News Article: Money Puck says the Oilers are ____ favourite to win the Cup.

[AM]

It's fun though. Arguably hardest shot isn't practical anymore too as most teams prefer well placed wrist shots through screens as those slappers tend to injure their own teammates. But hardest shot is a fun event

Fun for who? Fun for the people waiting to see if the player losses an edge?

 

[Mr Positive]

Fun for who? Fun for the people waiting to see if the player losses an edge?

Speed skating is even an Olympic event. Skating speed is definitely a skill that all fans appreciate. Its a defining trait for many dynamic players, including McDavid

I don't recall anyone getting injured doing it for the all star skills.

 

[AM]

Speed skating is even an Olympic event. Skating speed is definitely a skill that all fans appreciate. Its a defining trait for many dynamic players, including McDavid

I don't recall anyone getting injured doing it for the all star skills.

Olympic events don’t have boards cemented in place.

Money has a funny way of being right.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Thanks as always for the exchange. I'd argue that not referencing the standings is a worse probability play than banking on a very imperfect model.

Since you actually used the word banking in your statement, it's relevant to point out that professional gamblers in any major sport make extensive use of statistical models to inform their bets. The standings typically have zero relevance on the betting odds for individual games.

The standings are relevant for predicting a team's future chances of making the playoffs/winning 1 round /winning the Cup, etc., but only in the sense that they form a set of pre-conditions that leaves all 32 teams at a different level of advantage/disadvantage in trying to achieve a particular final outcome of their season. They are never used as a measure of which team is better or worse than another in this sense.

Generally speaking, the purpose of power rankings is to replace the standings with a ranking that is a truer representation of team strength. The standings only use wins and losses as their inputs. Power rankings typically use dozens of inputs with variable weighting given to each one in an attempt to create this truer representation.

Obviously anybody on a computer with a spreadsheet can create their own power ranking that may be complete junk (gives heavy weighting to jersey colour, ignores penalty killing proficiency, to make a ridiculous example). But even a decent amateur model should be able to outperform simply looking at the standings when it comes to predicting future outcomes.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

This is pretty much just b/c our division is weak besides Vegas (Kraken aint doing dick in playoffs with their lack of gamebreakers) whereas teams like Boston/Tampa/Toronto have to brawl through each other to even get to the conference finals even if they're better teams than us/Vegas.

 

[brentashton]

Skating around the outside of the rink fast is not a hockey skill. Why would anyone want to do it.

Neither is shooting at surfboards. Blow the whole f***ing thing up.

 

[Mr Positive]

This is pretty much just b/c our division is weak besides Vegas (Kraken aint doing dick in playoffs with their lack of gamebreakers) whereas teams like Boston/Tampa/Toronto have to brawl through each other to even get to the conference finals even if they're better teams than us/Vegas.

This may be true but it still highlights the immense opportunity we have to go all in.

If we can make ourselves the equal of those great eastern teams we are all but assured another appearance in the WCF, if not the SCF, assuming some injury luck of course.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

This may be true but it still highlights the immense opportunity we have to go all in.

If we can make ourselves the equal of those great eastern teams we are all but assured another appearance in the WCF, if not the SCF, assuming some injury luck of course.

Yeh agreed 100%. As long as you make the dance, you never know when a goalie can go on a Roloson esque hot streak to carry you past a stronger opponent or when a favoured team has a few key players choke/underperform. The more you load up the better the chances of getting that lucky break (and also lowers the chances of getting upset by an inferior team like we did in the bubble year).

 

[nexttothemoon]

I did this type of deep stats analysis before last season... put all the players from every team into a spreadsheet and weighted by many variables... offense/defense/goaltending... strength of schedule etc and it spat out the result that Colorado was clearly the #1 team... with quite a gap to #2.

...and they won... so actually a bit anti-climactic from my viewpoint as all season in the back of my mind I watched games and "knew" that Colorado was the clear best team... so barring huge injuries they should have won... and they did.

Sure it could have turned out differently as that's why they play the games and not just look at stats in spreadsheets... but from my view of doing all the stats and analysis and seeing that Colorado was clearly the #1 team... it somewhat took the "joy" out of watching as the season basically ended up exactly how the stats said it would... with the Avs winning.

This season I didn't bother doing that same in-depth analysis as I want it to be a surprise this year which will make the games more enjoyable without that "knowledge"... and I can cheer for the Oilers without knowing that some team is clearly better and will very likely win the Cup over them.

 

[Mr Positive]

I did this type of deep stats analysis before last season... put all the players from every team into a spreadsheet and weighted by many variables... offense/defense/goaltending... strength of schedule etc and it spat out the result that Colorado was clearly the #1 team... with quite a gap to #2.

...and they won... so actually a bit anti-climactic from my viewpoint as all season in the back of my mind I watched games and "knew" that Colorado was the clear best team... so barring huge injuries they should have won... and they did.

Sure it could have turned out differently as that's why they play the games and not just look at stats in spreadsheets... but from my view of doing all the stats and analysis and seeing that Colorado was clearly the #1 team... it somewhat took the "joy" out of watching as the season basically ended up exactly how the stats said it would... with the Avs winning.

This season I didn't bother doing that same in-depth analysis as I want it to be a surprise this year which will make the games more enjoyable without that "knowledge"... and I can cheer for the Oilers without knowing that some team is clearly better and will very likely win the Cup over them.

even last year though, the injury factor was huge. Colorado was #1, but we had Nurse and Draisaitl playing hurt, and Colorado didn't have nearly that handicap. The flaw with overall stats is that the season is long and you can have a chaotic team like ours was, that is hard to quantify and analyze, and overall stats can become meaningless when you averaging a failing grade with a red hot dominant one.

We also had a situation like Florida last season, where they weren't propped up by special teams and the stats said they should have been better in the playoffs, and many people were picking them to break through based on the stats. There is some element of human analysis that we can look at a team like Tampa just has "it". There's also no statistical justification for a team being clutch when it matters, and if there was then we are giving in entirely to stats being more reactionary than predictive.

 

[Fourier]

even last year though, the injury factor was huge. Colorado was #1, but we had Nurse and Draisaitl playing hurt, and Colorado didn't have nearly that handicap. The flaw with overall stats is that the season is long and you can have a chaotic team like ours was, that is hard to quantify and analyze, and overall stats can become meaningless when you averaging a failing grade with a red hot dominant one.

We also had a situation like Florida last season, where they weren't propped up by special teams and the stats said they should have been better in the playoffs, and many people were picking them to break through based on the stats. There is some element of human analysis that we can look at a team like Tampa just has "it". There's also no statistical justification for a team being clutch when it matters, and if there was then we are giving in entirely to stats being more reactionary than predictive.

There is significant evidence that pp success is as important in the playoffs as in the regular season. I have no idea why it is so often devalued. over the last 10 years 22.35% of all goals in regular season were pp goals and in the playoffs 22.66% were pp goals. Over the last 5 years 20.11% of the goals scored in the regular season have been on the pp and in the playoffs 23.27% of the goals scored have been on the pp.

Despite the common belief power play opportunities tend to be higher in the playoffs than in the regular season as well.

 

[Mr Positive]

There is significant evidence that pp success is as important in the playoffs as in the regular season. I have no idea why it is so often devalued. over the last 10 years 22.35% of all goals in regular season were pp goals and in the playoffs 22.66% were pp goals. Over the last 5 years 20.11% of the goals scored in the regular season have been on the pp and in the playoffs 23.27% of the goals scored have been on the pp.

Despite the common belief power play opportunities tend to be higher in the playoffs than in the regular season as well.

I'd say statistically that is true, but I have my doubts. The total PP opportunities and scoring may be similar to the regular season but whoever is the better 5 on 5 team is the one dictating the play more. I doubt extremely that there was a playoff team that went deep despite poor 5 on 5 play.

Ultimately the playoffs usually come down to key games. Elimination games and OT. Even if the total PPs overalll may be the same, those are the times when the refs put the whistles away and when teams buckle down and make sure they don't commit infractions.

 

[Fourier]

I'd say statistically that is true, but I have my doubts. The total PP opportunities and scoring may be similar to the regular season but whoever is the better 5 on 5 team is the one dictating the play more. I doubt extremely that there was a playoff team that went deep despite poor 5 on 5 play.

Ultimately the playoffs usually come down to key games. Elimination games and OT. Even if the total PPs overalll may be the same, those are the times when the refs put the whistles away and when teams buckle down and make sure they don't commit infractions.

Your argument above is sort of like arguing that FO% matters overall because you want the guy taking the last FO with 10 seconds left to be great on the dot. In reality there is no evidence that having that guy wins you more game overall. In fact as a factor for determining wins and losses it is way down on the list of things that determine outcome of games. You have to get to overtime or to an elimination game before your scenario even kicks in.

