Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: #46 Rangers @ Panthers

I don't understand the use of percentages. Hockey isn't a roll of die, its a dynamic game with a trillion variables in it.

As far as I'm concerned, having a 1% chance of winning is just as likely as a 99% chance.
 
Championship said:
Way too much ASSUMPTIONS. You admitted to making up the numbers. Therefore, it means nothing.

Here is what I KNOW:


In the last 12 years, the cup winner was
1st - 4 times
2nd - 4 times
3rd - 1 time
4th - 2 times
8th - 1 time (first time ever)

That's just the last 12 years.

Anything lower than 4th is an aberration.
Click to expand...

It's not debatable. They are based off my previous post which was based off the Penguins being around a 55% favorite in a given game vs. the Rangers a few weeks ago. I made it even more advantageous for the top team in each scenario.

Here is what I know. The "assumptions" I just made said the number 1 seed should have ~20% chance to win. That means the chase either one of the 1 seed wins is 1-(1-.2)(1-.2)=36%.

You just told me in the last 12 years the 1 seed won 4 out of 12 times. 33%. Fits right in with my model. And I will even tell you that is too small of a sample size.

Additionally if you know anything about Math/Engineering the whole thing is made up of assumptions. The key is to have reasonable realistic assumptions. Mine are such. If you have a problem with my assumptions tell me where exactly they are wrong and point me to a source showing it.
 
Bluenote13 said:
Top minutes for Florida went to Huberdeau, Fleischman, Kuba, Weaver,Goc, Campbell, Petrovic and Markstrom, a rookie, in net.

They couldn't beat those guys, people really think the Cup is even a possibility?

Petrovic, 2010 2nd rounder.
Click to expand...

exactly and people actually think they have a chance against Malkin, Crosby, Kunitz, Iginla, Sutter, Dupuis, Neal, Letang, Martin, Cooke....haha.
 
And yes, they dominated in a sense, but I attribute that more to Florida being really bad rather than us actually playing good hockey.

Puck luck had nothing to do with this game. Shooting a puck that bounces off 4 bodies and slides across the goal line before being covered up is bad puck luck. Taking 30 something perimeter wrist shots at the chest isn't bad luck, those are just bad shots.
 
Bob Richards said:
Puck luck had nothing to do with this game. Shooting a puck that bounces off 4 bodies and slides across the goal line before being covered up is bad puck luck. Taking 30 something perimeter wrist shots at the chest isn't bad luck, those are just bad shots.
Click to expand...
espnnewyork_g_girardi_mb_200.jpg
 
Bob Richards said:
And yes, they dominated in a sense, but I attribute that more to Florida being really bad rather than us actually playing good hockey.

Puck luck had nothing to do with this game. Shooting a puck that bounces off 4 bodies and slides across the goal line before being covered up is bad puck luck. Taking 30 something perimeter wrist shots at the chest isn't bad luck, those are just bad shots.
Click to expand...

Florida kept our guys to the perimeter on most shots, the question is why? Why did our guys allow them to do that? I said before, we played down to Florida's level and let them dictate the pace of the game. I don't care how bad a team is, but the team that is dictating the pace is usually going to win.

Zone possession means nothing if all it results in is a logo snipe or an un-screened point shot.

Failure to get guys in the slot and make life uncomfortable for Markstrom, logo sniping him and failure to convert on the PP were what lost this game.


Also, about Richards' penalty, while I think him diving was 100% the wrong play and I don't know why he did it, I think it was a weak call. He goes under the guy and swipes, misses and tries to avoid contact, the Panthers' guy knowing this leaned into the fallen Richards and exaggerated his fall. I actually though (especially on the replay from the refs POV) that it was a borderline dive. You see when he starts to go down Richards isn't even touching him anymore. It sucks that we couldn't kill that penalty off because it was a weak call. However, it sucks even more that we couldn't generate anything when Nash drew that penalty late.
 
jcman said:
espnnewyork_g_girardi_mb_200.jpg
Click to expand...

Stralman was also guilty of the un screened shot to the chest a few times. Cally was in pure logo snipe form tonight as well, usually on the rush too. I don't get it, big goalie, so either go for the snipe (like Zucc did when he hit the post) or try 5-hole...worst that could happen with that is a nice juicy rebound off the pads.
 
Glen Sathers Cigar said:
Florida kept our guys to the perimeter on most shots, the question is why? Why did our guys allow them to do that? I said before, we played down to Florida's level and let them dictate the pace of the game. I don't care how bad a team is, but the team that is dictating the pace is usually going to win.

Zone possession means nothing if all it results in is a logo snipe or an un-screened point shot.

Failure to get guys in the slot and make life uncomfortable for Markstrom, logo sniping him and failure to convert on the PP were what lost this game.
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, this is usually what we do to opposing teams.
 
Bob Richards said:
Interestingly enough, this is usually what we do to opposing teams.
Click to expand...

Good point. Florida basically eeked out a 2011-12 Rangers win. Timely goals, clog up the defensive zone and don't give the other team time or space and when they do get chances collapse in the slot and make it impossible to do anything.
 
Glen Sathers Cigar said:
Stralman was also guilty of the un screened shot to the chest a few times. Cally was in pure logo snipe form tonight as well, usually on the rush too. I don't get it, big goalie, so either go for the snipe (like Zucc did when he hit the post) or try 5-hole...worst that could happen with that is a nice juicy rebound off the pads.
Click to expand...
This team seems absolutely clueless when it comes to aiming low. They'll aim low when the goalies pads are firmly planted on the ice, yet when he's standing normally everyone suddenly thinks they're snipers :help:
 
SA16 said:
It's not debatable. They are based off my previous post which was based off the Penguins being around a 55% favorite in a given game vs. the Rangers a few weeks ago. I made it even more advantageous for the top team in each scenario.

Here is what I know. The "assumptions" I just made said the number 1 seed should have ~20% chance to win. That means the chase either one of the 1 seed wins is 1-(1-.2)(1-.2)=36%.

You just told me in the last 12 years the 1 seed won 4 out of 12 times. 33%. Fits right in with my model. And I will even tell you that is too small of a sample size.

Additionally if you know anything about Math/Engineering the whole thing is made up of assumptions. The key is to have reasonable realistic assumptions. Mine are such. If you have a problem with my assumptions tell me where exactly they are wrong and point me to a source showing it.
Click to expand...

Since the 1-8 format has been introduced, % of winning based on seed

Here's what I know:

1ST 6/18 33%
2ND 4/18 22%
3RD 4/18 22%
4TH 2/18 11%
5TH 1/18 5%
6TH 0/18 0%
7TH 0/18 0%
8TH 1/18 5%

Since the 1-8 format has started, those are the percentages of cup winners relative to their seed.

77% of cup winners won their division.

That's not debatable.
 
My thought process after the game: Well, I suppose after 3 incredible games, 1 loss might not send everyone over the edge. The most I'll hear is people calling for Torts head after that world class dumb goalie-pull.

After opening the post game thread: Huh. These boards have thinner skin than Chris Rooney.
 
Does anybody but me think Ryane Clowe has been mostly invisible? He may help in the playoffs against a physical team, but I do not think he is worth resigning for anything much.
 
Word has it Girardi is still at the arena, still trying to clear the puck out of his own zone. He's still yet to have any luck.
 
ltsthinaz said:
Does anybody but me think Ryane Clowe has been mostly invisible? He may help in the playoffs against a physical team, but I do not think he is worth resigning for anything much.
Click to expand...

He is a very streaky player. That's his M.O. It'll take 1 big moment for him to start rolling and then he'll be a very dangerous player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom