From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Radical Format Change (flame bait)
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:59:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.204847.3737@cs.ucf.edu> wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) writes:
>golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) wrote:
>>Through all this, the Stanley Cup winner is always more likely
>>to repeat than the regular season champion.
>
>I'm not going to get involved in SC versus PT any more, but you can't make
>this statement because it's not that simple. Everyone puts the emphasis on
>winning the SC because they associate that with being the best. The team that
>wins the PT but not the SC gets nothing but flack for not winning the SC. The
>next year, the emphasis is on doing nothing but winning the SC. Winning the
>PT is unimportant (won it once, who cares now). Winning the division might be
>even be important because the pressure of winning those first two at home is
>too great. Life's a lot easier when you're not expected to do well and you
>don't than when you are expected to and don't.
>

Playoff performance correlates with regular season performance, as I 
demonstrated last spring...since the basic current playoff format took
shape in the early eighties, the only third place club to win the
Stanley Cup were last years Penguins (new owner, dead coach, new coach,
major trade, contract hassles, a defending Champion that ultimately
got its act together).  I don't have the data to correlate playoff
performance with the last half of the regular season, but I'll
keep that in mind as a project, it probably is even more correlated.  

The outcomes since the basic current playoff format went into place
suggest that first place teams emerge from their divisions around
50% of the time, which means first place teams won almost 3 out of
every four playoff series...over about a decade long span.  You
take a few anomalies and blow it out of proportion.

And the President's Trophy is meaningless because the schedule is
unbalanced.

>If emphasis was on winning the PT and not the SC, you would see plenty of
>repeats. Statistically, a "good" team will do well in the long run, not matter
>what injuries or losing streaks. Almost all of these "good" teams experience
>4-game losing streaks. Often that's enough to be out of the playoffs.
>

Why should anyone be obsessed with the President's trophy when the
schedule is unbalanced, and the Stanley Cup over 50 years has 
unequivocally been a more reliable indicator of hockey excellence?

>You usually note the fact that the SC winner is a first or second place team
>in a division, which to me just says that the SC winner is always a good team.
>It doesn't say the team is the best. I don't think that anyone could really
>argue a team is the best if the team won the PT and the SC. Likewise, people
>will always question the team that doesn't.
>

At about this time last year, Pittsburgh had won its first Stanley Cup
after finishing first in its division, yet rec.sport.hockey was littered
with posts, many by me, suggesting Pittsburgh had had an easy road to
the Cup and yet had a lot to prove.  Last year they finished third, won
three tough playoffs series against Washington, the Rangers, and the
Blackhawks, and there is not a peep out of anyone about whether
Pittsburgh is the best team or not...because they beat all the
best contenders head on in Stanley Cup playoff series.  If Pittsburgh
didn't have a new owner, a dead coach, a new coach with a radically
different personality, several major contract disputes, and a major
trade or two, maybe they might have done better in the regular season
last year...the winner of the President's Trophy has demonstrated
excellence over mediocre competition...the winner of the Stanley Cup
demonstrates excellence over the best competition.    


>If anyone has every played in any kind of individual tournament (say
>racquetball, tennis, etc.) where you have no one to blame but yourself, then
>you know how easy it is to get "knocked out" of it. Winners always say I was
>"on." A good player wins. The best player, the one who would do the best in
>the long run, may not. If you want to define the best as the winner of the SC
>then there is no contradiction in terms. I find flaw in the definition, just
>as most people have trouble saying the best team is the one that wins just one
>game. Also, winner in a tournament and winner in a league are very different.
>In a league, teams play all teams (the unbalanced schedule is a financial
>decision not one to favor teams in the standings - but yes it does influence
>the outcome, but nowhere near as much as a tournament where the 4 teams that
>you play could be quite an easy schedule, which is statistically unlikely).

The Stanley Cup playoffs are not a single elimination tournament...you
are three lives every two weeks...the history of outcomes over decades
and decades demonstrates that little luck is involved.  The President's
Trophy is almost inevitably determined by luck...i.e. one of several
good teams with relatively little turnover in personnel with the fewest
injuries.  It would make a lot more sense to award the President's
Trophy to the team that accumulates the most points in the second half
of the season...that would have a much greater correlation with 
excellence.

>
>Like I said though, I'm not going to argue about it anymore. If everyone wants
>to say that Pittsburgh was the best team last year, then fine. Given the
>definition they want to use, I won't argue. If everyone else wants to say that
>the Rangers had the best team, then fine. Given the definition they want to
>use, I won't argue. There's no argument concerning who won the SC or the PT.
>The argument lies in which one is "best." Each person thinks he is right
>because of the view he holds. The one thing that is wrong is when people claim
>the SC winner is the league champion. There is no such correlation.
>

Most Ranger fans aren't deluding themselves...they know they weren't the
best team last year.

Gerald
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey