NHL Rankings by way of Puck Prospectus/VUKOTA

[firstroundbust]

I found this while reading some of the team previews from ESPN.

Rankings

As of now, it isn't completed, but some interesting rankings and probably worth some cannon fodder on this board.

Click to read more...

 

[Bravid Nonahan]

Look, I don't think the Leafs will be a powerhouse. I hope they make the playoffs but it is FAR from a sure thing. But honestly, HONESTLY does anyone think they will finish as low as 29th in the league?!? They finished 7th worst last year, and they have improved on that team...

 

[Finkle is Einhorn]

Look, I don't think the Leafs will be a powerhouse. I hope they make the playoffs but it is FAR from a sure thing. But honestly, HONESTLY does anyone think they will finish as low as 29th in the league?!? They finished 7th worst last year, and they have improved on that team...

No, and neither do these rankings, really.

PuckProspectus likes to keep our readers one step ahead of the competition. To this end, we have developed a tool called VUKOTA. Following in the tradition of PECOTA and KUBIAK, VUKOTA is PuckProspectus’ player projection system. Using a combination of fundamental and advanced statistics, VUKOTA compares current NHL players to comparable players throughout history to best project their next season’s performance in goals, assists and points as well as GVT.

It might not be accurate, but at least it sounds a little more objective.

 

[sobrien]

I dont' have a big problem with the Flyers in 9th, but i do have a big problem with them saying that our defense has gotten a lot worse and will give up more goals than last season. Thats laughable.

 

[The Bored Man]

I dont' have a big problem with the Flyers in 9th, but i do have a big problem with them saying that our defense has gotten a lot worse and will give up more goals than last season. Thats laughable.

Yeah I found that pretty weird too. Maybe they think Emery's gonna implode?

 

[Charlie Milles*]

These guys get paid to do this? I suppose #16 is Detroit.

 

[Noodletoro]

Absolutely horrible analysis of the Stars. I can't take someone seriously that says Turco is an AHL goalie and that Alex Auld is the better netminder. I also didn't realize we only had 8 usable forwards. Not including Benn at all also shows that they are pretty uniformed. I also don't see how they can project Richards, Morrow, and Lehtinen to only play 25 games more collectively this season.

I also love him implying that the "swoon" in the powerplay over Turco's "last 20 games" was at all his fault with no mention of Richards being knocked out for the season. The powerplay analysis doesn't even take into account that our main guys were out for good parts of the season. The whole article was a Turco hate fest. It doesn't even mention his stellar play in the middle of the season that was primarily responsible for the team getting back into things. If you read this and didn't watch the games you would assume he sunk the team the whole season. His play was bad but calling him an AHL netminder is so off base.

Not suprised though. This is just one in a million of such prediction sites that just looks at numbers and obviously doesn't watch or pay attention to the teams. I assume their are equally bad predictions for the other teams as well.

Oh and saying that the Stars should have only been a playoff bubble team last season goes against pretty much all previous predictions.

And Ribeiro scoring less points even though he has Morrow for more than double the games he played last season (according to their prediction). WTF? How does that make any sense?

 

[MathMan]

Yeah I found that pretty weird too. Maybe they think Emery's gonna implode?

They're projecting him based on his last NHL season. It's not that they think he's gonna implode, it's that they think he already has.

 

[chopkins]

So having Luongo back for a full season bumps our GAA up by 0.30?

 

[MathMan]

Absolutely horrible analysis of the Stars. I can't take someone seriously that says Turco is an AHL goalie and that Alex Auld is the better netminder.

Since the lockout, Turco has had save percentages of .898, .910, .909, and .898. Auld has been .888, .880, .919, and .911.

So Auld has been better lately, but I can't imagine feeling confident with that goaltending tandem.

Turco doesn't appear to be a very good goaltender, statistically speaking. Much to my surprise, to be honest. His performance over last season was AHL level.

