Team | Weighted PandaScore | Rank | EV Scoring Impact | Rank3 | PP Scoring Impact | Rank4 | Elite TOI % | Rank5 | Dangerous Scoring Chances | Rank6 | Shooting Talent-Adjusted xGoals | Rank7 | Created xGoals | Rank8 | xGoals +/- | Rank9 | Point Shares | Rank10 | Goaltending | Rank 11 | Passing | Rank2 | Entry Denials/60 | Rank11 | Exits | Rank12 | Entries |
Carolina | 162 | 17 | 300 | 6 | 245 | 10 | 31 | 20 | 14 | 12 | 169 | 4 | 178 | 3 | 14 | 20 | 93 | 1 | 48 | 19 | 50.16579 | 21 | 0.028557 | 13 | 52.46355 | 17 | 55.0782 |
Tampa Bay | 168 | 3 | 318 | 1 | 254 | 6 | 32 | 14 | 25 | 6 | 156 | 18 | 168 | 12 | 45 | 5 | 86 | 6 | 51 | 11 | 54.25391 | 15 | 0.035412 | 11 | 50.48224 | 25 | 55.9516 |
tampa bay is a better team
St. Louis is a better team than both.
pretty much lol. I almost want to post two fake forward groups and just see how far you'd have to eventually get HF'ers to vote for the winger-heavy team over the center-heavy one.
had to be made
pretty much lol. I almost want to post two fake forward groups and just see how far you'd have to eventually get HF'ers to vote for the winger-heavy team over the center-heavy one.
Keyword being almost
If people believed in your charts you would've won the 1st round.[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Team Weighted PandaScore Rank EV Scoring Impact Rank3 PP Scoring Impact Rank4 Elite TOI % Rank5 Dangerous Scoring Chances Rank6 Shooting Talent-Adjusted xGoals Rank7 Created xGoals Rank8 xGoals +/- Rank9 Point Shares Rank10 Goaltending Rank 11 Passing Rank2 Entry Denials/60 Rank11 Exits Rank12 Entries Carolina 162 17 300 6 245 10 31 20 14 12 169 4 178 3 14 20 93 1 48 19 50.16579 21 0.028557 13 52.46355 17 55.0782 Tampa Bay 168 3 318 1 254 6 32 14 25 6 156 18 168 12 45 5 86 6 51 11 54.25391 15 0.035412 11 50.48224 25 55.9516
I finished 2nd in Panda's charts and I finished lower than a team with Devan Dubnyk and another team with Korpisalo in net and Parayko as the top D-man.
I voted Carolina lower in my division and still ended up voting them over Toronto in the playoffs and thought the NJ series was close. I'll evaluate the TBL vs CAR matchup when it arrives.
It's pretty lol you weren't in the playoffs.I finished 2nd in Panda's charts and I finished lower than a team with Devan Dubnyk and another team with Korpisalo in net and Parayko as the top D-man.
I voted Carolina lower in my division and still ended up voting them over Toronto in the playoffs and thought the NJ series was close. I'll evaluate the TBL vs CAR matchup when it arrives.
I like the panda scores, thanks for doing them man.It's not my fault that a) people don't (or aren't willing to) understand statistics, b) people are affected by conformity bias, and c) people don't adequately investigate/research players before voting. I eye test and stat test.
I'm pretty confident in the latest iteration of PandaScores, which uses zone exit/zone entry/entry denial rates, different statistically-valid forms of xGoals, prorated even strength output that factors in time on ice, level of competition, Dangerous Fenwick and a couple of other things that are better predictors for future performance than simple Goals For/Goals Against and #NAME #VALUE.
By this point, the voting problem with PandaScores is ignorance and denial.
I don't think anyone has denied that they are a factor. For picks that I think are a tossup I may actually look toward your charts. But you clearly don't eye test and stat test because you continue to be adamant that your opinion is the only one that is right when it comes to players and teams based on the numbers. You should know (and I think you probably do, but enjoy trolling a bit) that numbers don't paint the full picture. All of those stats like entries/exits/denials are impacted by more than one player on the ice. That's my only gripe with it.It's not my fault that a) people don't (or aren't willing to) understand statistics, b) people are affected by conformity bias, and c) people don't adequately investigate/research players before voting. I eye test and stat test.
I'm pretty confident in the latest iteration of PandaScores, which uses zone exit/zone entry/entry denial rates, different statistically-valid forms of xGoals, prorated even strength output that factors in time on ice, level of competition, Dangerous Fenwick and a couple of other things that are better predictors for future performance than simple Goals For/Goals Against and #NAME #VALUE.
By this point, the voting problem with PandaScores is ignorance and denial.
It's not my fault that a) people don't (or aren't willing to) understand statistics, b) people are affected by conformity bias, and c) people don't adequately investigate/research players before voting. I eye test and stat test.
