Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: flies

  • 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

stars

  • Chris “don’t put him out in OT” Kreider

  • Mika Zibanejad

  • Kaapo Kakko

  • Artemi Panarin

  • Vincent Trocock

  • Alexis Lafreniere

  • Barclay Goodrow

  • Julius Gauthier

  • Jimmithy Vesey

  • Ryan Reavos

  • Samuel Blais

  • Andrew Carpenter

  • Adam Fox

  • Ronald Lindgren

  • Jacob Tuba

  • K’Andre Miller

  • Zac Jone

  • Braden Schneider

  • Igor Shesterkin

Results are only viewable after voting.
Rongomania said:
I've never seen a player play so good and not be on PP1 in my entire life. Beyond frustrating.

Laf deserves to be on PP1 too.

Are we seriously going to have to wait 2 years for this to happen?

Will gallant look like a total genius if despite this Laf and Kak break out 5v5?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the only way we see Kakko/Laf on that top unit is if there is an injury.
 
Chytil might be back tomorrow.
 

Attachments

  • Vince tweet.png
    Vince tweet.png
    23.7 KB · Views: 3
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: egelband, TheDirtyH, Greg02 and 2 others
aufheben said:
Hayes/DeAngelo didn’t get a point? And the Rangers scored? And the Rangers won?
Click to expand...
Plus no Giroux there anymore and they were missing ......Couturier-Van Riemsdyk & Ryan Ellis....I wonder what the score would be with them in the game ? Torts had them mucking .

aufheben said:
Kakko plays 18:56 and didn’t look tired at any point. Crazy how quickly things change.
Click to expand...
You can see his confidence growing every game.......he is going to be a great player eventually for us hopefully .
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohbaby
will1066 said:
It's not pretty over there on the Flyers board. Basically calling Torts a fraud and mocking "culture" and "tough to play against."
Click to expand...
Really? Flyers basically operates right now with one top-6 line (far from a 1st line quality) and have on their injured reserve an equivalent of another top-6 line. Their D is run of the mill at best. The only saving grace at the moment (surprisingly yet) is Hart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkAlbuquerque and will1066
Raspewtin said:
No, it implies the Rangers are shooting at brick walls and our goalies are not stopping the puck much.
Click to expand...
But it also incorporates shooting percentage, so that’s a matter of luck, too. Or am I misunderstanding?
 
egelband said:
But it also incorporates shooting percentage, so that’s a matter of luck, too. Or am I misunderstanding?
Click to expand...
the stat is Team Shooting % + Team SV%. generally, low PDO is "unlucky" and high PDO (well above 1.0) is "lucky". You'd need to look into what's driving the number down.

To me, the Rangers goalies (both of them) have been average this season and their finishing is on-a-nother-planet unlucky. hence, our very low PDO.

historically, dating back to Lundqvist, the Rangers are a high PDO team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH, KirkAlbuquerque, ecemleafs and 1 other person
Raspewtin said:
the stat is Team Shooting % + Team SV%. generally, low PDO is "unlucky" and high PDO (well above 1.0) is "lucky". You'd need to look into what's driving the number down.

To me, the Rangers goalies (both of them) have been average this season and their finishing is on-a-nother-planet unlucky. hence, our very low PDO.

historically, dating back to Lundqvist, the Rangers are a high PDO team.
Click to expand...

I still can't fathom how that stat makes sense. Save percentage and shooting percentage are not correlated in any way. A team that has a 0.920% needs to shoot 8% to have a PDO of 1, another team may have a shooting percentage of 0.910% and would need to shoot 10% to have a PDO of 1. Why is the second team more likely to shoot 10% than the first team? PDO just seems like a made up stat that means very little.
 
Levitate said:
I'd care more if people weren't so handwavy about all the bad stuff I see Miller do out there

Don't get me wrong, I love Miller, but going by the eye test and same assessment as Trouba I don't think he's had a great start to the season.

I don't think Trouba is ever worth his contract but to me that's a different argument. In general, he plays fine and he is what he is. The team also needs some of the intangibles he brings on the back end come playoff time, as dumb as that can sound. He sets the tone for the defense and the team when he starts playing the hard nosed nasty game and to be quite honest you need that in the playoffs and no one else on the team does it the way he can.

If a chance to trade him comes along in the future I think that's fine, I'm not saying we have to love his contract, but he's not realyl hurting the team the way people are complaining he is.

That he's captain is almost completely separate from his actual play on the ice and I don't see the point of bringing that up
Click to expand...
People wanted KAM back in Hartford last season. KAM has had some baffling plays but he's had his moments. Trouba has been on the struggle bus for most of the seaosn. His offense is terrible. His vision/gamesense in the O-zone, especially with the puck, is bad. He's a detriment on PP2.

When the negatives start piling up without many positives during a game, it's noticable. KAM has his moments but it's balanced, to put it in a weird way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gump116
SnowblindNYR said:
I still can't fathom how that stat makes sense. Save percentage and shooting percentage are not correlated in any way. A team that has a 0.920% needs to shoot 8% to have a PDO of 1, another team may have a shooting percentage of 0.910% and would need to shoot 10% to have a PDO of 1. Why is the second team more likely to shoot 10% than the first team? PDO just seems like a made up stat that means very little.
Click to expand...
It's not that SV% and Sh% are related but PDO for the entire league is 1 by definition so a natural question to ask is whether being above/below 1 means a team is lucky/unlucky.
 
  • Love
Reactions: egelband
sbjnyc said:
It's not that SV% and Sh% are related but PDO for the entire league is 1 by definition so a natural question to ask is whether being above/below 1 means a team is lucky/unlucky.
Click to expand...

Why is it a measure of luck though? In the NBA .500 is the average record (I used the NBA because the NFL has ties and NHL has OTL). Above .500 means good team and below .500 means bad team. Above .500 doesn't mean lucky team and below .500 doesn't mean unlucky team. I get the idea of sustainable and unsustainable save % but that makes more sense on an individual level compared to the player's history. So if a player historically has been an X % shooter and is now an X+10% shooter he's probably having a lucky season, but a team with Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin/Matthews will probably have a higher shooting percentage than the Coyotes. Same with Shesterkin vs. Blackwood.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Why is it a measure of luck though? In the NBA .500 is the average record (I used the NBA because the NFL has ties and NHL has OTL). Above .500 means good team and below .500 means bad team. Above .500 doesn't mean lucky team and below .500 doesn't mean unlucky team. I get the idea of sustainable and unsustainable save % but that makes more sense on an individual level compared to the player's history. So if a player historically has been an X % shooter and is now an X+10% shooter he's probably having a lucky season, but a team with Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin/Matthews will probably have a higher shooting percentage than the Coyotes. Same with Shesterkin vs. Blackwood.
Click to expand...
Maybe not “luck” so much as they’ve played better than the record/stats say…maybe?
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Why is it a measure of luck though? In the NBA .500 is the average record (I used the NBA because the NFL has ties and NHL has OTL). Above .500 means good team and below .500 means bad team. Above .500 doesn't mean lucky team and below .500 doesn't mean unlucky team. I get the idea of sustainable and unsustainable save % but that makes more sense on an individual level compared to the player's history. So if a player historically has been an X % shooter and is now an X+10% shooter he's probably having a lucky season, but a team with Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin/Matthews will probably have a higher shooting percentage than the Coyotes. Same with Shesterkin vs. Blackwood.
Click to expand...
It doesn't have to be, that's why it's a question. If Steph curry goes 1-15 on 3s and the Knicks beat GSW did they get lucky?
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom