How do you measure playoff success in an analytical way? Using Cup wins and Conference Final appearances don't seem to work (only seven teams have won at least one Stanley Cup during the last ten years) and using semifinal and playoff appearances just seems to be lowering the bar by too much. Winning percentage is better, but still flawed. So how do you measure playoff success analytically? Try using Wins per 16, my new metric for playoff success.
The rationale behind Wins per 16 is simple: you need 16 wins to win the Stanley Cup (since there are four best-of-seven series, as most of you know), so Wins per 16 measures out a team's total wins against the magical number: 16.
The formula for Wins per 16 is simple: just divide a team's playoff wins in the time span you're looking at by the number of seasons in the time span you're looking at multiplied by 16, then multiply that by 100,
Wins per 16 is a sort of winning percentage, but instead of dividing wins by games played, they are divided by how many wins a team would get if they won the Stanley Cup every year. Not only that, the results of Wp16 makes intuitive sense. Check out the top five teams in Wp16 since 2006-07:
** The difference between Edmonton and Winnipeg is that Edmonton has never made the playoffs since 2006-07, while the Jets made the playoffs twice, in 2006-07 (as the Thrashers), and in 2014-15, but got swept both times.
Notes
The rationale behind Wins per 16 is simple: you need 16 wins to win the Stanley Cup (since there are four best-of-seven series, as most of you know), so Wins per 16 measures out a team's total wins against the magical number: 16.
The formula for Wins per 16 is simple: just divide a team's playoff wins in the time span you're looking at by the number of seasons in the time span you're looking at multiplied by 16, then multiply that by 100,
Wins per 16 is a sort of winning percentage, but instead of dividing wins by games played, they are divided by how many wins a team would get if they won the Stanley Cup every year. Not only that, the results of Wp16 makes intuitive sense. Check out the top five teams in Wp16 since 2006-07:
- Chicago Blackhawks, 50.694
- Detroit Red Wings, 45.139
- Pittsburgh Penguins, 40.792
- Boston Bruins, 39.583
- New York Rangers, 37.500
- Edmonton Oilers, 0.000**
- Winnipeg Jets*, 0.000**
- Florida Panthers, 1.389
- (tie), Toronto Maple Leafs and Columbus Blue Jackets, 2.083
** The difference between Edmonton and Winnipeg is that Edmonton has never made the playoffs since 2006-07, while the Jets made the playoffs twice, in 2006-07 (as the Thrashers), and in 2014-15, but got swept both times.
Notes
- If you're surprised by LA's absence from the top five, it's only because that from 2006 to 2011, they either failed to make the playoffs or lost in the first round. Since 2010-11, their Wp16 has been an astounding 53.750.
- It seems that most, if not all good playoff teams have a Wp16 over 30, while the truly elite have a Wp16 of 40 or just under 40. Just seven teams with a Wp16 of 30 or over, - the Blackhawks, Red Wings, Penguins, Bruins, Rangers, Ducks, and the Kings, and only three teams - the Blackhawks, Red Wings, and Penguins - have a Wp16 of over 40, with the Bruins coming close to 40 with a Wp16 of around 39.6.