Our consensus NHL power rankings for week four of the NHL season.
To get our consensus point total, we awarded the top team 30 points, the second team 29 points, third team 28 points, etc. Added each teams total points and divided by the number of outlets used.
* See below chart for Greenberg’s analytics explanation
RK
|
Consensus
|
PTS
|
Last
WK |
TSN
Nov. 3 |
The
Score Nov 3 |
ESPN
Nov. 3 |
USA
Today Nov. 3 |
THN
Nov. 3 |
WSH
Post Nov. 3 |
CBC
Sports Nov. 4 |
SI
Nov. 4 |
1
|
229
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
2
|
|
226
|
2
|
|
|
|
|||||
3
|
|
213
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
||||
4
|
212
|
8
|
|||||||||
5
|
199
|
14
|
|
|
|
||||||
6
|
198
|
8
|
|||||||||
7
|
174
|
3
|
|||||||||
8
|
172
|
2
|
|
|
|||||||
9
|
166
|
12
|
|
||||||||
10
|
166
|
5
|
|
||||||||
11
|
166
|
16
|
|||||||||
12
|
161
|
11
|
|
|
|||||||
13
|
|
138
|
18
|
|
|||||||
14
|
137
|
17
|
|
||||||||
15
|
134
|
15
|
|||||||||
16
|
122
|
13
|
|||||||||
17
|
107
|
25
|
|
||||||||
18
|
106
|
7
|
|||||||||
19
|
95
|
10
|
|||||||||
20
|
92
|
19
|
|||||||||
21
|
86
|
21
|
|||||||||
22
|
85
|
27
|
|||||||||
23
|
85
|
28
|
|||||||||
24
|
58
|
20
|
|||||||||
25
|
49
|
26
|
|||||||||
26
|
43
|
24
|
|||||||||
27
|
40
|
22
|
|
||||||||
28
|
33
|
23
|
|||||||||
29
|
19
|
30
|
|||||||||
30
|
9
|
29
|
* Washington Post:
These NHL power rankings are based on two factors that are estimates of a team’s true talent level, both adjusted for strength of schedule: Pythagenpat win percentage and percentage of even-strength shots in their favor when the game is within one goal (“Fenwick Close“).
Pythagenpat estimates a team’s true talent level based on goals for and against, while a team’s Fenwick Close gives us a proxy for their ability to drive puck possession. The more shots in their favor after eliminating score effects, the more sustainable winning should be. You can find a complete explanation of the methodology by clicking here.