And the same can be said for the reverse. Kessel could be better than all 3 of those picks, or he could be worse. But until they are all used and the players chosen with them are in the NHL full-time (assuming all 3 picks DO produce NHL players) we cannot know. And that is all that yguy has said the whole time.

 

However, for what Brian Burke wanted in making that deal (a proven NHL goal-scorer), Kessel was better than the picks.

You're a leafs fan yguy...any time you try to prove that the leafs are doing good, it's more or less trying to prove that they're doing the near impossible. Facts are: the leafs are not in the playoffs. Therefore, they are not good, their team stinks, and many of their players are not good. You trying to prove that kessel will benefit the team more than 3 picks? It's like me trying to prove that every runescape moderator can be killed with a tapioca bullet...

Face->desk.

 

I'm NOT trying to prove the leafs are doing well.

 

I'm NOT trying to say Kessel is worth more than three picks ever possibly could be. I'm saying YOU DON'T KNOW. What the leafs needed was a goal scorer for this year and next. They got one. He did what they wanted.

it's spring, the leaf's are out ;)

it's spring, the leaf's are out ;)

 

When the going gets tough, the Leafs go golfing ... :rolleyes:

it's spring, the leaf's are out ;)

Yeah, now it's time to root for my back up team, Calga... oh... right.

 

Well... at least Ottawa didn't make it, either.

At least next season we won't have to worry about this. Chances are, because of all the bad decisions brian burke's done, many of the leafs fans will have committed suicide before next year's playoffs...

But don't worry, they'll be saved by all the people happy with the good decisions burke has made.

That, and I bet that the foam fingers with the words 'we're #24!' Will block access to the wrists...lol

But I thought not making the playoffs for a few years was just part of the rebuilding process and that we're guaranteed a cup in a few years? :rolleyes:

To derail the constant leaf bashing.....

 

Here are my predictions:

 

WSH vs NYR, Wsh in 6

PHI vs BUF, PHI in 5

BOS vs MTL, BOS in 7

PIT vs TB, TB in 6

 

VAN vs CHI, CHI in 7

SJ vs LA, SJ in 5

DET vs PHX, PHX in 7

ANA vs NSH, ANA in 6

lol i come back and its still leaf bashing. insecure much? rofl. let's just agree that the leafs was terrible this year and move on.

 

anyone doing a playoff pool?

If anyone wants I made one for this board.

 

registration is fast, or if you already have an ESPN account.

 

http://games.espn.go.com/playoff-hockey-challenge/en/group?groupID=2886

 

password is tipit

Good idea. I'll join.

 

EDIT: Wow, that was the most awful registration system I've ever used.

How do pools work again?

How do pools work again?

 

you get a budget and spend it on players. on ESPN it's 4 dmen, 1 goalie, 5 forwards.

 

you get points depending on how the players play during the first round. then next round you can change your roster again. etc.it's fairly simple. the idea is to fit as much good players within the budget from teams you think will do well.

Well that's the same as TSN's pool.

 

Damn I forgot my passwords to my accounts on TSN, and I ESPN won't validate my zip code :wall: :wall: I even used my real one.

use the oldest trick on the internets.

 

state: california

zip: 90210

Edited April 12, 201115 yr by Faux

Well that's the same as TSN's pool.

 

Damn I forgot my passwords to my accounts on TSN, and I ESPN won't validate my zip code :wall: :wall: I even used my real one.

Same. Hence why I said it was terribly annoying.

so maybe that's why i didn't have any trouble. just use a 5 digit american zip code and there's no issue.

 

it doesn't even ask you to validate through email.

Meh, according to aunte having a negative +/- automatically makes you a liability.. I say good riddance.

 

You know, it amuses me to see how people cannot comprehend that the 869th (out of 879) player in +/- isn't a liability.

 

I am not saying that all players with a negative +/- are a liability I am saying that the 869th player (out of 879) IS A LIABILITY.

 

I am also saying that, to trade away three (3 THREE) potential super-star prospects for the 869th biggest liability on the ice is a bad move.

 

Now please tell me which of those two concepts is beyond your scope of comprehension?

The latter. I can't wrap my head around how you can predict the future, it's impressive.

Faster, you truly surprise me.

 

What you're suggesting is that me and blyaunte are trying to 'predict the future', when in all actuality, we're using simple probability to solve the kessel equation.

 

Let's assume that there are 900 players in the nhl:

 

Kessel's +/- is ranked 867/900, thus meaning that he is better than 32 players. The chance of one rookie obtaining any given one of the +/-'s is 1 in 900. Now, time to do some math:

 

There's a 32 in 900 chance of one rookie having a +/- below kessel's, a 1 in 900 chance of a rookie tieing, and a 867 in 900 chance of 1 rookie having a better +/- than kessel. Multiply it by 3 for 3 picks, and although the overwhelming odds don't change, the ratio does (going from 33:867 to 69:2601).

 

Now, there's still a chance that the rookies will all do worse, but that chance is so miniscule if you factor in probability. This was also using 1 statistic. Using multiple, you'd get a better understanding of how we don't need to see the future to understand why the kessel deal was horrible.

So +/- is determined only by chance and probability? That's ridiculous.

 

+/- is not some be all and end all statistic that is a perfect indication of a player's ability.

 

Oh and I've said this before, but I'll say it again. Three players are always worth one, right? Excellent, I'll let BB know to contact Pittsburgh offering Giguere, Lebda and Komisarek for Crosby. That would be a phenomenal deal for pittsburgh by your logic.

 

Here are some more statistics for you.

 

40% of first round draft picks pan out as nhl players. 40%. Of first round draft picks. As you go down, there is less and less likelyhood draft picks will play in the nhl.

do you guys know who the last prospect the bruins drafted from inside the top 10 overall before seguin?

 

zach hamill

 

look him up, lol.

 

EDIT:

 

need more people to join the TIF playoff pool

 

http://games.espn.go...up?groupID=2886

 

use california and 90210 for state/zip if you have trouble registering

 

first round entries lock tomorrow.

Edited April 12, 201115 yr by Faux

Amazing, I go and solve one person's arguement and the heir to the maple-throne tries to counter it.

 

Hockey is always about probability yguy. There is no '100% chance of one team beating another team', and vice-versa.

 

Since you attempted to use my arguement against me, I'll do the same for you: let's take your '40% of all picks pan out' idea into my little probability equation. 867x4/10= ~340. Thus meaning that even with your idea, there's still a whopping 340:69 chance of the 3 picks doing better than kessel.

 

You can use this 'universal ratio' in other aspects as well, not just +/-. And taking it into other statistics (ie: scoring/salary), the picks'll almost always win probability-wise.

 

Your little idea of '3 players always being better than 1'. Read my posts next time, then maybe you'll understand the point of my arguement before posting something near-irrelivant.

Amazing, I go and solve one person's arguement and the heir to the maple-throne tries to counter it.

 

Hockey is always about probability yguy. There is no '100% chance of one team beating another team', and vice-versa.

 

Since you attempted to use my arguement against me, I'll do the same for you: let's take your '40% of all picks pan out' idea into my little probability equation. 867x4/10= ~340. Thus meaning that even with your idea, there's still a whopping 340:69 chance of the 3 picks doing better than kessel.

 

You can use this 'universal ratio' in other aspects as well, not just +/-. And taking it into other statistics (ie: scoring/salary), the picks'll almost always win probability-wise.

 

Your little idea of '3 players always being better than 1'. Read my posts next time, then maybe you'll understand the point of my arguement before posting something near-irrelivant.

 

Your probability makes absolutely no sense. How many picks end up scoring 30+ goals a season? Well this season there were 8. You think, that out of the 250 picks in a season, Boston will get three 30 goal scorers? That's ridiculous. Not mentioning, of course, that these picks are across multiple seasons.

 

There's no 100% chance of another team beating another team. Probability can't predict it either.

 

I understand your argument completely, but it's asinine. If kessel played for any other team you'd think he was great, but you're so determined to hate toronto that you make these ridiculous arguments and try to defend them with made up probabilities.