|
I went with a random number, 369. Who guessed highest?
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
Hockles posted:I went with a random number, 369. Who guessed highest? Follow along link for the new page: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1B1GSfpyDmA3l_-8chpnB8aujZzHZOQCPV2kNAafJhXc/edit#gid=0 darkwolf220 did, with 529. Only half a dozen of you or so have a realistic chance at that one, unless some 1-0 sweeps start happening. --- From the west coast cutting against the sun, the return. Blood has been spilled. Except Minnesota, because seriously nobody friggin picked them. 30 of you predicted 7 games in in Bos-Mtl, and 29 in NYR-Pitts. Congratulations. Most of you are already dead in Chicago's trenches.     Stickarts fucked around with this message at 07:27 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
You...uh...got some insider info you want to share?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
I finally got one right! Thanks, Chicago
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:You...uh...got some insider info you want to share? Yes. I'm dumb.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
mid round full updateStickarts posted:lazerwolf 46
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
Oh and shyfted one is in last place of all those who participated in both rounds! Huzzah!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
The New York Rangers winning in 7 is the first series I got both the team and games they won by correct. I went 7/8 in the first round, and somehow missed on all 8 of those series'. I am also surprised I guessed the fourth highest amount of goals scored in the playoffs. I think I guessed at the amount of games would probably be played in the playoffs, and multiplied that by a reasonable average goals per game. I was trying to be conservative, too.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
i did approximately total number of games in last couple playoffs multiplied by 5
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
A quick question for anyone interested in giving their input: Should I increase the value of the Conference Finals/Cup Finals in terms of points share? The current format of 2 points for correct winner, 2 points for correct # of games, 6 points (2-2-6) for getting both, seems like a decent way to reward getting something right in a series. Does awarding, say, 4-4-12 (opposed to 2-2-6) place too much emphasis on the later rounds? The reasoning that later rounds=more important holds a little bit of water, but I don't think it is necessarily fair to dilute rounds 1 and 2 (12 of 15 total rounds) too much. So, yea. Should I alter 3rd/4th round points to 3-3-9 or 4-4-12, or some other distribution? Or is the Messier Guarantee (thinking a 5 point bonus for every successful next game guarantee) enough of a point increase? The guarantee being kind of like football challenges, where if you get it right you get another (maximum of 3, say) but if you get it wrong you don't get any more. Stickarts fucked around with this message at 21:58 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
And if my tallying is correct, this is actually a high scoring playoffs thus far. 66 gp, 396 goals= Exactly 6 gpg
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:And if my tallying is correct, this is actually a high scoring playoffs thus far. well that's about exactly twice as high as I budgeted for, stupid goalies no doing their jobs
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Zamboni Jesus posted:i did approximately total number of games in last couple playoffs multiplied by 5 It looks like we did the same thing, although I may have added a game. Stickarts posted:Or is the Messier Guarantee (thinking a 5 point bonus for every successful next game guarantee) enough of a point increase? The guarantee being kind of like football challenges, where if you get it right you get another (maximum of 3, say) but if you get it wrong you don't get any more. I don't like the Messier Guarantee because I forget this thread exists. But, it's your thread! Do what you think is best.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Yea we're definitely out in the sticks here in TAQB. I note with some e-displeasure NBA's pick'em gets SAS proper. Which is to say, meh.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:Yea we're definitely out in the sticks here in TAQB. I note with some e-displeasure NBA's pick'em gets SAS proper. Which is to say, meh. this thread probably could have stuck around in the main forum but you requested to move it here so i would keep the points the same as they are because constantly changing things as the playoffs go along just gets confusing
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:
Yes it does because everyone gets a chance to pick the winner for the conference finals/cup finals. Later rounds = more important would hold more water if you structured the picks bracket style where everyone locks their picks in from the beginning of the playoffs. It's actually harder to pick the correct winner and games in the earlier rounds rather than the Conf/Cup finals because there are more matchups. Half of the posters should be able to pick the winner of the cup based on chance alone.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Of the 86 original entrants, only 23 picked a team to win the cup who is still in it. 16 if LA wins, 20 if Anaheim does. Anaheim - 7 Montreal - 6 Rangers - 5 LA - 3 Chic - 2 4 each of Montreal and New York were homer picks acing their way to victory.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
i picked new york to make the finals without it even being a homer pick  we'll just ignore that i picked san jose to win the cup
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
I am dominating the chicken poo poo repick round btw
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
If LA gets it done in game 7 I have a set of 6s. Pittsburgh of course greased its shorts.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:I am dominating the chicken poo poo repick round btw For the record you, myself and and four others have 12 points locked in this round, which is the second most points. Four others have 14. Also, I found a photo of the print I made for the poster formerly known as FlyingLemur from a few years back: 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
I'm at 99% monthly bandwidth with a week to go. Looks like imgur might be getting a new customer. If that's the web hosting site to use these days.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:I'm at 99% monthly bandwidth with a week to go. Looks like imgur might be getting a new customer. If that's the web hosting site to use these days.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
New York Rangers in 4 Chicago Blackhawks in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Montreal in 7 Chicago in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Hawks in 4. Montreal in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Hawks in 7 Habs in 5 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Rangers in 5 Kings in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Montreal in 5 Chicago in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Montreal in 6 Chicago in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Kings in 5 New York in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Chicago in 6 Habs in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Chicago in 7 Rangers in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Montreal in 6 Chicago in 5
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Habs in 6 Kings in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
Ugh. Chicago in 6 Habs in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
New York in 6 LA Kings in 5
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Habs in 6 Chicago in 6
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Montreal in 6 Chicago in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 09:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
Habs in 5 Kings in 7
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 09:18
|
|
