Wild Card Race (Western Conference)

[mrkajz44]

I went to hockeystats.ca to see the methodology (mainly because of the DAL ranking) and there is zero information on the site. It just has this graph. That's it.

Kind of hard to me to appreciate the calculations if you don't even discuss your method.

[blender]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

I went to hockeystats.ca to see the methodology (mainly because of the DAL ranking) and there is zero information on the site. It just has this graph. That's it.

Kind of hard to me to appreciate the calculations if you don't even discuss your method.

No need to discuss the method; the method is GOD.

[icecube]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Biggest game of the year for us. A loss to the Ducks sets the table for the gap to shrink even more. And you just know with how the hockey gods look down on us that we aren't going to get any help whatsoever.

Nay. The dark age has past. The hockey God's smile upon us.

[Jets4Life]

I think Calgary, Vancouver, and Los Angeles will make it to the playoffs. LA seems to have caught their stride, and I think they will finish in the top 3 in the division. It will be a battle between the Flames and Canucks to finish 3rd, and avoid the Wild Card spot, and honestly, I see the Flames finishing on top. They have this "never say die" mentality that can make them a dark horse in the playoffs.

I haven't been too impressed with San Jose, and I think Minnesota is relying on the performances of Dubnyk (like the Jets were for Hutch), and he will eventually come back to earth. the Jets are in trouble, losing Perreault, and our bottom 6 forward and undisciplined play will be our downfall. I think the Jets can finish in the last playoff spot, but it will take a bit of luck, and for Hutch to rebound after a crummy last month. My prediction:

Central:

1. Nashville
2. St.Louis
3. Chicago

West:

1. Anaheim
2. Los Angeles
3. Calgary

Wildcards:

1. Vancouver
2. Winnipeg

-----

3. San Jose
4. Minnesota
5. Dallas

[hwy19man]

After Friday's games:

1. Winnipeg (30-20-10) 24 ROW, 70 pts
Vancouver (33-22-3) 30 ROW, 69 pts--second in Pacific Division
Calgary (32-23-4) 29 ROW, 68 pts--third in the Pacific Division
2. San Jose (30-22-8) 28 ROW, 68 pts--and fourth in Pacific Division
3. Minnesota (30-21-7) 28 ROW, 67 pts
4. Los Angeles (27-18-12) 26 ROW, 66 pts--and fifth in the Pacific Division
5. Dallas (27-23-8) 25 ROW, 62 pts
6. Colorado (25-23-11) 18 ROW, 61 pts

Wild and Avalanche won in regulation
Canucks and Flames lost in regulation

[dying4acup]

San Jose is in trouble. I want them to win tomorrow, but in the end I expect them to finish on the outside looking in. It doesn't mean the Flames are in, but I do wish they had another 2 head to head before the end of the season..

[Mony]

I can't decide who we're cheering for tonight. LA could catch up with us in points with a win tonight, and I don't see them not making the playoffs by this point. San Jose I think has a better chance of missing.

I guess pray for a game that ends in regulation?

[Street Pharmacist]

Our chances dropped below 70% after last night according to Sportsclubstats

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mony

I can't decide who we're cheering for tonight. LA could catch up with us in points with a win tonight, and I don't see them not making the playoffs by this point. San Jose I think has a better chance of missing.

I guess pray for a game that ends in regulation?

Yup. It's impossible to guess who will get hot down the stretch and who won't. These teams are essentially tied, and one has to win, so just hope for a regulation outcome.

[landshark]

I'm pinning all of the sharks hope on tonight's game. They have shown that they can be a solid team, but then completely fall apart playing weaker opponents. If they can pull it together and beat the kings tonight under the pressure of a gigantic stage, then I think they'll be strong enough to push into the post season, but it won't be easy. I honestly lol'd when I first read the OP and saw the winnipeg confidence... How silly to assume that the Jets would make it and the sharks would not..

and yet... here we are...

[hwy19man]

Originally Posted by dying4acup

San Jose is in trouble. I want them to win tomorrow, but in the end I expect them to finish on the outside looking in. It doesn't mean the Flames are in, but I do wish they had another 2 head to head before the end of the season.

The Sharks have played the most games, but so have the Jets and they too will have a difficult time making it.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Updated for the 21st.

For those interested in the methodology, http://www.silversevensens.com/2014/...tions-with-pip

Not surprising that fans of a team that isn't favoured by the methodology would look for reasons to disregard it, but there it is nonetheless. Take it or leave it. Personally I try to remain objective about these things.

[blender]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Updated for the 21st.

For those interested in the methodology, http://www.silversevensens.com/2014/...tions-with-pip

Not surprising that fans of a team that isn't favoured by the methodology would look for reasons to disregard it, but there it is nonetheless. Take it or leave it. Personally I try to remain objective about these things.

Don't need to see the methodology to know it is valueless when it has a team with the less points as the flames but more games played with a higher chance of making the playoffs.
Sorry, not buying it.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by blender

Don't need to see the methodology to know it is valueless when it has a team with the less points as the flames but more games played with a higher chance of making the playoffs.
Sorry, not buying it.

This is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

Let's say a team, say the Flames, has played 59 games and have 68 points. Let's say another team, whoever, has played 60 games and has 67 points.

Now let's say the Flames' remaining 23 games are all against a combination of the Blackhawks, Blues, Ducks, Lightning, Penguins and rangers. The other team plays multiple games against the Sabres, Oilers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets... you get the idea.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that the other team has a cushy schedule with 17 of their last 22 played at home, and in the majority of those games, the team coming in played the night before and is on the tail end of a long road trip. The Flames, meanwhile, play most of their games on the road as part of brutal 3-in-4 stretches with back to backs involving long flights in between.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that some time this afternoon, Brodie, Gio, Wideman, Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler are all simultaneously struck by lightning and are out for the season. The other team is totally healthy.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

You know the answer. You know there are myriad factors that go into this. The only argument is how much relative weight to put on those factors to create the best predictive model you can - the one most likely to predict the final result or closest to it (since no model designed to predict the future in hockey is going to be even close to perfect).

[blender]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

Let's say a team, say the Flames, has played 59 games and have 68 points. Let's say another team, whoever, has played 60 games and has 67 points.

Now let's say the Flames' remaining 23 games are all against a combination of the Blackhawks, Blues, Ducks, Lightning, Penguins and rangers. The other team plays multiple games against the Sabres, Oilers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets... you get the idea.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that some time this afternoon, Brodie, Gio, Wideman, Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler are all simultaneously struck by lightning and are out for the season. The other team is totally healthy.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

You know the answer. You know there are myriad factors that go into this. The only argument is how much relative weight to put on those factors to create the best predictive model you can - the one most likely to predict the final result or closest to it (since no model designed to predict the future in hockey is going to be even close to perfect).

I believe your argument proves my point. To try and assess and value all those factors, and then account for them with a flawed method like Corsi and Fenwick, and then declare them as a percentage-rated score is what's ridiculous.
There's a reason they play the games, and that's what will determine the outcome.
The team with more points in less games played has a better chance of making the playoffs--end stop.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

Let's say a team, say the Flames, has played 59 games and have 68 points. Let's say another team, whoever, has played 60 games and has 67 points.

Now let's say the Flames' remaining 23 games are all against a combination of the Blackhawks, Blues, Ducks, Lightning, Penguins and rangers. The other team plays multiple games against the Sabres, Oilers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets... you get the idea.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that the other team has a cushy schedule with 17 of their last 22 played at home, and in the majority of those games, the team coming in played the night before and is on the tail end of a long road trip. The Flames, meanwhile, play most of their games on the road as part of brutal 3-in-4 stretches with back to backs involving long flights in between.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that some time this afternoon, Brodie, Gio, Wideman, Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler are all simultaneously struck by lightning and are out for the season. The other team is totally healthy.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

You know the answer. You know there are myriad factors that go into this. The only argument is how much relative weight to put on those factors to create the best predictive model you can - the one most likely to predict the final result or closest to it (since no model designed to predict the future in hockey is going to be even close to perfect).

Yea you just owned yourself and disproved your own methodology lol

[landshark]

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown...

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

Let's say a team, say the Flames, has played 59 games and have 68 points. Let's say another team, whoever, has played 60 games and has 67 points.

Now let's say the Flames' remaining 23 games are all against a combination of the Blackhawks, Blues, Ducks, Lightning, Penguins and rangers. The other team plays multiple games against the Sabres, Oilers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets... you get the idea.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

But that is not the case here. That is not a significant factor.

Now assume that the other team has a cushy schedule with 17 of their last 22 played at home, and in the majority of those games, the team coming in played the night before and is on the tail end of a long road trip. The Flames, meanwhile, play most of their games on the road as part of brutal 3-in-4 stretches with back to backs involving long flights in between.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

But that is not the case here. That is not a significant factor.

Now assume that some time this afternoon, Brodie, Gio, Wideman, Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler are all simultaneously struck by lightning and are out for the season. The other team is totally healthy.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

But that is not the case here. That is not a significant factor.

You know the answer. You know there are myriad factors that go into this.

Right. But your model, as described by your own website, uses Fenwick as the predominant factor. And you didn't even mention it in your long-winded baloney defence cited above.

In other words, you didn't even begin to address the actual criticism of your methodology. You blew smoke about a bunch of factors that have nothing to do with the point in question.

Basically, you are predicting that the Flames will miss the playoffs because their possession-proxy numbers are bad. But you would have predicted, based on those numbers, that the Flames would be dead last in the league this season, or close to it. You would also have predicted that the Oilers would be somewhere near the middle of the pack. When both these things consistently fail to happen, your only defence is to say that the difference is accounted for by luck. But in fact puck possession is not the sole determinant of success in hockey, and Fenwick and Corsi don't even measure puck possession.

Your model can't even predict the past. Why should we trust it to predict the future?

The only argument is how much relative weight to put on those factors to create the best predictive model you can - the one most likely to predict the final result or closest to it (since no model designed to predict the future in hockey is going to be even close to perfect).

Right. And you have put the heaviest weight on Fenwick, which is not a good predictor. Nor is Corsi.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Updated for the 21st.

For those interested in the methodology, http://www.silversevensens.com/2014/...tions-with-pip

Not surprising that fans of a team that isn't favoured by the methodology would look for reasons to disregard it, but there it is nonetheless. Take it or leave it. Personally I try to remain objective about these things.

I don't doubt you try to remain objective in your feelings towards teams, but it's obvious you're not objective in which stats to weight in your model, with a bias towards the shiny new stats because well they're shiny and new and all the cool kids use it.

For example, goal differential has a much stronger correlation with success then corsi/fenwick/pdo, yet i strongly doubt in your model that it carries as much if any significance in your predictions.7

By your own website a top 10 corsi team still misses the playoffs 20% of the time. a top 10 team in goal differential?? Way less.

[Roof-Daddy]

What a clusterfata.

One point separating 2nd thru 5th place in our division.