Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Nate Silver asks: Why hasn't a Canadian team won the Stanley Cup in 20 years?

macrov · 05-31-2013, 11:18 AM

As amazing at Nate Silver is, and as good as his analysis is, he does make some pretty obvious mistakes when analyzing his thesis that "Canadian teams have more fans, and are profitable, so don't need to field teams that are as good"

1) In his regression of US VS American teams, he shows a positive relationship between on ice performance and profitability. There is no such positive statistical relationship in Canada. Ok...that's great on first glance. But, Silver also explains that all the Canadians team make an operating profit but not all US teams do. So, by extension, Canadian teams can spend more equal amounts on payroll, while some US teams will be constrained to spend by their revenues (Ie - Nashville, Florida). As a result, there would per a correlation between profitability and performance in the US, because more profitable teams can spend more on payroll. In Canada most of the teams can spend up to the Cap if it makes sense for them to do so.

2) His argument is weaker when you consider that to become a contender, you often need to pick up top 5 overall draft talent. Toews, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Doughty, Schenn, and Johnson were all top 5 talent playing for 1 of the 4 final teams. How do you get top 5 draft talent? By being really bad. Which teams can afford to be bad - teams in market with lots of hardcore fans? Or teams in markets with a lot of fickle fans? Arguably its the former. Which suggests that teams with more fans should end up with better draft picks because they can afford to think more long-term.

3) He ignores that for many owners, the primary reason of owning a team is not the money - Tampa, Calgary, Ottawa, Buffalo, Detroit come to mind as the most obvious. So incentives for winning are aligned regardless of fan intensity or number of fans.

----

I think the issue with the Canadian teams has more to do with the first part of his argument - in the mid 1990s to early 2000s, Calgary, Vancouver and Edmonton couldn't really field competitive teams. As a result their were only 3 teams that could seriously compete.

05-31-2013, 11:18 AM	#11
macrov Lifetime Suspension Join Date: Oct 2010 Exp:	As amazing at Nate Silver is, and as good as his analysis is, he does make some pretty obvious mistakes when analyzing his thesis that "Canadian teams have more fans, and are profitable, so don't need to field teams that are as good" 1) In his regression of US VS American teams, he shows a positive relationship between on ice performance and profitability. There is no such positive statistical relationship in Canada. Ok...that's great on first glance. But, Silver also explains that all the Canadians team make an operating profit but not all US teams do. So, by extension, Canadian teams can spend more equal amounts on payroll, while some US teams will be constrained to spend by their revenues (Ie - Nashville, Florida). As a result, there would per a correlation between profitability and performance in the US, because more profitable teams can spend more on payroll. In Canada most of the teams can spend up to the Cap if it makes sense for them to do so. 2) His argument is weaker when you consider that to become a contender, you often need to pick up top 5 overall draft talent. Toews, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Doughty, Schenn, and Johnson were all top 5 talent playing for 1 of the 4 final teams. How do you get top 5 draft talent? By being really bad. Which teams can afford to be bad - teams in market with lots of hardcore fans? Or teams in markets with a lot of fickle fans? Arguably its the former. Which suggests that teams with more fans should end up with better draft picks because they can afford to think more long-term. 3) He ignores that for many owners, the primary reason of owning a team is not the money - Tampa, Calgary, Ottawa, Buffalo, Detroit come to mind as the most obvious. So incentives for winning are aligned regardless of fan intensity or number of fans. ---- I think the issue with the Canadian teams has more to do with the first part of his argument - in the mid 1990s to early 2000s, Calgary, Vancouver and Edmonton couldn't really field competitive teams. As a result their were only 3 teams that could seriously compete. Last edited by macrov; 05-31-2013 at 11:51 AM.