Comments on: Why winning the Pacific is kind of a big deal

By: dallasstars9

dallasstars9 — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:10:29 +0000

No disadvantage in home ice for the 1st round.

By: oside760

oside760 — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:48:25 +0000

KINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ALL DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: bensawesomeness

bensawesomeness — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:23:31 +0000

You’d prefer playing Vancouver or St. Louis?

By: letsgosjsharks

letsgosjsharks — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:45:25 +0000

Lets Go Sharks!

By: kbmorgan1

kbmorgan1 — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:33:31 +0000

The Canucks record against the Pacific was 9-5-4, only one regulation loss and you want to put them where? BTW, the NW Division is stronger this year than both the NE and the SE so where does that leave them, if Vancouver had a cakewalk what did Boston and Florida have?

By: warpstonebc

warpstonebc — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:15:32 +0000

Gah, this demonstrates a horrible grasp of probability and statistical relevance by Brad Weimer.

Winning the 3rd seed correlates with success. Sure.

But how much of the historical success rate of the 3rd team is down to division winners that were legitimate? In other words, this year’s #3 spots are particularly bad, so even if win 3rd spot, that doesn’t mean the Sharks/Panthers share the competitive advantages enjoyed by the bulk of previous #3 seeds. It’s like saying you’re okay with taking home the 3rd best looking girl at the party before investigating if the top 3 could be: supermodel; model; heffer.

Attempts to shoehorn in statistical outliers make for lazy reporting.

By: phillyphever

phillyphever — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:26:57 +0000

There’s also a disadvantage with the 3rd seed in the West: playing Chicago.