Are the Capitals and Jets PDO merchants ?

[The Gr8 Dane]

Pdo is trash , the points are banked. W is a W

 

[tarheelhockey]

PDO is a dumb stat. Just say they can’t sustain their shooting percentage, that’s what it comes down to when people talk about PDO. There’s no point muddling up the conversation with goalie stats which are a totally independent topic.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

PDO is a dumb stat. Just say they can’t sustain their shooting percentage, that’s what it comes down to when people talk about PDO. There’s no point muddling up the conversation with goalie stats which are a totally independent topic.

The thing that Irks me is when people talk about PDO and say things like *they will regress* like it's some sort of gotcha moment and feel real good about it. As if banking points in the regular season doesn't even matter because you will eventually regress lol.

I'm sure fans of teams with unsustainable PDO are really mad they won all those games! Does it even count?!

 

[qc14]

These stats just reveal that most people don't understand what numbers really are. Thinking a team HAS to play worse in the future just because they have a high shooting % or high save % is insane. They have those high statistics BECAUSE OF excellent play, whether it be superior shot selection or a goalie on top of his game. Thinking PDO means anything is putting the cart before the horse.

While I don't disagree with you here, history has proven that it is incredibly difficult for even historically good teams to sustain this level of excellent play over an entire season, let alone multiple. It is almost a certainty that the Caps will not continue to have this level of excellent play indefinitely. They will stop picking every corner, or finding every backdoor tap-in, or getting a stick on every puck.

That is fine -- it's not like the points they banked during this level of play don't count and there are a lot of things (both stats-wise and from the eye test) that suggest the Caps are still legitimately good even if their PDO dips. I don't think they will maintain their president's trophy leading pace though, probably not for the rest of this season and certainly not next season.

 

[Norwegianoiler]

Why are people always up in arms over unsustainably high PDO but don't ever bring up low PDO as unsustainable?

It's always more rewarding to pull a top down, than some boots up.

 

[tarheelhockey]

While I don't disagree with you here, history has proven that it is incredibly difficult for even historically good teams to sustain this level of excellent play over an entire season, let alone multiple. It is almost a certainty that the Caps will not continue to have this level of excellent play indefinitely. They will stop picking every corner, or finding every backdoor tap-in, or getting a stick on every puck.

That is fine -- it's not like the points they banked during this level of play don't count and there are a lot of things (both stats-wise and from the eye test) that suggest the Caps are still legitimately good even if their PDO dips. I don't think they will maintain their president's trophy leading pace though, probably not for the rest of this season and certainly not next season.

But what’s the big insight when we say “they won’t play this great forever”? Obviously a team or an individual player won’t be at the tip-top of their game forever, at some point they’ll bring less than their A+ game. It’s a matter of time. Do we need to make up stats for that?

The insinuation behind PDO is that teams/players are “lucky” to perform above the average, as opposed to simply being the better opponent during that particular time frame.

Funny enough, we don’t see a lot of this analysis in the playoffs when everyone is watching the same games and can speak competently to what’s actually been happening. In the playoffs suddenly it’s “that’s the best I ever saw that guy play, he really stepped up and earned the W”.

 

[qc14]

But what’s the big insight when we say “they won’t play this great forever”? Obviously a team or an individual player won’t be at the tip-top of their game forever, at some point they’ll bring less than their A+ game. It’s a matter of time. Do we need to make up stats for that?

The insinuation behind PDO is that teams/players are “lucky” to perform above the average, as opposed to simply being the better opponent during that particular time frame.

Funny enough, we don’t see a lot of this analysis in the playoffs when everyone is watching the same games and can speak competently to what’s actually been happening. In the playoffs suddenly it’s “that’s the best I ever saw that guy play, he really stepped up and earned the W”.

The big insight isn't saying "they won't play this great forever" it's trying to provide some sort of quantitative measure to separate out how much of a team's performance is sustainable over a longer period. That is the entire point of statistics.

I don't think it's mostly "luck" in the way of getting crazy bounces or offsides reviews or the other team hitting all posts (although that definitely has some part in it) and I think that lots of stats people often overstate this aspect. Rather, it is "luck" in the sense that the Caps are lucky to have basically every single player -- McMichael, Protas, Chychrun, Ovi, Strome, Wilson, PLD, Sandin, Thompson, etc. -- playing the best hockey of their careers at the exact same time.

