Total Hockey.

I gave some consideration to adding some copyright language, but
decided the fewer restrictions, the better.  I'm not 100% convinced
that was the correct decision, so perhaps further discussion of this
point would be useful.

Doug

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
>
> I'd like to ask a question; what is the goal of hockey-databank? If it
> is simply to "free" or "open source" the information on hockeydb.com or
> other online sources, I don't see the "value added" in that.
>
> You'll note that the Lahman baseball database has the following language
> on it:
>
> "This database is copyright 1996-2006 by Sean Lahman. A license is
> granted
> for individual use for research purposes. It may not be re-distributed
> without permission. Any commercial use, or other dissemination of the
> database in part or in whole is prohibited. Use of this database
> constitutes acceptance of these terms."
>
> Shouldn't this project have similar language?
>
> Ralph Slate
> http://www.hockeydb.com

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
>
> >A question, are you considering adding draftinformation to the
> >Master-file as well? Would be a nice complement and the information
is
> >readily available at hockeydb (amongst other sites).
>
> I'd like to ask a question; what is the goal of hockey-databank? If
it
> is simply to "free" or "open source" the information on hockeydb.com
or
> other online sources, I don't see the "value added" in that.
>
> Ralph Slate
> http://www.hockeydb.com
>

For me, personally, I see this is a one stop shop. I'd like to run my
own comparisons, see top stats for an entire year, compare number one
draftpicks whatever.. and I'd like the statistics in a database format
so that I have complete flexibility.

Lahman's database lets me do this for baseball, and yes, from my point
of view it's for "research" only and for personal use.

I use HockeyDb extensively, but one thing I miss from there is
individual shots-stats (for example).. with an "offline" database I
increase my flexibility for my own interests. With this said, please
don't think I don't appreciate the hockeydb-site.. It's a fantastic
resource as well.

/Daniel

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:

>
> It sounds to me that you want to enjoy the benefit of the substantial
> work that I have done while simultaneously taking away any benefit that
> I may able to derive from that work. That's awfully one-sided of you.
>

Is this what's bothering you? That this initiative will draw people
away from hockeydb and thereby cause loss of income for you?

I certainly hope not, but I see these two things as two separate
usergroups. This whole database is for people who simply can't fulfill
their need though HockeyDb.. if they would, this database would never
have appeared.

Like I've said before, hockeydb is a great site.. if I want to quickly
look up a certain player it's the first place I go to. But if I want
to run my own queries, where do I go? Now I can go here.

However, my friend, who's only interested in finding individual
players' stats, he "only" needs HockeyDb. I've used citations for only
because I don't mean to belittle a great site..

/Daniel

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
>
> I'm obviously trying to protect my self-interests here. I have no
> problem whatsoever with people using data from hockeydb.com personally,
> or to further their research, particularly when it comes in the form of
> value-added (I don't consider the ability to subtotal "value-added", by
> the way, because I was talking in terms adding additional information,
> not just user interface usability). My main concern is competition
> derived directly from my own work.

Let's be clear on one point - I freely admit that I did not type
everything in from scratch, but this database was *not* derived from
hockeydb.com.  The primary sources used were:

* The Hockey Research Association:  NHL 1917-18 - 1976-77, 1982-83,
1984-85, 1988-89 - 1998-99; team special teams, 1962-63 - 2000-01; all
WHA seasons
* The Hockey Summary Project:  1977-78 - 1979-80
* USA Today:  1999-2000 - 2005-06
* North American Pro Hockey (Tom King's site):  1983-84, 1985-86 - 1987-88
* Recent team special teams statistics (2001-02 - present) were
obtained from ESPN.com

This left a number of gaps (certain statistics missing from various
years), which were then filled in by hand from published sources.  I
primarily used hockeydb.com as a convenient way of double checking
problems - for example, when team totals didn't add up, it was a
convenient way to determine if a player / season had been omitted.

As far as "value added" is concerned - whether or not you see the
value in the ability to "subtotal", I think a number of people may
find it very useful.  As far as "adding additional information" is
concerned - have you actually looked at the database?  Because if you
do, you'll see that it includes power play goals, shorthanded goals,
shots taken, +/-, etc. - unless I'm mistaken, NONE of this is
available at hockeydb.com.

Doug

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
>
> >Is this what's bothering you? That this initiative will draw people
> >away from hockeydb and thereby cause loss of income for you?
>
> No, I'm concerned that since this data is being advertised as "open
> source", that means that the next entrepreneur would go to
> hockey-databank, download all the data (much of it pulled from
> hockeydb), and set up "hockeyd-c", which would be just like hockeydb.
> That person could then put his effort into other areas because he will
> be piggybacking on the effort I expended making this data available.
>
> I'd have no issue if there was a non-commercial disclaimer, nor would I
> use the data here to augment hockeydb.com.
>
> Ralph

You probably sent this before my last message, but again let me
emphasize - this database was NOT "pulled" from hockeydb.com.
Frankly, I think it's a bit presumptuous for you to assume that it was.

You also seem to be operating under the misconception that I need your
blessing (I assume because you still think I've stolen your work).  I
would certainly like it if you were "on board", but if you aren't,
that's OK too.

Discussion about whether hockeydb.com has been ripped off is now closed.

Doug

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
>

>
> I only started this conversation because of the talk of expanding the
> database with more data that was "available at hockeydb". Today it's
> just NHL/WHA data, but the next logical phase is to include data from

ok, that one was my fault. I was inquiring about draft-info, i.e.
Vincent Lecavalier's entry would have draftyear 1998, draftposititon 1
etc.

I mentioned hockeydb as an example of a source, but you could go to
any sports-site to find current information and you can look at the
draftlists in Total Hockey as well.

I'll address scope / goals / "to do" list shortly in a separate post.
  Suffice it to say for now that my goal is most definitely *not* to
duplicate hockeydb.com in CSV format.

As far as the chances of this project killing off hockeydb.com, I
honestly don't think there's much to worry about.
Baseball-reference.com has continued to grow despite the fact that the
underlying data is freely available (there has even been talk of
adding employees in the blog recently).

Doug

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, <slater@...> wrote:
> I only started this conversation because of the talk of expanding the
> database with more data that was "available at hockeydb". Today it's
> just NHL/WHA data, but the next logical phase is to include data from
> other leagues for NHL players, then the next logical phase is to include
> the other players from those leagues, etc. And before you know it, the
> goal of the group is to simply scrape data from hockeydb and publish it
> as a standalone database to let others use it in their own ventures.
>
> I think this is an important conversation to have, because if the
> ultimate goal is to open-source all hockeydb.com's data without doing
> any additional research to augment the body of knowledge, let me know so
> I can shift my priorities and not get hung up on the idea that I'll be
> able to ever do this as my day job.
>
> Ralph Slate
> http://www.hockeydb.com
>

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, "dsreyn" <dreynolds@...> wrote:
> As far as the chances of this project killing off hockeydb.com, I
> honestly don't think there's much to worry about.
> Baseball-reference.com has continued to grow despite the fact that the
> underlying data is freely available (there has even been talk of
> adding employees in the blog recently).
>
> Doug

Baseball-Reference.com, TheBaseballCube.com, BaseballAlmanac.com,
BaseballProspectus.com, REtrosheet.org, and I'm sure others, all offer
an online baseball database.  For the first, definitely, and the 3rd
and 4th and 5th, likely, they all used, or started to use, the Lahman
database, which itself has been spawned into baseball-databank.org.

The reason they can all exist is because the marketplace supports it.
Only the 2nd one offers minor league data (and draft data).  B-r.com
and Retro offer PBP data in addition.  BP.com offers "adjusted" stats.

Insofar as hockeydb.com, it's existence can be assured as long as it
keeps something of value, the most important being the minor league
data.  HockeyDB.com can increase its value by including the PP/SH and
full plus/minus data, and can decrease its value by giving up its draft
data.  Whether that's a fair trade, both sides can decide.

Since Ralph is a superb researcher, it would be insane to try,
intentionally or as a byproduct, to squeeze him out.  We need guys like
Ralph.

