Remember that the playoffs have a different scoring method than the regular season! And if you pick someone to advance in PKs, you need to have declared the match a draw first. (I.e. don't pick a match 3-2 if you mean 2-2 with the home team advancing on PKs)
Well, for sure she's not the "I-score-in-the-semifinal-and-bring-my-team-to-the-championship-game" girl! So you draw conclusions... Want to bet that someone is going to tie her Epcot adventure to her performance in the semifinal?
I don't know about that, but I will tell you something I know for a fact. Back when her ankle was injured while she was a Thorn -- the injury that took so long to heal [Note: I'm not doubting she had an injury.] -- she was doing promotions for one of her kid soccer player books and did one at a local bookstore here in Portland. What was she wearing on her feet? Spike heels. Having a really good education doesn't make you smart.
As I said in another thread, I totally expect the next chapter of her "The Kicks" series to come out soon. It will describe how the kids celebrate the end of the season and its title will be "Getting rowdy"! It will be a hit!
Championship game prediction: Portland 1 v North Carolina 1 Portland wins on KFTM Approaching KFTM is tricky, but I wanted to stay with a stats approach. I didn't want to go through all the data to find PKs and how many the keepers saved. So, I looked at each Portland and North Carolina box score and tallied goals against, saves, and the total of the two. This is a little suspect (as in, What was the quality of the shots?), and I don't completely trust the box scores, but it's the best I could do. Here's what I came up with: Thorns Franch: Goals Against 20.8%, Saves 79.2% Courage Rowland: Goals Against 23.5%, Saves 76.5% D'Angelo: Goals Against 34.5%, Saves 65.5% I've been looking at full season stats for all of my predictions, so that's what I've gone with. But, I also took a look at the last 10 games for Franch and Rowland and still come up with Franch having a better save percentage. Anyone want to bet that NC didn't use the stats in deciding who should be their starting GK?
My prediction is what I think was the mode (more frequent statistical result) for NC this season: POR 0 NC 1 Yes, you could say it's some kind of a cpthomas approach (although not really! ). Mind, other considerations would lead me to think that Portland will score instead, and anyway I guess whoever wins will be a very deserving champion, but I want to go with the "NC usual result" prediction. It also somehow goes against the historical data, because, if I am not wrong, no shield-winning team ever won the championship in NWSL so far: NC would be the first, should they make it.
On the other hand, the mode for Portland was 2-0. And, the mode "goals for" for Portland was 2 and the mode "goals against" was 0. For NC, the mode "goals for" was 1 and the mode "goals against" was 0. But, of course, these modes all were achieved against, on average, weaker opponents. It should be fun. I keep wondering what a ticket to Orlando would cost.
A realistic scenario, cpthomas. Portland wins a shoot-out because Franch is the more agile keeper. My reasoning is as follows. North Carolina is wasteful on offense and Portland is not. NC took 310 shots to get 38 goals. That's first in the league in shots Portland, by contrast took only 226 shots to get 37 goals. That's ninth in the league in shots. (Portland had more penalty kick goals. If that chance or a factor because Portland is usually closer to the goal than North Carolina?) So, with excellent defenses for both teams, Portland's efficiency will triumph over NC's prolificacy. NC wins in all statistical categories but loses in the score: 2-1. To look at it another way, Portland wins because it has more depth, "Play them even with your starters and win with your subs."
Adjusted pts for playoff scoring so may want to double check. There's too many outliers to make existing format auto do all the scoring but luckily no ties this week. Will have to eventually figure out a way to adjust the playoff scoring. Total goals would have helped me be tied for 1st Also, there is a +6 for final game MVP. Guessing we include that with our final prediction @SiberianThunderT ?
okay. a few questions for @SiberianThunderT as I'm trying to piece together all scoring possibilities with ties and overtime/PKs. If I were to predict 2-1 but don't identify overtime, and the game ends up 2-1 in OT, do I get 8 pts? Or do I only get 4? (2 for Correct advancing team if you predicted W/L by 1 goal but match was D and 1 pt each for correct # of goals by team). Or would it fall under another one I'm missing? If I predict 2-2 OT but its 2-2 regular time and THEN 3-3 OT? I fall under 4 pts for Exact score predicted (D) at 90min but not 120min WITH correct advancing team if I get the right winner? On the other hand, if I predict 1-1 with first team winning in PKs and game ends 2-1 in OT, would that be 5 pts? 4 for the Correct GD predicted (D) WITH correct advancing team and then 1 pt for correct # of goals from one team?
