[Psytic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

Let's say a team, say the Flames, has played 59 games and have 68 points. Let's say another team, whoever, has played 60 games and has 67 points.

Now let's say the Flames' remaining 23 games are all against a combination of the Blackhawks, Blues, Ducks, Lightning, Penguins and rangers. The other team plays multiple games against the Sabres, Oilers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets... you get the idea.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that the other team has a cushy schedule with 17 of their last 22 played at home, and in the majority of those games, the team coming in played the night before and is on the tail end of a long road trip. The Flames, meanwhile, play most of their games on the road as part of brutal 3-in-4 stretches with back to backs involving long flights in between.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

Now assume that some time this afternoon, Brodie, Gio, Wideman, Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler are all simultaneously struck by lightning and are out for the season. The other team is totally healthy.

Who has the higher chance of making the playoffs?

You know the answer. You know there are myriad factors that go into this. The only argument is how much relative weight to put on those factors to create the best predictive model you can - the one most likely to predict the final result or closest to it (since no model designed to predict the future in hockey is going to be even close to perfect).

Yea you just owned yourself and disproved your own methodology lol