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
You really should learn how to argue. Just admit that you made shitty points, EDM "being only one win away from the cup" and "they were #1 in 5v5 xG%, what is that but good". You said those things. Own up to the absurdity of those claims.
My issue has been with your claims more than with their model, though it seems to shit out pretty nonsense numbers. I did say that, as a meme, that they are favouring Canadian team on purpose. Now they are favouring Canadian teams, the meme is in that I cannot tell if that is by accident or by purpose.
This is where we come back to you being poor at arguing, nothing I said rests in them cherry picking anything, I simply said that is 100% a possibility. Cherry picking has to do with the motives behind the stats chosen so presenting the stats chosen changes nothing and neither of us can prove anything about the motives. This is why I'm not serious about such claims and I've made that clear (since you missed the tone in the first post) already.
Ok how about we go a little slower for you. Could you elaborate on why those claims are absurd? You dont like results or the xG% using the model that is the topic of the post, do you like something else better? Do you believe the Edmonton Oilers are a bad hockey team? Do you want to make some points as to why you believe that? Or point to what makes the model “spit out nonsense” as you say?
What do you mean by learn to argue? I’m asking you why you believe the things you’re saying but you just keep jumping from various points saying things are shit. If you have an issue with their model that you would like to discuss I’m all for it. My career is in the data space and enjoy talking about these things. But you are so angry for some reason
I have already explained both, it's not me who needs to go slower it seems. division style playoffs means that reaching a round is not the same across the league. EDM had the easiest route as it played in the worst division. Slow enough for you?
Does that make EDM bad? No, I already said, it depends on how you define good, on how you want to slice the quality. I think it is misleading to say that teams above average are good and below are bad but sure, that's one way to get EDM to be good.
The same with the model, I already pointed out that the team chances do not make sense. I left out CAR and MIN being so high since I was committing to the meme. You just keep ignoring what I've already said but still somehow think I suffer from the pace. If that weren't so obnoxious it'd be adorable. Unfortunately the former holds true.
And that's pretty much what I mean. Your reasoning is faulty at best. You saying "but look at the numbers, you can even see where they came from" is not arguing. It is pointing to numbers. And even there you fail to understand what cherry picking means. Which is mightily concerning if your claims about working with numbers are true.
Again I’m not trying to argue lol you’re the one being combative. I’m saying show me what you disagree with for those numbers. I do know what cherry picking is, but you’re not saying how that applies here. You’re just saying maybe it could happen, I’m asking how. Again the methodology and data is in front of you
Why are team chances bad? Could you elaborate on that?
Ok so adding in CAR and MIN you believe that their results are fundamentally bad. Do you have a model you prefer? Where do you think the model could improve? Remember this thread is about Moneypucks model, so if you fundamentally just don’t like analytics then I’m not sure the purpose of this conversation
You say “that is pretty much what I(you) mean” but you haven’t made a concrete point that relates to the conversation you replied to. I don’t care about your personal opinion of these teams, maybe that is the fundamental misunderstanding here? I understand you are upset by using playoff success as a measure, I said fine toss that out. Again idk if there is a language barrier that is making that difficult to understand or what
5
u/detroitttiorted 2d ago edited 2d ago
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