| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| leigh |
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 20:44:37
Do you like the NHL's new 4 Conference system for the 2012/13 season? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest2260 |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 10:45:47
sahis34 says it best with the following:
"THE LEAGUE IMPLEMENTS AN UNFAIR SYSTEM, all the other factors are not concrete, and really develop as the season progresses. When all the teams have played 0 games, two "equally" skilled teams in two "equally skilled divisions(quality of teams) should have the same likelyhood of making the playoffs."
I don't disagree with beans, slozo, polish and others that various factors play into who eventually ends up making the playoffs. But you also can't deny either the math behind the fact the the chances are skewed for a div with 7 teams vs 8. I even think i read them agreeing to it, but saying it is "irrelevant" which is not true. If you don't think that 7% makes a difference to YOU and don't care, then that's your opinion (ala nuxfan's post). But don't argue that math doesn't apply or is irrelevant in this case, because it is. Maybe just not to the importance that you think it does. But it certainly exists and is there. I don't think anyone said that 7vs8 would be the deciding factor or the ONLY thing that effects teams making the playoffs. But for me, I believe that the league should at least have a system in place to give every team an equal chance initially. Which isn't the case here. |
| Guest2260 |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 10:34:20
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4996
Its obvious the NHL plans on expansion by the new layout. I remember when they went from 24 to 26 teams and had the 7-6 or 13 teams per conference. It was glaringly obvious then that the league needed to add 2 more teams to even things out which they did. This is setup to do the same. i see quebec city and possibly kansas(lol) coming in the near future. Bettman is done with relocation.
If this is the case, then they should realign when they have the teams. No reason it needs to be done before hand and have some inequality in the league. Put the plan in place and execute once you have the number of teams to do so. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 10:33:56
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
I think everyone knows there's nothing like a good mathdebate once in a while... 
All I know is that Sahis better stop mathdebating on a pubic forum . . . quite frankly, I find it appalling. 
Sorry, could not resist 
Guest 4996 - I disagree, and think the opposite is being set-up as a possibility. Contraction.
With the failing economy in the US and some teams leaking money like no tomorrow down south, I think in a year or two that contraction is quite possible if not likely. We'll see I guess, but even if things just stay the same in some cities, there will be moves.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I'll agree with you on the contraction possibility, and I'm trying to move away from the mathdebate now, I agree it's disgusting and I have a problem
Instead I'll just say that having ann extra team to compete with will make it more difficult and that's just common sense.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Guest6133 |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 09:09:20
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
The best way to work around the differences would be to assign top 3 teams divisionally and have 4 remaining spots up for wildcard. It would offset any small percentage advantage between the conferences having the best 4 remaining teams regardless of conference playing in the playoffs.
The problem with the wild card approach - and with any approach that allows different number of playoff teams coming from different comferences - is that the first rounds of playoff cannot be played within a conference then. You may end up with pairs like Montreal - LA or Vancouver - Tampa, which is logistically difficult and exausting for their players. And what if the winner plays against a winner of battle between 2 NY teams in the next round? Clear disadvantage.
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 09:09:04
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
With the failing economy in the US and some teams leaking money like no tomorrow down south, I think in a year or two that contraction is quite possible if not likely. We'll see I guess, but even if things just stay the same in some cities, there will be moves.
I too don't see relocation in the cards, that would be the last thing that the NHL would want to do IMO. The talent pool is already diluted, there are several teams that are having financial problems with the teams that they have. Bettman might not like relocation, but if he doesn't allow moves he'll see teams closing down, and he'll like that even less.
PHX moving to the east next year seems to be a foregone conclusion at this point. Which would solve Sahis's math conundrum, and we're good to go. |
| n/a |
Posted - 12/23/2011 : 05:18:01
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
I think everyone knows there's nothing like a good mathdebate once in a while...
All I know is that Sahis better stop mathdebating on a pubic forum . . . quite frankly, I find it appalling.
Sorry, could not resist
Guest 4996 - I disagree, and think the opposite is being set-up as a possibility. Contraction.
With the failing economy in the US and some teams leaking money like no tomorrow down south, I think in a year or two that contraction is quite possible if not likely. We'll see I guess, but even if things just stay the same in some cities, there will be moves.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4996 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 23:18:20
Its obvious the NHL plans on expansion by the new layout. I remember when they went from 24 to 26 teams and had the 7-6 or 13 teams per conference. It was glaringly obvious then that the league needed to add 2 more teams to even things out which they did. This is setup to do the same. i see quebec city and possibly kansas(lol) coming in the near future. Bettman is done with relocation. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 23:15:47
Screw it , I guess if you people don't realize that an extra team to compete with is unfair then, what's the point . Beans still doesn't understand that the 7 percent is generic. He also doesn't understand that the quantity of teams enhances the quality of the division, and that if a higher quality divison and a lower quality divison have the same post season standards, then it's unfair.
Conference A without phoenix would match the other conferences in quality next year, with phoenix the quality would be enhanced. This is common sense, a fact and the whole point I'm trying to get across.This is the difference between 7 vs. 8, and the only counter argument I'm hearing is semantic bull**** about quality, and that this cancels out quantity, or somehow makes it insignificant.
Frankly I'm done with this argument if your only counter is to poke holes in the 7%, and to say things like:
 "Moving from an 8 team division to a 7 team division does not mean a better chance to move into a playoff spot based purely on the number of teams in the division. "
Guess what, in a league as balanced as the NHL, 99.% of the time moving from 8 to 7 means your more likely to get into the playoffs. You could assemble the best 7, and the worst 8, and you'd rather compete within the worst 8, but the league has balanced the teams fairly enough to make the average quality of the teams the same. The only difference of quality is the extra team, I like to call this QUANTITY.
If you ignore quantity and still think the the quality of either of the 7 team divisions match either of the 8 team ones then you're delusional.
These faces are awesome 
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 21:09:34
quote:
Originally posted by polishexpress
Again, Sahis, please remember to read the posts before replying.
Remember 4/7>4/8 only if the player doesn't hit the neck...
What did I miss? |
| polishexpress |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 21:04:29
Again, Sahis, please remember to read the posts before replying.
Remember 4/7>4/8 only if the player doesn't hit the neck... |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 17:57:39
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
As I clearly indicated in my last post, the difference between a 7 team division and an 8 team division is NOT one of the top four spots, it's the bottom spot. Moving from an 8 team division to a 7 team division does not mean a better chance to move into a playoff spot based purely on the number of teams in the division.
For example, if Philly(from a 7 team division) and CBJ (from an 8 team division) were switched, you are saying that CBJ automatically has a 7% higher chance of making the playoffs. In actuality, CBJ move from being the 7th best team out of 7 to the 8th best team out of 8th. Philly would most likely displace a top 4 team out of the playoffs.
Another example would be switching Toronto (from a 7 team vision) and Colorado (from an 8 team division). One of these other might go from a playoff spot to a non playoff spot. .
In either case (and in fact every case) the quantity of opponents has no impact. The quality of opponents has the impact. This struggle happens today between division. Teams in the West miss the playoffs when they have more points than teams in the East. The current system with even and equal divisions and teams has the same struggle you are attempting to blame on the new system having 7 or 8 teams in a conference.
"the quantity of opponents has no impact" I win right there. Clearly your missing that the 8th team can finish anywhere.
If the difference between 7 and 8 team divisons is an extra team assigned "the bottom spot' of 8, then you're assuming the 8 team division is just an 7 team division with an automatic dud of an 8th place team.
According to this logic if you put an 1st place team into an 100 team conference, that team would still remain in remain 1st and if you put the 8th place team in, they would drop to 100th(this is obviously wrong). This is an issue of quantity, unless you tie in quality by saying that the quality of teams improves if there is a greater quantity(but you don't have that luxury , quantity doesn't matter remember), Therefore your logic should hold up, but it doesn't.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 11:03:10
I think everyone knows there's nothing like a good mathdebate once in a while... |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 10:33:36
I was going to respond to the dumb math posts being tossed around. Glad I didnt. Not that I am commending your patience Beans, but your best response would have been silence, as Sahis and guest are not listening to your point of view. They are just hammering their point home and disregarding the other factors.
Someone pointed out earlier that the small math difference would schew the playoff probability. I agree there is a small difference between the conference's based on small percentages. The best way to work around the differences would be to assign top 3 teams divisionally and have 4 remaining spots up for wildcard. It would offset any small percentage advantage between the conferences having the best 4 remaining teams regardless of conference playing in the playoffs. Top teams playoff against weakest with the possibility of very interesting finals. Imagine the rivalry of a Pittsburg/Philly final should both finish in the 1-2 position end of year. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 08:35:39
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Why did I get tied up in a hit to the neck argument again? Clearly my fault. New Year's resolution: Don't get caught up in arguments like this. What a giant waste of time.
Beans....
Thank you for the above comment, it makes me feel i made the correct decision in staying out of this one!!! As you know, i usually like to stick my nose into these debates, but i wanted NO part of this one! I can see exactly what both sides are saying and both are correct in some way.
Yes, there is a mathematical advantage to having fewer teams battling for the same number of spots, but only as far as "odds" go when speaking in math terms (not Vegas / betting odds). However, as you point out, it doesn't really make a big difference when you're dealing with the teams playing a somewhat balanced schedule AND the fact that teams go through cycles of how competetive they are, therefore having the best one's qualify, regardless of how many there are fighting for those spots.
I will agree with sahis (omg, did i just type that?) that the math is definitely relevant though to some degree. However, it's not really much different than the current system in that the 9th place team on one side of the draw sometimes has more points than the 8th place team on the other side. This can still occur with these new divisions and in this case, some will say it's "unfair". BUT, how is the new more balanced sched not a little more "fair" as teams will be playing a little more similar opponents than in the past?
That's it, that's all. As far as this thread goes, i'm out like a fat kid in dodgeball. I want nothing to do with this as it prob should be "locked" and the verdict be a "hung jury" in reference to Slozo's witty "the defence rests" comment!
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 08:21:43
As I clearly indicated in my last post, the difference between a 7 team division and an 8 team division is NOT one of the top four spots, it's the bottom spot. Moving from an 8 team division to a 7 team division does not mean a better chance to move into a playoff spot based purely on the number of teams in the division.
For example, if Philly(from a 7 team division) and CBJ (from an 8 team division) were switched, you are saying that CBJ automatically has a 7% higher chance of making the playoffs. In actuality, CBJ move from being the 7th best team out of 7 to the 8th best team out of 8th. Philly would most likely displace a top 4 team out of the playoffs.
Another example would be switching Toronto (from a 7 team vision) and Colorado (from an 8 team division). One of these other might go from a playoff spot to a non playoff spot. .
In either case (and in fact every case) the quantity of opponents has no impact. The quality of opponents has the impact. This struggle happens today between division. Teams in the West miss the playoffs when they have more points than teams in the East. The current system with even and equal divisions and teams has the same struggle you are attempting to blame on the new system having 7 or 8 teams in a conference. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 07:44:41
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Sahis - you really aren't listening to other people's arguments, dude. I can tell, because you keep repeating yourself on this 7% thing, when many here have pointed out that number is based on pure math, and what we are dealing with is much more complicated than that as Beans has ably pointed out.
I think the biggest "unfairness" that can happen in the current system, or in the system to be implemented next year, is being in a division/conference with many great teams. This is, however, impossible to fight against, as it will naturally ebb and flow, and realistically, it's something every team at some point will have to live with.
I think the system we are moving to makes it LESS unfair for this, as increasing the division size to a conference size gives each team a larger sample size of teams that they have more games against, increasing the chances of having a better range of strong-weak teams.
In the current system, for instance, if you are, say, the New York Islanders, you have the misfortune of being pooched right off the bat in your 5 team division, because three top teams (Pitts, Philly and the Rangers) are in your division. If the Isles were in the Southeast division this year, they might have a fighting chance as a young and improving team to make the playoffs . . . but as it stands, they have zero chance, especially with another "bubble" team (New Jersey) also there.
But maybe Sahis will tell me how Florida, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Washington and Florida have exactly the same amount of chance to make the playoffs as the Islanders, due to "simple math"?
The defence rests
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Ok, just ignore the 7%, it's variable to change, all be it arbitrarily.
I've said multiple times that every team doesn't have the same probability of making the playoffs only that if you, but say you were to add a team to that the division, the likelihood of any of those teams to make the playoffs would go down, NO MATTER WHAT. It's easier to be the best at something when there are fewer people to compete with you. Are you saying it's as much of an accomplishment if your the best at something when there are 10 other people to compete with rather than 100? 7 vs. 8 is just a microcosm of that.
This is relevant. Don't think so?Lobby for a 5 team conference and a 11 team conference
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| n/a |
Posted - 12/22/2011 : 05:58:28
Sahis - you really aren't listening to other people's arguments, dude. I can tell, because you keep repeating yourself on this 7% thing, when many here have pointed out that number is based on pure math, and what we are dealing with is much more complicated than that as Beans has ably pointed out.
I think the biggest "unfairness" that can happen in the current system, or in the system to be implemented next year, is being in a division/conference with many great teams. This is, however, impossible to fight against, as it will naturally ebb and flow, and realistically, it's something every team at some point will have to live with.
I think the system we are moving to makes it LESS unfair for this, as increasing the division size to a conference size gives each team a larger sample size of teams that they have more games against, increasing the chances of having a better range of strong-weak teams.
In the current system, for instance, if you are, say, the New York Islanders, you have the misfortune of being pooched right off the bat in your 5 team division, because three top teams (Pitts, Philly and the Rangers) are in your division. If the Isles were in the Southeast division this year, they might have a fighting chance as a young and improving team to make the playoffs . . . but as it stands, they have zero chance, especially with another "bubble" team (New Jersey) also there.
But maybe Sahis will tell me how Florida, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Washington and Florida have exactly the same amount of chance to make the playoffs as the Islanders, due to "simple math"?
The defence rests
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 22:32:38
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Division 1-Division Two
Best Team Best Team
2nd Best Team 2nd Best Team
3rd Best Team 3rd Best Team
4th Best Team 4th Best Team
5th Best Team 5th Best Team
6th Best Team 6th Best Team
7th Best Team 7th Best Team
8th Best Team No Team
Where is the advantage????
What is unfair????
I admit when I am wrong when I am wrong. I don't admit I a wrong when I am not wrong. Your 7% is irrelevant. The best 4 teams make the playoffs. If or if there is an 8th team has no impact. The system is not unfair to any team.
Being "the best" at something depends on the number of people or teams or whatever you have to compete with.
In division one the best team is better than 7 teams, in division two the best team is better than 6 teams, they can't be equated like that. More importantly though in D-1 the 4th place team is better than 4 teams, and in D-2 it's three. There are different standards for making the playoffs this is an ADVANTAGE, this is UNFAIR. I'll tell you how the 8th team can have an impact, they can make the playoffs, cutting out the 4th place team that would've make it in the 7 team conference. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 21:27:07
Division 1-Division Two
Best Team Best Team
2nd Best Team 2nd Best Team
3rd Best Team 3rd Best Team
4th Best Team 4th Best Team
5th Best Team 5th Best Team
6th Best Team 6th Best Team
7th Best Team 7th Best Team
8th Best Team No Team
Where is the advantage????
What is unfair????
I admit when I am wrong when I am wrong. I don't admit I a wrong when I am not wrong. Your 7% is irrelevant. The best 4 teams make the playoffs. If or if there is an 8th team has no impact. The system is not unfair to any team. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 19:28:14
[/quote]
Did I say "doesn't real matter"? I actually forget, but if i did I'm sure I meant the math matter's than just strict probability.
[/quote]
* meant the math matter's *MORE* than........
|
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 19:25:12
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
My apologies. I mis-typed. My question was is there a 20% chance of each of those teams missing the playoffs, not making the playoffs.
I am seriously done with this. Sashis, if you go back and read each and every one of your posts you bring up this 57% vs 50%. Every single one. From the start I have been saying that the 7% difference between 7 vs 8 team divisions is irrelevant as there are countless other influences on a hockey game. Now you are talking 'generic' and that it doesn't really matter but is still applicable???
Before I leave, I want to go back to the guest who brought up the 8 girls and only 8 girls analogy. Here is the problem. There are not 8 girls. There are 29 girls and 29 other guys. You get to talk to each of those girls between 2 and 6 times each. Sometimes you have a better pick up lines and get the phone number and other time you have less game and get no phone number. Some guys are rich jocks and get a bunch more numbers and some guys are geeks and get far few numbers. At the end of the night, all the 30 guys get piled into smaller groups and figure out who has the most numbers. In each of those groups there are 4 guys who actually get dates.
Through all of that, what is the difference between getting a date a not getting a date:
If you are in a group of 7 guys or 8 guys??
or
the number of phone numbers you get???
Like I have said from the start, a team still has to win to get in. If there are 3 teams who don't make it from the division or 4 doesn't matter. All that matters is winning, baby. The rest doesn't matter.
Why did I get tied up in a hit to the neck argument again? Clearly my fault. New Year's resolution: Don't get caught up in arguments like this. What a giant waste of time.
Did I say "doesn't real matter"? I actually forget, but if i did I'm sure I meant the math matter's than just strict probability.
Well at least you admit that the 7% exists, , so I can only conclude that you mean 7% isn't a large enough factor to make a difference, or that it's somehow canceled out by the other factors, which is ludicrus{it could extenuate the discrepancy for all you know, (ex. 3 teams battle for one spot instead of 2)} . Here is my problem though, THE LEAGUE IMPLEMENTS AN UNFAIR SYSTEM, all the other factors are not concrete, and really develop as the season progresses. When all the teams have played 0 games, two "equally" skilled teams in two "equally skilled divisions(quality of teams)should have the same likelyhood of making the playoffs.Right off the bat your at a disadvantage, and that's the real problem which the numbers(generic as they might be) prove is correct and not only can be applied and have to be applied.Having an extra team in your division warps your probability, and you can't do anything about it, HOW THE F*** IS THAT FAIR? Admit your wrong.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 18:33:10
My apologies. I mis-typed. My question was is there a 20% chance of each of those teams missing the playoffs, not making the playoffs.
I am seriously done with this. Sashis, if you go back and read each and every one of your posts you bring up this 57% vs 50%. Every single one. From the start I have been saying that the 7% difference between 7 vs 8 team divisions is irrelevant as there are countless other influences on a hockey game. Now you are talking 'generic' and that it doesn't really matter but is still applicable???
Before I leave, I want to go back to the guest who brought up the 8 girls and only 8 girls analogy. Here is the problem. There are not 8 girls. There are 29 girls and 29 other guys. You get to talk to each of those girls between 2 and 6 times each. Sometimes you have a better pick up lines and get the phone number and other time you have less game and get no phone number. Some guys are rich jocks and get a bunch more numbers and some guys are geeks and get far few numbers. At the end of the night, all the 30 guys get piled into smaller groups and figure out who has the most numbers. In each of those groups there are 4 guys who actually get dates.
Through all of that, what is the difference between getting a date a not getting a date:
If you are in a group of 7 guys or 8 guys??
or
the number of phone numbers you get???
Like I have said from the start, a team still has to win to get in. If there are 3 teams who don't make it from the division or 4 doesn't matter. All that matters is winning, baby. The rest doesn't matter.
Why did I get tied up in a hit to the neck argument again? Clearly my fault. New Year's resolution: Don't get caught up in arguments like this. What a giant waste of time.
|
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 18:12:16
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
How does "that kind of math" not apply? I think that's crazier than the quote of math in general doesn't apply. So you're saying in sports that things like addition, subtraction, division, multiplication apply...buuuut fractions and percentages, nah not really. Fractions is based on division genius!! Beans I used to think you had at least a level head on your shoulders...but that's flushing down the drain quick. If you can't understand that, NO ONE can help you.
I'll state again and feel free to dispute this if you can:
What if there were only 4 teams in a div and 4 playoff spots. Would that NOT mean that you have a 100% chance of making the playoffs? 4/4. Or does probability and use of math not apply there either?
Perhaps this will prove my point:
There is a 5 team division and 4 teams make the playoffs. Those team are:
The Montreal Canadiens from the 70's
The New York Islanders from the early 80's
The Edmonton Oilers from the 80's
The Pittsburgh Penguins from the early 90's
The 74/75 Washington Capitals (winner of 8 games in the season, the fewest in history).
Are you saying that each of those teams have 20% chance of making the playoffs??? That is the logic you are trying to apply to the 8 or 7 team conference. I understand simple math and fractions. My point is that there are literally hundreds of other factors that go into a team making the playoffs that make the simple fraction nearly irrelevant.
Does it have an impact? Sure. The 7 vs 8 team conference has about as much impact as a mosquito's wings have an impact on the wind direction. As Nuxfan state, when the teams in the division are playing more than 1/2 their time playing against other divisions, 7 vs 8 is irrelevant.
How do think we would get 20% there? Generically it's 80%. Maybe you're confused with the 7%, that's not the odds of making the playoffs. In the 7's it's 57%, in the 8's it's 50%, 7 is the difference. Again I'm not saying every team has the same probability, it's generic, but still applicable. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 18:02:36
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Seriously, can you guys please go back and read the quote before trying to quote it! I never said math does not apply to sport, I said that kind of math does not apply to sport. Simply probability does not apply. If you can't understand that, I can't help you.
Sashis, just to clarify: if there are 8 teams in a division and every team has an equal chance to make the playoff, right?? Is that what you are saying?? I just want to clarify your logic so I can call Vegas and tell them they can fire all their odds makers as every team in every sport has an equal chance of winning or losing each game and each season.
Just like flipping a coin, where simply fractional probability applies.
Must you criticize everything that I indirectly imply through partial omission.
The 7 percent is generic, obviously you can't apply an exact probability on anyone. This doesn't make this 7% irrelevant as you so claim. Just because thier are 100 factor doesn't make the math 1% relevant. Frankly there are thousands of factors, but the math is the only one that can be controlled by the league, and still a very important one.
When did I say that every team has the same probability? EVERYONE KNOWS THIS IS NOT THE CASE, STOP MAKING IT YOUR ONLY ARGUMENT. In fact I said the opposite of that on numerous occasions. Also I've been careful to say IN GENERAL teams have it harder to make it in the 8 team division i never said vancouver has less chance of making the playoffs then the Islanders or what have you. Math isn't the biggest factor I agree, but surely "irrelevant" is not how you should describe it.
If 7 vs. 8 isn't a factor, then why don't we add Detroit to conference C, it shouldn't make a difference, 4 teams still make it right . Even if you added a much worse team, it is still more difficult to make the playoffs cause the extra team could make the playoffs in your stead(that's what the math proves, not that it needed proving).
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 15:08:10
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
How does "that kind of math" not apply? I think that's crazier than the quote of math in general doesn't apply. So you're saying in sports that things like addition, subtraction, division, multiplication apply...buuuut fractions and percentages, nah not really. Fractions is based on division genius!! Beans I used to think you had at least a level head on your shoulders...but that's flushing down the drain quick. If you can't understand that, NO ONE can help you.
I'll state again and feel free to dispute this if you can:
What if there were only 4 teams in a div and 4 playoff spots. Would that NOT mean that you have a 100% chance of making the playoffs? 4/4. Or does probability and use of math not apply there either?
Perhaps this will prove my point:
There is a 5 team division and 4 teams make the playoffs. Those team are:
The Montreal Canadiens from the 70's
The New York Islanders from the early 80's
The Edmonton Oilers from the 80's
The Pittsburgh Penguins from the early 90's
The 74/75 Washington Capitals (winner of 8 games in the season, the fewest in history).
Are you saying that each of those teams have 20% chance of making the playoffs??? That is the logic you are trying to apply to the 8 or 7 team conference. I understand simple math and fractions. My point is that there are literally hundreds of other factors that go into a team making the playoffs that make the simple fraction nearly irrelevant.
Does it have an impact? Sure. The 7 vs 8 team conference has about as much impact as a mosquito's wings have an impact on the wind direction. As Nuxfan state, when the teams in the division are playing more than 1/2 their time playing against other divisions, 7 vs 8 is irrelevant. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 09:42:00
well, this discussion certainly went off the rails...
While stats do matter, and the dynamics of making the playoffs in the east is slightly different than making it in the west, the reality is - nothing much has changed. 16 teams out of 30 still make it to the post season, and there are still inequalities within the NHL meaning that that the top-16 teams overall do not always make it to the playoffs.
However, what is different with the new structure is that teams can be more reliably measured against other teams league wide for the first time in a long time. Each team plays each other team twice, which means double the games against teams which you are not in direct competition for a playoff spot with. I believe that this equalization will mean that we have a truer representation of the top-16 teams in the playoffs each year, rather than what we have now.
So, I don't really care that teams in the east have a 4/7 chance of making the playoffs, while teams in the west have a 4/8 chance - its an irrelevant difference when you spend more than half of your season playing teams in other conferences, and are largely measured by your success against those teams. |
| Guest2260 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 07:54:45
How does "that kind of math" not apply? I think that's crazier than the quote of math in general doesn't apply. So you're saying in sports that things like addition, subtraction, division, multiplication apply...buuuut fractions and percentages, nah not really. Fractions is based on division genius!! Beans I used to think you had at least a level head on your shoulders...but that's flushing down the drain quick. If you can't understand that, NO ONE can help you.
I'll state again and feel free to dispute this if you can:
What if there were only 4 teams in a div and 4 playoff spots. Would that NOT mean that you have a 100% chance of making the playoffs? 4/4. Or does probability and use of math not apply there either? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 07:22:36
Seriously, can you guys please go back and read the quote before trying to quote it! I never said math does not apply to sport, I said that kind of math does not apply to sport. Simply probability does not apply. If you can't understand that, I can't help you.
Sashis, just to clarify: if there are 8 teams in a division and every team has an equal chance to make the playoff, right?? Is that what you are saying?? I just want to clarify your logic so I can call Vegas and tell them they can fire all their odds makers as every team in every sport has an equal chance of winning or losing each game and each season.
Just like flipping a coin, where simply fractional probability applies. |
| Guest2260 |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 06:55:34
Thank you sahis34 and Guest0262 for thinking beyond...."4 teams make the playoffs in each div so it must be fair!" Even if there are 100 teams in a div (are you serious??).
What if there were only 4 teams in a div and 4 playoff spots. Would that NOT mean that you have a 100% chance of making the playoffs? 4/4. Or does probability and use of math not apply there either?
I can't believe I read that math doesnt apply to sports...that's just plain ridiculous, so I'm just gonna pretend I didn't hear that. Math applies to EVERYTHING. That's why people use it to prove theories and fact! Beans, you should not be questioning peoples logic when you make a statement like that...it's clear who's not using any. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 21:23:48
Ok I obviously understand that a generic probability doesn't apply equally, but it should illustrate the fact that you are less likely to make the playoffs with 8 teams as opposed to 7. Seeing how you're blinded by the 4 in each division make it concept,I'll put this another way. In an eight team division 4 teams don't make, In a seven team division 3 teams don't make it.
Would you be ok if they had two conference each with 7 teams where Three make it on one side and Four make it on the other side? Of course you wouldn't. Of course it is not the same. it is actual twice as unfair. (4/7)-(3/7) divided by (4/7)-(4/8) = 2
A " fundamental issue (would be)if the 7 team conference allowed fewer teams or the 8 team conference allowed more teams(into the playoffs). " I don't see how this is not a "fundamental issue", it's can be compared.
Also please don't criticize my logic when I am the only one using any. You do realize you imply you rather be in a 100 team division where 4 make the playoffs rather than a 4 team division where 3 make the playoffs. The difference seems minimal when it comes to comes to 7 vs. 8, but the seven percent I mentioned is still valid. Also (4/7)-(4/8) is also 7 percent, wow what a shocker.
Polishexpress your points are valid, obviously vancouver's chances aren't gonna be the same as calgary's.
Traveller I'm not going to dignify you with a response, as your 1st sentence is indicative of someone who missed grade 4 math, or an american high school graduate.READ PAST THE FIRST SENTENCE!
Beans can you prove that % doesn't matter, cause the only argument that I'm hearing from you is that the probably is variant on other things, which is true , but it doesn't change the fact that the generic probability (which equates to the average) of making the playoffs is lower in an eight team conference, YOU CAN"T DISPROVE THAT, ergo I win.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 07:55:43
Frankly, I am with Polish on this one. I am shocked and amazed at the logic (or lack there of) and won't continue an argument that is painfully simple and obvious but still not understood.
