Player Discussion Adam Fox

[Synergy27]

Unless all you do is like a at CF% and such Erik Karlsson was never good defensively. His goals against numbers are bad almost every single year. Is it a fluke his GA > xGA in every single relatively full year? No, it's a limitation of the model. Erik Karlsson has been on the ice for more GA than GF at 5v5 in his career and only really had two years where he was a significant 5v5 asset. He was very good offensively and played high event hockey.

Most people who were paying attention were saying this as is what happening and we’re summarily dismissed by the stats zealots.

Fox is absurd. So lucky to have him.

 

[Chimpradamus]

I bet $1 on him to win the Norris back before the season started. $28 bucks if he wins.

Edit: Current Norris odds on FanDuel:

Hedman -150
Fox +340
Makar +550
McAvoy +650
Petry +750
Doughty +1100
Carlson +1100
Nurse +1500
Pulock +1500
Theodore +1500
Pietrangelo +3400
Girard +3400
Barrie +4800

A bit OT, but American betting odds are so weird. It would take me ages to get a good grasp of that betting system.

 

[ElLeetch]

A bit OT, but American betting odds are so weird. It would take me ages to get a good grasp of that betting system.

agreed. like, why is the guy with the best odds given a negative value? on the surface, it seems backwards.

 

[GAGLine]

A bit OT, but American betting odds are so weird. It would take me ages to get a good grasp of that betting system.

It's really pretty simple.

A negative line indicates how much you would have to bet to win $100. A positive line indicates how much you would win if you bet $100.

So Hedman at -150 means you'd have to bet $150 to win $100.
Fox at +340 means that if you bet $100 and he wins the Norris, you win $340.

You don't have to bet those amounts, but those are the ratios. I put $1 on Fox back when his odds were +2800, which means if he wins, I win $28.

The more negative the option, the more that option is favored. So right now they think Hedman has the best chance of winning it, followed by Fox, Makar, etc.

 

[Irishguy42]

American betting odds aren't that complicated. It's just a ratio.

If it's a negative, you need to bet that much to win $100 (so for Hedman you would win $100 for every $150 risked)

If it's positive, you will win that much per $100 you bet (so for Fox, you would win $340 for every $100 risked)

 

[ElLeetch]

American betting odds aren't that complicated. It's just a ratio.

If it's a negative, you need to bet that much to win $100 (so for Hedman you would win $100 for every $150 risked)

If it's positive, you will win that much per $100 you bet (so for Fox, you would win $340 for every $100 risked)

Then just list them as 15:10 and 10:34

 

[ilezia]

Just out of curiosity how would you count an accumulator with that betting system? Say I bet a three match accumulator at +220 and -150 and -170 how would I quickly count what is the accumulator?

 

[SA16]

Just out of curiosity how would you count an accumulator with that betting system? Say I bet a three match accumulator at +220 and -150 and -170 how would I quickly count what is the accumulator?

Assuming you mean a parlay...

100/320 * 150/250 * 170/270 = 0.14 which is about +600

 

[Harbour Dog]

I do a fair amount of sports betting where I use Vegas bookmakers (and Pinnaclesports) to find advantages against Canadian lotteries. American odds aren't complicated, but they definitely aren't intuitive either.

If you use the Kelly Criterion or some other formula, you have to convert to decimal odds anyway.

 

[Irishguy42]

Then just list them as 15:10 and 10:34

Well yeah

I never said it was better

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Well yeah

I never said it was better

Between the imperial system, the use of Fahrenheit and how they explain betting odds, it sometimes feels like the US is rebelling against the rest of the world

 

[Chimpradamus]

If Lundkvist is as great as he is being hyped up to be, I'm not sure he'll still be better than Fox.

He doesn't have to be, he'll only have to steal votes or be an excuse why Fox is playing so well. But, they will probably not play on the same pairing.

It's really pretty simple.

A negative line indicates how much you would have to bet to win $100. A positive line indicates how much you would win if you bet $100.

So Hedman at -150 means you'd have to bet $150 to win $100.
Fox at +340 means that if you bet $100 and he wins the Norris, you win $340.

You don't have to bet those amounts, but those are the ratios. I put $1 on Fox back when his odds were +2800, which means if he wins, I win $28.

The more negative the option, the more that option is favored. So right now they think Hedman has the best chance of winning it, followed by Fox, Makar, etc.

Yes, I've heard that it's based around betting $100 (for some reason). It's still a math exercise to count around that when you're not betting $100. I very much prefer the system I'm used to (of course). The 1.90, 2.50, etc odds that simply tells the growth on your bet in total if you win. With odds on 1.9, your $10 will be $19 if you win.

 

[Fvital92]

From young Rangers fan to 'the next Brian Leetch,' Adam Fox describes his NHL journey

 

[duhmetreE]

Then just list them as 15:10 and 10:34

-150
+340

is superior.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Between the imperial system, the use of Fahrenheit and how they explain betting odds, it sometimes feels like the US is rebelling against the rest of the world

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

NASA uses the metric system

Anyway, I was just joking about the betting odds because I also never understood how it works until Irish explained it

 

[ElLeetch]

-150
+340

is superior.

Why? One is about how much you have to bet (bet 150 to win 100) , the other is about how much you can win (bet 100 to win 340). Its not a consistent

If not ratios, then use simple multipliers. 0.67 and 3.4, in this case. This way, its based on what you expect to return on a winning bet. You also then don't have to bother with +/-.

 

[ElLeetch]

Between the imperial system, the use of Fahrenheit and how they explain betting odds, it sometimes feels like the US is rebelling against the rest of the world

Execpt they weren't our ideas. they were foisted upon us by European colonizers. Its our shitty inheritance.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Execpt they weren't our ideas. they were foisted upon us by European colonizers. Its our shitty inheritance.

At least you're not the mess the UK is where they can't even make up their minds on which system to go with

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

NASA uses the metric system

Anyway, I was just joking about the betting odds because I also never understood how it works until Irish explained it

i know you were, just havin a giggle m8.

I also never understood sports betting either . I had a roommate who was a bigtime sports gambler, he explained it to me once but it didn't stick. Also, he was Canadian so i'm not sure if they use the same system or not.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

i know you were, just havin a giggle m8

Just making sure before someone takes it seriously and thinks I am crapping all over the US haha.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

From young Rangers fan to 'the next Brian Leetch,' Adam Fox describes his NHL journey

not only a beast of a player but from all his interviews, media stuff just seems like a solid, mature , intelligent person

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

From young Rangers fan to 'the next Brian Leetch,' Adam Fox describes his NHL journey

not only a beast of a player but from all his interviews, media stuff just seems like a solid, mature , intelligent person

Didn't expect anything less from a kid who attended Harvard.

Not sure if this is still true, but Ivy league schools don't hand out athletic scholarships, right?

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

choice line from the interview:

ESPN: What's been the reaction from people you grew up with in Jericho to you becoming a Ranger?
Fox: Honestly, most of my friends aren't big hockey fans. And the ones that are, they're Islanders fans.

oof

 

[Greg02]

Didn't expect anything less from a kid who attended Harvard.

Not sure if this is still true, but Ivy league schools don't hand out athletic scholarships, right?

Sort of. The Ivy League doesn't hand out "scholarships" earned on the basis of merit period. The idea is that if you get in for whatever reason, you deserve to be there the same amount as anyone else, so instead there is extremely good need-based financial aid. However, that's not to say that being an athlete doesn't affect things like the test scores you need to get in.