Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2012 17:31:28 GMT -5
Even the 1974-75 Washington Capitals won eight games. In pro sports, the best team doesn't always win - evidenced by the Canucks 7-6 shootout thriller today against Detroit - so any sim that captures that is right on as far as I'm concerned. Holy crap, I lost to Vancouver?!? Inconceivable!!! Firesale! Firesale!
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Nov 9, 2012 17:52:11 GMT -5
I'd just like someone to explain Mike Smith to me, anyone...please.
I'm 1st in shots against, at 23.44, yet Mike Smith is at 88.6 save % with 2.80 GAA. Smith is an 84 OV goalie, who is being outplayed so far by goalies like...
Matt Climie - Colorado's backup goalie, rated 66. 88.8 save % in 3 losses. Peter Budaj - 76 OV goalie, 90.9 save %, 2.10 GAA Cory Schneider - 80 OV goalie, 91.6 save %, 2.46 GAA
To name a few.
Randomness to a point is good, its fun, it allows anyone a chance, but it pretty annoying to consistently be a better team on paper and get shit results. Why is a higher rated goalie, on a better team, with less shots against...performing worse than goalies who are behind in each of those things? Consistently worse, not "had a bad game". I can't make heads or tails or it.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Nov 9, 2012 17:58:58 GMT -5
Even the 1974-75 Washington Capitals won eight games. In pro sports, the best team doesn't always win - evidenced by the Canucks 7-6 shootout thriller today against Detroit - so any sim that captures that is right on as far as I'm concerned. Holy crap, I lost to Vancouver?!? Inconceivable!!! Firesale! Firesale! I think you got a pt. and moved into 1st, last I checked. it's an intense race, and will be all season, at least some of us care if we win or lose, so when I lose a gimme, AND lose ground, at the same time, it makes one feel the need to express dissatisfaction, what's wrong with that? I said no offense intended, if one blows off a little steam, so what. Players and GM'S in real life, do it alot and no one questions them. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2012 18:47:51 GMT -5
Holy crap, I lost to Vancouver?!? Inconceivable!!! Firesale! Firesale! I think you got a pt. and moved into 1st, last I checked. it's an intense race, and will be all season, at least some of us care if we win or lose, so when I lose a gimme and lose ground, at the same time, it makes one feel the need to express dissatisfaction, what's wrong with that? I said no offense intended if one blows off steam. Players and GM'S in real life, do it alot and no one questions them. lol I never said I didn't care if I won or lost. Obviously I do care, otherwise I wouldn't always be trying to improve my team. But I'm not gonna pout over a loss to an "inferior" team. Shit happens, otherwise you would have seen an 82-0 team by now. Even the 95-96 Wings lost 13 and tied 7. Since they were obviously the "best" team then the losses and ties came against worse teams. But how can that possibly be that a better team didn't beat a worse team? Which is what you're basically saying. Life is random, people are random. Imagine if everyone always knew which team was going to win, bookies would be out of business lol! There is obviously consistency otherwise Colorado, Buffalo, Montreal and Winnipeg would have made our playoffs last year, and you wouldn't be 7-2 with one of the better teams in the league.
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Nov 9, 2012 18:54:15 GMT -5
You can't compare what happens in real life against what happens in a simulation. Real life isn't a bunch of players on a spreadsheet, which is all our teams here are, numbers on a spreadsheet.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Nov 9, 2012 19:05:07 GMT -5
I think you got a pt. and moved into 1st, last I checked. it's an intense race, and will be all season, at least some of us care if we win or lose, so when I lose a gimme and lose ground, at the same time, it makes one feel the need to express dissatisfaction, what's wrong with that? I said no offense intended if one blows off steam. Players and GM'S in real life, do it alot and no one questions them. lol I never said I didn't care if I won or lost. Obviously I do care, otherwise I wouldn't always be trying to improve my team. But I'm not gonna pout over a loss to an "inferior" team. Shit happens, otherwise you would have seen an 82-0 team by now. Even the 95-96 Wings lost 13 and tied 7. Since they were obviously the "best" team then the losses and ties came against worse teams. But how can that possibly be that a better team didn't beat a worse team? Which is what you're basically saying. Life is random, people are random. Imagine if everyone always knew which team was going to win, bookies would be out of business lol! There is obviously consistency otherwise Colorado, Buffalo, Montreal and Winnipeg would have made our playoffs last year, and you wouldn't be 7-2 with one of the better teams in the league. I agree and never suggested YOU didn't care about winning or losing, I know you care, cause you work hard on your team. Does not mean i have to like my game today, these are the games teams like us have to win or at least get a pt from, so I was just expressing anger over losing a game i felt i should have won, don't see what's wrong with that. I said this about fifty times over the last 10 years the best team doesn't always win. That doesn't mean i can't express disbelief lol when losing to the team rated 26th in the league. Gavin's problem a bit different and he is just frustrated trying to figure how to stop the bleeding. It's all about hard work and no results in his case. He will figure it out.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Nov 9, 2012 19:11:20 GMT -5
Goalies who face less shots will obviously have a lower SV% if they are letting up the same amount or more goals than a goalie who faces a higher amount of shots.
Don't feel like going through tons of numbers, but pulling out Budaj...
7 more shots against and let up 4 less goals over an additional 52 minutes played. That could be flipped in one game, it's not like you're miles apart!
If all we are is numbers, and you believe in some sort of "absolute-ness" then we shouldn't even play seasons. Just like 10-5 will always be 5 you should divise some sort of formula to weigh all attributes and come to absolute values of teams, come up with a comparison forumla, process and come to absolute final results, let me know who the best team is, they get awarded the championship, I don't have to sim an entire season day-by-day for 174 season days +playoffs, nobody gets upset when they lose and life will be much easier!
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Nov 9, 2012 19:18:18 GMT -5
Whatever, I'll stop caring if I can't bitch about my team when I think its playing like shit....fuck last time I did it, I got a shutout.
I never said absolute-ness, but sensible logic would be nice when trying to make decisions.
The only way that 4 goal difference comes off in 1 game, is if one gets a shutout while the other lets in 4 goals. Otherwise, yes, its fairly big margin, hence the difference in GAA to boot, 7 shots is a small margin, but 4 goals over 52 minutes is not small IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Nov 9, 2012 21:54:59 GMT -5
The idea in the sim is that if you played 100 games, a clearly better team would win 65 or 70 of them. the numbers are supposed to work in the aggregate, not from game to game. That being said, sometimes there feels like a little too much randomness Yeah that's true, and the only downside to the non human factor, is probability. You lost 4 in a row, so you are due to win one, where as I won 7 in a row, so I'm due to lose one. I had that conversation today before the games with my girlfriend, told her I didn't like todays match-up for that reason.
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Nov 12, 2012 19:48:54 GMT -5
Wow Can Ryan O'Reilley get better any faster, holy crap...He has gain 2 con points in 4 games and started out day to day. Halishak will be better before him and he was down to something like 82. Not that it matters a whole lot but would like to cause some teams to get headache at times because they loss to a team they should have beaten...Chicago iwshes they could play us everyday.....LOL
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Nov 12, 2012 20:41:06 GMT -5
Wow Can Ryan O'Reilley get better any faster, holy crap...He has gain 2 con points in 4 games and started out day to day. Halishak will be better before him and he was down to something like 82. Pro players recover 1 CON point per day. O'Reilly and Halischuk are currently listed at 93.95/90.35 Yesterday they were at 92.95/89.35 Saturday they were at 91.95/88.35 Friday they were at 90.95/87.35 Thursday they were at 89.95/86.35 I went back and looked at the data.
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Nov 12, 2012 20:42:05 GMT -5
Yes, I have a fairly strong feeling I could pull a favorable record with NJ for 82 games lol
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Nov 13, 2012 10:38:50 GMT -5
Wow Can Ryan O'Reilley get better any faster, holy crap...He has gain 2 con points in 4 games and started out day to day. Halishak will be better before him and he was down to something like 82. Pro players recover 1 CON point per day. O'Reilly and Halischuk are currently listed at 93.95/90.35 Yesterday they were at 92.95/89.35 Saturday they were at 91.95/88.35 Friday they were at 90.95/87.35 Thursday they were at 89.95/86.35 I went back and looked at the data. Thanks Jon! Use to Day to day be a few days which O'Reailly had at beginning and day to day in past seem to heal faster the out week or 2. At least that is how I remember LOL So when I guy is day to day and 89 then it should be a week or more....what happen to pint Sunday or did you not run games and I miss that LOL Missing alot in my head these days!
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Nov 13, 2012 10:46:06 GMT -5
Thanks Jon! Use to Day to day be a few days which O'Reailly had at beginning and day to day in past seem to heal faster the out week or 2. At least that is how I remember LOL Last season that was a bit out of whack, glad to see it improved.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Nov 13, 2012 16:33:56 GMT -5
I seriously need this NHL season to start. Otherwise im going to finish bottom 5 next year tooooo
|
|