Monday, March 19, 2007
For Entertainment Purposes Only
Comments:
Interesting. Last year Dallas was the shootout kings, and look how well that translated to postseason success. The Wild and Vancouver could be the first to be eliminated.
Nice work. I really appreciate this kind of stat.
I guess it will be more important as we get closer to playoff time (read: playoff hockey pool time).
Thanks muchly for this!
You'd better update the to include the stunning regulation Canuck victory over the Oilers.
Maybe you should count how many goals each team should have if the forward pass rule was never implemented as well, while you are at it.
Yeah Vancouver's skills in 4 on 4 OT with nothing at risk and Minny's skills in the shooutout are really going to get it done in the playoffs.
Maybe you should count how many goals each team should have if the forward pass rule was never implemented as well, while you are at it
And I'm sure somebody will, once the forward pass is removed when the games start counting.
(I joke, but they might just do it...)
Yeah Vancouver's skills in 4 on 4 OT with nothing at risk and Minny's skills in the shooutout are really going to get it done in the playoffs.
WaAAAH! Waaaah!!!!
Hey Temujin, you fucking idiot. I said the exact same thing about this league's retarded rules last year when it was the Oilers benefitting from it. It's not like I'm here to carry water for the Flames either. Vancouver isn't really that good. It'll show up in the playoffs.
Idiot.
I wonder if a more telling "60 minute" standing (for predicting playoffs) would be to count it as a tie if the game goes to a shootout.
That is, count wins/losses in the overtime as exactly that.
And then, only tally up the second half of the season. Might take a bit of spreadsheet magic. Anyone know where complete W/L/OTL/S stats might be found?
NHL.com Stats page. I've kept all that stuff in an Excel file, but I haven't updated it since the Oil went in the shitter. It's not that hard, really. Just call up the Standings and the OT Results reports, copy and paste, and do a short bit of arithmetic. I've got W-L-OT, W-L-T, W-L, and 3-pt system standings that can easily be sorted from it with GD/G subsort, and it all took about ten minutes.
The whole not being able to win in a SO thing wouldn't be nearly a big of a deal if the Flames could get it done on the road. As far as I'm concerned not winning in SO's is an annoyance, not winning on the road is a heart attack inducing headache.
Jesus, Tyler, calm down. There's no need to call someone an idiot. How about just attacking the argument, rather than the ad hominem attacks? Or didn't you know they were a logical fallacy, you idiot? :)
Vancouver isn't really that good. It'll show up in the playoffs.
You may be right, and I'll certainly eat my words if they get swept in the first round. However, as much as everyone likes to credit King Roberto with saving the Canucks asses night in and night out, let's not forget that the Canucks have eleven players with ten or more goals. Sure, that's not going to remind anyone of the 1984 Oilers, but it does indicate an offense that is quite spread out. Luongo is their MVP, but they aren't without an offense. I think it's just as likely we'll see the Canucks put together a nice run in the playoffs and make some noise. As much as I hate to admit, I don't see Gary Bettman handing the cup to Markus effin' Naslund. But if the Canucks get Dallas or San Jose in the first round, I think they can beat them.
You bitter, bitter Oilers/Flames fans.
It's not as if the teams the Canucks are playing in the 4-on-4 / Shootout are not *trying* to win themselves. I grant you the element of risk in terms of 'going for it' is removed in these situations, but that's about it.
While we're at it, perhaps you should consider that we don't *know* how the Canucks would fare in sudden death OT because they haven't had the opportunity. But, I'll say this much, I would put my money on Luongo any day of the week to help them win their fair share of those games.
This brings me to the last point. Matt cites Dallas as last year's archetypal example of his 'point'. Well, let us all remember that the reason they bowed out in round 1 is because Turco shat the bed. Nothing more, nothing less. That is a totally different problem than the spurious correlation you lot seemingly want to draw.
The Oilers only made the playoffs because of OTL points. And they got to the finals. And people are arguing that the Canucks are doomed to failure because they've depended on OT so much?
I've always been confused by people that pay more attention to stats than the games, but moreso by people who only pick the stats they want to use.
I've got to say, I would much prefer that regular season games were played in this fashion. Save OT for the playoffs.
It has never bothered me to go to a game ending in a tie.
speeds
The real question is... who will Nazzy pass the cup to?
Gotta be Linden. He's Vancouver's Smyth (or, Vancouver's Fleury if you prefer...)
Sorry, Matt, I got a little carried away there. The first poster drew that particular implication (not you), which was then drawn upon by a few others.
kinger said...
The real question is... who will Nazzy pass the cup to?
Like all serious hockey fans, I've given this a lot of thought. Let's face it, anyone who hasn't thought about this is an idiot.
So, this about my 17th draft of the list, but I've got:
Naslund
Linden
BMo (starts skating around the ice clockwise)
Henrik Sedin
Luongo (longer skate for him)
Cooke
Ohlund
Henrik Sedin (again)
Mitchell (now shift to counterclockwise around the rink)
Bieksa
Vignault (on skates)
Green (extended skate)
Burrows
Sammi Salo
mystery guy (wears number 78, no name on jersey)
Kesler
Cowan
Nonis (in shoes)
.
The 'mystery guy' would be a one-off. And the thing with Henrik skating with the cup twice and Daniel not at all ... that would become a new Canuck tradition.
Post a Comment
<< Home
Interesting. Last year Dallas was the shootout kings, and look how well that translated to postseason success. The Wild and Vancouver could be the first to be eliminated.
Nice work. I really appreciate this kind of stat.
I guess it will be more important as we get closer to playoff time (read: playoff hockey pool time).
Thanks muchly for this!
# posted by 
: March 19, 2007 5:54 pm
: March 19, 2007 5:54 pm You'd better update the to include the stunning regulation Canuck victory over the Oilers.
