They absolutely did not. Tampa drastically outperformed their advances stats that year and Columbus underperformed theirs. Advanced stats people were the only people saying Columbus had a chance and they certainly weren't predicting a sweep based on possession/advanced stats. That season, Tampa was 8th in xGF% while Columbus was 12th. 9th vs 12th in CF%. Advanced stats were the only metrics giving Columbus a chance. Columbus sweeping a Tampa team everyone loved based on record and eye test is a perfect demonstration of how they are the most predictive info we have.
Can you find anyone anywhere who predicted Columbus to win that series in 4 games? Just because of an outlier outcome, I’m not sure what you’re trying to express here. That no one should try to employ predictive models? To me, any and every prediction system will turn out wrong at times. That’s the nature of sports. There are upsets. But that hardly seems like justification to throw out the entire effort to improve predictive models. It’s interesting to discuss them and analyze them.
Jets forward group is great, but their D is lacking. Hard to take them seriously until they improve back end.
Anything can happen in short series. But Jets don’t look to be on Colorado level.
You are correct, but their D are incredibly active in the offensive zone and play a massive role in their cycle/possession game. They are also incredibly mobile. Their blue line is built around quickly exiting their own zone, moving through the neutral zone with speed and driving offense. I don't think there is a blue line in the NHL that is more active in the offensive zone, especially below the opposition's goal line. I've never seen a team rely on a D man to play the F1 role as much as them. It's not all that rare for both D to be below the opponents has marks playing the F1 and F2/F3 roles while the forward group goes for a change. Their ability to effectively forecheck, get possession and then rotate back to the top of the zone once forward help arrives is unique in the NHL. In many situations where a tired group would normally dump the puck in and change all 5 guys, the Avs frequently rely on a D man to skate the puck through the neutral zone, chip it in, and pursue the puck while the 3 guys change (or if they can make a clean entry do so and go to a quiet area until help arrives). When successful, fresh forward help arrives, the Avs gain/maintain possession, the D rotates back and then goes for a change while the fresh players start establishing a cycle. This kind of play happens a lot in junior hockey, but you don't see it much in the NHL. It's one of the many ways the Avs D drives offensive possession and ultimately gets the puck onto the sticks of their fantastic top 9. It is also the main reason they dominated the 2nd period so much. Having the line change take place at the opponent blue line allows this strategy to work even better because the forward reinforcement arrives quicker and the D man who acted as F1 can get off the ice quicker once the cycle has gotten going with the fresh players. They led the league in 2nd period goals for AND goals against. Activating their mobile D to take advantage of the long change was a massive driver of that.
Yeah, that's hockey. Although advanced stats have their use, hockey at the NHL level seems to be the least predictable out of all professional sports. That's a perception, so I'm sure Brian39 will have something more concrete LOL.
Hockey is hands down the hardest to predict. So much randomness in hockey.
