Anaheim - huge regression incoming?

[Mubiki]

Ok, so looking purely at advanced stats, one has to acknowledge that the likelihood of Anaheim achieving the same PDO this upcoming season is incredibly low.

Anaheim had a ridiculous 103.6 PDO. That's going to be crazy difficult to duplicate. Outside of that, they were basically average in terms of possession.

Do you think they will be able to duplicate success in that fashion? Is the roster too good to trust the trends in PDO?

Feel free to offer opinions on Colorado as well, as they are very similar.

Also, if you think advanced stats are garbage, please just ignore this. I happen to like them, and I'd rather it not turn into a discussion about their merit.

Click to read more...

 

[Aceboogie]

Anaheim is an interesting case

The past 3 years they have had a ~20th ranked fenwick %. However in the last 2 seasons they have had a top 3 PDO. The year they had a 20th ranked PDO they finished 3rd last in the West.

It can be the case (and is) that elite teams can have above average PDO (over 1000) for several seasons. This is because they have elite goalies or elite scorers, thus high sv% or s%. Boston is a good example of this.

I am torn on the Ducks though, there below average Fenwick and high PDO indicate they should face regression next season. But they have elite players in Getzlaf (top 4 NHL player) and Perry (elite scorer). Plus they have a younger D core with great potential D (Fowler, Lindholm). So im not sure how much the PDO will regress (but it will)

I can see a regression, but not a mega one like I see for Colorado. Perhaps to 5th or 6th in the West. Fenwick uses past stats to forecast future predications, however some issues arise when a team has younger players on it, as their play will increase in the coming year(s), so this will improve Fenwick. This is the case or Fowler and Lindholm, plus having a potential elite goalie in Gibson (although wont be elite next year)

So that is my call, 5th in the West

As for Colorado, they also have younger guys that will improve, but their possession numbers are much worse, so I see a much more drastic regression.

By the same token, expect to see the Devils finish 5th in the East. 5th in Fenwick, 27th in PDO last year. 3rd in Fenwick, 27th in PDO year before. They will get there luck, and they will make the playoffs

 

[Strong Island]

I wouldn't bank on them regressing too much. They just got Kesler who is a strong possession and tough minutes guy. Also, they have so much young, NHL ready talent up front that anyone not pulling their weight will be rotated out of the lineup or to the AHL quickly. Their defense could be a problem point, but 5th or 6th in the west is a pretty good guess.

 

[Hammer Time]

Getzlaf and Perry have consistently produced above-average shooting percentages - at least some of that elevated PDO is sustainable. Adding Kesler (a strong possession player) should increase their possession numbers too. I still don't see the Ducks finishing below 3rd in the Pacific unless they have severe goaltending issues.

 

[Mubiki]

Getzlaf and Perry have consistently produced above-average shooting percentages - at least some of that elevated PDO is sustainable. Adding Kesler (a strong possession player) should increase their possession numbers too. I still don't see the Ducks finishing below 3rd in the Pacific unless they have severe goaltending issues.

I agree with the first statement. That talent is undeniable. The only catch for me isn't that it's high, it's that it's REALLY high. They could lose a full percent and still be at 102.6; which is still amazing.

 

[NHLPaul]

I think they will regress yes, but not an absurd amount. they are still a good team. PDO is too high but I expect it too be above 100 again, bc I have a lot of confidence in John Gibson and like someone abovie said, getz and perry can finish well. PDO isnt all luck.

Colorado I could definitely see regressing as well. I dont see Varlamov having that type of season again. Parenteau for Briere is a ginormous mistake imo. However, they do have a young team and guys like mackinnon, landy, duchene, ROR, EJ, Barrie, etc can all improve. I don't think Iginla helps too much. Much rather have stastny. D isnt great either

 

[BB1133]

The danger for a significant drop is real, but they've sustained a top 5 team shooting % for 4 years in a row now. There's no doubt that the Ducks have more skilled depth than most teams, but we just don't know how good they'll be with possession and goaltending. If they can improve their possession and continue to get above-average goaltending, they should be able to be just as good (if not better).

 

[Sojourn]

Anaheim was supposed to regress last season, too.

 

[42]

The assumption is regression towards the mean but Anaheim's forwards (and one could now argue d) are anything but mean (well, except for Perry). I don't expect a big drop.

 

[West]

Really torn about how much to say in this thread but I will say this, Anaheims low SA/G make them an unlikely team to regress as much as advanced stats would indicate.

As for Colorado in my opinion is a much more likely candidate for this although with all the young talent??? Hard to imagine them out of the play-offs.

 

[DigitalSea]

This thread is posted every offseason for the last 3 years. I expect growing pains early in the season, but on paper this team is better than last years, especially when it comes to playoff hockey IMO.


EDIT: Although it looks like most of the posters are starting to catch on. The Ducks are the team I point to when people only like to look at advanced stats without watching their games.

 

[stempniaksen]

I think they probably will regress, but that doesn't mean they'll tumble down the standings. They'll be comfortably in the top-three in their division, and the addition of Kesler should off-set any of their other losses.

 

[Micklebot]

Like all teams, they'll inevitably do better in some areas and worst in others. I doubt they keep up the sh% next year, and I really have no idea what to expect from their goalie tandem; less career starts than many backups get in a season is risky no matter how highly touted they are.

I think they may suffer some growing pains, but who knows.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Nice to see that the argument has been toned down quite a bit, but still, it's amazing how many people never bothered to look further into Anaheim's numbers. Their FF% last year was something like top 5 when trailing and 2nd when trailing by one. This wasn't a poor possession squad who lucked their way to a division title, it's a very talented squad that plays a style that does not suit Corsi/Fenwick very well.

 

[Mubiki]

The only major point from me was that high PDO.

It's to be understood that playing with a lead can effect possession. Also, a high shooting percentage can as well (if you score on the first shot, you may not take 3 or 4, etc.).

The possibility always exists that their possession is significantly better than it appears.

Logic would suggest that their PDO will decline, but it's pure speculation after that. The prediction of regression due to that fact is merely my opinion.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

They will do just fine in the regular season. They will win the Pacific again.

Their problem is in the playoffs

 

[jiboy]

What is pdo?

 

[Micklebot]

What is pdo?

on ice Sv% + On ice sh%

So, 91.0 sv% and a 10% sh% would result in a PDO of 101.0

 

[wgknestrick]

Ok, so looking purely at advanced stats, one has to acknowledge that the likelihood of Anaheim achieving the same PDO this upcoming season is incredibly low.

Anaheim had a ridiculous 103.6 PDO. That's going to be crazy difficult to duplicate. Outside of that, they were basically average in terms of possession.

Do you think they will be able to duplicate success in that fashion? Is the roster too good to trust the trends in PDO?

Feel free to offer opinions on Colorado as well, as they are very similar.

Also, if you think advanced stats are garbage, please just ignore this. I happen to like them, and I'd rather it not turn into a discussion about their merit.

Not a stretch to predict a "small" regression, but they have assembled quite the young talent pool on their 2nd/3rd lines. I wouldn't bet the "farm" against them being unable to compensate for their #1 line's steady decline (Perry/Getz are certainly past their primes). Health is always the big wildcard with these things though. Losing Getz/Fowler for a significant part of the season could wreck their totals. If that happens, people will come out from everywhere stating "unsustainable PDO" as the reason, but injuries would be the #1 reason they regress IMO. It is very hard to lose your #1C or #1D and replace him with your "worst starter".

 

[Mubiki]

Not a stretch to predict a "small" regression, but they have assembled quite the young talent pool on their 2nd/3rd lines. I wouldn't bet the "farm" against them being unable to compensate for their #1 line's steady decline (Perry/Getz are certainly past their primes). Health is always the big wildcard with these things though. Losing Getz/Fowler for a significant part of the season could wreck their totals. If that happens, people will come out from everywhere stating "unsustainable PDO" as the reason, but injuries would be the #1 reason they regress IMO. It is very hard to lose your #1C or #1D and replace him with your "worst starter".

It's not just about decline. By its very nature, a good PDO has to come at the expense of someone else's. Even if the Ducks played better, if other teams improve slightly more, it effects it. That's why it's difficult to maintain.

Too many people suggest it's about "luck". Now I know you didn't, but it's often perceived that way. It's not lucky at all. It's like when a baseball player hits 3 home runs; it's all skill, but the odds of him doing it the next game are extremely low.

I honestly think Anaheim will actually play "better". But last season was the statistical equivalent of hitting three home runs. It was all skill, but the odds of duplication are really small.

 

[hatterson]

I'm a little torn on this.

I've never been a huge fan of the strict adherence to PDO that some seem to be and I see that Anaheim also had a high PDO in the lockout shortened season which lends credibility to the idea that they might be able to keep it up. However, I'm not convinced that they can keep up a 1024 which may mean some small regression, perhaps down to the mid teens, which would likely result in a loss of anywhere from 5-15 points in the standings. I still fully expect them to be a playoff team, perhaps not winning the division, but I'd expect them to fight for home ice.

The team I see with the big regression coming is Colorado. They went from the 4th lowest 5on5 PDO 2 years ago, to the 3rd highest last year due to significant rises in both shooting percentage and save percentage. I think one of those numbers will fall and I wouldn't be surprised to see a larger regression in their PDO and see them fighting for a playoff spot, as opposed to fighting for the division lead.

 

[bossram]

Some regression but not huge. Anaheim is a team that has been able to have a consistently high PDO. Same with Boston for example, they are true talent plus1000 PDO teams. Getzlaf and Perry consistently shoot above average. They'll regress, but not back to 1000.

 

[nobuddy]

I'm gonna predict Anaheim at a 50.5 FF%, 101 PDO, and 8th in the West for next year.

 

[Rebuilt]

Ducks upgraded in the offseason from Selanne and Kouivu to Kesler . I expect them to be just as good if not better.

Using advanced stats to appear credible does nothing for me. They are over rated.

 

[OCSportsfan]

Having a High PDO does not mean the next year they will regress or get closer to the average of 100.

Depending on the players who are making most of the shots, your shooting % CAN be sustainable. If your forwards are making more shots than your Defense for example, your PDO will be higher since that is how your team plays.

Goalie save % is similar as well if you have Quick vs some rookie. Does one think that having an elite goalie, or defense system that limits quality shots is not sustainable

If you show year over year that your system can produce a high PDO, then a regression is not expected