I disagree with your point about the playoffs too. We see this every single year when a big upset happens and you take a closer look and it's because a goalie gets hot or has a complete meltdown. Basically the whole catalyst for the "analytics era" in hockey was the 09-10 Caps and their .977 PDO getting Halaked by the Canadiens! It definitely was a huge talking point in 2023 too with Vegas and their 105.3 PDO. Getting lucky, sure, but also just having everyone click at the same time (and the right time)!

 

[wetcoast]

Yes it is!

Is your name Donald, you are from New York right?

 

[Midnight Judges]

There is no force in hockey that would cause your shooting percentage to go down if your goalies' combined save percentage is relatively high.

I'll say that again: If your team shooting percentage is high, there is no causal effect that would result in your goal tender having a worse save percentage.

So why combine the two?

Hockey indeed has a very large randomness factor, but it certainly isn't just randomness. Randomness may outweigh skill in many instances and samples, but there is still skill.

The 80's Oilers had a PDO of 104 and they sustained it for 7 years. The Islanders dynasty did it for 11 years. That is not some bizarre coincidence.

Now, I think you could argue the NHL is far more balanced now (in the salary cap era) than it was back when a team with 7 hall of famers would routinely go against teams with 0 hall of famers. But if PDO were just luck and no skill then these Oilers/Islanders PDOs would be all over the map. But they aren't.

 

[wetcoast]

While I don't disagree with you here, history has proven that it is incredibly difficult for even historically good teams to sustain this level of excellent play over an entire season, let alone multiple. It is almost a certainty that the Caps will not continue to have this level of excellent play indefinitely. They will stop picking every corner, or finding every backdoor tap-in, or getting a stick on every puck.

That is fine -- it's not like the points they banked during this level of play don't count and there are a lot of things (both stats-wise and from the eye test) that suggest the Caps are still legitimately good even if their PDO dips. I don't think they will maintain their president's trophy leading pace though, probably not for the rest of this season and certainly not next season.

PDO probably isn't the best way to describe thing but rather teams goes through peaks and valleys and anyone who has ever played sports on any level understands that sometimes everything goes right and at other times even with more effort nothing goes right.

Take the Jets, they are basically the Leafs of Manitobia but people don't hate them but really until they take the next step in the playoffs does the regualr season matter that much?

The Capitals seem to be greater than the sum of their parts, especially on the back end and we'll see how things turn out this post season but in their favour the Metro is an easier path than the Central.

 

[Machinehead]

Is your name Donald, you are from New York right?

Ok that's not funny.

 

[acor]

Pdo is trash , the points are banked. W is a W

Says fans of every overachieving team, and season after we always have a puzzled and astonished threads, like "what happened to Canucks/Flames/Rangers (etc.), thay were so good last year"...

 

[qc14]

PDO probably isn't the best way to describe thing but rather teams goes through peaks and valleys and anyone who has ever played sports on any level understands that sometimes everything goes right and at other times even with more effort nothing goes right.

Totally agree with the peaks and valleys -- some nights you just have it and some nights you really don't. I think my point is that PDO is a good (if certainly flawed!) way to approximate how many more peaks you are having than valleys, as well as what a typical range of peaks and valleys looks like in the NHL.

 

[Machinehead]

PDO is a dumb stat. Just say they can’t sustain their shooting percentage, that’s what it comes down to when people talk about PDO. There’s no point muddling up the conversation with goalie stats which are a totally independent topic.

See, I don't agree with that. I think goaltending is the flimsy part.

Teams with good shooters have shot the lights out through a whole tournament -- 2017 Pens, 2018, Caps, 2023 Knights.

Goaltending alone has never gotten a less-than-elite team through all four rounds. It has never happened.

You could convince me that a team outside the top 10 or so in xGF% will skill their way to the Stanley Cup. It has happened a handful of times. No team outside the top 10 in xGF% whose undisputed star talent is a goaltender has won the Stanley Cup since xGF% is being recorded.

 

[BFLO]

I wouldn't consider either of these teams "PDO merchants". Even after their PDO regresses to the mean, they would still both be solid playoff teams given their other underlying numbers.

 

[TS Quint]

so last year was just luck for the canucks then. Faced zero adversity all year, and now that have some adversity they crumble.

One year where they had many outliers last year now there are back to being.... well.... the Canucks.

 

[Romang67]

See, I don't agree with that. I think goaltending is the flimsy part.

