ST Alpha - "I'm not saying it's anything more than a vague theoretical parallel to football. It's cost/benefit analysis." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 166

In response to "The difference with football is that if the onside kick works you deny possession of the ball. " by Reagen

I'm not saying it's anything more than a vague theoretical parallel to football. It's cost/benefit analysis.

Posted by musubi Feb 26 '10, 13:48

As some point (I don't know what, but 6-0 in the first seems like a good start), there is opportunity there to do something crazy like pulling the goalie (for a short period) because the downside is being downside is being down 7-0. The risk no longer outweighs the potential benefit. If you're gonna lose anyway, 6-0 bears little difference to 7-0.

Responses:

Not true. They still have a chance at a bronze medal. - Subversive - remembering Tommy Salo Feb 26, 13:54
You have a far better chance of coming back through normal means than through desperate strategies - Reagen Feb 26, 13:52 11
- Oh sure, it would *have* to be used extremely rarely. Extremely. But I don't think zero is the rught number. - musubi Feb 26, 13:57 10
  - wrong - there is no risk during a delayed penalty. play ends when the other team touches the puck -- nm - Guy Feb 26, 13:59 7
    - it is possible to put it in your own net. But that's happened precisely twice. -- nm - Reagen Feb 26, 14:06
    - And a puck can't find the empty net without the other team touching it? - musubi Feb 26, 14:06 5
      - or your goalie could slip on his way to the bench and knock himself out. or maybe a meteor crashes through the roof -- nm - Guy Feb 26, 14:10 2
        
        So you admit, when you said I was wrong about risk, it was you who was wrong. Thanks. (nm) - musubi Feb 26, 14:11 1
        
        You're better than this. I mean, you should be better than this. -- nm - Reagen Feb 26, 14:13
      - it's infintesimal. -- nm - Reagen Feb 26, 14:07 1
        
        I agree. But it's not zero. - musubi Feb 26, 14:10
  - And Reagen's point (and that of everyone else who knows hockey) is that a 6-0 game is NEVER that time. - Subversive - remembering Tommy Salo Feb 26, 13:59 1
    - Fair enough. Like I said, I don't know hockey that well. 6-0, to me, seems like a score that's one where crazy is justified. - musubi Feb 26, 14:02

Post a message top

I'm not saying it's anything more than a vague theoretical parallel to football. It's cost/benefit analysis.

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.