NHL Annual Prediction Contest Overview
With July 1 just behind us, the NHL has officially transitioned into its new league year, but among the most significant events of the day was the conclusion of its much-anticipated annual prediction contest. This year marked the fourth edition of the contest, which has steadily grown in popularity, evidenced by a surge in participants each time it’s held. In a twist, even though participants seem to be honing their skills, the outcome was as unpredictable as ever.
Contest Format and Early Results
The format of the contest remains simple yet challenging: a wrong answer results in an entry losing all points, leading to a delicate balance of risk and reward. For those who are unfamiliar with the contest, a refresher can be found in the original announcement post. Notably, early results revealed that few had faith in player Sam Reinhart—a judgment ultimately validated as the season progressed.
Performance Breakdown
This time around, the contest produced a single champion, a departure from previous years where ties were common at the top. Let’s delve into the questions and see how approximately 1,200 participants fared.
Question 1: Playoff-Bound Teams
Question 1 required participants to name up to five playoff-bound teams, but many faltered early on. Despite their strong performance in the previous season, around 75% of entrants, totaling 913, mistakenly included the New York Rangers, as their meltdown left contestants starting from a disadvantage. Only 241 players correctly identified teams like Vancouver, Boston, and Nashville among the playoff caliber, reflecting how this question set the tone for the competition.
Question 2: Teams Likely to Miss the Playoffs
Question 2, asking for teams likely to miss the playoffs, presented a stark contrast as many participants found success by naming San Jose, Columbus, Chicago, and Anaheim as favorites. However, the Montreal Canadiens surprised many, eliminating over 1,100 entries. Similar misjudgments regarding the Blues, Senators, and Capitals also contributed to the initial struggles.
Question 3: Middle 16 Teams
For Question 3, participants were asked to identify teams finishing in the middle 16 of the standings. This year saw an unexpected level of accuracy, with the usual suspects—Wild, Islanders, Red Wings, and Penguins—being correct choices. Tragically, however, numerous players underestimated teams like the Kings and Capitals which were better than projected.
Coaching and Managerial Predictions
Moving on to the coaches and GMs in Questions 4 and 5, participants needed to predict stability in coaching and managerial roles. Having none of the newly hired coaches in the mix complicated things for many, leading to errors like mistakenly including Pete DeBoer. Similarly, the GM question was much easier since only three teams had changes, yet some still missed the mark by naming unqualified candidates.
Goaltenders and Rookies
In Questions 6 and 7, players had to pinpoint goaltenders and rookies finishing strongly in league votes. While question 6 typically offered easy points, only a few doubtful names like Jacob Markstrom were missing from correct lists. The rookie category, however, proved fruitful, with many successful answers following the season’s award standings.
Top Defensemen
Question 8 saw participants naming top defensemen, which turned into a calamity for many as popular picks failed to deliver expected results. The question left contestants thoroughly disappointed—no participation managed to ace it, posing serious challenges for their overall scores.
Player Awards and Bonus Question
The focus then shifted to player awards in Questions 9 and 10, regarding the Hart Trophy contenders and potential team changes. Confounding expectations, star player Auston Matthews emerged as the most common incorrect entry, indicating a rough patch for many participants.
Lastly, the bonus question offered a chance for 15 additional points if participants could predict a player scoring over 50 goals. Unfortunately for many, few could successfully identify Leon Draisaitl despite being a common name – the discrepancy in choices leading to missed opportunities for numerous entries.
Conclusion
Despite the struggles, our top scorer, Matt, proved that playing it safe was the key to victory, securing 88 points without engaging in the bonus question. His strategic choices all year, opting cautiously on several answers, positioned him as the ultimate champion of a contest that often rewards wild predictions.
As the NHL offseason unfolds, strategizing for next year’s competition begins now. Thanks to all participants and everyone involved in organizing this year’s event. Looking forward to 2025!
