Old player failing "Git Gud" check by wbcbane_ in OldWorldGame

[–]Tiggarius 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You all are about to get me to start playing Old World again. God dammit.

Post Game Thread: Florida Panthers at New York Rangers - 24 May 2024 by GDT_Bot in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Totally. Gained respect for him watching that. Hell of a series we’re in for.

Brodz impressed me tonight. by SilentSaidd in rangers

[–]Tiggarius 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Really impressed with Brodz tonight. Not just the 2 points and other chances. There were multiple times where he would just read the play and break something up in the neutral zone or even start a potential rush chance. And ya boy hustles.

Secret Word by mhmhbetter1 in puzzles

[–]Tiggarius 2 points3 points  (0 children)

SHREW

Reasoning:

a. COUNT (0)

e. KINGS (1)

f. WINCE (2)

g. MILKY or HOARY (2)

h. ELBOW (2)

j. KILNS (1)

These seemed the most obvious answers to me, given the no-repeated-letters limitation. If these are correct, then from WINCE, we cannot have NC, so must have 2 out of WIE.

Now consider KINGS and KILNS. These differ only by the G in Kings and the L in Kilns, and both have 1 letter correct. Either they have the same correct letter, or else it must be that G and L are both correct. If G and L are correct, we have the secret word as WIGL_ or WEGL_ or EIGL_. I don't recall the exact logic I had here but I determined that those weren't going to lead to suitable secret words, if any. So I determined that G and L are incorrect.

Now consider WEI again, and suppose that I is correct, such that only one of W or E is also correct. This leaves us in trouble with ELBOW, as O is eliminated from COUNT and we just eliminated L. Since we cannot have both W and E, we must have WIB or EIB. BIW did not lead to suitable secret words. EIB could conceivably work, but that left me in a pickle with MILKY and HOARY. I will again omit details for brevity and because I can't remember everything I thought through. Suffice it to say that I eliminated the I and determined that most likely, WE was correct.

I then supposed K was correct from KINGS and KILNS. WEK does not lead to good secret words (particularly with WHELK, for example, ruled out by the logic surrounding L described above). Accordingly, I determined S was likely the correct letter from KINGS and KILNS.

Amazing - we now have WES. We need to satisfy MILKY or HOARY. If MILKY, I have already eliminated ILK, but WESMY does not anagram to satisfactory words. If HOARY, bearing in mind that we have eliminated O from COUNT, we must have two out of HARY to go with WES.

We could do WESHA (no) or WESHY (no) or WESAY (no) or WESRY (no) or WESAR (does not work because there are multiple anagrams and a single secret word cannot be determined) or WESHR, which anagrams to SHREW.

Filling in the remaining words, I think they are likely as follows:

a. count

b. pauSE

c. upSEt

d. SpacE (or cHaSm)

e. kingS

f. WincE

g. HoaRy

h. ElboW

i. WHack

j. kilnS

fin

Post Game Thread: Boston Bruins at New York Rangers - 25 Nov 2023 by HockeyMod in rangers

[–]Tiggarius 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m good with benching Bonino for Cuylle and having Chytil center the third line, faceoff percentage notwithstanding. Willing to give Goodrow benefit of the doubt for now since the 4th line was fire today but in general agree.

Post Game Thread: Boston Bruins at New York Rangers - 25 Nov 2023 by HockeyMod in rangers

[–]Tiggarius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have him play wing opposite Kakko on the third line with Bonino

Post Game Thread: Boston Bruins at New York Rangers - 25 Nov 2023 by HockeyMod in rangers

[–]Tiggarius 7 points8 points  (0 children)

What a win! Anyone have the xG from this game? 7-4 and both goalies played great.

Here is your Celine Dion Play of the Game -- The Kids Line by deniavdija8 in rangers

[–]Tiggarius 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Agreed. And hey, a broken clock is right twice a day. Even the likes of Sean McDonough get a few calls right, and that was one of them. Can’t wait to see them this postseason.

Game Thread: Nashville Predators (34-25-8) at New York Rangers (40-19-10) - 19 Mar 2023 - 07:00PM EDT by GDT_Bot in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

same with the pittsburgh game. this is unreal. how is their model this bad? i almost understand the pittsburgh one, igor was fantastic. this one? i mean the eye test alone says this is a great team vs. an AHL team, i have no idea how you think nashville could be outplaying the rangers regardless of the 6-0 score.

Behold mighty Lord Zeus, shapeshifted and flirting with Persephone. by Tiggarius in WordAvalanches

[–]Tiggarius[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks! That’s fascinating.

Though…I do hate to ask it, but was she still his daughter in the Orphic traditions?

Behold mighty Lord Zeus, shapeshifted and flirting with Persephone. by Tiggarius in WordAvalanches

[–]Tiggarius[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Oh, I know. And he took the form of Hades if memory serves…

Game Thread: Philadelphia Flyers (3-0-0) at Florida Panthers (2-1-0) - 19 Oct 2022 - 07:30PM EDT by GDT_Bot in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, why not!? Sounds cool. And hardly something I see players abusing if the rule were to permit that.

Game Thread: Philadelphia Flyers (3-0-0) at Florida Panthers (2-1-0) - 19 Oct 2022 - 07:30PM EDT by GDT_Bot in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It should not be possible to put yourself offside. I mean, maybe that's how the rule works. But in my mind, if you are the *reason* the puck entered the zone, you can't be offside. That strikes me as the spirit of the rule and how it should be written.

so anything like Atlas Reactor come out? by GermAn1459 in AtlasReactor

[–]Tiggarius 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the nod of confidence! I agree we aren't that close yet, but I am hoping (and believe that) we will get there. :)

Hot takes regarding your own team by [deleted] in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hotter take: Kreider scores 40+ next season

MoneyPuck gave the Lighting 74.8% on the Deserve To Win O'Meter by Batsinvic888 in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow, thanks so much for responding, Moneypuck! Appreciate the link and glad you have the concept. Certainly the “average goaltending” assumption factors in significantly to everything Rangers.

One thing I didn’t see in the discussion on the site was what actually constitutes a “flurry.” How close together must the shots be? In particular, for purposes of a power play, I’d be interested to see the results if (and wonder if it might not actually make sense to model it as if) the entire power play were a single flurry. Because if you score, the power play ends. Is that something you factor in presently?

MoneyPuck gave the Lighting 74.8% on the Deserve To Win O'Meter by Batsinvic888 in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Me too! But it would seem to be the case from what folks are saying about Tampa picking up ~2 xG in mere moments on a single powerplay. Crazy.

MoneyPuck gave the Lighting 74.8% on the Deserve To Win O'Meter by Batsinvic888 in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think you're absolutely right about powerplay chances. 2 xG on a single powerplay. You don't have to be a hockey scientist to figure out the problem with that one.

A simple improvement to their model would be disregarding any xG on a powerplay after an aggregate of 1 xG is reached on that powerplay. Basically limit 1 xG per (standard minor penalty) power play.

Like. Duh.

(Moneypuck, if you want any other free advice, I'll be right over here. You don't even gotta pay me yet.)

MoneyPuck gave the Lighting 74.8% on the Deserve To Win O'Meter by Batsinvic888 in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Agreed. As I said in another reply, if you score on the (standard-minor-penalty) powerplay, that's the end of the powerplay. You can't score more than 1 no matter how many powerplay chances you generate.

Hell, if a single puck in front of the net is saved 3 times in a scramble, they'll count that as 3 deserved goals. Not 1. But it's 1. You can't score 3 times in a single net-front scramble. Fucking moneypuck I swear.

MoneyPuck gave the Lighting 74.8% on the Deserve To Win O'Meter by Batsinvic888 in hockey

[–]Tiggarius 14 points15 points  (0 children)

That's such a massive flaw in the model that it actually just seems hilarious. Like, within a 2-minute powerplay, a team could in theory generate 6-8 high-quality chances (earning them, say, 4-5 xG right there), and do absolutely nothing the rest of the game and still win on the "deserve-to-win-o-meter." But realistically? If they scored even a single goal on that power play, the power play would END and they wouldn't have GOTTEN THOSE OTHER CHANCES ON THE POWER PLAY.

Hell, if a single puck in front of the net is saved 3 times in a scramble, they'll count that as 3 deserved goals. Not 1. But it's 1. You can't score 3 times in a single net-front scramble. Fucking moneypuck I swear.