HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Detroit Red Wings
Notices

Every Time Danny Cleary

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-02-2013, 09:01 PM
  #126
Flowah
#FireHolland
 
Flowah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JmanWingsFan View Post
Thank you for agreeing with me. Argument over. You can't quantify chances of winning the Cup, and thus you can't come up with a logical definition of "reasonable chance."
Uh no, you can absolutely quantify chance. That's why there are betting odds. They don't pull those out of thin air. That's why better teams win more than they lose. They have a better chance of winning.
Quote:
The Sharks, Canucks, Capitals, Bruins, Penguins, Devils, and Sabres disagree with you. All of them, points wise, had one of the best teams in the league. All of them didn't even get out of the first round. Even the '06 Red Wings Team that had the best record in the West didn't get out of the first round. You can't quantify chance. You can only look at hindsight. Hindsight says "Get in the playoffs, and we'll see what happens."
This is stupid. There are always exceptions when talking about probability. What matters is the trend. And guess what, better teams do better. They go further, they win the cup more. Period.

http://www.puckreport.com/2009/04/pl...-cup-wins.html

Look at the winners since 1994. 14/17 years, a top3 seeded team has won. 14/18 once you count LA last year.

It is A FACT, that statistically, better teams, win more often. I just don't see how you're arguing with the empirical evidence here? Reality denial?

Flowah is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 09:22 PM
  #127
icKx
What now?
 
icKx's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 2,352
vCash: 500
My eyes tell me this team is not good enough to win a playoff round, much less a Cup.

Inane conceptions of 'contender' be damned.

icKx is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 09:41 PM
  #128
JmanWingsFan
Your average Jman
 
JmanWingsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere
Country: United States
Posts: 4,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowah View Post
Uh no, you can absolutely quantify chance. That's why there are betting odds. They don't pull those out of thin air. That's why better teams win more than they lose. They have a better chance of winning.
Betting odds are nothing but BS. Every year, Vegas just selects the president's trophy winner or the previous years' Stanley Cup Champion. Every year, way more often than not, that pick doesn't even make it to the Finals. Vegas exists to steal money from the poor suckers who have money to flush down the toilet with the vain hope of getting rich quick. Don't invoke Vegas with me. You can't predict the future. That's why I scoff at betting odds. Using statistics to predict the future of such events is absolute BS.

Quote:
This is stupid. There are always exceptions when talking about probability. What matters is the trend. And guess what, better teams do better. They go further, they win the cup more. Period.
An exception to the rule does not occur often. Upsets occur often in the playoffs (at least twice a year). That's not an exception, that's a common occurrence.
Quote:
http://www.puckreport.com/2009/04/pl...-cup-wins.html

Look at the winners since 1994. 14/17 years, a top3 seeded team has won. 14/18 once you count LA last year.
You're cherry picking an era where the best teams were also the ones allowed to flex their financial might. The game has changed since the 05 Lockout. There's a salary cap in place. Teams aren't deep. The game is faster and bigger. It's almost an apples to oranges comparison. Using the exact era of hockey we are in ('06-Present), you'll find:

The 1 Seed has made the finals twice (1-1)
The 2 Seed has made the finals five times (4-1)
The 3 Seed has made the finals once (1-0)
The 4 Seed has made the finals twice (1-1)
The 5 Seed has never made the Finals
The 6 seed has made the finals once (0-1)
The 7 seed has made the finals once (0-1)
The 8 seed has made the finals twice (1-1)

The only correlation is that being the 2 seed in the past meant you made the finals... Except that hasn't happened in two years.

Quote:
It is A FACT, that statistically, better teams, win more often. I just don't see how you're arguing with the empirical evidence here? Reality denial?
Not in this era. There is little correlation outside the 2 seed with being able to make the finals.

In any case, there are also massive upsets of these so called contenders that occured year in and year out.

The Red Wings ousted by the Oilers in '06
The Thrashers ousted by the Rangers in a Sweep
The Ducks and Sharks upended by the Stars in '08, the Flyers upending the Canadiens in the same year

The Ducks ousting the President's trophy winner Sharks in '09, the Hurricanes mowing through New Jersey and Boston in the same year

The upset fest in the Eastern Conference in 2010 (Canadiens over Pittsburgh and Washington, Philly over New Jersey...).

The Lightening dismissing the Caps in 2011...
The Caps upending the Bruins Last year, the Kings destroying the top 3 seeds in the west.

Being the best is no guarantee. You don't know when you're the next '09 Sharks. It happens every year. That's history. To argue against this is to argue against the facts.

JmanWingsFan is online now  
Old
02-02-2013, 09:53 PM
  #129
Flowah
#FireHolland
 
Flowah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Betting odds are nothing but BS.
No they are not.... You show a really poor grasp of statistics and logic.

Quote:
You can't predict the future.
No one is talking about predicting the future. Holy crap. We're talking about probabilities. That has a *built in* understanding that it is not a prediction of the future, merely chances.

Quote:
Upsets occur often in the playoffs (at least twice a year). That's not an exception, that's a common occurrence.
Only twice? Out of... how many rounds/teams? 16 teams, 4 rounds. 15 total series being played, so 13 out of 15 go according to plan and there are only 2 upsets? Looks like the better team does win more often, by your own words.

Quote:
You're cherry picking an era where the best teams were also the ones allowed to flex their financial might.
It went all the way up to 2011... it's just the batch of numbers I found first, and it's a good number of years making it more statistically significant. But fine, let's play it your way. Since 2006, there have been 14 finals teams. 8 of them have been division winners. 10 have been top4 seeding. Only 3 teams were seeded 7-8.

There is a clear trend there. Better seeding = more chance for deep playoffs, even in the salary cap era.

Quote:
Being the best is no guarantee
No one is talking about guarantees but YOU. This is about chance, the complete freaking opposite of a guarantee. Lower seeds have historically had lower chances of winning. PERIOD.

Flowah is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 09:55 PM
  #130
Winger98
Moderator
powers combined
 
Winger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 13,702
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Winger98
Quote:
Originally Posted by icKx View Post
My eyes tell me this team is not good enough to win a playoff round, much less a Cup.

Inane conceptions of 'contender' be damned.
If we're healthy, especially down the middle, I think we could pull out a round or two. If we're unwilling to move Flip to the third line center, we're just not deep enough to run Gator and Emmerton out there every night and have an effective bottom 6. Meanwhile, we also don't have the top end to overload our top6 and play them 40 minutes a night.

__________________
blah, blah, blah
Winger98 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 10:05 PM
  #131
Brick Top
eeeehhhhhhhhhhh
 
Brick Top's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Grand Rapids
Posts: 1,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JmanWingsFan View Post
Don't invoke Vegas with me. You can't predict the future. That's why I scoff at betting odds. Using statistics to predict the future of such events is absolute BS.
There's a Dwight Schrute tone coming through here. And yes, we can predict the future- just takes a Magic 8 Ball.

And I'll bet that if I were to quantify your posts by topic response, I could use your history to accurately predict that they will:
a) vehemently defend KH against any and all criticisms
and/or
b) maintain that the Wings are contenders and any opinions to the contrary are pure rubbish

Quote:
An exception to the rule does not occur often. Upsets occur often in the playoffs (at least twice a year). That's not an exception, that's a common occurrence.

Being the best is no guarantee. You don't know when you're the next '09 Sharks. It happens every year. That's history. To argue against this is to argue against the facts.
He's just telling you that over time, the trend is that better teams perform better in the playoffs. And he's correct. Are there exceptions? Yes, and you listed a few. However, your own list of team PO results show that since the 2005 lockout, the 1st thru 4th seeded (and generally better) teams are 7-3 in the Finals, while the 5th thru 8th seeded teams are a combined 1-3.

Being the best team doesn't guarantee anything. But in looking at the recent results, it seems that those teams are more likely to succeed.

Brick Top is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 10:09 PM
  #132
Frk It
#FireHolland
 
Frk It's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 8,861
vCash: 500
Every time Danny Cleary has the puck, I am tempted to whip my remote at my brand new tv.

Frk It is online now  
Old
02-02-2013, 11:48 PM
  #133
aar000n
Registered User
 
aar000n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,944
vCash: 500
every time Danny Cleary has the puck i put down turnover in the stat sheet.

aar000n is offline  
Old
02-03-2013, 09:35 AM
  #134
Kronwalled55
Eatin' your hats
 
Kronwalled55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 4,626
vCash: 500
"...And a two on one developing."

"...Cleary with the puck"

Kronwalled55 is offline  
Old
02-03-2013, 10:27 AM
  #135
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 17,017
vCash: 500
Seriously he's beyond awful. What the hell is he still doing on the pp and getting minutes like that?

InjuredChoker is offline  
Old
02-03-2013, 10:33 AM
  #136
mindfly
KEN HOLLAND OUT
 
mindfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Bloomfield Hills, MI
Country: Sweden
Posts: 8,724
vCash: 500
Watch KH re-sign him for another 3 years in a near future.

mindfly is offline  
Old
02-03-2013, 01:21 PM
  #137
DRWCountryClub
Registered User
 
DRWCountryClub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfly View Post
Watch KH re-sign him for another 3 years in a near future.
Sadly, this wouldn't surprise me.

Brick and flowah, reading that last post by Jman, you may as well save your breath, or fingers. The evidence is right there and he/she won't accept it, like he's in denial or something. Then comes back with such retorts as "Betting odds are BS". Can't have a good discussion with someone like that.

DRWCountryClub is offline  
Old
02-03-2013, 01:26 PM
  #138
we like our team
Registered User
 
we like our team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 941
vCash: 500
remember in 10-11 when he was one of our best players for half a season? that was fun

we like our team is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 05:19 PM
  #139
THW
Registered User
 
THW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
vCash: 500
The worst part of all of this, is that he is hindering the progress of at least one of our top prospects.

THW is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 06:38 PM
  #140
Ricelund
We like our team.
 
Ricelund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfly View Post
Watch KH re-sign him for another 3 years in a near future.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Ricelund is online now  
Old
02-04-2013, 07:31 PM
  #141
JmanWingsFan
Your average Jman
 
JmanWingsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere
Country: United States
Posts: 4,446
vCash: 500
This is not the product of careful mathematical quantification. This is the result of picking and choosing familiar names. There is no math involved. Look. The argument is this: Playoff success is the key to being a contender. If you want to argue that, then there is a long list of teams many people would consider contenders that you would have to defy common sense and say they were not.

JmanWingsFan is online now  
Old
02-04-2013, 07:34 PM
  #142
THW
Registered User
 
THW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
vCash: 500
Bro, you dont get it and you are the only man toting that flag. If thats the hill you wanna die on, good on ya, but you are an army of one. Let it go.

THW is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 07:47 PM
  #143
JmanWingsFan
Your average Jman
 
JmanWingsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere
Country: United States
Posts: 4,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by THW View Post
Bro, you dont get it and you are the only man toting that flag. If thats the hill you wanna die on, good on ya, but you are an army of one. Let it go.
What don't I get? That under the standard of contenderness you hold, then last year's Bruins and Canucks teams could not be considered contenders? That the '10 Capitals weren't contenders by the same logic? That the Penguins haven't been contenders since '09 by that very logic that is incited? I think I get it.

JmanWingsFan is online now  
Old
02-04-2013, 07:52 PM
  #144
The Nose
#FireHolland
 
The Nose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 6,460
vCash: 500
How many threads do you guys have to argue about the same thing? Give it its own thread or give it a rest. Seriously this is about Dan Clearly not ******* "contenderness".

The Nose is online now  
Old
02-04-2013, 07:58 PM
  #145
BinCookin
Registered User
 
BinCookin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: London, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 500
Rediculous page of "arguments" and "stats" arguing contenderness.

I get your point Jman, the wings are a contender.

Well I would argue any 100 pt + team, is a contender (something detroit has been for the last 5 years at least).

But if we do not get whatever the prorated equivalent of 100 pts is this year (55?), then we arn't a contender (oh we might still win the cup as a 7th or 8th seed, but odds are lower) I can't support anything further that argues against math

BinCookin is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 09:09 PM
  #146
THW
Registered User
 
THW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
vCash: 500
I wonder if anyone has the stats on how many top 6 guys are without a point thus far? Come on, Babcock has to see that a guy with no legs, is a turnover machine and has 0 points through 8 games and a minus 2...

THW is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 09:14 PM
  #147
JmanWingsFan
Your average Jman
 
JmanWingsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere
Country: United States
Posts: 4,446
vCash: 500
Chad LaRose is a FA. Any interest? Michigan guy. He registers a lot of hits, shoots right, and has potted 19 goals twice. He's 5'10", but plays bigger than his size (Think a goal scoring version of Jordin Tootoo).

JmanWingsFan is online now  
Old
02-04-2013, 09:21 PM
  #148
THW
Registered User
 
THW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
vCash: 500
We have an abundance of guys in Grand rapids that should be brought up and given a chance before we trade for someone. They need to let these guys experience the bigger, stronger, faster NHL game to see if they have the chops. Even Cleary was brought in on the 3rd and 4th line till he found his stride.

THW is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 09:56 PM
  #149
we like our team
Registered User
 
we like our team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JmanWingsFan View Post
Chad LaRose is a FA. Any interest? Michigan guy. He registers a lot of hits, shoots right, and has potted 19 goals twice. He's 5'10", but plays bigger than his size (Think a goal scoring version of Jordin Tootoo).
chad larose sucks

we like our team is offline  
Old
02-04-2013, 10:21 PM
  #150
P U L L H A R D
Picca Slice
 
P U L L H A R D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa
Country: Somalia
Posts: 23,603
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by braille View Post
chad larose sucks
LaRose > Cleary & Miller, though.

__________________
Hardly Human
P U L L H A R D is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:30 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.