Doug has also proven himself to be quite resourceful, and therefore,
his efforts need to be fed as well, if we want this thing to grow.

It is also possible that baseball-reference will eventually get into
the hockey field (or some other site), be it either by buying out Ralph
or Doug or going on its own.  To that end, the sites that don't grow
will end up being on the short-end.

I would have to say that any data that is made available would need to
be done with almost no limitation, as is Retrosheet and baseball-
databank (i.e., cite the source).  Anything else would be a recipe for
disaster.

Tom

Just want to add my 2 cents in regards to Ralph's comments...

Ralph wrote:
>>I have never subscribed to the theory of so many SIHR members,
>>which is to hoard data, keep it unavailable, and then make secret
>>deals to share it under the provision that it can be shared with no
>>one else. I am not holding back any set of data under subscription
>>or pay services.

I have only been a SIHR member for about 5 years, but in that time have
become a rather central part of most aspects, acting as webmaster and
newsletter editor. I have never considered that we "hoard" data, and
have certainly not made any secret deals for data. The hockey news or
paper xyz calls, and I write custom queries to try to answer the
question. Some clown trying to win a Leafs contest calls, I say so
sorry...no time. I decide what happens with the data and who gets it,
and have only ever dealt with one person with which we have exchange
data. No other person has ever approached me. As for copying "total
hockey", the stats actually came from us in the first place. And, we
are so far beyond on the NHL now that it only makes up a small portion
of our stats. Also, we never, ever intended to compete with hockey DB.
That is almost impossible at this point in term of recognition. Plus,
we really only have the basics (G-A-P). It is not intended for hard
core stats guys and poolies, but rather a decent historical record of
all levels of organized hockey.

In regards to to the "subscription" part, please remember that SIHR is
not just a stats DB, but an organization that offers quarterly
newsletters and an annual journal (hard copy snail mail stuff) in
addition to the stats DB. How are we supposed to finance that? So, we
made the decision to make the website accessible only to members, where
they can access the stats, and the publications in PDF format. We also
have two meetings a year. Finally, I am really against having pop-up
adds and annoying banner ads (sorry, I just hate them), so the small
$25/year fee per member allows us to avoid this form of cost recovery
for hosting fees.

Ralph wrote:
>>I can understand why the SIHR attitude evolved the way it did. I
>>never created hockeydb.com as a business venture,...
SIHR is 100% volunteer operated. We do not make any $, so calling it a
business venture is not reasonable. I have spent many hours like you
fixing messed up stats, licking enveloppes and so on, and I get
absoluteluy no money. I invest all of my time in programming and and
design for free, just like you.

So...let's all just get along :-)

James

I believe the Lahman / Forman team is working on a hockey site.
http://www.hockey-reference.com has been reserved by them for over a
year, though it's just a placeholder for now.  Lahman apparently has a
hockey database of his own.

For what it's worth, there's another site that's been up at least a
year with a layout undoubtedly based on the sports-reference.com model
(though lacking most of the usual sports-reference.com bells and
whistles) at http://www.databasehockey.com (NHL only, with only the
basic stats).

Doug

--- In hockey-databank@yahoogroups.com, "tangotiger" <tangotiger@...>
wrote:
>
> It is also possible that baseball-reference will eventually get into
> the hockey field (or some other site), be it either by buying out Ralph
> or Doug or going on its own.  To that end, the sites that don't grow
> will end up being on the short-end.

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the hockey-databank
group.

   File        : /hdb-2007-02-01.zip
   Uploaded by : dsreyn <dreynolds@...>
   Description : Hockey database, Feb. 1, 2007

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hockey-databank/files/hdb-2007-02-01.zip

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

dsreyn <dreynolds@...>

I have made a number of changes in this release.  The main ones (other
than minor corrections) are as follows:

* Removed probable phantoms - Mike Neville, 1917; Bob Price, 1919;
Charles Fortier, 1923.  After the recent discussion, I have decided to
leave Randy Andreachuk in.

* Master table:
   - Dropped the "WHA flag" field in favor of two separate fields -
"firstWHA" and "lastWHA".
   - "lastNHL" now uses a year consistent with the rest of the database
- e.g., 2005 for 2005-06.
   - "Hal Colborne" is now listed as "Howie Colborne"; "Gordon Spencer"
is now listed as "Gordon Spence".

* Scoring table:
   - Substantial revisions for 1917-18 through 1925-26 (and some others
through about 1940), mainly in line with Total Hockey II.  Thanks to
Stu McMurray for corrected 1917-18 data, which includes game-winning
goals.
   - Added a couple of missing entries - Gordon Spence, 1925-26, and
Vic Lynn, 1942-43.
   - Fixed Ron Hextall's goal in the 1988-89 playoffs (now listed
correctly as a shorthanded goal).
   - Numerous additions to the WHA statistics, drawing primarily from
Surgent's book.

* Teams table:
   - The "rank" field for 1917-18 through 1920-21 now represents an
overall combined ranking for two halves of the season.
   - Added an additional table - TeamsHalf, with separate results for
the first and second halves of the season for 1917-18 through 1920-21.
   - Added WHA special teams statistics, PIM totals, and bench minors
(where available).
   - Filled in the playoff result field for 1977-78 and 1978-79 WHA
seasons (inadvertently omitted previously).

* Awards:
   - Added WHA awards
   - Separated the awards into three tables - AwardsPlayers,
AwardsCoaches, and AwardsMisc (the last has only the Lester Patrick
award, which doesn't really fit in either of the other two).
   - Posthumous Lester Patrick award winners are now indicated.

* Coaches:
   - A bunch of fixes based on the notes in the introduction to the
coaching register in Total Hockey II.  This primarily impacts early
NHL seasons (particularly Toronto).
   - Dave Lewis and Barry Smith now have distinct "stint" entries while
they served as co-coaches in 1998-99.

* There are three new tables - ScoringSC, GoaliesSC, and TeamsSC.
These have Stanley Cup Finals data for 1917-18 through 1925-26, when
the Stanley Cup was not an NHL-only event.  Playoff data for these
seasons in the other tables (Scoring, Goalies, Teams) no longer
includes the Stanley Cup Finals.

Doug

> I believe the Lahman / Forman team is working on a hockey site.
> http://www.hockey-reference.com <http://www.hockey-reference.com> has
> been reserved by them for over a
> year, though it's just a placeholder for now. Lahman apparently has a
> hockey database of his own.
>
> For what it's worth, there's another site that's been up at least a
> year with a layout undoubtedly based on the sports-reference.
>
> com model
> (though lacking most of the usual sports-reference.com bells and
> whistles) at http://www.databasehockey.com
> <http://www.databasehockey.com> (NHL only, with only the
> basic stats).
>
On that note, do people actually LIKE the layout of the
baseball-reference website? I've used it on occasion, but I found it
maddening to use.

On another note, there is another hockey stats database project,
developed independent from the other online sources.

http://www.bballsports.com/

That one is different because it is actually an online application that
does not allow you unfettered access to raw data, but gives you an
interface to query it. From what the site says, it only goes to 2004. I
suppose the problem with any such site is that there is a risk that they
will get discouraged and give up.

Ralph

--- Ralph Slate <slater@...> wrote:
> On that note, do people actually LIKE the layout of
> the
> baseball-reference website? I've used it on
> occasion, but I found it
> maddening to use.
>

What is so maddening about it?  Speaking as both a
programmer and end-user, it's fantastic.

And I'm not alone:
http://tinyurl.com/32gvvt

HockeyDB is excellent too.

Tom

---------------------------------------------
http://www.InsideTheBook.com
The Book--Playing The Percentages In Baseball











-----------------------------------



________________________________________________________________________________\
____
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265

dsreyn wrote:

> Substantial revisions for 1917-18 through 1925-26 (and some others
> through about 1940), mainly in line with Total Hockey II.

This one is a pet peeve of mine. I'm not sure if people are aware of the
issues surrounding this, but I'll try and highlight them.

