That was my point...

Not saying the site is 100% bulletproof, but I think it paints a pretty realistic picture in terms probabilities.
- Pecafan Fan

Nothing is 100% bulletproof, obviously. I'm not personally a fan of the site. I think it's far more useful to look at things like that in terms of what a team would realistically need to do, as opposed to "they have x% chance of making the playoffs". For example, some Isles fans were saying last week, they think it's a possibility still that the Isles make the playoffs. It's going to take at least 92 points, I'd say, in the east this year. likely 1 or 2 more. So, they'd need to get roughly about 38 points in their remaining 27 games. That's about a .703 pts%. Roughly the pts% that the best team in the league is putting up, and they'd have to do that for the remainder of the schedule. In short, not gonna happen. That's my preference on how to look at these things.

http://articles.latimes.c.../11/sports/sp-ducktrade11



So much for Murray being the shrewd architect of the cup-winning Ducks team.

http://articles.latimes.com/2003/dec/11/sports/sp-ducktrade11



So much for Murray being the shrewd architect of the cup-winning Ducks team.
- p_zub

Comrie was a pretty good player when they where trying to make that move so i dont see your point here,and as far as bm building that team who do you think built it bb

Comrie was a pretty good player when they where trying to make that move so i dont see your point here,and as far as bm building that team who do you think built it bb
- top shelf 15

Far moreso than Murray, that's for sure.

Have you actually looked at Murray's FULL record as GM of NHL teams? It's pretty bad.

Far moreso than Murray, that's for sure.

Have you actually looked at Murray's FULL record as GM of NHL teams? It's pretty bad.
- prock

Getzlaf ,perry,kunitz,macdonaldetc etc .Ask duck fans how they feel about BB ,BM was in a more senior position than burke when he was with the ducks ,are you going to tell me Burke built the ducks The heavy lifting was done ,top line center top line winger great second and third line depth.The team was there for the most part, a few tweaks and boom cup winner

Getzlaf ,perry,kunitz,macdonaldetc etc .Ask duck fans how they feel about BB ,BM was in a more senior position than burke when he was with the ducks ,are you going to tell me Burke built the ducks the young tallent that was the nucleus of that cup team was drafted by BM not burke
- top shelf 15

And Murray would have traded Perry AND a 1st for Comrie had it not been for the idiot Lowe bailing him out.

And Murray would have traded Perry AND a 1st for Comrie had it not been for the idiot Lowe bailing him out.
- p_zub

And BB hasnt done anything stupid

Getzlaf ,perry,kunitz,macdonaldetc etc .Ask duck fans how they feel about BB ,BM was in a more senior position than burke when he was with the ducks ,are you going to tell me Burke built the ducks the young tallent that was the nucleus of that cup team was drafted by BM not burke
- top shelf 15

Selanne, Niedermayer, Pronger, if I recall, I think it was every single Dman on the roster was brought in by Burke.

Murray joined the Ducks as coach in 01/02, took over the GM spot in 02/03. His first year as GM, they put up 96 points. The next year, they declined. Like every other team he's ever taken over. Burke took over, and remade a good portion of the roster.

If you're going to sit there and look at him taking two good players (who I would seriously hesitate to say were the nucleus of that team), in the best draft in the history of the NHL, when he didn't manage to improve the team as GM, and yet ignore that a good portion of the roster was redone by Burke, I'd have to say you're out to lunch.

And Murray would have traded Perry AND a 1st for Comrie had it not been for the idiot Lowe bailing him out.
- p_zub

Does this remind you of any more recent trades?

Well if you lead your division and rank 3rd, your chances of making the playoffs are pretty good. But if the 2nd team in your division bounces you and your team ends up 8th in the conference standings, it explains the shift from 90% to 50%.
- Pecafan Fan

So it doesnt take into consideration the fact that the top 3 teams automatically make it in, but after you lose the spot you can drop fromt he playoffs?

Again, the site is pointless. If it doesnt take into account some of the basic rules of the standings, it is no better than looking at the standings and just guessing.

Again, there are a number of us that have monitored this site for a few years now, and although not perfect, it is pretty good in predicting which teams have no chance of making the playoffs from about mid December on.

for example this site predicted on December 20th, that these teams had the lowest "chances of making the playoffs" in the Eastern Conference.