I'm pretty confident in the latest iteration of PandaScores, which uses zone exit/zone entry/entry denial rates, different statistically-valid forms of xGoals, prorated even strength output that factors in time on ice, level of competition, Dangerous Fenwick and a couple of other things that are better predictors for future performance than simple Goals For/Goals Against and #NAME #VALUE.
By this point, the voting problem with PandaScores is ignorance and denial.
I'm pretty lazy about qualifying team match ups when I've already spent so much time quantifying them, but I do pick teams with a combination of the two and I've proven to be happy to help people correct lineup errors when it comes to poorly constructed lines or players in the wrong position. But due to a combination of confirmation bias and being a certified card-carrying genius, my rankings are a pretty good reflection of which team I think is better both on paper and on ice.I don't think anyone has denied that they are a factor. For picks that I think are a tossup I may actually look toward your charts. But you clearly don't eye test and stat test because you continue to be adamant that your opinion is the only one that is right when it comes to players and teams based on the numbers. You should know (and I think you probably do, but enjoy trolling a bit) that numbers don't paint the full picture. All of those stats like entries/exits/denials are impacted by more than one player on the ice. That's my only gripe with it.
Team | Rank Sum (Lower is better) | Weighted PandaScore | Rank | EV Scoring Impact | Rank3 | PP Scoring Impact | Rank4 | Elite TOI % | Rank5 | Dangerous Scoring Chances | Rank6 | Shooting Talent-Adjusted xGoals | Rank7 | Created xGoals | Rank8 | xGoals +/- | Rank9 | Point Shares | Rank10 | Goaltending | Rank 11 | Passing | Rank2 | Entry Denials/60 | Rank11 | Exits | Rank12 | Entries | Rank13 |
1A | 73 | 159 | 5 | 282 | 7 | 254 | 3 | 31 | 6 | -17 | 8 | 172 | 1 | 172 | 4 | 10 | 7 | 78 | 7 | 52 | 3 | 57.57355 | 1 | -0.054502384 | 6 | 54.08643 | 3 | 57.70329 | 3 |
1B | 61 | 156 | 7 | 304 | 2 | 214 | 7 | 29 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 162 | 5 | 180 | 1 | 36 | 5 | 86 | 4 | 60 | 1 | 52.26611 | 5 | 0.145303239 | 2 | 55.78594 | 1 | 56.81444 | 4 |
2A | 83 | 157 | 6 | 280 | 8 | 243 | 5 | 31 | 4 | 21 | 3 | 145 | 8 | 159 | 8 | 39 | 3 | 81 | 5 | 47 | 6 | 56.83021 | 2 | 0.189136998 | 1 | 53.05178 | 4 | 59.53105 | 2 |
2B | 89 | 175 | 1 | 300 | 4 | 285 | 1 | 34 | 1 | 11 | 5 | 172 | 2 | 173 | 3 | -9 | 8 | 91 | 2 | 42 | 8 | 43.6368 | 8 | -0.129811777 | 7 | 50.54587 | 7 | 51.74876 | 8 |
3A | 74 | 162 | 4 | 300 | 3 | 245 | 4 | 31 | 5 | 14 | 4 | 169 | 3 | 178 | 2 | 14 | 6 | 93 | 1 | 48 | 5 | 50.16579 | 6 | 0.028556705 | 5 | 52.46355 | 5 | 55.0782 | 6 |
3B | 92 | 164 | 3 | 296 | 5 | 213 | 8 | 33 | 2 | 35 | 1 | 156 | 6 | 162 | 7 | 81 | 1 | 74 | 8 | 47 | 7 | 45.80569 | 7 | 0.069151277 | 3 | 51.17535 | 6 | 52.50759 | 7 |
4A | 64 | 168 | 2 | 318 | 1 | 254 | 2 | 32 | 3 | 25 | 2 | 156 | 7 | 168 | 6 | 45 | 2 | 86 | 3 | 51 | 4 | 54.25391 | 3 | 0.035412108 | 4 | 50.48224 | 8 | 55.9516 | 5 |
4B | 76 | 153 | 8 | 290 | 6 | 227 | 6 | 29 | 7 | -8 | 7 | 163 | 4 | 169 | 5 | 38 | 4 | 80 | 6 | 55 | 2 | 53.75145 | 4 | -0.226300639 | 8 | 54.83956 | 2 | 61.08931 | 1 |
Montour and "boost" do not go well together. Unless you're talking about giving the other team a boost when he's on the ice.
Matt Benning GF% = 59%.39 GF, 30GA at 5v5 this year...on tire fire Buffalo...
He's not a perfect player defensively by any stretch but he can move the puck really well, if he's on the bottom pair then that's a good boost to me.