I also didn't realize we only had 8 usable forwards.

Most teams have 6-9 decent forwards who can be relied on to do tough sledding and a variety of grinders who you don't expect much out from except not get murdered by the opposition and are mostly used to give the guys up a breather. I think this is what is meant by "usable".

I also don't see how they can project Richards, Morrow, and Lehtinen to only play 25 games more collectively this season.

They base it on injury history. Morrow for example has played an average of a bit over 47 games over the last three seasons, so their estimate for about 50 makes a certain amount of sense, especially since he's not getting any younger.

Not suprised though. This is just one in a million of such prediction sites that just looks at numbers and obviously doesn't watch or pay attention to the teams.

Personally, while I have my doubts about their projection system, I'm glad to see at least one alternate vision of things that tries to look at things more objectively, rather than predictions from pundits that are based more on cliches, who made the loudest moves in the off-season, who built their team to the pundit's biases, the past reputation of teams... and, ironically, a lot by looking at how the teams did in the standings without wondering about whether they had injuries, good or bad luck, players playing over their heads or having bad runs, et caetera. They tend to not be very good nor very insightfuls.

They made statistical projections based on past performance. You can debate their statistical model (a lot), but certainly that doesn't seem to be an entirely silly way to approach things.

At the very least, it provides new ways to look at things.

 

[PotaGuitar]

So let me get this straight...the Sharks add Dany Heatley, and they think Thornton's point values will drop? They project

Jumbo - 78 pts
Heatley - 70 pts

I'm not expecting them to score like 200....but for neither one of them to reach 80 at the very least is ridiculous.

 

[RebelMe]

Fail. Toronto 29th? Tampa 26th? Rangers 24th? Ottawa 22th? Florida 13th? ... ooooooo-kay, let's get you a nice strait jacket, boy.

 

[hairylikebear]

The Sharks won’t win the President’s Trophy again, but they substantially improved the team over last year.

How does that sentence make any sense?? Argh

Regarding the Stars, I'm not surprised a statistic-based ranking system isn't showing them any love. Though I really don't see how a healthier core, more experienced youngsters, and an offensive mantra will account for only eight more goals next season.

 

[kingsholygrail]

So the Kings are projected to get the 6th overall pick this season?


Movin' on up.

 

[Viqsi]

No, and neither do these rankings, really.



It might not be accurate, but at least it sounds a little more objective.

It might be objective w/r/t the past, but in terms of figuring out how new factors may change things, I'm not yet convinced. Note, for example, how they rate Minnesota highly because of its past prowess as a defensive squad - never mind the fact that that coaching philosophy is getting tossed aside.

Hey, Canucks and Flames fans:

Minnesota is an all-around balanced team with good special teams and excellent goaltending. They should be able to fight their way back into the playoffs, and with some contributions from some key players, they could even find themselves in the mix for the division lead.

As for their review of my team (Columbus)... the only thing in there that seems a bit over the top is that they expect Nash to do slightly worse this season. Then again, they're also assuming Brass won't stay healthy, and qualify with (paraphrasing) "if he does stay healthy, then, well, this projection is going to be off-base."

 

[MisterUnspoken]

I don't know I really liked the Rangers writeup. Thought it was pretty accurate. The point projections are obviously a guess based on last season and seem kind of low, also you can't project how rookies will affect the team.

I don't think the Rangers will be 24th, but I don't think they are a bonafide playoff team either.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Wow it says that the Flyers will give up 20 more goals this season than last season? Even with the better defense and a possibly better Emery than Biron? Wow, stupid if you ask me...

 

[passive voice]

Uh oh.

Gonna get a lot of resistance to anything numbers-based around here.

Puck Prospectus is a sister site to Baseball Prospectus, whose PECOTA Projections have consistently outstripped Pejorative Slur pundits for the past few years. (Please spare us the "hockey's different from baseball!" pleading for now--we know.) I think the big problem with the VUKOTA Projections is that it's a fairly new system. BP has spent several years fine-tuning their shizz...I'm not sure PP is at that point.

 

[Michael Scofield]

Write-ups aren't bad for some teams, I just don't like statistical projections like that, they're so low.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Wow it says that the Flyers will give up 20 more goals this season than last season? Even with the better defense and a possibly better Emery than Biron? Wow, stupid if you ask me...

Biron last season: .915 sav %
Emery in his last NHL season: .890

Yeah there's a possibility he'll be better than Biron, but the probability is that he won't.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Gonna get a lot of resistance to anything numbers-based around here.

Puck Prospectus is a sister site to Baseball Prospectus, whose PECOTA Projections have consistently outstripped Pejorative Slur pundits for the past few years. (Please spare us the "hockey's different from baseball!" pleading for now--we know.) I think the big problem with the VUKOTA Projections is that it's a fairly new system. BP has spent several years fine-tuning their shizz...I'm not sure PP is at that point.

Exactly. Like any other system of ranking teams or judging players, it is going to have mistakes and flaws. But all of this: "I guess they don't watch the games" stuff is just stupid. Plenty of people here "watch the games" and still make dumb comments and faulty predictions (and I'm as guilty of it as anyone).

There's absolutely nothing wrong with looking at numbers and trying to use them to find some meaning.

 

[chaosof99*]

Biron last season: .915 sav %
Emery in his last NHL season: .890

Yeah there's a possibility he'll be better than Biron, but the probability is that he won't.

Yeah, let's compare two different season, and while we're at it, let's take a season which has next to no statistical validity anymore and the reasons for bad performance are known.


BTW, Emery's stats from the preseason. 0.943 SV% and 1.76 GAA. And he looks very very good.

Edit: I calculated Birons for compairon. He only played three preseason games as far as I could find (Emery played five). His stats are 0.846 SV% and 2.39 GAA

 

[firstroundbust]

It might be objective w/r/t the past, but in terms of figuring out how new factors may change things, I'm not yet convinced. Note, for example, how they rate Minnesota highly because of its past prowess as a defensive squad - never mind the fact that that coaching philosophy is getting tossed aside.

Ya the philosophy changed, but our blueline will be better defensively this year with the addition of Zanon (who is apparently a defensive god according to VUKOTA.)

I get that this system doesn't take into account things like injuries, slumps, etc. but I guess its as objective as it gets, in a perfect world sort of way.

 

[Viqsi]

Gonna get a lot of resistance to anything numbers-based around here.

Puck Prospectus is a sister site to Baseball Prospectus, whose PECOTA Projections have consistently outstripped Pejorative Slur pundits for the past few years. (Please spare us the "hockey's different from baseball!" pleading for now--we know.) I think the big problem with the VUKOTA Projections is that it's a fairly new system. BP has spent several years fine-tuning their shizz...I'm not sure PP is at that point.

This. I'll consider taking it more seriously once it's moved past the "literally born yesterday" stage.

ESPN borrowed its data for their own preseason rankings, but also threw in estimates of injury possibilities and "intangibles" from outside sources, and weighted them differently. Those had a pretty large impact in some cases - for example, VUKOTA raw projections have Columbus 10th in the west, whereas ESPN's VUKOTA+pundits have us as 6th.

 

[Viqsi]

Ya the philosophy changed, but our blueline will be better defensively this year with the addition of Zanon (who is apparently a defensive god according to VUKOTA.)

I get that this system doesn't take into account things like injuries, slumps, etc. but I guess its as objective as it gets, in a perfect world sort of way.

Oh, I'm not doubting his ability or anything like that. I was just amused at their bold prediction that Minnesota could compete for the Northwest crown. No offense, but I'm not buying. (Mostly because I'm still convinced that as many players over there will be exposed as will benefit from a new coaching style, so IMO Fletcher's going to have to do a lot more revisions first.)