Buffalo Sabres
Ottawa Senators
Winnipeg Jets
Montreal Canadiens
Tampa Bay Lightning
New York Islanders
Carolina Hurricanes


And as of today it is predicting these teams as having the lowest "chances of making the playoffs" in the Eastern Conference.

Ottawa Senators
Winnipeg Jets
Montreal Canadiens
Tampa Bay Lightning
New York Islanders
Buffalo Sabres
Carolina Hurricanes


Although the rankings are a little different, they are the same seven teams. So not as useless as you may like to think it is.
- Doppleganger

My point is that I bet you come to the same result (or similar) by just figuring out the PPG for each team at that point in the season, and then ranking them accordingly. It isn't giving some sort of great insight.

If that's all you are expecting (i.e. for it to do the small callculation of PPG) then it is a useful site. Take it for what it is tho. A sometimes accurate, sometimes inacurrate tool. Don't try to prove a point by using what it says.

So it doesnt take into consideration the fact that the top 3 teams automatically make it in, but after you lose the spot you can drop fromt he playoffs?

Again, the site is pointless. If it doesnt take into account some of the basic rules of the standings, it is no better than looking at the standings and just guessing.
- mfreedman

Yes, it does.

Yes, it does.
- Pecafan Fan

Then your point doesnt make sense. It dropped because it was innacurate. Not because of a rule it missed.

Also consider the following from December and Now:

Team - Late NOV- NOW
NAS - 43.9 - 98.3
EDM - 71.6 - 1.7
WAS - 49.5 - 69.5
...

Pretty big differences.

Then your point doesnt make sense. It dropped because it was innacurate. Not because of a rule it missed.

Also consider the following from December and Now:

Team - Late NOV- NOW
NAS - 43.9 - 98.3
EDM - 71.6 - 1.7
WAS - 49.5 - 69.5
...

Pretty big differences.
- mfreedman

Well maybe my point wasn't clear enough (english is my second language).

Well maybe my point wasn't clear enough (english is my second language).
- Pecafan Fan

good response..

Edit: Missed your reply, my apologies.

good response..
- mfreedman

He's already clarified. Let it go.

Nothing is 100% bulletproof, obviously. I'm not personally a fan of the site. I think it's far more useful to look at things like that in terms of what a team would realistically need to do, as opposed to "they have x% chance of making the playoffs". For example, some Isles fans were saying last week, they think it's a possibility still that the Isles make the playoffs. It's going to take at least 92 points, I'd say, in the east this year. likely 1 or 2 more. So, they'd need to get roughly about 38 points in their remaining 27 games. That's about a .703 pts%. Roughly the pts% that the best team in the league is putting up, and they'd have to do that for the remainder of the schedule. In short, not gonna happen. That's my preference on how to look at these things.
- prock

This is what CSS does too. You stop at saying a team (in your example) would need to play at .703P% for the remainder of the season to accumulate the 92 points you project, to be needed to get into a playoff spot.

CSS just takes that one step further (than you do) and calculates the "Chances" that the Islanders will play at a .703P% for the rest of the season is 02.1%.

So it's just a little more precise and it's easier to compare teams (Chances).

This is what CSS does too. You stop at saying a team (in your example) would need to play at .703P% for the remainder of the season to accumulate the 92 points you project, to be needed to get into a playoff spot.

CSS just takes that one step further (than you do) and calculates the "Chances" that the Islanders will play at a .703P% for the rest of the season is 02.1%.

So it's just a little more precise and it's easier to compare teams (Chances).
- Doppleganger

No, that's not what they do. They explain exactly what they do.

No, that's not what they do. They explain exactly what they do.
- prock

Well you can interpret what they do any way you want. But you'd still be wrong, because it is what they do.

Today I read (on their site) that the Islanders need to win 17 games, lose 6 and lose another 4 in OT/SO, to gain 92 points, or gain 38 points out of a possible 54 points, or in other words, play at a .704 P% pace for the remainder of the season to get to the 92 point mark.

That would put them in the, at best 7th spot in the East.

The "chances" of this happening is posted on their site as 1%.

So, yes, that IS what they do.

Well you can interpret what they do any way you want. But you'd still be wrong, because it is what they do.

Today I read (on their site) that the Islanders need to win 17 games, lose 6 and lose another 4 in OT/SO, to gain 92 points, or gain 38 points out of a possible 54 points, or in other words, play at a .704 P% pace for the remainder of the season to get to the 92 point mark.

That would put them in the, at best 7th spot in the East.

The "chances" of this happening is posted on their site as 1%.

