MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548186105 · doi:10.1177/056943451205700105

Does Player Mobility Lead to Higher Earnings? Evidence from the Nhl

2012· article· en· W2548186105 on OpenAlexaff
Claude Vincent, Byron D. Eastman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Economist · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsLeagueAgency (philosophy)Demographic economicsEconomicsLabour economicsBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A superficial examination of NHL earnings data shows that players who have changed teams earn more, on average, than players who have not. Extensive media coverage of player movement at trading and free agency deadlines has generated the perception that players on the move are consistently moving to higher salaries. Using career data for players in the National Hockey League, we estimate an earnings function and find, perhaps surprisingly, that the cumulative effect of moving on earnings is negative. Players who have changed teams many times during their careers earn less than those who remained with the same team throughout their career. We show that the negative impact of moving holds for free agents and highly talented players only if they move often.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American EconomistSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207