Quote:
Originally Posted by saillias
Honest question: Have advanced stats accurately predicted Stanley cup winners in years past?
|
No, and that's not really the point. Guys like Yost seem to heavily rely on these statistics, which I feel really distracts from their actual usefulness.
This picture is old, but gives a snapshot of the impact of possession. It's a collection of possession numbers (for 5 years of regular seasons from 2007-08 to 2011-2012). It uses fenwick (unblocked shot attempts) at even strength in close score situations. Not a perfect metric by any means, but a reasonable substitute for possession %. Starting from the positive x axis (40% ie Buffalo bad) moving counter clockwise upwards in possession.
Basically, teams with a sub 50% possession rating made the playoffs 29% of the time. Teams over that mark made it 78% of the time
Bad possession teams such as Calgary this year (and Montreal/Colorado last year, Toronto the year before, etc) CAN make the playoffs or better. It's just less likely based on historical data.
I tend to liken 'advanced' statistics to special teams percentages in terms of importance. Having a poor PK and PP makes winning games more difficult, but not impossible. And poor special teams doesn't necessarily mean a poor team. Same idea with possession metrics like corsi and fenwick.
The biggest problems with these stats is how they are being used. You have the Yost-type guys preaching nothing but, which usually ends up in shouting matches with the 'watch the games' crowd. Then you have casually interested fans who take the stats out of context which really takes away from the perceived credibility of the stats.