So, yes, that IS what they do.
- Doppleganger

That's not what it says. It says the chance of them finishing in 7th spot is 1%. It doesn't say how many points that would take, or what record it would require. It's the sum of several different outcomes, of different amounts of points. It's taking the number of different permutations each team can experience, and taking the number of them that results in the Isles finishing in 7th.

That's not what it says. It says the chance of them finishing in 7th spot is 1%. It doesn't say how many points that would take, or what record it would require. It's the sum of several different outcomes, of different amounts of points. It's taking the number of different permutations each team can experience, and taking the number of them that results in the Isles finishing in 7th.
- prock

Yes it does. If you click on the Islanders, and go to their (teams) page http://www.sportsclubstat...Atlantic/NYIslanders.html and look at the record required to get the 92 points as you suggested, it shows what record would get them there (92 points) It also shows that if they actually end up with the project records of wins/losses/ot/so the chances of making the playoffs jump to 86%.

On that same page, if you go across the line from 92 points, you'll see the "Chance team will finish the regular season at position" section and you'll their chances at 38% for 7th place and 35% for 8th.

Then go back to the first page, http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html and if you follow across the Islanders line, you'll the chances of finishing in 7th or 8th are both 1%.

Yes it does. If you click on the Islanders, and go to their (teams) page http://www.sportsclubstat...Atlantic/NYIslanders.html and look at the record required to get the 92 points as you suggested, it shows what record would get them there (92 points) It also shows that if they actually end up with the project records of wins/losses/ot/so the chances of making the playoffs jump to 86%.

On that same page, if you go across the line from 92 points, you'll see the "Chance team will finish the regular season at position" section and you'll their chances at 38% for 7th place and 35% for 8th.

Then go back to the first page, http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html and if you follow across the Islanders line, you'll the chances of finishing in 7th or 8th are both 1%.
- Doppleganger

You clearly can't follow this very well.

the chances of them finishing in 7th or 8th spot, by the number of different permutations that makes this possible, is 1%. That is the sum of the different permutations that has them ending up with 89 pts, and finishing in 8th, finishing with 90 points, in 8th, 91 points in 8th, etc.

In short, not what you're saying.

Yes it does. If you click on the Islanders, and go to their (teams) page http://www.sportsclubstat...Atlantic/NYIslanders.html and look at the record required to get the 92 points as you suggested, it shows what record would get them there (92 points) It also shows that if they actually end up with the project records of wins/losses/ot/so the chances of making the playoffs jump to 86%.

On that same page, if you go across the line from 92 points, you'll see the "Chance team will finish the regular season at position" section and you'll their chances at 38% for 7th place and 35% for 8th.

Then go back to the first page, http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html and if you follow across the Islanders line, you'll the chances of finishing in 7th or 8th are both 1%.
- Doppleganger

Replace the word "chances" by "probability".

Replace the word "chances" by "probability".
- Pecafan Fan

It won't matter, because he's never been a fan of the site, and will NEVER admit that it has any merit whatsoever.

He did not believe this site projected "chances" a few seasons ago, and not having an open mind, still has not changed his mind since. here is what he said back a few seasons ago.


Although he does seem to be contradicting himself today, from what he said a few season ago. But that's par for the course, as it's nature to be on the opposite side of most discussions.

It's a website that puts together stats on the different potential outcomes of games, giving the possibility of a win, tie, or loss, equal probability, for every time, and statistically analyzes how many permutations out of the total number of permutations have the Leafs making the playoffs, and then spits that out as a percentage.

It's really kind of BS. But does give you an idea of how well they have to play to make the playoffs. i.e. it shows that there isn't a lot of room for error.

The thing is, people saying that they're only 5 points out of a playoff spot have to realize that before this winning streak, they were something like 8 or 9 points out of a playoff spot. Prior to last night's loss in Boston, there wasn't a single team in the NHL that had a better record in their last 10 games, and it still only made up 3 or 4 points over that last playoff spot. It gives you an idea of just how well they have to play to actually make up those points.
- prock

I tried to explain to a few hard headed leaf fans, that did not understand that looking only at the points out of a playoff spot, does not matter as much as the number of teams that you'd have to pass to get there (a playoff spot).

go back and read this thread http://www.hockeybuzz.com...hread.php?thread_id=71753 and you'll see what i mean.

And BB hasnt done anything stupid
- top shelf 15

Enlighten me?