Why underdogs do better in icehockey than Basketball

Do you agree with the findings in the video?


  • Total voters
    24

QuietContrarian

Registered User
May 28, 2008
8,260
3,083
Hey everyone,

Wanted to share this rather interesting video, and had no idea in which subsection to put it - Figured this was the best place since it is based of analytics.



This explains a team like Vegas in the SCF, would almost never see this in the NBA.
Even the Soccer UCL or FIFA WC are very predictable compared to Hockey tournaments.

You usually see a steady top 6-7 teams top the UCL, and even less for the WC.

The best team almost always wins the NBA, Soccer tourneys etc. this is not the case with hockey which has a great deal of randomness involved.

Like the MLB the best players in the NHL are limited in their time in action. NBA stars play more, Soccer stars can play the whole game etc.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Juicy Pop

Kyndig

Registered User
Jan 3, 2012
5,147
2,862
There is so much wrong in that video I don't even know where to begin or of I should bother.
 

Dogewow

Such Profile
Feb 1, 2015
2,883
291
There is so much wrong in that video I don't even know where to begin or of I should bother.

What's wrong about it? I can't speak to specific formulas, but the ultimate point they're getting at makes sense.

It explains the difference between sports in terms of luck versus skill, specifically pointing out the differences in games like Hockey and Basketball.

The most obvious being that a star basketball player will be on the court for the majority of the game and will likely have the ball the majority of that time, where as a star hockey player will be out for 1/3 of the game and even less of the time have the puck. In addition, the nature of the game is inherently chaotic and at much higher speeds. Bounces (both good and bad) have a much bigger effect on the outcome of the game.

I'm legitimately interested to hear your differing opinion about this, as this concept seems obvious even without this video (though I do thank the OP for posting it).
 

Kyndig

Registered User
Jan 3, 2012
5,147
2,862
What's wrong about it? I can't speak to specific formulas, but the ultimate point they're getting at makes sense.

It explains the difference between sports in terms of luck versus skill, specifically pointing out the differences in games like Hockey and Basketball.

The most obvious being that a star basketball player will be on the court for the majority of the game and will likely have the ball the majority of that time, where as a star hockey player will be out for 1/3 of the game and even less of the time have the puck. In addition, the nature of the game is inherently chaotic and at much higher speeds. Bounces (both good and bad) have a much bigger effect on the outcome of the game.

I'm legitimately interested to hear your differing opinion about this, as this concept seems obvious even without this video (though I do thank the OP for posting it).

The video should've just been titled "Why superstars make a bigger difference in basketball vs other sports during the regular season."Then I could've agreed with the video. Because everything else they say doesn't match the actual argument they're going for. Should be obvious... If a hockey team gave 100% in the regular season you would be pulling random joes off the street by game 30. Add that in with goalies starting only 50-60 games and you get added variance in the regular season which skews the whole test. They should've instead measured playoffs instead of the regular season because the goal isn't to win the presidents trophy. In football you have to fight for every win as its a short season so you won't get as much variance in teams winning. The other sports have almost no contact whatsoever to have this issue. That doesn't make one more lucky or skilled.

Over the last 10 years there has been 9 different football winners

Over the last 10 years there has been 7 different basketball winners

Over the last 10 years there has been 6 different hockey winners

Idk anything about soccer leagues but soccer and baseball have no salary cap. :dunno:

Doesn't that in itself make hockey more predictable as they've had fewer winners? How can a game that is considered the most luck based of them all have the fewest winners!?

Also the part where they tried somehow saying soccer and hockey have less skill because they have more height variance is so backwards. The fact that you can be big or small is direct proof of those sports requiring skill instead of just being tall.

After all this is said and done you can't make a slider showing Hockey requiring the least skill, at least phrase it in a different way because no sport requires more skill than hockey. I've played all the sports they mentioned other than Soccer. The whole video kind of seemed like a subtle jab at hockey with the way they measured things specifically in the regular season and the way they worded things.
 

Dogewow

Such Profile
Feb 1, 2015
2,883
291
The video should've just been titled "Why superstars make a bigger difference in basketball vs other sports during the regular season."Then I could've agreed with the video. Because everything else they say doesn't match the actual argument they're going for. Should be obvious... If a hockey team gave 100% in the regular season you would be pulling random joes off the street by game 30. Add that in with goalies starting only 50-60 games and you get added variance in the regular season which skews the whole test. They should've instead measured playoffs instead of the regular season because the goal isn't to win the presidents trophy. In football you have to fight for every win as its a short season so you won't get as much variance in teams winning. The other sports have almost no contact whatsoever to have this issue. That doesn't make one more lucky or skilled.

Over the last 10 years there has been 9 different football winners

Over the last 10 years there has been 7 different basketball winners

Over the last 10 years there has been 6 different hockey winners

Idk anything about soccer leagues but soccer and baseball have no salary cap. :dunno:

Doesn't that in itself make hockey more predictable as they've had fewer winners? How can a game that is considered the most luck based of them all have the fewest winners!?

In the NHL, you're more likely to see a team make a run or have a legitimate shot at a cup. The difference between one or two teams isn't that drastic. Every year we see a new team or group of stars get a shot at the cup in the NHL.

Nearly every NBA Finals in the last ten years has had a team with Lebron on it or yet another Cavs and Warriors matchup.

Parity is more than just about who wins the ultimate prize, and it's infinitely more interesting when the finals matchup isn't pre determined by the preseason.

I would be shocked if we saw another Caps vs. Knights finals next year. I'd also be shocked if we didn't see another Cavs vs. Warriors finals in the NBA (assuming Lebron stays, which doesn't look likely).

After all this is said and done you can't make a slider showing Hockey requiring the least skill, at least phrase it in a different way because no sport requires more skill than hockey. I've played all the sports they mentioned other than Soccer. The whole video kind of seemed like a subtle jab at hockey with the way they measured things specifically in the regular season and the way they worded things.

The author very clearly states in the video that he's not insinuating that hockey players are less skilled or that hockey requires less skill. The whole point of the video is to explain why you're more likely to find an upset or more parity in a sport like hockey over a sport like basketball, that seemingly has the same finals matchup on a yearly basis.
 

Aladyyn

they praying for the death of a rockstar
Apr 6, 2015
18,090
7,212
Czech Republic
There are 100+ scoring plays in a game of NBA basketball compared to 5 or so in hockey. That and the increased impact of superstar players are the main reasons we barely see underdog runs in NBA compared to NHL.

Imo an underrated aspect of hockey variance is playing through injuries in playoffs. Hockey equipment allows players to play through stuff that basketball players would never be able to (yes, yes, "hockey players are tougher") and that introduces more varience into performance.
 

c9777666

Registered User
Aug 31, 2016
19,892
5,875
Only 5 times since the NBA went to the playoff format we know in 1984 has a 7th seed beaten a second seed.

From 1994-2013, an NHL 7 seed was the most successful lower seed in the hockey playoffs.
 

KCC

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
18,190
9,058
Don't think a video was warranted. it's quite common sense. Two different sports, one played at a very high pace with no out of bounds making it not possible to have one player control a game. Basketball, a star player that slowly go up the court and jack up 3's all game. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: jc17

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,831
4,924
Vancouver
Visit site
The author very clearly states in the video that he's not insinuating that hockey players are less skilled or that hockey requires less skill. The whole point of the video is to explain why you're more likely to find an upset or more parity in a sport like hockey over a sport like basketball, that seemingly has the same finals matchup on a yearly basis.

Yeah, and if you look at what they talked about in the height segment they essentially said that the NBA has more skill than luck because the players have less skill.

The video makes perfect sense if you don't just assume the luck/skill labels here have a negative/positive connotation respectively.
 

jc17

Registered User
Jun 14, 2013
11,015
7,733
Why are people getting so defensive and trying to make this a hockey vs basketball argument as to which is a better sport. The video was very straightforward in just explaining differences, not saying one is better.
 

weaponomega

Registered User
Feb 9, 2004
10,807
2,207
Calgary, Alberta
Why are people getting so defensive and trying to make this a hockey vs basketball argument as to which is a better sport. The video was very straightforward in just explaining differences, not saying one is better.

I think the problem is many people aren't comprehending the video, yet are posting about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuietContrarian

ProspectsFanatic

Registered User
Nov 13, 2012
3,696
2,426
They omit to mention in their analysis the object which the athletes try to put in the net that they should be factoring in as well. The puck which is a slice of a cylinder brings a lot of variances by being asymmetrical compared to sports like baseball, soccer, and basketball which plays with an almost perfect symmetrical sphere. No matter which way you receive a basketball, you can always expect to have in hand the same rounded surface, in hockey the puck hits the stick or glass in different angles, so the point of contact of the glass with the puck hits different surfaces of the puck which impacts where the pucks ends up in unpredictable ways. Sometimes the puck will jump just over a player stick in unexpected fashion or other times a long shot which was supposed to be an easy save do an unusual angle bounce which surprised the goaltender and lead to a goal. Those type of events doesn't happen anywhere as often in sports like soccer. Taking a one-time from a wobbly pass is an often occurrence in hockey which brings for the shooter and the goaltender a nearly impossible trajectory to accurately predict. This an often overlooked feature of the sport that brings a lot of variance to the game of hockey. I will tend to believe that it is actually one of the most determinant source of variance in the game.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Crosbyfan

Uncle Rotter

Registered User
May 11, 2010
5,974
1,037
Kelowna, B.C.
Hey everyone,

Wanted to share this rather interesting video, and had no idea in which subsection to put it - Figured this was the best place since it is based of analytics.



This explains a team like Vegas in the SCF, would almost never see this in the NBA.
Even the Soccer UCL or FIFA WC are very predictable compared to Hockey tournaments.

Switzerland, Germany in the Finals in big tourneys.
You usually see a strady top 6-7 teams top the UCL, and even less for the WC.

Have you watched the World Cup this year (or any year)? Or the European Championships? 4 of the last 5 World Cup champions out in the first round.
 

justafan22

Registered User
Jun 22, 2014
11,629
6,249
In most non warriors cases, if you have the best player on the court, you're likely to win a series. In hockey, only a goalie can match that level of importance and even then it's variance to the max.
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,841
20,900
Toronto
This was obvious to anyone who looked at Vegas odds for the past 30 years. The only sport of the BIG 4 in North America that is harder to predict for an indvidual game is baseball, and that is reflected through Vegas odds. Only time you see crazy odds in baseball, is when you see an elite #1 (say Kershaw or Scherzer) go against a bad team starting their 5th guy.
 

Mikeshane

Registered User
Jan 15, 2013
6,175
3,923
This video helps explain part of why I like hockey(and MLB playoffs) and don't like most individual person sports. Hockey hits a pretty good balance of unpredictability, and like the guy says: having highs and lows is what makes it engaging as a fan. The NBA's popularity is as a skill showcase and celebrity platform, as far as a sport that brings engaging highs and lows it's poor.

I don't mind golf occasionally, I think what it has going for it is they compete against both the course and the entire field.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,644
16,188
Luck/randomness is part of it but it’s mostly the fact the impact of an individual player is far greater in basketball. A star basketball player is on the court for 50+ minutes a game. A goalie is comparable I guess but they are more restricted than any NBA position because they can’t score only prevent scoring.
 

Juicy Pop

BONK
Apr 26, 2014
9,301
4,724
Scranton, PA
I really love the point that basketball artificially engenders a skill gap based upon selection criteria that overwhelming favors height.

Imagine if all defenseman needed to be around Hedman's height to even make it into the NHL. The raw talent of the defensive pool would take a nosedive and suddenly the few good examples who remain would stand well above the new average.
 
Last edited:

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,077
12,078
Tampere, Finland
If we would determine a hockey game result in shots on goal, then it would be more equal to basketball.

Basketball is basicly shooting on the empty net.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->