Not To Be Trusted With Knives

The Internet’s leading authority on radicalized geese

By

2014-15 Hockey Pool – Team Has-To-Be-Reasonably-Attractive-Or-At-Least-A-Nice-Guy

The start of the NHL season this week means one thing – it’s fantasy hockey pool time! As you know, I’m usually pretty terrible at this hockey pool thing, which I like to blame on a variety of excuses, including “I was too busy with MBA school to pay attention to my picks” and “I’m testing important scientific theories, such as the correlation between level of attractiveness and hockey skill”1.

  • Three years ago I used Team Hottie, where every player on my team had to be a hottie. My terrible finish in the pool that year disproved the hypothesis that level of attractiveness is correlated with hockey skill (p < 0.05)2.
  • Two years ago there was Team Uggoe – since my hypothesis that attractiveness does not correlate with scoring all the points, I decided to try the opposite and hypothesized that higher levels of ugliness correlate with scoring all the points. I again did terribly in the pool and this hypothesis was also shot down3.
  • Last year there was Team Hockey P0rn, where players had to have a dirty sounding name to be on the team (Notable members include Grant Clitsome, David Legwand, Victor Hedman, and Jiří Tlustý). And again – terrible finish in the pool4.

So this year, I’ve decided I’m going to try to be more diligent about updating my picks each week and I’m going to give myself a little more leeway on who I can pick by choosing Team Has-To-Be-Reasonably-Attractive-Or-At-Least-A-Nice-Guy – the latter part of which will allow me to choose a Sedin or two once in a while5.

For the record, here’s my week 1 team:

Hockey Picks - Week 1

I have no idea why I starred St. Louis instead of Crosby. (You get to “star” one forward, one defenceman, and one goalie and you get double that person’s points for the week). I actually thought I’d starred Crosby until I looked at my standing later in the week.

Now, I know it’s early days and we only have 4 people in our pool so far (I expect more to join soon), but I have to record for posterity that, at this moment, I’m tied for first:

Hockey Pool - 12 Oct standings

Now I’m going to make my picks for next week. Wish me luck!

  1. It definitely has nothing to do with the fact that I rarely pay attention to hockey beyond the Canucks and thus have no idea who to pick in a pool. Nothing whatsoever to do with that. []
  2. The scientist in me had a really hard time writing that sentence - we don't attempt to *prove* or *disprove* things in science! But the comedian in me said that "My terrible finish in the pool provided evidence against the hypothesis that level of attractiveness is correlated with hockey skill but the sample size of n=1 means that the study was unpowered to detect an effect. More research is needed." just wouldn't have the same comedic effect. []
  3. I accepted the null hypothesis. But again, this study was underpowered. []
  4. I think that not changing my picks the entire season (this is a pool where you can change picks each and every week, which means that you can clear out injured players and stack the team with players who have the most number of games on any given week) probably had something to do with this. []
  5. Daniel and Henrik are fugly, but I’ve heard that they are really nice guys. []

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.