NHL Power Rankings

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by troutman

Thanks.

I was thinking shots are counted differently from arena to arena. IIRC, DET is known for having super inflated shot totals.

The physical shot count data is generally accurate, where statisticians are finding discrepancies in shot collection is the area the shots are from. The next wave of advanced statistics is going to be location based shooting(ie who's the most efficient finisher in certain areas of the ice/ who gets the most shots of in a certain area and which players concede the highest percentage shots when defending).

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Hells Bells

Drance is a tool.

How anyone can rank the Coyotes, Flyers or Stars ahead of the Flames in any way, shape or form right now is insane. Obviously other questionable ones ahead of the Flames but those three should put you out of a job.

Honestly, does he watch hockey?

he watches spreadsheets

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by J epworth kendal

Flames nation still does, Ryan Pike just had a good article today there looking at how scoring chances occur. He has starting tracking zone entries, looking at how the puck entered the offensive zone during the game (either carry-in or dump). He has found a trend that:



That's over a data size of



It's data like this which Burke talks about when he says we do lots of in-house analytics to help get a larger picture of how goals occur and who is being successful in scoring for the Flames. Not just straight up counting stats, but using stats to find trends in how goals occur, what is successful.

Here's the whole article, it's a good read:
http://flamesnation.ca/2014/12/1/whe...nces-come-from

I love that data, but it's not helpful in comparing with other teams as we only have flames numbers

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

he watches spreadsheets

Well then he's watching the wrong spreadsheets

[ForeverFlameFan]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=742408

We didn't even make the top 16. What an atrocious list.

[burn_this_city]

Somehow Corsi and Fenwick have replaced goal differential and actual standings when generating the power rankings. That Drance guy was supposed to be on the Fan this morning, would have loved to hear how those advanced stats somehow supersede GD and overall record.

The 2014 Improved Corsi Cup goes to the Edmonton Oilers!

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=742408

We didn't even make the top 16. What an atrocious list.

Awesome. I'm actually glad that list looks like that. Hartley is most certainly using lists like these as motivation for the boys.

Here is my own power rankings and it's the only one that matters.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Somehow Corsi and Fenwick have replaced goal differential and actual standings when generating the power rankings. That Drance guy was supposed to be on the Fan this morning, would have loved to hear how those advanced stats somehow supersede GD and overall record.

The 2014 Improved Corsi Cup goes to the Edmonton Oilers!

Yeah he was on and pretty much spewed exactly what you would expect....Flames will be crashing back to earth soon. Discounted the injured guys returning as not good enough to make up fro the low Corsi. He was also careful to cover his but with some "you never know's" and "it's always possible".

I don't know enough about the fancy stats and to be honest I don't have time to learn or care too much. My common sense tells me that the Flames can't sustain the current puck luck and they are most certainly paying with fire on these third period comebacks. But I think they are playing better than the stats show (stats say they suck, I think they don't) and I don't have an answer for that. It seems to me that they get buzzing around and almost always have 2-3 layers in front of the goalie for point shots, and they are good at getting those point shots...could help with the shooting %?

Defensively, and possession wise, it seems like when the other team has the puck the Flames aren't giving them the time and space to do much with it. So the other team may have it more but they aren't getting the time and room to capitalize.

Anyway....I am having fun watching and understand that there will be a drop off but I can't see this team going on an extended losing skid...too much hustle. They are also getting back some defense and speed right quick here with Stajan and Raymond.

[djsFlames]

SO...

Did anyone noticed how NHL.com dropped the Flames off this week's top 16? Despite having gone undefeated since the last rankings were released?

Oh and that's not the best part.... who jumps on the list to replace them?

Why, the 10-13 Florida Panthers!

Someone try to explain that logic.


Joke rankings are a joke.

joke joke joke....

[united]

Power rankings are a brilliant creation. You know the fans of every team except the team you ranked first are going to be furious with where you've slotted them, and you also know those angry fans will give you hits week after week despite declaring your rankings as garbage and useless, and vowing they're never going to read them again.

The outrage!

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by united

Power rankings are a brilliant creation. You know the fans of every team except the team you ranked first are going to be furious with where you've slotted them, and you also know those angry fans will give you hits week after week despite declaring your rankings as garbage and useless, and vowing they're never going to read them again.

The outrage!

Unless you're an Oilers fan. E=NG

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by united

Power rankings are a brilliant creation. You know the fans of every team except the team you ranked first are going to be furious with where you've slotted them, and you also know those angry fans will give you hits week after week despite declaring your rankings as garbage and useless, and vowing they're never going to read them again.

The outrage!

The power rankings are anything but brilliant, unless the entire point is to generate views and fan interaction.

Super 16 selection procedure: Take the last three cup winners, list them in any order at the top, because there's nothing that makes you look more genius than going by recent history, then get pissed drunk and spin a wheel to select the next 13. Await impending rage.

[heep223]

Almost every comment on those rankings is pointing out the ludicrousness of not having the Flames on it. And not just people from Calgary.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=742408

We didn't even make the top 16. What an atrocious list.

Good. I hope people outside Calgary continue to underestimate this team.

[Huntingwhale]

Here is what the disclaimer says about the rankings.

While the Super 16 is NHL.com's weekly power rankings, it focuses more on the "power" than the "rankings" when determining the order. It's not always going to look like the League standings and likely will take more of a long view than a short one. If two teams are close the tiebreaker almost always is this: If the two teams started a seven-game series right now, who would prevail? Stop by to see where your favorite team ranks, but stay for the information.

I have no idea wtf it means. But it's no good. How do you even focus on the power?

[heep223]

FWIW:

http://http://espn.go.com/nhl/powerrankings
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-power-rankings...-2014-1.148881
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nhl/rankings/
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/n...urgh-penguins/
http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/po...own-no-1-spot/
http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/12/...tors-islanders

[djsFlames]

Pretty sure the Flames would sweep the Panthers in a 7 game series.

Also a third of the teams on that list (beat, not sweep). Few of those teams run with the belief and fearlessness this team plays with nightly. Where is that calculated in? Where are third period goals (in which we lead the league) calculated in? Goal differential? Goal scoring ability, period? What about the ability to come from behind? To close games out? What about the things you can only see with your own damn eyes, such as the Bruins ####ing the bed against worthy opponents, while the Flames not only keep up, but shut them down completely?

That's some kinda subjective baloney BS, that is.

Edit: Sure, call me sour, but I've heard too much about how the Flames are a non factor, and the Oiler are destined for greatness, for too long for our guys to finally start proving themselves - and for a 70+ stretch going back to last season - and still not get near the recognition they deserve.

#### that site and their writers.

[Incogneto]

Please just follow the only 'power rankings' that matter - The Sagarin ratings:
http://sagarin.com/sports/nhlsend.htm

[Incogneto]

double post

[Coach]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Yeah he was on and pretty much spewed exactly what you would expect....Flames will be crashing back to earth soon. Discounted the injured guys returning as not good enough to make up fro the low Corsi. He was also careful to cover his but with some "you never know's" and "it's always possible".

I have a few problems with what this guy said. I understand the stats, but don't take a lot from them for a couple reasons:

1) The guy frames the discussion like "The stats say they WILL regress to the mean" and then says "But it's possible to maintain I suppose". Why are the stats an absolute?

2) Everything is seemingly attributed to luck (either good or bad). It looks to me like they just attribute luck to the things they can't account for (yet). And even when the idea of different players having better shots, better position, etc...equalling higher scoring percentages, it's just "Well we have metrics for that, but they aren't very good yet, so we'll just ignore it/assume it's statistically insignificant". He actually said that the quality of player (or quality of shot), while not accurately measured right now, is not important anyways. Well no, you can't just ignore it. Because the different skills/talents/abilities of players (an no, ability is not just scoring vs preventing scoring. It's small things like first on forcheck, smart decisions at bluelines, positioning without the puck, attitude etc...) might be the greatest reasons for differences in these numbers. These stats are takin in a vaccum and analyzed with the assumption that all players, teams, coaches, etc.. are equal and therefore will all regress to an average. But there are good teams, average teams and bad teams. Ignoring these facts and assuming equality across the competition is a huge part of why people are questioning this stuff.

I don't doubt that there's support in the analytics, but it is support for the eye-test, not the other way around. There are too many variables in hockey for the stats to show a full picture of the game now, and maybe ever. Which is fine, that doesn't discount them. But it certainly precludes them from being used in support of any sort of absolute claim of a teams fortunes either way.

EDIT: He was also adament about teams not showing these tendencies year-to-year, and thus they arent repeating and reliable, or don't show a skill because it's random. No mention that players and teams improve or regress season-to season. AND he used the Flames and their 1-goal wins as an example. Forgetting that the Flames had a bunch of 1-goal games last year across the league. Now we are winning some/most of them. To me that's not an aboration, it's improvement.