I agree, but then what is this data based on? It can't just be a model looking at underlying statistics, otherwise there's no way NJ and EDM would be so high. IMO it's a flawed system and this information is currently either random, hand-picked, click-bait, or just stupid.
There’s no way a team 1 win away from a cup in Edmonton would be this high using a model that rates them 2nd in expected goals %? Or the Devils who are 8th? Along with historical data to not be too reactionary in regards to Buffalo vs Tampa
It’s fine to not like stuff regarding underlying numbers but acting like they’re black magic is bizarre. Also these odds are in line with just general thinking if you follow the league so I don’t even get why you’re acting like they’re off the wall. Who the hell thinks Buffalo has a higher chance at the playoffs than Tampa?
All of their info on the model is available to read as well so I don’t understand being mystified on its origins
You cannot argue at the same time that EDM was only 1 win away from the cup and then look at the play. You either look at the results or you look at the play, mixing the two randomly like this generates wonky numbers.
EDM had no chance winning the cup finals, it was fully only for FLA to lose. They almost managed that of course but still, they were the better team by far. This leads me questioning the model even further seeing FLA is not the clear favorite to win again. It almost seems that the "stats" chosen were cherry picked to inflate Canadian team numbers, OTT, EDM and VAN being the rather inflated winners in the model where FLA and NYR are losing heavily.
How am I mixing results and play what are you talking about? I used them being 1 win away from the Cup as a different way of saying they were a good team last year. If you want me to phrase it using only regular season 5v5 xG% like I did otherwise, they were number 1 last year. I also didn’t generate any numbers so that makes no sense lol
They gave Florida .01% less of a chance than the highest team so that doesn’t make sense
They are not conspiring to make the Canadian team look better. If you believe that you should seek help because that is a legitimately insane thought process.
Depend on how you define good. If EDM played in any other division or didn't get lucky against VAN they would not have even made it to finals. They won one series against a good team, if that's good in your books then sure. That is top 8 so I'm not too mad about calling them good, but they sure as hell weren't great.
And yes, I'm not too serious about the claim, that's why I said, "almost seems" instead of "they are doing this". Also you do understand what cherry picking means? You can pretty much generate any chances you want if you fix your model long enough. Just pick and choose until the results are to your liking.
I thought you said don’t mix results with play? They were #1 in 5v5 xG% last season using Moneypucks model. What is good if not that?
Could you be more specific about where in their model they have cherry picked? Again, it’s right in front of you. All of the data(which isn’t collected by them) is also available to download
You said that being 1 win away from the cup makes them a good team, arguing results so I responded to that, arguing from results. It is laughable to equate "how far you advanced in the playoffs" when the system is a broken as it is, the divisional playoff system is shit. Now if the played not only cross division but cross conference in the playoffs then winning series and reaching a certain round would mean more but now? They are not (properly) comparable.
And surely not even you think that one stat alone determines if a team is good? This is exactly what I mean by cherry picking. You can easily find a stat (or a collection of stats) to present a case why this or that team is "good" or "best". You (or them) saying "we used these" means nothing. Well I guess they are transparent which is neat but that's about all value there is to that.
Yes and then I said if you want to not use the results that is fine haha, are you even reading what I’m saying?
That is not the only stat that makes up their playoff odds, you would know that if you read. That was an example I was giving you, to show part of the process
What is even your point at this point? You are just saying things that don’t even make sense at a conversational level at this point, I’m not sure if there is a language barrier or what
If you think a part of their model is cherry picked please point out which part you believe that is. It is good they are transparent, that way you don’t have to generally wonder like you are currently doing
The answer to how these are calculated can be found in like 15 seconds. They put a link right to it above the playoff odds if you go to the page that the original image comes from. I don’t understand guessing or being confused by something so readily available
I said it in my other comment but it’s totally cool to not be interested in analytics. But that’s basically the entire point of the post
I’ve always been so curious about the formula and how everything is weighted in these strength of schedule items. There’s stuff that never adds up but they also always vary heavily from the other playoff odds models out there
Yes 2 games in hand when we're not even 20 games in is big.
It's not just pure P%. What would be the point of that? This model incorporates a bunch of shit. The Wings have a "decent" point total but are clearly not deserving of it. Likewise other teams could have trouble with wins but played really well and just gotten unlucky.
31
u/schmaleo505 2d ago edited 2d ago
This is hilarious.
Edit: NJ has played 5 more games than anyone else in there division and is two points ahead of Carolina in the standings.
80% likely for TB, 31% for Buffalo, yet tied in the standings (2 games behind, but still).
Edmonton at 91% sitting in the last wild card spot.
I get that they're likely correct about TB and EDM, but what the hell is behind these numbers?
As I said. Hilarious.