according to some on the main boards this is an overpayment, as he is not as good as Tom Gilbert. I really wish people would watch games before forming opinions based on stats alone.
I think this shows Ej's loyalty/team first mentality just as much as it shows Sherman's negotiating skills.
I think this is a good point. This deal essentially assures EJ that he won't be traded or even come up in trade rumours. It's just too good of a deal to give up.
I think this is a good point. This deal essentially assures EJ that he won't be traded or even come up in trade rumours. It's just too good of a deal to give up.
Wait...how does it do that? If anything it assures that more suitors will come forward in the case that we do want to trade him. Everyone and their dog is gonna want a first overall at that kind of cap hit.
Just because he showed some loyalty in taking a good cap hit doesn't mean he doesn't get the boot if he sucks.
Wait...how does it do that? If anything it assures that more suitors will come forward in the case that we do want to trade him. Everyone and their dog is gonna want a first overall at that kind of cap hit.
Just because he showed some loyalty in taking a good cap hit doesn't mean he doesn't get the boot if he sucks.
There's no way the Avs trade him away with such a good cap hit. Not only is it a good hit, but it will set the bar for other young players like ROR and eventually Barrie/Elliot.
Why don't the Canucks trade Burrows? Because he's on a great cap hit for what he brings, which is important when you want to contend.
There's no way the Avs trade him away with such a good cap hit. Not only is it a good hit, but it will set the bar for other young players like ROR and eventually Barrie/Elliot.
Why don't the Canucks trade Burrows? Because he's on a great cap hit for what he brings, which is important when you want to contend.
Doesn't matter if the day ever comes where we decide he hasn't proven enough to be the no. 1 guy and decide we wanna trade him to shore up in some other area.
There isn't a guy on this team that's untouchable.
Doesn't matter if the day ever comes where we decide he hasn't proven enough to be the no. 1 guy and decide we wanna trade him to shore up in some other area.
There isn't a guy on this team that's untouchable.
He's already the #1 guy on the Avs. We're just hoping he gets even better. Obviously if he somehow forgets how to skate in the next few months, the Avs will move him. But if his skill levels stays at least the same (though it should improve) and there are no off-ice problems, he's not getting moved.
Wow! Best contract handed out this offseason and an absolute steal! I'm a huge E.J. fan and I have no doubt he will get better, that 3.75 is going to look awfully good in 2 years. Great young core the Avs are assembling.
Big time steal from Greg. I like the terms and the hit. Now get Mcginn, ROR signed long terms and lets get this season going. Also should be a clause in EJ's contract to stay away from golf carts at all times.
So I've been trying to think of ways to analyze an effective defender (offensive, two-way, defensive) and what statistics would show effectivity versus being overwhelmed or unlucky. I'm still learning about advanced statistics (to be fair, some of the posters around here should spend more time learning about them before spouting them as well).
But theoretically, it should be possible to create a 4-D plot if I could find the data, of things like Corsi v QoC v Zone Start over time. It'd look like a string I believe. Never tried and don't know how long it would take me to do that (I'm in college... time is not free). Plus, I am hesitant to do something massive like that because I don't believe advanced stats are very accurate. QoC can be debunked by the logical analysis that everyone will have relatively similar competition over the full course of a season. Example: You put your #1 line out against the other team's #3, they put their #1 line out against your #3, over the course of 82 games you'd expect the data to average out approximately, so any variations are not statistically significant but rather almost "cherry picking" the data.
QoC and QoL (quality of teammates) are two highly flawed stats that are based on number of shots allowed and they don't take shot quality into consideration, some teams allow loads of shots, but the shot quality is poor and 2nd chances are limited (ie Caps in these past playoffs). What followers of Church of CORSI don't get is that hockey isn't baseball where you only depend on your own and pitchers/hitters performance.
Zone starts is another flawed stat that often gets missused because people don't understand that zone starts don't depend solely on a strenght/weaknees of a certain player but also on quality and skill sets of other players on the team and on strenghts of their partner/linemates. Perfect example to debunk this stat are last years Avs and their destribution of ice time amongst their defense.
Big time steal from Greg. I like the terms and the hit. Now get Mcginn, ROR signed long terms and lets get this season going. Also should be a clause in EJ's contract to stay away from golf carts at all times.
Doesn't matter if the day ever comes where we decide he hasn't proven enough to be the no. 1 guy and decide we wanna trade him to shore up in some other area.
There isn't a guy on this team that's untouchable.
Everyone said the same thing about Andy after his first season here too. The jury is still out on Varly, but I do have to say I'm pretty optimistic about this kid.
QoC and QoL (quality of teammates) are two highly flawed stats that are based on number of shots allowed and they don't take shot quality into consideration, some teams allow loads of shots, but the shot quality is poor and 2nd chances are limited (ie Caps in these past playoffs). What followers of Church of CORSI don't get is that hockey isn't baseball where you only depend on your own and pitchers/hitters performance.
Zone starts is another flawed stat that often gets missused because people don't understand that zone starts don't depend solely on a strenght/weaknees of a certain player but also on quality and skill sets of other players on the team and on strenghts of their partner/linemates. Perfect example to debunk this stat are last years Avs and their destribution of ice time amongst their defense.
Mark Twain:
I agree entirely, it's why I am having a hard time coming up with a legitimate group of stats to argue a situation. There is always exceptions to the rule, so even picking out the most consistent is difficult.
That NHLnumbers article on #1 defenders for instance, it listed Hejda/ROB as our top pairing guys because of TOI, Zone starts and QoC. When clearly that is not the case for our team.
But likewise, zone starts can be used to damn a player (RNH for instance) because they are simply not capable/ready for being used in a bigger role.
I'm sitting in a statistics class atm, which makes this even more interesting.
I agree entirely, it's why I am having a hard time coming up with a legitimate group of stats to argue a situation. There is always exceptions to the rule, so even picking out the most consistent is difficult.
That NHLnumbers article on #1 defenders for instance, it listed Hejda/ROB as our top pairing guys because of TOI, Zone starts and QoC. When clearly that is not the case for our team.
But likewise, zone starts can be used to damn a player (RNH for instance) because they are simply not capable/ready for being used in a bigger role.
I'm sitting in a statistics class atm, which makes this even more interesting.
There really isn't a perfect way (or even a good way) to present these stats because everyone interprets them differently (most often in the way it's suits their argument).
