HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All purpose stats thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-13-2012, 11:14 AM
  #1
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
All purpose stats thread

I thought we could carry over this conversation and dig into the numbers a bit. I fall somewhere in the middle when it comes to stats. They're relevant but don't tell the whole story.

In Manny's case, he's playing tough minutes and sawing them off. Does that mean he's playing well? I don't think so. It means he's finding a way to contribute even though he hasn't played all that well. There is something to be said for that. In his case it can easily be attributed to his injury and lack of training this past summer. IMO his play has been been getting better, slowly, throughout the season. The numbers bear that out.


It's been brought up a few times that Henrik and Daniels zone start ratio has not shown up in their point totals. While starting in the other end can be an advantage offensively, so can starting in your own end. When you start in the other teams end they have all 5 guys in position and an even money chance at possession. When you carry the puck into the other teams end, they still need to get into position and you have the puck (in the case of the Sedins specifically) a large percentage of the time. Again, I think the stats are relevant and I like the strategy but there is something to be said for points off the rush. The Sedins had quite a few of them over their first season and a half with Burrows and they have regressed with this new strategy. IMO the Sedins overall game would benefit from a less dramatic split.

Lots to talk about when it comes to the numbers and there are posters here that know a lot more than me. Thoughts?

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 11:31 AM
  #2
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." ~ Mark Twain (a quote which he attributes to Benjamin Disraeli)

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 11:36 AM
  #3
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,305
vCash: 50
A thread about stats and not a single number? I'll start.

Games 1-2010-9-1
Games 21-4014-4-2
Games 41-5510-2-3
After a victory20-11-3
After a loss10-3-2
After a loss in overtime4-1-0
1st day back at home3-3-1
1st game on the road7-1-0
On weekends13-2-1
On weekdays21-13-5
With 0 day off3-4-0
With 1 day off17-6-2
With 2 days off8-4-1
With 3+ days off1-0-0
When outshot17-6-3
Outshooting the opponent15-9-3

xtr3m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 12:05 PM
  #4
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,693
vCash: 500
Cool. a stats thread.






I've been perusing through different sites in order to get a better statistical representation of some of the players that may be available at the deadline. I came across two that may especially fit our needs:


Erik Condra, RW on OTT. He plays 4th line there. According to a site referenced by PITB (http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/), he ranks as follows (all scores related to 5v5 close situations):

Goals - #18
Shots - #68
Fenwick - #50
Corsi - #53

These ratings are placed by his "HART" stat score which is described loosely as --- HART greater than 1 indicates the player is a better than average player and anything under 1 indicates the player is a below average player. HARO (offense) + HARD (defense)/2 = HART (total)

For Condra, he is ranked greater than 1 in HARO, HARD, and HART in every one of the 4 major categories listed above. That is very impressive if I'm reading this right.








Other things I found interesting here:


MA Gragnani (a player of much debate here a while back) has a HART score of 2.407 (goals 5v5 (close)), ranking him 2nd overall in league. He ranks 145, 274, and 199 in the remaining 3 categories, so there are issues there outside of goals being scored for and against. But I found it especially interesting that despite having a weaker than average HARD stat in shots, fenwick, and corsi, he's still stellar in the goals category HARO, HARD, and HART. Meaning, he's very strong at both not allowing goals to occur against him, and creating goals for when he is on the ice.


*Note: The creator of this stats page does state the following "given 1 year or more of data I feel that goal based ratings produce as good or better results.<than fenwick or corsi adjusted ratings>"





Another interesting candidate at the trade deadline should be Ben Lovejoy out of PIT. He ranks #52 in the goals HART stat.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 02-13-2012 at 12:25 PM.
Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 12:12 PM
  #5
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
It's been brought up a few times that Henrik and Daniels zone start ratio has not shown up in their point totals. While starting in the other end can be an advantage offensively, so can starting in your own end. When you start in the other teams end they have all 5 guys in position and an even money chance at possession. When you carry the puck into the other teams end, they still need to get into position and you have the puck (in the case of the Sedins specifically) a large percentage of the time. Again, I think the stats are relevant and I like the strategy but there is something to be said for points off the rush. The Sedins had quite a few of them over their first season and a half with Burrows and they have regressed with this new strategy. IMO the Sedins overall game would benefit from a less dramatic split.
The Sedins offensive game is built largely around setting up shop in the offensive zone and cycling the puck until the opponents defensive structure breaks down - why force them to win possession in their own zone and move it up the ice before they can get started?

(Unless you happen to think their defensive game needs work, which is certainly a fair point.)

Furthermore, when you have an offensive zone start, which more productive offensive player should be getting it instead of the Sedins? Along the same lines, when you have a defensive zone start why put your third-best (IMO) defensive line on the ice?

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 12:14 PM
  #6
luongo321
Registered User
 
luongo321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 11,394
vCash: 50
How many times do we win when there is a full moon?

luongo321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 12:30 PM
  #7
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
The Sedins offensive game is built largely around setting up shop in the offensive zone and cycling the puck until the opponents defensive structure breaks down - why force them to win possession in their own zone and move it up the ice before they can get started?

(Unless you happen to think their defensive game needs work, which is certainly a fair point.)
The Sedins cycle game is their bread and butter, no doubt. I'm not arguing they should abandon the strategy altogether. As I said, I think it's a good one. My argument is two fold. One, like you mentioned, their defensive game could benefit from some more starts in their own end. I think this strategy has hurt their defensive game some.

Also, they still have to win possession no matter where they start. As I said, the problem with starting in their end is that they have all 5 guys back and in position. A lot of cheap goals are scored off the rush because of pinching D, poor back checking etc. When the Sedins took their game to another level a few seasons ago with Burrows, scoring off the rush was a big part of that. The cycle was still their bread and butter but it gave them another weapon.

I'm not calling for an even split of offensive and defensive starts. More like a few more defensive starts a game, maybe when the matchup favours them?


Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
, when you have an offensive zone start, which more productive offensive player should be getting it instead of the Sedins? Along the same lines, when you have a defensive zone start why put your third-best (IMO) defensive line on the ice?
We have a lot of good offensive players now, I think Hodgson and Kesler (and whoever they are playing with) can turn those starts into offence.

I wouldn't put the twins out in our zone against the other teams top line, that doesn't make sense given our makeup. I'm really only talking about a few more starts a game, when the matchup makes sense.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 12:41 PM
  #8
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Yeah.. a few starts one way or the other is hard to argue over.

I think in the sense that the regular season is seen as an opportunity to train for a playoff run, I agree with you - the Sedins should be using this time to keep their all-around game sharp.

However in the sense that every outcome matters, I prefer to see the Sedins used where they are best - and in crunch time (whether that is now or in the playoffs) I hope the coaches aren't sitting them for shifts where they have the highest probability of helping the team.

Another element of this argument could be that offensive zone starts are one way for the coaches to make the Sedins 19:00/G as easy as possible; they are the oldest forwards on the team aside from Manny, and are subjected to a lot of punishment as the season goes on. I'm not sure if cycling in the offensive zone is significantly less hazardous than chasing the puck around your own zone and moving it up the ice, just spitballing really.

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 01:07 PM
  #9
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Another element of this argument could be that offensive zone starts are one way for the coaches to make the Sedins 19:00/G as easy as possible; they are the oldest forwards on the team aside from Manny, and are subjected to a lot of punishment as the season goes on. I'm not sure if cycling in the offensive zone is significantly less hazardous than chasing the puck around your own zone and moving it up the ice, just spitballing really.
The more I think about this the more I wonder if this strategy is helping the team in the way they think. The Sedins were among the best 5 on 5 producers in the league before this strategy and that has suffered greatly since. The theory is good but maybe it just doesn't bear fruit they way you would think it would.

The Sedins may not be as good defensively as Kesler or Manny but they are our best players at bringing the puck up the ice and gaining the zone. That's important. The team has struggled this season at times getting the puck out and through the neutral zone. That makes sense when you consider we are often trying to get up the ice with our least gifted forwards.

I was a big fan of this strategy... now I'm starting to rethink that position.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 01:28 PM
  #10
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,998
vCash: 50
To me, Corsi is one of the most useful stats. Corsi tracks the 5-on-5 shots directed at the net (for and against) while a player is on the ice. Basically, it gives an indication of how much time is spent in the offensive versus defensive zone. It basically serves as a proxy for puck possession and zone time.

Unfortunately, hockey stats all require a story. Any stat will be distorted by the quality of competition, offensive versus defensive zone starts, etc. A number of advanced stats sites attempt to weigh all of these factors and come up a magic metric, but I think that approach is too opaque. I would rather have 2 or 3 simpler statistics and allow my brain to subjectively weigh how they interact and the player's role on the team.

