Mike Augello: Leafs blueline on the mend? Petan signed to two-year extension

Mike Augello: Leafs blueline on the mend? Petan signed to two-year extension
- mikeinbuffalo

Test

Test
- bobbyisno1

Failed

Mike Augello: Leafs blueline on the mend? Petan signed to two-year extension
- mikeinbuffalo

The Petan Man Can

Melnyk.

Imagine being the guy that gave him some of his liver and absolutely hating him now.

Melnyk.

Imagine being the guy that gave him some of his liver and absolutely hating him now.
- GreatGigInTheSky

Honestly, I think that most Sens fans would hate the guy that gave him the liver almost as much as Yuuugene himself...

According to the Athletic, we now have a 52% chance of winning the first round, with Boston falling to 48%.

Don't shoot the messenger here, boys.

Honestly, I think that most Sens fans would hate the guy that gave him the liver almost as much as Yuuugene himself...
- lumlums

Does Melnyk have kids? If he doesn't, who would have taken over the team after his death?

According to the Athletic, we now have a 52% chance of winning the first round, with Boston falling to 48%.

Don't shoot the messenger here, boys.
- Atomic Wedgie

Are their calculations based on something similar to Eklund's "simulator"?

According to the Athletic, we now have a 52% chance of winning the first round, with Boston falling to 48%.

Don't shoot the messenger here, boys.
- Atomic Wedgie

Did someone from the AthleticTO write that?

According to the Athletic, we now have a 52% chance of winning the first round, with Boston falling to 48%.

Don't shoot the messenger here, boys.
- Atomic Wedgie

Some other wacky insights:

We have about a 1 in 3 chance of beating TB in the 2nd round.

TB has a 24% chance of winning the Stanley Cup.

After that, there's a few teams at 9%:

Leafs
Penguins
Predators

Then a few at 8%:

Bruins
Sharks
Golden Knights

Yeah, don't ask me how they are generating these numbers.

Are their calculations based on something similar to Eklund's "simulator"?
- TheMussel

The BuzzTron 3000 is currently loaned to the Trump administration so they can use it to calculate the benefits of building the border wall.

Some other wacky insights:

We have about a 1 in 3 chance of beating TB in the 2nd round.

TB has a 24% chance of winning the Stanley Cup.

After that, there's a few teams at 9%:

Leafs
Penguins
Predators

Then a few at 8%:

Bruins
Sharks
Golden Knights

Yeah, don't ask me how they are generating these numbers.
- Atomic Wedgie

I have less faith in this than Eklund's "simulator".

Are their calculations based on something similar to Eklund's "simulator"?
- TheMussel

"The projections are based on 50,000 simulations of the remainder of the season, which factors in each team’s projected strength, current health, and their strength of schedule (which includes opponent strength, venue and rest). "

He then has a page which goes into further details. Basically he assigns values to each player, and then spits out a number based on calculations. Much like James Tanner, he has trouble recognizing that when you feed 5 subjective numbers into a formula, the sum it spits out isn't necessarily "fact."

From his FAQ:

How accurate are these?

Last year they were within +/- 9.9 points of the actual results. That sounds bad (and it is because the year before most models were within eight or nine), but that’s largely because last year was much less predictable than recent seasons. Compared to every other public point projection I found, this model was actually the best one. Go me! Keep in mind that’s just one season, but it’s still pretty good. You can also see Micah McCurdy’s assessment of different playoff probabilities last season to see this model had the right idea about many teams quicker than most. During the playoffs, it did pretty well compared to the other models. too. On a game-by-game basis, it predicted the favourite correctly 59.4 percent of the time last season, which is very high for hockey. It was also profitable against Pinnacle, the world’s most reputable sportsbook. Again, it’s been just one season, but the results have been good enough to be relatively trustworthy.

The BuzzTron 3000 is currently loaned to the Trump administration so they can use it to calculate the benefits of building the border wall.
- TrashPanda

Can we get the Mexicans to pay for my Season Ticket to Hockeybuzz?

"The projections are based on 50,000 simulations of the remainder of the season, which factors in each team’s projected strength, current health, and their strength of schedule (which includes opponent strength, venue and rest). "

He then has a page which goes into further details. Basically he assigns values to each player, and then spits out a number based on calculations. Much like James Tanner, he has trouble recognizing that when you feed 5 subjective numbers into a formula, the sum it spits out isn't necessarily "fact."

From his FAQ:

How accurate are these?

Last year they were within +/- 9.9 points of the actual results. That sounds bad (and it is because the year before most models were within eight or nine), but that’s largely because last year was much less predictable than recent seasons. Compared to every other public point projection I found, this model was actually the best one. Go me! Keep in mind that’s just one season, but it’s still pretty good. You can also see Micah McCurdy’s assessment of different playoff probabilities last season to see this model had the right idea about many teams quicker than most. During the playoffs, it did pretty well compared to the other models. too. On a game-by-game basis, it predicted the favourite correctly 59.4 percent of the time last season, which is very high for hockey. It was also profitable against Pinnacle, the world’s most reputable sportsbook. Again, it’s been just one season, but the results have been good enough to be relatively trustworthy.
- Atomic Wedgie

So, some geek wrote an algorithm...... ok.

Happy Friday Buzzards

I have less faith in this than Eklund's "simulator".
- Aetherial

seems reasonable to me
if you just say everyone has a 1/16 chance thats 6.25%

but some teams I would say have a better chance than others

Does Melnyk have kids? If he doesn't, who would have taken over the team after his death?
- GreatGigInTheSky

I would’ve hoped UG. That would’ve made my life.

"The projections are based on 50,000 simulations of the remainder of the season, which factors in each team’s projected strength, current health, and their strength of schedule (which includes opponent strength, venue and rest). "

He then has a page which goes into further details. Basically he assigns values to each player, and then spits out a number based on calculations. Much like James Tanner, he has trouble recognizing that when you feed 5 subjective numbers into a formula, the sum it spits out isn't necessarily "fact."

From his FAQ:

How accurate are these?

Last year they were within +/- 9.9 points of the actual results. That sounds bad (and it is because the year before most models were within eight or nine), but that’s largely because last year was much less predictable than recent seasons. Compared to every other public point projection I found, this model was actually the best one. Go me! Keep in mind that’s just one season, but it’s still pretty good. You can also see Micah McCurdy’s assessment of different playoff probabilities last season to see this model had the right idea about many teams quicker than most. During the playoffs, it did pretty well compared to the other models. too. On a game-by-game basis, it predicted the favourite correctly 59.4 percent of the time last season, which is very high for hockey. It was also profitable against Pinnacle, the world’s most reputable sportsbook. Again, it’s been just one season, but the results have been good enough to be relatively trustworthy.
- Atomic Wedgie

Remember when Yost was so proud that Corsi correctly predicted 15 of the 16 teams that would make the playoffs in January.

The actual standings in January also predicted 15 of the 16 teams.

... So did the actual standings.

Most of the advanced stats proponents are idiots.

thanks a lot Lou

"The projections are based on 50,000 simulations of the remainder of the season, which factors in each team’s projected strength, current health, and their strength of schedule (which includes opponent strength, venue and rest). "

He then has a page which goes into further details. Basically he assigns values to each player, and then spits out a number based on calculations. Much like James Tanner, he has trouble recognizing that when you feed 5 subjective numbers into a formula, the sum it spits out isn't necessarily "fact."

From his FAQ:

How accurate are these?

Last year they were within +/- 9.9 points of the actual results. That sounds bad (and it is because the year before most models were within eight or nine), but that’s largely because last year was much less predictable than recent seasons. Compared to every other public point projection I found, this model was actually the best one. Go me! Keep in mind that’s just one season, but it’s still pretty good. You can also see Micah McCurdy’s assessment of different playoff probabilities last season to see this model had the right idea about many teams quicker than most. During the playoffs, it did pretty well compared to the other models. too. On a game-by-game basis, it predicted the favourite correctly 59.4 percent of the time last season, which is very high for hockey. It was also profitable against Pinnacle, the world’s most reputable sportsbook. Again, it’s been just one season, but the results have been good enough to be relatively trustworthy.
- Atomic Wedgie

I really hope the Leafs have real data scientists working with them.

Any real data analyst would build a model based on historical data. I know the sample size of 100 seasons is pretty small but still beats trying to invent a formula on a whim, because you like sports.

I really hope the Leafs have real data scientists working with them.

Any real data analyst would build a model based on historical data. I know the sample size of 100 seasons is pretty small but still beats trying to invent a formula on a whim, because you like sports.
- TheMussel

It might be hard to get the Corsi for Reg Noble - the Arenas' leading scorer in 1917-18.

And they didn't award assists back then, so we will have to adjust the numbers for that.

I really hope the Leafs have real data scientists working with them.

Any real data analyst would build a model based on historical data. I know the sample size of 100 seasons is pretty small but still beats trying to invent a formula on a whim, because you like sports.
- TheMussel

for sure anyone who doesnt factor in the 1922 nhl standings into thier models is an idiot

for sure anyone who doesnt factor in the 1922 nhl standings into thier models is an idiot
- senstroll

chill out bros, it was an exaggeration with a hint of sarcasm

thanks a lot Lou


- senstroll

Kristen Shilton
‏Verified account @kristen_shilton
27m27 minutes ago

Asked Morgan Rielly what he thought of Eugene Melnyk’s comment that #Leafs “forgot about defence” in rebuild: “That’s funny. I don’t really have any comment on that except it’s pretty funny.”