# posted by : March 19, 2007 9:34 pm
: March 19, 2007 9:34 pm Maybe you should count how many goals each team should have if the forward pass rule was never implemented as well, while you are at it.
# posted by : March 19, 2007 9:43 pm
: March 19, 2007 9:43 pm Yeah Vancouver's skills in 4 on 4 OT with nothing at risk and Minny's skills in the shooutout are really going to get it done in the playoffs.
# posted by : March 19, 2007 9:59 pm
: March 19, 2007 9:59 pm Maybe you should count how many goals each team should have if the forward pass rule was never implemented as well, while you are at it
And I'm sure somebody will, once the forward pass is removed when the games start counting.
(I joke, but they might just do it...)
Yeah Vancouver's skills in 4 on 4 OT with nothing at risk and Minny's skills in the shooutout are really going to get it done in the playoffs.
WaAAAH! Waaaah!!!!
# posted by : March 19, 2007 10:53 pm
: March 19, 2007 10:53 pm Hey Temujin, you fucking idiot. I said the exact same thing about this league's retarded rules last year when it was the Oilers benefitting from it. It's not like I'm here to carry water for the Flames either. Vancouver isn't really that good. It'll show up in the playoffs.
Idiot.
# posted by : March 19, 2007 11:16 pm
: March 19, 2007 11:16 pm I wonder if a more telling "60 minute" standing (for predicting playoffs) would be to count it as a tie if the game goes to a shootout.
That is, count wins/losses in the overtime as exactly that.
And then, only tally up the second half of the season. Might take a bit of spreadsheet magic. Anyone know where complete W/L/OTL/S stats might be found?
NHL.com Stats page. I've kept all that stuff in an Excel file, but I haven't updated it since the Oil went in the shitter. It's not that hard, really. Just call up the Standings and the OT Results reports, copy and paste, and do a short bit of arithmetic. I've got W-L-OT, W-L-T, W-L, and 3-pt system standings that can easily be sorted from it with GD/G subsort, and it all took about ten minutes.
The whole not being able to win in a SO thing wouldn't be nearly a big of a deal if the Flames could get it done on the road. As far as I'm concerned not winning in SO's is an annoyance, not winning on the road is a heart attack inducing headache.
Jesus, Tyler, calm down. There's no need to call someone an idiot. How about just attacking the argument, rather than the ad hominem attacks? Or didn't you know they were a logical fallacy, you idiot? :)
Vancouver isn't really that good. It'll show up in the playoffs.
You may be right, and I'll certainly eat my words if they get swept in the first round. However, as much as everyone likes to credit King Roberto with saving the Canucks asses night in and night out, let's not forget that the Canucks have eleven players with ten or more goals. Sure, that's not going to remind anyone of the 1984 Oilers, but it does indicate an offense that is quite spread out. Luongo is their MVP, but they aren't without an offense. I think it's just as likely we'll see the Canucks put together a nice run in the playoffs and make some noise. As much as I hate to admit, I don't see Gary Bettman handing the cup to Markus effin' Naslund. But if the Canucks get Dallas or San Jose in the first round, I think they can beat them.
You bitter, bitter Oilers/Flames fans.
It's not as if the teams the Canucks are playing in the 4-on-4 / Shootout are not *trying* to win themselves. I grant you the element of risk in terms of 'going for it' is removed in these situations, but that's about it.
While we're at it, perhaps you should consider that we don't *know* how the Canucks would fare in sudden death OT because they haven't had the opportunity. But, I'll say this much, I would put my money on Luongo any day of the week to help them win their fair share of those games.
This brings me to the last point. Matt cites Dallas as last year's archetypal example of his 'point'. Well, let us all remember that the reason they bowed out in round 1 is because Turco shat the bed. Nothing more, nothing less. That is a totally different problem than the spurious correlation you lot seemingly want to draw.
# posted by : March 20, 2007 9:05 am
: March 20, 2007 9:05 am The Oilers only made the playoffs because of OTL points. And they got to the finals. And people are arguing that the Canucks are doomed to failure because they've depended on OT so much?
I've always been confused by people that pay more attention to stats than the games, but moreso by people who only pick the stats they want to use.
# posted by : March 20, 2007 9:40 am
: March 20, 2007 9:40 am I've got to say, I would much prefer that regular season games were played in this fashion. Save OT for the playoffs.
It has never bothered me to go to a game ending in a tie.
speeds
# posted by : March 20, 2007 9:57 am
: March 20, 2007 9:57 am The real question is... who will Nazzy pass the cup to?
Gotta be Linden. He's Vancouver's Smyth (or, Vancouver's Fleury if you prefer...)
# posted by : March 20, 2007 10:12 am
: March 20, 2007 10:12 am Sorry, Matt, I got a little carried away there. The first poster drew that particular implication (not you), which was then drawn upon by a few others.
# posted by : March 20, 2007 10:33 am
: March 20, 2007 10:33 am kinger said...
The real question is... who will Nazzy pass the cup to?
Like all serious hockey fans, I've given this a lot of thought. Let's face it, anyone who hasn't thought about this is an idiot.
So, this about my 17th draft of the list, but I've got:
Naslund
Linden
BMo (starts skating around the ice clockwise)
Henrik Sedin
Luongo (longer skate for him)
Cooke
Ohlund
Henrik Sedin (again)
Mitchell (now shift to counterclockwise around the rink)
Bieksa
Vignault (on skates)
Green (extended skate)
Burrows
Sammi Salo
mystery guy (wears number 78, no name on jersey)
Kesler
Cowan
Nonis (in shoes)
.
The 'mystery guy' would be a one-off. And the thing with Henrik skating with the cup twice and Daniel not at all ... that would become a new Canuck tradition.
Post a Comment
<< Home
