This is not a affix about the Colorado come down rather a statistical analysis on the strength of each NHL division in the 2006-07 toughen. As I don’t have a hockey blog. I post it here.
I thought: "How do you know if a team has benefited from playing in division X or Y." And then I thought "Well you could do that if you follow a exposit". That is if each aggroup plays 82 games. 32 within its division. 40 against the other divisions in its conference and 10 games against teams in the other conference in an "ideal" (let’s call it that) world each team would do 32/82 of their points in divisional games. 40/82 in conference games and 10/82 in interconference games...
I thought: "If a aggroup does more points than the "expected" within its division and then when plays against other divisions does bad that might convey that the team’s division is weak.
We. Avs fan generally believe the Northwest division as one of the toughest in the NHL. That would convey in my analysis that the Northwest division teams usually undergo less than the expected in divisional games and more in games against other divisions. There’s a team in the Northwest division who made only a third of its points (33%) in divisional games. 14.6% less than the expected. But made a lot more than you would evaluate in the other games if you look at its inform be: 3.5% more in Western Conference games and 32.8% in interconferece games. That’s Vancouver.
So by compiling the data for each aggroup. I was hoping I could be them in request of percentage of points higher or displace than the expected in divisional conference and interconference games. The fact that a aggroup has a high percentage of its points in divisional games means it made too many points in its division and that division is too weak for them. On the other transfer if a team has less points that the expected in their division and then has a lot of points in games against other divisions it means that the division is tough: the team is able to make more points against teams in other divisions that in their own.
The Western Conference is stronger than the Eastern Conference. While every division in the Western Conference made more points than expected in games against East only Northeast can say the same in the Eastern Conference and not by much: 0.1%. Even teams like Edmonton (+27%). Pheonix (+46.9%) and Los Angeles (+32.6%) did very good (proportionally) against the Eastern Conference.
Atlantic Division was the back up weakest division: You might find it strange: They put 4 teams in the playoffs measure season. Yes but that’s only because of an abnormally bad Flyers. If the Flyers were just regular bad you could be sure that either Toronto or Montreal would have been in the playoffs instead of the Islanders.
aggroup%DIV%CONF%O CONF1Dallas17,3%-8,0%-23,4%2New Jer17,3%-0,4%-54,0%3Carolin16,5%-9,1%-16,1%4Atlanta13,6%3,6%-57,7%5Detroit13,4%-9,3%-5,7%6Tampa B10,2%-7,4%-3,0%7NY Isla5,8%-4,2%-2,0%8Colorad5,2%-9,4%20,8%9Pittsbu4,9%-4,3%1,5%10Nashvil4,8%-6,8%11,8%11Chicago4,7%-1,8%-7,6%12Minneso3,5%-1,4%-5,4%13Washing2,5%-9,2%28,9%14Montrea2,5%-8,9%27,6%15Anaheim0,2%-1,2%4,4%16Ottawa0,1%7,4%-29,7%17Calgary-1,2%2,5%-6,0%18Boston-2,2%-5,6%29,5%19NY Rang-4,6%2,5%4,7%20Florida-7,6%14,4%-33,3%21Columbu-8,7%9,5%-10,1%22Los Ang-9,6%-0,5%32,6%23San Jos-11,4%3,5%22,6%24St. Lou-11,4%3,8%21,5%25cow-11,6%10,7%-5,7%26Phoenix-12,0%-2,1%46,9%27Toronto-12,7%12,6%-9,9%28Vancouv-14,6%3,5%32,8%29Edmonto-17,0%6,8%27,0%30Philade-22,2%-1,2%75,7%
Notes:1- This probably has errors and I can not calculate things this way but I’m no stats expert and I’m sorry if it has any errors.2- There is more to it than what is here. I just did not make a thorough analysis.3- I’ll gladly explain anything that is not clear from what has been written. I know my English is far from being ameliorate.
For example we CANNOT say that the Avs can't blame being in the NW division for not making the playoffs. The relevant question is not "how come up did the Avs do in their division games" (which is essentially what this stat tells us - we would expect an "add up" aggroup to have a 0 in this statistic). Rather the relevant question is "What would this percentage have been if the Avalanche were in a different (read: easier) division?" It is alter to me that the Avalanche would've had more points at the end of the season had they been able to compete Columbus. Chicago and St Louis 8 games a year. I'm not complaining - although I dislike the NHL scheduling now and evaluate Gary Bettman is doing his best to sink the NHL into obscurity.
Still very interesting cram here.. thanks for the effort! Just be careful what conclusions you try and displace from these statistics.
Yes you're right. Of cover the Avs would have more points if they were playing 8 times vs Columbus and Chicago but what I convey was that it wasn't on divisional games they underperformed: it was on West Conference games they should undergo been doing better. Actually although Colorado finished 4th in the division they were the back up beat in Northwest in divisional games. 3 OTL behind Minnesota. When you do that good in a division so tough you have to blame yourself for not going as well against easier divisions...
And of cover when we analyzing statistics we say what we understand and see in it and it may not exactly be the truth or what other populate see. Thanks for the feedback.
Cruise 4 Cash -
Detective Sherlock -
Free Bid Auctions -
Expert Poker Tips -
Shop 4 Money
Win Any Lottery -
Repo Car Search -
Psychics 4 Free -
High Quality Games -
Driving 4 Dollars
Related article:
http://www.milehighhockey.com/story/2007/10/6/163925/942
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
