|
|
Post by Matt-Colorado on Apr 27, 2023 10:06:06 GMT -5
So, I should just be ok with that? Wouldn't you question a result such as this after putting together a team that performed as it did throughout the regular season? In 17-18 I was the #1 seed in the west and got dummied by Washington in 5. Sucks because that was the only year I could’ve made it to the finals without running into the Alaska or Cleveland brick walls for the next 5 years. Shit happens, you got unlucky. It never occurred to me to launch a congressional inquiry. Your team laying an egg is statistically improbable, and likely shouldn’t happen, but it doesn’t mean it can’t happen. There’s no guarantee of anything unless you’re working with 100% odds, and where’s the fun in that? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 27, 2023 12:38:54 GMT -5
Then how will I know how to build back better? I lost...I'm ok with that...But, there's got to be an explanation as to why. At least there has to be numbers to suggest a reason. One goalie played well...Guys that don't shoot much scored...Guys that shoot much and score much--didn't score, but still shot a lot. a goalie that saved a lot, didn't save shit. I see all of that...But, there's no logical explanation that I can see in the stats that would indicate a reason why. So, I should just be ok with that? Wouldn't you question a result such as this after putting together a team that performed as it did throughout the regular season? Regular Season: Top Scoring Team-Check Presidents Trophy as Top Winning Team-Check Top Power Play-Check Top Rated Skill Team-Check 3rd Ranked Defensive Team-Room for Improvement Top Offensive Ranked Team-Check 6th Ranked Against PP-Room for Improvement Goaltender SvPtg Ranked 2nd-Room for Improvement Record Vs Opponent- 2-0-1 Playoffs: Worst Ranked Goaltender-Check Worst Goaltender Tandem-Check Only Playoff Team with Both goaltenders Under .882 Outshot Opponent by 60 Shots-Check Outscored by Opponent/8th Ranked Team-Check Team Offense Shutdown-Check Opponents Offense Excelled-Check Team Defense Performed Like A Sieve-Check Opponent Defense Performed Like A Defense-Check Questions: -Why would one team's offense get Shutdown and the other team not? -Why would one goaltending tandem in a series be So Horrendus, and the other Steller? -Why would one team be so dominant in the Regular Season, and be dominated by the 8th Place team in the playoffs without a boost of some kind? -Not only did my Goaltending take a 180, but also the Offense? Weird. -All of these questions were asked approx 3 months ago, when this was happening, ironically back then. I am asking, NOT because I want the result changed/reversed. I ask, because I would like to adjust my team for the future. Don't tell me..."It happens in the NHL." I already know that. But, we've already clarified that there is no psychological advantage, no advantage for toughness, AND...we have already determined that the GHL and NHL cannot be compared. So, I'd like to know what I can do on my end, to lessen the chances of this type of BS occurring. This is a statistical based simulation, correct? Many times, NOT ONLY AGAINST SUFFOLK, the 20 sided dice roll, wink wink, is questionable. Shots taken, shots against, etc...Goalie Love Elevated for sure! Like I said, the results are final. I'm not asking for a reversal. I'm asking for my future alterations for MY team.
[b]Does Winning the Presidents’ Trophy Guarantee a Stanley Cup?
