Measuring division strength
Here's a look at how well the six divisions do in play outside of their division. Every team outside of New Jersey and Boston, who face each other next week, has played exactly 50 non-division games this season:
| Division | GP | W | L | T | Pts | Pt% | /82 | |
| 1 | Atlantic | 249 | 131 | 87 | 31 | 293 | 58.8% | 96.5 |
| 2 | Northeast | 249 | 126 | 88 | 35 | 287 | 57.6% | 94.5 |
| 3 | Northwest | 250 | 130 | 95 | 25 | 285 | 57.0% | 93.5 |
| 4 | Pacific | 250 | 131 | 100 | 19 | 281 | 56.2% | 92.2 |
| 5 | Central | 250 | 122 | 95 | 33 | 277 | 55.4% | 90.9 |
| 6 | Southeast | 250 | 109 | 113 | 28 | 246 | 49.2% | 80.7 |
Since we're into a stretch of purely divisional games, there's an obvious benefit to playing in a weaker division. Points are going to be harder to come by in the Atlantic and Northeast Division battles, as those teams have made up a lot of points against the Southeast, while the Northwest rates slightly better than the other two Western Conference divisions.
Keep in mind that Anaheim's 94 points as part of the Pacific Division isn't necessarily better than Calgary's 88 in the Northwest. Strength of schedule has played a part in shaping the standings, and that'll play a big role in the final two weeks.
.
by James Mirtle @ 1:15 PM
Trackbacks
| Permalink |
7 comments
7 Comments:
1) So are the Atlantic/NE divisions 'stronger' due to playng 4 games each against the 'weak' SE OR is the SE so bad because they have to play 2 of the stronger divisons in the NHL?
2) Consider that 3 of the 5 SE division teams have .500 or better records against the West this season
The fact the Southeast has posted the equivalent of an 82-point season against the West, a record that's good for about 22nd in the NHL, isn't all that impressive.
Consider that 25 out of 30 NHL teams have .500 or better records, the "3 out of 5 SE division teams having .500 or better records against the West" really tells little, especially given that they have not faced 5 out of 15 Western Conference teams at all.
On the other hand, I do agree that the picture is a little bit skewed due to the fact that 40 out of the 50 non-divisional games are within the conference.
I guess there's a difference between the 'strongest' division and the 'toughest'. I'm a Canucks fan, and therefore biased, but in recent years I've felt that the Northwest division has been the toughest, because it's consistently had five competitive teams.
Only eight points currently separate the first and fifth place teams, and they're all in the playoff hunt. Maybe this implies that there are five good-but-not-great teams, but given all the divisional play, the NW teams have fewer 'soft' opponents than other divisions.
Faux Rumors makes a good point (his first one) in that the Eastern divisions play far more games against the Southeast, and that would skew things.
I look at it this way: The Northwest is the toughest division in the toughest conference, which means it's pretty difficult to come out of there. There's a reason the division leader in that group is finishing third every year.
When ranking the top 3 seeds in a conference, perhaps the NHL should consider using only points gained from non-divisional games. With a more balanced schedule next season, it probably won't be necessary, however.
Where was the NHL's version of the Bell Curve when I was in university. Even the sh!tty performers grade out at nearly 50%. With that kind of measuring stick, I coulda been a rocket surgeon, instead of a blog commenter.
Post a Comment
<< Home