They have a PDO of like 104 over the last month or so; that’s exactly how they won the cup in 2017 lol
- j.boyd919

They're playing a better brand of hockey than in 2017, PDO similar or not.

They've been limiting the HDSC most games quite a bit and for a while now. That's a huge difference. They were bleeding HDSC in those playoffs back then... 1st and 2nd round majorly and 4th quite a bit as well.

They're playing a better brand of hockey than in 2017, PDO similar or not.
- MattStrat

With less talent so what does it matter? Hitchcock coaching Pens 2016 has a better shot at the Cup than Trotz with this year’s Isles.

With less talent so what does it matter? Hitchcock coaching Pens 2016 has a better shot at the Cup than Trotz with this year’s Isles.
- Victoro311

Hockey is a sport that hard work can trump skill. A group of guys fighting and battling for each other and cohesive as a group can do a lot of damage.

Look how many years the Pens were the best team on paper and didn't go far.

Hockey is a sport that hard work can trump skill. A group of guys fighting and battling for each other and cohesive as a group can do a lot of damage.

Look how many years the Pens were the best team on paper and didn't go far.
- MattStrat

That only holds for 10/11 and we got murdered by injuries. After that we had no bottom six.

Hockey is a sport that hard work can trump skill. A group of guys fighting and battling for each other and cohesive as a group can do a lot of damage.

Look how many years the Pens were the best team on paper and didn't go far.
- MattStrat

When were the pens ever the best team on paper lmao?

That only holds for 10/11 and we got murdered by injuries. After that we had no bottom six.
- Victoro311

Who was injured in 2013 when they had Iggy and also Morrow in the bottom 6?

When were the pens ever the best team on paper lmao?
- Feds91Stammer

Perhaps I should of said the heavy favorites...perhaps..

Perhaps I should of said the heavy favorites...perhaps..
- MattStrat

Those teams were loaded with studs. Kennedy. Glass. Rupp. Adams. Cooke. Murray. Engelland. Vitale. Etc.

Who was injured in 2013 when they had Iggy and also Morrow in the bottom 6?
- MattStrat

Morrow was toast and we had a Dude by the name of Brandon “Flat Stanley” Sutter centering the third line killing whatever Morrow would have brought anyways. And our 4th line was AHL caliber.

Best teams on paper have really good bottom sixes.

Those teams were loaded with studs. Kennedy. Glass. Rupp. Adams. Cooke. Murray. Engelland. Vitale. Etc.
- Feds91Stammer

Yikes, guys like that would get steamrolled against a team like the 2009 Red Wings!

Morrow was toast and we had a Dude by the name of Brandon “Flat Stanley” Sutter centering the third line killing whatever Morrow would have brought anyways. And our 4th line was AHL caliber.

Best teams on paper have really good bottom sixes.
- Victoro311

I agree but regardless, they were still one of the top favourites pretty much every year except when Sid and Geno were both out....at least up here they were, I mean amongst all the insiders with TSN and Sportsnet.

I agree but regardless, they were still one of the top favourites pretty much every year except when Sid and Geno were both out....at least up here they were, I mean amongst all the insiders with TSN and Sportsnet.
- MattStrat

These are the same people that kept Malkin off the top 100 list. They don’t have critical thinking capabilities.

So a factor in PDO is save%, correct?... And we've all been seeing that alot of games the shots against the Pens are low quality, correct?

These are the same people that kept Malkin off the top 100 list. They don’t have critical thinking capabilities.
- Victoro311

No not all of them, some of the playoff broadcast panels picking playoffs picks were retired players, coaches and GMs, on both networks...and as for someone like Friedman, Im not gonna just assume he doesn't think Geno is a top 100 player, many people voted.

So a factor in PDO is save%, correct?... And we've all been seeing that alot of games the shots against the Pens are low quality, correct?
- MattStrat

PDO isn’t necessarily a bad word that means your team sucks. It’s an attempt to quantify a bunch of unquantifiable or difficult to quantify factors that are generally speaking unsustainable in the long run. These are things like the goalie running hot and shooters going on a heater. Statistically, it is “luck” because you can’t plan around it but in real life it’s not actually luck. Like take the 2017 Pens. Pucks weren’t just being shot into MAF and Mur’s gloves, they legitimately played great in their own right. It was lucky that Sid, Geno, Phil, and G all got hot at the same time, but they weren’t just bungling into goals. They were sniping.

That’s to say yes we have a high PDO. At a certain point players will regress to means and we won’t play as well as we are now. But it doesn’t mean that it’s absolutely going to happen in the middle of this season, and it certainly doesn’t discredit the level of play the team has turned in thus far. It just means that it wasn’t super likely all these guys would be at peak performance at the same time and that we should expect a drop of a group mean regression takes place.

Yikes, guys like that would get steamrolled against a team like the 2009 Red Wings!
- Tojo.

