SportLogiq has Ottawa as the 19th best team in xG differential(total +3), while MoneyPuck saw them as the 15th best team at +5. Conversely, Boston ranks 17th by SportLogiq at +14, while MoneyPuck ranks them 20th at +3
The result is Ottawa having the third worst "goal differential above expected" by MoneyPuck – the impact of finishing talent and goaltending – while SportLogiq has them 7th from last, with a difference of 10.7 goals between the two values.
Similarly, there's a 10 goal gap between MP and SL's "differential above expected" for Boston, with MoneyPuck showing an extra 10 goals scored/saved
The last picture shows the "expected standings" from last year, where neutral goaltending and finishing for each team has Ottawa tied for 9th in the conference and 4 points out of the playoffs.
Ottawa is by no means the abysmal defensive team some make them out to be, but they're also probably worse than the public numbers show
by Josefstalion
3 Comments
Hard to read much into this when we can’t separate the effects of goaltending and finishing just looking at differentials. Both sites seem to agree Ottawa had above average finishing, which masks just how abysmal the goaltending was. If you just looks at goals against vs expected and not differential the sens dip to last by a huge margin on moneypuck at least, I’d expect it to be the same on sportlogiq
Is there a reason why we trust SL vs MP? What if we average the two of them for more accurate representation?
Pretty sure it’s because it’s using all situations and not 5v5…