Wild Card Race (Western Conference)

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Nope. If you want to look at utter hopelessness over a series of five or so seasons, sure. But just this year? There has literally not been an Oilers team this bad... well, probably ever, but definitely in the cap era. Even that godawful 09-10 team doesn't stack up for sheer horrendousness.

using the only stat that counts the Oilers are only 5 points ahead of Buffalo, they are definitely "down there with buffalo"

Both teams have 17 wins for crying out loud

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by dino7c

using the only stat that counts the Oilers are only 5 points ahead of Buffalo, they are definitely "down there with buffalo"

Both teams have 17 wins for crying out loud

That'll change. The sabres pulled out a few victories while getting shelled horribly. If the oilers had Buffalo's net minding they'd be 10 points clear. If Buffalo had oilers' goaltending they'd have one win

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

^Can't recall a long list, but Grabovski was there and is probably at least as good as Bonino. Query whether he'd sign a one year deal. But the point is, if you've got 6 million bucks and you're smart about it you can find an asset who belongs in your top 6F/4D. Ehrhoff signed for 1y/4m in Pittsburgh.

You can't compare every signing and say team x should have signed that deal

of course Ehrhoff on a 1 y/4m is a great deal, was he signing it with anyone who wasn't a top 5 favorite for the Stanley Cup?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You've completely missed my point. It was not "the Canucks should have signed Ehrhoff". My point was that if you have 6M in cap space, you're going to be able to use it to acquire an asset that will help your team unless you're incompetent as a GM. Hopefully that is clearer now.



Flames change since yesterday: -0.037%
Flames 2 weeks change: -13.013%

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That'll change. The sabres pulled out a few victories while getting shelled horribly. If the oilers had Buffalo's net minding they'd be 10 points clear. If Buffalo had oilers' goaltending they'd have one win

they don't lol

if the Flames had Crosby they would be competing for the division lead

[troutman]

MIN's loss hurt them much more than CGY's loss hurt.

http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL/Western.html

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

About twice as much in fact.

Calgary 1 day change: -4.584%
Minnesota 1 day change: -9.855%

Chart above auto-updated, see post 524.

Unrelated note, I don't know where to post the below but it's hilarious. Is there some "around the NHL" thread on here?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

About twice as much in fact.

Calgary 1 day change: -4.584%
Minnesota 1 day change: -9.855%

Chart above auto-updated, see post 524.

I don't care for your chart. I'm sticking with sportsclubstats.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You're welcome to. I'll be interested to see at the end of all of this which model was more accurate (particularly earlier).

[mrkajz44]

It's impossible to tell which model is more accurate, because at the end of the season they will predict the same thing (whoever is in has a 100% chance).

At this point, percentages are percentages. If Calgary makes it, does that mean sportsclubstats was better because they consistently had Calgary at a higher percentage? No, you'd need thousands of seasons to see which model was more accurate in their prediction. The results at the end of this year will neither validate nor disprove either model.

[heep223]

I always find it mind boggling how much of a difference one or two points makes at this time of the year.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by troutman

MIN's loss hurt them much more than CGY's loss hurt.

http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL/Western.html

It makes sense. We lost a road game against a tough eastern team. That doesn't hurt too much in the big picture. Min blew a gimme game at home.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

^ Sportsclubstats doesn't really take into account the "road game to a tough eastern team" thing, though, you know?

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

It's impossible to tell which model is more accurate, because at the end of the season they will predict the same thing (whoever is in has a 100% chance).

At this point, percentages are percentages. If Calgary makes it, does that mean sportsclubstats was better because they consistently had Calgary at a higher percentage? No, you'd need thousands of seasons to see which model was more accurate in their prediction. The results at the end of this year will neither validate nor disprove either model.

Assume all other things are equal, and assume the Wild end up making the playoffs. If model A consistently has, say, the Wild with an above 50% chance of making the playoffs from January 15 on, and model B has them under 50% until March, then model A was a better predictor this year. You're right that that doesn't mean it will be better next year or that it would be better if they played the same season ten times.

It's not about validating or disproving. Could absolutely be just chance if one works better but I still will be interested to see. I don't know about needing thousands of seasons, though - if you take a predictive model and apply it to, say, the last ten years, and on Jan 1 it predicts the playoff teams with 80% accuracy overall, that sounds like a pretty good model to me. Interestingly, that's what NHL.com claims to have (or something of that sort). Have to be realistic about what's possible here and do the best we can.

[Erick Estrada]

I looked at the teams schedules and if the Flames lose tonight they will be almost done (not statistically but realistically) as it means they are going to have to go on a big tear down the stretch and hope for teams to lose big and this is the time of year where teams start playing for points in close games causing more 3-point games.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I looked at the teams schedules and if the Flames lose tonight they will be almost done (not statistically but realistically) as it means they are going to have to go on a big tear down the stretch and hope for teams to lose big and this is the time of year where teams start playing for points in close games causing more 3-point games.

I disagree. With the finishing schedule a small tear is all that would be needed. Would definitely make it unlikely though

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You've completely missed my point. It was not "the Canucks should have signed Ehrhoff". My point was that if you have 6M in cap space, you're going to be able to use it to acquire an asset that will help your team unless you're incompetent as a GM. Hopefully that is clearer now.



Flames change since yesterday: -0.037%
Flames 2 weeks change: -13.013%

I don't disagree with the general trends here, but two weeks seems like an awfully short window for significant changes like Minnesota gaining 30%.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I disagree. With the finishing schedule a small tear is all that would be needed. Would definitely make it unlikely though

If they come out of these games in NY with anything less than 2 points the season is over barring a miraculous run of wins down the stretch. Let's not forget the Flames are currently playing their worst hockey since the mid season losing streak right now. If you look at the upcoming schedule they are going to have to on a dime drastically change their play quickly to defeat the upcoming opposition which are mostly playing good hockey right now. It's a tall task. One that isn't impossible but has to start very, very soon.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If they come out of these games in NY with anything less than 2 points the season is over barring a miraculous run of wins down the stretch. Let's not forget the Flames are currently playing their worst hockey since the mid season losing streak right now. If you look at the upcoming schedule they are going to have to on a dime drastically change their play quickly to defeat the upcoming opposition which are mostly playing good hockey right now. It's a tall task. One that isn't impossible but has to start very, very soon.

Not that bad - they have to play 4-5 games above .500 to get to 95 points, and the schedule gets easier in March. They are still in a better position than MIN and SJ.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

^ Sportsclubstats doesn't really take into account the "road game to a tough eastern team" thing, though, you know?

Doesn't it (indirectly) in running scenarios?

It knows the season schedule and scores for past games. As games are played it grabs the new scores from the internet (or gets scores sent in from fans) and simulates the rest of the season by randomly picking scores for each remaining game. The weighted method takes the opponents record and home field advantage into account when randomly picking scores, so the better team is more likely to win. The 50/50 method gives each opponent an equal chance of winning (or tying if the sport allows it) each game. When it’s finished "playing" all the remaining games it applies the league’s tie breaking rules to see where everyone finished. It repeats this random playing out of the season million of times, keeping track of how many "seasons" each team finishes where. Finally it updates the site with the new results for you to read with your morning coffee.

[mrkajz44]

So Calgary goes 0-2-1 and suddenly there is no way we can make the playoffs if we lose the next game? The overreactions are getting worse and worse.

94 points is a maybe, with 96 as being a virtual lock. That's what we need at the end of the season, winning tonight or not.