  From what I understand, no one bothered to compile NHL statistics in
1917-18 for the 1917-18 season. They were compiled years later by
someone in the NHL. There were no gamesheets, so he presumably used
newspaper accounts. Games played were not compiled; they were largely
researched by Charles Coleman in the 1960's.

Those NHL stats were in effect from perhaps the 30's or 40's until when
TH2 came out.

Someone -- Bob Duff, perhaps -- went back and re-compiled the stats from
the NHL's first season from newspaper accounts. Over 80% of the numbers
now do not match what had been previously accepted as the correct
numbers. I'm not sure if the details of this research have ever been
made public, or if we just have to "trust" whoever recompiled them. I
believe they even "added" assists, even though the NHL did not compile
them for that season. They did this by making judgment calls by reading
the newspaper accounts. I think that's preposterous because it uses
today's standards to revise history.

I have had disagreements with Morey Holzman on this issue a number of
times. He feels that since there is no way to know how the original
stats were compiled, and since we have no way to prove or disprove any
errors made while compiling them,  and since they were presumably done
from newspaper articles, that it is OK to create a new set of stats in
this way. I have heard that the NHL has hired Duff to do this for all
early NHL seasons, even those which were compiled from actual game
sheets, now long-gone. I think that's also preposterous because it takes
the de facto stance that whoever compiled the stats originally was an
idiot who didn't know what he was doing, and that newspaper writers are
far more accurate. I find that ridiculous.

I believe that it is OK to use newspaper reports to fill in information
that has never been compiled before (such as pre-1942 NHL GP), but using
the accounts to revise established stats shouldn't be done lightly. At
the very least, the person undertaking this significant endeavor should
publish all details behind it, including methodologies and detailed game
data, and that should be vetted among other researchers.

Until that is done, I won't accept the clandestine revisions to the
1917-18 NHL stats, I accept the version published by the NHL augmented
by the Coleman games played data.

Ralph

Tangotiger w
> What is so maddening about it? Speaking as both a
> programmer and end-user, it's fantastic.
I think it's the overabundance of abbreviations. I like the verbosity of
showing that a player played for the Boston Bruins instead of BOS. I
suppose that something has to give when there are 20+ items to report on
a line. I also don't like the "throw everything onto one page" concept,
I'd prefer to see data more categorized.

I do like the "similar player" function though. That's really cool. Too
bad the lack of hockey stats makes such automated comparisons virtually
impossible to make.

Ralph

General objectives:

* Provide data in a format that can be used to run queries, aid in
research, etc.

* Avoid excessive restrictions on distribution and use.

* Try to be as historically accurate as possible.  This means that the
data could deviate from historical "original" sources in a number of
cases.

Scope:

* Currently the database covers the NHL and WHA.  I would like to
expand it to include several other leagues generally recognized as
"major":  NHA (1909-10 through 1916-17), PCHA (1911-12 through
1923-24), and WCHL (1921-22 through 1925-26).  I consider minor
leagues, amateur leagues, European leagues, etc. to be beyond the
scope of this project.

"To do" list (in no particular order of priority):

* Resolve situations where individual totals do not add to the team
totals.  Obviously, this will not always be possible, but some errors
may be correctable.  For example, there are a relatively large number
of cases in the 1980s where PIM totals don't add correctly.

* Data for the other major leagues mentioned above.

* A postseason series table - not listing every game, but summarizing
the results of each playoff round.

* Team splits (home / road records, month by month results).

* Additional biographical information:
   - Change name information so we have first name, middle name, and
nickname(s)
   - Height, weight, shooting hand
   - Death (date, location)
   - College attended

* Draft information - year, drafting team, round, overall pick number.

* Additional statistical categories - power play and shorthanded
assists, average time on ice, game tying goals, overtime goals,
shootout statistics (for both shooters and goalies).  I rate this as a
fairly low priority.  Of the statistics I mentioned, I'd probably be
most interested in shootout statistics.

* Total Hockey II updated goals allowed for 1955-56 through 1962-63 to
account for empty net goals.  I haven't decided how or if I want to
incorporate this information.  One possibility would be to leave the
goals allowed data as-is, and add a supplementary table with the
revised figures.

There are probably a bunch of other useful things that could be added.

Doug

Ralph Slate wrote:

> dsreyn wrote:
>
> > Substantial revisions for 1917-18 through 1925-26 (and some others
> > through about 1940), mainly in line with Total Hockey II.
>
> This one is a pet peeve of mine.

Hi Guys:

Bob Duff recompiled the NHL stats at the request of the league for the
1917-18 through 1925-26 seasons. There are no gamesheets for these
seasons. I have seen first-hand at the NHL office in Toronto that they
have nothing for those first few years. In fact, there are a few sheets
missing here and there for all seasons up until the early 1950's.

The NHL commissioned and accepts Duff's work as official so who are we
to say otherwise?

There is no detailed methodology published because this was an inhouse
project of the NHL and not private "publish or perish" research.

My personal pet peeve has always been seeing Mike Neville show up in
the 1917-18 stats. An early researcher made a mistake from a newspaper
account of a game and the error wasn't corrected for years. Even the
NHL guide used to include him in their retired player roster, showing
his first NHL season as 1917-18. The error was corrected based mainly
on Bob Duff's research.(not to mention the fact that Neville would have
only been 13 years old at the start of the 1917-18 season!)

I have talked to Duff a number of times on this interesting subject. He
has shared his research with me and I provided the stats for the
1917-18 season to this project because one of the goals here is
accuracy. What could be more accurate than stats that are deemed
official by the league in question?

I would love for Bob to write a paper in the SIHR Journal outlining his
trials and tribulations in re-compiling the early stats of the NHL. It
would go a long way to answering many researchers questions.

Stu




________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Have a burning question?
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.

Stu McMurray wrote:
> Bob Duff recompiled the NHL stats at the request of the league for the
> 1917-18 through 1925-26 seasons. There are no gamesheets for these
> seasons. I have seen first-hand at the NHL office in Toronto that they
> have nothing for those first few years. In fact, there are a few sheets
> missing here and there for all seasons up until the early 1950's.

That's my peeve -- if score sheets once existed, they were presumably
more accurate than newspaper accounts. I can _maybe_ see it for the
1917-18 season, although I think that recreating assists is wrong,
because they weren't awarded/compiled that season, and since they are
subjective, this is revisionism.

The Hockey Summary Project should tell you this. Look at what Pete Anson
did with boxscores from the Hockey News -- he can't match the official
stats.

I would like to see Duff do his thing on a season where gamesheets are
available -- using the exact same methodology, and then see what he
comes up with. If there is more than a 1% difference, then I say the
methodology is simply revisionism based on flawed accounts.

Ralph

Ralph wrote-->
That's my peeve -- if score sheets once existed, they were presumably
more accurate than newspaper accounts. I can _maybe_ see it for the
1917-18 season, although I think that recreating assists is wrong,
because they weren't awarded/compiled that season, and since they are
subjective, this is revisionism.

Stu writes-->
There were no score sheets until 1926-27. The NHL relied on newspaper
accounts. There was no radio coverage back then either. The newspaper
accounts were the only written record of the games. I am sure they had
errors but they would be the most accurate account of the games simply
by default wouldn't they?

On a side note I found that the majority of the missing sheets for the
years 1927 to 1952 were from the Chicago home games played on Sundays.
For some reason these game sheets had a hard time making it to the NHL
office in Montreal. At the bottom of each sheet it stated that "This
report should be checked, signed and dispatched to National Hockey
League, 922 Sun Life Building, by the quickest means possible."
Apparently the pony express out of the mid-west wasn't reliable when it
came to delivering hockey reports. <g>

===

Ralph wrote-->
The Hockey Summary Project should tell you this. Look at what Pete
Anson did with boxscores from the Hockey News -- he can't match the
official stats.

Stu writes-->
Agreed, but we knew going in that the numbers would be off because THN
was well known for typos. We used THN as a starting point for our data
entry because that is what I had access to on a wide basis. I think we
found that it could be off by 20% or more per year from the official
stats <gasp> and the penalty totals were always hopelessly way off.

===

Ralph wrote-->
I would like to see Duff do his thing on a season where gamesheets are
available -- using the exact same methodology, and then see what he
comes up with. If there is more than a 1% difference, then I say the
methodology is simply revisionism based on flawed accounts.

Stu writes-->
I have no doubt that the difference would be more than 1%. My
experience with the HSP and working with THN summaries tells me so.
Don't get me wrong, I hear you and agree with what you say except as it
relates to those first 9 years of the NHL where the league itself
relied on the newspaper accounts. That's the rub, in my view. The
newspaper accounts were all there ever was back then. There couldn't
possibly be anything more accurate (or flawed) because nothing else
existed.

Stu



________________________________________________________________________________\
____
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail

On 2007.2.3, at 12:28 PM, Stu McMurray wrote:


> The NHL commissioned and accepts Duff's work as official so who are we
> to say otherwise?


Hi Stu, the problem with this is that, as you have noted below, until
recently the NHL has been more than happy to sanction stats that
weren't correct for decades, so I don't think that we are in a position
yet to just simply accept what they offer as "officially correct."


>
> There is no detailed methodology published because this was an inhouse
> project of the NHL and not private "publish or perish" research.


I'm kind of bothered about the NHL simply sitting on these old
scoresheets and making you go into their office to check your
information against them. Why don't they just release them? Or compile
them themselves and release it? I really don't understand this "must be
locked away in a file" attitude towards this old information. Unless,
the NHL historical stats are a "pile of garbage", as Morey Holzman dubs
it. And if it is garbage, then why wouldn't the NHL want to clean it
up??


>
> My personal pet peeve has always been seeing Mike Neville show up in
> the 1917-18 stats. An early researcher made a mistake from a newspaper
> account of a game and the error wasn't corrected for years. Even the
> NHL guide used to include him in their retired player roster, showing
> his first NHL season as 1917-18. The error was corrected based mainly
> on Bob Duff's research.(not to mention the fact that Neville would have
> only been 13 years old at the start of the 1917-18 season!)
>


In fairness, the NHL only published the last name Neville and awarded
him one goal. Someone somewhere added the first name "Mike".
I agree with you about there being no Neville, and I think I told you
about my theory on it, that given the way information was orally passed
on by telephone to the wire press services, the name "Noble" was heard
to be "Neville" by the person in the wire office and so it was printed
in newspapers across the nation.
>


>
> I would love for Bob to write a paper in the SIHR Journal outlining his
> trials and tribulations in re-compiling the early stats of the NHL. It
> would go a long way to answering many researchers questions.
>

I agree, he should. It should have been done a long time ago.


On 2007.2.4, at 01:08 AM, Stu McMurray wrote:

> Stu writes-->
> There were no score sheets until 1926-27. The NHL relied on newspaper
> accounts. There was no radio coverage back then either. The newspaper
> accounts were the only written record of the games. I am sure they had
> errors but they would be the most accurate account of the games simply
> by default wouldn't they?



Yes and No on the accuracy. Yes because they are all there is. No,
because it is a problem we have been down the road with the GP because
the NHL didn't start compiling games GP until 42-43. The different
books who compiled them have a lot of different numbers on them. I
think it is save to argue that as soon as we start researching G, A &
PIM, there is going to a deluge of different numbers from different
people on these numbers because the newspapers will provide different
numbers. The question is, do we want to go down this road?? Again, the
NHL can avoid this in the years after 26-27 by releasing the summaries.


James

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the hockey-databank
group.

   File        : /hdb-2007-02-05.zip
   Uploaded by : dsreyn <dreynolds@...>
   Description : Hockey database, Feb. 5, 2007 (bug fix)

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hockey-databank/files/hdb-2007-02-05.zip

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

dsreyn <dreynolds@...>

Nothing major this time - just fixing an error in Coaches.csv.  I had
inadvertently entered a non-existent coachID for Orval Tessier.

Doug