So I invented a new stat

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
I'm on holidays and a little bit bored, so I invented a brand new statistic just for the hell of it. It's kinda, sorta intended to give a general indication of cap management competence. Or maybe not... I'm not a statistician lol.

I call it the "Cap Hit Performance Quotient" which produces the incredibly catchy acronym CHPQ.

I simply took each team's current cap hit rank (as per CapGeek.com) and divided by the team's current league rank (as per NHL.com) as of roughly 2 pm Pacific time.

The higher a team's CHPQ, the better. A CHPQ of 1 would be considered "good" or "fair" value. A perfect CHPQ would be 30, while the absolute worst would be 0.03. I rounded all values off to the nearest hundredth.

The top 5 CHPQs belong to: Anaheim (19.00), Nashville (6.75), NYI (3.67), Chicago (3.50), and Winnipeg (2.40).

The worst 5 CHPQs belong to, in descending order: Los Angeles (0.50), Colorado (0.46), Washington (0.25), Boston (0.11), and finally Philadelphia (0.04).

Obviously this stat changes daily and is a very rough number since it doesn't account for some reasons why a team might be near the cap, such as injuries and LTIR.

Any thoughts? It's just for fun so feel free to flame away.

I did all the teams but wasn't sure if I should try to cram it into a single post.
 

AKL

Danila Yurov Fan Club President
Sponsor
Dec 10, 2012
39,503
17,968
As long as you understand that it's just for fun and really doesn't give us an idea of how good GMs are at actually managing cap, then I support you.

For example, Los Angeles is much better than their current standing indicates, and Winnipeg is not that good.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
As long as you understand that it's just for fun and really doesn't give us an idea of how good GMs are at actually managing cap, then I support you.

For example, Los Angeles is much better than their current standing indicates, and Winnipeg is not that good.

Yep. That about sums up my intentions.
 

Korpse

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 5, 2010
20,723
9,568
Pretty sure the Ottawa Senators run something similar to this. Believe it's cap hit/point though.
 

NoMoreRusselCrowin4u

Ludicrous Speed, Go!
Mar 11, 2014
21
0
New York
It's not exactly a useful stat, but I like the concept behind it. It might be more interesting to apply it to individual players. Like, a means of measuring the degree to which high cap-hit players can account for a given team's success, or lack thereof. For it to be accurate, it would probably need to account for too many variables, but as a simple, broad estimation, it might be kind of neat.

For example, you might look at a star forward's offensive in games won exclusively, and compare it to a league average for similarly paid players.

:dunno:
 

fedfed

@FedFedRMNB
Oct 28, 2010
4,143
0
Moscow City
What if we take money spent for like 5 years and standing points of the same span? So one-year anomalies, bad luck, etc. don't play as big a role due to the larger sample.
 

oilers_guy_eddie

Playoffs? PLAYOFFS!?
Feb 27, 2002
11,094
0
This is Oil Country!
Visit site
The top 5 CHPQs belong to: Anaheim (19.00), Nashville (6.75), NYI (3.67), Chicago (3.50), and Winnipeg (2.40).

The worst 5 CHPQs belong to, in descending order: Los Angeles (0.50), Colorado (0.46), Washington (0.25), Boston (0.11), and finally Philadelphia (0.04).

If the metric doesn't rank Edmonton as the worst in the league, then the metric isn't very good.
 

Stand Witness

JT
Sponsor
Oct 25, 2014
9,629
2,704
London, ON
Doing it for 1 year at a time doesn't really make any sense to actually call it something new. It pretty much lists the highest and lowest spenders in relation to the standing. Its interesting but you can more or less scan the list of cap and see that.

I'd suggest doing to over a longer period of time and maybe compare the amount of UFA let go and wins or something.

Actually I'd be interested in seeing a chart of players signed and let go (and how much signed by the other team) by each team and the success related to it.

For example:

Toronto:

Adds:
David Clarkson 5.25
...
...

Loses:
...
...
...

New Jersey:

Adds:
...
...
...

Loses:
David Clarkson 5.25
...
...

And try to gain some data of how well managed it is from that and how the team and players are performing.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
Also expected to see Edmonton. Don't have to be last but bottom 5. They have a high payroll and a garbage team

They finished just outside the bottom 5 with a CHPQ of 0.57.

St. Louis was slightly worse at 0.56.

I got the idea in the first place because people kept pointing out that Edmonton, in addition to being in 30th place, had a high payroll. And yet, they only rank 17th for total cap hit. It just struck me that their cap situation is not as high on the list of problems as a lot of the other ones that team is facing.

Anyways, some interesting suggestions from people. Keep up the good work!
 

oilers_guy_eddie

Playoffs? PLAYOFFS!?
Feb 27, 2002
11,094
0
This is Oil Country!
Visit site
I got the idea in the first place because people kept pointing out that Edmonton, in addition to being in 30th place, had a high payroll. And yet, they only rank 17th for total cap hit. It just struck me that their cap situation is not as high on the list of problems as a lot of the other ones that team is facing.

Ranking them by standings points divided by dollars spent would probably give a better indication of how incompetent the mismanagement group has been.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
Ranking them by standings points divided by dollars spent would probably give a better indication of how incompetent the mismanagement group has been.

I think we've long since passed the point of needing better indications of just how incompetent Lowe and Co. are, lol.

Unfortunately for Oiler fans, Katz may be the only person in the entire hockey universe who needs more indicators.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->