HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Projections (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=347275)

Inferno 02-19-2007 01:49 AM

Projections
 
thought you might be interested...
http://www.rangersreview.com


(click link for better formatting)


Quote:

How this works:

Basically what I do, is to divide the points a team has managed till now, divide it by the games played, then multiply it by 82. That should accurately project what the team should finish it, unless there is an extreme streak one way or the other.

Current
Rank Team Games Played Points PointsPerGame ProjectedFinalPoints ProjectedRank
6 Atlanta 61 69 1.1311 93 6
7 Carolina 61 67 1.0983 90 8
8 Toronto 59 66 1.1186 92 7
9 Montreal 61 66 1.0892 89 9
10 N.Y. Islanders 59 64 1.0847 89 10
11 N.Y. Rangers 59 63 1.0678 88 11
more info on the blog...

JRGNYR 02-19-2007 02:22 AM

Another way to look at it is comparing the Rangers with Toronto, since both have 23 games remaining. The Leafs are playing excellent hockey right now, but even if they went .500 the rest of the way (11-11-1), that'd only net them 23 more points for a total of 89. They could go 12-10-1 to get to 91. I still think the Leafs will play even better hockey than that, so then you have to start looking at what other teams will do.

Montreal is fading, 2-7-1 in their last 10. With 21 games left and 66 points currently, if they went 10-10-1 for another 21 points, that gets them to 87.

Carolina is 4-5-1 in their last 10, 67 points now with 21 games left. If they also go 10-10-1 in their last 21, they'd get to 88.

The Islanders have 23 games left and lead the Rangers by 1 point. 11-11-1 to finish the year nets them 90.

I guess my point here is, 91 is cutting it way too close. The Rangers would need the three teams ahead of them all to go .500 or worse for 91 to be a somewhat reasonable goal to get into the postseason. I think 95 points is probably closer to what the Rangers should strive for, only because you can't expect

I guess my point is, I think 91 is low, even though the extrapolation above shows that 91 seems to be the cutoff.

Frankly, I think the Rangers will need to play better than 14-9-0 hockey to get into the playoffs. Of their next 23 games and 46 possible points, I think they'll need to go somewhere like 16-6-1, or 17-5-1 to get in.

Inferno 02-19-2007 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRGNYR (Post 8131514)
Another way to look at it is comparing the Rangers with Toronto, since both have 23 games remaining. The Leafs are playing excellent hockey right now, but even if they went .500 the rest of the way (11-11-1), that'd only net them 23 more points for a total of 89. They could go 12-10-1 to get to 91. I still think the Leafs will play even better hockey than that, so then you have to start looking at what other teams will do.

Montreal is fading, 2-7-1 in their last 10. With 21 games left and 66 points currently, if they went 10-10-1 for another 21 points, that gets them to 87.

Carolina is 4-5-1 in their last 10, 67 points now with 21 games left. If they also go 10-10-1 in their last 21, they'd get to 88.

The Islanders have 23 games left and lead the Rangers by 1 point. 11-11-1 to finish the year nets them 90.

I guess my point here is, 91 is cutting it way too close. The Rangers would need the three teams ahead of them all to go .500 or worse for 91 to be a somewhat reasonable goal to get into the postseason. I think 95 points is probably closer to what the Rangers should strive for, only because you can't expect

I guess my point is, I think 91 is low, even though the extrapolation above shows that 91 seems to be the cutoff.

Frankly, I think the Rangers will need to play better than 14-9-0 hockey to get into the playoffs. Of their next 23 games and 46 possible points, I think they'll need to go somewhere like 16-6-1, or 17-5-1 to get in.

yep, which is why these numbers will be edited on a regular basis (at least on the nights the Rangers play a game, perhaps even every day, i'll see if i can get the time to do quick updates of it) so if you want, you can check out the blog to see the projections as the season goes on. The closer to the end of the season, the closer the accuracy.

HVPOLARBEARS19 02-19-2007 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inferno272 (Post 8131389)
thought you might be interested...
http://www.rangersreview.com


(click link for better formatting)



more info on the blog...

Nice analysis. The only thing that bothers me about the projections is that basically it projects everyone to be the same. It's too mathematical. Obviously this isn't your fault at all since it is a mathematical forumla, but I just never put much stock into them. In any event, great site, I've never been there before, definately a nice suprise to say the least! Keep up the great work man.

