GDT: 12/23: Sharks vs Avs 7:30pm CSNCA

[Mafoofoo]

Yaaaay Thornton with hella points! Sharks win! Yaaay

 

[Gene Parmesan]

That was a fun game. I remember in the last few years watching the Avs would be kind of boring. Whatever Roy is doing it's working because that has turned into a fun, fast team. There were stretches in this game where the game was going at such a quick pace it felt like something you would see in the playoffs. I wouldn't mind a playoff series between the Avs and Sharks. That could be an exciting 6 gamer.

Also, much better lines tonight. I love Pavelski on the same line as Burns and Thornton. At least now he might get more goals this way.

The Sharks also seem re-committed to playing hard and physical hockey. They let that get away from them for a bit.

 

[SJSharksfan39]

The Sharks also seem re-committed to playing hard and physical hockey. They let that get away from them for a bit.

Indeed. It was like the team finally woke up from a coma. Going into the Christmas Break, that was great to see at long last.

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

Finally we get to see Brown do what he gets paid for. Glorious...

 

[19sharks19]

Really glad we got that win. The guys played too well to feel like crap after the game

So true, this was definitely a deserved win. Loved the look of Jumbos line. Marleau looked solid tonight as well.

 

[The Nemesis]

Need to PhotoShop Marlov on Borat.

terrible 15 minute version

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Finally we get to see Brown do what he gets paid for. Glorious...

He's fought like 5 times as a Shark.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

terrible 15 minute version

Very nice!

 

[hohosaregood]

Niemi has a decent ability to stop shots in close, but it seems like any point shot that gets on net will go through. Maybe it's fatigue but whatever the reason is he's not exactly giving the group confidence like he did last year.

His reaction times haven't been super consistent lately considering the weakish goals he's let in. It probably is one of those things where he does need to get into game rhythm for but I think I'd rather see Stalock get more starts in first before they decide to ride Niemi into the ground.

 

[jwhitesj]

You are forgetting about variable change. The variables change after every shot. This is probably the best and most basic explanation of what variable change is.

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rl_p3JlSd0

The easiest way to put it is if you go first and score the odds of the other team winning has dramatically decreased. If you miss your odds of winning have decreased but to a lessor extent.

I only watched 5 seconds of that clip, but I know he's talking about the Monty Hall Paradox. I can assure you that doesn't apply here because you don't get to choose what you want to do after the initial shot. You cant decide to go second later.

I think the reason that coaches decide to go first is because it gives the goalies the opportunity to win with a save rather than a shooter winning with a goal. Goalies are more used to handling the pressure than one random shooter. Whether or not that reasoning is valid is debatable.

As far as the probabilities of actually winning, each team has statistically equal chances of winning the shoot out regardless of who goes first..

Shooting Odds	50%				
		Team B			
		0	1	2	3
Team A	0	0.015625	0.046875	0.046875	0.015625
	1	0.046875	0.140625	0.140625	0.046875
	2	0.046875	0.140625	0.140625	0.046875
	3	0.015625	0.046875	0.046875	0.015625
					
Goals Scored	Probability				
0	0.125				
1	0.375				
2	0.375				
3	0.125				
					
More Rounds	31.25%				
Team A Wins	34.38%				
Team B Wins	34.38%

 

[WantonAbandon]

I only watched 5 seconds of that clip, but I know he's talking about the Monty Hall Paradox. I can assure you that doesn't apply here because you don't get to choose what you want to do after the initial shot. You cant decide to go second later.

I think the reason that coaches decide to go first is because it gives the goalies the opportunity to win with a save rather than a shooter winning with a goal. Goalies are more used to handling the pressure than one random shooter. Whether or not that reasoning is valid is debatable.

As far as the probabilities of actually winning, each team has statistically equal chances of winning the shoot out regardless of who goes first..

Shooting Odds	50%				
		Team B			
		0	1	2	3
Team A	0	0.015625	0.046875	0.046875	0.015625
	1	0.046875	0.140625	0.140625	0.046875
	2	0.046875	0.140625	0.140625	0.046875
	3	0.015625	0.046875	0.046875	0.015625
					
Goals Scored	Probability				
0	0.125				
1	0.375				
2	0.375				
3	0.125				
					
More Rounds	31.25%				
Team A Wins	34.38%				
Team B Wins	34.38%

Yes the whole scenario doesn't fit, but the basic concept does. The statistical variables, or the odds of a team winning, changes after every shot.

I realize the odds don't significantly (edit (when talking stats, its probably better to use the word largely) favor one strategy or another, but here is another set of math related to hockey http://rinkstats.blogspot.com/2013/07/should-you-shoot-first-or-second-in.html

Here is another interesting take as it relates to soccer http://www.prozonesports.com/news-article-analysis-penalty-shootouts---a-lottery-or-a-scienceij.html

 

[hohosaregood]

Ya know, there were times during the game that I didn't realize that Stuart was playing. Turns out he only had 16 minutes of ice time today.

 

[Coily]

He's fought like 5 times as a Shark.

But, he made him bleed this time.

 

[drunksage]

I'm back from an evening of ridiculous games, both live and on DVR.

So I managed to take some notes from Brodie's interview of Demers from the first intermission:

- has been working with coaches on getting pucks to the net
- weird to watch McGinn in a fight, didn't want him hurt but was rooting for Stuart, and Sharks got some momentum off of that
- great to have family around, takes a load off and good to see them at Christmas time [Brodie dropped a "daddy's daddy" on the broadcast lol]

------------------------------------

Anyway, looks to me like no SNOG. Too bad I missed getting my prediction in since it was surely going to be 5-4.

[table="head"]Game|SNOG winner|Result
Oct. 3 vs VAN|jakeytown|Sharks 4-1
Oct. 5 vs PHO|VP and GM|Sharks 4-1
Oct. 8 vs NYR|none|Sharks 9-2
Oct. 10 at VAN|AstroDan, Brownie21|Sharks 4-1
Oct. 12 vs OTT|DuckEatinShark|Sharks 3-2
Oct. 15 at STL|none|Sharks 6-2
Oct. 17 at DAL|none|Stars 4-3
Oct. 19 vs CAL|CanadienShark|Sharks 6-3
Oct. 21 at DET|none|Sharks 1-0
Oct. 24 at BOS|TheJuxtaposer|Bruins 2-1
Oct. 26 at MON|none|Sharks 2-0
Oct. 27 at OTT|Winky|Sharks 5-2
Oct. 30 at LA|none|Kings 4-3
Nov. 2 vs. PHO|none|Coyotes 3-2
Nov. 5 vs. BUF|none|Sabres 5-4
Nov. 7 vs. VAN|none|Canucks 4-2
Nov. 10 at WIN|none|Jets 5-4
Nov. 12 at CAL|DrSanchez|Sharks 3-2
Nov. 14 at VAN|none|Sharks 2-1
Nov. 15 at EDM|BeeRad, rangerssharks414|Sharks 3-1
Nov. 17 at CHI|none|Blackhawks 5-1
Nov. 21 vs TB|Hertl My Pickles, SpinTheBlackCircle|Sharks 5-1
Nov. 23 vs NJ|Pavelski2112|Sharks 2-1
Nov. 27 vs LA|DrFeelgood, SFtoBoston, SJSharksfan39, Slipstar|Sharks 3-2
Nov. 29 vs STL|none|Sharks 6-3
Nov. 30 vs ANA|Barrie22, DuckEatinShark, Episkey|Sharks 4-3
Dec. 3 at TOR|TheDanceOfMaternity|Sharks 4-2
Dec. 5 at PIT|none|Penguins 5-1
Dec. 6 at CAR|none|Hurricanes 5-3
Dec. 8 at MIN|none|Wild 3-1
Dec. 10 vs NYI|none|Islanders 3-2
Dec. 12 vs MIN|BeeRad|Sharks 3-1
Dec. 14 at NAS|none|Predators 3-2
Dec. 17 at STL|FeedingFrenzy, SharksFan1|Sharks 4-2
Dec. 19 at LA|none|Kings 4-1
Dec. 21 vs DAL|AnderFunk, drunksage|Sharks 3-2
Dec. 23 vs COL|none|Sharks 5-4
[/table]

2013-14 Standings
--------------------
1) DuckEatinShark (2)
T-2) AnderFunk, AstroDan, Barrie22, BeeRad, Brownie21, CanadienShark, DrFeelgood, DrSanchez, drunksage, Episkey, FeedingFrenzy, Hertl My Pickles, jakeytown, Pavelski2112, rangerssharks414, SFtoBoston, SharksFan1, SJSharksfan39, Slipstar, SpinTheBlackCircle, TheDanceOfMaternity, TheJuxtaposer, VP and GM, Winky (1)

 

[nabbyfan]

Absolute roller coaster of emotions being at this game live, Sharks played really well for 59 minutes and 40 seconds and deserved to get at least something out of it. They looked really good in the O zone for long stretches, which was encouraging. Niemi played well until the collapse, but the team picked him up and its good to see the 2 points on the board.

Someone able to explain the Roy smirking stuff? Didn't catch any of that at the game.

 

[Alwalys]

You are forgetting about variable change. The variables change after every shot. This is probably the best and most basic explanation of what variable change is.

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rl_p3JlSd0

The easiest way to put it is if you go first and score the odds of the other team winning has dramatically decreased. If you miss your odds of winning have decreased but to a lessor extent.

That does not apply because it relies upon the gameshow announcer's knowledge that the door he picks is 100% for sure not the car. That never happens in a shootout, in a shootout each shot is effectively random, so it would be equivalent to the gameshow host randomly picking a door.

 

[WantonAbandon]

That does not apply because it relies upon the gameshow announcer's knowledge that the door he picks is 100% for sure not the car. That never happens in a shootout, in a shootout each shot is effectively random, so it would be equivalent to the gameshow host randomly picking a door.

The point of that video was to explain the concept of variable change...
The team that goes first should have a slight advantage.

There was a time when McLellan used to go second, but my guess is someone told him that it was in his advantage to not do that.

 

[Alwalys]

The point of that video was to explain the concept of variable change...

which does not apply at all to shootouts.

The team that goes first should have a slight advantage.

I believe historic stats shows it does, a marginal one, but there is absolutely no mathematical reason behind it.

 

[jwhitesj]

Yes the whole scenario doesn't fit, but the basic concept does. The statistical variables, or the odds of a team winning, changes after every shot.

I realize the odds don't significantly (edit (when talking stats, its probably better to use the word largely) favor one strategy or another, but here is another set of math related to hockey http://rinkstats.blogspot.com/2013/07/should-you-shoot-first-or-second-in.html

Here is another interesting take as it relates to soccer http://www.prozonesports.com/news-article-analysis-penalty-shootouts---a-lottery-or-a-scienceij.html

Well, as an amature statistician, all I can say is those results appear to be inconclusive, since the confidence intervals always have overlap. Also it appears that the author is misapplying the meaning of a confidence interval.

 

[WantonAbandon]

which does not apply at all to shootouts.


.

Of course it does. It happens after every shot.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Also it appears that the author is misapplying the meaning of a confidence interval.

I'm not quite following you here

 

[Alwalys]

Of course it does. It happens after every shot.

No it doesn't. Each shot is effectively a coin flip. The example you gave, as I said, relies on the intervention of the gameshow host, whose pick is not a coin flip, it is a guaranteed outcome pick.

 

[LadyStanley]

Post game links: http://icebergpix.com/h/news/131223post.html

 

[Anomie2029]

Of course it does. It happens after every shot.

Each shot has the same odds, whether shooting first, or second, etc.

The only odds that change are the odds of winning after a goal - not the odds of the subsequent shot.

 

[jwhitesj]

I'm not quite following you here

I had to bug my stats teacher for weeks to understand how to properly use confidence intervals. It's really hard to explain and understand, but this is a good paper on the subject.

http://iase-web.org/documents/papers/icots8/ICOTS8_C143_CANAL.pdf