View Single Post
01-09-2013, 10:42 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
The expected GPG in the playoffs is a bit of a problem for me as the style of play and indeed the rules are sometimes different for the regular season and the playoffs.

A simple extension of the Hockey Reference adjusted method for regular season scoring using a baseline over time seems to be a good starting point to me.

Of course it would be less reliable for a number of reasons including exclusively different opponents for different players as not all teams play consistent schedules as they do in the regular season.

Like it was mentioned PNEP did soemthign like this and it's a good baseline but there are alos alot of differences over time which can cause problems if one reads too much into any "adjusted playoff stat" IMO.

An example of this is number of games and series.

Today the SC winner needs 16 wins but could play up to 28 games and in the past it was much lower and required 2 series and less games.

I think that the more that we try to account for these differences in any formula it would also take away from it's accuracy and subjectivity as well.

Playoff performance is uneven as it's largely team driven as well and for this reason I'm not sure on how much to value "playoff performance" except to say that it should not be weighted more than 25% of any players resume IMO and perhaps less.

25% would apply only to the absolute best of the best like Wayne, Richard ect and would only be for their best seasons.

I'm always struggling on how much weight to give playoffs and 25% is the max and maybe it should be more like 15%.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote