August 29, 2008

Predicted Standings for 2008-2009

Based on the expected offense from the tables presented in the other posts, this would be the expected standings. There seems to be a lot of volatility in the east, but the west appears to be business as usual (changes smaller than 10 are not really that significant)
Western Standings
NTeam20072008D
1Detroit Red Wings115113-2
2Anaheim Ducks102101-1
3San Jose Sharks10798-9
4Vancouver Canucks88946
5Dallas Stars9794-3
6Colorado Avalanche9593-2
7Calgary Flames9490-4
8Minnesota Wild9889-9
9Chicago Blackhawks88891
10Edmonton Oilers88880
11Nashville Predators9185-6
12St. Louis Blues79790
13Phoenix Coyotes8379-4
14Columbus Blue Jackets8078-2
15Los Angeles Kings71721

Eastern Standings
NTeam20072008D
1Washington Capitals9411622
2Pittsburgh Penguins1021086
3Montreal Canadiens1041040
4New Jersey Devils991012
5New York Rangers97981
6Buffalo Sabres90977
7Tampa Bay Lightning719423
8Ottawa Senators9493-1
9Florida Panthers85894
10Philadelphia Flyers9588-7
11Carolina Hurricanes9288-4
12Boston Bruins9480-14
13Toronto Maple Leafs8380-3
14Atlanta Thrashers76771
15New York Islanders7976-3



I think it's worth saying I'm not very satisfied with the results, but I like the method. There are a few things I still need to work out, especially in terms of Crosby and Ovechkin's offense. I also need to look at Tampa a little bit closer ( they are expected to score 300 GF - a little bit unrealistic).

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

In general the standings are likely to be a whole lot tighter than your predictions indicate.

Marc said...

The total number of standings points goes way up relative to 2007-08. Are you suggesting that there will be a LOT more overtime games next year? (Or maybe your model needs some tweaking, eh? :-) )

The Commentator said...

Devils and Avalanche out of the playoffs.

It felt strange typing that.

voxel said...

Any way to weight the individual player stats more heavily in the past 5 years vs. other years?

0.4*(last year) + 0.3*(two years ago) + 0.2 * (three years ago) + ...

Using average points for a player who is on the decline (37+) isn't going to be meaningful.

JavaGeek said...

The system adjusts for age:
37+ are assumed to get 72% of their average points/game
34+ are assumed to get 90% of their average points/game

Eg: A. Kovalev has average 0.80 points per game, however my system is only giving him 0.71 due to his age.

voxel said...

Well some players decline at different rates (Sundin + Sakic are keeping pacing with their career averages) - whereas Bertuzzi has severely dropped off.

The Puck Stops Here said...

How am I supposed to understand some of your results like Jason LaBarbera being for more valuable than Roberto Luongo, Henrik Lundqvist, Marty Turco etc?

Or am I reading it wrong? His -29 appears to befar better than any of the other goalies I named.

Anonymous said...

Washington will end up with around 95 points... No way will they ever see 116, not a chance

JavaGeek said...

RE: LaBarbera...
I don't disagree, however I need a systemic way to calculate these numbers and since it's easiest to use last season's data. Since LaBarbera had a better shot quality neutral save percentage than Luongo (and the others) his results goal prevention is higher.
Also a small factor of the difference is a result of the fact that LaBarbera is expected to see more rubber/game than some of the other options (you cannot prevent goals if there are no shots).

RE: Washington.
Bodog has Washington #3 in terms of odds of winning the cup in 2009.
Keep in mind that Washington is such a young team (top 3 under 24) and those players often get better every year (peak @ 24).
100-110 is probably a more reasonable estimate, but it's hard to be sure.
Washington will be better than last season, the question is by how much...

Suneil Parmar said...

Lol, Vancouver that high? I will give you my first born if Vancouver does that well this season. Hell I'll give you my fridge if Vancouver even makes the playoffs this year. I think the method is seriously flawed...

Scott said...

Thanks for doing all of this work Javageek. I think that we all really appreciate it.

One suggestion with the model might be to incorporate a similar system that you have for points for games played to account for players that are frequently injured. Then replace any "injury games" with whatever you've been using for a replacement level credit and see if the results come out closer to what you'd expect. It may also help to drive the overall point totals down, which would probably be good. For the most part the ordering looks plausible and the point totals aren't too bad.

Great Job!

Scott said...

Sorry. I just added it up and realized that the overall point totals are the same and that the system is actually just transferring 34 points from the Western Conference to the Eastern Conference. I'm not sure I believe that the East can rack up the sixteen extra wins, but I guess we'll see.

The Falconer said...

Any comments on why Boston falls so hard in your East projections?