Inferno 02-19-2007 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HVPOLARBEARS19 (Post 8131525)
Nice analysis. The only thing that bothers me about the projections is that basically it projects everyone to be the same. It's too mathematical. Obviously this isn't your fault at all since it is a mathematical forumla, but I just never put much stock into them. In any event, great site, I've never been there before, definately a nice suprise to say the least! Keep up the great work man.

well, what i try to do is to use what the team has actually done to this point as a projection of how they will end up. to me its the only sensible way of doing it. While it is just a guesstimate its still worth a look see. I guess if you did the calculation for the Habs like a month ago it would be radically different than what it is now. likewise the penguins would have been radically different as well but in the opposite direction. Like i say, theres no way to accurately predict streaks unless you want to use the real trends stats from the rodent. but those numbers are proprietary, or at least i treat his site with respect to not steal his numbers.

JRGNYR 02-19-2007 02:36 AM

Also if you look at what the Rangers have done this year in points per game, and how much better they'd have to perform to get into a reasonable position for the playoffs (say 92-95 points), they'd have to up their point-per-game outcome from 1.06 to better than 1.3 a game, which would be a pretty sizeable increase of about 23%.

Very mathematical, but it kind of quantifies how much better the Rangers have to play if they want a realistic shot at the 8th spot.

Inferno 02-19-2007 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRGNYR (Post 8131567)
Also if you look at what the Rangers have done this year in points per game, and how much better they'd have to perform to get into a reasonable position for the playoffs (say 92-95 points), they'd have to up their point-per-game outcome from 1.06 to better than 1.3 a game, which would be a pretty sizeable increase of about 23%.

Very mathematical, but it kind of quantifies how much better the Rangers have to play if they want a realistic shot at the 8th spot.

true enough, im about to goto bed, but in future editions i will include that stat.

good call!

HockeyBasedNYC 02-19-2007 08:18 AM

Don't agree with these predictions. Sports are too unpredictable.

I bet if he did that analysis 4 or 5 weeks ago Pittsburgh would be somehere in that lower conference list. No one expected them to go 14-0-2 in their last 16.

Just as no one expected the Devils to rattle off all those wins last year to come back and take the division away.

I cant follow these models.

Inferno 02-19-2007 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC (Post 8132389)
Don't agree with these predictions. Sports are too unpredictable.

I bet if he did that analysis 4 or 5 weeks ago Pittsburgh would be somehere in that lower conference list. No one expected them to go 14-0-2 in their last 16.

Just as no one expected the Devils to rattle off all those wins last year to come back and take the division away.

I cant follow these models.

:banghead:

again, if you read the site, i acknowledge all that, and clearly state the projections cant account for extreme streaks.

JRGNYR 02-19-2007 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC (Post 8132389)
Don't agree with these predictions. Sports are too unpredictable.

I bet if he did that analysis 4 or 5 weeks ago Pittsburgh would be somehere in that lower conference list. No one expected them to go 14-0-2 in their last 16.

Just as no one expected the Devils to rattle off all those wins last year to come back and take the division away.

I cant follow these models.

I think inferno's work is pretty good in that it takes into account what a team has done over the course of the first 60 games of the season, when the peaks and valleys of the season, in theory, average out, and you get a better overall picture of what a team has done since October.

Of course, any team who goes incredibly hot (Pit) or incredibly cold is going to defy the average of the season so far.

The main thing you need to keep in mind when reading inferno's stats is it's extrapolation, not a prediction. There is a huge difference.

Fish 02-19-2007 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRGNYR (Post 8135542)
I think inferno's work is pretty good in that it takes into account what a team has done over the course of the first 60 games of the season, when the peaks and valleys of the season, in theory, average out, and you get a better overall picture of what a team has done since October.

Of course, any team who goes incredibly hot (Pit) or incredibly cold is going to defy the average of the season so far.

The main thing you need to keep in mind when reading inferno's stats is it's extrapolation, not a prediction. There is a huge difference.

I've been doing the same thing for a few years on my standings page, but ultimately I think the formula is nothing more than an interesting talking point. Generally teams fluctuate quite dramatically during the season and this can happen right up until the end of the year.

bleedrngrblue 02-19-2007 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish (Post 8135742)
I've been doing the same thing for a few years on my standings page, but ultimately I think the formula is nothing more than an interesting talking point. Generally teams fluctuate quite dramatically during the season and this can happen right up until the end of the year.

Just like last year where the Rangers stunk up the ice at the end of the season! I don't want to ever see a collapse like that again!

Inferno 02-25-2007 02:23 AM

Updated Projections are being posted after every Rangers game. right now were projecting at 85 points, 7 points lower than what it should take to secure a playoff spot.

natureboy* 02-25-2007 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bleedrngrblue (Post 8135802)
Just like last year where the Rangers stunk up the ice at the end of the season! I don't want to ever see a collapse like that again!

pretty much every year.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.