They kinda did and that was without a healthy Datsyuk and a suspension that should have been given to Malkin but oh well.

So a factor in PDO is save%, correct?... And we've all been seeing that alot of games the shots against the Pens are low quality, correct?
- MattStrat

The pens were good in terms of high dangers against in March but you have to ask is that because they’re better now or because they mostly played awful teams all month?

PDO isn’t necessarily a bad word that means your team sucks. It’s an attempt to quantify a bunch of unquantifiable or difficult to quantify factors that are generally speaking unsustainable in the long run. These are things like the goalie running hot and shooters going on a heater. Statistically, it is “luck” because you can’t plan around it but in real life it’s not actually luck. Like take the 2017 Pens. Pucks weren’t just being shot into MAF and Mur’s gloves, they legitimately played great in their own right. It was lucky that Sid, Geno, Phil, and G all got hot at the same time, but they weren’t just bungling into goals. They were sniping.

That’s to say yes we have a high PDO. At a certain point players will regress to means and we won’t play as well as we are now. But it doesn’t mean that it’s absolutely going to happen in the middle of this season, and it certainly doesn’t discredit the level of play the team has turned in thus far. It just means that it wasn’t super likely all these guys would be at peak performance at the same time and that we should expect a drop of a group mean regression takes place.
- Victoro311

^^swell post good Sir.

They kinda did and that was without a healthy Datsyuk and a suspension that should have been given to Malkin but oh well.
- Feds91Stammer

Superstah Max Talbot says hi.

The pens were good in terms of high dangers against in March but you have to ask is that because they’re better now or because they mostly played awful teams all month?
- Feds91Stammer

I think it’s both. I think our limited roster has rounded into form, especially the goal tending that was preforming way below the mean in the first half of the season and is now above the mean probably, but also we wouldn’t look this good with a harder schedule against better teams.

Here we go on the PDO/luck train...

The absolute dumbest thing the "advanced stat" world has brought us. Any "stat" used to try to quantify luck is garbage.

The Penguins are overall playing good hockey, today aside. When they get everyone healthy and possible get some help via trade I'm excited to see what they can do. They are by far surpassing what I thought they could do this year.

Here we go on the PDO/luck train...

The absolute dumbest thing the "advanced stat" world has brought us. Any "stat" used to try to quantify luck is garbage.

The Penguins are overall playing good hockey, today aside. When they get everyone healthy and possible get some help via trade I'm excited to see what they can do. They are by far surpassing what I thought they could do this year.
- MacPatty

You think Lazar is as good a hockey player as Ennis. Your opinion is invalid.

It's hard to know anything about this team. The first couple of months the D was crippled. Now the forward group is crippled. I'm a little afraid Malkin might not come back in the same form he left, but I'd love to see what they can do fully healthy. Maybe add a good bottom 6 forward.

PDO isn’t necessarily a bad word that means your team sucks. It’s an attempt to quantify a bunch of unquantifiable or difficult to quantify factors that are generally speaking unsustainable in the long run. These are things like the goalie running hot and shooters going on a heater. Statistically, it is “luck” because you can’t plan around it but in real life it’s not actually luck. Like take the 2017 Pens. Pucks weren’t just being shot into MAF and Mur’s gloves, they legitimately played great in their own right. It was lucky that Sid, Geno, Phil, and G all got hot at the same time, but they weren’t just bungling into goals. They were sniping.

That’s to say yes we have a high PDO. At a certain point players will regress to means and we won’t play as well as we are now. But it doesn’t mean that it’s absolutely going to happen in the middle of this season, and it certainly doesn’t discredit the level of play the team has turned in thus far. It just means that it wasn’t super likely all these guys would be at peak performance at the same time and that we should expect a drop of a group mean regression takes place.
- Victoro311

That is a great response post, no question. I've always understood the prolonged success factor with it I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the how the number gets there because those 2017 Penguins were hemorrhaging quality chances against on the regular. These ones are not for the most part and to Feds point, quality of comp is def a factor but not the whole story to my eyes.

^^swell post good Sir.
- j.boyd919

What a lot of people is about analytics is that they think it’s a bunch of nerds trying o claim players that look bad are actually good, when it’s really about hedging against players playing below their abilities and making results as sustainable as possible even if good players play poorly.

For this year’s example: ZAR-Blueger-Tanev have produced offense at a 3rd line level with ZAR and Tanev shooting super high percentages. We could bank on them continuing to do that and roll them as the third line, and they could very well continue to do that. Or we can acknowledge that they’re playing super well right now, uncharacteristically well, and hedge against them returning to their normal level of play by continuing to treat them as 4th liners and try to build out a different offensive third line.

Results don’t have to be sustainable for them to work. In fact, coaches should very much believe in and encourage players to believe in unsustainable results if they’re going to properly motivate the locker room and unlock everyone’s peak play. But the best course of action for executives building a roster is to shoot for the highest amount of sustainability as possible.