Re: ''Stanley told you so '' All my predictions for 2013
posted at 1/30/2013 12:24 PM EST
In response to Davinator's comment:
In response to dezaruchi's comment:
To be fair though Dave, those guys pick scores also because they're playing against a spread.
Damn, I was trying to avoid this thread.
I knew that was coming dez...they don't HAVE to pick the score - they could only pick the team and plus or minus the points. The spread is still a black/white proposition, the same as picking a winning hockey team. Berman was close with the score(don't remember exactly) in the Ravens game though.
Anyway, if Stanley wants to pick scores then I will take it with a grain of salt and let it go.
Besides, it is VERY difficult to get the winning team and exact score correct so I won't rub it in when he is wrong(he came closest against the Rangers 4-3 OT loss...he predicted 4-3 Bs).
When he is right, I'll grin and get onto the next thread. Cheers!
Yeah Dave, but picking the score against the spread makes more sense to me is all. If the spread is 9.5 then it makes at least some sense when you predict a 20-10 score. In hockey, the spread is always .5 goals so there's zero need for Stanley to predict 5-2 games with goals by Bourque,Seguin, and Wheeler. I don't care one way or the other but I understand why people are getting tired of all the pom pom waving after getting 1 part of a 4 part prediction right. I also don't blame people for getting a little miffed over all of Stanley's gambling guarantees considering he absolutely welched on paying a number of wagers last season. It's not really gambling at all if you don't plan on paying if you lose. I've no doubt he'd be the sort to try and collect had he won. Welchers are typically like that.
