K8prisoner Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) On 2/13/2015 at 6:46 AM, WildCard said: So we're sittin on a throw pillow then with 6 points?I'll be comfy with 6 games left .. Up eleven .. I can handle that. I'll even send you few bucks to dress up like Tonya and send you to St. Louis with hammer .. Crazy guy carried out blues lockeroom yelling " I am tank" over and over . Or we can send a blanket with smallpox .. The tank is affecting my character ... Ok .. I know . Before I starting verbally sharting .. I read someone here posted. that cool company that sends glitter to enemies.. A box to the island and st Louis and I can be happy with another ball and an extra 3.5%.. I'd be on a bean bag then. An L couch .. A sex tional. Edited February 13, 2015 by K8prisoner
Hoss Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 6:52 AM, K8prisoner said: I'm nervous .. Look at the difference Roy and the subtraction of three good players ,we would want, ..have done for them.. 0 -10 to 5-5 and on the road .. Out shooting their opponents . On 2/13/2015 at 6:52 AM, Taro T said: No. To clinch, you have to get more than the 2nd team (less than the 29th NHL squad) gets. So, the team in 1st needs one more than 2nd place can get (technically, because Buffalo took 2 in both games against the Eulers and hold the tiebreaker, they just need to finish even w/ them, but we don't want to worry about tie breakers, win it outright) and the 2nd place team also needs 1 more than they can get (aka, they CAN'T clinch as they can't get there from here). We could make it more complicated, but anybody behind 2nd place has to get ahead of THAT to clinch; that they'll also need help from the current 1st place team becomes immaterial as they CAN'T get ahead of #2 w/ what remains available to them. Once they climb to #2, they need exactly 1 more point than is available to clinch. If you're in first you need to clinch more points than the second place team. Say that Toronto gets to 124... They did a great job of getting ahead of Edmonton and clinching more points than they could possibly get. But what if Buffalo gets to 125? Oops, they clinched nothing.
Taro T Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 6:54 AM, Tank said: If you're in first you need to clinch more points than the second place team. Say that Toronto gets to 124... They did a great job of getting ahead of Edmonton and clinching more points than they could possibly get. But what if Buffalo gets to 125? Oops, they clinched nothing. TO has 114 under their control. If the landscape alters and they can get to 124, it will be reflected. (They can't w/out help.)
Hoss Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 6:58 AM, Taro T said: TO has 114 under their control. If the landscape alters and they can get to 124, it will be reflected. (They can't w/out help.) I don't know how you got to this from what I said, but okay. It's obvious (as you point out) that teams will need more points than they have available to them in order to clinch unless they're in first. My point was that your standings have it set up so that any team that gets more points than Edmonton can possibly get then they clinch first, which is false. That just clinches second place for them. You need to clinch more than the first place team can possibly get to get to first.
K8prisoner Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:05 AM, Tank said: I don't know how you got to this from what I said, but okay. It's obvious (as you point out) that teams will need more points than they have available to them in order to clinch unless they're in first. My point was that your standings have it set up so that any team that gets more points than Edmonton can possibly get then they clinch first, which is false. That just clinches second place for them. You need to clinch more than the first place team can possibly get to get to first. It's a good thing you guys don't get caught up in minutiae .
Taro T Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:05 AM, Tank said: I don't know how you got to this from what I said, but okay. It's obvious (as you point out) that teams will need more points than they have available to them in order to clinch unless they're in first. My point was that your standings have it set up so that any team that gets more points than Edmonton can possibly get then they clinch first, which is false. That just clinches second place for them. You need to clinch more than the first place team can possibly get to get to first. But you don't. The 1st place team (and the 2nd and the rest) only need to get more than the 2nd place team can get. Once you are ahead of that, nobody else can get ahead of you. ( You'll have to get to 2nd to make it relevant, but it's true.)
Hoss Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:10 AM, Taro T said: But you don't. The 1st place team (and the 2nd and the rest) only need to get more than the 2nd place team can get. Once you are ahead of that, nobody else can get ahead of you. ( You'll have to get to 2nd to make it relevant, but it's true.) This simply isn't true. So if anybody finishes a point ahead of the Ducks this season they'll have clinched the president's trophy since the Ducks are currently in 2nd? No... They still have to pass the Blues. Same thing here.
Taro T Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:39 AM, Tank said: This simply isn't true. So if anybody finishes a point ahead of the Ducks this season they'll have clinched the president's trophy since the Ducks are currently in 2nd? No... They still have to pass the Blues. Same thing here.It is true. You are overlooking that the team that passed the team that was in 2nd is now in 2nd and by definition needs 1 more point than they can get.
SDS Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:39 AM, Tank said: This simply isn't true. So if anybody finishes a point ahead of the Ducks this season they'll have clinched the president's trophy since the Ducks are currently in 2nd? No... They still have to pass the Blues. Same thing here. I have no idea what is being said, but given that, I would trust Taro T to perform brain surgery on me if he said he could. Smart dude.
Samson's Flow Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:39 AM, Tank said: This simply isn't true. So if anybody finishes a point ahead of the Ducks this season they'll have clinched the president's trophy since the Ducks are currently in 2nd? No... They still have to pass the Blues. Same thing here. On 2/13/2015 at 2:12 PM, Taro T said: It is true. You are overlooking that the team that passed the team that was in 2nd is now in 2nd and by definition needs 1 more point than they can get. You two are making my head spin. It took us all long enough to figure out this bizarro world CHL language where up is down, now you guys are debating the made up RPTC stat from the invented reverse standings where a win is a loss. :unsure:
mphs mike Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 2:22 PM, Touched by Boyes said: You two are making my head spin. It took us all long enough to figure out this bizarro world CHL language where up is down, now you guys are debating the made up RPTC stat from the invented reverse standings where a win is a loss. :unsure: CLEARLY the post of the year!
Hoss Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 2:12 PM, Taro T said: It is true. You are overlooking that the team that passed the team that was in 2nd is now in 2nd and by definition needs 1 more point than they can get. Getting one more point than they can get won't close the four point gap, though.
woods-racer Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:07 AM, K8prisoner said: It's a good thing you guys don't get caught up in minutiae . On 2/13/2015 at 2:22 PM, Touched by Boyes said: You two are making my head spin. It took us all long enough to figure out this bizarro world CHL language where up is down, now you guys are debating the made up RPTC stat from the invented reverse standings where a win is a loss. :unsure: On 2/13/2015 at 2:34 PM, mphs mike said: CLEARLY the post of the year! Clearly the thread with the most nominated posts of the year!
MattPie Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 This doesn't seem that hard. Points remaing: PR = (82 - Games Played) * 2 Max Possible Points: MPP = current points + PR <--- losing out Remaing Points to Clinch: RPTC = (leader MPP - #2 MPP) ... umm... Maybe this is a little harder. :) Maybe a simple "points behind" like "games behind" in baseball makes sense?
Taro T Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 4:21 PM, Tank said: Tank, on 13 Feb 2015 - 11:21 AM, said: Getting one more point than they can get won't close the four point gap, though. On 2/13/2015 at 6:45 PM, MattPie said: MattPie, on 13 Feb 2015 - 1:45 PM, said: This doesn't seem that hard. Points remaing: PR = (82 - Games Played) * 2 Max Possible Points: MPP = current points + PR <--- losing out Remaing Points to Clinch: RPTC = (leader MPP - #2 MPP) ... umm... Maybe this is a little harder. :) Maybe a simple "points behind" like "games behind" in baseball makes sense? Yep. Once 2 can't catch you, you have clinched 1. How's that for the 'moment of Zen.' ;)
woods-racer Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 7:50 PM, Taro T said: Yep. Once 2 can't catch you, you have clinched 1. How's that for the 'moment of Zen.' ;)AAAAHHHH, all is right in the world now
Brawndo Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 6:45 PM, MattPie said: This doesn't seem that hard. Points remaing: PR = (82 - Games Played) * 2 Max Possible Points: MPP = current points + PR <--- losing out Remaing Points to Clinch: RPTC = (leader MPP - #2 MPP) ... umm... Maybe this is a little harder. :) Maybe a simple "points behind" like "games behind" in baseball makes sense? Dammit nobody said anything about there being math!!!
Samson's Flow Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 I think I figured it out. And turns out both Taro and Tank are both somewhat correct in the RPTC number. For the first place team (Sabres), the remaining points to clinch should be calculated as enough points to beat out the highest possible total of the rest of the teams. - So in this case, it would be Buffalo getting to Edmonton's 123 Maximum Possible Points number. Since the Sabres have 75 pts already, they would need 123-75=48 pts to tie EDM, so 49 pts to clinch dead last. For the rest of the teams chasing the Sabres, the remaining points to clinch is always more than Points Remaining (PR). It is the amount of points needed to pass the top team's (Sabres) maximum possible points. - In this case, Edmonton would need to surpass the Sabres' 129 MPP number in order to clinch, so they would need to get 130 points. Seeing as EDM currently has 71 pts, to clinch they would need an RPTC of 59 (130 - 71 = 59), as this would get them to first place no matter what the Sabres do for the rest of the year. However, it is impossible for EDM to gain 59 pts, so they would need some help in the form of Sabres losing CHL games. - Edmonton needs the Sabres to miss out on 8 of their possible points (EDM RPTC of 59 - EDM PR of 52 - 1 pt to prevent tie) in order for them to be able to pass the Sabres. In this scenario, the Sabres MPP is 122 and Edmonton's MPP is 123, resulting in EDM clinching first. In summary, I hate you all for making me explain this. :anger:
Taro T Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 9:00 PM, Touched by Boyes said: I think I figured it out. And turns out both Taro and Tank are both somewhat correct in the RPTC number. For the first place team (Sabres), the remaining points to clinch should be calculated as enough points to beat out the highest possible total of the rest of the teams. - So in this case, it would be Buffalo getting to Edmonton's 123 Maximum Possible Points number. Since the Sabres have 75 pts already, they would need 123-75=48 pts to tie EDM, so 49 pts to clinch dead last. For the rest of the teams chasing the Sabres, the remaining points to clinch is always more than Points Remaining (PR). It is the amount of points needed to pass the top team's (Sabres) maximum possible points. - In this case, Edmonton would need to surpass the Sabres' 129 MPP number in order to clinch, so they would need to get 130 points. Seeing as EDM currently has 71 pts, to clinch they would need an RPTC of 59 (130 - 71 = 59), as this would get them to first place no matter what the Sabres do for the rest of the year. However, it is impossible for EDM to gain 59 pts, so they would need some help in the form of Sabres losing CHL games. - Edmonton needs the Sabres to miss out on 8 of their possible points (EDM RPTC of 59 - EDM PR of 52 - 1 pt to prevent tie) in order for them to be able to pass the Sabres. In this scenario, the Sabres MPP is 122 and Edmonton's MPP is 123, resulting in EDM clinching first. In summary, I hate you all for making me explain this. :anger: Close. You've explained the 'magic number' so to speak. Which for the 1st place team is equivalent to the RPTC. It will almost always be more than the RPTC for the others, but not absolutely always. (Right? ;)) And once again, to clinch (which is what RPTC measures), you need only to lock in 1 point better than 2nd. It only concerns your team and 2nd place. :lol:
TrueBlueGED Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 You don't need a bunch of math and knowledge of the breakers to know who is going to win the Shart. The only thing you need is to know which team is the Buffalo Sabres and which teams are not.
Derrico Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 9:40 PM, TrueBluePhD said: You don't need a bunch of math and knowledge of the breakers to know who is going to win the Shart. The only thing you need is to know which team is the Buffalo Sabres and which teams are not. I'm still a wimp and not celebrating anything yet. But it was nice to hear bob Mackenzie on hockey hotline call us a virtual lock this morning.
TrueBlueGED Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 9:45 PM, Derrico said: I'm still a wimp and not celebrating anything yet. But it was nice to hear bob Mackenzie on hockey hotline call us a virtual lock this morning. How about when we go with Lindback-Hackett in net to close out the year? Even if Neuvirth isn't traded, he's bound to get hurt.
dudacek Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) If statistical trends mean anything, the only legitimate threat is Edmonton. There is no way this team will cough up 10 or 12 points in 27 games to get caught by Carolina or Arizona. Even if we flop to .500 hockey the rest of the way, the Oilers at their current pace wouldn't catch us. Of course I will remain nervous until the end. Edited February 13, 2015 by dudacek
IKnowPhysics Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 The only thing that scares me even a little is the Toronto Maple Leafs. They're nose-diving without really having committed to the tank. They may be able to execute a fire sale in short order and compete for the brown medal. The only thing protecting us is our 15 point head start. What we need to hope for is Toronto players and coaches playing for their lives, something they're not used to doing, just long enough for us to pull away.
TrueBlueGED Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 On 2/13/2015 at 10:00 PM, IKnowPhysics said: The only thing that scares me even a little is the Toronto Maple Leafs. They're nose-diving without really having committed to the tank. They may be able to execute a fire sale in short order and compete for the brown medal. The only thing protecting us is our 15 point head start. What we need to hope for is Toronto players and coaches playing for their lives, something they're not used to doing, just long enough for us to pull away. Toronto isn't catching us. No way. They're going to win some games if for no other reason than Kessel isn't only scoring 5 over the final 28 like he has the previous.
Recommended Posts