Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread
This is just getting comical at this point.
Finally! You're beginning to catch on! Honestly, I was hoping you'd get it a little earlier, since you say you majored in math.
I've given you the numbers, but I realize they are complicated, and are probably above the BC level. I'm not going to repeat them all here, but to summarize:
1. The MN strength of schedule has been tougher than BC's.
This is the very definition of "opinion & conjecture"! Geez you are becoming a freaking characature of yourself. How about take a look at the SOS ratings on
KRACH and
RPI? We're blowing the Gophers away! Even with the inherent western bias built into the ratings (don't even pretend you don't know what I'm talking about here) BC STILL torches Minnesota in SOS. Why? Maybe because they play in a better conference and play better teams and didn't build a smoke & mirrors 20-0-0 "perfect" record?
2. The WCHA's non-conference record is 24-8-1, by far the best in the land.
I don't know how much more we can go over this, but if the Red Sox go 0-162 and my town's little league goes 20-0, that doesn't mean the kids could whoops the big leaguers. That's exactly what this is here.
3. Vs. common opponents, the Gophers record trumps BC's, both in won/loss and goals for/against.
I'm going to give you a pass on this one because based on your inability to grasp numbers and facts, I wouldn't expect the term "small sample size" to stick to you. Trust me, I was a math major, so I know what I'm talking about. Don't you get that? I WAS A MATH MAJOR. That immediately gives me credibility over you. This is why if you turn on Fox News you see guys with real credentials talking about what's REALLY going on in this country and why if you turn on the mainstream AKA LAMESTREAM media they just feed the sheeple what the government WANTS THEM TO HEAR. Same thing.
What were you anyway, a physics major? I'll let the physics guy stick to physics and you let the math guy stick to math, okay?
4. The WCHA has the overall better record against Hockey East.
Again. Not just a small-ish sample size, but see my Little League/MLB analogy above. Minnesota plays in the Little League of women's hockey. Winning an 8 team tournament a few times where you just need to string together a few lucky wins does not a better conference make. I mean honestly, take a look at what happens when Minnesota has to play BC in the tournament. Once they get absolutely
curbstomped to the point where it leaves their coach's head spinning and he's forced to remind his team the next year of what happens when they play real competition, and the other time, on their own ice, they get the luckiest win of all time by a single goal where for basically the entire game BC was teeing off on target practice on whoever the Minnesota goalie was.
None of these are "opinion and conjecture",
For the love of all that is good and holy,
yes they are!
as they are based on ACTUAL RESULTS!
Yeah, against Lindenwood and St. Cloud and Bemidji Freaking State. Little Leaguers. Why are your teams afraid to play the big boys?
And, taken as a whole, they are NOT based on a small sample size.
No, that's not how it works. Small sample size + small sample size + small sample size does not equal BIG SAMPLE SIZE. It equals uncertainty to the third power. And for you, Mr. Physics-Major-Not-A-Math-Major, that means even MORE uncertainty than just ONE set of small sample size.
Sigh.
So, until the NCAA's, I rest my case!
I mean honestly like I said, have at it, but the rest of us can clearly see the writing on the wall. You guys are in for a world of disappointment.
Don't drag me in but 10 of those wins are against Lindenwood. Who doesn't play any HEA teams.
Q. E. Freakin' D.