FanPost

Yes, the Caps were particularly bad at secondary scoring last year


I was going to put this in CapsChick's earlier thread but it was just too long and different.  I fiddled around with some numbers from '08-'09 just to see if there would be something notable in the numbers for the top tier teams.  Basically similar to GINI coefficient (measure of inequality) to see how balanced the scoring is for the top nine teams, with 99 pts or more (calling that the Caps peer group).  This is a bit different than secondary scoring (and my headline is misleading) but may point us in the right direction.

If someone can recommend a good way to post an excel spreadsheet anonymously I'm happy to share, not that there's anything too special in the numbers.



First I took all scorers with more than 10 pts for each team, ranked them by points scored, then normalized.  So perfection would be everyone on the team scoring exactly the same (something above 10) no matter how many total points the players had.  The Caps look by far the most unbalanced compared to the others.  The unit numbers don't mean much but it went WAS (.215), PIT (.197), PHI (.189), NJD (.186), BOS (.178), DET (.165), VAN (.155), SAN (.153), and CHI (.147).

10 pts is probably low but it gets you towards a full measure of all "scorers" on the team  while getting rid of most everyone who only played a few games..  I considered doing another cutoff at 20 or 30 pts but instead decided upon top 10 scorers for each team.  By this approach the Pens are even slightly more unbalanced than the Caps (.150 vs .146), the Hawks, Sharks, Wings, and Bruins look very balanced (.067 to .079), and the Canucks, Devils, and Flyers are in the middle (.120 to .127).

This is partly just putting numbers onto an obvious result you can "see" by looking at the scoring lists.
And one number doesn't tell you everything - the Pens skew at the top thanks to Malkin and Crosby, while the Bruins had a ton of people getting 10+ pts.  Problems include not accounting for games played, trades during the season, not accounting for lines/position in each game, getting an exact definition of secondary scoring, and the normalizing which gives the Wings 774 pts the same weight as the Devils 625.  This is all psuedo-scientific at this point.

But while I do think there is a "there" worth looking at, I also think looking at the '09-'10 season so far (9-12 games) might be premature.  Unless you're willing to rigorously define secondary scoring for each team, break apart line combinations, and do hard work for each game.  In which case if that's what you're after do it now, instead of for the whole season.

If this FanPost is written by someone other than one of the blog's editors, the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of this blog or SB Nation.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

Join Japers' Rink

You must be a member of Japers' Rink to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Japers' Rink. You should read them.

Join Japers' Rink

You must be a member of Japers' Rink to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Japers' Rink. You should read them.

Spinner

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9355_tracker