Regulation Results of Four in Seven-Game Streaks: Another Way to Look at Team Records

[Textcritic]

1. The Idea

This is based on Darryl Sutter's season-long tracking of seven-game sets, but with a few wrinkles.

For those who don't know, in the 2003–04 season Sutter divided the regular season schedule into 11 seven-game sets, with one five-game set at the end of the season, and the object was to record four wins in each set of seven. He did this as a means to provide a manageable goal to the players which would result in a playoff berth. The thought was that winning most of the 11 series would result in a playoff berth, and Sutter's plan seems to have worked. That year the Flames won seven series, lost two, and split two, and then recorded a 3–2 record in their remaining five games.

2. The Challenge

I like this idea for how it sets teams into the context of seven-game playoff series. The problems with it are twofold: First, while this synopsis accounts for winning seven game sets, it can also mislead for the events in which teams lose more than four out of every seven games. For example, in the 2003–04 season when the Flames won seven of their 11 game-sets they also recorded at least four losses in seven-game streaks 23 times! Conversely, in an actual playoff run the defending Stanley Cup champions recorded four losses in a seven-game streak only once when they lost Games #3–5 of the Eastern Conference Finals and Game #1 of the Stanley Cup Finals. In other words, when it comes to playoff success it is important for teams to not just be able to win four out of every seven games, but also to avoid losing four out of seven.

Second, because of 3v3 overtime format and shootouts accounting for all wins against all losses or even regulation + OT wins against losses does not provide a clear enough picture of a teams record in seven-game streaks. When NHL.com compiles their L10 column, OT and S/O wins are recorded as outright wins.

3. The Criteria

The purpose of this exercise is to provide an alternative view for gauging team strength on the basis of streaks within seven games. In other words: how often within seven game samples do teams either win four or lose four games? Because I am interested in team-strength as it pertains to the playoffs, I have completely ignored ALL OT results, and only factored into consideration results in Regulation. Now, because I am accounting for streaks most games will be counted more than once. For example, after Game #7, the Flames had a record of 4-3-0; after Game #8, they had a record of 5-2-0 in their last seven; after Game #9 their record was 4-3-0 in their last seven; and so on and so forth. However, because the Flames won Game #5 v. Colorado in 3v3 OT, that result does not count for our purposes. This also means that not all results will count. The Flames did not get their first four regulation-win result in seven games until Game # 8 on 21 October, with a record of 4-2 with one OT win. They recorded their first four regulation-loss result in seven games in Game #10, with a record of 2-4 with one OT win.

4. The Results

Because of the complexity, I am only analyzing results of the four Division leaders, and the #2 and #3 Pacific Division teams. For each of Tampa, Washington, Winnipeg, Calgary, SJ, and Vegas, I have counted streaks of four wins and four losses per seven-games after every game as illustrated above. Tampa has played 75-games, meaning that they have compiled a total of 69 seven-game streaks. All five of the other teams have a total of 68. By way of reminder, because of OT and S/O results no team has a four-win / four-loss total equaling their seven-game streak number. Because we are not yet at the end of the season, I have also accounted wherever possible for the outcome of current streaks; i.e., the Flames are guaranteed at least two more streaks of four wins in seven; SJ is guaranteed at least three more four-loss in seven streaks, etc. Here are the results:

Tampa: 53–0
Calgary: 39–5
SJ: 36–5
Washington: 32–6
Winnipeg: 30–8
Vegas: 30–23

A couple of observations about this:

1. It is ridiculous that the Tampa Bay Lighting have AT NO TIME this season lost four out of ANY seven games in regulation time.

2. Tampa, Calgary, SJ, and Vegas have all recorded one streak of 7–0.

3. Tampa has on 19 occasions registered at least four wins in seven games with no regulation losses. The Flames have done it six times, Vegas four times, Washington twice, and SJ once.

4. Vegas's 23 streaks of four-losses in seven-games is a clear outlier. I attribute this to the fact that the Knights are exceptionally more inconsistent than the other five teams. While they have on several occasions compiled impressive runs of regulation wins, they have also strung together a huge number of frequent losses.

What does this mean? I think there are a couple of take-aways from this:

First, the Flames appear poised to go far in the playoffs on the basis of their consistency. Out of a possible 68 seven-game streaks they have recorded four losses only five times, and most of these are concentrated in their four-game streak from 2–7 March.

Second, Tampa is almost unbelievably good. I still believe that they can be beaten in a seven game series, but this exercise shows that they are more than just a prohibitive favourite to win the Cup—They SHOULD win it.

Third, I think this shows from another perspective just how closely matched SJ and Calgary are.

Fourth, I think an exercise like this helps to set VGK's recent run into context. Strange Brew has on occasion suggested that they are peaking too early. I think this shows that this might be the case, but also that they may not be as good as they appear today. Consistency is key.

[SebC]

Just a quick note... this methodology under-represents the start and end of the data set (to make it not, you could make the season loop or something weird like that). E.g. game 1 is in only one series, game 7 is in 7.

[the2bears]

Very interesting analysis, thanks for putting it together. Now I'm thinking of automating this with some functional programming...

[DeluxeMoustache]

So many Section 1’s.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Did you just throw out the OT games and count the 7 games around them?

Or simply determine that a 7 game segment including an OT or shootout result, with anything less than 4 wins or losses, is inconclusive?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by SebC

Just a quick note... this methodology under-represents the start and end of the data set (to make it not, you could make the season loop or something weird like that). E.g. game 1 is in only one series, game 7 is in 7.

Do you mean adding the first six games to the end of the seasons and the final six to the beginning for each team?

If so, the results look like this:

Tampa: 63–0
Calgary: 49–5
Winnipeg: 38–8
Washington: 36–6
SJ: 36–14
Vegas: 33–27

That seems to skew things a good distance away from the intended purpose of this exercise.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Did you just throw out the OT games and count the 7 games around them?

Or simply determine that a 7 game segment including an OT or shootout result, with anything less than 4 wins or losses, is inconclusive?

As mentioned in the Criteria:

Originally Posted by Textcritic

...because I am accounting for streaks most games will be counted more than once. For example, after Game #7, the Flames had a record of 4-3-0; after Game #8, they had a record of 5-2-0 in their last seven; after Game #9 their record was 4-3-0 in their last seven; and so on and so forth. However, because the Flames won Game #5 v. Colorado in 3v3 OT, that result does not count for our purposes. This also means that not all results will count. The Flames did not get their first four regulation-win result in seven games until Game # 8 on 21 October, with a record of 4-2 with one OT win. They recorded their first four regulation-loss result in seven games in Game #10, with a record of 2-4 with one OT win.

In other words, I have counted every instance of either four wins or four losses in each seven-game streak, but eliminated all OT and S/O results. This means that when teams have won or lost a lot of OT or S/O games in a shorter period of time, their results are not counted. For example, Washington recorded five OT or S/O results in their first 12 games. As a result their first streak of four regulation wins in seven games does not occur until after Game #23, with a result of 4-1 with two OT wins.

[shogged]

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Do you mean adding the first six games to the end of the seasons and the final six to the beginning for each team?

I think you only need to do one these. Game 1 = last 6 + 1, Game "82" = "75" to "82". No need to add to the tail as well if you do it that way.