Yahoo Clever wird am 4. Mai 2021 (Eastern Time, Zeitzone US-Ostküste) eingestellt. Ab dem 20. April 2021 (Eastern Time) ist die Website von Yahoo Clever nur noch im reinen Lesemodus verfügbar. Andere Yahoo Produkte oder Dienste oder Ihr Yahoo Account sind von diesen Änderungen nicht betroffen. Auf dieser Hilfeseite finden Sie weitere Informationen zur Einstellung von Yahoo Clever und dazu, wie Sie Ihre Daten herunterladen.

Leafsfan29-Embrace the drought!
Lv 7
Leafsfan29-Embrace the drought! fragte in SportsHockey · vor 7 Jahren

What to the last four Stanley Cup Winners have in common?

LAK 2014, CHI 2013, LAK 2012, BOS 2011 had one statistical advantage. Name it. It's not goal differential and it's not special teams.

Hint: Steve Simmons doesn't think it exists.

Update:

Its Shot attempts (rolling average) over their most recent 20/30 game splits. Teams that are in the top 3 walk away with hardware (PIT and SJS are in the top 3).

7 Antworten

Relevanz
  • Chad
    vor 7 Jahren
    Beste Antwort

    shot differential?

  • Mike
    vor 7 Jahren

    DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH!

    The only reason the Rangers got close this year is because they had 4th liners chipping in all playoffs long (and playing good defense)

    look at the stats from the 4 centers on the kings this year. they all had 20+ points. (crazy)

    Blackhawks had guys chipping in all season and playoffs long in 2013

    Bruins in 2011 were able to outplay the Canucks because the Canucks couldn't trust all 4 lines. Alain Vigneault said it himself.

    ^ these are facts. DEPTH is the only way to win a Stanley cup nowadays. It's not like Basketball where you can get 3 amazing players and they can carry you to the finals.

  • tomjc43
    Lv 7
    vor 7 Jahren

    Fat Steve has (like myself) never embraced advanced stats in hockey. So I would imagine that by some manipulation of these stats you could prove that the last four Stanley Cup winners deservedly won the Cup.

    Here is my argument against these 'numbers'. The stats that are measured are selective and in no way directly related to the only vital statistic in hockey results. Goals for vs. goals against. Equating time of possession to wins is tenuous at least. Since this figure is recorded only by biased home team minor officials and varies in report from city to city. Also is possession in the neutral zone better or worse than possession in the defensive zone or does it matter at all. A team with low possession figures in the offensive zone but is able to have five takeaways in that zone in a game leading to three goals will have low advanced stat numbers but extremely good dumb stats numbers. Just sayin'

  • ?
    Lv 6
    vor 7 Jahren

    Depth that's the reason why they all won the cup. When you are able to roll all 4 lines and not miss a beat you are going to be very hard to beat.

  • Wie finden Sie die Antworten? Melden Sie sich an, um über die Antwort abzustimmen.
  • Anonym
    vor 7 Jahren

    Lol simple, all were loaded with Canadian players.

    2011 Bruins - 15 Canadians

    2012 Kings - 17 Canadians

    2013 Blackhawks - 12 Canadians

    2013 Kings - 15 Canadians

    All 4 teams were majority Canadians, the only way to win a championship is to build and draft Canadian its the only way.

  • jcherry_99
    Lv 7
    vor 7 Jahren

    And now for the yuck of the day.

    They were better than the team the y played against.

  • Anonym
    vor 7 Jahren

    they were all from major cities, hence money making for NHL

Haben Sie noch Fragen? Jetzt beantworten lassen.