As of this morning, here are the real standings. Pay no attention to the false standings. That is the way of senseless teeth-gnashing.
| Q | OFF. | | GP | GiH | W | L | WSO | OTL | PTS | W% | PRJ | W%* | PRJ* | GB | PS +/- | PB | to95 |
| 1 | 1 | VAN | 40 | 1.0 | 26 | 8 | 1 | 5 | 59 | 0.738 | 121 | 0.675 | 111 | 0 | 15 | 21 | 16-22-4 |
| 2 | 2 | DET | 41 | 0.0 | 25 | 10 | 1 | 5 | 57 | 0.695 | 114 | 0.634 | 104 | -2 | 11 | 25 | 17-20-4 |
| 3 | 3 | DAL | 42 | -1.0 | 20 | 13 | 4 | 5 | 53 | 0.631 | 103 | 0.571 | 94 | -5 | 5 | 31 | 19-17-4 |
| 4 | 4 | NAS | 40 | 1.0 | 17 | 13 | 4 | 6 | 48 | 0.600 | 98 | 0.525 | 86 | -5.5 | 4 | 32 | 22-16-4 |
| 5 | 9 | STL | 39 | 2.0 | 17 | 13 | 3 | 6 | 46 | 0.590 | 97 | 0.513 | 84 | -5.5 | 4 | 32 | 23-16-4 |
| 6 | 10 | PHX | 40 | 1.0 | 17 | 13 | 2 | 8 | 46 | 0.575 | 94 | 0.475 | 78 | -6.5 | 2 | 34 | 23-15-4 |
| 7 | 7 | SJS | 41 | 0.0 | 19 | 15 | 2 | 5 | 47 | 0.573 | 94 | 0.512 | 84 | -7 | 1 | 35 | 22-15-4 |
| 8 | 5 | COL | 42 | -1.0 | 18 | 15 | 3 | 6 | 48 | 0.571 | 94 | 0.500 | 82 | -7.5 | 0 | 36 | 22-14-4 |
| 9 | 12 | MIN | 40 | 1.0 | 20 | 15 | 0 | 5 | 45 | 0.563 | 92 | 0.500 | 82 | -7 | 1 | 35 | 23-15-4 |
| 10 | 11 | LAK | 40 | 1.0 | 18 | 17 | 4 | 1 | 45 | 0.563 | 92 | 0.550 | 90 | -7 | 1 | 35 | 23-15-4 |
| 11 | 8 | CHI | 43 | -2.0 | 19 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 47 | 0.547 | 90 | 0.512 | 84 | -9 | -3 | 39 | 22-13-4 |
| 12 | 6 | ANA | 44 | -3.0 | 20 | 18 | 2 | 4 | 48 | 0.545 | 89 | 0.500 | 82 | -9.5 | -4 | 40 | 22-12-4 |
| 13 | 13 | CBJ | 41 | 0.0 | 17 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 43 | 0.524 | 86 | 0.488 | 80 | -9 | -3 | 39 | 24-13-4 |
| 14 | 14 | CGY | 42 | -1.0 | 14 | 20 | 4 | 4 | 40 | 0.476 | 78 | 0.429 | 70 | -11.5 | -8 | 44 | 26-10-4 |
| 15 | 15 | EDM | 40 | 1.0 | 12 | 20 | 1 | 7 | 33 | 0.413 | 68 | 0.325 | 53 | -13 | -11 | 47 | 29-9-4 |
Sorted by winning percentage (W%).Only regulation wins and OT wins are counted as wins (W).Shoot-out wins (WSO) are tallied separately. Why? Because they don't count in the "total wins" tie-breaker, so we need to keep them out of the W column. "OTL" = loss in OT or shoot-out (i.e. Bettman point). "OFF." = the official standings, as rendered by ESPN. "Q" = Quisp standings. "GiH" = games in hand, relative to the average for the conference. "PRJ" = projected final point total."W%*" and "PRJ*" (note the asterisks) show the team's win percentage an projected point total if you eliminate the "Bettman Point" and treat a loss as a loss."GB" = games back, i.e. baseball standings. "PB" = points blown. Points-blown refers to the number of potential points a team has failed to earn. Lower number is better, like golf. I find it's a useful way to correct for disparities in games-played. Think of points-blown as a kind of "hidden reason for optimism (or pessimism)" quantifier. "PS +/-" = points blown, relative to the 8th seed. In other words, how far above or below the post-season ("P.S.") cut-off a team is.In the first two columns (Q rank and ESPN rank), green means 1-4 seed, yellow is 5-8, orange is 9-12, red is 13-15. For the columns starting with "team name" and ending with "PRJ", Green indicates a projected finish 100 points or above (certain to qualify for playoffs). Yellow is 94-99 projected points (probable for playoffs), orange is 86-93 (projected to fall short), red is below 85 (falling short of falling short). For the No Bettman Point columns (with asterisks), the thresholds have been shifted downward slightly, to reflect the fact that teams across the board earn between 2-14 fewer points.For the last four columns, the colors translate to great, good, bad and screwed. "to 95" -- the record each team needs to get to the presumed playoff threshold of 95 points. Some observations:
- Five points separate 4th seed from 13th. The Kings are literally smack (dab) in the middle (2 points from the bottom, 3 from the top, with a game in hand).
- They've lost five in a row. That's not good. But look at the neighbors. Nobody can lose 5 in a row and expect not to be in danger.
- In other words, the Kings may have been sucking of late, but just before that, they rocked. So, you know, take the average.
Comments ()