HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Leaf fans: would you trade kadri for luongo?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-02-2012, 07:54 PM
  #701
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
News reports? Sure, when news of Luongo being traded comes down, that's a great insight as to what he'll be traded for. Until that point, we've got nothing.

There's absolutely an incentive to bury big contracts in the minors -- their entire cap hit can be cleared. It means players demanding NMCs and teams having to fork out money well in excess of the cap to bury problems in the minors. The NHL, and PA as a collective, may address both of these issues.

Personally, I think a limit of how much of a player's salary is re-assignable to the minors solves this... something like $1m. You want to bury a guy making $750k on a 1 way deal? no problem. You want to bury a guy making $1.2m on a 1 way deal? you're going to have to pay $200k of his salary at the NHL level. You want to bury a guy making $5m? you're going to have to pay $4m of his salary on the cap. Helps to level the playing field that the League needs to continue growth. Maybe they specifically look to solve this issue and new CBA closes this loophole as well, maybe they leave the incentive out there. Maybe fixing the cap circumvention problem fixes this problem too.

Lu's ability to get "positive" value in trade is those GMs all being faced with the same choice.

What do you think Edmonton is prepared to offer?
At least MPS + 1st. Even an Oilers fan said he would take that and run if we weren't in the division.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:03 PM
  #702
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
At least MPS + 1st. Even an Oilers fan said he would take that and run if we weren't in the division.
Wonderful. Although I do wonder how that fan can be so sure with no CBA in place.

That being said, if Luongo's willing to go there, and Edmonton's offering that kind of price, please cut Toronto out of it.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:03 PM
  #703
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,830
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
The whole "shooting percentage" argument to suggest that Kulemin is at best a 15-20 goal guy is utterly ridiculous. He had a high shooting percentage, because he was shooting well and getting in the high percentage positions.

If anything, the fact that he had "Stamkos-like" shooting percentage numbers one year should suggest that he's capable of producing a "Stamkos-like" shooting percentage. Give me a guy who scores 30 goals while being over 15% shooting than a guy who scores 30 while being at 7.5% shooting. The former's one who capitalizes on his team's chances. The latter is a drain on his linemates potential production.
You realize that unless Kulemin is one of the best shooters in the world, his high shooting percentage means that he was very lucky, and putting up 30 goals again isn't very likely?

Then again, he did put up 7 goals last year which is more recent than this year. You're the guy who says Luongo "being a backup this year" hurts his value, so how come we are overlooking Kulemin's more recent 7 goal season and praising him for his 30 two years ago?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:04 PM
  #704
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Wonderful. If Luongo's willing to go there, please cut Toronto out of it.
I think Luongo would prefer EDM to TOR by far.

Great young core and the whole Grant Fuhr thing.

His wife on the other hand...

kthsn is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:06 PM
  #705
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Wonderful. Although I do wonder how that fan can be so sure with no CBA in place.

That being said, if Luongo's willing to go there, and Edmonton's offering that kind of price, please cut Toronto out of it.
Okay. Although Burke might not feel the same way.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:06 PM
  #706
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 18,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Funny how Hossa has huge value, but Luongo's value is hurt by his contract. They have nearly identical contracts
The wierd thing about Luongo's contract is that it hold a lot of value over the last 4-5 years. He costs almost nothing and caries a big cap hit. To a team below the floor he's money for jam. If he's still playing well that's great value.

If they change the rules and his contract is counted even if he retires - that's amazingly good news for a team getting his rights - they can now be $5m below the floor legally.

This is why the extra years thing being a worry is stupid.

me2 is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:07 PM
  #707
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
You realize that unless Kulemin is one of the best shooters in the world, his high shooting percentage means that he was very lucky, and putting up 30 goals again isn't very likely?

Then again, he did put up 7 goals last year which is more recent than this year. You're the guy who says Luongo "being a backup this year" hurts his value, so how come we are overlooking Kulemin's more recent 7 goal season and praising him for his 30 two years ago?
I realize that Kulemin, over the course of the 2010-2011 hockey season, was one of the best shooters in the world. In 2011-2012, obviously he wasn't.

We're not overlooking his most recent performance, we're simply taking both into context of being one great year showing just how good he can be, and one terrible year showing just how ineffective he can be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Okay. Although Burke might not feel the same way.
Trust me, a someone who's witnessed every single one of Burke's moves, examined and understood it to a far greater degree than you have, someone who realizes how stubborn he is; he's not going to come anywhere close to matching that kind of package, even if the NHLPA proposal was signed tomorrow.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:14 PM
  #708
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
Nonono. Crawford was not "amazing". Crawford was "pretty good". Steve Mason was "amazing"; he won the Calder Trophy and was in the top three in Vezina voting. That is an amazing freshman goaltender.

Having crashed and burned with assuming Mason will rebound, we now have a similar "very good first year, so-so the next" guy in Bobrovsky. And yet our goaltending situation is acknowledged as one of the worst ones in the League. Most folks would probably say that we have a reasonable chance of getting a good performance out of one or the other of the guys, but having someone more proven would be an order of magnitude better than what we've got.

Ponder this for a few moments.

Evasive reply of "lol u r columbus we r chicago we win u suck" in 5... 4... 3...
Steve Mason has been brutal since his first season, as has CLB's goaltending in general. Crawford has been bad for 1 season.

And yes, he was amazing in his first season, he also had an amazing playoffs. 2.3GAA and a .920sv% reg season...2.21gaa .927sv% playoffs

I'm not saying he is guaranteed to come back, but its not out of the question, just ask Jimmy Howard. Just don't ask Mason or Raycroft. All I'm saying is even if Crow doesn't play well again, we'll take our chances finding another goalie as oppossed to trading a top RW in the game for someone who MIGHT help us get to the final.

...and ya, CLB does blow.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:16 PM
  #709
TheLeastOfTheBunch
Registered User
 
TheLeastOfTheBunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
At least MPS + 1st. Even an Oilers fan said he would take that and run if we weren't in the division.
Seems like Oiler fans have a harsh stance on Luongo . http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...243469&page=37

TheLeastOfTheBunch is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:17 PM
  #710
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,830
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
I realize that Kulemin, over the course of the 2010-2011 hockey season, was one of the best shooters in the world. In 2011-2012, obviously he wasn't.

We're not overlooking his most recent performance, we're simply taking both into context of being one great year showing just how good he can be, and one terrible year showing just how ineffective he can be.
And to someone who understands advanced statistics and probabilities, we can conclude that Kulemin isn't as good as his unsustainably high shooting percentage was in 2010-11, but he also isn't as bad as his shooting percentage was in 2011-12 (6.5% which is low and suggests he was a bit unlucky too). Based on an average 11%, Kulemin is about a 15-20 goal scorer.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:17 PM
  #711
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Suit yourself. Although I wouldn't call Crawford's season "amazing" in any sense of the word.
His stats stacked up against some of the best that year, and he was amazing in the playoffs, better than Luongo in that series.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:20 PM
  #712
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,660
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Steve Mason has been brutal since his first season, as has CLB's goaltending in general. Crawford has been bad for 1 season.

And yes, he was amazing in his first season, he also had an amazing playoffs. 2.3GAA and a .920sv% reg season...2.21gaa .927sv% playoffs

I'm not saying he is guaranteed to come back, but its not out of the question, just ask Jimmy Howard. Just don't ask Mason or Raycroft. All I'm saying is even if Crow doesn't play well again, we'll take our chances finding another goalie as oppossed to trading a top RW in the game for someone who MIGHT help us get to the final.

...and ya, CLB does blow.
But the point is, "not out of the question" is a very different consideration from "guaranteed". Luongo's pretty guaranteed, despite what folks might assume from a certain playoff series.

(also, Sanford was actually halfway decent. He just couldn't keep it up, and was too frequently injured. Garon, OTOH, simply can't start regularly - as the Lightning also found out this past year.)

That said, I can understand why that would mean Chicago would be unlikely to pay a premium. Columbus is arguably in a similar situation.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:23 PM
  #713
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
And to someone who understands advanced statistics and probabilities, we can conclude that Kulemin isn't as good as his unsustainably high shooting percentage was in 2010-11, but he also isn't as bad as his shooting percentage was in 2011-12 (6.5% which is low and suggests he was a bit unlucky too). Based on an average 11%, Kulemin is about a 15-20 goal scorer.
Statistical probabilities have nothing to do with it. Ovechkin / Stamkos have years where they put up similar shooting percentages, the difference is in a) their ability to do it in greater shots, and b) their ability to follow it up year after year without a significant dip in overall productivity.

There was nothing to suggest that Kulemin would be unable to do so, until he did. A guy who shoots at 11% in his first 2 years can be reasonably expected to progress. Was 17% too high? obviously it was, but 1 year ago, there was nothing to suggest that he wouldn't be capable of matching similar production levels.

And as previously mentioned, 11% assumes absolutely no progression from his rookie year. There's nothing to suggest that Kulemin can't find the shooting ability he had a year ago (or at least into the mid-teens), and at the same time figure out that shooting more means more goals in the process, and get back into the high 20s or 30 as a productivity level. Is it a safe bet? absolutely not, but far from outside his abilities.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:24 PM
  #714
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
But the point is, "not out of the question" is a very different consideration from "guaranteed". Luongo's pretty guaranteed, despite what folks might assume from a certain playoff series.

(also, Sanford was actually halfway decent. He just couldn't keep it up, and was too frequently injured. Garon, OTOH, simply can't start regularly - as the Lightning also found out this past year.)

That said, I can understand why that would mean Chicago would be unlikely to pay a premium. Columbus is arguably in a similar situation.
Luongo is not a guarantee, unless you like a good regular season. Chicago is in it for the cup, and Luongo doesn't guarantee anything when it comes to the playoffs. The difference between 'not out of the question' and close to a guarantee is not worth Marian Hossa.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:24 PM
  #715
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
"Counting" on him for 12% is assuming basically no progression from his rookie year... not exactly a fair assumption when he's progressed in all but one extreme outlying year.

I never said he's a lock to be back at 15%+. I simply said that it's completely ridiculous to dismiss his 30 goal year based on "his shooting percentage being too high". Like I said, give me a guy who scores 30 goals on 200 shots over a guy who scores 30 goals on 400 shots any day of the week.

It's equally ridiculous to suggest that all he's capable of being is a 15-20 goal guy. That may be the point where a bet on his production doesn't become safe anymore, but certainly not his upside. He did that his first 2 years in the league.

I'm not, I'm simply saying that it's ridiculous to dismiss a 30 goal year because he was one of the best shooters in the league that year. You're much better off dismissing a high production year that resulted from simply a quantity of shots.

Dismiss it, or take it into context of being a substantial jump up from his previous year, as it potentially just being one great year....but the shooting percentage argument is ubsurd.
12% seems like a fair and reasonable assumption since it is above the shooting percentages in 3 of his 4 seasons.

The shooting percentage argument is certainly not absurd. The Leaf Nations explains about Kulemin and shooting percentage regression right here:

http://theleafsnation.com/2012/7/11/...ter-regression

One key point from that article:

"Since the lockout, no player with 1400 shots (about 200 a season) has maintained a shooting percentage of 17% or more, The highest is Thomas Vanek's 15.2%, followed closely by Sidney Crosby's 15.1%."

Stamkos is at 17%, but hasn't reached 1400 shots yet.

Is it likely that Kulemin is a Vanek, Crosby, Stamkos level sniper?

Also from that article:

The players with similar shooting percentages to Kulemin in 2010-11, dropped from an average 17.3% that season to 12.5% last season.

On average, they went from being 35 goals per 82 game scorers to 25 goals per 82 game scorers.

All of that points to the fact that it is far from ridiculous to bring up shooting percentage in suggesting that his 30 goal year is an aberration.

Could he score 30 again? Certainly, but he's much more likely to be close to the 20 goal range most seasons. If he regains his confidence and shoots more often, maybe the 20-25 range.

Zarpan is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:30 PM
  #716
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLeastOfTheBunch View Post
Seems like Oiler fans have a harsh stance on Luongo . http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...243469&page=37
They have a harsh stance against giving up their 2nd line centre, their top defensive prospect, and a potential power forward.

A completely different offer.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:31 PM
  #717
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Luongo is not a guarantee, unless you like a good regular season. Chicago is in it for the cup, and Luongo doesn't guarantee anything when it comes to the playoffs. The difference between 'not out of the question' and close to a guarantee is not worth Marian Hossa.
No goalie guarantees anything. Neither is a forward. All goalies have bad games, and all forwards have dry patches. I think Chicago + Luongo - Hossa is a better team that stands a better chance of success in the playoffs.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:34 PM
  #718
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarpan View Post
12% seems like a fair and reasonable assumption since it is above the shooting percentages in 3 of his 4 seasons.

The shooting percentage argument is certainly not absurd. The Leaf Nations explains about Kulemin and shooting percentage regression right here:

http://theleafsnation.com/2012/7/11/...ter-regression

One key point from that article:

"Since the lockout, no player with 1400 shots (about 200 a season) has maintained a shooting percentage of 17% or more, The highest is Thomas Vanek's 15.2%, followed closely by Sidney Crosby's 15.1%."

Stamkos is at 17%, but hasn't reached 1400 shots yet.

Is it likely that Kulemin is a Vanek, Crosby, Stamkos level sniper?

Also from that article:

The players with similar shooting percentages to Kulemin in 2010-11, dropped from an average 17.3% that season to 12.5% last season.

On average, they went from being 35 goals per 82 game scorers to 25 goals per 82 game scorers.

All of that points to the fact that it is far from ridiculous to bring up shooting percentage in suggesting that his 30 goal year is an aberration.

Could he score 30 again? Certainly, but he's much more likely to be close to the 20 goal range most seasons. If he regains his confidence and shoots more often, maybe the 20-25 range.
You seem to be missing the point... of course 17% isn't sustainable over the long run... but that doesn't mean a guy's production must be assumed to go down if he attains a 17% shooting percentage. It means that generally, guys start to take more shots, with a lower percentage, and overall production either goes up or down as a result. The fact that he shot at 17% and scored 30 goals, shows that he's got the ability to shoot with, or at least near, the elite players. Not as impressive as 15% and 45 goals of course, but at the end of the day, it's 30 goals, without being a drain on his linemates (who combined for 50 that year), hence more impressive than a guy who scores 30 while taking 300 shots.

In the case of Kulemin, both shooting and production fell apart completely... but that cannot be blamed on the fact that he scored 30 goals on less than 200 shots versus a a guy who scored 30 goals taking 275 shots.

12% is less than 1 point above 2 of those 4 years. Furthermore, you make the equally ridiculous assumption that he doesn't figure out that he needs to shoot more.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:37 PM
  #719
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Statistical probabilities have nothing to do with it. Ovechkin / Stamkos have years where they put up similar shooting percentages, the difference is in a) their ability to do it in greater shots, and b) their ability to follow it up year after year without a significant dip in overall productivity.

There was nothing to suggest that Kulemin would be unable to do so, until he did. A guy who shoots at 11% in his first 2 years can be reasonably expected to progress. Was 17% too high? obviously it was, but 1 year ago, there was nothing to suggest that he wouldn't be capable of matching similar production levels.

And as previously mentioned, 11% assumes absolutely no progression from his rookie year. There's nothing to suggest that Kulemin can't find the shooting ability he had a year ago (or at least into the mid-teens), and at the same time figure out that shooting more means more goals in the process, and get back into the high 20s or 30 as a productivity level. Is it a safe bet? absolutely not, but far from outside his abilities.
As per http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2010/...centage-vs-age, there is no evidence to suggest that players increase their shooting percentage significantly as they age / gain more experience.

If anything, gains in production are due to players taking more shots (generating more chances) as they gain more experience. This is due to them getting trusted with more ice time, figuring out how to get in better position, etc...

Zarpan is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:38 PM
  #720
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 9,221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
I think Luongo would prefer EDM to TOR by far.

Great young core and the whole Grant Fuhr thing.

His wife on the other hand...
The Leafs have a pretty good core themselves. Not on Edmontons level but still. The Leafs are in more win-now mode too. The Oilers will be elite...in 2-3 years realistically. By that time how good will Luongo be?

Man Bear Pig is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:38 PM
  #721
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
12% is less than 1 point above 2 of those 4 years. Furthermore, you make the equally ridiculous assumption that he doesn't figure out that he needs to shoot more.
My last point mentioned that if he shoots more, he's probably a 20-25 goal scorer...

Zarpan is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:39 PM
  #722
TheLeastOfTheBunch
Registered User
 
TheLeastOfTheBunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
They have a harsh stance against giving up their 2nd line centre, their top defensive prospect, and a potential power forward.

A completely different offer.
Take a look at their counter offers. You brought up a fan who would easily do "MPS and 1st," doesn't seem like any of the counteroffers are close to that.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...o#post54555807

A glance and you'd realize they have the same issues with Luongo (and similar proposals) like most Leaf fans have expressed in this and the countless other Luongo to Toronto threads.

TheLeastOfTheBunch is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:40 PM
  #723
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
News reports? Sure, when news of Luongo being traded comes down, that's a great insight as to what he'll be traded for. Until that point, we've got nothing.


I meant news reports that are about aspects of a potential deal. Not rumours, but more based on fact. For instance, Burke did talk to Gillis on such and such day instead of "it is believed" Burke talked to Gillis on this day. The latter is rumour, the former is a confirmed report.



Quote:
There's absolutely an incentive to bury big contracts in the minors -- their entire cap hit can be cleared. It means players demanding NMCs and teams having to fork out money well in excess of the cap to bury problems in the minors. The NHL, and PA as a collective, may address both of these issues.

Personally, I think a limit of how much of a player's salary is re-assignable to the minors solves this... something like $1m. You want to bury a guy making $750k on a 1 way deal? no problem. You want to bury a guy making $1.2m on a 1 way deal? you're going to have to pay $200k of his salary at the NHL level. You want to bury a guy making $5m? you're going to have to pay $4m of his salary on the cap. Helps to level the playing field that the League needs to continue growth. Maybe they specifically look to solve this issue and new CBA closes this loophole as well, maybe they leave the incentive out there. Maybe fixing the cap circumvention problem fixes this problem too.

I see what you mean. In rebuttle, I will say that I cannot envision a CBA where waivers is not an out for GMs. This affects all teams running with NTCs instead of NMCs. If there is no distinction, no "out", you have essentially punished teams that have handed out NTCs over NMCs for no apparent reason. As such, I still stand behind my Lu to waivers over negative value argument.



Quote:
Lu's ability to get "positive" value in trade is those GMs all being faced with the same choice.

What do you think Edmonton is prepared to offer?


Yup, it's the same choice. Personally, I think it doesn't get to that point and Lu is traded for positive value. So it's moot.



Don't know what EDM is prepared to offer, only that the rumour said their offer was better than Burke's own. As the next best team, as long as Burke stays close, no matter what it is, he's got a shot.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:45 PM
  #724
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 18,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Statistical probabilities have nothing to do with it. Ovechkin / Stamkos have years where they put up similar shooting percentages, the difference is in a) their ability to do it in greater shots, and b) their ability to follow it up year after year without a significant dip in overall productivity.

There was nothing to suggest that Kulemin would be unable to do so, until he did. A guy who shoots at 11% in his first 2 years can be reasonably expected to progress. Was 17% too high? obviously it was, but 1 year ago, there was nothing to suggest that he wouldn't be capable of matching similar production levels.

And as previously mentioned, 11% assumes absolutely no progression from his rookie year. There's nothing to suggest that Kulemin can't find the shooting ability he had a year ago (or at least into the mid-teens), and at the same time figure out that shooting more means more goals in the process, and get back into the high 20s or 30 as a productivity level. Is it a safe bet? absolutely not, but far from outside his abilities.
Care to list all the NHLers that progressed their shooting percentage (aged 22/23) from 11% to something much higher?

I'm just curious. Stamkos was 17% as 19 yo and he's still about that. Crosby, Malkin about the same. Gaborik had settled on his during 22/23, Kessel nothing outside what he was doing as a youngster, Neal nope, Oveckin nope, Perry nope, Kovalchuck nope.

Hartnell borderline case, Glencross maybe but he's not a 30g player unless you believe in 22% shooting percentages.

This just keeps reminding me of Mason "25 goal scorer" Raymond.

me2 is offline  
Old
10-02-2012, 08:46 PM
  #725
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I meant news reports that are about aspects of a potential deal. Not rumours, but more based on fact. For instance, Burke did talk to Gillis on such and such day instead of "it is believed" Burke talked to Gillis on this day. The latter is rumour, the former is a confirmed report.

I see what you mean. In rebuttle, I will say that I cannot envision a CBA where waivers is not an out for GMs. This affects all teams running with NTCs instead of NMCs. If there is no distinction, no "out", you have essentially punished teams that have handed out NTCs over NMCs for no apparent reason. As such, I still stand behind my Lu to waivers over negative value argument.

Yup, it's the same choice. Personally, I think it doesn't get to that point and Lu is traded for positive value. So it's moot.

Don't know what EDM is prepared to offer, only that the rumour said their offer was better than Burke's own. As the next best team, as long as Burke stays close, no matter what it is, he's got a shot.
"news reports that are about aspects of a potential deal"... sounds like Rumours to me. As mentioned, GMs don't get into the habit of making negotiations public, so anything you hear from so called "insiders" should be taken with a grain of salt.

It's not a matter of punishing teams, simply putting all teams on a level playing field. There's still a substantial distinction between a guy with a NMC and NTC in terms of risk (guy with the NMC needs to agree to wherever he's going), just eliminate the incentive and ability for big teams to flex their financial muscle over the small teams... just like they did with the salary cap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
Care to list all the NHLers that progressed their shooting percentage (aged 22/23) from 11% to something much higher?

I'm just curious. Stamkos was 17% as 19 yo and he's still about that. Crosby, Malkin about the same. Gaborik had settled on his during 22/23, Kessel nothing outside what he was doing as a youngster, Neal nope, Oveckin nope, Perry nope, Kovalchuck nope.

Hartnell borderline case, Glencross maybe but he's not a 30g player unless you believe in 22% shooting percentages.
He doesn't need to. Kulemin's proven the ability to be one of the best shooters in the league and score 30 goals in his 3rd year. Guys who score 30 tend to be between 11% and 16%... or at least were last year. When a player as a rookie / sophmore shoots at 11%+ for his first 2 years, then works his way up to 17... it show's he's got a heck of a lot more in him than 11%.

seanlinden is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.