Who would win a 7 game playoff series, Tampa or Washington

[VoluntaryDom]

If the Caps stay out of the box they would have a great shot..If it 5 on 5 I'm extremely confident in the Caps ability to win that series.

This season tampa has been by far the better 5v5 team than Washington

 

[Taluss]

They couldn't do it last year, can't see why they'd do it this year.

Caps.

#hflogic

 

[kuzy92]

This season tampa has been by far the better 5v5 team than Washington

Don't really care about regular season comparisons.. Im going by what I witnessed in last years ECF. Without the Bolts power play and Vasi standing on his head Caps win in 5..

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Don't really care about regular season comparisons.. Im going by what I witnessed in last years ECF. Without the Bolts power play and Vasi standing on his head Caps win in 5..

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

 

[Regal]

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

I have to admit it's a little amusing seeing Caps fans put so much stock in the postseason sample size after downplaying it for years

 

[kuzy92]

I have to admit it's a little amusing seeing Caps fans put so much stock in the postseason sample size after downplaying it for years

Oh I never downplayed anything. They deserved every bit of criticism they got during that debacle.

 

[kuzy92]

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

Miles better? Ok..

 

[kuzy92]

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

Should I care about 100 regular season games or 7 of the most important games of the season?

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Miles better? Ok..

since start of 17-18 TB has a +69 5v5 goal diff and +32.5 5v5 expected goal diff. WSH has +42 5v5 goal diff and -29.4 expected goal diff.

Should I care about 100 regular season games or 7 of the most important games of the season?

if youre trying to predict the future... the larger sample

 

[Cats2TheCup]

Feels like I've been seeing Tampa as the Stanley cup favorites for at least 5 years and they haven't pulled it off. Giving this one to the reigning Champs.

 

[Kalopsia]

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

Miles better? By what standard? Tampa has scored 106 goals and allowed 84 at 5 on 5 in 39 games, so that's a net +0.56/game. Washington has scored 91 goals and allowed 65 at 5 on 5 in 37 games, for a net +0.70/game.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Miles better? By what standard? Tampa has scored 106 goals and allowed 84 at 5 on 5 in 39 games, so that's a net +0.56/game. Washington has scored 91 goals and allowed 65 at 5 on 5 in 37 games, for a net +0.70/game.

again tiny samples

 

[Kalopsia]

again tiny samples

So then why stop at the last 100 games? Let's go back an extra season to get an even bigger sample. Over the last 3 seasons the Caps are a net +108 at 5 on 5 while Tampa's a net +68.

Also, stop and think about what the data is saying. Tampa was better at 5 on 5 last regular season, and lost anyway. This year the Caps are better at 5 on 5. What does that tell you?

 

[VoluntaryDom]

So then why stop at the last 100 games? Let's go back an extra season to get an even bigger sample. Over the last 3 seasons the Caps are a net +108 at 5 on 5 while Tampa's a net +68.

Also, stop and think about what the data is saying. Tampa was better at 5 on 5 last regular season, and lost anyway. This year the Caps are better at 5 on 5. What does that tell you?

this year the caps are a better goals team 5v5. however they did not have to start louis domingue for a month, and they are by far the worse overall play team 5v5 by basically every metric besides pure goals scored.

 

[Kalopsia]

this year the caps are a better goals team 5v5. however they did not have to start louis domingue for a month, and they are by far the worse overall play team 5v5 by basically every metric besides pure goals scored.

The Domingue comment is funny because the Caps basically went through the same thing. Holtby posted a .900 sv% over the first five weeks of the season before he got his act together. They also lost Kuznetsov, Oshie, and Wilson for big parts of this season. Everyone deals with stuff like this.

The other metrics, at least all the ones I've seen, revolve around shot volume rather than shot quality. It should be obvious from how far off the expected goals you posted are from the actual for the Caps that that's not a good way to evaluate their offense. Their game plan is quality over quantity.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

The Domingue comment is funny because the Caps basically went through the same thing. Holtby posted a .900 sv% over the first five weeks of the season before he got his act together. They also lost Kuznetsov, Oshie, and Wilson for big parts of this season. Everyone deals with stuff like this.

The other metrics, at least all the ones I've seen, revolve around shot volume rather than shot quality. It should be obvious from how far off the expected goals you posted are from the actual for the Caps that that's not a good way to evaluate their offense. Their game plan is quality over quantity.

xg is a shot quality metric where tampa blows washington out of the water

 

[VoluntaryDom]

55.6% for tampa and 47.09% for washington this season according to offsidereview (corsica is down rn)

 

[Kalopsia]

xg is a shot quality metric where tampa blows washington out of the water

Clearly not a good one. Assuming you're talking about the Corsica one, the coefficient of determination between xGF and actual GF in 17/18 was 0.182. That means xGF accounted for just 18.2% of the variation in actual GF. For this season, the coefficient of determination drops to 0.128. That's too low for me to put any stock in it being predictive.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Clearly not a good one. Assuming you're talking about the Corsica one, the coefficient of determination between xGF and actual GF in 17/18 was 0.182. That means xGF accounted for just 18.2% of the variation in actual GF. For this season, the coefficient of determination drops to 0.128. That's too low for me to put any stock in it being predictive.

couple things about xg from corsica's writeup on it

The R^2 value obtained from the relationship [of goals scored to xG] (0.750) significantly exceeds that of goals scored versus unblocked shots (0.586) and even shots on goal (0.619) despite the disadvantage of ignoring whether shots missed the target.

its not perfect but seems to show that xgf correlates more with gf than corsi/fenwick/sog

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Tampa is better on paper and Stamkos and McDonagh's improved play is a big edge over last year's team, plus more experience for Point, Vasi and Sergachev. Tampa has a clear edge over anyone imo, but in a 7 game series anything can happen and the Caps have played Tampa well.

Also I have to laugh at KoozNets calling Washington more talented. Never change.

Where did I say this? I said skill and speed is basically a wash but caps have a physical element that Tampa can't match.

 

[Kalopsia]

couple things about xg from corsica's writeup on it

The R^2 value obtained from the relationship [of goals scored to xG] (0.750) significantly exceeds that of goals scored versus unblocked shots (0.586) and even shots on goal (0.619) despite the disadvantage of ignoring whether shots missed the target.

This is referring to the xG of individual players. All of these metrics seem to do much better for individual players, but they fail on a team level when forced to account more for tactics and player interaction.

View attachment 170291

its not perfect but seems to show that xgf correlates more with gf than corsi/fenwick/sog

The fact that the difference between the shot quality metric and the volume ones is around 0.04-0.05 is pretty damning of the shot quality metric - that's definitely not a significant improvement. It honestly pains me to tear this stuff down, because making a shot quality metric like that used to be one of my dreams. I'm in a masters program for statistics in large part because hockey analytics got me interested in the field. The more I learned about stats though, the more I realized how little predictive value hockey analytics had. Kind of a "never meet your heroes" sort of thing.

Edit: I should've read a little further, because Perry himself acknowledges that his model is not predictive.

"This idea of projecting future outcomes is of great importance in analyses relating to hockey and indeed a great number of fields. In its present condition, 5v5 xGF% is not a better predictor of future 5v5 GF% than CF% at the player level. Regular skaters’ 5v5 xGF% in one >400 TOI season did not yield a higher correlation with the next season’s 5v5 GF% than the same test performed with CF%.12 The same variance observed in early shot quality analyses prevents on-ice xG from predicting real goals, or itself for that matter, in any practical way. Though descriptive of shot quality, the xG model has not yet shown to be appreciably predictive of future shot quality or goals at the on-ice level.13"

 

[TRASHCAT]

Miles, miles better!

Oh dominic im soo sorry it was the schedule that cost you a chance in the finals last season lol.

Not washington being the better team but that dasterdly schedule.

Jets vs Lightning Sunday a Preview of Stanley Cup Final?

yeah no

 

[wetcoast]

Caps are better. Have a physical element in addition to the speed and skill that Tampa can't match.

Tampa has more skill up and down their lineup and have a better defensive group as well.

I would expect them to win in 6 games.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Who needs a 100 game regular season sample of Tampa being miles better than Washington at 5v5, let’s use 7 games!

Those 100 games include games vs teams like Ottawa, Detroit, etc which Tampa gets to feast on in the regular season. So the 7 game head to head means more. And you've been proven wrong anyway so whatever.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

This is referring to the xG of individual players. All of these metrics seem to do much better for individual players, but they fail on a team level when forced to account more for tactics and player interaction.



The fact that the difference between the shot quality metric and the volume ones is around 0.04-0.05 is pretty damning of the shot quality metric - that's definitely not a significant improvement. It honestly pains me to tear this stuff down, because making a shot quality metric like that used to be one of my dreams. I'm in a masters program for statistics in large part because hockey analytics got me interested in the field. The more I learned about stats though, the more I realized how little predictive value hockey analytics had. Kind of a "never meet your heroes" sort of thing.

Edit: I should've read a little further, because Perry himself acknowledges that his model is not predictive.

"This idea of projecting future outcomes is of great importance in analyses relating to hockey and indeed a great number of fields. In its present condition, 5v5 xGF% is not a better predictor of future 5v5 GF% than CF% at the player level. Regular skaters’ 5v5 xGF% in one >400 TOI season did not yield a higher correlation with the next season’s 5v5 GF% than the same test performed with CF%.12 The same variance observed in early shot quality analyses prevents on-ice xG from predicting real goals, or itself for that matter, in any practical way. Though descriptive of shot quality, the xG model has not yet shown to be appreciably predictive of future shot quality or goals at the on-ice level.13"

yeah xg hasnt been shown to be predictive (though do note the use of the word yet, there just hasnt been a long enough study period on it) and i do feel that some teams xg are system related and not too indicative of the talent on the roster (WSH COL and BUF being so low, and CAR being so high) but i dont think washington is a better 5v5 team than tampa bay in general. for the small sample of this season they are doing better goals wise but a lot of that can be attributed to goaltending (or lack thereof for tampa). in both GF and when extending the sample to last season GD favor tampa. i do wish there was a shot quality model that factored in teams that make their living on the counter-attack like washington though. washington is a very good team but at this point i think tampa bay is the best 5v5 team in hockey and has shown to be just that over a large sample. and tampa i do not think is a team where xg isnt indicative of play. tampa is a very good team at clearing the crease defensively which shows up strongly in xg but thats mainly due to clearing out all the rebounds our goalies generate (especially domingue). tampa isnt amazing at defending the slot but does very well at defending around the net. and offensively, they are very good at getting shots from the slot.

if you can make any sense of what i just typed go on ahead.