Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Transfer Portal - 2024

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sierra View Post

    I think every fan believes their team will win. Why would you bet against your team. That's a silly way to think. I'll take the bet!
    The bet isn't "against" Wisconsin, it's against Ohio State. It's Kentucky Derby weekend; you're installing yourself as 'the favorite' and giving me 'the field'? I'll take the field.

    OK, let's be clear: the bet is Ohio State wins the national championship in March of 2025; you get 'yes', and I get 'no'. Are there odds involved, or a straight up bet? Because if it's a straight up bet, name your price!
    Last edited by robertearle; 05-03-2024, 09:06 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

      Not for your team. You haven't had an undefeated regular season home series against us in SEVEN years and that's when the Muzzinator was still in the rebuilding phase.
      Any reason I shouldn't believe OUR home series sweep of the Banders won't continue? Stats show our barn is the hardest place for any team to come here and earn a win against us.
      Let's say a team is a 95% favorite to win each game they play. And they're going to play 16 games.

      They are less than 50-50 to win all of those 16 games, actually about 44%.

      One of my favorite stats is that NFL kickers are 95% likely to make extra point kicks. But every week, some kicker somewhere misses an extra point, usually more than one kicker. Because 95% is not 100%. 95% is only 95%.
      Last edited by robertearle; 05-03-2024, 09:50 AM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BackyardIce View Post

        They were established National Team players well before. They had a much better surrounding cast at OSU. That makes a BIG difference. You are delusional.
        I had an obvious typo . My point was they had better numbers at OSU because they had a much better supporting cast there ... not at BC.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BackyardIce View Post

          I had an obvious typo . My point was they had better numbers at OSU because they had a much better supporting cast there ... not at BC.
          I'll buy that and take back what I said.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

            I'll buy that and take back what I said.
            Maybe, but I look at the stats and some other players had better stats elsewhere. It all comes down to whether you are annointed and put on power play 1. And I'm not a habitual watcher and more of a stat checker so I could be off on what some might say is a generalization. The counter is going to be that the two BC players were on pp 1 at BC so I would agree that there was more talent on PP 1 at OSU then at BC.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BackyardIce View Post

              I had an obvious typo . My point was they had better numbers at OSU because they had a much better supporting cast there ... not at BC.
              OSU ran 4 lines. BC did not. B and B got less minutes at OSU than at BC. B and B put up their numbers in the WCHA and not HE. OSU had to share the puck with that amazing supporting cast. When at BC their was no one to share the puck with.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
                Undefeated at home is absolutely achievable for us.
                Being achievable doesn't mean it's going to happen. Minnesota almost lost at home to last-place Bemidji St. during its perfect season. Hockey is an unpredictable game. You were the best team in 2023, but you didn't win.

                There is nothing more humbling to a team than running out of healthy goalies. If it could happen to the Mavericks a couple years ago, lightning could strike somewhere else. Some rosters are crazy-talented, but for whatever reason, they just don't gel. Or they do, but some other team winds up having a magical season and putting the pieces together even better. You might go undefeated at home and hoist the trophy again; or, you might not do either. Let's wait and see.

                "... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
                And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sierra View Post

                  OSU ran 4 lines. BC did not. B and B got less minutes at OSU than at BC. B and B put up their numbers in the WCHA and not HE. OSU had to share the puck with that amazing supporting cast. When at BC their was no one to share the puck with.
                  Please...
                  This is just not true.



                  At the outset, we could hang with the dude...

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by robertearle View Post

                    Let's say a team is a 95% favorite to win each game they play. And they're going to play 16 games.

                    They are less than 50-50 to win all of those 16 games, actually about 44%.

                    One of my favorite stats is that NFL kickers are 95% likely to make extra point kicks. But every week, some kicker somewhere misses an extra point, usually more than one kicker. Because 95% is not 100%. 95% is only 95%.
                    Last season Ohio State including playoff played 18 home games winning 17 of them. That's a 94 and a half home ice winning percentage.
                    I'm not going to look at the home games for every D1 women's team to be 100% certain but I'm assuming that was the best in the country unless someone shows otherwise.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

                      Last season Ohio State including playoff played 18 home games winning 17 of them. That's a 94 and a half home ice winning percentage.
                      I'm not going to look at the home games for every D1 women's team to be 100% certain but I'm assuming that was the best in the country unless someone shows otherwise.
                      Like I said, 94.5% isn't 100%, it's 94.5%.

                      If you're a 94.5% favorite to win every game, and you play 18 games, you have about a 36% chance of winning all 18.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by FiveHoleFrenzy View Post

                        Please...
                        This is just not true.


                        Please....
                        explain how it's not true?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by robertearle View Post

                          Like I said, 94.5% isn't 100%, it's 94.5%.

                          If you're a 94.5% favorite to win every game, and you play 18 games, you have about a 36% chance of winning all 18.
                          It will be 100% next season. It was not 100%last season because of the one game the Muzzinator was absent. She brings something special to her games with her presence.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

                            It will be 100% next season. It was not 100%last season because of the one game the Muzzinator was absent. She brings something special to her games with her presence.
                            Possibly, and possibly not.

                            A prediction is little more than a hope expressed out loud. But your team last year won the national championship, and they couldn't manage it. And roughly half of that team is now gone. So expecting this year's team to be able to do it is rather unrealistic and silly.

                            But if you're so sure about it, we could undertake a wager on the possibility.... LOL
                            Last edited by robertearle; 05-05-2024, 11:17 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sierra View Post
                              Please....
                              explain how it's not true?
                              Barnes' career in particular spans different eras a BC. Her first full season, the Eagles had Keller, Watts, Lonergan, Newkirk ... Whatever problems BC had in those days, it wasn't that talented players didn't have any other talent to play with.

                              "... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
                              And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ARM View Post
                                Barnes' career in particular spans different eras a BC. Her first full season, the Eagles had Keller, Watts, Lonergan, Newkirk ... Whatever problems BC had in those days, it wasn't that talented players didn't have any other talent to play with.
                                I don't even really understand the premise:

                                A player with "nobody to pass to" manages to put up X number of points. The next year, with talent all around her, she puts up a 25% increase in points. Is it because she "became a better player", or is it because she had "somebody to pass to"?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X