25
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Apr 6, 2023 11:43:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 6, 2023 18:05:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Apr 6, 2023 20:01:33 GMT -6
Well late night let’s see how it’s goes . Top line has been fun to watch.
Go Hawks !!
|
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Apr 6, 2023 20:26:49 GMT -6
Gotta say, our bottom end guys seem to control a lot of the play when they’re out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 6, 2023 20:31:59 GMT -6
Gotta say, our bottom end guys seem to control a lot of the play when they’re out there. so...you mean lines 2, 3 and 4? : ) |
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Apr 6, 2023 20:33:41 GMT -6
Gotta say, our bottom end guys seem to control a lot of the play when they’re out there. so...you mean lines 2, 3 and 4? : )  Just 3 & 4. Good period for them. |
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Apr 6, 2023 20:34:51 GMT -6
Quinnipiac is up 3-2 on Michigan in the third.
|
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Apr 6, 2023 20:38:59 GMT -6
Kuzmenko is a pretty good pickup for the Canucks, too old to qualify as a rookie but 38 goals and nearly a point a game in his first NHL season. Gives me hope for Safonov, he has better numbers at the same age than Kuzmenko.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Apr 6, 2023 20:47:04 GMT -6
Quinnipiac is up 3-2 on Michigan in the third. Intense game! |
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Apr 6, 2023 20:54:20 GMT -6
4-2 Quinnipiac with 5:20 left
|
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Apr 6, 2023 21:02:01 GMT -6
Quinnipiac advancing.
|
|
|
|
Post by phill9 on Apr 6, 2023 21:05:00 GMT -6
Seth Jones seems to be the only one who can score consistently on Hawks goalies
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Apr 6, 2023 21:05:38 GMT -6
Seth Jones seems to be the only one who can score consistently on Hawks goalies What about Ian ? |
|
|
|
Post by phill9 on Apr 6, 2023 21:11:04 GMT -6
Seth Jones a -73 over last 2 seasons
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Apr 6, 2023 21:19:37 GMT -6
Seth Jones a -73 over last 2 seasons That’s gonna happen when u play half the game on this team |
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Apr 6, 2023 21:23:13 GMT -6
Team is -162 in 2 years
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 6, 2023 21:50:43 GMT -6
tyler johnson would look about 11 years old if not for the facial hair.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Apr 6, 2023 22:27:59 GMT -6
4 to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 6, 2023 22:36:52 GMT -6
somewhat close game coupled with a good effort, so a good tank loss.
watched about 5% of it but listened to it all.
canucks 16-11-4 since tocchet took over so we lost to a pretty decent team.
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 6, 2023 23:09:32 GMT -6
after tonight's loss, sharks now at 78 games played, 22-40-16 .385%
|
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Apr 7, 2023 7:58:26 GMT -6
after tonight's loss, sharks now at 78 games played, 22-40-16 .385% OK, I don't get it----the problem is the focus on the points percentage. As I understand the tiebreaker steps it goes as follows for the first three steps and then there are others after that, but I am not copying them here: 1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage). 2. The greater number of games won, excluding games won in Overtime or by Shootout (i.e., “Regulation Wins”). This figure is reflected in the RW column. 3. The greater number of games won, excluding games won by Shootout. This figure is reflected in the ROW column. What are the chances that each of the bottom three won't end up playing 82 games, which as I understand the rules will render the points percentage tiebreaker meaningless and thus, the current focus on it as an useless exercise in calculations. So, I must be missing something because the rest of the world seems to focus on the points percentage instead of the number of games won as per rules 2 and 3 above. Can someone educate me on this? |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 7, 2023 17:37:43 GMT -6
after tonight's loss, sharks now at 78 games played, 22-40-16 .385% What are the chances that each of the bottom three won't end up playing 82 games... i would say the chances are about as close to zero as you could get, but of course it has happened recently. i'm guessing it's done like this if there's a repeat of the 2019/20 season when the teams all finished playing between 68-71 games because of the pandemic. or if something they call in the insurance business a "force majeure" occurs. (natural disaster, civil unrest, infrastructure failure, etc.) |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Apr 9, 2023 7:18:52 GMT -6
What are the chances that each of the bottom three won't end up playing 82 games... i would say the chances are about as close to zero as you could get, but of course it has happened recently. i'm guessing it's done like this if there's a repeat of the 2019/20 season when the teams all finished playing between 68-71 games because of the pandemic. or if something they call in the insurance business a "force majeure" occurs. (natural disaster, civil unrest, infrastructure failure, etc.) OK, so it is pretty safe to just ignore the points percentage factor when estimating which team will finish last, right? |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 9, 2023 7:32:06 GMT -6
i would say the chances are about as close to zero as you could get, but of course it has happened recently. i'm guessing it's done like this if there's a repeat of the 2019/20 season when the teams all finished playing between 68-71 games because of the pandemic. or if something they call in the insurance business a "force majeure" occurs. (natural disaster, civil unrest, infrastructure failure, etc.) OK, so it is pretty safe to just ignore the points percentage factor when estimating which team will finish last, right? As far as this season goes and the vast majority past, present and in the future...yes, ignore the points %. |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Apr 10, 2023 9:46:50 GMT -6
after tonight's loss, sharks now at 78 games played, 22-40-16 .385% OK, I don't get it----the problem is the focus on the points percentage. As I understand the tiebreaker steps it goes as follows for the first three steps and then there are others after that, but I am not copying them here: 1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage). 2. The greater number of games won, excluding games won in Overtime or by Shootout (i.e., “Regulation Wins”). This figure is reflected in the RW column. 3. The greater number of games won, excluding games won by Shootout. This figure is reflected in the ROW column. What are the chances that each of the bottom three won't end up playing 82 games, which as I understand the rules will render the points percentage tiebreaker meaningless and thus, the current focus on it as an useless exercise in calculations. So, I must be missing something because the rest of the world seems to focus on the points percentage instead of the number of games won as per rules 2 and 3 above. Can someone educate me on this? You can generally ignore it, but it's used as a predictor stat. If a team has a higher point percentage than another, then if all remains the same they should theoretically win more of their future games (or at least get the loser point) than a team with a lower point percentage. Not all remains the same, though. But it's useful for guesstimating. |
|
Just 3 & 4. Good period for them.