Teams with good shooters have shot the lights out through a whole tournament -- 2017 Pens, 2018, Caps, 2023 Knights.

Goaltending alone has never gotten a less-than-elite team through all four rounds. It has never happened.

You could convince me that a team outside the top 10 or so in xGF% will skill their way to the Stanley Cup. It has happened a handful of times. No team outside the top 10 in xGF% whose undisputed star talent is a goaltender has won the Stanley Cup since xGF% is being recorded.

The 2011 Boston Bruins were 19th in xGF%.

 

[Machinehead]

The 2011 Boston Bruins were 19th in xGF%.

They're probably the closest example, yes, but they had first ballot Hall of Famers at 1D and 1C.

That's also probably a bad example of what that core was capable of - 9th in 2009, 8th in 2010, 5th in 2012, and 6th in 2013.

Yes, I think you could describe the Bruins as a team that relies on goaltending, and that's sort of exactly my point. Here's a team that has the most wins the NHL since the lockout by a not insignificant distance, and they only have the one Cup. Relying on goaltending is flimsy in the playoffs.

 

[Adam da bomb]

They're probably the closest example, yes, but they had first ballot Hall of Famers at 1D and 1C.

That's also probably a bad example of what that core was capable of - 9th in 2009, 8th in 2010, 5th in 2012, and 6th in 2013.

Yes, I think you could describe the Bruins as a team that relies on goaltending, and that's sort of exactly my point. Here's a team that has the most wins the NHL since the lockout by a not insignificant distance, and they only have the one Cup. Relying on goaltending is flimsy in the playoffs.

MTL canadians made it to the finals on the back of Price.

 

[Machinehead]

MTL canadians made it to the finals on the back of Price.

Actually, they were just outside the top 10 in xGF% that year.

And they didn't make Tampa break a sweat.

I will say this about that Canadiens team: they went to the Finals smack dab in the middle of going 46-70-22 across two seasons. That should have been the end of "I just look at the standings man" but alas.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Actually, they were just outside the top 10 in xGF% that year.

And they didn't make Tampa break a sweat.

I will say this about that Canadiens team: they went to the Finals smack dab in the middle of going 46-70-22 across two seasons. That should have been the end of "I just look at the standings man" but alas.

But, for most teams going to the finals would be great.

 

[qc14]

There is no force in hockey that would cause your shooting percentage to go down if your goalies' combined save percentage is relatively high.

I'll say that again: If your team shooting percentage is high, there is no causal effect that would result in your goal tender having a worse save percentage.

So why combine the two?

Hockey indeed has a very large randomness factor, but it certainly isn't just randomness. Randomness may outweigh skill in many instances and samples, but there is still skill.

The 80's Oilers had a PDO of 104 and they sustained it for 7 years. The Islanders dynasty did it for 11 years. That is not some bizarre coincidence.

Now, I think you could argue the NHL is far more balanced now (in the salary cap era) than it was back when a team with 7 hall of famers would routinely go against teams with 0 hall of famers. But if PDO were just luck and no skill then these Oilers/Islanders PDOs would be all over the map. But they aren't.

I think there are definitely reasons why combining the two is bad but the reasoning is that shots and saves are zero-sum. Across all games played in the entire NHL this year, the amount of total shots taken is constant, and the amount of goals is exactly equal to the amount of total shots minus the amount of saves. The PDO of the entire league then is by definition always 100.

As for sustaining it I don't think anyone would argue that there isn't some skill involved and that good teams can generally maintain higher PDOs than bad teams. I don't think that ability is quite as repeatable as you would think though (especially in the modern era) and the degree to which teams are able to be above that 100 mark are pretty hard capped

 

[Machinehead]

But, for most teams going to the finals would be great.

Having a real shot to win is important.

The Rangers have made noise but it's been over a decade since I took the idea of them winning the Cup seriously.

Goaltending just isn't a great recipe and that's from experience.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Having a real shot to win is important.

The Rangers have made noise but it's been over a decade since I took the idea of them winning the Cup seriously.

Goaltending just isn't a great recipe and that's from experience.

Seriously as a Jets fan I would be happy if we made it to the second round for a change. Anything more than that is bonus. Yes, one day I hope we make the finals and might possibly win it, but, one step at a time.

 

[Brookbank]

I just ran into the Caps head coach in the concourse at Rogers Place