Tournament Team Rankings Idea - Genesis

[kingraph]

There have been many rankings done for tournaments where we group teams into tiers, but something always felt off.  It was either too many tiers, not enough tiers, or the personal preferences around which teams on the fringe make it or not into a particular tier.  I am trying an updated method that doesn't group teams into tiers so rigidly, but rather offers a scale based on team.  Here's my first pass:

 

The idea is that you find a team and then a reasonable matchup will be any other team that shares the color tier. UPDATE V02 AS OF 04/09/19

You can also assume the top teams in a band are stronger than the bottom.  So St. Louis vs New York Islanders, STL would be stronger, but that is still a reasonable matchup.  However, STL vs TOR, TOR would be the stronger matchup, but still reasonable.  TOR can't play NYI though.

I found this to be a pretty good exercise in that it will also give you a general team ranking.  Some teams are interchangeable that are only in one band (NYI/NJ/HFD/WSH), but it's really the fringe teams that make you think.  

I included the rosters of main players, bolded the top 50ish, and added home/away advantages.  I think this can be printed as a good reference. 

Having said all that, I've messed around with this enough and came to the point where my mind started turning into mush.  So I'm sharing it now with the group to get your input, see if it makes sense, see if I'm missing something, etc.  Thanks for taking the time to review.  

[kingraph]

Sorry for the large picture - I have to make a smaller version without logos. 

[CoachMac]

6 hours ago, kingraph said:

There have been many rankings done for tournaments where we group teams into tiers, but something always felt off.  It was either too many tiers, not enough tiers, or the personal preferences around which teams on the fringe make it or not into a particular tier.  I am trying an updated method that doesn't group teams into tiers so rigidly, but rather offers a scale based on team.  Here's my first pass:

The idea is that you find a team and then a reasonable matchup will be any other team that shares the color tier.  So for example, a team like Quebec can play anyone from Boston (purple band) down to New York Rangers (brownish band).  Meanwhile, Chicago is just the top 4 teams.  This lends to more flexibility as all you have to do is add/drop a team from a band to adjust any unfair matchups instead of fencing them into a tier. 

You can also assume the top teams in a band are stronger than the bottom.  So St. Louis vs New York Islanders, STL would be stronger, but that is still a reasonable matchup.  However, STL vs TOR, TOR would be the stronger matchup, but still reasonable.  TOR can't play NYI though.

I found this to be a pretty good exercise in that it will also give you a general team ranking.  Some teams are interchangeable that are only in one band (NYI/NJ/HFD/WSH), but it's really the fringe teams that make you think.  

I included the rosters of main players, bolded the top 50ish, and added home/away advantages.  I think this can be printed as a good reference. 

Having said all that, I've messed around with this enough and came to the point where my mind started turning into mush.  So I'm sharing it now with the group to get your input, see if it makes sense, see if I'm missing something, etc.  Thanks for taking the time to review.  

How much can I love this post and chart!

I tried to make something like this for Vegas that did get passed out and used, but this is a major upgrade.

Incredibly well done!

6 hours ago, kingraph said:

Sorry for the large picture - I have to make a smaller version without logos. 

NOOOOOO!

[jer_33]

These types of resources are awesome. I would make a nice chart (no logos), and shrink it down to playing card size and have them printed in packs of playing cards. I have a site that I've used for this with great success often for $9.99 with free shipping.

[corbettkb]

20 hours ago, kingraph said:

Sorry for the large picture - I have to make a smaller version without logos. 

Awesome. Can you add the .png file for download, would be nice to see full sized version.  Only super minor quibble, id drop QUE down below TOR & NYR.

Edited March 13, 2019 by corbettkb

[smozoma]

15 minutes ago, corbettkb said:

Awesome. Can you add the .png file for download, would be nice to see full sized version.  Only super minor quibble, id drop QUE down below TOR & NYR.

use the "open in new tab" option of your browser to view the full image.

or click here, and zoom in if necessary: https://forum.nhl94.com/uploads/monthly_2019_03/1974583957_TournamentTeamListv01a.png.e506585330d5f29dca34544b7bdaa1ac.png

[CoachMac]

I really also like what you did with the Home and Away.

Including the numbers makes it easy to see for example that EDM vs PHI Match Home Ice will be huge +3 for the Oil at Home and +4 for Philly at Home.

While a Dallas Vs Calgary match Home Ice will essentially mean nothing as it turns out as zero in either building.

[kingraph]

30 minutes ago, CoachMac said:

I really also like what you did with the Home and Away.

Including the numbers makes it easy to see for example that EDM vs PHI Match Home Ice will be huge +3 for the Oil at Home and +4 for Philly at Home.

While a Dallas Vs Calgary match Home Ice will essentially mean nothing as it turns out as zero in either building.

Thanks, I am hoping to find out exactly (or at least directionally) what those modifiers do sooner than later! 

[kingraph]

3 hours ago, corbettkb said:

Only super minor quibble, id drop QUE down below TOR & NYR.

Let's finish this a bit more because I'm not as concerned with rankings per se, but matchups.  So QUE should be fair against EDM, PIT, PHI, STL?  

[kingraph]

And what I mean by not ranking, BOS,WPG, CGY, and DAL all have the same rank as they all share the same color bands.  I don't necessarily need to shift in between those teams for now. 

[corbettkb]

45 minutes ago, kingraph said:

Let's finish this a bit more because I'm not as concerned with rankings per se, but matchups.  So QUE should be fair against EDM, PIT, PHI, STL?  

I guess I was thinking more that TOR & NYR should be lined up with DAL & CGY (though understandable if anyone disagrees).  But yes, i could certainly see QUE pairing up with PHI & EDM and maybe PIT.

 

[kingraph]

Maybe move the purple bar down through TOR and NYR and elminate the brown bar altogether?  That means TOR and NYR would be eligible between BOS and STL.  Maybe?  

[corbettkb]

Maybe, take the purple bar down thru TOR & NYR and pop your yellow bar up one spot to QUE then just lose the army green bar.  But that thing is really great as is so whatever you think is best.

Edited March 14, 2019 by corbettkb

[angryjay93]

I second removing the army green ban. I think the only matchup below LA that is fair is QUE and even then I'm not too sold on that

I'll grant you STL is tough to group but I think I'd put them below WSH. STL seems substantially worse than every team above them but also fairly better than everyone below them except WSH. I would consider flipping PHI and EDM so that you could run a band for STL from Edm to NJ. (Edm, Pit, Hfd, NJ) I would put WSH above Edm and leave them out of the STL band. 

My argument for WSH over STL can be summed up this way. Wsh has a 6 speed player, a legit sniper in Khristch and a good role player in Ridley. Throw in one of the best and most versatile blue lines in the game and you have a great team with a weak goalie. STL has one player (Hull) who does not have elite skating and can be inconsistent with goal scoring. They lack a true play maker or speedster up front and are brutally slow. Their defense is 1 player deep, but Brown is slow too. Joseph is an okay goalie but nothing more. 

I think WSH is dynamic and deserves a band along the lines of (Tor, Edm, NYR, Pit, Que). I think they can go even higher but I don't want to go further until I get a feel for the reaction on this line of thinking.

I guess Que still needs a band (Tor & NYR for sure). I guess LA? Dal too? But not much more than that. 

DAL you could give them a line from Van-NYR. They are crazy inconsistent and have no home ice adv. On the other hand their skating allows them to play with anyone and they are great on the road. 

I intended only to note a few things, I have clearly gotten out of hand so I'll stop now

[corbettkb]

WAS is controversial, id argue few can play well with them.  the orange line of STL, WAS, HFD, NJ, NYI works well.

Edited March 14, 2019 by corbettkb

[kingraph]

I need to digest a little more on what @angryjay93 and @corbettkb have posted above.  Again, not so much as ranking, but it helps to think "is this a fair matchup?" and at what point does it seem like too much of a stretch.  I'd rather be conservative.  At the end of the day, it's a guide meant to help.  You can go crazy and pick MTL vs PHI *ahem* if you wanted to. 

[kingraph]

I can also utilize our social media -- ask a question "is this a fair matchup" and if we get more than 20% or whatever saying "No", then that can help with our fringe team decisions.

[smozoma]

27 minutes ago, kingraph said:

I can also utilize our social media -- ask a question "is this a fair matchup" and if we get more than 20% or whatever saying "No", then that can help with our fringe team decisions.

Pretty sure the social media crowd has voted "incorrectly" on at least half of the facebook "which team do you pick" polls, so I'm a little skeptical of their opinions...

We'd need a few control polls to see what they think of matchups that are considered relatively fair by the online veteran crowd

[smozoma]

What if we just gave team numeric ratings (like your old ratings post),and said within 5 pts is pretty fair?

So you'd take the ratings of the two team, add the relevant home or away value (although away value has less of an effect than home), and then you'd get a decent idea of the relative skills of the two teams.

(The team ratings in the image are the mathematically derived values from your old post. we'd need to agree on new values)

"Skillcap" is a bonus to deal with cases where a good player can get more out of a team.

[smozoma]

Another format, although maybe it spells out the matchups a little *too* clearly

(also the 77 row is pretty crazy looking!)

[CoachMac]

4 hours ago, smozoma said:

What if we just gave team numeric ratings (like your old ratings post),and said within 5 pts is pretty fair?

So you'd take the ratings of the two team, add the relevant home or away value (although away value has less of an effect than home), and then you'd get a decent idea of the relative skills of the two teams.

(The team ratings in the image are the mathematically derived values from your old post. we'd need to agree on new values)

"Skillcap" is a bonus to deal with cases where a good player can get more out of a team.

-2, -1, or 0 is a poor way to think about away rating.
There really is no away rating just a Home Ice advantage that can range from a low of zero to high of 5.

 

This is being way over thought in my opinion.

