HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

3.9% chance of making the playoffs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2012, 01:00 PM
  #1
shortcat1
Registered User
 
shortcat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Downtown Palau, ON
Country: Palau
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
3.9% chance of making the playoffs

http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html

Funny but not that far off, really.

It looks like, and with no surprise, that the Bruins are given the highest percentage to make the playoffs at over 38%.

The Rangers, Red Wings and Canucks follow but are way back. In fact, their possibility rate is closer to Montreal's than Boston's.

shortcat1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:01 PM
  #2
Lars Mon Amour
Mon beau Lars
 
Lars Mon Amour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Saint-Hyacinthe, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,293
vCash: 500
Better than 0%.

GO HABS GO! PLAYOFFS, HERE WE COME.

Lars Mon Amour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:03 PM
  #3
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,282
vCash: 500
21-9-3 For the win!

Cup numbers bare no meaning until regular season is over.

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:16 PM
  #4
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Sports club stats uses goal-differential to determine team strength, which is why it (over)rates the Bruins so highly, and likes the Habs' chances more than most of the teams around them (note how they're given better odds than Winnipeg despite trailing them in the standings)

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:19 PM
  #5
76ftw
24
 
76ftw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,478
vCash: 50
Let's do it! Go Habs Go... to the playoffs **** tanking aka losing.

76ftw is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:20 PM
  #6
sweat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Whatever the chances are, I think it's important we move some of our expiring contracts before the Habs get to close to a playoff spot. Guys like Campoli, Gill and Moen. I wouldn't even be against moving Kostitsyn for the right return.
Even if Montreal did move these 4 guys, I don't think it significantly lowers their chances for a miracle run to the playoffs.
If Montreal waits to long, they may end up close enough to a playoff spot that that moving anyone initiates a media frenzy.

sweat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:25 PM
  #7
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Sports club stats uses goal-differential to determine team strength, which is why it (over)rates the Bruins so highly, and likes the Habs' chances more than most of the teams around them (note how they're given better odds than Winnipeg despite trailing them in the standings)
Those numbers are starting to be very telling, especially for Fla. Ottawa too, i expect the number to drop more into the negative
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat View Post
Whatever the chances are, I think it's important we move some of our expiring contracts before the Habs get to close to a playoff spot. Guys like Campoli, Gill and Moen. I wouldn't even be against moving Kostitsyn for the right return.
Even if Montreal did move these 4 guys, I don't think it significantly lowers their chances for a miracle run to the playoffs.
If Montreal waits to long, they may end up close enough to a playoff spot that that moving anyone initiates a media frenzy.
campoli wont change the numbers, gill maybe, Ak will do. Keep AK and keep moen too. Gill still good, not sold on trading him yet.

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:28 PM
  #8
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortcat1 View Post
http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html

Funny but not that far off, really.

It looks like, and with no surprise, that the Bruins are given the highest percentage to make the playoffs at over 38%.

The Rangers, Red Wings and Canucks follow but are way back. In fact, their possibility rate is closer to Montreal's than Boston's.
The odds of the Habs making the playoffs is closer to 10% than 25%, not sure where that info came from...

Monctonscout is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:29 PM
  #9
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The odds of the Habs making the playoffs is closer to 10% than 25%, not sure where that info came from...
from the link you quoted. Where did you get your info?

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:33 PM
  #10
Krnage
Registered User
 
Krnage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Fermont
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,860
vCash: 500

Krnage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:49 PM
  #11
Captain Saku
Registered User
 
Captain Saku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 10,659
vCash: 500
I'm not a statistics expert but how is it even possible for a team at this point to have 100% chance to make the playoffs?

Boston, Rangers and Detroit have 100% chance and St.Louis, Philadelphia, Vancouver have 99.9% chance? WTF?

Captain Saku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 01:59 PM
  #12
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
Those numbers are starting to be very telling, especially for Fla. Ottawa too, i expect the number to drop more into the negative
Goal differential is better than previous record as a yardstick of team strength, but it's not the be-all end-all either.

