From 8c837f352874a87a33f812a33ebed550f1a88541 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?St=C3=A9phane=20Caron?= Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 13:46:30 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Typos --- report/report.Rmd | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/report/report.Rmd b/report/report.Rmd index 946643b..3e1b262 100644 --- a/report/report.Rmd +++ b/report/report.Rmd @@ -238,8 +238,8 @@ The resulting curves are shown in Figure \ref{fig:gam}. Since Figure \ref{fig:gam} pretty much conveys the same information as Figure \ref{fig:barcharts}, it is not surprising that is shows nice bumps right after the faceoff when this latter is won by the offensive team (Erie in the left panel, and its opponent in the right panel). Its continuous nature makes it easier to compare the offensive and defensive performances of Erie. -For example, they seem to be able to limit their opponents' ability to score when they lose the faceoff in defensive zone (right panel, red curve), as their opponents' performance in similar situation (left panel, green curve) shows a much bigger bump, which corresponds to goals for Erie. -We again note that when the advantage provided by winning an offensive faceoff seems to vanish around 20 seconds into the sequence. +For example, they seem to be able to limit their opponents' ability to score when they loose the faceoff in defensive zone (right panel, red curve), as their opponents' performance in similar situation (left panel, green curve) shows a much bigger bump, which corresponds to goals for Erie. +We again note that the advantage provided by winning an offensive faceoff seems to vanish around 20 seconds into the sequence. It also seems that when Erie is in defense, winning the faceoff is almost disadvantageous. This is most probably due to the lack of data, and the variability that ensues. In fact, it must be said that the results we have so far are not "significant", in the statistical sense. From 2b725574a05ba728480ad43e2a8ba4562d94b7a1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?St=C3=A9phane=20Caron?= Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 13:47:47 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert (my bad) --- report/report.Rmd | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/report/report.Rmd b/report/report.Rmd index 3e1b262..de98387 100644 --- a/report/report.Rmd +++ b/report/report.Rmd @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ The resulting curves are shown in Figure \ref{fig:gam}. Since Figure \ref{fig:gam} pretty much conveys the same information as Figure \ref{fig:barcharts}, it is not surprising that is shows nice bumps right after the faceoff when this latter is won by the offensive team (Erie in the left panel, and its opponent in the right panel). Its continuous nature makes it easier to compare the offensive and defensive performances of Erie. -For example, they seem to be able to limit their opponents' ability to score when they loose the faceoff in defensive zone (right panel, red curve), as their opponents' performance in similar situation (left panel, green curve) shows a much bigger bump, which corresponds to goals for Erie. +For example, they seem to be able to limit their opponents' ability to score when they lose the faceoff in defensive zone (right panel, red curve), as their opponents' performance in similar situation (left panel, green curve) shows a much bigger bump, which corresponds to goals for Erie. We again note that the advantage provided by winning an offensive faceoff seems to vanish around 20 seconds into the sequence. It also seems that when Erie is in defense, winning the faceoff is almost disadvantageous. This is most probably due to the lack of data, and the variability that ensues.