Still feel like he should have given LAK a better home town discount than 2 years at 7MM AAV after earning 130MM on his last two contracts with them.
Around the League Thread | Marching to the Trade Deadline
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Still feel like he should have given LAK a better home town discount than 2 years at 7MM AAV after earning 130MM on his last two contracts with them.
Reverend Mayhem
Serial Hanlon's Razor Ignorer
Never work for less than what you deserve. That might be his last contract and his family is not going to be mad at him for making a couple M more
Billy Kvcmu
Registered User
TruKnyte
Give me the meds now
Billy Kvcmu
Registered User
canuckking1
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2015
- 12,961
- 14,116
On the other hand, you’ve got one life to live. Once you make a certain amount as a young person, your money will make far more than you ever do (assuming you’re not a complete idiot). The memories of being on a competitive team will far outweigh the extra dough
He won a couple cups, LA struggles are not on Kopitar earning 7M but rather Blake pissing away their depth for PLD.
sandwichbird2023
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2004
- 4,261
- 2,510
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 30,238
- 18,839
very true, in contrast to me constantly shushing my wife when she used to waych hockey with me
wonder why she stopped lol
Are they a better team this season if the trade was reversed though? It is obviously dependent on Faber signing with the Kings and how the Kings spend their Fiala money.
Reverend Mayhem
Serial Hanlon's Razor Ignorer
To be honest, any non-event, fluid in terms of gameplay and the attack-defense dynamic sport : hockey, basketball, soccer (aka real football), boxing, tennis even, is pretty as the kids say autism-coded.
I had a whole bloody write up. TLDR you can suss out how a game went in football and baseball by the box score better than other sports. Each event is compulsory to move the game towards its conclusion. You can more or less drift thru the game and hit the big notes of the number and not miss much.
Other games you kind of have to be self-compelled to reach your enjoyment in a more relaxed manner of moving the game forward, basketball being assertive, baseball moving towards that in a jarring way admittedly for this purist.
So not muchofa Cosell, but, you hear about Wayne learning the game, boxers studying tape, basketball is basically a blitzkrieg of highlight material, you kind of have to be fixated upon it.
Last edited:
Tables of Stats
Registered User
Among some rival fanbases, there has been much bellyaching about how some teams are frauds often with much pointing to the "Deserve to Win O'Meter". This inspired me to do something stupid and compile stats for every team to see who is actually "stealing wins" and who "deserves better". As I have to do everything by hand, this has turned out to be a huge task. It's taken me the better part of a week to get the first 20 games of the season done.
Over this span the team who "stole the most games" is... The Washington Capitals who won 9 games the meter predicted them to lose. They also had the highest adjusted difference between "stolen games" and "deserved to wins" leaving them having 6 "extra" wins that weren't canceled out by underserved losses.
Going the other way the team that lost the most games they should have won is... The Edmonton Oilers who lost 8 games which they were favored to win. They also run away with the most "extra" losses with 7 losses not countered by "undeserved wins".
Over this span, the Canucks "stole" 1 extra win.
The DtWOM was correct about ~60% of the games played over the span I've thus far analyzed. The team it was most correct about was the San Jose Sharks (80% correct prediction rate) who lost a lot of games they deserved to lose. The team it was least correct about was the Anaheim Ducks (30%) who stole wins and lost games they should have won more than they managed to achieve the "correct" result.
The spreadsheet I used to collect this data can be viewed here:
The notation I used is as follows:
1W - Deserved to Win, Won
0W - Deserved to Lose, Won
1L - Deserved to Lose, Lost
0L - Deserved to Win, Lost
#x0W - Number of games they deserved to lose but won
#x0L - Number of games they deserved to win but lost
#W - Number of "extra" wins a team has over what they were predicted to achieve
#L - Number of "extra" losses a team has over what they were predicted to achieve
As always, I may have made some data entry errors so if anybody feels like picking a team or two to double check that would be much appreciated.
Finally, this is all for fun and is not intended to say that any given team hasn't earned its record. The NHL is one of the hardest leagues to predict with stats alone and at the end of the day a team's record is determined by the score at the end of the game and nothing else. I'm just a crazy person who decided to dive into the numbers and see what shook out.
Over this span the team who "stole the most games" is... The Washington Capitals who won 9 games the meter predicted them to lose. They also had the highest adjusted difference between "stolen games" and "deserved to wins" leaving them having 6 "extra" wins that weren't canceled out by underserved losses.
Going the other way the team that lost the most games they should have won is... The Edmonton Oilers who lost 8 games which they were favored to win. They also run away with the most "extra" losses with 7 losses not countered by "undeserved wins".
Over this span, the Canucks "stole" 1 extra win.
The DtWOM was correct about ~60% of the games played over the span I've thus far analyzed. The team it was most correct about was the San Jose Sharks (80% correct prediction rate) who lost a lot of games they deserved to lose. The team it was least correct about was the Anaheim Ducks (30%) who stole wins and lost games they should have won more than they managed to achieve the "correct" result.
The spreadsheet I used to collect this data can be viewed here:
The notation I used is as follows:
1W - Deserved to Win, Won
0W - Deserved to Lose, Won
1L - Deserved to Lose, Lost
0L - Deserved to Win, Lost
#x0W - Number of games they deserved to lose but won
#x0L - Number of games they deserved to win but lost
#W - Number of "extra" wins a team has over what they were predicted to achieve
#L - Number of "extra" losses a team has over what they were predicted to achieve
As always, I may have made some data entry errors so if anybody feels like picking a team or two to double check that would be much appreciated.
Finally, this is all for fun and is not intended to say that any given team hasn't earned its record. The NHL is one of the hardest leagues to predict with stats alone and at the end of the day a team's record is determined by the score at the end of the game and nothing else. I'm just a crazy person who decided to dive into the numbers and see what shook out.
Plus how does last season change for LA without Fiala as Faber would at best have signed late in the season after the Frozen 4 final. And the 1st is still in Europe.
So, like you said, comes down to how they spend that $7 mill cap space they used on Fiala.
Honestly, LA was in the spot where the kids were not going to be good enough to help the older vets.
Kind of like Van pre lockout with the Twins not ready yet to help the WCE with legit secondary scoring.
No love for curling, and you don't watch table tennis at all. To be fair, no one can see the puck in the pre-HD TV era
I did actually watch Ping Pong, but only around Summer Olympic times. Normally, at least back then, there weren't many Ping Pong tournaments to be followed within China. The big thing was always soccer, and the Beijing vs Shanghai thing was almost as intense as El Classico.
Curling made Baseball look like a drunken mardi gras, so no, no curcling.
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 6,498
- 7,111
That seems silly to me. I don't see why the motivation for the PP team would change at all, they're already extremely averse to giving up a goal shorthanded. It arguably the most momentum swinging event in hockey. Losing 30 seconds of leftover PP time is negligible in comparison to the importance of a goal against.
And how often are PPs even successful after a SHG? 99% of the time it completely deflates the team and they spend the rest of the PP being super passive because they're scared to give up another.
If anything, I think your argument that coaches are conservative and boring makes it more likely that it will change virtually nothing, because that also applies to the coach on the PK - just like when you hack a player down on a good scoring chance, teams much prefer a structured PK to a chaotic odd-man rush resulting in a high danger chance. I see most coaches preferring to have a calm, sound PK to kill a penalty over sending waves of players up ice for the off-chance they score and end it early.
I also don't really agree with @MS that this is a drastic change to the rule book, and even if it was, they change the rule book all the time. Just recently they made it a penalty to put your hand on the puck while trying to win a draw. Prior to that we had penalties for pucks over the glass, or painting entirely new lines on the ice to prevent goalies from playing the puck. Calling it a "jailbreak" makes it seem gimmicky, so I get that, but the rule itself? meh.
But hey, to each their own
Last edited:
Tables of Stats
Registered User
I'm against the rule because I think it will lower scoring overall. Coaches will create more defensively sound PP units/formations and early shorthanded goals could easily negate the rare but possible scenario where a team gives up a shorty early in the PP and still manages to score in the time left. It's also just stupid to in any way reward a team that is supposed to be getting punished for taking a penalty just because they scored a shorty.That seems silly to me. I don't see why the motivation for the PP team would change at all, they're already extremely averse to giving up a goal shorthanded. It arguably the most momentum swinging event in hockey. Losing 30 seconds of leftover PP time is negligible in comparison to the importance of a goal against.
And how often are PPs even successful after a SHG? 99% of the time it completely deflates the team and they spend the rest of the PP being super passive because they're scared to give up another.
If anything, I think your argument that coaches are conservative and boring makes it more likely that it will change virtually nothing, because that also applies to the coach on the PK - just like when you hack a player down on a good scoring chance, teams much prefer a structured PK to a chaotic odd-man rush resulting in a high danger chance. I see most coaches preferring to have a calm, sound PK to kill a penalty over sending waves of players up ice for the off-chance they score and end it early.
I also don't really agree with @MS that this is a drastic change to the rule book, and even if it was, they change the rule book all the time. Just recently they made it a penalty to put your hand on the puck while trying to win a draw. Prior to that we had penalties for pucks over the glass, or painting entirely new lines on the ice to prevent goalies from playing the puck. Calling it a "jailbreak" makes it seem gimmicky, so I get that, but the rule itself? meh.
But hey, to each their own
It's a gimmick that I dislike as much as I dislike 3-on-3 OT and the trapezoid.
LuckyDay
Registered User
Good question.
They play it more aggressive. Every team starts to play the trap 1-3-1 and circle the wagons around the goaltender collapsing to the net - and they play it the whole period.
Three points looks good on paper but it doesn't work in practice. I've pointed it out on the main boards but the people there are bigger experts than what Gary said what happened in practice.
- Aug 28, 2011
- 18,806
- 24,350
I don't blame Blake for going for it when they looked like they were turning the corner. It fooled most of us.
In hindsight...it's obvious to say they should have attempted to part with Kopitar and Doughty and proceed with a retool. Kopitar has literally fallen off a cliff the past 5 weeks. It's stunning to see. Likewise with Doughty. It's always a tough ask for players in their mid to late 30's carry a team in a key position (1C and 1D).
They would be in better shape without PLD, and Faber along with Durzi in their top 4.
In hindsight...it's obvious to say they should have attempted to part with Kopitar and Doughty and proceed with a retool. Kopitar has literally fallen off a cliff the past 5 weeks. It's stunning to see. Likewise with Doughty. It's always a tough ask for players in their mid to late 30's carry a team in a key position (1C and 1D).
They would be in better shape without PLD, and Faber along with Durzi in their top 4.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Trades & Free Agency Thread: 2024-2025 - Trade Deadline Approaches- Latest: Americanadian
Ad
Upcoming events
-
To Advance Liverpool vs Tottenham Hotspur - Tottenham Hotspur leads 1-0Wagers: 1Staked: $20.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-