Action! PC Hockey simulation

[bauerpower]

....You can see the results for yourself. Given the void in NHL games on TV right now, I thought I would use a Historical Hockey simulator to create a tournament to answer the question that most of us have debated for most of our lives. The Simulator is the best on the market: Action! PC Hockey which has a collection of the 112 greatest teams.

I divided those 112 teams into 16 groups of 7 teams using a random name generator. Each team plays the six other teams in their group 6 times for a 36 game schedule after which the top 4 teams advance to a 64 team playoff.

I am posting key games on Youtube so you can see the results for yourself.

Here is Group A

1967-68 Montreal Canadiens 42-22-10 (94 points) 1968 Stanley Cup Champions
1973-74 Philadelphia Flyers 50-16-12 (112 points) 1974 Stanley Cup Champions
1974-75 Buffalo Sabres 49-16-15 (113 points) 1975 Stanley Cup Runners Up
1985-86 Montreal Canadiens 40-33-7 (87 points) 1986 Stanley Cup Champions
1998-99 Dallas Stars 51-19-12 (114 points) 1999 Stanley Cup Champions
2000-01 New Jersey Devils 48-19-12-3 (111 points) 2001 Stanley Cup Runners Up
2009-10 Chicago Blackhawks 52-22-8 (112 points) 2010 Stanley Cup Champions

The key game from this group (1986 Montreal vs 2010 Chicago) is posted in two parts:

Part 1 http://youtu.be/t_P-6UalzNA
Part 2 http://youtu.be/SxacaAY5HFs

 

[Michael Farkas]

I appreciate the effort, but the results seem rather questionable. The runner-up Sabres are the 3rd best ever? The 2010 Blackhawks had one of the worst starters to ever win a championship...

The sim was run just once?

 

[Big Phil]

It's cute and all..............but computers cannot replace the human eyeball. Nothing about the 1968 Habs indicates they are the best of all-time. They were a great team, they won 4/5 in that span but it was also a time when they had some of their better players going through a transition. Beliveau, still great, but old. Lemaire was a rookie. Savard was a rookie. Worsley and Vachon in goal which is fine, but they aren't Dryden or Plante. Henri was getting older, Cournoyer hadn't quite hit that top level yet.

Anyway, I understand how bored you can get with the NHL gone. We'll do anything to keep our minds occupied and reminicsing about an NHL before Bettman and Fehr is always a good thing

 

[bauerpower]

This was only Group A

This was not the final 7 teams, only 7 of 112. There are 15 other groups besides this one. Group B, IMO is a stronger group which includes the 77 Bruins, 78 Canadiens, 83 Oilers, 92 Rangers among others. It is going to be fun seeing the 78 Canadiens and the 83 Oilers battling each other 6 times.


Here are the Standings in Group A after the end of the Round Robin.


The 74 Flyers were the class of the group only losing 6 games in regulation. They along with 75 Buffalo and 68 MTL advance to the 64 team playoff. The 86 Canadiens and the 10 Blackhawks end in a tie, which means they will be playing a one game playoff to determine Group A's final playoff entry.

 

[bauerpower]

Group A Scoring Leaders

It might be interesting to see the scoring leaders of Group A. Big Jean Beliveau was the scoring champion.

 

[Killion]

....You can see the results for yourself. Given the void in NHL games on TV right now, I thought I would use a Historical Hockey simulator to create...

... you failed. D-. An F. Were you were working off of what could find on youtube? Absolute laziness.

 

[bauerpower]

... you failed. D-. An F. Were you were working off of what could find on youtube? Absolute laziness.

Laziness?!?.....It took me hours to make those videos! The opposite of laziness! I found a clip of United Center national anthem, filmed the game, did the commentary, attached the sound to the video, composed the video, used MovieMaker and Handbrake to compress the two 25 minute videos to uploadable sizes. Spent 90 minutes to upload them to Youtube....I should get at least a C+

 

[Czech Your Math]

Laziness?!?.....It took me hours to make those videos! The opposite of laziness!

Your computer simulation is no match for Killion's toxin-fuelled hallucinations! Statistics always lie, but his mind is sharper than a Chinese finger trap!

Seriously though... it might be fun for some to read about the results of your computer simulations... but they really don't lend themselves to video... surely you must realize this?

 

[Killion]

Your computer simulation is no match for Killion's toxin-fuelled hallucinations! Statistics always lie, but his mind is sharper than a Chinese finger trap!

... ah ha ha. How amusing my Bohemian completely outlier friend. Sure, perfectly capable of flicking the "Flashback Switch". Might even be "Certifiable". Im in Control. Are you? Or were ya Brainwashed by Finnish Mathematicians who went around painting tree trunks in fluorescent colours to pickup Swedish & Russian Intruders? Motion Sensors & Floodlights... while you were at the cottage like.

Sippin on a beer. ****** Nazis'.

 

[Nalens Oga]

The simmed results are only as good a the attributes u assign the players which is based on human judgement.

 

[Czech Your Math]

Im in Control. Are you?

Finnish Mathematicians who went around painting tree trunks in fluorescent colours to pickup Swedish & Russian Intruders? Motion Sensors & Floodlights... while you were at the cottage like.

Sounds like those Finns were out chasing rabbits... or picking mushrooms. Maybe they were just laying down in the snow, making snow angels and waiting for the Norsemen's blue spiral laser show to start.

Proud to be an outlier, as I'm sure you are as well. Glad to hear you're in control... attention all planets of the solar federation, Killion has assumed control, he has assumed control... he has assumed control. I like to straddle the edge, walk the line... try not to get too far out or too far in... but sometimes a little chaos is needed.

 

[Killion]

... but sometimes a little chaos is needed.

... aye, a little drama for the pajamas' never hurt anyone.

 

[bauerpower]

The simmed results are only as good a the attributes u assign the players which is based on human judgement.

While your observation may be true for games like NHL 13 and Eastside Hockey Manager, Action PC's ratings are based entirely upon statistical results. For example Goaltender ratings are mostly based upon save percentage. If the SV% for the league in 1986 is .875, then a goalie like Patrick Roy whose SV% was .875 in '86 will have a rating of 6.5. Doug Soetaert who had a SV% of .895 will have a rating of 8. The game also calculates cross era statistics so a 50 goal scorer in 1983 will most likely score around 30 goals playing in 2003 and vice versa. This leads to many interesting "what ifs" like how many goals would Gretzky in his prime score in the "clutch and grab" and "goalie armor" era of the 2000's? The game engine bases all the results upon thousands of these internal calculations and leaves nothing to "human judgment".

Seriously though... it might be fun for some to read about the results of your computer simulations... but they really don't lend themselves to video... surely you must realize this?

Surely you must realize that there is a youtube phenomenon of video game walkthroughs, also called "let's plays". Go to Youtube and search for "walkthrough" or "let's play" and you will find literally thousands of videos with millions and millions of views of mostly guys recording video game footage with commentary. And the games you will find are not just action/shooters, in fact many of the more popular videos by growing legends like getdaved and quill18 are games with very little graphic variation at all. I would think that there would be at least someone in a forum called "History of Hockey" that might be interested in a game that features games between teams that you could never see in real life like the '86 Canadiens and the 2010 Blackhawks. And if people listen to games on the radio and others follow games on ESPN Gametrax, then they might not need live action footage to enjoy a game.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Goaltender ratings are mostly based upon save percentage. If the SV% for the league in 1986 is .875, then a goalie like Patrick Roy whose SV% was .875 in '86 will have a rating of 6.5. Doug Soetaert who had a SV% of .895 will have a rating of 8.

So your statistics from 1986 didn't bear the expected results in 1986, but the assumptions you'll make from the for a completely hypothetical cross-era situation are irrefutable?

Awesome.

 

[bauerpower]

So your statistics from 1986 didn't bear the expected results in 1986, but the assumptions you'll make from the for a completely hypothetical cross-era situation are irrefutable?

Awesome.

1) I don't have any statistics from 1986 at all, let alone any that "didn't bear the expected results". In the game, if you play the 86 season and the average league sv% is .875, then a goalie with a rating of 6.5 will end up with a sv% of around .875. If you take that same goalie from 1986 with the rating of 6.5 and stick him on a team in 2011 which has an league average sv% of .915, then at the end of the year he will have a sv% of around .915.

2) I do not recall saying anything about any "irrefutable assumptions". If you replay the 2011-2012 season 1000 times in a game like this even the Leafs might win once. Generally the best team wins but there are variants which in reality is what makes it all fun. The title of this thread was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek as I didn't realize at the time that the adherents of this board were so humorless.

 

[Johnny Engine]

1) I don't have any statistics from 1986 at all, let alone any that "didn't bear the expected results". In the game, if you play the 86 season and the average league sv% is .875, then a goalie with a rating of 6.5 will end up with a sv% of around .875. If you take that same goalie from 1986 with the rating of 6.5 and stick him on a team in 2011 which has an league average sv% of .915, then at the end of the year he will have a sv% of around .915.

2) I do not recall saying anything about any "irrefutable assumptions". If you replay the 2011-2012 season 1000 times in a game like this even the Leafs might win once. Generally the best team wins but there are variants which in reality is what makes it all fun. The title of this thread was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek as I didn't realize at the time that the adherents of this board were so humorless.

1) No, you used save percentage to determine that the goalie who won the Conn Smythe in 1986 and was consistently that good throughout his career was an average backup. That should tell you that a quick scan of statistics isn't much better than arbitrary EA Sports style qualifications.

2) Accusing people of being humourless on the internet is a dangerous game, which is why you are literally the worst person who has ever lived.

 

[bauerpower]

1) No, you used save percentage to determine that the goalie who won the Conn Smythe in 1986 and was consistently that good throughout his career was an average backup. That should tell you that a quick scan of statistics isn't much better than arbitrary EA Sports style qualifications.

2) Accusing people of being humourless on the internet is a dangerous game, which is why you are literally the worst person who has ever lived.

1) Straight from Hockey-Reference
Patrick Roy 1985-86 (Pos)G (Age)20 (GP)47 (W)23 (L)18 (Tied)3 (GA)148 (Shots Against)1185 (Saves)1037 (Save %).875 (GAA)3.35 (Shutouts)1

There is a reason why Roy won the Conn Smythe in 86 and not the Calder. His regular season was average. He was out-performed by Doug Soetaert. The Action PC Hockey game takes stats from the 82 game regular season, not the playoffs. Most games including NHL 13 do the same. That is probably because the non-playoff teams want to play, too. Those stats that "didn't bear the expected results" that you mentioned were Patrick Roy's actual stats from 1986. So you can say that in the regular season of 1986, Roy was an average backup.

2) Thank you. Although all I can go by are the posts in this thread and it is my observation that the people are responding in a humorless way. That should have been the way I worded it and I didn't and that is my fault.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

1) Straight from Hockey-Reference
Patrick Roy 1985-86 (Pos)G (Age)20 (GP)47 (W)23 (L)18 (Tied)3 (GA)148 (Shots Against)1185 (Saves)1037 (Save %).875 (GAA)3.35 (Shutouts)1

There is a reason why Roy won the Conn Smythe in 86 and not the Calder. His regular season was average. He was out-performed by Doug Soetaert. The Action PC Hockey game takes stats from the 82 game regular season, not the playoffs. Most games including NHL 13 do the same. That is probably because the non-playoff teams want to play, too. Those stats that "didn't bear the expected results" that you mentioned were Patrick Roy's actual stats from 1986. So you can say that in the regular season of 1986, Roy was an average backup.

2) Thank you. Although all I can go by are the posts in this thread and it is my observation that the people are responding in a humorless way. That should have been the way I worded it and I didn't and that is my fault.

I have the sim and I'm reworking the teams so that the playoff numbers are included. It will probably take me the better part of a year to rework all the teams I have. Currently I'm working on the 83-84 season.

 

[SealsFan]

Hey Bauer, I have this sim but haven't played in quite a while, found another game more to my liking but I appreciate all the work you put into making these videos. It is tough to watch on Youtube though, especially since the text and other elements on the screen are too small to see.

 

[bauerpower]

Hey Bauer, I have this sim but haven't played in quite a while, found another game more to my liking but I appreciate all the work you put into making these videos. It is tough to watch on Youtube though, especially since the text and other elements on the screen are too small to see.

Thanks Mr. Seals for your input...I know exactly what you are saying. That's why I try to say who has the puck but my mouth is too slow to keep up with how fast things go. I am planning to do something similar with baseball and basketball which I think would make better videos since they are slower paced and more deliberate.

Anyway...The Tiebreaker Game between '86 Montreal and '10 Chicago is now up. I am just showing the 3rd period now, which keeps the videos much shorter.

Here's the link.... http://youtu.be/jS_r5smWhAo

Now we can move on to Group B which might have some teams of interest. (In chronological order)

1972-73 New England Whalers 46-30-2 (94 points) First WHA Champion

Yes there are a few WHA teams in the tournament. I don't know if I would have chosen to include a handful of WHA teams, but the file that is available from Dave Koch Sports of the collection of greatest teams has these teams included. I guess this means I have to say greatest hockey teams of all time, not NHL teams. I just didn't want anyone to ask why I didn't include the Red Army team or something. Anyway, a few WHA teams might add a little flavor to the proceedings.

1975-76 New York Islanders 42-21-17 (101 points) Semi-finalists Lost to Montreal

I am going to lay my cards on the table here. As the avatar might give the hint, the Islanders are my team. The '75 Islanders are the team that made me an Islander fan even while living in Edmonton where they were rarely on TV. The '76 Isles were a very good team, in fact they were the only team to give the '76 Canadiens a loss in their entire Playoff run.

1976-77 Boston Bruins 49-23-8 (106 points) Swept by MTL in finals
1977-78 Montreal Canadiens 59-10-11 (129 points) Stanley Cup Champions
1982-83 Edmonton Oilers 47-21-12 (106 points) Swept By Islanders in the Finals
1987-88 Calgary Flames 48-23-9 (105 points) President's Trophy Winners but lost to Oilers (4-0) in Divisional Final
1991-92 New York Rangers 50-25-5 (105 points) President Trophy Winners but lost to Penguins (4-2) in Divisional Final

Only one Stanley Cup Champion in the group, and yet I believe there are some very interesting matchups and very good teams. Some of these teams should have won the Cup and since the game stats and ratings are based upon regular season results, these teams should be very good. There are some excellent rivalries here MTL-BOS, MTL-NYI, EDM-CGY, EDM-NYI, NYI-NYR, NEW-BOS, NEW-CGY, well maybe not the last one, but it should be interesting.

I have not played a single game yet from this group so I can give my predictions:

1) 1978 Montreal
2) 1983 Edmonton
3) 1992 Rangers
4) 1976 Islanders
5) 1977 Boston
6) 1988 Calgary
7) 1973 New England Whalers

If there are any requests for a third period video from any of these games, let me know.

 

[Hardyvan123]

It might be interesting to see the scoring leaders of Group A. Big Jean Beliveau was the scoring champion.

Clarke scores goals at his highest career rate and against top teams not the bottom feeders that were around when he played?

Simulated games might be fun but they don't tell us anything.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I find it quite amusing that people actually take the clearly not entirely serious contention of the OP that this will end all debate and find the definitive best team ever at face value.

It's a funny little thing to do, I did something quite similar with college football years ago. Not sure in hindsight it was worth the effort but at the time it seemed fun in the sense that you wanted to see the outcome.

 

[8LX7psQ]

I find it quite amusing that people actually take the clearly not entirely serious contention of the OP that this will end all debate and find the definitive best team ever at face value.

It's a funny little thing to do, I did something quite similar with college football years ago. Not sure in hindsight it was worth the effort but at the time it seemed fun in the sense that you wanted to see the outcome.

This.


The op has done a bang up job as far as I'm concerned.

A lot of you really don't have a sense of humor do you?

 

[Hardyvan123]

This.


The op has done a bang up job as far as I'm concerned.

A lot of you really don't have a sense of humor do you?

A really good joke can take only 20 seconds or less easily, it sure is an awe full lot of work to humor someone.

Might be my bad but in my experience guys who run these types of things and are stat freaks really are serious about their stuff.

 

[bauerpower]

Group A Semi-Final Series 1

1968 Montreal Leads Series (1-0)

Gump Worsley's 31 saves vs. Roger Crozier's 15 the difference as Habs take Game 1.