HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Odds of winning the Stanley Cup for each seed

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-18-2011, 05:35 PM
  #1
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Odds of winning the Stanley Cup for each seed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zer0flames View Post
I would not. When you're a 4th seed, you've got a legitimately good chance at bringing the cup home.

If you are the 4th seed, your odds are terrible.

There are 8 top-4 seeds in the East and West. That means that the average team has a 12.5% chance of winning the Cup and 87.5% chance of not winning it. But that's not all.

The #1 seed has a better chance of winning than #2 who has a better chance than #3 who has a better chance than #4.

I looked at the numbers since the 1980-81 season. That's a full 30 seasons. Here are the results (NOTE that this is NOT the ranking in the East/West conference. These are the overall rankings NHL-wide based on total points):


1) President's Trophy winners won 11 of 30 championships.
Championship Odds: 36.67%

2) Second and third highest point totals in the NHL (not just the conference, but the whole league, East and West): 10 championships.
Championship Odds: 16.67% for each team

3) Teams that were 4th to 6th in the NHL (and NOT the conference) won 7 championships.
Championship Odds: 7.77% for each team

4) Teams ranked 7th to 9th won only two Cup in 30 years.
Championship Odds: 2.22% for each team

5) No team ranked below 9 in the NHL ever won the Cup.
Championship Odds: 0%


All in all, if you are the #4 seed in the East (about a 7-8 in the NHL overall), your odds of winning are only about 2%.

Everyone likes to focus on the few exceptions, even paying attention to Cindarella teams that go far, but not quite far enough as proof that you can win as a #4 seed or that "anything can happen in the playoffs."

But the reality is that the team that proves itself best in the regular season is the one that has the overwhelming chance to win.

The top-3 teams in the NHL, both conferences, have overwhelming odds of winning the Cup. This means that to be a true contender, you have to finish first or second in your conference.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 05:39 PM
  #2
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
Interesting stuff.

I remember when the Giants were in the Super Bowl back in '07 everyone was talking about how a #6 seed had never won a championship. I guess the story is that for every bell curve there are a few outlyers.

The Oilers made the final as a #8 seed one year. I'd consider that contention. I think the Ducks and Flames both made it in the bottom 3 seeds as well.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 05:44 PM
  #3
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
The thing about finishing as a 4th seed is that you will almost certainly face 3 rounds as an underdog. That's a very, very tough challenge. Any team that finished in the top-3 and made its way to round 2 or better is going to be a very difficult team to knock out for a middling playoff squad.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 05:46 PM
  #4
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
For sure.

But I would point out that the vast majority of cup winning teams made the playoffs the year before, and many the year before that.

Finishing 4th means you are a very long shot at a cup, yes, but it is a step forward, in terms of making a playoff rum, getting the guys on your squad hungry for the real deal next year, ect.

You can't just tank 5 consecutive years and then be all of a sudden ready to step in and grab a cup.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 05:47 PM
  #5
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLU Hockey View Post
Interesting stuff.

I remember when the Giants were in the Super Bowl back in '07 everyone was talking about how a #6 seed had never won a championship. I guess the story is that for every bell curve there are a few outlyers.

The Oilers made the final as a #8 seed one year. I'd consider that contention. I think the Ducks and Flames both made it in the bottom 3 seeds as well.

Yeah, but teams like the Oilers and Philly in 2009 are Cindarellas that eventually, sooner or later, have their heart broken. You can win a round or two, but 4 rounds of hockey as an underdog is awfully hard to do.

Normally you need to face weak opposition in the first round (7-8 seed), win in 4-5 games and then rest up. This essentially creates 3 rounds of hockey and you are the favorite in at least 2 of them.

That's a lot easier than trying to win 4 rounds by going to game 6 and 7 every time, and playing away every time there is a game 7.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 06:01 PM
  #6
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLU Hockey View Post
For sure.

But I would point out that the vast majority of cup winning teams made the playoffs the year before, and many the year before that.

No kidding!

Teams that won as the 6th best team in the regular season were:

- The Isles in 1983 after winning the 3 years before;
- Pitts in 1992 after also winning in 1991;
- Montreal in 1986 and 1993, which both came the year after they won the Adams division.

Devils won in 1995 as the only 9th best team to win, but that was the lockout season with only 48 games, so it was a weird season. The year before they were the second-best team in the NHL to the Rangers.

Pitt in 1991 (#5) and Edmonton in 1990 (#4) were both parts of dynasties.

Really, the only exception here is Boston last year. Every other team was either very good (top-3 in the whole NHL) that particular season or were part of a dynasty or were very good the year before, but merely slipped slightly during the playoffs.

A team that finished 6th last season, then finished 4th this season has pretty much no shot of winning. Now, if you finished 1st in the East last year and now slipped to #3 because of regular season injuries, then it's different.

But a run-of-the-mill #4 seed in the East (or West) has very, very, VERY tiny odds of winning.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 07:10 PM
  #7
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
Now as far as the modern era is concerned, the data that we have right now is somewhat unreliable as there have only been the standard 16 team format we see today for about 18 years.

In another 30 years, who knows what data we might find. But in terms of statistical analysis a size of 18 time periods is certainly insufficient to make any bold assumptions on, aside from that teams that perform better in the regular season have a better chance of winning the cup come postseason. And I think we all knew that, which is what prevents the reg season from being boring.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 07:54 PM
  #8
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,507
vCash: 500
I think this is pretty obvious. The NHL is a league where the more talented teams almost always win the Cup. Upsets in early rounds aren't rare, but upsets in the SCF are VERY rare. But something about your assumption on 4th seeds and where they finish in the league... the following is a breakdown of where teams that earned the 4th seed finished in the league since 1994 (the inception of the current playoff format):

2: 1
3: 1
4: 5
5: 4
6: 6
7: 6
8: 5
9: 3
10: 2
11: 0
12: 0
13: 1

So, as you can see... the 4th seed is as likely to be 4th in the league as they are likely to be 8th. What this really illustrates is that there is a pretty big discrepancy between the conferences. Not all 4th seeds are created equal.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 07:59 PM
  #9
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,507
vCash: 500
Not only all of that, but there is far more parity in the league now... especially when you go back 30 years. The best team in the NHL is nowhere near as far ahead of the 15th best team in the league as it was 30 years ago. I don't find the statistics of this kind of thing to be valuable.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 08:24 PM
  #10
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Not only all of that, but there is far more parity in the league now... especially when you go back 30 years. The best team in the NHL is nowhere near as far ahead of the 15th best team in the league as it was 30 years ago. I don't find the statistics of this kind of thing to be valuable.

There used to be fewer teams so if you are #15 among 30 teams, it's very different than being #15 among 21 teams.

That said, for the teams that are in the top-4 in each conference, the effect isn't as great as for bottom feeders. If you are #20 out of 21, you are a horrible, horrible team that can't compete. If you are #20 among 30 teams, you are kind of ok and will likely get about 70 points a season.

On the other hand, if you are #2 in the East, whether the East has 11 teams or 16, it's clear that you are a very good team.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 08:46 PM
  #11
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
There used to be fewer teams so if you are #15 among 30 teams, it's very different than being #15 among 21 teams.

That said, for the teams that are in the top-4 in each conference, the effect isn't as great as for bottom feeders. If you are #20 out of 21, you are a horrible, horrible team that can't compete. If you are #20 among 30 teams, you are kind of ok and will likely get about 70 points a season.

On the other hand, if you are #2 in the East, whether the East has 11 teams or 16, it's clear that you are a very good team.
Think of it this way... what if you took today's NHL and put the 21 best rosters on the ice. The gap between 1 and 21 would be a LOT smaller than the gap between 1 and 21 in 1981. You'd still have dominant teams in the league. There's no way around that. But parity is waaaay up. My only point here is that the timespan of 30 years in the NHL is way too large to gain any meaningful statistical data from it given the changes in the makeup and reality in the NHL. A large set of data is only meaningful is conditions remain constant.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 11:00 PM
  #12
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Think of it this way... what if you took today's NHL and put the 21 best rosters on the ice. The gap between 1 and 21 would be a LOT smaller than the gap between 1 and 21 in 1981. You'd still have dominant teams in the league. There's no way around that. But parity is waaaay up. My only point here is that the timespan of 30 years in the NHL is way too large to gain any meaningful statistical data from it given the changes in the makeup and reality in the NHL. A large set of data is only meaningful is conditions remain constant.

Ok, let's look at recent years then.

In the last 11 seasons since 1998-99, we saw 5 President's Trophy winners win the Cup. That's 45.5% of the Cups that went to the top regular season team.

Since 1995, only two teams that were NOT top-3 in the NHL during the regular season won the Stanley Cup. That's 13 out of 15 seasons where one of the top-3 teams in the NHL during the regular season won.

Leaving out the bottom 3 playoff seeds and counting only the top-6 seeds, any given team that was not top-3 in the NHL stood only LESS THAN 1.5% chance of winning the Cup.

The President's Trophy winner has about 31 times more chance to win the Cup than a team that finished 2-5 in the East or West.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 01:57 AM
  #13
Callagraves
Block shots
 
Callagraves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6,371
vCash: 500
Well I'm not used to having an entire thread in response to a single sentence of mine, but let's take these, admittedly, well researched numbers and follow through with them.
I'd like to first argue, that the percentages are labeled incorrectly. It's true that a tremendous amount of insight can be gained by looking at past results, but to suggest that win percentages for a particular seed represents the odds of that seed winning the whole damn thing is a logical fallacy. That is not to say that these numbers are not without value, but it is important to first distinguish between what has happened and what will happen.
As previously mentioned by Twanos, the difference between the 1st ranked team and the 21st team has certainly shrunk in the recent decade, with fewer teams being dominant powerhouses. This can be evidenced by playoff results in recent years. Philly, two years ago, went from only making playoffs by a shootout (sorry to bring it up), to overtime in the Stanley cup Finals game 7. I think it is sometimes easy to forget how one missed save or fluke goal can influence our retrospective memory.
Nowhere is the concept of retroactive rationalization of the results of playoff rounds more evident than this past playoffs. Vancouver went to OT of game seven of the very first round, against the 8th seeded Vancouver. It cannot be underestimated how close this Stanley cup favorite came close to first round exit: one goal.
Boston, our present cup champions went to game 7 both in the first round, and then again in the Conference finals (my favorite series of the playoffs) which ended up being a 1-0 game.
I'm more than aware that everyone reading has the knowledge of what happened in this past playoffs, but i think it's very telling of the truth in the now cliche'd and oft disregarded "anything can happen in playoffs"
While now, if you ask who the better team was last year between the Cup Finalists, you'd expect the majority, understandably, to answer Boston. I have to inquire, if Vancouver happened to show up and have a better 60 minutes than Boston that night, our answer would be different?
A teams win percentage over 82 games is, by definition, a more telling statistic than over a 7 game series. Larger sample sizes lead to a lower margin of error. Therefore, it's very likely that the best teams will be seated highest. What's so exciting about the playoffs is that the underdog stands a chance.

To summarize my point, I think the competitiveness of the league minimizes the how indicative standings are of a team's chance of winning in the playoffs, both because of how close the top seeds are in points, and how different gameplay and structure of the playoffs is from the regular season.

Callagraves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 08:12 AM
  #14
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,260
vCash: 500
Except that we still see even more top teams win now, not less.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 02:43 PM
  #15
Callagraves
Block shots
 
Callagraves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
Except that we still see even more top teams win now, not less.
Come on, I go through that whole thing and you only give me one sentence!?

It's no fun if you don't play along.

Callagraves is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.