News and Notes Thread 10: Where all media bias gets beaten to death

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/
Status
Not open for further replies.

dogbazinho

Registered User
May 24, 2006
9,456
14,272
Fairfax, VA
I was considering buying the pigs one as a surprise gift for the wife but not only are they sold out of the smallest size but they don't even have pigs! Glad I didn't get swindled out of my hard earned cash. Guess I'll surprise her with the usual gift, nothing.
 

Oenatzu

Chad-in-the-Box
Mar 7, 2010
1,067
2
Are we even gonna get any #hcanes into the ASG? Honestly not even one on this list:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=740909&navid=DL|NHL|home

I'd say Faulk is the most deserving right now. But then again I guess "deserving" to be there doesn't matter since Olli Maatta is ahead of actual "all stars".

I voted for Nash, Semin, Boychuk, Gleason, Harrison and Ward. Really looking forward to seeing how the Gleason-Harrison defensive pair can shut down the other stars in the All-Star Game.
 

Sens1Canes2

Registered User
May 13, 2007
10,694
8,366
What a horrible sweater. Both of them. Although i suppose that's the point?

Where'd the pigs come from? I'm so confused.
 

tomdundo

Registered User
Sep 11, 2011
7,757
406
Raleigh
What a horrible sweater. Both of them. Although i suppose that's the point?

Where'd the pigs come from? I'm so confused.

You know Stormy, the ice hog? AKA a pig...? Our mascot...? Since NC is pork country, I'd say it's probably safe to assume that's where the pigs came from.



(I apologize for the sarcasm. I had to.:laugh:)
 

Joe McGrath

Registered User
Oct 29, 2009
18,406
39,414
Fun with +/- numbers. The Hurricanes have had 85 players in their history have a + rating for their career with the organization out of 419. That's good for only 20.3%. Close, but not the worst % only because of how awful Tampa and Columbus were for such a long period of time. Of teams that have been around as long as the Whale/Canes there is no team with less total players with a + rating and they are actually behind Anaheim and Ottawa who had over 10 years less to accumulate players.

Long story short, possibly the worst franchise ever with regards to even strength play.
 

garnetpalmetto

Jerkministrator
Jul 12, 2004
12,476
11,842
Durham, NC
That's all well and good (really, it is) but it still doesn't explain the loss of pigs.

The child laborers in the factory outside Jakarta cranking out orders for shop.nhl.com for the holidays don't know the difference between a reindeer and a pig and their tiny little fingers got tired from doing the heatpress on all those Sidney Crosby jerseys so they decided to skip out on stitching "Carolina" so that they get carpal tunnel at age 11 instead of age 10?

Explanation in bold. Jeez, some people and reading comprehension. :shakehead :laugh:
 

Francis10

Registered User
Jan 28, 2012
1,060
1,345
Canada
Not to get off topic, but Loktionov is heading to the KHL. Have to wonder how much that was already in the cards before his injury.

Where did he sign? Pretty much the last we will ever see of him. No chance he comes back to NHL now. He will make alot more $$$ in KHL than here, its his home country, and his game is suited for the big ice as well. Really wish he would have came back.....was a great 3rd liner and 2nd unit PP guy.
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
Loktionov to Lokomotiv

@mirtle
Kontiola and Loktionov both to sign with Yaroslavl in the KHL, via @IgorEronko. Loktionov one of last UFAs out there.

I think is an overstatement, but he would have been a nice option to have as a 3rd line winger.
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
ss824Ab.png


PDO: Essentially a measure of luck. SH% + SV%. Almost always regresses to 100 since every SOG results in either a save or a goal. Too high and they're overachieving, too low and they're underachieving.

2005-06: Wow did this team overachieve. Look at it compared to 2009-2012 and think of where each team finished. They were lucky, and that's okay, but they also built a speedy team to take advantage of the "new" rules, especially the ridiculous amount of special teams gameplay.

Playoffs: "Luck" caught up a bit and they struggled at times for it. Again, special teams were really important.

2006-07: This is kind of a massive jump in FF% while seeing an equally large decline in PDO. Any theories? It'd kinda point to them bringing in a whole bunch of volume shooting grinders like Nathan Gerbe, but it was pretty much the same team.

2007-08: "Underachieved", ever so slightly. Would have been very interesting to see this team in the playoffs had they beaten Florida.

2008-09: Basically this is the team we've expected them to be whenever optimism floats around. Not super talented, so their regressed PDO is probably going to be a bit lower than 100, but a tough team to play against.

Playoffs: Ran into some tough opponents then ran cold.

2009-10: Sucked and earned it.

2010-11: They probably should have been even worse than they were. Jeff Skinner probably single handily resulted in several points in the standings.

2011-12: Sucked and earned it.

2012-13: Like with the playoffs, this is a smaller sample size, so it's far less concrete than the fuller seasons, but they were more the first half team than the second half. The goaltender injuries killed them, and IIRC everyone aside from Staal, Semin, and Tlusty shot at a pretty low %.

2013-14: Probably deserved a few more points in the standings, but not a playoff team.

2014-15: Stop changing the ****ing lines every 10 shifts and maybe that near league-worst PDO will rise and they'll finish chances. There's a lot of reason to be optimistic, but this team is kinda filled with some of the aforementioned Gerbes. At worst, we should be looking at a bubble team.
 

Blueline Bomber

AI Generated Minnesota Wild
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2007
40,196
45,445
I have no idea what to make of that chart. It's got the Cup team on the level of the bottom-feeder years, and it's got the terrible 06-07 year well above every other one.

But in your own words "Too high and they're overachieving, too low and they're underachieving."

So does that mean the 05-06 team was underachieving and the 06-07 year was overachieving?
 

tomdundo

Registered User
Sep 11, 2011
7,757
406
Raleigh
I have no idea what to make of that chart. It's got the Cup team on the level of the bottom-feeder years, and it's got the terrible 06-07 year well above every other one.

But in your own words "Too high and they're overachieving, too low and they're underachieving."

So does that mean the 05-06 team was underachieving and the 06-07 year was overachieving?


The color of the bubble is the PDO...the more blue the bubble is than what it shows for 100, the more overachieving they are (since they should realistically be at a PDO of 100). The more red it is, the more underachieving they are. That's what he means by overachieving/underachieving when comparing it to the fenwick on the vertical axis.



For example, in 2005-06, our possession was less than ideal but the PDO was higher than usual, which confirms our status as #luckercanes...
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
Yep, you got it. At 5 on 5, that 2005-06 team wasn't very good. They were negative in even strength goal differential. Actually, the only team to be positive was 2007-08 (such a what-if year), with 2008-09 right on par with 2005-06.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad