- 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).
--- In email@example.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
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "dsreyn" <dreynolds@...> wrote:
> As far as the chances of this project killing off hockeydb.com, IBaseball-Reference.com, TheBaseballCube.com, BaseballAlmanac.com,
> 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).
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
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
- 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
--- In email@example.com, "tangotiger" <tangotiger@...>
> 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 believe the Lahman / Forman team is working on a hockey site.On that note, do people actually LIKE the layout of the
> 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).
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.
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 Slate <slater@...> wrote:
> On that note, do people actually LIKE the layout ofWhat is so maddening about it? Speaking as both a
> baseball-reference website? I've used it on
> occasion, but I found it
> maddening to use.
programmer and end-user, it's fantastic.
And I'm not alone:
HockeyDB is excellent too.
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.
- Tangotiger w
> What is so maddening about it? Speaking as both aI think it's the overabundance of abbreviations. I like the verbosity of
> programmer and end-user, it's fantastic.
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.