JJFIVEOH

Americans are soft, and our athletes are starting to show it too.

Yup. :P

I wonder if Team USA was out partying, falling down drunk until 6AM.

I don't think I would look more forward to a hockey game outside of the Sabres being in the Cup finals. :D

You and me both. I stopped following after the Jays back-to-backs. Although I did read David Wells' book, wouldn't surprise me if he's pitched more than one game half in the bag.

That was quite an impressive run.

...

On the other hand, well trained athletes can get over a hangover much quicker. If you're out of shape and have a crappy diet, you're not going to get over a hnagover as quickly. If you're circulatory and respiratory system are in top shape, and you have a healthy diet, you're going to get over it much quicker. Especially when you consider the best way to get over a hangover is plenty of fluids and and heavy workout. Somebody that isn't healthy isn't going to be up for a heavy workout while hungover.

Well then, based on how they performed the rest of the way, one can only assume they got drunk every night. You're gonna have to try harder than that. They both weigh the same, they would get drunk equally. :P

Would this be a good time to bring up Dock Ellis?

They slept twice.

I stand corrected. I still don't see it being an issue two nights later. From the perspective of representing your country, I think they did wrong. I don't think it had an impact on their performance.

Some posters are really sensationalizing this whole thing. One, they're taking one story at its word that it was 6AM. Regardless, second, nowhere does it say anything about any bender or falling down-can't talk drunk. Staying up late and having a few drinks is different than getting blackout drunk. Especially when you consider 6AM Sochi time is 9PM our time, even though they've been there for a couple of weeks. Were they wrong? Sure. Are some of you blowing this way out of proportion? Hell yes.

Natalie Darwitz

Wow!

The one with the man hands?

Every time I see Fred Roggin I think of Christopher McDonald. Juice by Tappy, juice by Tappy, Tappy's got juice, Tappy's got juice, whooooaaaa Tappy!

So much so that they decided to commit mass suicide.

It's a real shame. I thought NBC did a good job the last two Olympics. This Winter Games has been an absolute joke. From the media coverage, to the stories, to the hype and the poor scheduling. They're using five channels, with all the coverage they show they could probably squeeze it all into one channel if they aired 24 hours. I hope they get their act together for the next one.

You're not the only one. I was doing that first scatterplot earlier and for some reason the save percentages just didn't make any sense. Then I realized I was doing the same thing. :P

Might want to re-check those save percentages.

I was talking to somebody about that last night and we both agreed it was getting really old. Why does there need to be a story behind everything, why do they need to dramatize every event? We just wanted to see them focus on an athlete that was just happy to be there, talk about how good they were and they expected to win, talk about going home and getting back to work. I don't mean to sound cold, I feel sorry for him, but I was pretty sick of hearing about Bode Miller. The way they had his wife mic'ed up for his last run was comical.

You've supported my point that some advanced stats become too advanced to have any theoretical significance. At what point do you include so many variables that makes each case completely irrelevant because there is simply no way to find any correlation anywhere? If you can't take a broad statistic and find some kind of correlation, ther certianly isn't going to be any thing to be found the deeper you dig. All the variables you mention are meaningless (as you point out) because there doesn't appear to be any correlation between the two major varibales that I compared already. If there was a correlation then you could dig deeper to find why some goaltenders have a higher save percentage. I did this just to find if there was a correlation. I used to be a goaltender and I preferred to have a high workload. I think I was sharper and mentally it kept me from thinking too much if I had more to do. Now we can sit here and look at Miller's record with 40+ shots, I recall he had some insane winning percentage when faced with a ton of shots which tells me that he thrives when the team plays a wide open game. I also remember some stat about Craig Anderson having a super high win percentage when faced with 40+ shots. I wanted to see if there was a pattern. Apparently not.

It appears he performs better with more shots on goal.

If there was a correlation between shots on goal and save percentage, then there would be consistency year after year. In this case, there isn't. The trendline isn't there for appearance.