Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 
Forums :: NHL Talk :: WHO is in a better situation: LEAFS or SENS?
Author Message
Feeling Glucky?
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Tanktown, ON
Joined: 10.08.2008

Feb 1 @ 11:55 PM ET
Well I think is possible that the team with a .500 P% can catch the team with the .591 P%.

In fact this situation actually exists today, and there is a lot of season left.


BUT, that's not the point.

ou just can't look and P% and make an informative call on this particular example, without knowing games played, games in hand for one team or the other, and of course the points difference at this point in the season.

- Doppleganger

rmiethaner
Buffalo Sabres
Location: Buffalo, NY
Joined: 10.04.2006

Feb 2 @ 12:21 AM ET
Are you for real? It is mathematically impossible for .500p% to catch the higher team (unless the lower team wins considerably more pts or the higher team losses considerably more) You cannot be this stupid.
- burn



OK. I have not read this thread, so I may be way off base here, but….

You just said it is mathematically impossible for the lower team to catch up while following that up with an unless.

So it is possible?
Feeling Glucky?
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Tanktown, ON
Joined: 10.08.2008

Feb 2 @ 12:24 AM ET
OK. I have not read this thread, so I may be way off base here, but….

You just said it is mathematically impossible for the lower team to catch up while following that up with an unless.

So it is possible?

- rmiethaner

what he means is that if they continue on their pace, they'll never pass the other team, no matter how many games they have in hand.
rmiethaner
Buffalo Sabres
Location: Buffalo, NY
Joined: 10.04.2006

Feb 2 @ 12:38 AM ET
what he means is that if they continue on their pace, they'll never pass the other team, no matter how many games they have in hand.
- Feeling Glucky?



Right, and that makes sense if they continue on their current pace. But it was followed up with the "unless", which makes it possible.

Maybe I am missing something. Is points percentage in hockey like winning percentage in baseball? Because teams behind in the baseball standings pass each other all the time.

I don't know.
Feeling Glucky?
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Tanktown, ON
Joined: 10.08.2008

Feb 2 @ 12:42 AM ET
Right, and that makes sense if they continue on their current pace. But it was followed up with the "unless", which makes it possible.

Maybe I am missing something. Is points percentage in hockey like winning percentage in baseball? Because teams behind in the baseball standings pass each other all the time.

I don't know.

- rmiethaner

Dopps is double counting games played when talking about point%... saying the Leafs aren't doing as well because while their point% is higher, they have more games played.

The argument is that since point % takes games played into consideration, bringing up games played is flawed.
rmiethaner
Buffalo Sabres
Location: Buffalo, NY
Joined: 10.04.2006

Feb 2 @ 12:45 AM ET
Dopps is double counting games played when talking about point%... saying the Leafs aren't doing as well because while their point% is higher, they have more games played.

The argument is that since point % takes games played into consideration, bringing up games played is flawed.

- Feeling Glucky?



Ah, got it. Thank you.
The Truth
Joined: 09.15.2005

Feb 2 @ 2:28 AM ET
So.....
- burn

well obviously the leafs look like the better team at this time, kessel is an elite player and they did indeed steal JVR from the flyers, but they still get outshot too often but i think the leafs are a playoff team

i would love to see the leafs and habs matchup in the first round
Doppleganger
Ottawa Senators
Location: Reality
Joined: 08.25.2006

Feb 2 @ 9:36 AM ET
Dopps is double counting games played when talking about point%... saying the Leafs aren't doing as well because while their point% is higher, they have more games played.

The argument is that since point % takes games played into consideration, bringing up games played is flawed.

- Feeling Glucky?



Please don't put words into my mouth.

I know what I'm saying, not you.

You seem to assume that a team that has played more games, than one that has not, has the advantage of already player those two or three games already. The advantage you seem to be claiming is that they've already banked the points from those games. But you assume the two or three games are wins (or loser points) an not losses that no points were owned.

That's were you and I part company. Neither of us may be 100% correct, but I see a team that knows that it has to win those games in hand in order to catch up to the team ahead of them in the standings, and therefore are more motivated to win and can affect their own destiny, while all the other team can do is watch.

It's like the "club house leader" who has a one stroke lead in a golf tournament, while there are three or four other players still out on the course with the chance to catch the "club house leader" who can only sit and watch. These other golfers know they must take a few chances, not play safe, in order to make up the ground.


One cannot assume a team continues to play at their current P%, no team has and no team will. It's a better indication of how the teams rank vs each other at any point in the season than just looking at the points system because teams will only have played the same amount of games each, on the same day, twice a season.


But when there is ten days left in the season, and a team that is trying to catch a team ahead of it, and it has a couple of games in hand, I see it as an advantage...........and apparently you do do not. If the trailing team has four games to go, and is only three points back, they know what they must do and have more "racetrack" left than the team with only two games left.......who know they must win every game to maintain their lead.
prock
Vegas Golden Knights
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON
Joined: 08.30.2007

Feb 2 @ 9:45 AM ET
Please don't put words into my mouth.

I know what I'm saying, not you.

You seem to assume that a team that has played more games, than one that has not, has the advantage of already player those two or three games already. The advantage you seem to be claiming is that they've already banked the points from those games. But you assume the two or three games are wins (or loser points) an not losses that no points were owned.

That's were you and I part company. Neither of us my be 100% correct, but I see a team that knows that it has to win those games in hand in order to catch up to the team ahead of them in the standings, and therefore are more motivated to win and can affect their own destiny, while all the other team can do is watch.

It's like the "club house leader" who has a one stroke lead in a golf tournament, while there are three or four other players still out on the course with the chance to catch the "club house leader" who can only sit and watch. These other golfers know they must take a few chances, not play safe, in order to make up the ground.


One cannot assume a team continues to play at their current P%, no team has and no team will. It's a better indication of how the teams rank vs each other at any point in the season than just looking at the points system because teams will only have played the same amount of games each, on the same day, twice a season.


But when there is ten days left in the season, and a team that is trying to catch a team ahead of it, and it has a couple of games in hand, I see it as an advantage...........and apparently you do do not.

- Doppleganger


No, that's not what he's saying at all.

The team with games in hand can be at a disadvantage if their pts is lower than the other team, because it means they have to perform above their current level to pass them. Or they can be at an advantage if their pts % is higher, because it means they can perform lower than their current level and still potentially stay ahead.

You can argue they control their own destiny if you want. The flipaide of that argument is that if they're behind in pts% the other team has already banked points and put the pressure on them to win. Just opinion.

All we can really say for certain is that the team with the higher pts % has performed better to date, and put themselves in a better situation. No matter how many games either has played.
daeth
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Drink full, and descend, ON
Joined: 09.15.2005

Feb 2 @ 9:48 AM ET
You guys fell for his plan. Rather than talking about how much better the Leafs are than the Senators (clearly the gap is HUGE) you're talking about why you don't need to mention games played when using points %. Stop this madness!
daeth
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Drink full, and descend, ON
Joined: 09.15.2005

Feb 2 @ 9:48 AM ET
Oh yeah, did I mention how much better the Leafs are? They're a lot better.
Mr_Squeaks
Ottawa Senators
Location: Location: Location: Glitch in
Joined: 06.26.2006

Feb 2 @ 11:10 AM ET
Oh yeah, did I mention how much better the Leafs are? They're a lot better.
- daeth


I'm still hoping that by the end of the season things turn around, but right now (especially last night) the Leafs are much better. Kessel is on fire (I wish), Kadri is getting away with murder (almost), JVR is looking almost as dangerous as Kessel and you've got two goalies playing very solid.

On the other hand, the Sens are capable of playing VERY solid games, but don't seem to have the push-back that we see from so many other teams. The goal after the boarding non-call (Kadri on Ceci, looked a lot like the Alfie on Tucker from years ago) should have sparked the lads into either ramping up the intensity or ramping up the violence. They did neither, and proceeded, for the most part, to watch the Leafies fly by. Until they show more cohesion than this, and much more consistency, they're going to hover around the .500 mark.

Leafs, quite honestly, look very impressive right now.
Morris
Referee
Edmonton Oilers
Location: Hall looks disengaged, NS
Joined: 07.18.2007

Feb 2 @ 11:21 AM ET
Please don't put words into my mouth.

I know what I'm saying, not you.

You seem to assume

- Doppleganger

RogerRoeper
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Toronto, ON
Joined: 03.27.2007

Feb 2 @ 12:01 PM ET
Wonder why Spatso stopped posting in this thread?
prock
Vegas Golden Knights
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON
Joined: 08.30.2007

Feb 2 @ 1:22 PM ET
Wonder why Spatso stopped posting in this thread?
- RogerRoeper

He tucked tail and ran. He's a total chump.
senstroll
Vegas Golden Knights
Location: Sens Suck, ON
Joined: 02.22.2008

Feb 3 @ 10:31 AM ET
He tucked tail and ran. He's a total chump.
- prock


he hangs in the Sens blogs busting a nut over karlsson every game
prock
Vegas Golden Knights
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON
Joined: 08.30.2007

Feb 3 @ 10:33 AM ET
he hangs in the Sens blogs busting a nut over karlsson every game
- senstroll


Yup. I go in there and call him out. He immediately disappears from those threads too.

What a chump. Its funny that the Sens have the two biggest jacka$$ posters on the entire site.
burn
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Boyle > Marleau :dopes, ON
Joined: 08.02.2006

Feb 3 @ 10:40 AM ET
he hangs in the Sens blogs busting a nut over karlsson every game
- senstroll



hows pageau doing??
Feeling Glucky?
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Tanktown, ON
Joined: 10.08.2008

Feb 3 @ 11:07 AM ET
hows pageau doing??
- burn

Like Giroux.