In short, no. There have been only eight teams in 35 seasons to win both the Presidents’ Trophy and Stanley Cup. The most recent was the Blackhawks in 2013.[/b] Full article here: thehockeywriters.com/docs/presidents-trophy/Toughness does play a factor, but it also increases a teams chance to take penalties. In working with external auditors you are asking me to prove a negative which is impossible to do. Another example would be to ask me to prove that there are no blue unicorns in Pennsylvania. We all know there aren't any but anyone would be hard pressed to prove it. I repeat, there were no changes made prior to the start of the playoffs. There (never was/is/will be) anything in the engine (code/lookup tables/shenanigans) that hampers or enhances a particular teams performance or particular players card. Any changes made (as was done several months back) impact all players/teams in the league. [/quote] Thank you. I just want to be clear though...Are you comparing the GHL to the NHL? Which is it? Are we just like the NHL or are we NOT like the NHL? I get so confused. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 27, 2023 12:48:22 GMT -5
So, I should just be ok with that? Wouldn't you question a result such as this after putting together a team that performed as it did throughout the regular season? In 17-18 I was the #1 seed in the west and got dummied by Washington in 5. Sucks because that was the only year I could’ve made it to the finals without running into the Alaska or Cleveland brick walls for the next 5 years. Shit happens, you got unlucky. It never occurred to me to launch a congressional inquiry. Your team laying an egg is statistically improbable, and likely shouldn’t happen, but it doesn’t mean it can’t happen. There’s no guarantee of anything unless you’re working with 100% odds, and where’s the fun in that? Matt, I totally understand your point, and I agree with you. I know that winning the President's Trophy doesn't guarantee anything. But, it's a good indication that your team is doing pretty well, we can all agree there. But, don't take this the wrong way, just because you didn't question anything when it happened to you, doesn't mean everything was in working order. It doesn't mean that it is broken either. BUT, I question things when they look broken or seem to be off. That's what I did during the season, and that's all I am doing now. Glenn answered me..albeit with smart ass-ery comments towards Suffolk as usual, but none-the-less, answered. Uni-corns...SMH! It's just difficult to go all in on and believe in the concept of the GHL not seeing the inner works and to just accept the results because your told to do so. I have difficulty there. Do you know what I mean?That's why we have "unicorns" winning MVP Trophies in the GHL, I guess. Matt, BTW, In 17-18 you finished first in your conference, not the league. Washington was actually the 2nd highest scoring team in your conference. Besting you by 30 goals scored. The difference between 1st and 8th in your conference was 23 pts.
This season, Suffolk finished in 1st place...The Modern Era (LOL), Suffolk bested Cornwall by 90 goals, the GHL Most Goals Scored, and 3rd Least Amount of Goals Scored Against. The difference between 1st-8th was 36 Points. Big Difference!Congressional Inquiry, possibly! LOL! Where's Hunter? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 27, 2023 12:54:06 GMT -5
Yea unfortunately that argument doesn't hold up. Brought Chris in to manage Alaska turned it around in a 1 year rebuild then had 4 100+ point seasons before leaving after 5th season. May even have record for most points in a season with 150. OHH, I totally forgot about Chris running Alaska for a few seasons. Yes, he did an excellent job as well. Didn't mean to disrespect him. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Apr 27, 2023 13:10:11 GMT -5
I believe Eric-Baltimore can correlate that I used the Blue Unicorns analogy at work when discussing similar requests from our internal and external audit teams. I know I use it with my team and my senior management all of the time.
Yes Chris, we strive to be like the NHL. As much as possible. This is apparently where our visions of what the GHL is differ. There has been so much said about it being broken and wrong over this past year. There is no "broken" or "wrong" because there is no "right" either. The goal is to make it as accurate a simulation as possible which means we are dealing with degrees of realism. There isn't any way to step back and say. "there, with that last adjustment things are perfect."
