Jump to content

Photo

Bad or Unlucky? The 2012-13 Season.


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,436 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:03 PM

If I remember the Greenberg thing, I think I disagreed with Greenberg but also felt Daniel was misstating what Greenberg was saying. I could be remembering it wrong though.

Also, to pat myself on the back, I almost perfectly predicted the playoff winners for the entire playoffs before the first round started. :lol:

Edited by Devils731, 17 July 2013 - 04:04 PM.

  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#22 GoArmySports

GoArmySports

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,065 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:06 PM

This is bad....Yellow?

 

http://sports.yahoo....-180030443.html


  • 0

#23 ATLL765

ATLL765

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,049 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:15 PM

The key to your response is that "Olesz, Clowe, is a risk, but so would have been Clarky."  Clarkson could put ten goals in his own net on purpose this upcoming season, but it's irrelevant.  The point is, we know what he did last season, and the issue is whether Clowe, Olesz, whoever, is going to outperform what Clarkson did last season.  That's pretty shaky.  Ryder should put up his share of goals, but it's a pretty bold prediction to say that he'll produce more goals than Kovalchuk did last year, when you account for his injury, shortened season, etc.

 

I think this season really comes down to the goaltending, if you want had to look at one thing.  You have to hope that some combination of Schneider and Marty can do for the Devils what Lunqvist does for the Rangers. 

Clowe doesn't need to be better than Clarky, if he's consistent, that will be enough. I also never said that Ryder could fill Kovy's lost offense. I said Ryder could put up similar numbers to what Parise had in the past. I can see Ryder having a 60-65 point season, but that would be Ryder at his best and still not quite be what Parise can do at his best.

My point on Olesz is that say he puts up 5-10 goals and 15-20 points. We signed him for less than $1M. Clowe was signed for $4.85 per, if they, combined, can equal Clarkson's expected performance, 20-25 goals maybe 40 points, it's basically a wash. I think that's a conservative estimate for these two guys, even if one doesn't have a great year.


  • 0

#24 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,133 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:24 PM

Clowe doesn't need to be better than Clarky, if he's consistent, that will be enough. I also never said that Ryder could fill Kovy's lost offense. I said Ryder could put up similar numbers to what Parise had in the past. I can see Ryder having a 60-65 point season, but that would be Ryder at his best and still not quite be what Parise can do at his best.

My point on Olesz is that say he puts up 5-10 goals and 15-20 points. We signed him for less than $1M. Clowe was signed for $4.85 per, if they, combined, can equal Clarkson's expected performance, 20-25 goals maybe 40 points, it's basically a wash. I think that's a conservative estimate for these two guys, even if one doesn't have a great year.


Your comparing two players output with one, so I can't say it's that convincing.
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#25 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,893 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 05:03 PM

1.  He did claim to predict the result of playoff series, and seemed pretty damned sure of himself, and went so far as to brag that he predicted at Kings upset, but ignoring his misses.  I don't know how much money he has, but I doubt he's a millionaire.  I suppose he could fall back on saying "well I only gave a percentage chance" of an outcome.  But it's the equivalent of saying there's a 70 percent chance that aliens will land on earth tomorrow, and when it doesn't happen, responding, "well, I didn't say it was a certainty".   (That is, it's a one time event that you can't reproduce in a controlled environment, like a coin flip, or roulette).

 

Writers have to self-promote, unfortunately.  As Phil Birnbaum, scourge of all misusers of probability wrote, "And I hate [pre-season predictions], when they're taken seriously.  Because, predicting outcomes with a high degree of accuracy is impossible.  All you can do is guess at the basic probabilities.  After that, it's all luck."  So the error here is Greenberg patting himself on the back.  Baseball Prospectus used to promote themselves based on their prior predictions, and it doesn't really make sense to do so.

 

 

2.  I'm not quite clear on what you're saying.  You say that it took a giant leap of faith to pick the Kings, but then said the stats suggested the Kings should be the favorite, or are you just saying that Greenberg's stats said the Kings should be the favorite.  In any event, had he kept it to saying that the Kings are an undervalued Vegas bet, I really wouldn't care so much.