In October.
burn
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Boyle > Marleau :dopes, ON
Joined: 08.02.2006

Feb 3 @ 11:15 AM ET
Like Giroux.


In October.

- Feeling Glucky?



But Giroux wasin the NHL, no?? So not even
top shelf 15
Ottawa Senators
Joined: 11.23.2008

Feb 3 @ 11:23 AM ET
But Giroux wasin the NHL, no?? So not even
- burn

Meh he is prospect that showed some glitter,i think he too small at center but he does have speed and good hands.Who knows ,what will become of him .But he is decent for where he was drafted
burn
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Boyle > Marleau :dopes, ON
Joined: 08.02.2006

Feb 3 @ 11:33 AM ET
Meh he is prospect that showed some glitter,i think he too small at center but he does have speed and good hands.Who knows ,what will become of him .But he is decent for where he was drafted
- top shelf 15


sadly some got carried away and thought he was giroux.
top shelf 15
Ottawa Senators
Joined: 11.23.2008

Feb 3 @ 11:38 AM ET
sadly some got carried away and thought he was giroux.
- burn

Yeah that was a big reach,both are french and play center is about as far as i would go
prock
Vegas Golden Knights
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON
Joined: 08.30.2007

Feb 3 @ 5:58 PM ET
There is no doubt the Leafs lack size among some of their key skill players. Pretty frightening prospect for the Leafs if they put out Orr and McClaren and a team like the Senators counters with Pageau, Conacher and Condra.

Things that work in a short season (48 games) might really mess you up this year (82 games).

- spatso



You know what else will mess you up? Having a junk roster. Like the Sens.

WHERE ARE YOU, YOU POS CHUMP?
RogerRoeper
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Toronto, ON
Joined: 03.27.2007

Feb 3 @ 6:30 PM ET
I remember when Spatso was already celebrating before the season started how much better the Sens and their rebuild was because the "Experts" were saying it.

Those experts never thought Anderson's .941 save % would come down?
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 523, 524, 525, 526, 527, 528, 529, 530, 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541, 542, 543, 544, 545, 546, 547, 548, 549, 550, 551, 552, 553, 554, 555, 556, 557, 558, 559, 560, 561, 562, 563, 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 583, 584, 585, 586, 587, 588, 589, 590, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, 617, 618, 619, 620, 621, 622, 623, 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631, 632, 633, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651, 652, 653, 654, 655, 656, 657, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671, 672, 673, 674, 675, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681, 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691, 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711, 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717, 718, 719, 720, 721, 722, 723, 724, 725, 726, 727, 728, 729, 730, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741, 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759, 760, 761, 762, 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 769, 770, 771, 772, 773, 774, 775, 776, 777, 778, 779, 780, 781, 782, 783, 784, 785, 786, 787, 788, 789, 790, 791, 792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, 799, 800, 801, 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809, 810, 811, 812, 813, 814, 815, 816, 817, 818, 819, 820, 821, 822, 823, 824, 825, 826, 827, 828, 829, 830, 831, 832, 833, 834, 835, 836, 837, 838, 839, 840, 841, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848, 849, 850, 851, 852, 853, 854, 855, 856, 857, 858, 859, 860, 861, 862, 863, 864, 865, 866, 867, 868, 869, 870, 871, 872, 873, 874, 875, 876, 877, 878, 879, 880, 881, 882, 883, 884, 885, 886, 887, 888, 889, 890, 891, 892, 893, 894, 895, 896, 897, 898, 899, 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905, 906, 907, 908, 909, 910, 911, 912, 913, 914, 915, 916, 917, 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923, 924, 925, 926, 927, 928, 929, 930, 931, 932, 933, 934, 935, 936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941, 942, 943, 944, 945, 946, 947, 948, 949, 950, 951, 952, 953, 954, 955, 956, 957, 958, 959, 960, 961, 962, 963, 964, 965, 966, 967, 968, 969, 970, 971, 972, 973, 974, 975, 976, 977, 978, 979, 980, 981, 982, 983, 984, 985, 986, 987, 988, 989, 990, 991, 992, 993, 994, 995, 996, 997, 998, 999, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1011, 1012, 1013, 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1019, 1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024, 1025, 1026, 1027, 1028, 1029, 1030, 1031, 1032, 1033, 1034, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043, 1044, 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1058, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1067, 1068, 1069, 1070, 1071, 1072, 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076, 1077, 1078, 1079, 1080, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089, 1090, 1091, 1092, 1093, 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1100, 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104, 1105, 1106, 1107, 1108, 1109, 1110, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1115, 1116, 1117, 1118, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, 1127, 1128, 1129, 1130, 1131, 1132, 1133, 1134, 1135, 1136, 1137, 1138, 1139, 1140, 1141, 1142, 1143, 1144, 1145, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1149, 1150, 1151, 1152, 1153, 1154, 1155, 1156, 1157, 1158, 1159, 1160  Next