8 teams or 7 teams in a conference is irrelevant of 4 teams making the playoffs. There could be 100 teams and still only 4 would make the playoffs. There would be a fundamental issue if the 7 team conference allowed fewer teams or the 8 team conference allowed more teams. However, it doesn't matter how you slice and dice your fractions, simple % does not apply to this situation.
|
| Traveller |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 21:54:53
quote:
If my team finishes 5th in a 8 team division my team doesn't make the playoffs. If you randomly drop a team to make it a 7 team conference you get a 57% chance that you make the playoffs that year. One out of 8 teams is in 5th spot, so (1/8)x(4/7)=(4/56) or 7%, this means that your 7% less likely to make the playoffs in an 8 team conference. Really math doesn't apply to sport, wow... that's why i didn't look at stats when I did my hockey pool, I just picked the coolest sounding names.I like seafood so I picked schremp, oystrich and cammalleri, instead of the sedin's and ovechkin. Learn your fractions. Hockey isn't flipping coins cause it's not dependent on luck(mostly), but that doesn't change the fact of probability.
But if your team finishes 5th in a 7 team conference they don't make the playoffs either.
This would only be a problem if the two conferences did not get the same amount of teams into the playoffs (ie if the 8 team conference got 5 teams in and the 7 team conference got 3 teams in - or something like that)
Its the top 4 teams that matter not the bottom 3 or 4. If you are in the bottom of your conference it doesn't matter how many teams are in your conference you still will be golfing in May. |
| polishexpress |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 20:20:41
Sahis, you obviously don't know what proof by induction is, as you don't even have a basis step, not even an inductive step. You have not declared any assumptions, and you have not written a conclusion. So, please don't say you proved anything. Just wiki "mathematical induction" and you'll see why it was more of a "tongue-in-cheek" comment at Guest 0262.
You completely misinterpreted Beans, and on purpose I might add.
Guest 0262, Beans, and myself all understood that 4/7>4/8
At least Guest0262 was polite in his statements.
You on the other hand, assume that the probability of making a particular spot in the conference is an independent event. Well, it isn't, so you cannot apply your fraction multiplication. Getting a spot in a conference is dependent not only on your performance, but on that of others, so exact probability is more than just two fractions multiplied.
I just hate this oversimplification of how many teams play in a conference. And since my math skills are not high enough to determine this accurately, I will concede from commenting further on the subject of probabilities in regard to how the number of teams in a conference affect said chances. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 20:03:13
[quote]Originally posted by Guest0959
Actually, your proof is nowhere near being clear ***NOT HOCKEY RELATED:*** Please prove by induction that 4/7 > 4/8 implies that you have higher chances to get into playoffs in a 7 team conference. If you can do so, then you will have clearly proved that. Until that time, leave "FACT" away from the word "OPINION", and stop denigrating my language, comprehension, and math skills.***
Here is the reason why the system needed change:
1. Winnipeg. Had to move Winnipeg out of Atlanta's spot, but couldn't switch them with another team(i.e. Detroit) without many others complaining...
2. Phoenix. The new system will make it easy to move the team should the team go somewhere else. (just stick them in one of the 7 team conferences.
3. Expansion. In the future, the NHL may want to expand, and this system would be easier to add a team than does the current.
4. Guest0262 needed to be able to show his superior math skills to Polishexpress in proving by induction that 4/7>4/8 implies p (p=his opinion)
(OK, 4 isn't a reason, but at least you'll get that the first paragraph was meant partially in jest.)
[/quote
]I just did the proof above, even though it should be self-evident.
You have a (1/8)% chance of being in the 5th spot in an 8 team division. In you where to make that division into a 7 team division, you would randomly remove one team, four are in the playoffs three aren't, therefore you have a (4/7)% chance that you become a playoff team.(4/7)x(1/8)= (4/56)% chance that you don't make the playoffs because you are in an 8 team conference instead of 7. This means you have a 7% less of a chance of making the playoffs.
I know (sigh...)numbers are confusing....
|
| sahis34 |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 19:54:07
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Ok, something people do not appreciate is that this 4/7 vs 4/8 is not math that applies to sports. If we were flipping coins and you needed to get 4 heads out of 7 flips vs 4 heads out of 8 flips, there is an advantage. But hockey is not flipping coins. Each team still had to win enough games and collect enough point to make it into the playoffs.
16 teams in the West
14 teams in the East.
8 teams making the playoffs out of 16 in the West is the same as 8 teams making the playoffs out of 14 in the East. There may be situations where a team who finishes in 5th would have more points than a team who finishes 4th in the other conference, but the number of teams in the division has no impact on that. That could also happen with 8 or 9 or 10 teams. That's sport.
Are you saying that math and probability doesn't apply to sport? So if we had a division with 11 teams you're saying it's just as likely to make it in a division with 4 teams? Or are you saying that the nature of sport is to avoid fairness, when fairness is easy to achieve.
You say "the number of teams in the division has no impact on (where a team who finishes in 5th would have more points than a team who finishes 4th in the other conference)"
BULLs***! go back to kindergarden
If my team finishes 5th in a 8 team division my team doesn't make the playoffs. If you randomly drop a team to make it a 7 team conference you get a 57% chance that you make the playoffs that year. One out of 8 teams is in 5th spot, so (1/8)x(4/7)=(4/56) or 7%, this means that your 7% less likely to make the playoffs in an 8 team conference. Really math doesn't apply to sport, wow... that's why i didn't look at stats when I did my hockey pool, I just picked the coolest sounding names.I like seafood so I picked schremp, oystrich and cammalleri, instead of the sedin's and ovechkin. Learn your fractions. Hockey isn't flipping coins cause it's not dependent on luck(mostly), but that doesn't change the fact of probability.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| polishexpress |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 19:12:26
Thanks Beans, you verbalized what I was not really able to put into words.
I've been trying to get that across the whole time, its not just as simple as how many teams there are. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 19:02:08
Ok, something people do not appreciate is that this 4/7 vs 4/8 is not math that applies to sports. If we were flipping coins and you needed to get 4 heads out of 7 flips vs 4 heads out of 8 flips, there is an advantage. But hockey is not flipping coins. Each team still had to win enough games and collect enough point to make it into the playoffs.
16 teams in the West
14 teams in the East.
8 teams making the playoffs out of 16 in the West is the same as 8 teams making the playoffs out of 14 in the East. There may be situations where a team who finishes in 5th would have more points than a team who finishes 4th in the other conference, but the number of teams in the division has no impact on that. That could also happen with 8 or 9 or 10 teams. That's sport. |
| Guest0262 |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 15:04:56
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0959
Actually, your proof is nowhere near being clear ***NOT HOCKEY RELATED:*** Please prove by induction that 4/7 > 4/8 implies that you have higher chances to get into playoffs in a 7 team conference. If you can do so, then you will have clearly proved that. Until that time, leave "FACT" away from the word "OPINION", and stop denigrating my language, comprehension, and math skills.***
Here is the reason why the system needed change:
1. Winnipeg. Had to move Winnipeg out of Atlanta's spot, but couldn't switch them with another team(i.e. Detroit) without many others complaining...
2. Phoenix. The new system will make it easy to move the team should the team go somewhere else. (just stick them in one of the 7 team conferences.
3. Expansion. In the future, the NHL may want to expand, and this system would be easier to add a team than does the current.
4. Guest0262 needed to be able to show his superior math skills to Polishexpress in proving by induction that 4/7>4/8 implies p (p=his opinion)
(OK, 4 isn't a reason, but at least you'll get that the first paragraph was meant partially in jest.)
Just because you're getting frustrated, doesn't mean you need to throw in childish jabs at me...
Look man, 4/7>4/8 is a proven mathematical equation, that's not an opinion. I don't just believe it is to be true...it IS true. Just like 2+2=4...that is a fact (Can you at least follow up to there? haha) or do you think that's just my opinion as well? Just like if a conf had 4 teams 4/4 = 100% chance to make the playoffs, 4/7 = 57% and 4/8 = 50%
You're arguments are just helping me show how the numbers don't lie....but like you said its "EVERYTHING to do with how many games you play, and against whom"....then i'll propose to you this YET again:
If you play just as well as the other teams in your conf (like you said what it's all based on) and end up with the exact same record and points, does that not mean that the odds of you not making the playoffs is higher in the conf with 8 teams??? You seem to keep dodging this point. Explain to me how it would be the same?
2 of your 3 reasons are things that haven't even happened yet or might not, so how is that reasons why the system NEEDED to be changed right away? Why not wait until you get expansion teams or until phoenix moves to whereever? So basically this all boils down to Winnipeg? One of the smallest markets in the league? Let's change it all for them....makes total sense :P
|
| polishexpress |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 14:04:46
doh, above is me forgetting to login. |
| Guest0959 |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 14:04:21
Actually, your proof is nowhere near being clear ***NOT HOCKEY RELATED:*** Please prove by induction that 4/7 > 4/8 implies that you have higher chances to get into playoffs in a 7 team conference. If you can do so, then you will have clearly proved that. Until that time, leave "FACT" away from the word "OPINION", and stop denigrating my language, comprehension, and math skills.***
Here is the reason why the system needed change:
1. Winnipeg. Had to move Winnipeg out of Atlanta's spot, but couldn't switch them with another team(i.e. Detroit) without many others complaining...
2. Phoenix. The new system will make it easy to move the team should the team go somewhere else. (just stick them in one of the 7 team conferences.
3. Expansion. In the future, the NHL may want to expand, and this system would be easier to add a team than does the current.
4. Guest0262 needed to be able to show his superior math skills to Polishexpress in proving by induction that 4/7>4/8 implies p (p=his opinion)
(OK, 4 isn't a reason, but at least you'll get that the first paragraph was meant partially in jest.) |
|
|
