I get a kick out of it when one side is equally involved in the debate, and then proceeds to try and belittle the other side for continuing in the debate.

But I digress. Yes, there is an authority on how a team is determined to be a .500 team. That authority is the NHL. Just because you or I, or anyone else disagrees with how it is calculated. Such as how wins in the shootout are awarded. Doesn't change the facts.
- MJL

We're not equally involved. You've typed like a million more letters than me. Anyways, please show me the NHL definition of "a .500 team".

#TeamMJL

Heresay.
- jmatchett383

BALDERDASH!

So what? You're assuming that being labeled a .500 team makes any kind of difference when in reality it means nothing. So going by points or going by wins is up to the person.
- NickTheKid87

That is incorrect. In reality it does mean something. It means a lot. Every point means a lot. And you're missing the point. Which is by using the NHL standings, individual opinion is removed.

I get a kick out of it when one side is equally involved in the debate, and then proceeds to try and belittle the other side for continuing in the debate.

But I digress. Yes, there is an authority on how a team is determined to be a .500 team. That authority is the NHL. Just because you or I, or anyone else disagrees with how it is calculated. Such as how wins in the shootout are awarded. Doesn't change the facts.
- MJL

You're assuming the standing are a definition. Just because a hockey body produces standings based on accumulated points does not mean they are a .500 team.

BALD
- johndewar

We're not equally involved. You've typed like a million more letters than me. Anyways, please show me the NHL definition of "a .500 team".
- BulliesPhan87

A response is a response.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/te...ointPctg&viewName=summary

Nevermind, I'm not doing this anymore.

You're assuming the standing are a definition. Just because a hockey body produces standings based on accumulated points does not mean they are a .500 team.
- jmatchett383

In the NHL point standings system, they are. And they are official.

Nevermind, I'm not doing this anymore.
- jmatchett383

Look at the top 23 teams.

- PLindbergh31

Opinion. I say he is balding, not bald.

Please engage me in endless circular debate.

Look at the top 23 teams.
- MJL

That's fantastic. You win.

It must feel so good to always be right.

That is incorrect. In reality it does mean something. It means a lot. Every point means a lot. And you're missing the point. Which is by using the NHL standings, individual opinion is removed.
- MJL

The LABEL means nothing. A 1-1-1 team is in the exact same place in the standings whether we call it a .500 team or not. The NHL has not written a rule or official statement saying ".500 means point percentage" because it's irrelevant. The league dgaf if you call a 1-1-1 team .500 or not because it is purely semantics.

S e m a n t i c s

I get a kick out of it when one side is equally involved in the debate, and then proceeds to try and belittle the other side for continuing in the debate.

But I digress. Yes, there is an authority on how a team is determined to be a .500 team. That authority is the NHL. Just because you or I, or anyone else disagrees with how it is calculated. Such as how wins in the shootout are awarded. Doesn't change the facts.
- MJL

What's funny about this is that you're guilty of this as well in your own way.

Calling people's statements and opinions "laughable" on a consistent basis is a form of belittlement.

I kind of want to take MJL to a game, just to see him totally flip out whenever anybody says anything he disagrees with.

A response is a response.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/te...ointPctg&viewName=summary
- MJL

That is a stat they track, yes. But I don't see the official definition of .500 status. They also track winning percentage when trailing first, should that factor into being a .500 team?

The LABEL means nothing. A 1-1-1 team is in the exact same place in the standings whether we call it a .500 team or not. The NHL has not written a rule or official statement saying ".500 means point percentage" because it's irrelevant. The league dgaf if you call a 1-1-1 team .500 or not because it is purely semantics.

S e m a n t i c s
- NickTheKid87

What you're arguing is semantics. Using the official NHL standings is not semantics. It's using facts.

What you're arguing is semantics. Using the official NHL standings is not semantics. It's using facts.
- MJL

The fact is, a 1-1-1 team has 50% of the points possible but only won 33.3% of their games. These are the facts. How you choose to interpret them is opinion and semantics.

That is a stat they track, yes. But I don't see the official definition of .500 status. They also track winning percentage when trailing first, should that factor into being a .500 team?
- BulliesPhan87

What you're missing is that the stat is based on points, which is how the NHL calculates the standings. The NHL standings is a points based system. Therefore if you have earned half of the points available to the team, then you are a .500 team.

If you want my personal opinion. A team who hasn't won half of it's games should be considered a .500 team. But that's not the reality of the NHL standings system. It is skewed because you can actually earn points even if you lost the game. But what I or any other fan thinks is irrelevant to the facts of the standings.

The fact is, a 1-1-1 team has 50% of the points possible but only won 33.3% of their games. These are the facts. How you choose to interpret them is opinion and semantics.
- NickTheKid87

You've missed the point. My statement isn't based on how I interpret it. It's based on the official standings and how the NHL ranks teams in it's point based standings system.

What you're arguing is semantics. Using the official NHL standings is not semantics. It's using facts.
- MJL

So I am going to use official NHL standings.

Flyers have 4 wins.
Flyers have 5 losses.

Now, because my homeboy Pythagoras of Samos decided Math was a cool ting...

I will do math.

Flyers have played 9 games. They have won 4 games. 4/9=z

z=.444444∞

That looks to me like a mathematical answer. Typically math is factual as well.

It's really sad that this argument is one of the more interesting of the daily 8-page variety we've come to put up with.

You've missed the point. My statement is based on how I interpret it. It's based on the official standings and how the NHL ranks teams in it's point based standings system.
- MJL

Aren't interpretations based in opinion?

You've missed the point. My statement is based on how I interpret it. It's based on the official standings and how the NHL ranks teams in it's point based standings system.
- MJL

I didn't miss your point at all. You just didn't supply what I requested.

Fencing on the head of a pin regardless.