Very impressive Stats Correlation between FHM6 and Real Life NHL...

[rain94]

So I've been playing my save with Calgary and I'm up to OCT 25, 2019. Decided to check how NHL stats were league-wide up to today. Stats are pretty much on point. I know it's early but quite impressive so far!

The only issue is with FHM giveaway total per game (both teams combined) at 11.79 vs 22.03 of NHL.

There is a great NHL Hockey Simulation in FHM6 underneath it all. Just have to fix up the bugs and improve the UI a bit!

[AlpineSK]

Hits and blocks seem pretty high.. Did you happen to look at Corsi comparisons since they include blocked and unblocked shots?

[skunt3m]

I was going to post some of my complaints about last year's simulation and inquire if they'd been fixed. I figured I'd just run a test season with FHM 5 to jog my memory and compare its numbers to yours.

Anyway, I was pleased to see that the issues I had on release last year were fixed or at least improved during FHM 5's lifetime:
-Top players on good lines absolutely feasted on the league. Guys on the Bruins and Penguins in particular would rack up crazy (70+) plus/minus numbers. That was fixed.
-Goalie save percentages were way, way too low. That was fixed.
-Penalties and powerplay goals were too low. That was improved.
-Top players took too many/too high a proportion of shots. Not sure on this one.

Here's the link to last year's release simulations.
Here's the sim I just ran.

Looks like giveaways/takeaways were an issue last year too.

[rain94]

Originally Posted by AlpineSK

Hits and blocks seem pretty high.. Did you happen to look at Corsi comparisons since they include blocked and unblocked shots?

FHM Hits / gm: 41.03
NHL Hits / gm: 45.06

FHM Blocks / gm:30.31
NHL Blocks / gm: 27.87

Looks decent to me. I'll keep the chart updated as my season goes on. I'll take a look at Corsi too.

[rain94]

Originally Posted by skunt3m

Looks like giveaways/takeaways were an issue last year too.

FHM Takeaways: 10.40 p/g
NHL Takeaways: 15.08 p/g

Not too bad for both teams combined.

What I would like to do is a test on players and tactics. For example, if I created a team with nothing but players with 20 shot accuracy, then 19, 18, etc while keeping everything else constant. I'll have to run the test over many simulations per value.

[SirMichaelJordan]

In FHM the AI rarely dig into their farm unless it’s for a long term injury replacement. IRL, teams usually see 30-40 different players making an appearance through the season. In FHM, it’s just the 23 with a few more bodies making an appearance do to an injury.

I would assume that this could screws up the numbers in some way.

[Spartacus70]

Originally Posted by skunt3m

I was going to post some of my complaints about last year's simulation and inquire if they'd been fixed. I figured I'd just run a test season with FHM 5 to jog my memory and compare its numbers to yours.

Anyway, I was pleased to see that the issues I had on release last year were fixed or at least improved during FHM 5's lifetime:
-Top players on good lines absolutely feasted on the league. Guys on the Bruins and Penguins in particular would rack up crazy (70+) plus/minus numbers. That was fixed.
-Goalie save percentages were way, way too low. That was fixed.
-Penalties and powerplay goals were too low. That was improved.
-Top players took too many/too high a proportion of shots. Not sure on this one.

Here's the link to last year's release simulations.
Here's the sim I just ran.

Looks like giveaways/takeaways were an issue last year too.

-Top players took too many/too high a proportion of shots. Not sure on this one.

For this one, my 4 tests indicated that is not fixed in historical . The best scorers obtains regularly more than 400 shots and their shots % are too low. I mean a season, 1974 test, Bobby Orr scored 46 goals (good) but with 490 shots... and 9.3%/shots, he was 12.0%. The only fowards with more than 20.0% are low scorers in a period where it war frequent for the elite.
But since the modern game look better, its maybe more the result of what I suspect from a long time : the tier 2 and 3 goalies in some historical period are over evaluated (Ex. Ron Low +/- 725OVR. For a guy who was one of the worst starter of the period)

But at the end, the averages are great, it's sometimes the statistical distribution who can be questionable. I will run a test tomorow after modifying the goalies only for see the difference.