Do you accept the hand you are dealt when you are playing in your poker league? Are there some inner workings of the card game that you aren't privy to that you should be? How is that different than this? Is the difference the fact that in your eyes I am the dealer all of the time? Are you musing that I am dealing from the bottom of the deck? If so I have been doing a royally good job of fucking that up seeing as its been 13 years and I have 0 contemporary cups to my name. If so, my pinnacle was getting my starting goalie hurt in game 3 of the conference finals against Joe (Adirondack) and blowing a 3-0 lead to the Aces on their way onto a sweep of Pittsburgh in the finals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 27, 2023 13:27:34 GMT -5
I believe Eric-Baltimore can correlate that I used the Blue Unicorns analogy at work when discussing similar requests from our internal and external audit teams. I know I use it with my team and my senior management all of the time. Yes Chris, we strive to be like the NHL. As much as possible. This is apparently where our visions of what the GHL is differ. There has been so much said about it being broken and wrong over this past year. There is no "broken" or "wrong" because there is no "right" either. The goal is to make it as accurate a simulation as possible which means we are dealing with degrees of realism. There isn't any way to step back and say. "there, with that last adjustment things are perfect." Do you accept the hand you are dealt when you are playing in your poker league? Are there some inner workings of the card game that you aren't privy to that you should be? How is that different than this? Is the difference the fact that in your eyes I am the dealer all of the time? Are you musing that I am dealing from the bottom of the deck? If so I have been doing a royally good job of fucking that up seeing as its been 13 years and I have 0 contemporary cups to my name. If so, my pinnacle was getting my starting goalie hurt in game 3 of the conference finals against Joe (Adirondack) and blowing a 3-0 lead to the Aces on their way onto a sweep of Pittsburgh in the finals. No, and that seems to be your problem. You keep thinking I am accusing you of foul play. But, you never look into what I propose might be an issue. I/We have had issues with AHL players/goalies being better than legit NHL players when they suit up in GHL games. Does that mean you're cheating? No! IFFFF, we are striving to be as close to the NHL as possible...things need to change in the GHL. Your resistance to accept change, or to hear another persons perspective without getting pissed off, is a problem as well. But, Thank You for Clearing it up....Turns out, We ARE LIKE the NHL....Ok. We are STRIVING to be LIKE. But, we Aren't there yet? Gotcha. BTW: No GHL Presidents Trophy Team has ever been eliminated in the 1st Round. Check your league history. 2 or 3 have been eliminated in Qtr's, 2 or 3 in Semi's, all the rest have either Lost in Cup Finals. or won in Finals. So, there's a 1st for the record books. SIDE NOTE: The Wales Conference has historically been the WEAKER conference. A few teams have won the President's Trophy because of the points accumulated playing against weaker teams, losing to the Campbell Conference later on. That's just a side note...and this writers opinion based upon league stats. |
|
|
|
Post by Joe-Adirondack on Apr 27, 2023 14:41:22 GMT -5
I believe Eric-Baltimore can correlate that I used the Blue Unicorns analogy at work when discussing similar requests from our internal and external audit teams. I know I use it with my team and my senior management all of the time. Yes Chris, we strive to be like the NHL. As much as possible. This is apparently where our visions of what the GHL is differ. There has been so much said about it being broken and wrong over this past year. There is no "broken" or "wrong" because there is no "right" either. The goal is to make it as accurate a simulation as possible which means we are dealing with degrees of realism. There isn't any way to step back and say. "there, with that last adjustment things are perfect." Do you accept the hand you are dealt when you are playing in your poker league? Are there some inner workings of the card game that you aren't privy to that you should be? How is that different than this? Is the difference the fact that in your eyes I am the dealer all of the time? Are you musing that I am dealing from the bottom of the deck? If so I have been doing a royally good job of fucking that up seeing as its been 13 years and I have 0 contemporary cups to my name. If so, my pinnacle was getting my starting goalie hurt in game 3 of the conference finals against Joe (Adirondack) and blowing a 3-0 lead to the Aces on their way onto a sweep of Pittsburgh in the finals. Much appreciated getting mentioned Glenn in a happier time ! after i got bounce like a beach ball by Eric |
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Apr 28, 2023 8:54:32 GMT -5
