Math

I clarify this. I was speaking about some countries in Europe, and overall in terms of age (the age drill-down is not always accessible, for quality and sometimes legal reasons). Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany for instance do not show a significant anomaly whereas Italy, Belgium, UK clearly show a clear outlying behavior.

Also, This data should (and will) be Not every country defines their stats (cases/ICU admissions, deaths) the same way, which make any comparison tedious. Why is there so much differences is mind-boggling still right now. Another example: Vancouver didn't shut down all businesses, didn't ordered a hard shut down. The city was expected to be severely hit by the pandemic due to its chinese ties, strong asian minority and by the fact that int'l flights and borders were not immediately closed. Vancouver has been pretty much spared by the pandemic. Meanwhile, Montréal turned into Fukushima in their living facilities... 

In the US, I think we pretty much all agree on the terrible portrait as for now, especially in TX, AL, OK where things do not look good at all.

19 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

You make statements like this and have provided no links or support for them, so I assume you made them up.

Sure, I could have made up a whole and purely invented story. But for what? Just to lose time and give myself importance and pretend to be a cool and smart guy on the boards? Not my thing, I got other stuff to do. I'm a bit narcissist, totally cynical, sometimes a true a*hole, but I'm not into that bossy stuff. Again, the information I got comes directly from discussions I had from people working on the field (who are trustable a priori), and live daily presser from Dr. Carignan (from Sherbrooke), Dr. Tam (Chief Health Officer of Canada), Dr. Koch from Bern, Switzerland, and others. My apologies for these not being recorded on the web, though pressers may surely be archived on the CBC website. On this board, we share thoughts, opinions, facts, experiences, no more no less. If you still believe that I made that all up, it doesn't bother me. I'm no doctor nor expert in immunology/epidemiology, though I'm a scientist working in statistics. Not to show my hairy torso to you guys, just to add some context.

19 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

The province had 451 deaths on top of the reported COVID-19 deaths and the historical average for a four-week period ending in mid-April. The preliminary data showed fatalities were 8.5-per-cent higher than might have been expected after accounting for COVID-19.

My first reflex is caution. You can quickly find all kind of numbers thrown out of various sources from Google. Here: 8.5%-increase. Yes, for the whole population and we know that most the the casualties are elderly people (90% for 70+ y.o.) and people in living facilities (80%). Therefore, young and adult people do not show a significant rate in mortality, and due to Covid-19. The main questions that we have to ask when dealing with stats and numbers are: It is significant? Not necessarily, because it always depends on the sample size and structure. Are all class of ages represented? Has randomization been applied? Are all geographical areas equally represented? What the statistical tests performed? Chi-squared, t-test, F-test, Test of means, is normality ensured? So here's my sources as I was asked (some of them in french, sorry for that):

https://www.lesoleil.com/actualite/vos-questions-sur-la-covid-19/quelle-surmortalite-due-a-la-covid-19-d9f9348eb12d04b5e1aa2b18c7186ed3
https://comparaisons-sante-quebec.ca/mortalite-par-covid-19-quebec-et-comparaisons-internationales/
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus

On a stricto senso statistical point of view, all is debatable. First because we don't have the answers to these questions, second because the pandemic is not over. We do have trends, we do have preliminary responses, threshold levels, but final results is a long, harsh work. You have to verify your assumptions, go through the peer review process, track changes, check these, double-check these, back to peer review, and then studies and results can be listed as reliable and this whole process takes months.

By saying there's no evidence of a second wave, it does not mean that it won't happen: it means that we just don't know right now. By looking through all these charts, That's my gut feeling. I might be wrong or not. Only time will tell and the only that is sure is today's reality is always different of tomorrow's. What I loathe is the way media present the crisis, generating terror and fear that would eventually lead to more damages than the virus itself, making for example special broadcasts about healthy adults died form Covid as widely spread and normal events when it's not.

4 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

You must have seen that guy that said he would take Chicago at long odds.  I do not see it.  But shortened seasons might even give my once mighty Orioles a chance.  Now if they win the World Series, if there is one, do you think they would be respected? 

Not even the Orioles themselves ? 

As a Cubs fan, I'll take it. Don't want to wait another century for the next championship.

1 hour ago, SCFlyguy said:

Citation(s) needed.

 

I personally know two people affected: 

• 50 year old, no prior conditions, dead.
• 24 year old got so oxygen deprived so suddenly he ended up in a coma and has been in rehab for 2 months trying to regain the use of his right side.

So GTFOH with your bull$hit.

Hats off with such a great argumentation.

So you generalize with a sample of two persons. Ok great. FYI, I also know two persons in the exact same situation you described, exceptions does not make the norm. We can always start a "my dad is stronger than yours" type of fight but I'm not really interested by those and it's not the place for.

Finally it's not my BS, this BS comes from people I know and working in the forefront of ICU and daily presser from doctors and epidemiologists in QC, Canada and Europe. But maybe they are all stupid and wrong, who knows...

42 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

I have to assume you mean by this that parents will get their kids vaccinated once their is a vaccine.

It depends if they manage to find a vaccine that is also able to cause autism.

43 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Most viruses don't die out. They mutate, usually toward a less deadly strain. There will be a vaccine, likely within the year. The issue will be how effective it is at a virus that has mutated by the time the vaccine is ready.

Exactly what I heard from epidemoilogists.

10 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I'm no doctor/expert.... but from what I see, I think the virus is going to "run its course" through the entire world population and kill off whoever it's going to kill. In other words, the only "vaccine" for this thing is going to be herd immunity: the hope that people can only catch this virus once before building an immunity to it -- an immunity that is hopefully passed onto their children. The COVID-19 survivors will be able to carry on with their lives as normal and see the virus die out.

 

You're right, and that was the purpose of the curve flattening: to slow down the virus not to have everybody sick at the same time and not overflowing the health system. Not to stop it.

That being said, there's a need to be cautious about numbers cited here and there, they depend on hundreds of factors, they are not always counted in the same way, it depends of the number of tests performed, etc. etc.

Living in QC, Canada's province most affected by the virus and for now, there's not a statistically significant increase in the number of deaths of adult people compared to last year at the same period and the same observations have been made in other European countries. Here, almost 95% of cases are within living facilities and about 80% of the deaths are 60+ year old people that already had other major health issues. We have the impression that the virus grasps everybody and kills regardless of the age and condition but it's these outlying casualties (healthy young persons dead of Covid) that are highlighted everywhere in the media. You can say and twist everything out of numbers if not treated and interpreted as they should be.

I usually have opinions on that subject that are quite unpopular, but I'm trying as much as possible to coldly stick to the facts and the numbers while obtaining reliable information through professionals and not through Facebook, Twitter and other information sources whose goal is to create a psychotic and irrational environment. I still believe Sweden took the right decision (for them), and we will see by the end of next year at the soonest if they were right, they decided to go that way because they were able to do so (Sweden has by far one of the best health care system in the world and its population is well educated)

Nothing is certain and built out of concrete, but there's one thing that every health professional across multiple countries know and came to the same conclusion so far: children under 12 are not virus transmitters, and they are not affected by it. If they catch Covid, it's asymptomatic for a huge majority, otherwise it's like a cold. I'm curious to know why, but there's a wide and large consensus about it.

Now I'm ready for the napalm shower ! 

On 6/12/2020 at 7:02 PM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

My biggest concern in all this is the status of the proper 2020-21 season.
How will that be affected?

Apparently not before Jan. 2021 for a starting point with a Winter Classic being the first game of the season, because there will be training camps again and the need to have a break in between. At that point, either it will be a shortened regular season, or they will go to a full season but with playoffs and SC final later on again. I've heard some people working in sports entertainment businesses, they think that "normality" would occur in two to three years from now, not before.

22 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

What 2020-2021 season?  When the virus comes back bigger in the fall, I don't see there being a 2020-2021 season.  Perhaps at all.

We don't know, I think we have to remain rational and pragmatic to this. For now, there's no evidence so far for the media's favorite "second wave" that would wipe everything out. There's measures and protocols in place that will remain in place, the situation is very different compared to March where the crisis was widely underestimated. The League and the economy in general cannot afford further cancellations and shut-downs.

22 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

I could at least understand the argument that the NHL should shut down permanently until a highly effect vaccine is found even if that means sacrificing multiple seasons.

We still can't count on a possible vaccine. Maybe an efficient vaccine will be found this fall or a bit later, maybe not. The plan is to blend the current SRAS-Cov-2 virus with the 2003 SRAS to broader the spectrum of actions. One thing is sure: the League will never cancel multiple seasons. That would mean the death of the NHL.

1 hour ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Ill pretend for a minute my Sabres were in the mix.  This is the one year I would NOT WANT my team to win the Stanley Cup.  Because its going to be "tainted".  There will be an asterik.  And I do not think the winner will be respected unless its the Blues only because they would have overcome all and repeated.  Its not doubted their talent and ability.  All of the other teams, not the case.  

Well it depends... I heard some broadcasts that had this debate about "will the winner be legitimate towards other SC winners and the public opinion", most of panelists tend to "no asterisk".

I'd say the same because all teams are facing the same extraordinary conditions, everybody in the same boat. You have to get back to training camps, and then to playoffs hockey mode right after that in empty arenas will all the harsh logistics involved. The challenges and adversity might be even bigger than in a normal situation.

However, I'll put a big bold red asterisk on a team like Montréal or Chicago if they win because they had almost no chance to make the playoffs. Taking teams ranked 17-24 is a master of unfairness and pure BS.

I usually don't use emojis because I'm too angry with them.

And the 'Yotes. But only if they wear their Kachina jersey 

Talent and equity, so to speak, and hoping for a bright and clear sweep in this particular series. 

It's cliché, but everything can happen once you're in, especially in that extraordinary situation. All counters are set to zero, it's like a new season where unexpected teams are on top of the standings before fading out.

In that context, as much as I'm pissed to admit it, Montréal has a reasonable chance to beat the Pens for example.

I think we'll see after the preliminary round if the season resumes, as the preliminary round is not part of the playoffs as Montréal fans used to shout it out loud.

30 minutes ago, hf101 said:

 

Yeah, but... there is quite a bit of importance to the money aspect.  There is a big TV contract to cash in on for the NHL.  Sure I know I will be missing out on seeing a playoff game or two in person, but frankly I'd be watching the majority of any playoffs from my couch anyways.   Not much changes really for a lot of NHL fans, other than it's being summer and nothing much else to watch on TV.

Good point. And even if I despise this whole nonsense solution, I'll be a b!tch and watch it.

30 minutes ago, hf101 said:

 

For me it is the health aspect that is more concerning imo.  How can the NHL keep all involved not to get Covid once they start up?

Because Buttman is God. All governments, doctors, health staff are fighting with this pandemic, trying desperately to put out those fires, but He has the solution. Send 1000+ people in some place in the US and Canada, along with the NHL crew, players, their families, jam-packed them in hotels and everything will be allright.

I heard that the final word will come to the players through the NHLPA. So it's still theoretically possible that they turn this down at the end If I'm not mistaken.

Teams like Chicago and Montreal had almost zero chances to get in the playoffs and now they are in, having a shot at the Cup. If they lose in the preliminary round, they would be in the draft lottery...

The 24-team format allow big market like MTL, CHI and NYR to be lucky losers and back into contention. What did Buttman say? Oh yes: "I want to make clear that the health and safety of our players, coaches, essential support staff and our communities are paramount". Sure...

If this really happen, next season is planned to start no earlier than late December/early January.

Me being sarcastic or me being a lady ?

12 minutes ago, Icechipper said:

Zajac and a defenseman for Zucker and a pick......just me spitballin' 

Zajac is way too young and inexperienced. Zucker for a conditional 7th rounder and sign Chara as a UFA with a 5-yr/$7.5M per with a MNC/NTC contract.

1 hour ago, IllaZilla said:

 

Top six as in "Top Six in the NHL" or "Top Six players on the Wild"?

IMO Top-6 center, like a player able to play center in the first 6 lines of the roster.

I watched him a couple of times in the LHJMQ when he was pretty dominant in St-John, in a team that was dominant at that time. I wasn't expecting him to install himself so quick in the NHL but after the Karlsson trade people immediately saw him as a replacement.

I also attend some Sens games and he managed to succeed in that quick jump in the league. Also on the plus side, he's playing in a trainwreck, unfortunately, but NOT in Montréal, away from distractions and all the negative pressure that surrounds the Habs. Still needs to work on his defensive game but he has a good margin of progression. I think he can be a regular 60+ pts Defenseman.

it's somehow the new reality of these days' contracts.

I'm not so shocked because he will be Ottawa's D-man #1 for the years to come and it's the price to pay for that. I'm pretty sure he will increase his stats as well.

12 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

May help Mr. Meruelo's efforts that his Yotes will be moving to the Central division in 2021

I think the League stated than this will be done when Seattle comes in. Coyotes to the Central and Seattle in the Pacific.

That being said, I think the Coyotes' future is settled. Once they move in a new area in downtown Phoenix, things are gonna be on the track and they will remain there unless a major catastrophe happens. Maybe Buttman's message shook a bit the organisation when he was surprisingly vague about the future in Arizona, in opposite as when the was speaking about the Hurricanes', insisting that the franchise will "never, ever, ever move elsewhere".

Amongst all keywords related to the Wild's current situation (GM, owner, Coach,...), one word is the centerpiece IMO: Culture.

I honestly don't know what it takes to have a bit of a resolution to this giant mess, but one thing has to change: the team culture. If you want to change that, you have to remove every malignant cell in the entire body. If you let just one single sick entity in the system, the cancer will spread again, soon or later. I'm really afraid that this can only be validated when the Parisé/Suter era is over, when it's absolutely certain that these guys (and some other) have an absolute zero influence on anything that touches closer or farther the franchise.

In that sense, letting the assistant GM in charge for the whole next season seems to be the least worst option.

Nice try, but it's not the 1st of April.

Oh wait...

Even NHL.com uses sarcasm in their team reset articles. They wrote "key substractions", "Bitetto" and "Åberg" in the same sentence.