What exactly is parity? Doesnthe NHL- or any league- really have it?

[PistolPete]

I am quite fascinated by this concept of parity.

In my short time perusing these boards I have seen it mentioned often with some claiming there is parity and that it has never been harder to to win a Cup; others claiming there is none because the finals are the same this year as last.

Is parity about who wins the Cup? Who makes the finals? Or given it's a tournament and only one team wins, is parity more about the RS? Where the points spread between the best and worst is small? The average standard deviation from the mean tiny?

In sports, talent is always relative- Player A is equal to Player B but both are better than Player C who is better than Player D....so how does a league achieve parity when the talent itself isn't equal?

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Parity to me is about the odds of the worst teams in the league being able to win a game against the best teams in the league in any given night , that's how I see it at least.

For example , this historically bad sharks team still has more wins than the bottom 3 NBA teams this season.

Last year was even worst , the NBA sported a team with 14 and 15 wins on the entire season

The randomness of hockey also helps create parity.

 

[Goptor]

In sports, its the idea of limiting outlier teams.

Fans cling to the idea as a hope their team can win the championship. It reality, it doesn't hold much value outside of preventing certain teams from being ticket draw black holes.

 

[Djp]

I am quite fascinated by this concept of parity.

In my short time perusing these boards I have seen it mentioned often with some claiming there is parity and that it has never been harder to to win a Cup; others claiming there is none because the finals are the same this year as last.

Is parity about who wins the Cup? Who makes the finals? Or given it's a tournament and only one team wins, is parity more about the RS? Where the points spread between the best and worst is small? The average standard deviation from the mean tiny?

In sports, talent is always relative- Player A is equal to Player B but both are better than Player C who is better than Player D....so how does a league achieve parity when the talent itself isn't equal?

Look st sports history and bad ownership.

In baseball you had perennial great teams and bad ones due to management and the willingness to psy pkayers.

If you have parity it limits how much the best teams or high profile teams can spend which balances talent pool.

Parity isn't about killing great dynsdty teams that may wjn 2-3 championships over 5-7 years with a common core group

Parity us in conjunction with free agency and bad teams pick high.

 

[tucker3434]

In my time watching the NHL, I’ve seen my team win a couple of cups, then turn into an absolute dumpster fire for about a decade, then win another cup. I think that’s what you’re looking for. Parity takes a long time to make itself known.

Remember how terrible Florida was after 1996? Good for them.

 

[Jerzey Devil]

I’m not a fan but I think I heard this will be the 7th year in a row that a different team will win the NBA championship.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Parity to me is about the odds of the worst teams in the league being able to win a game against the best teams in the league in any given night , that's how I see it at least.

For example , this historically bad sharks team still has more wins than the bottom 3 NBA teams this season.

Last year was even worst , the NBA sported a team with 14 and 15 wins on the entire season

The randomness of hockey also helps create parity.

I think this nailed it. Even the worst NHL teams in the cap era have a chance to at least keep games honest

 

[3074326]

I’m not a fan but I think I heard this will be the 7th year in a row that a different team will win the NBA championship.

Ironically, the NBA probably has less parity (historically) than any other league. The Lakers and Celtics have literally won nearly half of all NBA titles ever.

There is definitely parity in the NHL. I’d argue more than the other NA sports leagues. We have had 8 seeds win cups. It has been over 30 years since a team lower than a 3 seed has won an NBA title.

We have it pretty good in hockey world

To answer your question about how teams keep it even.. it’s the salary cap. Look at the MLB for evidence of what happens without a cap. It’s a dogshit show of a league IMO. $268 million difference in spending between the Mets and Athletics. Clown show. There are players (plural) that make more than the entire A’s roster.

Parity is easier to see when it doesn’t exist. I think the NHL is fine in this regard. Repeat finals doesn’t mean no parity, but it does mean there are a couple really good teams. But they haven’t always been the same teams.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Ironically, the NBA probably has less parity (historically) than any other league. The Lakers and Celtics have literally won nearly half of all NBA titles ever.

