HFBoards Top Players by Position Polls Results & Analysis

[LT]

This thread will cover some analysis of the results from these threads:

Centers - HFBoards Top 31 NHL Centers

Wingers - HFBoards Top 31 NHL Wingers

Defenders - HFBoards Top 31 NHL Defenders

Goalies - HFBoards Top 20 NHL Goaltenders

Now that the HF Top Players by Position polls have concluded, I did some simple analysis on the results. Basically just breaking things down by team, country, and division, as well as looking at the averages, minimums, and maximums.

One thing to note - I added a "Points" column, which is basically a very crude metric of how "good" a team should be simply based on their "top-line" talent. This is as simple as assigning points per ranking. So Tampa would get 31 points for having Kucherov in 1st for wingers, Chicago gets 30 for Kane in 2nd, and so on. This is clearly a flawed metric for several obvious reasons, but that's for another thread and argument.

With that said, here are some of the results (I'll add some of my own commentary in the next comment):

Click to read more...

 

[Kale Hulls]

I don't like the metrics.

 

[LT]

I think what is most interesting to me is how, with a few exceptions, this Points metric actually seems to correlate quite well with a general consensus of who should end up where (for me, at least). The Islanders are a clear exception to this, for instance, showing clearly that this isn't perfect. But I think it does show just the importance of having at least some elite talent. For the Islanders, I think it's clear that that's in coaching, which won't show up here.

The division tiers are also interesting. It seems clear that the Central and Atlantic are on a different level than their conference counterparts.

Everything else is relatively normal.

 

[Kevin27NYI]

I think what is most interesting to me is how, with a few exceptions, this Points metric actually seems to correlate quite well with a general consensus of who should end up where (for me, at least). The Islanders are a clear exception to this, for instance, showing clearly that this isn't perfect. But I think it does show just the importance of having at least some elite talent. For the Islanders, I think it's clear that that's in coaching, which won't show up here.

The division tiers are also interesting. It seems clear that the Central and Atlantic are on a different level than their conference counterparts.

Everything else is relatively normal.

Even with the Isles, guys like Lee, Pulock and Greiss are just on the outside of these lists.

This was so well done btw, loved it. Should be annual, I love the breakdown after.

 

[LT]

Even with the Isles, guys like Lee, Pulock and Greiss are just on the outside of these lists.

This was so well done btw, loved it. Should be annual, I love the breakdown after.

Yep, and a lot of talent bled over the last two offseasons (Tavares, Lehner). The Rangers, for instance, are quite different.

I would like to do these yearly and eventually see the trends over 5+ years. We'll see how things go, as that's obviously a long way out.

 

[LT]

I don't like the metrics.

Any particular reason?

Also it's just one. The rest is pure, normal stats.

 

[Howard Beale]

Great stuff! I'm wondering, what do the colours mean, on the chart listing the teams?

 

[Tall Morty]

Great stuff! I'm wondering, what do the colours mean, on the chart listing the teams?

Seems to be team colours, no?

 

[izzy]

getzlaf taking a beating in the centre info

 

[LT]

Great stuff! I'm wondering, what do the colours mean, on the chart listing the teams?

Seems to be team colours, no?

Correct. Roughly their primary color. It's so you can follow a single row easier.

 

[CartographerNo611]

Yeah lets put the norris winner at 5 while Mr. Turn Over is at 2...