I believe Eric-Baltimore can correlate that I used the Blue Unicorns analogy at work when discussing similar requests from our internal and external audit teams. I know I use it with my team and my senior management all of the time. Yes Chris, we strive to be like the NHL. As much as possible. This is apparently where our visions of what the GHL is differ. There has been so much said about it being broken and wrong over this past year. There is no "broken" or "wrong" because there is no "right" either. The goal is to make it as accurate a simulation as possible which means we are dealing with degrees of realism. There isn't any way to step back and say. "there, with that last adjustment things are perfect." Do you accept the hand you are dealt when you are playing in your poker league? Are there some inner workings of the card game that you aren't privy to that you should be? How is that different than this? Is the difference the fact that in your eyes I am the dealer all of the time? Are you musing that I am dealing from the bottom of the deck? If so I have been doing a royally good job of fucking that up seeing as its been 13 years and I have 0 contemporary cups to my name. If so, my pinnacle was getting my starting goalie hurt in game 3 of the conference finals against Joe (Adirondack) and blowing a 3-0 lead to the Aces on their way onto a sweep of Pittsburgh in the finals. No, and that seems to be your problem. You keep thinking I am accusing you of foul play. But, you never look into what I propose might be an issue. I/We have had issues with AHL players/goalies being better than legit NHL players when they suit up in GHL games. Does that mean you're cheating? No! IFFFF, we are striving to be as close to the NHL as possible...things need to change in the GHL. Your resistance to accept change, or to hear another persons perspective without getting pissed off, is a problem as well. But, Thank You for Clearing it up....Turns out, We ARE LIKE the NHL....Ok. We are STRIVING to be LIKE. But, we Aren't there yet? Gotcha. BTW: No GHL Presidents Trophy Team has ever been eliminated in the 1st Round. Check your league history. 2 or 3 have been eliminated in Qtr's, 2 or 3 in Semi's, all the rest have either Lost in Cup Finals. or won in Finals. So, there's a 1st for the record books. SIDE NOTE: The Wales Conference has historically been the WEAKER conference. A few teams have won the President's Trophy because of the points accumulated playing against weaker teams, losing to the Campbell Conference later on. That's just a side note...and this writers opinion based upon league stats. Not sure if you've ever played an EA Sports NHL game and franchise mode, but I used to all the time and would build powerhouse teams only to lose in the playoffs some seasons, in any round, while simulating the games. (Building the team and simming the games was more fun for me than actually playing back then.) This league is basically a franchise mode in the game. The point is is that it's an engine, just like the one we use, where the better team isn't always going to beat an inferior team, even in a best of 7. And I certainly wouldn't say to EA that there might be a problem with the sim engine because I'm not winning the cup (or a playoff series) every season that I have the best team. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 28, 2023 15:45:09 GMT -5
Yes, Familiar with it and the GM Mode. I'm aware of how it works. I'm also aware, that I don't expect to go undefeated for an entire season and for the entirety of a playoff series.
You are aware that EA Sports NHL game is not only an engine but also contains algorithms? For example, a learning algorithm that adjusts to play of the person playing. Or, when you SIM the games in the season instead of playing them, your players get injured more frequently. Also, an algorithm that rewards your created players faster when you actually participate versus when you SIM the games.
Does Glenn have those algorithms? I think not. But, I understand the gist of your comment is that "I shouldn't expect to win every game or series, because it happens in real life." Yeah, I understand.
However, in this particular case...I don't think it's relative. The stats, and the competitors products don't compare and it was demonstrated throughout an 82 game SIMULATION.
I'm finding it difficult to understand how Suffolk's Offense, Defense and Goalie all just stopped working at the same time Cornwall's Offense, Defense and Goalie climbed a-top it's Mount Everest. It's happens in the NHL. But, we weren't supposed to be compared to the NHL. Then, we are supposed to be compared to the NHL.
We don't have an algorithm in our SIM....Do we?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 28, 2023 15:53:01 GMT -5
My bottom line feeling is, I made a product that worked for 82 games.
Cornwall made a product that didn't work for 82 games.
But, suddenly, one very good product was a piece of crap. The other piece of crap product became a very good product.
If I could get a reason as to How or Why, other than to hear another person say, because it happens in the NHL, which is a place where there are REAL personalities and players and NOT algorithms, I'd love to hear it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon-Seattle on Apr 29, 2023 16:02:43 GMT -5
My bottom line feeling is, I made a product that worked for 82 games. Cornwall made a product that didn't work for 82 games. But, suddenly, one very good product was a piece of crap. The other piece of crap product became a very good product. If I could get a reason as to How or Why, other than to hear another person say, because it happens in the NHL, which is a place where there are REAL personalities and players and NOT algorithms, I'd love to hear it. I could but I don’t think you’d like or appreciate it. In brief, I think the only game 1 looks a bit lopsided. Otherwise your team scores 3+ goals a game on the 5th best goalie card in the league with a good big save (something that seems to be fairly significant especially considering it’s something your goalies lack). His top pairing D is better defensively and he has better shot blockers and hitters which is reflected in the series stats which probably hampered your offensive output. Also since the last 3 games are so close it would suggest that both team had fairly even odds at winning the game. The difference could have been goaltending, top pairing defense, or just random statistical probability that is the core component of our sim. I’ve argued about improving some of the long term statistical probability but even I have to point out with all my complaints about Shesterkins first half of the season his second half of the season might arguably pull his statistics back into the norm. Does that mean his second half was only good because his first half was so bad, in short, no. We can’t use 2-3 games or even a 7 game series to make the sim push out consistent results for individual players. Austin Matthew’s isn’t going to score every fifth or tenth shot because he has a specific shooting/shot %. Location, shot blocking, goalie quality, Stamina, and more variables all factor in with the most important being Random Number Generation (RNG). the easiest way to explain this: At best you might have a 15-20% chance to score and on average probably closer to <10%. Each shot is taken independently so just because Matthew might not have scored on his last 10 shots he doesn’t get any advantage or disadvantage to the shot. An argument we could have is that some of the randomness of the RNG could be removed to ensure improbable statistical anomalies that we have seen, like the one I described with Shesterkins first half stats that I was trying to unsuccessfully describe earlier this year. There’s a variety of reasons that could have caused it, from legit randomness or to odd phenomena of computerized RNGs having some odd quirks (like selecting some numbers more than others or ensuring all numbers are utilized equally regardless of situation which can skew individual stats if say a 80-100 is needed for Matthew’s to score but gets a larger proportion of 1-79s because Hintz has randomly gotten a larger % of those 80-100s despite on scoring on 85+) that’s only a small example as the sim is constantly generating numbers so this could just as arguably go for one team against another not to mention that there aren’t just two players but 40 and the same number generation could apply to other stats cumulatively rather than independently. It doesn’t mean RNG is being stolen or incorrectly attributed to different players but just a quirk of how RNG works. All this said I don’t have the numbers to back this up, which I’m sure you’ll hang your Stetson on and disregard everything I’ve written up to this point, but only Glenn has the definitive algorithm and even he might not have all the statistics for how RNG is attributed to players or stat categories. I’d be a proponent for adding in some mechanism to ensure statistically probably number generation but then the question becomes at what level and how stringently. Do all players get their own independent RNG or should we break it down even farther so every players different stats get one, how about each shot location per player? Is it even possible? It wouldn’t have changed your results. They all appear within statistical norms and as a league even Shesterkins improbable first half (over 40 games of stats?) could be explained away by one simple statistical phrase: improbable but not impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Apr 30, 2023 13:23:11 GMT -5
I DO appreciate your comment and thoughts. I don't totally disagree with you.
Your entire analogy/comparison is based upon a 5 Game Playoff series. Wherein, the Top Ranked team throughout an 82 Game span, demonstrated Offensively to be the Best in the GHL (+194), the Defense Ranked 3rd Overall (220GA), and the Goaltender ranked 2nd with a 28-5-4 record (.923, 2.49GA, 5 Shutouts with a 2 Big Save).
Compare that to the opponent, whom Ranked 8th Overall (+42), Offensively Ranked 7th overall, Defensively Ranked 14th overall, and the Goaltender Ranked 27-25-7 (.908, 3.42GA, 4 Shutouts with a 3 Big Save).
Even Demko finished the season better than Kuemper.
Demko- 33-12-0 (.909, 2.80GA, 4 Shutouts with a 1 Big Save)
Do we just dismiss these Stats? Did they not happen? Did Cornwall demonstrate something different? Did Suffolk?
Are we to believe that an 82 Game demonstration using the algorithms in the GHL are thrown out the window for the playoffs?
If you'd like to use head-to-head comparisons during the season, Suffolk was 2-0-1 in that series.
If you want to RNG, why does/did it effect one team and not the other? You compare Suffolk's Offense to Cornwall Goaltender and Defense and claim that the RNG or the Stats benefit or give the edge to Cornwall?
Are you even considering Cornwall's Offense versus Suffolk's Goaltender and Defense?