 

Sigh.  You don't know what you don't know.  I am saying that when stats say counter-intuitive things, things against what a reasonable person would expect, intelligent people don't assume that their analysis is correct.  There's so much shoddy analysis (and people trying to sell proprietary systems, people trying to promote themselves, etc.) out there that this is what you might think.  But when the stats think that the 8th seed is considerably better than the 1 seed, yeah, it's a leap of faith to pick against what the regular numbers (wins! pointszzz! you are what your record says you are!) say.

 

As an aside, comparing the unlikelihood of upsets in the NHL and MLB playoffs versus basketball is less about "luck" (a term I guess I still don't understand), than it is far fewer variables in the NBA.  (Perhaps that's what "luck" means).  There are a lot more moving parts in a baseball and hockey, than there are in basketball.

 

I've explained what luck means many times.  Chance elements.  You can't predict the score, you can't predict how people will shoot, etc.  It's a game featuring incredibly high velocity shots, most of which are taken from a reasonably long range, against a player intent on stopping them, who may or may not have enormous pads which cover a large portion of the net.  The biggest number that correlates to future wins that we've found is Fenwick Tied, but even that isn't all that strong.  Because luck - we don't know when the shooters will go cold, we don't know when the goalies will get hot.  Pittsburgh was the best shooting team for years, all their stars were healthy and playing, and Tuukka Rask stopped everything for 4 games.  No accounting for that.  Is there a chance it could happen?  Absolutely, and that's what probability says.  Regardless, you don't really seem to understand that luck or 'the unknown' is ostensibly quantifiable.  We can theoretically know what we can't know.  

 

The NBA has less variance not because there are less moving parts, whatever that means, it's because A: there are more scoring plays attempted and B: the chance of a scoring play succeeding are much higher.  A typical NHL game features around 55-60 shots on goal and 5.X or so goals.  The average NBA game features many more shot attempts (around 80 per team) and way more points (even if we divide all NBA points by two to reflect hockey scoring, the scores are still around 100 between both teams).  Beyond that, shooting percentages in the NBA are often closer to true averages in a single game than in an NHL game, where they are almost never close to true averages (since most forwards average a goal around every 9 shots and D men double that, so in a single game they are typically either way above average or below).  In addition, NBA players have much more control over their shooting percentage.  NHL players have not much control over their shooting percentage on a year to year basis and almost 0 control over it on a game to game basis.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#26 lazer

lazer

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 05:13 PM

We will win the cup this season.

 

red-solo-cup_custom-6904949d2957888ea3a7


  • 1
Posted Image

#27 LucifersDog

LucifersDog

    Broken Record

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,786 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 07:01 PM

Clowe doesn't need to be better than Clarky, if he's consistent, that will be enough. I also never said that Ryder could fill Kovy's lost offense. I said Ryder could put up similar numbers to what Parise had in the past. I can see Ryder having a 60-65 point season, but that would be Ryder at his best and still not quite be what Parise can do at his best.

My point on Olesz is that say he puts up 5-10 goals and 15-20 points. We signed him for less than $1M. Clowe was signed for $4.85 per, if they, combined, can equal Clarkson's expected performance, 20-25 goals maybe 40 points, it's basically a wash. I think that's a conservative estimate for these two guys, even if one doesn't have a great year.

 

 

WOW I don't want to eat any of your chicken soup or chicken salad.


Edited by LucifersDog, 17 July 2013 - 07:05 PM.

  • 0

#28 lazer

lazer

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 04:50 PM

question is, how much of last season was a result of Kovy tanking?


  • 0
Posted Image

#29 ATLL765

ATLL765

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,049 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 04:53 PM

question is, how much of last season was a result of Kovy tanking?

None.

Edit: You can't call the guy a mercenary, who only cares for cash, then double back and say he didn't play to his fullest here because his heart wasn't in it. A mercenary, by definition, is there for the cash and the cash only, his heart doesn't change things.


Edited by ATLL765, 18 July 2013 - 05:12 PM.

  • 0

#30 Pepperkorn

Pepperkorn

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,339 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:52 PM

Seriously? It's just not my problem how or why the Devils play and if someone theorizes people just yap about how little the other knows. Why bother?
  • 0

I'm here for the party





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users