Adv stats power ranking: What's the deal with Seattle?

[FanIn80]

According to this, Seattle is currently the 8th best team in the league: https://moneypuck.com/power.htm

This ranking uses advanced stats to rank each team's "probability of beating an average NHL team."

I have a very rudimentary-at-best knowledge of what these stats mean, as well as the formulae used to calculate them. I have tried on a couple of occasions to figure it all out, but I can't seem to find a single source of truth that explains what each stat represents (other than just stating the non-abbreviated stat name), as well as each stat's formula.

So, to that end, my question is wtf is the deal with Seattle on this list?

They've played 9 games, have a 3-5-1 record and a .338 points %. Their goal differential is -5 and they lost their last game (MoneyPuck places a higher weighting on recency). Given all that, what is it about the stats used in this power ranking that makes Seattle the 8th most probable team in the NHL to beat an average NHL team?


Edit: Also, they have the 9th best odds of winning the Stanley Cup: https://moneypuck.com/predictions.htm

[Johnny Makarov]

Ron Francis owns moneypuck.com.

He should have been fired 20 mins after the expansion draft.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

According to this, Seattle is currently the 8th best team in the league: https://moneypuck.com/power.htm

This ranking uses advanced stats to rank each team's "probability of beating an average NHL team."

I have a very rudimentary-at-best knowledge of what these stats mean, as well as the formulae used to calculate them. I have tried on a couple of occasions to figure it all out, but I can't seem to find a single source of truth that explains what each stat represents (other than just stating the non-abbreviated stat name), as well as each stat's formula.

So, to that end, my question is wtf is the deal with Seattle on this list?

They've played 9 games, have a 3-5-1 record and a .338 points %. Their goal differential is -5 and they lost their last game (MoneyPuck places a higher weighting on recency). Given all that, what is it about the stats used in this power ranking that makes Seattle the 8th most probable team in the NHL to beat an average NHL team?


Edit: Also, they have the 9th best odds of winning the Stanley Cup: https://moneypuck.com/predictions.htm

I have no idea, but I see from this that the Flames have the #2 best odds to win the Cup.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Sylvanfan]

Small sample size, and I think Grubauer was like 28th for Goals saved above average in another post that I saw.

Advanced stats are supposed to be indicators of what can be expected for future results if the metrics being measured can be maintained. So if Seattle continued to play as they have, and started to get league average goaltending, the expectation is that their record would improve.

There are many on this board who are far more in tune with advanced stats than myself, but I would think once you get to 30 games played that you start to get a better idea of how teams are playing, and how statisticians would expect the final league standings to look. As is the case with anything statistics related, there will always be an outlier team with bad advanced stats that yields unexpected positive results in terms of wins and losses, and there will be a strong team that does the exact opposite.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Ron Francis owns moneypuck.com.

He should have been fired 20 mins after the expansion draft.

Wait a minute... are you telling me Seattle's GM owns the site?

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have no idea, but I see from this that the Flames have the #2 best odds to win the Cup.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Yeah me too, which is why I'm trying to understand how much credence I should be giving this stuff.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Wait a minute... are you telling me Seattle's GM owns the site?

ummmmm YES! Yes he owns the site!lol

How else do you explain a bottom 3 team in the league ranked 8th on it.

I just clicked on it. It looks like some kid's Grade 8 IT project. haha

[Kovaz]

Usually when you see something like this, the first thing to check is goaltending. On Natural Stat Trick (http://naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?stdoi=g)

They've had 3 goalies play minutes:

Grubauer: -5.57 GSAA
Daccord: -1.12 GSAA
Driedger: -0.62 GSAA


Sum it up, and you get -7.31 GSAA. So for a team with a -5 goal differential, if your goalies have given up 7.3 more goals than expected, it's mostly due to them. With average goaltending, Seattle should be at a +2 goal differential, and IIRC every 3 goals is worth about 1 win, so their record should be closer to 5-3-1, which would put them in 8th place in the standings. Of course that all assumes that this is just a random cold streak for their goalies, and it's reasonable to expect Grubauer to bounce back and play better the rest of the way. It's entirely possible he keeps playing poorly, and it's also possible that they've got some defensive issues that are making the goalies look bad.


But that's the gist: they're getting 53% of the chances, but they have the 2nd-worst save percentage in the league.

[1Nite]

This is a Outrage, why are the oilers ranked at 14!

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Small sample size, and I think Grubauer was like 28th for Goals saved above average in another post that I saw.

Advanced stats are supposed to be indicators of what can be expected for future results if the metrics being measured can be maintained. So if Seattle continued to play as they have, and started to get league average goaltending, the expectation is that their record would improve.

