Takes and trash talk from both ALL sides of the NHL's most obscure PATHETIC* rivalry

* Thanks, Kevin Lowe!

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Drinky BoC Gameday Post Part 1: Ducks at Sharks

Anaheim Ducks (32-13-8, 3rd in west) at San Jose Sharks (34-18-1, 4th in west)

Well, here it is—a home-and-home today-and-tomorrow with the top two teams in the Pacific, and going in the Sharks have only 3 less standings points (69) than the hot-and-cold Ducks (72).

I don’t have much to offer number-wise for this game (yay, red wine!), but I would like to point out how difficult it is to even think about the standings even just two games into the future, with overtime and shootout results being possible. For example, there are ten (!) possible point outcomes to these two games, not even counting permutations:

  1. Sharks get 4 points, Ducks get 0.
  2. Sharks get 4 points, Ducks get 1.
  3. Sharks get 4 points, Ducks get 2.
  4. Sharks get 3 points, Ducks get 2.
  5. Sharks get 3 points, Ducks get 3.
  6. Sharks get 2 points, Ducks get 2.
  7. Sharks get 2 points, Ducks get 3.
  8. Sharks get 2 points, Ducks get 4.
  9. Sharks get 1 point, Ducks get 4.
  10. Sharks get 0 points, Ducks get 4.
With the first 2 of these 10 outcomes, San Jose would take the Pacific division lead. Otherwise, Anaheim holds it.


If you haven't noticed, this blog was moved to Blogger 2.0 recently. A few notes on that:

a) Though I generally managed (crappy) maintenance of this blog, I didn't make the decision to upgrade (though I don't mind it much either). The one time I investigated the option, Blogger told me that I wan't the "owner" of the blog, so I generally suspect that this upgrade was the work of James Mirtle (who set us up); plus the conversion of his site times well with BoC's. Thanks, JM.

b) Generally, I'm generally indifferent to 2.0, except for two nice features: First off, I was never any good at making the sidebar and body of the blog fit well on different screen resolutions; this appears to be auto-fixed in the upgraded version (so far as I know). Secondly, there is a categorization function in 2.0 that is pretty cool; if you scroll down on the left sidebar you can check it out. I've gone back and tagged almost all of our archives (yay manageable post total!), so you can go check out all the posts that pertain to karma, or grammar, or whatever you'd like.

c) Does anyone else find that they have to log in with much more frequency on Blogger 2.0? That is made doubly obnoxious by forcing me to log in with my e-mail address rather than my (shorter) blogger account name each time.


Psst, Mark Bell, I saved you a parking spot, dude.

Prediction: Ducks 3, Sharks 1. Pahlsson, Selanne, and Pronger.


Jordi said...

Oh boy. My dad found out how to buy wine in dozens on the internet and the living room is just a fancy name for a wine cellar now. I hit my foot on those fucking boxes when I want to actually get in that place (which isn't often).

And funny enough, I dont even get to touch that stuff. I'm too young *whines*. But it's okay when my dad drives us home after drinking one full bottle of red wine. I shit you not.

PJ Swenson said...

I didn't upgrade to the new blogger for you, but I did on my blog. My site ballooned from 200mb to 700mb, and there was no way to switch back. But if you turn off all the labels and dont use them, it will not create individual pages for each post, which is cool if you have 1100+.

Lets hope this is like the second Ducks-Sharks game this year, where they both tried to roll over the other team, but could not.

Earl Sleek said...

By the way, David Johnson at HockeyAnalysis.com released his weekly power rankings, and Sharks and Ducks are #1 and 2, respectively.

Objectionable Conduct said...

Earl you and I share a common issue I believe. Alcohol and posting while drinking (such as now)

James Mirtle said...

Earlie — it made me upgrade all of my blogs, including this one, when I upgraded the mothership, so I hope it works out alright for you. I'm sure I could have passed ownership for this baby onto you long ago, but I'm here just in case things go awry.

Have we lost some of our contributers, by the way? Maybe someone else is interested in wearing the Kings hat?