Playoff race/Scoreboard watching thread

[spintheblackcircle]

Montreal-Blues
Detroit-Colorado
Rangers-Kings
Buffalo-Ottawa

Let's go American home teams!

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

If someone says 3% probability something happens, and the thing doesn't happen, that doesn't mean they were incorrect.

With probabilities the test is how often will it happen out of 1000 times. 20-40? Then I'm in the neighborhood. Zero out of 1000? Then you were right. Obviously we are unlikely to find out "who was right" this season because they are likely to miss the playoffs, which is what we both expect to happen.

Buffalo is not mathematically eliminated. And yet somehow I feel no compunction in saying they're not making the postseason.

 

[Doggy]

Buffalo is not mathematically eliminated. And yet somehow I feel no compunction in saying they're not making the postseason.

Oh the shame of it, next you are going to tell Viqsi that Nashville is not making the playoffs. They are only 21 points behind and still have 12 games to play...they can do it! You are cold hearted DSL.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Oh the shame of it, next you are going to tell Viqsi that Nashville is not making the playoffs. They are only 21 points behind and still have 12 games to play...they can do it! You are cold hearted DSL.

I'm all about the compunction and the not having of it.

 

[Viqsi]

Oh the shame of it, next you are going to tell Viqsi that Nashville is not making the playoffs. They are only 21 points behind and still have 12 games to play...they can do it! You are cold hearted DSL.

They're not?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

They're not?

I don’t know, I think it might be premature to say they aren’t.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I don’t know, I think it might be premature to say they aren’t.

Compunction and all.

 

[majormajor]

Buffalo is not mathematically eliminated. And yet somehow I feel no compunction in saying they're not making the postseason.

I don't have any compunction about saying that either.

The kind of people who I took probability and inferential stats classes with, and did a lot of sports watching and drinking with, use the same lay language like "not happening", but seemingly at different probabilities than most lay people do.

So according to moneypuck, the Jackets are currently at 9.4% chance of making the playoffs. So we'd say it's "unlikely" but not "very unlikely".

At 3% we might switch to "very unlikely", but we wouldn't say "done", or "not happening" yet.

Under 1% then yeah we'll say "not happening".. but since we're nerds we won't say "absolutely done" or "absolutely not happening" we'd say "almost absolutely...". I get that that is somewhat pedantic.

Buffalo and Nashville and the like all have odds that are under .03%, in other words less than 1/100th of a 3% chance. That gap between 3% and .03% is huge - the difference between something that happens 30 times out of 1000 and something that happens 0 times out of 1000.

I don't feel like it's just pedantry to make note of the difference between those two chances. 3% events happen all the time, every day. The Jackets season was more unlikely than that.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I don't have any compunction about saying that either.

The kind of people who I took probability and inferential stats classes with, and did a lot of sports watching and drinking with, use the same lay language like "not happening", but seemingly at different probabilities than most lay people do.

So according to moneypuck, the Jackets are currently at 9.4% chance of making the playoffs. So we'd say it's "unlikely" but not "very unlikely".

At 3% we might switch to "very unlikely", but we wouldn't say "done", or "not happening" yet.

Under 1% then yeah we'll say "not happening".. but since we're nerds we won't say "absolutely done" or "absolutely not happening" we'd say "almost absolutely...". I get that that is somewhat pedantic.

Buffalo and Nashville and the like all have odds that are under .03%, in other words less than 1/100th of a 3% chance. That gap between 3% and .03% is huge - the difference between something that happens 30 times out of 1000 and something that happens 0 times out of 1000.

I don't feel like it's just pedantry to make note of the difference between those two chances. 3% events happen all the time, every day. The Jackets season was more unlikely than that.

Yes but the kinds of pronouncement that we're talking about here - the one that literally started this whole sub-discussion - is about gut feel and a general overall sense of the likelihood of a thing, not a mathematical one. Not that math and probability don't play a part, but only a part. Pretty much like statistics in general.

