Wednesday, April 14, 2010

2010 NHL PLayoffs

I haven't posted anything not serious lately. Playoff time seems like a good time to restart. I've made my predictions below. I didn't pick any upsets (5 over 4 doesn't count), so I'll probably be wrong in at least two series. Keep in mind that I don't predict series to end in 7 games, b/c that's like predicting who is going to get a lucky bounce.

Eastern Conference
(1) Washington
vs (8) Montreal
There shouldn't be any question about Washington's goaltending. There should be questions about its defense. Conversely, Montreal had a rough year, but got healthy at the right time. It'll buy them one more game. Washington in 5.

(2) New Jersey vs (7) Philadelphia
New Jersey has the games best goaltender of all time in Martin Brodeur, but he has finally looked human this year. They have underrated offense capabilities, but their defense hasn't been up to their glorious past. Philly has some offensive talent, a great defensive corps, and NO goaltending. These teams hate each other, and Philly will be out to play the body. This is going to be one of the best first-round series. NJ in 6.

(3) Buffalo vs (6) Boston
This series features the top 2 goaltenders in the East. It also features two inept offenses, and two fantastic 6'8'' defenders. I'm picking Buffalo for 2 reasons. 1) It's a homer pick. 2) Buffalo has some young guns, who I'm banking to be impervious to the pressure. Buffalo in 6.


(4) Pittsburgh vs (5) Ottawa
If memory serves me correct, this is a repeat of last year's first round. Pittsburgh has lost some luster compared to last year. If Malkin is up to par, and Fleury regains his stride, watch out. Ottawa is a weird team that could give Pittsburgh a run for their money if they click. I don't think they will. But this could be a great series. Pittsburgh in 6.

Western Conference
(1) San Jose vs (8) Colorado
If this matchup occured in December, it would've featured the top two teams in the West. But its April. Unless Craig Anderson has 3 shutouts, Colorado is done. San Jose in 4. (SWEEP!!!)

(2) Chicago vs (7) Nashville
LIke Washington, there are questions about Chicago's goaltending, and like Washington, I don't know why. They have a great defense and offense. Nashville had a rough beginning of the season but became hot at the right time. I like Chicago in this one. Chicago in 5.

(3) Vancouver vs (6) Los Angeles
This was supposed to be Vancouver's year to tear up the league, but Luongo struggled a bit. The Sedin twins more than enough made up for it. LA has a young team, but a lot rides on Jonathan Quick's shoulders. LA can wait until next year. Vancouver in 5.

(4) Phoenix vs (5) Detroit
This will be the best first round series. Detroit struggled early, but was baller since Christmas. Phoenix almost won their division, and surprised everybody. This series could go 7 games, but I can't pick that. I'm gonna pick Detroit in 6, but I'm not confident about this series. I do look forward to watching this one.

Stanley Cup Prediction: I can't shy away from picking Washington. No other team in the East seems to have played as consistently well as the Caps.

Any team in the West above the 5th seed has a chance at getting to the Cup. Chicago reminds me of Washington, and they have a Buffalo boy (Patrick Kane).

Washington meets Chicago in the Finals. You can flip a coin to see who wins.



Friday, April 9, 2010

Publicly Accessible AND Peer-Reviewed Academic Journals?!?!?!

Over the past few years, it has become more popular for content on the web to be fee based. Napster was shut down, and iTunes rose to glory soon after. Soon, parts of the NY Times will become pay-per-view.

Access to scholarly journals has always seemed to live in this world of "pay-for-play". Recently, a guest speaker mentioned a seemingly innovative collection of publications controlled by The Berkeley Electronic Press. The articles published in these journals are all peer-reviewed, and available for access by anyone with a computer!!

The publishing guidelines vary between journals, and although I can't comment on all the publications, the International Journal of Biostatistics has some unique policies regarding submission. Like all journals, it charges the authors a price for publication of a paper. However, the author has the option to waive the cost of publishing in exchange for a reviewing others' paper submissions and can actually earn 'publication' credits for reviewing papers.

Furthermore, the paper prides itself on being expedient in its review. There is a 21 day limit on the reviewer to review the paper and provide a response to the author or it will actually cost the reviewer money!!! Along with this focus on expediency, the journal also does not have any requirements on text formatting, which means that the authors are able use the style they deem most efficient at getting their message across.

Lastly, the authors retain the right to post their work on their personal websites as a not only an additional resource for the web-going public, but allows an easy way for a author to showcase their work.

Personally, I think this concept is really cool. It allows for the conveyance of important information in a rapid manner that allows the author some authority as to the dissemination of their work. I have no idea on how the quality of this journal compares to other statistical journals, but if one person was able to use the publicly accessible information to advance the field, I think that it's a victory for open information on the web. Furthermore, the introduction of open-web/public contribution concepts with traditional academic publishing in a journal-like setting could in time threaten the established practices in which the journals operate.

Monday, April 5, 2010

Learning with Google and Wikipedia

A recent discussion I had on how Wikipedia and Google effect learning focused mostly on how the veracity of content of these sources. While the discussion was very good, I was disappointed that one point, that may have been alluded to once or twice, wasn't discussed more.

Using Wikipedia and Google allow you to see a plethora of information in mere seconds. As a former physics nerd, there was no reason for me to remember the gravitational acceleration (9.8m/s^2) or Schrodinger's equation (since forgotten) since it was available in seconds if I was sitting at a computer (which I often was).

Now, I do have a particularly poor memory for facts. I have forgotten friends' names before, even the one I knew since Pre-K. I do believe that I am more suited to learning how solve problems, either statistically or otherwise. Memorizing facts, equations, and so forth seems like a misuse of time since they can be easily researched on the Internet. It makes more sense to me to focus my time on methods development and the use of the plethora of knowledge that people already wrote down...

...which actually leads me to the crux of my discussion. With a profusion of knowledge out on the web, accessible in seconds, how will academia react to the time-honored tradition of cramming knowledge into every nook and cranny of students' brains? I have yet to see how instructing students how to gain the necessary skills to find and process knowledge as an end-user is a bad thing. Of course, considerable time must be spent to ensure the veracity of the information gathered, and I am certainly not proposing that we either discourage or downplay students' memorizing key pieces of information. However, the sheer memorization of facts is only a tool to process the information, and if we can focus on teaching students to process rather than memorize, we will be building up a much more rational student body.

A caveat to this my opinions is that my experience is severely restricted to analytical fields (physics and statistics). I am very curious to hear how other fields use the internet as a resource in their work. Please feel free to comment!