There is definitely parity in the NHL. I’d argue more than the other NA sports leagues. We have had 8 seeds win cups. It has been over 30 years since a team lower than a 3 seed has won an NBA title.

We have it pretty good in hockey world

To answer your question about how teams keep it even.. it’s the salary cap. Look at the MLB for evidence of what happens without a cap. It’s a dogshit show of a league IMO. $268 million difference in spending between the Mets and Athletics. Clown show. There are players (plural) that make more than the entire A’s roster.

Parity is easier to see when it doesn’t exist. I think the NHL is fine in this regard. Repeat finals doesn’t mean no parity, but it does mean there are a couple really good teams. But they haven’t always been the same teams.

In MLB, because of the nature of the game, the As can beat the Mets on any given day too. Parity like that does exist in MLB. Just like in the NHL.

 

[Machinehead]

Parity kind of sucks. To me, the Oilers vs the Panthers again is one of the more exciting matchups in recent years.

 

[kevistar]

I'm wondering what doesnthe mean? English is not my native language

 

[HolyHagelin]

I think parity shows up more in teams having hope that they can go from the outhouse to the penthouse. The NFL sees this constantly, so everyone has hope. It isn't something that shows up in one game or even one season, but rather over time as many different teams make the playoffs, and teams don't stay mired in the bottom of the standings forver.

Stil can't fix the Sabres though.

 

[DaveG]

Ironically, the NBA probably has less parity (historically) than any other league. The Lakers and Celtics have literally won nearly half of all NBA titles ever.

There is definitely parity in the NHL. I’d argue more than the other NA sports leagues. We have had 8 seeds win cups. It has been over 30 years since a team lower than a 3 seed has won an NBA title.

We have it pretty good in hockey world

To answer your question about how teams keep it even.. it’s the salary cap. Look at the MLB for evidence of what happens without a cap. It’s a dogshit show of a league IMO. $268 million difference in spending between the Mets and Athletics. Clown show. There are players (plural) that make more than the entire A’s roster.

Parity is easier to see when it doesn’t exist. I think the NHL is fine in this regard. Repeat finals doesn’t mean no parity, but it does mean there are a couple really good teams. But they haven’t always been the same teams.

worse than that when you expand it to the best 5 franchises in the NBA: Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, Spurs, and Warriors - combined they've won 2/3rds of the titles in NBA history. Only 25 won by other teams, ever.

 

[avocadosmoothie]

parity was a thing when goalies weren't luck of the draw every year. a bad team can beat a good team in a series when their goalie is hot, but when goalies don't get hot enough anymore, the better team wins 95% of the time

 

[RebuildinVan]

I mean even with the big name trades this year the NBA finds itself having to market Indiana vs Oklahoma

 

[Lieutenant Bookman]

I am quite fascinated by this concept of parity.

In my short time perusing these boards I have seen it mentioned often with some claiming there is parity and that it has never been harder to to win a Cup; others claiming there is none because the finals are the same this year as last.

Is parity about who wins the Cup? Who makes the finals? Or given it's a tournament and only one team wins, is parity more about the RS? Where the points spread between the best and worst is small? The average standard deviation from the mean tiny?

In sports, talent is always relative- Player A is equal to Player B but both are better than Player C who is better than Player D....so how does a league achieve parity when the talent itself isn't equal?

To me it’s measured by looking at the difference between the top and the bottom and how likely the bottom (in regular season or playoffs) is to beat those at the top. From that perspective I feel like the NHL is better than others since it’s not uncommon for 8s to beat 1s, and I think only like twice in the last 20 years has the Presidents trophy winner won the cup. In terms of most to least parity I would rank them: NHL, MLB, NFL, NBA

 

[PistolPete]

I’m not a fan but I think I heard this will be the 7th year in a row that a different team will win the NBA championship.

I'm sure that will be a record

 

[PistolPete]

In MLB, because of the nature of the game, the As can beat the Mets on any given day too. Parity like that does exist in MLB. Just like in the NHL.

I recall reading that a longer schedule contributes to parity since teams tend to regresa to the mean more with longer schedules (like MLB)

 

[PistolPete]

parity was a thing when goalies weren't luck of the draw every year. a bad team can beat a good team in a series when their goalie is hot, but when goalies don't get hot enough anymore, the better team wins 95% of the time

If I were a betting man, I would say lower seemed teams win more around 40% of the time

 

[KingsFan7824]

Parity, however you wish to define it, is not about stopping one team from winning every Cup for 20 consecutive years. If you can be that ruthless and smart, good on you. What we call parity is just limiting what owners can spend. Because owners will spend stupid money(it's why players wanted free agency). It's fair to say, if you're an owner, and you want to pay Bobby Holik $1,000,000,000, that's on you. However, there are more than 5 teams in the league, and they're not all in big markets. So ultimately it's a balance.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Parity means everyone has the same opportunity. Every team has to operate within a given set of parameters financially, and fittingly parity is a financial term in origin. Teams will still ebb and flow as players come and go, some will get stuck in a funk for a while, some will have relatively sustained success, but at least everyone knows that if they make the right personnel moves they can have a shot.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Parity to me is about the odds of the worst teams in the league being able to win a game against the best teams in the league in any given night , that's how I see it at least.

For example , this historically bad sharks team still has more wins than the bottom 3 NBA teams this season.

Last year was even worst , the NBA sported a team with 14 and 15 wins on the entire season

The randomness of hockey also helps create parity.

First poster after the OP is a winner.

 

[T REX]

I am quite fascinated by this concept of parity.

In my short time perusing these boards I have seen it mentioned often with some claiming there is parity and that it has never been harder to to win a Cup; others claiming there is none because the finals are the same this year as last.

Is parity about who wins the Cup? Who makes the finals? Or given it's a tournament and only one team wins, is parity more about the RS? Where the points spread between the best and worst is small? The average standard deviation from the mean tiny?

In sports, talent is always relative- Player A is equal to Player B but both are better than Player C who is better than Player D....so how does a league achieve parity when the talent itself isn't equal?

NFL futures odds: How many new playoff teams will there be this year?

Offseason moves, injuries, coaching changes, and a 17-game schedule lead to more year-over-year NFL playoff turnover than you may think.There's been an average of 5.85 new postseason teams compared to the year prior since 1990, according to USA Today's Nate Davis. That number increased to nearly...

www.thescore.com

THAT is parity and an incredible statistic. The NFL has nailed it when it comes to parity and cost certainty.

I hate the lottery system but I get why it is done. There just aren't enough superstars to go around in the NHL. Expansion is partly to blame as well. Bettman sucks.

 

[Bank Shot]

I think parity shows up more in teams having hope that they can go from the outhouse to the penthouse. The NFL sees this constantly, so everyone has hope. It isn't something that shows up in one game or even one season, but rather over time as many different teams make the playoffs, and teams don't stay mired in the bottom of the standings forver.

Stil can't fix the Sabres though.

Bingo. I don't think you see Cup wins for teams like Carolina, and Anaheim without a cap.

Parity means every team has a chance to build a contender. I couldn't bother watching a sport like Baseball where some of the teams are basically feeder teams for the big money clubs. Hockey was getting like that in the mid 90s and on until the lockout year, and my interest was low.

 

[FissionFire]

NFL futures odds: How many new playoff teams will there be this year?

Offseason moves, injuries, coaching changes, and a 17-game schedule lead to more year-over-year NFL playoff turnover than you may think.There's been an average of 5.85 new postseason teams compared to the year prior since 1990, according to USA Today's Nate Davis. That number increased to nearly...

www.thescore.com

THAT is parity and an incredible statistic. The NFL has nailed it when it comes to parity and cost certainty.

I hate the lottery system but I get why it is done. There just aren't enough superstars to go around in the NHL. Expansion is partly to blame as well. Bettman sucks.

NFL doesn’t have guaranteed contracts which is a huge advantage. Teams can just get rid of underperforming players instead of being stuck with an anchor