If you prefer to think of it in primarily math terms, then just acknowledge other people have different levels for all of those pedantic categories you assign.

 

[majormajor]

Yes but the kinds of pronouncement that we're talking about here - the one that literally started this whole sub-discussion - is about gut feel and a general overall sense of the likelihood of a thing, not a mathematical one. Not that math and probability don't play a part, but only a part. Pretty much like statistics in general.

If you prefer to think of it in primarily math terms, then just acknowledge other people have different levels for all of those pedantic categories you assign.

People seemed to be specifically objecting to the phrases I used around a 3% chance. So I think this difference in language might actually be just about language, not really a dispute about the math and not a dispute about whether likelihood/probability is the correct way to think about it.

"A general overall sense of the likelihood of a thing" is a very interesting turn of phrase, I must admit. I'm trying to think if it means something other than "probability based on my first thought and emotional reaction without having thought about it yet".

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

People seemed to be specifically objecting to the phrases I used around a 3% chance. So I think this difference in language might actually be just about language, not really a dispute about the math and not a dispute about whether likelihood/probability is the correct way to think about it.

"A general overall sense of the likelihood of a thing" is a very interesting turn of phrase, I must admit. I'm trying to think if it means something other than "probability based on my first thought and emotional reaction without having thought about it yet".

People were objecting to you saying it was inappropriate to call them "done" when they wanted to call them "done." You used math to explain your application. Other people have other criteria, or weigh other criteria differently. No one objected to your 3% thing - they objected to your balance of criteria weighted heavily toward math.

I'm not sure what part of "general overall sense of a thing" makes you think of "haven't given it any thought whatsoever."

This discussion isn't fun any more.

 

[majormajor]

People were objecting to you saying it was inappropriate to call them "done" when they wanted to call them "done." You used math to explain your application. Other people have other criteria, or weigh other criteria differently. No one objected to your 3% thing - they objected to your balance of criteria weighted heavily toward math.

I'm not sure what part of "general overall sense of a thing" makes you think of "haven't given it any thought whatsoever."

This discussion isn't fun any more.

I'll yield that I should avoid mathematizing everyone's posts and leave room for more gut feel takes.

But I think you know that CBJW's game of saying they're "done" or "this game is over" gets pretty silly too (like in last night's game). Whether he has some strategy of altering reality or not, I'll push back on it. And this discussion began with CBJW insisting that I admit their position, I probably don't even comment on it if not for "you must admit".

 

[Nanabijou]

Is this the point we post the Dumb and Dumber meme about chance probability?!

I know the odds are long but I feel better thinking the Jackets still could pull this off if they get on a run.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I'll yield that I should avoid mathematizing everyone's posts and leave room for more gut feel takes.

But I think you know that CBJW's game of saying they're "done" or "this game is over" gets pretty silly too (like in last night's game). Whether he has some strategy of altering reality or not, I'll push back on it. And this discussion began with CBJW insisting that I admit their position, I probably don't even comment on it if not for "you must admit".

The thing is though, I didn’t even address you by name. I said “even the most optimistic fan.” I guess that’s my fault for assuming that my circle of incredibly optimistic fans (who admitted to me they thought last night was a must win or it was over) applied to everyone. But you wanted this argument over a nitpicky reason.

As far as the GDT stuff, I have admitted to being emotional. However, some of my posts are not meant to be taken literally. I allude to my jinxing superstition all the time.

 

[koteka]

I have spent a career in data, statistics, etc. I have been rather successful. In my professional life I am insanely specific in what I say or write differentiating between things like “a five percentage point increase” and a “five percent increase” and I spend lots of time making visualizations (or having other people make visualizations) to clarify things to people who who are not as strong with data analysis.

That said, I have no idea what issue @majormajor had with @CBJWerenski8 - if we would have lost last night that would have been 7 straight losses. That, by itself, seems to justify calling a team that is technically still in playoff contention but on the outside looking in “done”. Add in a specific scenario where we are 9 points behind the 2nd wildcard team, and that again seems to point to “done” status.

 

[majormajor]

That said, I have no idea what issue @majormajor had with @CBJWerenski8 - if we would have lost last night that would have been 7 straight losses. That, by itself, seems to justify calling a team that is technically still in playoff contention but on the outside looking in “done”.

This is one of those cases where I don't know if you are using the word "done" because you think the odds are worse than I do (not sure where you'd put the odds of a team making it when they're 4 pts out with 12 games left and Monahan coming back to it's lineup?) or if you're making a non mathematical point.

Add in a specific scenario where we are 9 points behind the 2nd wildcard team, and that again seems to point to “done” status.

It certainly would if we were 9 points out. But losing one game doesn't make us 9 pts out, that requires other independent events to occur. And I presume you know that, so perhaps you misread our conversation.

 

[ViD]

Our friend Tex puts St Louis up 4-1 against Montreal

 

[ViD]

Buffalo defeated Ottawa in regulation

 

[Theo Von]

montreal getting demolished tonight is huge.

 

[Cowumbus]

We don’t deserve to watch the out of town scoreboard. Win the next two then we can start looking at it.

 

[Doggy]

We don’t deserve to watch the out of town scoreboard. Win the next two then we can start looking at it.

Of course we do. Go Avs and Go Kings.

 

[koteka]

This is one of those cases where I don't know if you are using the word "done" because you think the odds are worse than I do (not sure where you'd put the odds of a team making it when they're 4 pts out with 12 games left and Monahan coming back to it's lineup?) or if you're making a non mathematical point.



It certainly would if we were 9 points out. But losing one game doesn't make us 9 pts out, that requires other independent events to occur. And I presume you know that, so perhaps you misread our conversation.

It seems like you are using math with an assumption that events (games) are independent of each other and others are more Bayesian and are updating their priors to include the seven game losing streak (in the scenario presented) in the probability of the Jackets catching up to the 2nd wildcard spot.

I quote directly: “Montreal plays twice before we play again. It could go up to 9 back.” I take that to mean that Montreal has a game in hand and plays more games before we play again, so we are likely to drop farther out of the playoff picture without doing anything.

Anyway, in my American English, saying a team is “done” is like saying they are “hopeless” or it is ”over”. These are not literal statements. I take the @CBJWerenski8 statement to mean: If we lose a 7th game in a row, we are not making the playoffs. This is especially true because Montreal has more games this week while we are idle, and can put more distance behind them. And that doesn’t even factor in other teams that are ahead of us and not in the playoffs.

Posted in the GDT but tonight is it. If we lose, it’s done. Even for the most optimistic fan you’d have to admit it.

If we lose we’re 5 points back(because of tiebreaker), and Montreal plays twice before we play again. It could go up to 9 back. That’s not even including the Rangers/Isles/wings

And for some reason you jumped in and disagreed.

I wouldn't admit it because it isn't true. We go more like from 10% chance of making it to 3%. We still wouldn't even have to win every game if we lose tonight, so it's too early to say "done". You like to call things too early.

I read this as: How dare you say they are done? Some doofus has a model (that likely just uses winning percentages and doesn’t place a greater weight on recent games) and he still says the Jackets have a non zero chance of making the playoffs.

Anyway, we have had disagreements on how people communicate in the past (like I was very critical of Jarmo telling young kids to “get a place” when he still intended to send them to the minors, even though he had told them they could still be sent down - I think that is not an effective way to communicate and hurt the team) and surely will again.

ETA - to specifically answer your question about different perception of odds vs non mathematical point, I think it is both.

 

[Theo Von]

this is shaping up to be a monumental night. detroit getting hammered. If LAK can win, yeesh.

 

[VT]

Blues and Sabres helped us (interesting what Montreal made in that game, probably was sleeping), hope Kings too.