HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

Official Blackhawks Trade Proposal/Trade Rumour Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-25-2013, 11:46 AM
  #651
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
 
Marotte Marauder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Determinism has yet to mount a reasonable case for how it applies to quantum mechanics.

As best we can tell, quantum mechanics is objectively random.
As best we can tell? That's another way of saying you have not discovered the yet unknown variable or hidden mechanism.

The deterministic case is just as strong as that is it not? The case being that one doesn't know what one doesn't know.

One man's random for example, is clearly explainable by another man. The one who understands the key.

Marotte Marauder is online now  
Old
02-25-2013, 11:48 AM
  #652
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,109
vCash: 500
This is stupid, of course there is randomness in sports, its why sample size is an important concept.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 11:59 AM
  #653
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
So overall he's less productive than his linemates? Gee an actual use for +/-.

Thanks MG
No ****!!! He's playing with Sharp and Kane. Not many C's in the league can keep up with them offensively.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 12:16 PM
  #654
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,358
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
As best we can tell? That's another way of saying you have not discovered the yet unknown variable or hidden mechanism.

The deterministic case is just as strong as that is it not? The case being that one doesn't know what one doesn't know.

One man's random for example, is clearly explainable by another man. The one who understands the key.
No, "as best we can tell" is another way of saying that scientific understanding is ever-evolving, never set in stone.

Determinism was a central concept of the Bohr-Einstein debates ("God does not play dice") and it's been scrambling for evidence for the 100+ years since then. It's not that people haven't tried to argue it, it's that their efforts have been stymied by actual evidence it doesn't exist. Bell's Theorem alone states that no theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics. Determinists moved the goalposts, saying there are non-local hidden variables that we're not accounting for, but again, there's no evidence for this and actually some of their arguments would even involve violating the theory of relativity. Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle made things even harder for determinists. Just the concept of determinism at that level would imply things (i.e. a universal wave function, or infinite parallel universes) that we just have no conclusive evidence for accepting.

Basically, quantum mechanics has been a thorn in determinism's side ever since it first appeared.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 01:58 PM
  #655
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
 
Marotte Marauder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
No ****!!! He's playing with Sharp and Kane. Not many C's in the league can keep up with them offensively.
I love it! Crappy linemates over the years have held Bolland back. Now he's playing with linemates that are too good. Got it all covered now.

Marotte Marauder is online now  
Old
02-25-2013, 02:12 PM
  #656
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
I love it! Crappy linemates over the years have held Bolland back. Now he's playing with linemates that are too good. Got it all covered now.
There is no doubt the ****** linemates he had held him back. He's probably still suffering by expecting the passes to go to crap, or expecting crappy passes.

But the point is still there, not many C's in the league can keep up offensively with Kane and Sharp.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 02:18 PM
  #657
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,384
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
I love it! Crappy linemates over the years have held Bolland back. Now he's playing with linemates that are too good. Got it all covered now.
Please. Tell me the proper useful function for the stat.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 04:11 PM
  #658
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
So overall he's less productive than his linemates? Gee an actual use for +/-.

Thanks MG
Wrong, his production has nothing to do with +/-, that's what points are for. +/- is simply being out there for a goal or a goal against in even strength play. Bolland could be on a line with Crosby and Stamkos, never touch the puck, finish with 9 points but still be +100 because of what his linemates do. It has nothing to do with his point total. Stamkos leads the league in points, +2, Tavares is 3rd in points, -2. Meanwhile Mark Fraser is +13 with a total of 2 points. What does that tell me, nothing, because it's a meaningless stat.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 05:27 PM
  #659
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
 
Marotte Marauder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Wrong, his production has nothing to do with +/-, that's what points are for. +/- is simply being out there for a goal or a goal against in even strength play. Bolland could be on a line with Crosby and Stamkos, never touch the puck, finish with 9 points but still be +100 because of what his linemates do. It has nothing to do with his point total. Stamkos leads the league in points, +2, Tavares is 3rd in points, -2. Meanwhile Mark Fraser is +13 with a total of 2 points. What does that tell me, nothing, because it's a meaningless stat.
It is a reflection of his productivity compared to his linemates. His contribution has been net negative while Sharp and Kane are net positive. ES only.

So unless you think Bolland is so unlucky to be the linemate always stepping onto the ice as the opponent scores or stepping off as the Hawks score, it is a reflection of his play.

Marotte Marauder is online now  
Old
02-25-2013, 05:37 PM
  #660
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
It is a reflection of his productivity compared to his linemates. His contribution has been net negative while Sharp and Kane are net positive. ES only.

So unless you think Bolland is so unlucky to be the linemate always stepping onto the ice as the opponent scores or stepping off as the Hawks score, it is a reflection of his play.
Explain how he has such a crappy +/- compared to Kane and Sharp when he plays every minute at even strength with them? Kane and Sharp go off the ice when the puck goes to the defensive zone, and Bolland goes off when the puck goes to the offensive zone, that's the ONLY possible explanation for it.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 06:02 PM
  #661
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 2893
5v5 Goals Against:
Bolland - 10
Kane - 10
Sharp - 9

On Ice Shooting %:
Bolland - 6.58%
Kane - 12.5%
Sharp - 7.89%

On Ice SV%:
Bolland - .907
Kane - .926
Sharp - .929

5v5 TOI/G:
Bolland - 13:14
Kane - 16:17
Sharp - 14:19

Personally I think Bolland is struggling, but has largely been unlucky so far this year. Also Kane and Sharp tend to extend their shifts when the puck is in the offensive zone (leading to more scoring chances) while Bolland is pretty consistent with the length of his shifts (nothing to do with the stats just something I have observed).


Last edited by sketch22: 02-25-2013 at 06:08 PM. Reason: clarification
sketch22 is offline  
Old
02-25-2013, 06:12 PM
  #662
madgoat33
Registered User
 
madgoat33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
No ****!!! He's playing with Sharp and Kane. Not many C's in the league can keep up with them offensively.
his +/- is 12 below kane and 6 below Sharp. if you don't think that shows he s not played well, you're crazy. the team is almost completely impotent when he's on the ice. despite playing a huge portion of his minutes with kane and Sharp, he's been on the ice for only 7 es goals. he's hurt the offense. you can see it watching the games and you can see it in the stats


Last edited by madgoat33: 02-25-2013 at 06:19 PM.
madgoat33 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 12:25 AM
  #663
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 23,923
vCash: 500
Bolland hasn't played well, Sharp hasn't played well too and still does.

+/- is a BS stat and tells next to nothing after 18-19 games.

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 03:23 AM
  #664
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Just two games ago people wanted Sharp, dropped to the third line, scratched, and cut. He was playing horribly according to most and yet he was a + players. Bolland being a - is random. No he isn't the same offensive players Kane and Sharp are, and neither of them are the defensive player Bolland is.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 05:07 AM
  #665
madgoat33
Registered User
 
madgoat33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,367
vCash: 500
its a game based on skill, its not a random occurrence.

madgoat33 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 05:33 AM
  #666
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 23,923
vCash: 500
going back to the topic, I'd like to call the Flames and ask about Cervenka... not Iginla.

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 08:58 PM
  #667
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 100,973
vCash: 340
With ROR now back with Avs and the costs going up for them

Gotta hope Bowman checks into availablity of Stastny

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 09:22 PM
  #668
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
With ROR now back with Avs and the costs going up for them

Gotta hope Bowman checks into availablity of Stastny
@ 6.5mil?? Not happening, no thank you.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:17 PM
  #669
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,694
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
@ 6.5mil?? Not happening, no thank you.
I've said before that Stastny becomes a hell of a lot more attractive at 3.75M if they will retain half of the cap it.

coldsteelonice84 is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:35 PM
  #670
BBH
34|38|61|10|13
 
BBH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago, IL, US of A
Country: United States
Posts: 4,206
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBH
I'm wondering why people are bringing up changing the roster. Kruger's proven himself thus far to be more than capable of handling whatever role he needs to. He's not somebody we need to try and replace.

I think if a top six C goes on LTIR, that's when you go to the trade market.

BBH is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:42 PM
  #671
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,694
vCash: 10592
If the right opportunity comes up, you take it. Other players aren't going to poison the team if they make us even stronger and deeper. Now if requires players from the roster, it is likely a no, I agree on that.

coldsteelonice84 is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:46 PM
  #672
zac
Registered User
 
zac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
5v5 Goals Against:
Bolland - 10
Kane - 10
Sharp - 9

On Ice Shooting %:
Bolland - 6.58%
Kane - 12.5%
Sharp - 7.89%

On Ice SV%:
Bolland - .907
Kane - .926
Sharp - .929

5v5 TOI/G:
Bolland - 13:14
Kane - 16:17
Sharp - 14:19

Personally I think Bolland is struggling, but has largely been unlucky so far this year. Also Kane and Sharp tend to extend their shifts when the puck is in the offensive zone (leading to more scoring chances) while Bolland is pretty consistent with the length of his shifts (nothing to do with the stats just something I have observed).
I don't think Bolland has been the same player defensively for a couple of years now. He's shown some offensive flashes, but he's not nearly as effective in his own zone as he once was.

zac is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:41 AM
  #673
Jeffrey Lebowski
Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
 
Jeffrey Lebowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Side
Country: United States
Posts: 5,183
vCash: 500
We should pursue the best 2nd line C option that we could, and if nothing comes of it, then we need to get a solid #3 C like we did in '09 when we got Pahlsson. I'm happy with our defense and, right now, our offense. Would much rather have 2 #3C than Bolland and Shaw as our 2/3C in the playoffs.

Jeffrey Lebowski is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:42 AM
  #674
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 23,923
vCash: 500
Stastny has this and 1 more year left on the contract... If the Avs - who have more than enough Cap Space - keep a bit of his Cap Hit, it would work out well. Stastny would be a perfect addition to our team. Gladly would take him. Stalberg + 1st + higher prospect (not Danault, Saad, TT or McNeill)

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 01:21 AM
  #675
Jeffrey Lebowski
Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
 
Jeffrey Lebowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Side
Country: United States
Posts: 5,183
vCash: 500
Not sure I'd be okay with letting Stalberg go quite yet though... even though Stastny would be a great addition. Ya gotta look at our strengths at our prospect pool to deal from... Pirri, Kayes, Danault, McNeill etc. are where you have to look from. Pirri would be the most tradeable, IMO, as long as you believe that Bolland/Shaw/Danault/McNeill is the solution to our 2/3C problem.

If it were me, I'd go:

Saad-Toews-Hossa
Sharp-Bolland-Kane
Stalberg-Danault-Shaw
Carcillo-Kruger-Jayes

for next year. Danault and Kruger are exchangeable depending on performance. Jayes replaces Bickell who I feel like isn't worth the upgrade in money/contract that he'd ask for. ****, you could even plug Morin somewhere in that line-up and make it even more stacked.

Jeffrey Lebowski is offline  
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 06:20 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.