Raphs first post was perfect.  It is just a guide.  We are all going to have some preferences, what I loved in the Original post was #1 how cool it looked gotta keep the logos, #2 The wealth of info, players Home away, #3 The simplicity.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2019 by CoachMac

[kingraph]

Trust me, nobody likes numbers and data more than me, but that gets into a slippery slope on rankings.  I agree with Coach, keep it at an eyeball/sniff test after playing thousands of games, tens of thousands when you factor in all of us combined.

"Is it a fair matchup"

If it's a fringe, or questionable, we leave it off as a guide.  It's the middle that gets a little fuzzy.  I'll clear up some noise by focusing on fringe matchups and asking this community in a poll.

[kingraph]

I updated the original post with a version 02.  Minor tweak, I removed a purple band and extended the army green to the Dallas Stars.  I wouldn't feel comfortable calling Calgary vs. any of the other teams below "fair".  Of course people can still call that, but at the end of the day I think the matchups are fair, and people are free to choose whatever they want.  We aren't preventing anyone from a matchup, this should be used as a guide.

 

 

[Maitrefun]

Wow thanks kingraph ! 

 

Thanks you ! 

[Nhl94slapshot]

On 3/12/2019 at 4:16 PM, kingraph said:

There have been many rankings done for tournaments where we group teams into tiers, but something always felt off.  It was either too many tiers, not enough tiers, or the personal preferences around which teams on the fringe make it or not into a particular tier.  I am trying an updated method that doesn't group teams into tiers so rigidly, but rather offers a scale based on team.  Here's my first pass:

 

The idea is that you find a team and then a reasonable matchup will be any other team that shares the color tier. UPDATE V02 AS OF 04/09/19

You can also assume the top teams in a band are stronger than the bottom.  So St. Louis vs New York Islanders, STL would be stronger, but that is still a reasonable matchup.  However, STL vs TOR, TOR would be the stronger matchup, but still reasonable.  TOR can't play NYI though.

I found this to be a pretty good exercise in that it will also give you a general team ranking.  Some teams are interchangeable that are only in one band (NYI/NJ/HFD/WSH), but it's really the fringe teams that make you think.  

I included the rosters of main players, bolded the top 50ish, and added home/away advantages.  I think this can be printed as a good reference. 

Having said all that, I've messed around with this enough and came to the point where my mind started turning into mush.  So I'm sharing it now with the group to get your input, see if it makes sense, see if I'm missing something, etc.  Thanks for taking the time to review.  

This is great!   Question about the 1st Forward though...does that also mean they should be your Center in your line & not just the best overall forward?  Enjoy the YouTube posts, by the way.  

[kingraph]

15 minutes ago, Nhl94slapshot said:

This is great!   Question about the 1st Forward though...does that also mean they should be your Center in your line & not just the best overall forward?  Enjoy the YouTube posts, by the way.  

Thanks, I definitely want to do more YouTube instructional videos! 

You definitely don't need to have the 1st F as your Center, though many of them usually end up that way.  Personally I have Oates on LW on Boston, Gretzky in LA is also best on a wing, Savard in Montreal.  Ultimately how you stack the lines becomes your own personal preference and how you prefer to play.  

For some more reading material, I highly suggest reading "Building Lines with AJ", which is a comprehensive guide to structuring lines for each team:  Building Lines with AJ

There's a thread for each team. 

[smozoma]

54 minutes ago, kingraph said:

Thanks, I definitely want to do more YouTube instructional videos! 

You definitely don't need to have the 1st F as your Center, though many of them usually end up that way.  Personally I have Oates on LW on Boston, Gretzky in LA is also best on a wing, Savard in Montreal.  Ultimately how you stack the lines becomes your own personal preference and how you prefer to play.  

For some more reading material, I highly suggest reading "Building Lines with AJ", which is a comprehensive guide to structuring lines for each team:  Building Lines with AJ

There's a thread for each team. 

Other guys I'd swap in as C..

Ottawa: Baker over Turgeon
Hartford: Sanderson over Verbeek
St. Louis: maybe Emerson over Hull?
NY Islanders: Turgeon over Hogue depending on the other team's defensive play

[kingraph]

45 minutes ago, smozoma said:

Other guys I'd swap in as C..

Ottawa: Baker over Turgeon
Hartford: Sanderson over Verbeek
St. Louis: maybe Emerson over Hull?
NY Islanders: Turgeon over Hogue depending on the other team's defensive play

Good examples, and I personally like Hull and Verbeek at C.

More personal preferences while we are at it:

Detroit: Dino vs Yzerman
Calgary: Roberts vs Fleury
Quebec (sometimes): Sundin vs Sakic
New York Rangers (sometimes): Messier over Gartner
Washington (sometimes): Khristich over Bondra

[segathon]

this chart is so great, you mind sharing the working doc with me to make a bastardized nhl 95 version?

[smozoma]

51 minutes ago, kingraph said:

Good examples, and I personally like Hull and Verbeek at C.

More personal preferences while we are at it:

Detroit: Dino vs Yzerman
Calgary: Roberts vs Fleury
Quebec (sometimes): Sundin vs Sakic
New York Rangers (sometimes): Messier over Gartner
Washington (sometimes): Khristich over Bondra

Why Messier?? C/B check?