The reality is that special teams matter as much or more in the playoffs.

For what it matters the Oilers scored the second most 5 vs 5 goals in the playoffs last year behind only the AVS. But the Avs also had the top pp% last year.

 

[Drivesaitl]

There is significant evidence that pp success is as important in the playoffs as in the regular season. I have no idea why it is so often devalued. over the last 10 years 22.35% of all goals in regular season were pp goals and in the playoffs 22.66% were pp goals. Over the last 5 years 20.11% of the goals scored in the regular season have been on the pp and in the playoffs 23.27% of the goals scored have been on the pp.

Despite the common belief power play opportunities tend to be higher in the playoffs than in the regular season as well.

The PP play opportunities are a result of how good the teams are 5 on 5. All you're proofing is how important 5 on 5 is, and continues to be in the playoffs. To wit the vast majority of goals scored in regular season or playoffs, and the most minutes are of course 5 on 5.

That teams score at around the same rate on PP in playoffs doesn't change that playoff success, any success, is borne on solid 5 on 5 play.

To add due to the importance of playoff games its fair to say teams bare down on getting some PP markers when they have those opportunities because each goal and game is so huge in postseasn, and not, in regular season.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

The PP play opportunities are a result of how good the teams are 5 on 5. All you're proofing is how important 5 on 5 is, and continues to be in the playoffs. To wit the vast majority of goals scored in regular season or playoffs, and the most minutes are of course 5 on 5.

That teams score at around the same rate on PP in playoffs doesn't change that playoff success, any success, is borne on solid 5 on 5 play.

To add due to the importance of playoff games its fair to say teams bare down on getting some PP markers when they have those opportunities because each goal and game is so huge in postseasn, and not, in regular season.

In the NHL with game management being a thing, I dont think that first line is all that true.

 

[Drivesaitl]

In the NHL with game management being a thing, I dont think that first line is all that true.

Game management exists primarily in regular season to prop up non competitive teams against relatively superior clubs. Its my take that PP's are more earned in the playoffs and with increasing parity of clubs in playoffs, and no longer having any doormats, the league isn't required to manage games as much. Still, in either scenario PP's are most often deserved vs just granted. The tendency to remember the worst calls, and think the worst maybe distorts people's view around what proportion of calls are legitimate. homer glasses does too, just saying.

 

[Fourier]

The PP play opportunities are a result of how good the teams are 5 on 5. All you're proofing is how important 5 on 5 is, and continues to be in the playoffs. To wit the vast majority of goals scored in regular season or playoffs, and the most minutes are of course 5 on 5.

That teams score at around the same rate on PP in playoffs doesn't change that playoff success, any success, is borne on solid 5 on 5 play.

To add due to the importance of playoff games its fair to say teams bare down on getting some PP markers when they have those opportunities because each goal and game is so huge in postseasn, and not, in regular season.

I don't disagree with any of this except possibly that pps only come from being good 5 vs 5. In fact, a lot of pp are pretty much independent of 5 vs 5 suceess. But that is not the point I was trying to counter. It was that pp's are less important than in the regular season.

 

[fuswald]

I'd say statistically that is true, but I have my doubts. The total PP opportunities and scoring may be similar to the regular season but whoever is the better 5 on 5 team is the one dictating the play more. I doubt extremely that there was a playoff team that went deep despite poor 5 on 5 play.

Ultimately the playoffs usually come down to key games. Elimination games and OT. Even if the total PPs overalll may be the same, those are the times when the refs put the whistles away and when teams buckle down and make sure they don't commit infractions.

Though I tend to feel many stats are not worth knowing percentage of the goals is percentage of the goals no matter how the game goes.
Less power plays but less goals overall.

Would be interesting to know if the same percentage (pp vs non pp) for game winning goals.

 

[Fourier]

Though I tend to feel many stats are not worth knowing percentage of the goals is percentage of the goals no matter how the game goes.
Less power plays but less goals overall.

Would be interesting to know if the same percentage (pp vs non pp) for game winning goals.

Its not even less pp's. Last year pps were down slightly vs the regular season but in the previous years they have been up a fair bit. The intensity of playoff games tend to generate pps.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I don't disagree with any of this except possibly that pps only come from being good 5 vs 5. In fact, a lot of pp are pretty much independent of 5 vs 5 suceess. But that is not the point I was trying to counter. It was that pp's are less important than in the regular season.

Yes. but it often gets conflated to views that PP specific players and scorers are just as important as those that are prolific in EV and that all goals are the same importance. etc.

EV play is the bulk of hockey play and represents the bulk of goals and critical and game winning goals.

 

[Bleedred]

I mean, people laugh but look how many points McDavid rattled off last year and they got to the conference finals. Didn't he have like 2 points per game?

As far as the West goes, I've been saying they probably have the best chance, other than maybe Colorado with some real deadline help.

Who else from the West can you really see win the cup? Honestly?

Dallas? Maybe.

Winnipeg? Hellebuyck is the best in the West as far as I'm concerned, so I wouldn't completely write them off.

Minnesota? lol. They either choose to not play their best goalie or they still don't even know that MAF sucks. And I don't even think Evason/Guerin even believe that MAF is toast.

Vegas? Can't score enough goals, have mediocre goalies and injury case Stone looks like he's done for the year.

Seattle? No...... Just, it's a no. It would be a nice story, but I don't think it's happening.

LA? Same thing. They're playing a career minor league goalie that they've won a ridiculous amount (unsustainable) with with how mediocre he's been. Quick's toast. And their head coach SUCKS. They already got strikes against them with Todd McLOSER coaching, then there's the goaltending.

Calgary? They just find ways to lose games.

Keep laughing. I have no use for this Edmonton team either, but McDavid ain't gonna go his entire career without a cup, if not multiple.

Now, do I think they will beat someone like Boston in the finals? Don't know about that......

Edmonton vs Colorado could be the WCF for the second year in a row, but I'm not very high on Colorado either. They lost Burakovsky and Kadri and they've been replaced with either nobody or infeior replacements, but they're a pretty good deadline acquisition or two and a Landeskog away from being a serious threat again.

 

[Fourier]

Yes. but it often gets conflated to views that PP specific players and scorers are just as important as those that are prolific in EV and that all goals are the same importance. etc.

EV play is the bulk of hockey play and represents the bulk of goals and critical and game winning goals.

First off all goals are equally as important. In the end of a game there is no bonus for an ES goal over a pp goal.

Your two statements are not the same. The fact that most goals are scored at ES does not always mean that a top end pp player could not be more valuable than a good or very good ES player. One has to look at the relative contributions.

All that said. Of course being a good ES team is important. BUt good ES teams with bad special teams are also flawed.

 

[Drivesaitl]

First off all goals are equally as important. In the end of a game there is no bonus for an ES goal over a pp goal.

Your two statements are not the same. The fact that most goals are scored at ES does not always mean that a top end pp player could not be more valuable than a good or very good ES player. One has to look at the relative contributions.

All that said. Of course being a good ES team is important. BUt good ES teams with bad special teams are also flawed.

Did you misinterpret this statement?

"Yes. but it often gets conflated to views that PP specific players and scorers are just as important as those that are prolific in EV and that all goals are the same importance. etc."

What is meant by this is that more goals are scored EV, more than 3X as many, and that prolific EV scorers are more impactful in hockey than prolific PP scorers on the basis of them scoring more goals in their optimal modality. Additionally prolific PP players are of course dependent on their even being PP's rewarded. This is of course not the case with prolific EV players. The Oilers even lost a series to the Jet due very much to this one kind of phenomenon.

 

[Fourier]

Did you misinterpret this statement?

"Yes. but it often gets conflated to views that PP specific players and scorers are just as important as those that are prolific in EV and that all goals are the same importance. etc."

What is meant by this is that more goals are scored EV, more than 3X as many, and that prolific EV scorers are more impactful in hockey than prolific PP scorers on the basis of them scoring more goals in their optimal modality. Additionally prolific PP players are of course dependent on their even being PP's rewarded. This is of course not the case with prolific EV players. The Oilers even lost a series to the Jet due very much to this one kind of phenomenon.

Those are two different things. The fact that more "important goals" are scored ES does not mean that an individual ES goal is more important. Hence you cannot conclude that all Es goals are more important than pp goals which is what your statement suggests.

Your last statement is too absolute. In the end if someone scores 30 goals 10 on the pp and 20 at 5 vs 5 and another player scores 25 ES goals and none on the pp, those 30 goals still help you win more than the 25 ES only goals.

 

[AM]

Neither is shooting at surfboards. Blow the whole f***ing thing up.

At least shooting the puck is some semblance of a hockey skill. Skating around in circles is not what hockey players do.