Thavoice
Well-known member
Yes I have too much time on my hands...
With all the talk of possibly changing the region format and people giving their opinions I began to wonder what the numbers say. I followed one team from 2000-2018, spanning three divisions, and compared what teams would have made it under the 32 team proposal vs how well the teams did who would have missed out if the 32 team system was in place the whole time.
This is essentially just one division worth....
Under the current region format, below is how many teams would have made it per the region setup if the top 32 were selected around the state.
5 teams per region: 9 times it occurred.
6 teams per region: 9 times.......
7 teams/region: 12....
8 teams/region: 17
9 teams/region: 10
10 teams/region: 12
11 teams/region: 6 times
12 teams/region: 1 times
56 times from 2000-2018 teams who were in the top 32 in harbins missed the playoffs. 2.9 teams per year.
Of course, we have no way of know how well those teams who missed the playoffs because they were not in the top 8 of their region would have done, but we CAN analyze how the teams who WOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT under 32 team proposal did in the postseason.
The teams who would have been left out from 2000-2018 if there was a 32 team format went a total of 14-52, a 21.2% winning percentage. ( I thought some place I had seen what the overall winning percentage of seeds 6-8 are across the board to compare it to this amount but I cannot find at this time.)
The furthest one of those teams went, and it happened 4 times, was winning 2 playoff games.
What does this tell us, other than thavoice has away too much time on his hands, on the validity? Do the teams who have made it under the 8/region with a 21% winning percentage warrant keeping it in place?
In looking at a few seasons, 7-8 seeds won 13% of the time across all divisions, but in the study I did the teams (mostly 7-8 seeds with a few 6) who made it under the current version, but not under the top 32, won 21% in this small sample size.
As I said, it was essentially following 1 division for 19 years.
These are just the numbers to crunch through. Unfortunately, we cannot compare what those teams who were left out would have done, but at least we can see how those who did make it, but wouldn't under the proposal, fared.
Personally, I thought the winning percentage would have been a lot lower since they were predominantly 7-8 seeds, with a handful of 6 seeds.
With all the talk of possibly changing the region format and people giving their opinions I began to wonder what the numbers say. I followed one team from 2000-2018, spanning three divisions, and compared what teams would have made it under the 32 team proposal vs how well the teams did who would have missed out if the 32 team system was in place the whole time.
This is essentially just one division worth....
Under the current region format, below is how many teams would have made it per the region setup if the top 32 were selected around the state.
5 teams per region: 9 times it occurred.
6 teams per region: 9 times.......
7 teams/region: 12....
8 teams/region: 17
9 teams/region: 10
10 teams/region: 12
11 teams/region: 6 times
12 teams/region: 1 times
56 times from 2000-2018 teams who were in the top 32 in harbins missed the playoffs. 2.9 teams per year.
Of course, we have no way of know how well those teams who missed the playoffs because they were not in the top 8 of their region would have done, but we CAN analyze how the teams who WOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT under 32 team proposal did in the postseason.
The teams who would have been left out from 2000-2018 if there was a 32 team format went a total of 14-52, a 21.2% winning percentage. ( I thought some place I had seen what the overall winning percentage of seeds 6-8 are across the board to compare it to this amount but I cannot find at this time.)
The furthest one of those teams went, and it happened 4 times, was winning 2 playoff games.
What does this tell us, other than thavoice has away too much time on his hands, on the validity? Do the teams who have made it under the 8/region with a 21% winning percentage warrant keeping it in place?
In looking at a few seasons, 7-8 seeds won 13% of the time across all divisions, but in the study I did the teams (mostly 7-8 seeds with a few 6) who made it under the current version, but not under the top 32, won 21% in this small sample size.
As I said, it was essentially following 1 division for 19 years.
These are just the numbers to crunch through. Unfortunately, we cannot compare what those teams who were left out would have done, but at least we can see how those who did make it, but wouldn't under the proposal, fared.
Personally, I thought the winning percentage would have been a lot lower since they were predominantly 7-8 seeds, with a handful of 6 seeds.
Last edited: