Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,171
- 14,523
Here's the best hockey related analogy I can come up with:
Up until 1999, every NHL game was worth 2 points in the standings. After, with the advent of the "losing in OT" point, the average game is worth about 2.2 points. As a result, it's probably misleading to compare the number of points a team has earned in the standings between those two eras. (As an example - there were 12 teams with 100+ points last year, compared to just 3 in 1999).
The same is true with the Hart trophy, the Norris trophy, and a few other awards. The ballot expanded starting in 1996, and as a result, there are more points to go around. Therefore it's probably misleading to compare vote shares pre and post 1996 (which is what I had been doing before).
In this post, which is too technical to copy into this discussion, I make a case for why the new weighting system gives us results that make more sense.
I like the idea of "re-casting" the Norris trophy from 1996 onwards, excluding the 4th and 5th place votes. That's the closest we'll get to an apples-to-apples comparison. But I haven't put together that data (it exists, but it needs to be compiled).
Up until 1999, every NHL game was worth 2 points in the standings. After, with the advent of the "losing in OT" point, the average game is worth about 2.2 points. As a result, it's probably misleading to compare the number of points a team has earned in the standings between those two eras. (As an example - there were 12 teams with 100+ points last year, compared to just 3 in 1999).
The same is true with the Hart trophy, the Norris trophy, and a few other awards. The ballot expanded starting in 1996, and as a result, there are more points to go around. Therefore it's probably misleading to compare vote shares pre and post 1996 (which is what I had been doing before).
In this post, which is too technical to copy into this discussion, I make a case for why the new weighting system gives us results that make more sense.
I like the idea of "re-casting" the Norris trophy from 1996 onwards, excluding the 4th and 5th place votes. That's the closest we'll get to an apples-to-apples comparison. But I haven't put together that data (it exists, but it needs to be compiled).