All of the points spreads I had stated way back when were intended for the final score of the game, whether it goes to OT or not. No one was ever supposed to specify OT or not, since the final score is final whether it was regulation or OT. All of those (D) scenarios were to give people credit if they predicted a draw (close game) and it was that way at regulation but switched to W/L after OT. If it helps simplify your thoughts, remember that the points in the regular season are awarded on the "correct exact score -> correct GD -> correct result" sliding scale, so the three broad categories of the playoff points distributions are based on those three general results. Since the distinction between regulation and OT only exists in the playoffs, it's a secondary consideration to what the final result actually is. As such... yup, 8pts 4pts, but more correctly the 4pts would be from "Correct GD predicted (D) WITH correct advancing team" as opposed to "Exact score predicted (D) at 90min but not 120min WITH correct advancing team" because the former specifically casts the original 2-2 prediction in light of the actual drawn result. You would get the same 4pts if you had predicted 0-0 and the game ended 3-3, regarless of what the draw at regulation was. The latter points argument (what you initially asked about) would be in the scenario of you predicted 2-2 with team A advancing but it ended something like 4-3 or 7-3 after OT (if it ended 3-2 or 5-2, you'd get 5pts because correctly getting team B's 2 goals earns the +1). yup, 5pts
Do I get this, that a game that is tied after extra time, then decided by PKs, is not treated as a tie for GD purposes? Sort of odd, because for all other purposes it's treated as a tie decided by KFTM. Not that it matters, just curious.
No, a draw is a draw. Final score is all that matters. KFTM don't affect the score, only who advances. Just so I'm clearer in the future, what of what I said in the previous post made you think otherwise?
I didn't remember that. Can we really indicate an MVP and hope for a consistent bonus should we guess? In that case, I'd like to go with one of the Portland stars, but, since I predicted a 1-0 result for NC, maybe I'd better choose the MVP accordingly... I'll have to think about it.
Here's what I was looking at: From Lucy: On the other hand, if I predict 1-1 with first team winning in PKs and game ends 2-1 in OT, would that be 5 pts? 4 for the Correct GD predicted (D) WITH correct advancing team and then 1 pt for correct # of goals from one team? Your response: yup, 5pts If Lucy predicted 1-1 followed by PKs, but the game ended 2-1 in OT, how would she have had the Correct GD? She would have had it only if the 1-1 tie followed by PKs were treated as a 2-1 result. Or, maybe I misunderstood the exchange.
My stats came up with three scenarios: yours, 1-1, and Portland 2 v NC 1. The hard thing for the stats is that we don't have any other neutral site games. Let's hope for a great game. Personally, I'd rather it not come to KFTM since that's sort of a bum ending. But, let's have a great game above all.
Agreed. I'm not particularly emotionally invested in either team like I know you are, but I really am hoping for a great game.
Ah, I see the problem. Lucy had the right points value but the wrong explanation for the third scenario - i.e. the backwards version of their second scenario, and I just read it as the right explanation after having been dealing with it while re-hashing their second scenario. That's my bad for not paying closer attention. So, the correct explanation for the third scenario is still 5pts, but the details are: 4pts for "Exact score predicted (D) at 90min but not 120min WITH correct advancing team" +1pt for getting the second team's final score right
I guess here's the outline for the full scoring thought process, reading (paragraph-lines) from my OP in the other thread: If you pick W/L correctly (regulation or OT, whatever is final), it's either 8pts (p1-l1), 5pts (p2-l1), or 3pts (p3-l1) If you pick D correctly (i.e. must be OT), it's either 8pts (p1-l2), 6pts (p1-l3), 4pts (p2-l2), or 3pts (p2-l3) If you pick D but it's W/L in regulation, no points If you pick D but it's W/L in OT, it's either 4pts (p1-l4), 3pts (p1-l5), 2pts (p2-l4), or 1pt (p2-l5) If you pick W/L but it's D even after OT, it's 2pts (p3-l2) or 1pt (p3-l3) That clear things up?