You only compared one Suffolk's offense and contribute the losses to Cornwall's Goaltender having a 3 Big Save and better shot blockers. Well, yes, they did block shots. But, A LOT of shots they didn't block. 213 Shots got by them into the goaltender. Technically, Suffolk Defense performed better than Cornwall. Blocking just about 33% of all the shots Cornwall took, compared to Cornwall blocking about <30% of Suffolk's.
On top of that, so Matthews, Tkachuk, Svechnikov, Burakovsky, Hintz, Bertuzzi, Gaunce RNG's prohibited their scoring ability against Kuemper and his 3 Big Save.
But, Larsson, Blueger, Carrier, Jeannot, Gourde, Henrique RNG's were uninhibited their scoring ability against Strolarz and his 2 Big Save?
I understand the point of the RNG...But, in this particular example/series, the randomness didn't appear to random. It was more a constant IMO. Constantly affecting Suffolk's Offense, Defense and Goaltenders negatively. Constantly affecting Cornwall's Offense, Defense and Goaltending positively.
Blueger-6 Shots, Carrier-2 Shots, Larsson-4 Shots = 5 Goals, 12 Shots
Hintz-29 Shots, Matthews-38 Shots, Tkachuk-40 Shots = 12 Goals, 107 Shots
***You need to look at the propensity for the above players to "even attempt shots" Even still, the 3 Suffolk players still have better chance of scoring using the RNG.
Time on Ice, Situational play, etc... all plays a part. We all know that. But, you'd have to look at the series to know, You won't be able to choke up any goals against Suffolk's 4th line, they didn't play much at al. However, randomly, Tkachuk, Lemieux, D'Angelo and Burakovsky were sent out to Penalty Kill in that deciding game.
In any case, I set up a team to play for the long haul. A RNG undermined it all with an improbable outcome. Miracles do happen. In this case, they happened repeatedly in 4 games. Not a single miracle, but 4 of them in a single series. And, many of them in each of the 4 games.
IMO, this SIM is BIASED towards goaltending. Always has been.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon-Seattle on Apr 30, 2023 22:24:15 GMT -5
I appreciate the level headed discussion and I see what you’re saying about having the better stats.
Ya’ll are in the same division so primarily same opponents which should equate to a fairly balanced evaluation of both teams stats but despite the stats Cornwalls goalie is better per the card. Maybe he played him against more difficult opponents or was just unlucky. Cornwalls overall goals against are gunna be higher because his backup isn’t as good and even with RNG a player or goalie can go on hot/cold streaks.
Overall your defense may be better but you were also playing a guy with a 7 stamina, 25 minutes a game in some cases. In all your defense was good but had some legit weaknesses that could be exploited at inopportune times.
Cornwalls offense still averaged 4 goals a game and against a slightly above average starting goalie plus a game against you backup was still short of that mark.
So the biggest question is probably your offense. You average more than 5 goals a game but again you’re up against one of the better goalies (top 5 card) and a defense that only averaged 3.5 goals/game which you exceeded but not by much. I think a little of this is somewhat unfair expectations because your team has feasted against lesser competition, and even against good teams. I would chalk up your unmet expectation to playing against higher tier competition, playing against a top 5 goalie, and a bit of poor RNG
All this to say season stats mean nothing while card value and possibly even more so RNG matter more especially when the teams are more evenly matched (as even the lowest ranked seed was “better” than half the league). Even over a 5 game series it’s hard to take away concrete lessons learned as the smaller the sample size of specific events (I.e. Matthew’s shots per goal) can result in significant outliers.
I also wanna put out that none of this takes into consideration of Phil’s goalie usage, line combos, playing time, etc. 5 games is still a small sample size and I’m sure if you played 100 games you might win 70 of them but they aren’t going to be evenly spaced out and it’s within every realm of reason to see even Phil manage to pull 4 straight wins out of his Cornhole.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on May 1, 2023 6:30:21 GMT -5
President's trophy winners and reigning cup champs were both knocked out in the first round despite no RNG in the NHL. How do we explain this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on May 1, 2023 7:08:55 GMT -5
I just want to know who let the Leafs out of the 1st round. NHL 100% broken.
|
|
