Quote: Originally Posted By damag on 4/17/2010
These are perfect examples of why my theory works, as far as I can see.
The 68-69 Blues gave up 157 goals in 76 games. That was 39 goals less than the next best team - half a goal per game better..... Not saying this is how it should work, but this is how it does work. These teams established statistical dominance.
I have snipped your post, but it is all there right above for reference.
I agree with what you say, to a point. Certainly, the GA data for the two teams I called out supports their strong defensive nature. But I don't think the def rating is as accurate as it could be.
Problem #1. As I already cited, was 68-69 Doug Harvey's best ever defensive effort? The WIS data base would say it is, and by a very large margin.
I don't think this is accurate.
Problem #2. I think these team Def ratings (for all teams, not just the 74-75 Kings and 68-69 Blues) are too homogeneous.
G A P +/-
The plus minus data for this team is very good. I am mostly looking at defensemen, as they are the players for whom def is their WIS bread-and-butter.
Player +/- WIS DEF
Kanneg. +41 95
Harper +38 88
Brown +31 92
Murdoch +39 88
Komadoski +10 84
Hutchison +5 68
My feeling for the 74-75 Kings is that yes, they played well defensively, but that it was a "lunch-box" kind of success. No stars, but few weak links. I think that the def ratings should be lower overall, but still good. I would probably lower all of the defencement by 10 def points.
Komadoski is a problem, though. He is 20 to 30 "pluses" worse than most of his teammates. On a team stacked with defensively responsible forwards, he was only a +10. Given the overall strength of his team, he looks to me like a weak link. I'd give him a 65 rating. Hutchison a 60.