[Smetana]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

In FHM the AI rarely dig into their farm unless it’s for a long term injury replacement. IRL, teams usually see 30-40 different players making an appearance through the season. In FHM, it’s just the 23 with a few more bodies making an appearance do to an injury.

I would assume that this could screws up the numbers in some way.

You make a good point, but that doesn't really have much effect on the overall stat output. The reason being that, on most teams, a certain number of players in the "best 23" will still be replacement-level caliber, just like the top callups for each team are replacement-caliber.

In previous versions of the game, you'd see some stats thrown off by a distinct lack of injuries, and the best players often getting 82 games. FHM 6 is more realistic (not perfect, yet!) in this regard.

[Smetana]

Originally Posted by Spartacus70

-Top players took too many/too high a proportion of shots. Not sure on this one.

For this one, my 4 tests indicated that is not fixed in historical . The best scorers obtains regularly more than 400 shots and their shots % are too low. I mean a season, 1974 test, Bobby Orr scored 46 goals (good) but with 490 shots... and 9.3%/shots.
But since the modern game look better, its maybe more the result of what I suspect from a long time : the tier 2 and 3 goalies in some historical period are over evaluated (Ex. Ron Low +/- 725OVR one of the worst starter of the period)

But at the end, the averages are great, it's sometimes the statistical distribution who can be questionable. I will run a test tomorow after modifying the goalies only for see the difference.

I can't speak to the historical side of the game, but in the modern NHL set-up, yes the shots on goal distribution could stand to be better. Many players w/ too many SOG, especially defensemen. Jeff and I have talked about it, and I'm trying to work on that with the NHL guys.

[Spartacus70]

Even if the numbers look close sometimes it's the combination who express the differences...
Your test : NHL 6.33 g/gms and 63.28 shots per game
FHM 6.03 and 65.47 respectively.

Verdict : FHM = 9.21 shot%
NHL = 10.00 shot%

For goalies save % that meaning 7.9% higher in FHM. I mean .900 becoming ..908.
And it's just for the average.

[Spartacus70]

Originally Posted by Smetana

I can't speak to the historical side of the game, but in the modern NHL set-up, yes the shots on goal distribution could stand to be better. Many players w/ too many SOG, especially defensemen. Jeff and I have talked about it, and I'm trying to work on that with the NHL guys.

Yes particularly the DEFs are shooting to mutch. And in relation of their relatively low shooting% maybe too much from the outside.


But I'm happy that you are concerned by this element and you are working on this.

[Spartacus70]

Unmodified 1974 debute


FHM 1974 Average / 6.23 g/g / 63.16 s/g / 9.86%/s
NHL 1974 Average / 6.86 g/g / 61.6 s/g / 11.1%/s
/
FHM Team shot% / NHL Team shot%
Boston 10.9 / 12.4
Philadelphia 10.3 / 10.9
Buffalo 10.2 / 12.0
Montreal 9.7 / 14.6
Detroit 10.5 / 11.0
Toronto 10.7 / 10.2
7 other teams in the middle…
Vancouver 10.2 / 11.2
Atlanta 9.6 / 10.7
California 8.7 / 9.9
Kansas City 8.9 / 8.3
Washington 9.2 / 9.8

FHM worst/best = 20.2% / NHLworst/best=43.2%

The scale of gap in FHM is half the reality…


But like I said, tomorow I will run a test with modified goalies for knowing if it's help in restablishing the gap.

[Spartacus70]

Sorry if my previous post is not clear in it's presentation.
I dont know how to put some space between the numbers.

[Spartacus70]

And making it worst.


Guy Lafleur NHL (best scorer) :70games/ 53g/260shots= 20.4%
FHM : 74games/41g/328shots= 12.5%


The best in FHM :

Reggie Leach 61g/387shots= 15.8%


Sorry but not even close.