rakish
-
Posts
1,470 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by rakish
-
Previous balance 905 Bet 100 on Sabres Today's charts get rid of the tipping nonsense. I try to isolate for the strength of the opponent in each game, so a goal unit, or so, is added against stronger opponents, with a jump at the beginning of each game. It all makes sense, right?
-
Edit: To be more fair, I limited a second chart 2003-2009, since a recent 2nd round pick won't have played much
-
Previous balance: 905 No bet
-
previous balance: 805 current bet: 220 on Tampa
-
OK, today's charts are a little different. Since both teams have relatively straight lines down, I tipped the charts on an angle so they would begin and end at 0, thus emphasizing the change in goals (or shots) rather than merely their total. The x axis? It's something like standard deviations The y axis remains the seconds played this season. By the way, trading against a new technical trader is called the odd lot theory. Previous total 950 Bet: Florida 145
-
wow
-
In case you missed it, ghost explained his thoughts on using technicals in hockey prediction a few days back. These are the 4 charts I came up with for today, since I don't see a consensus from the charts, I will stay at 950 The x axis indicates seconds starting from the beginning of the season. If I have some time, I will make useful divisions, like maybe by game The y axis is plus and minus goals, or shots. The shot totals include goals, but not misses or blocks.
-
Using technicals is an interesting approach
-
So Ghost, how do hockey gambling odds work? I understand football where the spread makes relatively equivalent betting on each team, but here, as I see other's fantasy bets, all the money went toward Colorado. The Islander game all the money went one way, except yours. Is my perception wrong and it's more balanced than I think, do the odds slide towards game time, or does the money often end on one side?
-
Buffalo 3 Team Points in 9 games (.33) Colorado 12 team points in 7 games (roughly 1.7) Buffalo -13 goal differential (roughly -1.45) Colorado 13 goal differential (almost 2) After game 5, in the past 15 years, the home team, when Team PPG + 1 < Opp Team PPG --- 10 wins - 20 losses After game 5, in the past 15 years, the home team, when Team Goal differential per game + 3 < Opp Team goal differential per game ---- 1 win - 10 losses Previous balance 850 Current bet Colorado 160
-
Previous balance 850 Both teams playing poorly, I'll skip this one
-
I'm wanting to get a bit better at handicapping, so I've been looking at some stats What interests me about this game is tired vs. fresh. The Sabres played last night, the Islanders have had two nights off. In the last 15 years, against a team with two days off, the back to back road team with a worse team points per game is 193-420. Early in season (first 20 games), before the tired team is really tired, the win loss is a bit better 64-103. Replacing goal differential for team points per game gets similar numbers. You may argue that the reason for the back to back poor play involves the backup goaltender, which isn't an issue here. Previous total: 1000 Today's bet: 150 Islanders
-
Prior Balance 1100 Bet 100 Buffalo
-
230 on Pittsburgh
-
Yeah, July in the South is hot
-
If you like painting, the Metropolitan Museum in New York is my favorite, Guggenheim has novelty because of the building, but is tiny Air and Space in DC is good If you like baseball, I would see it in Boston Niagara Falls is great If you like auto racing, I would see the Daytona Nascar race or the Talledaga race, maybe Richmond Walk the Brooklyn Bridge, from Brooklyn into the city, Walk from the North end of Central Park to Wall Street If you are allowed to climb the statue of liberty, you must be on the first boat of the day. If there is a cuisine you can't get at home, you can find it in NY In my neighborhood, Monticello is good. Yorktown gives you a good feeling of space, as does Appomattox, because these three are relatively the same as they were 200 years ago. Avoid Williamsburg Beware the South during the summer
-
Interesting video. I'm a bit surprised the Sabres were interested in Domi. What struck me watching the video was how agreeable they were. Had half of this board been in the room, we would have said "Wennberg? You jokin?" with Lazar and Gauthier on the board.
-
Streaming, says Julie Robenhymer of hockeybuzz That's all for now. Team USA plays Sweden tomorrow at 4:15 ET after Canada plays Finland at 1ET, both games lives streamed on FastHockey.com
-
Wikipedia list of undrafted NHL players
-
Teams are actually pretty good at comparing players between different leagues. The metric that I use is games played in relation to draft slot. The CHL (OHL,Q,WHL) for picks 91-292 come exactly to 0. USA picks for picks 91-292 are at -.1, which to me is almost meaningless. The Czechs, for all picks, score the highest at 1.7, the Russians the lowest, at -1.7 The Sabres decided about 2000 that drafting mostly Czechs would be a good plan. They have two or three Czech picks for a few years running. It isn't a strategy that works, these numbers aren't big enough to make the picking by analytics worth it.
-
Part of the requirement is proof of readers, other than that, yes, you could get yourself evicted from the interview room
-
It will be interesting to watch this play out. You gotta believe he plans on playing in the KHL next year.
-
What me an Chz believe, if I may speak for her, is that the Rangers will owe a cap advantage charge of 17m if Richards retires with 3 years left (which is the intent of the last 3 years of the contract). So 5.6 per year will be charged to the Rangers cap for 3 years. If Richards retires with 2 years left, we believe that the Rangers will have a cap advantage charge of 11.2m over two years, or 5.6m each for two years. If Richards retires with 1 year left, we believe the Rangers will have a cap advantage charge of 5.6m for that last year. The language of the CBA uses the term 'in aggregate', some in the media believe that means the 17m carries over to the last year if Richards retires with 1 year left. The quote that I used from capgeek says, they believe, that the team is reimbursed cap advantage when they pay the player more in cap than in cash, as the Rangers would in the last three years, so when they get to the last year, the Rangers have been reimbursed 11m in cap advantage, and will have a cap charge of 5.6m, not a 17m one-year charge. The idea is simple. If someone signs a 100m 8 year contract, 100m will be allocated to the cap. You can juggle when it's allocated to the cap, but the Rangers, Sabres, Devils, and whomever else will be spending against the cap later for long-term contracts signed recently.
-
Capgeek has this quote [ Edit: June 2, 2013 ] Teams do not receive a credit for net negative cap benefit (where cap hit exceeds salary over the course of the contract prior to retirement). However, in calculating net “cap advantage,” teams do receive a credit for seasons in which cap hit exceeds salary. The first sentence seems to contradict the second, if you believe the second sentence, Richards' cap advantage should be 5.6m in the last year. Edit: The first sentence is talking about cap space, so the Rangers don't get added cap space if Richards plays for 1m, the second sentence is about the cap advantage. I'm still saying Larry Brooks is wrong
-
The quote lacks the per that X adds, no?
