TSN's power rankings

[puckhead]

you make puke, you may scream, you may agree. No, scratch that last one.

FANTASY NEWS

 

[dash]

It's funny how much shutout wins (and shutout losses) factor so heavily in Cullen's rankings. Oh well, I print them out to line the bottom of my bearded dragon's cage.

 

[mooger_35]

Cullen's a twat.

I don't think I've ever agreed with his picks in any sport.

 

[puckhead]

It's funny how much shutout wins (and shutout losses) factor so heavily in Cullen's rankings. Oh well, I print them out to line the bottom of my bearded dragon's cage.

is that a euphemism?

 

[dash]

is that a euphemism?

lol...Nope here he is (well my daughter's actually)

/Not an actual photo, but he's a dead ringer

 

[Dacks]

The Scott Cullen Methodology

Some highlights:

...
In any case, it was this realization that prompted me to try and generate my own method for power rankings and it involved establishing ratings for every player.
...
So, now that each player has a rating based on his statistical production, the next step is to generate team rankings and I do that by weighting each player's contribution based on their role on the team.
...
Additionally, by using statistics alone to generate the rankings, there should be no illusions of bias or favouritism affecting the rankings.
...
The premise, then, of my NHL Power Rankings is to determine the team that would be favoured to win a seven-game series on neutral ice.
...

The problem is that players aren't robots, production isn't a simple random variable, and many of the factors that determine whether or not Team A will beat Team B don't show up in statistics. Now, his rating system probably produces decent predictive results in the long run, averaged out over all teams - but that's not what people want to read power rankings for. They want to read about their specific team. And in cases like this, there's ample scientific evidence that it's better to trust the gut instincts of an expert in the field over statistics.

 

[mooger_35]

If it's not the ORM, I'm not interested... nor is it right.

 

[UTVolCountry]

*spits coffee on keyboard*...#2?! ok

 

[IPostedWhat]

Fuck Dallas!

 

[BOSSMANPC]

I never like Scott Cullen's rankings. To me they make no sense at time's. He does have a Canadian bias and that's Okay but I look at a lot of rankings and his seem way off. He seems to rank based on hypotheticals too much just by reading some of his comments.

Honestly (and I haven't checked them yet) I feel Fox's Sports is the most accurate.

But in the end the most accurate is the standing's.

I do like the power rankings comeds post as well.

 

[Slimpikins]

Fuck Dallas!

Agreed, without lube.

 

[beantownmaniac]

The Bruins shut out the Devils IN NJ and they DROP 3 places? WTF!!!

 

[BOSSMANPC]

The Bruins shut out the Devils IN NJ and they DROP 3 places? WTF!!!

That's in Cullen's world. If Boston was in Canada they would move up five spot's. He is the Eklund of power rankings.

 

[Squatchito]

I am looking like a genius taking Loui Eriksson as high as I did, and Kari was working out quite well for me until last night. I am a Dallas fan right now.

As a self deprecating Caps fan, they are too high on this list in there current state. They have not played as well as there record indicates. But, I suppose finding ways to win does count for a lot.

 

[Darkstone42]

The Scott Cullen Methodology

Some highlights:



The problem is that players aren't robots, production isn't a simple random variable, and many of the factors that determine whether or not Team A will beat Team B don't show up in statistics. Now, his rating system probably produces decent predictive results in the long run, averaged out over all teams - but that's not what people want to read power rankings for. They want to read about their specific team. And in cases like this, there's ample scientific evidence that it's better to trust the gut instincts of an expert in the field over statistics.

An analysis like this doesn't work in the short term. Player statistics are too variable in a sample this small. Now, if he were using three-year trends with slight adjustments for current production, then these might prove more accurate, but at this point, the numbers are still dishonest.