A little.
- bixll

A little.
- bixll

Oh frank yes.

I remember our concierge (we stayed in Manhattan) explaining how to get to the game:

"Take the PATH train. Get off at X station. Walk indoors through a mall (follow everyone else), down an escalator, out the doors - then run as as fast as you can across the street, and into the arena. Do not wander away for any reason."
- Atomic Wedgie

Insane that needs to stated.

Dom at the Athletic continues to use complex numbers and graphs and stuff to over-rate the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Apparently we have a 98% chance of making the playoffs.

51% chance of winning the Atlantic.

25% chance of coming in second.

Yeaaaaaah. OK.

Really seems to be an acquired taste.

I think it tastes like victory.
- Scabeh

I find it a bit overrated, myself.

- AdamFrench

Dom at the Athletic continues to use complex numbers and graphs and stuff to over-rate the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Apparently we have a 98% chance of making the playoffs.

51% chance of winning the Atlantic.

25% chance of coming in second.

Yeaaaaaah. OK.
- Atomic Wedgie

Why do you not trust a man with a name that would instantly win scrabble?

- Scabeh

The little fella may be the rookie of the year, if he can stay healthy.

Dom at the Athletic continues to use complex numbers and graphs and stuff to over-rate the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Apparently we have a 98% chance of making the playoffs.

51% chance of winning the Atlantic.

25% chance of coming in second.

Yeaaaaaah. OK.
- Atomic Wedgie

Maybe? They are a very good team. When the going gets tough, they have shown an inconsistency in playing through it. They're about a .500 team when they have to fight their way through a solid trap or respond to an aggressive and well applied forechecking team. The rest of the time they are an awfully good team. Hell, even half the time you play a solid trapping or solid forechecking team, they don't get their game applied, so it's not like playing the Hurricanes or Islanders is _always_ hard (but usually it is).

Every game is a game of 'if', but if the Leafs learn to dictate their style of play instead of responding to the other team and taking the opportunities given to them, they will be a top-5 team in the league. They have Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Muzzin, Rielly, Brodie and Mrazek/Campbell. There are very few teams that boast as much talent.

We should be disappointed, but we should be disappointed because a team with that calibre of talent has no excuse to be this ineffective when it matters.

Dom at the Athletic continues to use complex numbers and graphs and stuff to over-rate the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Apparently we have a 98% chance of making the playoffs.

51% chance of winning the Atlantic.

25% chance of coming in second.

Yeaaaaaah. OK.
- Atomic Wedgie

Considering we had something like a 96% chance of beating the Habs after going up 3-1. A 98% chance of making the playoffs doesn't seem far off.

Dom at the Athletic continues to use complex numbers and graphs and stuff to over-rate the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Apparently we have a 98% chance of making the playoffs.

51% chance of winning the Atlantic.

25% chance of coming in second.

Yeaaaaaah. OK.
- Atomic Wedgie

Sounds like Dom alright.

Considering we had something like a 96% chance of beating the Habs after going up 3-1. A 98% chance of making the playoffs doesn't seem far off.
- Leafs43

When the series began, Dom had the odds of the Habs winning 4 games in that series at 1%.

Winning 1 game? 5%.

It's a stupid model.

When the series began, Dom had the odds of the Habs winning 4 games in that series at 1%.

Winning 1 game? 5%.

It's a stupid model.
- Scabeh

How do you figure it stacks up to Ek's simulator?

How do you figure it stacks up to Ek's simulator?
- TheMussel

I'm giving the slight edge to Dom here because it's actually based on SOMETHING.

When the series began, Dom had the odds of the Habs winning 4 games in that series at 1%.

Winning 1 game? 5%.

It's a stupid model.
- Scabeh

I think that was the odds of the Habs winning in 4 games. So 1% chance the Habs sweep.

He had the odds the Leafs sweep at 19%. So he was giving you 81% chance of winning atleast one game.

Why do you not trust a man with a name that would instantly win scrabble?
- AdamFrench

Because proper nouns aren't permitted in scrabble

I think that was the odds of the Habs winning in 4 games. So 1% chance the Habs sweep.

He had the odds the Leafs sweep at 19%. So he was giving you 81% chance of winning atleast one game.
- Leafs43

Hmm that's not how I understood it.

But I could easily be wrong.

Hmm that's not how I understood it.

But I could easily be wrong.
- Scabeh

Heres what I found from the preseries.

When the series began, Dom had the odds of the Habs winning 4 games in that series at 1%.

Winning 1 game? 5%.

It's a stupid model.
- Scabeh

that doesn't sound right.

meaning are you sure you are interpreting those odds properly?

I could see 1% chance of the Habs sweeping the leafs

Hmm that's not how I understood it.

But I could easily be wrong.
- Scabeh

must be this one

Really seems to be an acquired taste.

I think it tastes like victory.
- Scabeh

what dat like?

Maybe? They are a very good team. When the going gets tough, they have shown an inconsistency in playing through it. They're about a .500 team when they have to fight their way through a solid trap or respond to an aggressive and well applied forechecking team. The rest of the time they are an awfully good team. Hell, even half the time you play a solid trapping or solid forechecking team, they don't get their game applied, so it's not like playing the Hurricanes or Islanders is _always_ hard (but usually it is).

Every game is a game of 'if', but if the Leafs learn to dictate their style of play instead of responding to the other team and taking the opportunities given to them, they will be a top-5 team in the league. They have Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Muzzin, Rielly, Brodie and Mrazek/Campbell. There are very few teams that boast as much talent.

We should be disappointed, but we should be disappointed because a team with that calibre of talent has no excuse to be this ineffective when it matters.
- Monkeypunk

it's their pencil neck, soft as a new born baby poo.

Yeah so I’ll the poorer teams never get to sign superstars, ruining their competitiveness and ticket sales.

The NHL will never be able to pull this off until all the teams are hugely popular
- Dozzer

It doesnt need to be this dramatic. Jesus.
Have the soft cap at whatever the current cap is (it will grow yearly) and have a hard cap at 5 million more with incremental penalties.
Heck, those penalties could even be split among the 5 poorer teams.

It can be done without "ruining" anything.

The little fella may be the rookie of the year, if he can stay healthy.
- bixll

My $ is on Bunting

My $ is on Bunting
- Canada Cup

is that a bet that can be made?