It is, however, a good clue that the Habs are a lot stronger than their record suggests. They lose too many one-goal games.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:02 PM
  #13
Habit11
Registered User
 
Habit11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Sports club stats uses goal-differential to determine team strength, which is why it (over)rates the Bruins so highly, and likes the Habs' chances more than most of the teams around them (note how they're given better odds than Winnipeg despite trailing them in the standings)
That would explain the 9% jump from the previous day. Habs' increased their goal differential by 5 against the Wings.

Habit11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:04 PM
  #14
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Saku View Post
I'm not a statistics expert but how is it even possible for a team at this point to have 100% chance to make the playoffs?
Sportsclubstats operates by simulating six million seasons then counting which proportion has team X making the playoffs.

While it's mathematically possible that Boston might miss, it only occured in 540 out of 6 000 000 -- far less than 0.05%, so it was rounded up.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:11 PM
  #15
Maverik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 573
vCash: 500
So your telling me there's a chance?


Maverik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:22 PM
  #16
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Goal differential is better than previous record as a yardstick of team strength, but it's not the be-all end-all either.

It is, however, a good clue that the Habs are a lot stronger than their record suggests. They lose too many one-goal games.
I find goal differential to be rather meaningless tbh. It's much like the pythagorean record in baseball. Blowing out a team one game 7-2 has no predictive value whatsoever as to how that team will fair in subsequent games where injuries and rosters are ever changing.

Not only is goal differential flawed in the sense it doesn't tell us much, but the goal differential itself can be misleading. For example, early in the beginning of the year we had a negative goal differential despite outplaying nearly everyone, so it's bad that goals scored one game are not indicative of the next game, but how the differential came about in the first place is also misleading. However, it's not completely without merit, you obviously can't be hugely in the negative and still make the playoffs, you do have to outscore your opponents to win games, but it's not nearly as valuable as some would like to believe. I agree that it's a good clue that the habs are better than their record indicates, how much better is where the problem lies.

Every year the Jays had an outstanding Pythagorean record and finished anywhere from 3-4 in the division under JP Ricciardi. Interesting to discuss, but not very meaningful in the end.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:24 PM
  #17
Dom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Sportsclubstats operates by simulating six million seasons then counting which proportion has team X making the playoffs.

While it's mathematically possible that Boston might miss, it only occured in 540 out of 6 000 000 -- far less than 0.05%, so it was rounded up.
It also assumes that teams will remain as good as they were from the start of the season to now, which is why Boston's most likely record until the end is 25-8-2 and Montreal is 18-12-3.

Dom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:26 PM
  #18
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habit11 View Post
That would explain the 9% jump from the previous day. Habs' increased their goal differential by 5 against the Wings.
That's the flaw in this metric and many other statistics. The 5 extra goals against Detroit doesn't really increase our chances at all, but if you use something as arbitrary as goal differential it would imply that our chances got that much better, when really, they barely improved at all.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:32 PM
  #19
Dom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
The simulation simply weighted the Habs a bit more with this new data and gave an average of 1 or 2 wins more for each of the 6 million runs.

I think the best way to use the site is to see where the simulations projet the points threshold to make the playoffs in the east. Right now it says it is around 90 points. The Habs therefore need a 20-10-3 or similar record until the end.

Dom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:36 PM
  #20
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
I find goal differential to be rather meaningless tbh. It's much like the pythagorean record in baseball. Blowing out a team one game 7-2 has no predictive value whatsoever as to how that team will fair in subsequent games where injuries and rosters are ever changing.

Not only is goal differential flawed in the sense it doesn't tell us much, but the goal differential itself can be misleading. For example, early in the beginning of the year we had a negative goal differential despite outplaying nearly everyone, so it's bad that goals scored one game are not indicative of the next game, but how the differential came about in the first place is also misleading. However, it's not completely without merit, you obviously can't be hugely in the negative and still make the playoffs, you do have to outscore your opponents to win games, but it's not nearly as valuable as some would like to believe. I agree that it's a good clue that the habs are better than their record indicates, how much better is where the problem lies.

Every year the Jays had an outstanding Pythagorean record and finished anywhere from 3-4 in the division under JP Ricciardi. Interesting to discuss, but not very meaningful in the end.
Its still better than predicting based off team record, which should tell you how reliable using that is.

And the Jays were always a good team in a ridiculous division. That's going to heavily distort the result.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:45 PM
  #21
Le Tricolore
Boo! Booooo!
 
Le Tricolore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 27,195
vCash: 137
Send a message via Skype™ to Le Tricolore
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverik View Post
So your telling me there's a chance?

First thing I thought of.

Le Tricolore is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 02:56 PM
  #22
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
I find goal differential to be rather meaningless tbh. It's much like the pythagorean record in baseball. Blowing out a team one game 7-2 has no predictive value whatsoever as to how that team will fair in subsequent games where injuries and rosters are ever changing.
One game sample ? no **** the predictive value is basically useless, it's not meant for 1 game samples.
Quote:
Not only is goal differential flawed in the sense it doesn't tell us much, but the goal differential itself can be misleading. For example, early in the beginning of the year we had a negative goal differential despite outplaying nearly everyone, so it's bad that goals scored one game are not indicative of the next game, but how the differential came about in the first place is also misleading. However, it's not completely without merit, you obviously can't be hugely in the negative and still make the playoffs, you do have to outscore your opponents to win games, but it's not nearly as valuable as some would like to believe. I agree that it's a good clue that the habs are better than their record indicates, how much better is where the problem lies.

Every year the Jays had an outstanding Pythagorean record and finished anywhere from 3-4 in the division under JP Ricciardi. Interesting to discuss, but not very meaningful in the end.
We maintained a close to nil GD, the jump was due to +5 and a win, and a win against a team that was, statistically, supposed to win that game, by alot i'm assuming, that the 16% chance of making prior to the win was in large part due to the fact it factored the low probabilities of winning that game.

Meaningfulness, well, that's just like your opinion man.

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 03:18 PM
  #23
Richiebottles
Big Mike !
 
Richiebottles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,590
vCash: 500
Well I know one thing that has 100 % odds.

http://didgomezscore.com/

Richiebottles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 03:26 PM
  #24
shortcat1
Registered User
 
shortcat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Downtown Palau, ON
Country: Palau
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat View Post
Whatever the chances are, I think it's important we move some of our expiring contracts before the Habs get to close to a playoff spot. Guys like Campoli, Gill and Moen. I wouldn't even be against moving Kostitsyn for the right return.
Even if Montreal did move these 4 guys, I don't think it significantly lowers their chances for a miracle run to the playoffs.
If Montreal waits to long, they may end up close enough to a playoff spot that that moving anyone initiates a media frenzy.
The only 'fear' I have regarding to letting loose some or all of these players (and maybe others) is that Mr. Gauthier will pull a 'Bob Gainey' and just let them go without trying to get something in return (ie. Mark Streit & to a lesser extent, Sheldon Souray).

I don't think he'll do that since he's already signed a player during the season which was, in Mr. Gainey' way, a thing that wasn't done.

shortcat1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2012, 03:27 PM
  #25
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
One game sample ? no **** the predictive value is basically useless, it's not meant for 1 game samples.


We maintained a close to nil GD, the jump was due to +5 and a win, and a win against a team that was, statistically, supposed to win that game, by alot i'm assuming, that the 16% chance of making prior to the win was in large part due to the fact it factored the low probabilities of winning that game.

Meaningfulness, well, that's just like your opinion man.
No, it's not an opinion. Obviously I used an extreme case of one game to highlight the fact that it means very little, it doesn't change the point. These give you a little insight to what's going on in the bigger picture, nothing more.

habsjunkie2* 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 01:22 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.