Home Unfiltered Articles Stats Glossary
Baseball       
Hockey Prospectus home
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

2013 NHL Entry Draft - Top draft prospects list and analysis

<< Previous Article
Dropping The Puck (03/01)
<< Previous Column
Behind The Net (12/09)
No Next Column
Next Article >>
In The Crease (03/02)

March 1, 2010
Behind The Net
2010 Olympic Recap

by Gabriel Desjardins

Printer-
friendly

The conclusion of the 2010 Olympic Hockey tournament was about as suspenseful as possible. Interestingly, the level of play was also higher than in years past. Using the League Equivalency method, we can determine how difficult it is for an NHL player to score a point in the tournament relative to the NHL. In the 2006 Olympics, 12 teams competed in the opening round, resulting in an overall equivalency of 1.15 (the eight-team final round had an equivalency of 1.52.) This time, the level of play with 12 teams in the tournament was 1.34, which is roughly as good as the 2004 World Cup and the 2002 Olympics, which featured just eight teams.

Here we can see the winners of previous top international tournaments with a level of play substantially above that of the NHL:

Legend:

Level: Level of Play, determined with League Equivalency method

Teams: Number of Teams in the tournament

NHL Players: Number of NHL Players in the tournament

Year  Tournament    Winner  2nd      3rd      Level      Teams  NHL Players 
2010  Olympics      Canada  USA      Finland  1.34       12     132 
2006  Olympics      Sweden  Finland  Czech    1.15/1.52  12/8   129 
2004  World Cup     Canada  Finland  Czech    1.31        8     139 
2002  Olympics      Canada  USA      Russia   1.34        8     132 
1998  Olympics      Czech   Russia   Finland  1.51        8     105 
1996  World Cup     USA     Canada   Sweden   1.51        8     117 
1991  Canada Cup    Canada  USA      Finland  1.39        6      68 
1987  Canada Cup    Canada  USSR     Sweden   1.47        6      56 
1984  Canada Cup    Canada  USSR     Sweden   1.31        6      50 
1981  Canada Cup    USSR    Canada   Czech    1.22        6      54 
1976  Canada Cup    Canada  Czech    Sweden   1.43        6      40 
1972  Summit Series Canada  USSR     --       1.87        2      26 

Historically, there have been six consistently competitive national teams: Canada, the US, Russia, Sweden, Finland and Czechoslovakia. The dissolution of the Eastern Bloc added a seventh as the Czech Republic and Slovakia became two separate teams. Here are the records of each of these teams among themselves since 1996:

Legend:

GF: Goals For

GA: Goals Against

Pyth%: Pythagorean Winning Percentage

Team     W  L GF GA Pyth% 
Canada  18  9 85 70 0.596 
USA     12 13 87 70 0.607 
Sweden  10  7 51 46 0.551 
Russia  12 13 73 73 0.500 
Finland 11 12 59 69 0.422 
Czech    7 14 47 56 0.413 
Slovakia 5 11 35 59 0.260 

Pyth%, as shown in the legend above, is a team’s Pythagorean winning percentage (GF^2/[GF^2+GA^2]). Canada has overperformed its Pythagorean record by two wins, while the US has three more losses than expected, which is what happens when you blow out Finland 6-1, but lose to Canada 3-2.

None of this should take anything away from Canada’s performance in this Olympic tournament. Over the course of seven games, Canada was clearly the best team in the group of 12. I like to count what I call “close” shots – that is, shots taken below the top of the face-off circles, between the face-off dots, and on less than a 45 degree angle to the net. In this category, Canada had the highest ratio of shots for to shots against, even if we normalize the shot ratio to account for the relative strength of each team’s opponents:

Legend:

SF/60: Shots For per 60 minutes

SA/60: Shots Against per 60 minutes

RATIO: Ratio of Shots For per 60 minutes to Shots Against per 60 minutes

NORM: Normalized Shot Ratio

Team GP SF/60 SA/60 RATIO NORM 
CAN  7  32.3  17.2  1.88  1.78 
RUS  4  27.9  17.4  1.61  1.55 
SWE  4  24.8  14.0  1.77  1.43 
USA  6  25.1  20.7  1.21  1.30 
CZE  5  25.8  21.2  1.21  1.25 
FIN  6  23.7  19.8  1.19  1.17 
SVK  7  20.8  23.2  0.90  0.95 
GER  4  18.0  23.8  0.76  0.91 
SUI  5  19.7  24.6  0.80  0.77 
NOR  4  13.9  28.7  0.48  0.55 
BLR  4  14.4  28.3  0.51  0.53 
LAT  4  13.7  34.3  0.40  0.48 

Any outcome is possible in a single-elimination tournament, but the most-likely outcome was Canada finishing first. People who like to put money on these things had Russia pegged for second, but the Quarter-Final “Gold Medal” game between Canada and Russia lacked the suspense of the actual final, and the silver medalist American team was also arguably the second-best team in the tournament.

Gabriel Desjardins is a contributor to Puck Prospectus and runs the statistical hockey sites Behind The Net Hockey and Behind The Net. You can contact him at: info at behindthenet.ca.

0 comments have been left for this article.

<< Previous Article
Dropping The Puck (03/01)
<< Previous Column
Behind The Net (12/09)
No Next Column
Next Article >>
In The Crease (03/02)

RECENTLY AT HOCKEY PROSPECTUS
NHL Playoffs, Stanley Cup Finals: Chicago Bl...
Top 100 Draft Prospects 2013: 91-100
Premium Article Conn Smythe Watch: Rask Leads Race
Top 100 Draft Prospects 2013: 81-90
Top 100 Draft Prospects 2013: 71-80

MORE FROM MARCH 1, 2010
Dropping The Puck: USA-Canada Review

MORE BY GABRIEL DESJARDINS
2010-03-01 - Behind The Net: 2010 Olympic Recap
2009-12-09 - Behind The Net: Shootouts – Where in the Wor...
2009-10-07 - Behind The Net: A Basic Goaltending Model
2009-09-27 - 2009-10 VUKOTA Projections: Anaheim Ducks, 7...
More...

MORE BEHIND THE NET
2010-03-01 - Behind The Net: 2010 Olympic Recap
2009-12-09 - Behind The Net: Shootouts – Where in the Wor...
2009-10-07 - Behind The Net: A Basic Goaltending Model
2009-09-25 - Behind The Net: The Value of a Wide-Open Sho...
More...