TheOtherOne
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2010
- 8,276
- 5,273
Teams that don't have a 1, 2, or 3 in the 3rd column "Top 10 Picks by Team on SC Roster (Overall)"Where are you getting 7 teams from?
Edmonton 06
Anaheim 07
Detroit 08
Detroit 09
New Jersey 12
New York 14
Nashville 17
The caveat is that all of those teams had those picks before the draft was reworked in 2013. Pittsburgh, for instance, had four top2 picks in a row. I can't imagine any team pulling that off in the current system. Chicago had a run of three top3 picks in four years. As those teams age out of contention, it wouldn't surprise me if we see teams built more from the top10 rather than the top3 being the contending teams. and outside of a team just getting stupidly lucky and getting a few top picks at just the right time, I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see a truly dominant, multiple cup winning team in awhile.
That's absolutely true, but bear in mind that when you do something like that you kill your sample size. That's the trouble with all this analysis. To do any statistics at all, you need as large a sample size as possible. But it often doesn't make sense to include different years with different rules and different league makeup.
But the best way to cut through all the outliers and exceptions "i.e. Detroit doesn't count because Lidstrom is Jesus" is to just use as large a sample size as possible. That's why I think one of the most interesting stats is the total percentage of ALL teams post-cap that made the finals with no top-3 picks.
An arguably slightly better stat would include all CONFERENCE Finals teams post-cap, because then your sample size would be 71. But of course then one could argue that a Conference Finals loser wasn't a real Cup contender.
Edit: I mismathed, sample size would be 47 for conference finals teams.
Last edited: