Toggle sidebar

Line Combos: Leafs roster [Before] & [After] and work in progress

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dekes For Days said:
You stated "As for Kucherov missing the season, it’s amazing how, if you balance out the cap allotment, teams are more able to overcome that type of diversity." It had nothing to do with their cap allotment.

On the contrary, both Dubas and I both have our positions guided by understanding the substantiated reasoning behind what happens.
Click to expand...
1st paragraph- you are correct, Kucherov getting injured and Tampa using the LTIR had nothing to do with cap allotment, my bad
2nd paragraph- keep drinking the kook-aid. Sometimes a person must look in the mirror to see what the real problem is. Hopefully Dubas does it.
 
4thline said:
It's certainly an interesting twist on the gambler's fallacy. If you treated the series as straight coin flips we're looking at a base 3% probability of five losses. Hell even if you put it us as 3:1 underdogs in every series it's only like 24%.

Each series is an independent event, so it's fallacious to say we're due. But is it also fallacious to conclude that we're incapable of winning.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the bolded.

I'm not sure I agree that each series is an independent event, in a way they are but in another way they aren't IMO. I get why you say that but the reality is that it's the same core every time so past results can help us project the future, something that isn't true for coin flips.

What concerns me the most is that we don't even seem to show up in deciding games. As long that keeps happening (and is there any reason to think it won't?), it's highly likely that we'll keep losing those games until whatever is wrong with this team is fixed (or removed).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beleafer34
Gary Nylund said:
I don't understand the bolded.

I'm not sure I agree that each series is an independent event, in a way they are but in another way they aren't IMO. I get why you say that but the reality is that it's the same core every time so past results can help us project the future, something that isn't true for coin flips.

What concerns me the most is that we don't even seem to show up in deciding games. As long that keeps happening (and is there any reason to think it won't?), it's highly likely that we'll keep losing those games until whatever is wrong with this team is fixed (or removed).
Click to expand...

3:1 = 25% chance of winning each = 75% chance of losing ^ 5 = 24% of losing all 5.

At this point the only constants are M&M&M(organ Rielly).

But to what degree do they help us predict the future? It's a crazy scenario to be sitting here where we're frankly discussing whether a 100+ point team is simply incapable of winning in the playoffs and should be essentially an infinite odds underdog until proven differently.
 
Bomber0104 said:
So losing in the first round is OK with you, as long as they have good blog stats that might suggest they played good team defence....
Click to expand...
No, I think you'll find I didn't say anything close to that. I was specifically replying to a false statement that was made about team defense in the series.
Bluelines said:
In the other 5 games we were out scored by 4 goals, 9 GF - 13 GA, not that context ever matters to you in your world.
Click to expand...
I'd say proper context is not arbitrarily removing games to fit a narrative, and even in those games, we played better defense.
 
Gary Nylund said:
I don't understand the bolded.

I'm not sure I agree that each series is an independent event, in a way they are but in another way they aren't IMO. I get why you say that but the reality is that it's the same core every time so past results can help us project the future, something that isn't true for coin flips.

What concerns me the most is that we don't even seem to show up in deciding games. As long that keeps happening (and is there any reason to think it won't?), it's highly likely that we'll keep losing those games until whatever is wrong with this team is fixed (or removed).
Click to expand...

Those last 3 games were pretty hard to watch.

Someone else put it better than me, you see an engine problem with your vehicle why do you keep changing the brake pads, starter, shocks etc? Core has pretty much been consistent through all this, 0-7 in games they can win a series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beleafer34 and Gary Nylund
WTFMAN99 said:
Those last 3 games were pretty hard to watch.

Someone else put it better than me, you see an engine problem with your vehicle why do you keep changing the brake pads, starter, shocks etc? Core has pretty much been consistent through all this, 0-7 in games they can win a series.
Click to expand...

because its one of the fastest engines around.
 
Dekes For Days said:
No, I think you'll find I didn't say anything close to that. I was specifically replying to a false statement that was made about team defense in the series.

I'd say proper context is not arbitrarily removing games to fit a narrative, and even in those games, we played better defense.
Click to expand...
And yet you do the same thing!
 
Dekes For Days said:
No, that's not all that matters, especially when specifically discussing team defense in the series.
Click to expand...
What the heck are you talking about?
How can Wins not be the most important stat?
I understand other stats matter too and it is indication of how a team is doing but at the end of the day, W is the most important stat for any teams in any leagues. 16W in the playoffs means Cup Champions but scoring 100 goals in the playoffs doesn’t mean Cup Champions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beleafer34
4thline said:
3:1 = 25% chance of winning each = 75% chance of losing ^ 5 = 24% of losing all 5.

At this point the only constants are M&M&M(organ Rielly).

But to what degree do they help us predict the future? It's a crazy scenario to be sitting here where we're frankly discussing whether a 100+ point team is simply incapable of winning in the playoffs and should be essentially an infinite odds underdog until proven differently.
Click to expand...
Huh. If you are leading 3:1 in a 7 games series. The leading team only need to win 1/3 games-33.3333%to advance while the other team needs to win all 3 games-100%. I think it is easier to achieve 33.333% than 100%.

I think some here are over complicating stuff.
The Caps series, Leafs should not even be in the playoffs.
The 1st Bruins series was a good exp for the boys.
The 2nd Bruins series was the first time the boys showed they could win in playoffs.
The BJ series was a a series where they should have won.
The Habs series was a lesson that hopefully the Leafs learn, you could lose a series even up 3-1 and it takes a lot more than what they have been given to advance in the playoffs.
 
Gabriel426 said:
Huh. If you are leading 3:1 in a 7 games series. The leading team only need to win 1/3 games-33.3333%to advance while the other team needs to win all 3 games-100%. I think it is easier to achieve 33.333% than 100%.
Click to expand...

3:1 underdog in the series (or 1/4 odds to win) not up 3 games to 1 in the series
 
4thline said:
3:1 = 25% chance of winning each = 75% chance of losing ^ 5 = 24% of losing all 5.

At this point the only constants are M&M&M(organ Rielly).

But to what degree do they help us predict the future? It's a crazy scenario to be sitting here where we're frankly discussing whether a 100+ point team is simply incapable of winning in the playoffs and should be essentially an infinite odds underdog until proven differently.
Click to expand...

The math checks out, I misread what you had said. :)

Nobody cares about the 1st loss, it's the last 4 that are the issue and, the same top heavy core 4 forward core that's ever present in each loss and it looks to be the same top heavy core 4 forwards this season.

The bolded is the million dollar question, isn't it? Anyone saying we "can't win" is obviously mistaken IMO. At the same time, I don't think that the way we embarrass ourselves in deciding games is something that should be ignored when considering probabilities and doing so would just as big a mistake. I don't know how much weight we should be giving it exactly because I've never seen anything like it in 50 years of following pro sports but it seems pretty important to me.

And that's why I'm on the trade Marner train. Not because it's "not possible" to win with the current core, but because I think our odds are much better if we do NOT continue down the same path.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beleafer34, Gabriel426 and 4thline
zeke said:
because its one of the fastest engines around.
Click to expand...

Perhaps when it's firing on all cylinders in ideal conditions. If it continually misfires in inclement weather, perhaps some parts need to be looked at and potentially be replaced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: weems
egd27 said:
Perhaps when it's firing on all cylinders in ideal conditions. If it continually misfires in inclement weather, perhaps some parts need to be looked at and potentially be replaced.
Click to expand...

All I know is if I took a car for a test drive and it handled fine in residential areas but broke down on the side of highway, I wouldn't say it's good engine, that's just me though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beleafer34 and egd27
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom