Front Page Changes: News logos and Playoff Pace chart added

[Thorner]

13 minutes ago, SDS said:

So, I went through every season and the last eight years or so and leaving out the two Covid seasons almost every season was around 98 points. Taro T saw the same thing. Where are you looking?

98 97 95 93 98 93 92 93 88 93 (94 the average, there)

..are the point totals for the 10 seasons previous to the most recent, leaving out the two covid years + lockout year

Seasons ending in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

Edited October 11, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

96 represents the average for the most recent 5 years (including last season, but not the covid years) if we think the more recent 5 year stretch is more revelatory 

[Taro T]

41 minutes ago, Thorny said:

96 represents the average for the most recent 5 years (including last season, but not the covid years) if we think the more recent 5 year stretch is more revelatory 

And, again, teams (within the last 50 years) have missed w/ 96.  Since the very unusual '70 season where literally every good team was in the Eastern Conference, nobody at or above NHL 0.600 has missed the playoffs.  That should be the goal (6 points every 5 games, or if that's too many increments then 12 points every 10).  Ensuring they're in, not hoping they're in.

[Thorner]

23 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And, again, teams (within the last 50 years) have missed w/ 96.  Since the very unusual '70 season where literally every good team was in the Eastern Conference, nobody at or above NHL 0.600 has missed the playoffs.  That should be the goal (6 points every 5 games, or if that's too many increments then 12 points every 10).  Ensuring they're in, not hoping they're in.

And no one has missed with 100, could set the line there. 

You can set it wherever you want, I don’t care. I’m just saying that mathematically 98 points is very infrequently needed to make it

[Thorner]

The line can be an approximation of ~ what we think we’d need to make it (96, or 94 points, depending on whether you go with the 5 or 10 year stat pool) or it can be set at a failsafe number where, should we hit it, playoffs are all but guaranteed. Seems as though you prefer the latter.

Im good with that  

Edited October 11, 2022 by Thorny

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

And no one has missed with 100, could set the line there. 

You can set it wherever you want, I don’t care. I’m just saying that mathematically 98 points is very infrequently needed to make it

No one's missed with 120.  Hey, maybe ...

You don't care, but yet are belaboring it.  😉

NHL 0.600 is easy to track in season.  Played 10 games?  Yep.  Got at least 12 points?  Yep.  Cool.  Keep up the good work.  Nope?  Better find some more points the next 10 so you've got 24 after 20.  98 is the closest you can come and cross that 0.600 threshold after the full year. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

No one's missed with 120.  Hey, maybe ...

You don't care, but yet are belaboring it.  😉

NHL 0.600 is easy to track in season.  Played 10 games?  Yep.  Got at least 12 points?  Yep.  Cool.  Keep up the good work.  Nope?  Better find some more points the next 10 so you've got 24 after 20.  98 is the closest you can come and cross that 0.600 threshold after the full year. 

Frankly, such an annoying rep to have, on a message board where, aside from obvious exceptions, more content = positive, imo. 

Regardless, and notwithstanding, I WILL belabour now, in an effort to explain that classifying my initial posts as “belabouring” is kinda questionable when, if you read what SDS said in response to me, prompting further response, it was about an actual contesting of what the qualifying numbers were (which I clarified) and not any sort of semantic disagreement. 

Again, your preferred system is good with me. 

[SDS]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Frankly, such an annoying rep to have, on a message board where, aside from obvious exceptions, more content = positive, imo. 

Regardless, and notwithstanding, I WILL belabour now, in an effort to explain that classifying my initial posts as “belabouring” is kinda questionable when, if you read what SDS said in response to me, prompting further response, it was about an actual contesting of what the qualifying numbers were (which I clarified) and not any sort of semantic disagreement. 

Again, your preferred system is good with me. 

So, I was just looking at Eastern Conf totals, which I think is a better gauge for an EC team. 

[Thorner]

31 minutes ago, SDS said:

So, I was just looking at Eastern Conf totals, which I think is a better gauge for an EC team. 

Same

Edited October 12, 2022 by Thorny

[Stoner]

17 hours ago, Thorny said:

The line can be an approximation of ~ what we think we’d need to make it (96, or 94 points, depending on whether you go with the 5 or 10 year stat pool) or it can be set at a failsafe number where, should we hit it, playoffs are all but guaranteed. Seems as though you prefer the latter.

Im good with that  

I will pray for your soul.

[Eleven]

The front page is down.

[SDS]

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

The front page is down.

Thanks for the heads up. Shoot me a text time, since that is pretty urgent and I might not see it here.

[Stoner]

The logos are a great touch. I also like the out of town coverage on a separate page.

[Eleven]

Update the chart!  164 point pace!

[SDS]

24 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Update the chart!  164 point pace!

It's already driving me crazy. I can't get the blue line on top of the other lines, despite being first in the legend. My guess is that I just need to change the order of the lines, but I want the legend This season, last season, pace. Now it may have to be reverse so this season isn't underneath the others.

[Thorner]

6 hours ago, SDS said:

It's already driving me crazy. I can't get the blue line on top of the other lines, despite being first in the legend. My guess is that I just need to change the order of the lines, but I want the legend This season, last season, pace. Now it may have to be reverse so this season isn't underneath the others.

Weirdly doesn’t load on my iPad at all but my iPad is old as hell. 

[SDS]

32 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Weirdly doesn’t load on my iPad at all but my iPad is old as hell. 

It’s not an image. It actually gets re-created from another website every time it loads. Your operating system is probably just too old.