There are many on this board who are far more in tune with advanced stats than myself, but I would think once you get to 30 games played that you start to get a better idea of how teams are playing, and how statisticians would expect the final league standings to look. As is the case with anything statistics related, there will always be an outlier team with bad advanced stats that yields unexpected positive results in terms of wins and losses, and there will be a strong team that does the exact opposite.

Originally Posted by Kovaz

Usually when you see something like this, the first thing to check is goaltending. On Natural Stat Trick (http://naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?stdoi=g)

They've had 3 goalies play minutes:

Grubauer: -5.57 GSAA
Daccord: -1.12 GSAA
Driedger: -0.62 GSAA


Sum it up, and you get -7.31 GSAA. So for a team with a -5 goal differential, if your goalies have given up 7.3 more goals than expected, it's mostly due to them. With average goaltending, Seattle should be at a +2 goal differential, and IIRC every 3 goals is worth about 1 win, so their record should be closer to 5-3-1, which would put them in 8th place in the standings. Of course that all assumes that this is just a random cold streak for their goalies, and it's reasonable to expect Grubauer to bounce back and play better the rest of the way. It's entirely possible he keeps playing poorly, and it's also possible that they've got some defensive issues that are making the goalies look bad.


But that's the gist: they're getting 53% of the chances, but they have the 2nd-worst save percentage in the league.

Ok, this actually makes sense.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Seattle is no good.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

Moneypuck is new to me. They are way more bullish on the Flames than most of the stat nerd guys. Most analytics sites had the Flames as a coin flip to make the playoffs to start the year, and their hot start has moved them up a little bit to around 65-70% as it stands today.

Those same analytics projected Seattle to be a strong play driving team with a good defense and strong goaltending. But that's all analytics are, simple projections. Seattle haven't gotten the expected goaltending, and they were missing their top C in Gourde. Now that he is back and the goaltending is showing some positive regression they look quite a bit better.

You should also know that most of these projections do not account for injuries so that will throw a wrench in things if teams lose guys throughout the season. I know for example, that JFresh simply plugs in all rookies as replacement level regardless of talent as well as he has no pro data to work with. These assumptions colour the overall projections but have a tendency to even out league wide over the course of a full season.

[Erick Estrada]

Power rankings are weekly hot takes for media and fans. The standings are the only rankings that count.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Seattle is no good.

The only worse look than a guy in a Roughrider jersey at the Dome this year, is a guy in a Kracking jersey! lol

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Power rankings are weekly hot takes for media and fans. The standings are the only rankings that count.

You are correct that the standings are the only rankings that count in hockey.

But the standings are not likely the best indicator of future success. A good indicator, but not the best.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[McG]

Originally Posted by 1Nite

This is a Outrage, why are the oilers ranked at 14!

It was a grade 8 project; digits transposed. Meant to be 41st.

[blankall]

Who cares. Just hope they beat Edmonton tonight, in regulation.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

You are correct that the standings are the only rankings that count in hockey.

But the standings are not likely the best indicator of future success.

Neither are most "power rankings."


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Power rankings are weekly hot takes for media and fans. The standings are the only rankings that count.

In the long run, when schedules balance out. Early on, there is a big difference in strength of schedules.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

According to this, Seattle is currently the 8th best team in the league: https://moneypuck.com/power.htm

This ranking uses advanced stats to rank each team's "probability of beating an average NHL team."

I have a very rudimentary-at-best knowledge of what these stats mean, as well as the formulae used to calculate them. I have tried on a couple of occasions to figure it all out, but I can't seem to find a single source of truth that explains what each stat represents (other than just stating the non-abbreviated stat name), as well as each stat's formula.

So, to that end, my question is wtf is the deal with Seattle on this list?

They've played 9 games, have a 3-5-1 record and a .338 points %. Their goal differential is -5 and they lost their last game (MoneyPuck places a higher weighting on recency). Given all that, what is it about the stats used in this power ranking that makes Seattle the 8th most probable team in the NHL to beat an average NHL team?


Edit: Also, they have the 9th best odds of winning the Stanley Cup: https://moneypuck.com/predictions.htm

Well their stats tell you that they have been out chancing and out shooting teams. Grubauer has struggled, he gave up 3.6 goals more than expected. That comes down to one soft(ish) goal every two games.

The other problem Seattle has, is that there are no elite forwards on that team. They create themselves opportunities, like the Flames did last year, but they don't have the finish to outgun teams. Actually most of the Flames' struggles last season can be applied to Seattle this year so far.

EDIT: Also their PP is 30th in the league with 10.3% which makes sense really if you look at their personnel. As for the last game they played against the Rangers Moneypuck actually has Seattle at ~84% deserving to win that game.