Also different sites generate slightly different ranking depending on how you filter for time on ice and how often their databases are updated. I look at http://www.behindthenet.ca and http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com

Right now, the top 10 Corsi numbers in the league are:
  1. Alec Martinez (who?)
  2. Alex Steen
  3. Chris Kunitz
  4. Daniel Sedin
  5. Jordan Staal
  6. Tyler Seguin
  7. Evgeni Malkin
  8. Henrik Sedin
  9. Brad Marchant
  10. Pavel Datsyuk

However in close games (+/- 1 goal differential), Martinez and Steen disappear and the order changes to:
  1. Pavel Datsyuk
  2. Carlo Colaiacovo
  3. Brad Richards
  4. Alex Pietrangelo
  5. Chris Higgins
  6. Ryan Kesler
  7. David Backes
  8. Kimmo Timonen
  9. Justin Williams
  10. Nathan Horton

All the guys you would expect are in the top 40 (Chara, Zetterberg, Kunitz, Daniel Sedin and Boychuck are 11 - 15). Adjusting for zone starts, quality of competition, on-ice versus off-ice, game situations (protecting a lead, trailing, tied, over-time) etc. all give different ways to look at the data.

Hockey is much more a team sport than say, baseball, to evaluate the statistics, you really have to consider what you know about a player's role on a team. Is Alec Martinez the best player in hockey? Obviously not. Guys like Martinez, Pierre-Marc Bouchard, Stefan Elliott, John Mitchel, etc. rise in the ranking simply because they see very projected ice time. When you filter by quality of competition, these guys disappear (but so do most of the top offensive players in the league).

To me, filtering by close games (+/- 1 goal) seems to yield the most intuitively sensible results. However, this heavily weighs the coaching staff's confidence in a player, so it less objective than a pure number.

Corsi will also favour teams that play a possession style. Good players on teams that prefer to trap and counter attack will have lower Corsi numbers because they generally don't get a lot of 5-on-5 puck support or sustained pressure in the offensive zone. Their defence doesn't pinch much and they employ a 1 man forecheck and score most of their goals counter attacking off of neutral zone turn-overs. These teams may give up a lot of shot attempts, but if they do it well, they block a lot of shots and try to limit the quality scoring chances. However Corsi counts all shot attempts (blocked or missed) as a negatives.


BTW: Using ANY Corsi related stat, ANY way you filter it, Kevin Bieksa is our best defenceman.


Last edited by LeftCoast: 02-13-2012 at 01:33 PM.
LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 01:58 PM
  #11
Type Not Specified
Part of the process
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
The more I think about this the more I wonder if this strategy is helping the team in the way they think. The Sedins were among the best 5 on 5 producers in the league before this strategy and that has suffered greatly since. The theory is good but maybe it just doesn't bear fruit they way you would think it would.

The Sedins may not be as good defensively as Kesler or Manny but they are our best players at bringing the puck up the ice and gaining the zone. That's important. The team has struggled this season at times getting the puck out and through the neutral zone. That makes sense when you consider we are often trying to get up the ice with our least gifted forwards.

I was a big fan of this strategy... now I'm starting to rethink that position.
I couldn't agree more and I've actually been thinking about this for a while. It's just a theory and it could be totally wrong, but it does make some sense. When the Sedins went from 80-point players to 100+ point players a couple of years ago, one of the biggest differences in my mind was they started producing more off the rush. By having them start almost exclusively in the offensive zone, I do think a lot of their rush offense has been taken away and that could be why their even strength numbers are down.

It could also be that 09-10 was somewhat of a statistical anomaly - that one career year that you're never able to repeat. Henrik's even strength production jumped from 58 points in 08-09 to 83 in 09-10, and then back down to 59 in 10-11. His ES minutes stayed basically the same over those 3 seasons - roughly a 70-minute increase in 09-10 and then an 8-minute decrease in 10-11.

Type Not Specified is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 01:58 PM
  #12
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
BTW: Using ANY Corsi related stat, ANY way you filter it, Kevin Bieksa is our best defenceman.
If you are trying to convince the masses these stats matter, you should have left that out I'm a bigger Bieksa fan then almost anyone, so that doesn't surprise me.

Thanks for all that info. You did a nice job explaining yourself, I learned a lot. I'm really interested in the numbers but still find it hard to put into context. Your post helped, thanks again.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 02:02 PM
  #13
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hekla View Post
It could also be that 09-10 was somewhat of a statistical anomaly - that one career year that you're never able to repeat. Henrik's even strength production jumped from 58 points in 08-09 to 83 in 09-10, and then back down to 59 in 10-11. His ES minutes stayed basically the same over those 3 seasons - roughly a 70-minute increase in 09-10 and then an 8-minute decrease in 10-11.
It could definitely be an anomaly but there is something else to consider. There is no doubt (at least in my mind) that the Sedins took another step in their play when Burrows was put on their line. Not only is Burrows a good fit but they had never played regularly with a talented offensive player before that.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 02:12 PM
  #14
Type Not Specified
Part of the process
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
It could definitely be an anomaly but there is something else to consider. There is no doubt (at least in my mind) that the Sedins took another step in their play when Burrows was put on their line. Not only is Burrows a good fit but they had never played regularly with a talented offensive player before that.
No doubt Burrows was a big factor as well but I think the 2 are somewhat related. Burrows is quick and really good at making things happen off the rush - much more so than anyone else the Sedins have played with for any length of time. Before Burrows came along, their wingers tended to be guys whose skill sets more heavily favoured the cycle game.

Type Not Specified is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 03:22 PM
  #15
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,998
vCash: 50
I think in the case of both Daniel and Henrik, their 112 and 104 point seasons were within the type of variation you see in top players. Look at players like Datsyuk, Thornton, Iginla, Ovechkin, etc. they all have had swings of 20+ points in successive years.

In analyzing the play of the Sedins this year versus last year, here are some interesting statistical observations.

This year, the Sedins are actually facing tougher quality of competition than last year. Both Daniel and Henrik's Relative Corsi Quality of Competition have gone from .174 and .211 last year to .457 and .492 this year.

Interestingly, the same is true of Ryan Kesler - this year, he is facing tougher competition as well (from .228 to .454) but not as tough of assignments as he faced in 2009-10 or 2008-09 (where it was close to 1.000).

So what does this mean?

Last year we had a checking line - Malhotra, Hansen and Torres that took virtually all defensive zone face-offs and when ever possible matched up against the top offensive lines of our opponents. This year our 3rd line is a scoring line. Alain Vigneault doesn't trust Hodgson, Hansen and Raymond as a defensive unit. Cody Hodgson has 40% neutral zone face offs to 30% Ozone and 30% DZone. Kesler is balanced (33/33/33) while Henrik is 50% Ozone, 35% NZone and 15% DZone. In 2008-09 and 2009-10, ryan Kesler was taking almost 40% of defensive zone face-offs. Malhotra and Lapierre's faceoff prowess have allowed Kesler to be more of a 3 zone player.

Clearly AV, without a dedicated checking line, is more comfortable in matching either the Sedin line or the Kesler line against top opponents. The 3rd line is far more protected than last year. AV also gives the Sedins the lions share of the offensive zone starts, but this also means that unless it is an icing situation, they will also face the toughest defensive assignment.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 08:46 PM
  #16
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
Clearly AV, without a dedicated checking line, is more comfortable in matching either the Sedin line or the Kesler line against top opponents. The 3rd line is far more protected than last year. AV also gives the Sedins the lions share of the offensive zone starts, but this also means that unless it is an icing situation, they will also face the toughest defensive assignment.
It's hard to know for sure but I don't think AV worries too much about who is on the ice. It seems like he is much more focused on the where. It would obviously be a consideration for him but the numbers are so skewed that it really has become the number one consideration imo.

I wonder if part of the reason for the change in the strength of opposition for Kesler and Hanks lines is the rest of the league catching onto what they are doing. One of the bad things about the strategy they imply imo is that it makes it easier to match lines for the other team on the road. They have a good idea who is coming over the boards by where the face-off is.

I still like the strategy but the more I dig into it the more it seems they've maybe taken it too far.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2012, 08:49 PM
  #17
OgoBoHo
FIRE DESJARDINS
 
OgoBoHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,478
vCash: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtr3m View Post
A thread about stats and not a single number? I'll start.

Games 1-2010-9-1
Games 21-4014-4-2
Games 41-5510-2-3
After a victory20-11-3
After a loss10-3-2
After a loss in overtime4-1-0
1st day back at home3-3-1
1st game on the road7-1-0
On weekends13-2-1
On weekdays21-13-5
With 0 day off3-4-0
With 1 day off17-6-2
With 2 days off8-4-1
With 3+ days off1-0-0
When outshot17-6-3
Outshooting the opponent15-9-3
Damn, they're good at bouncing back after a loss. We also need more weekend games that are the 1st game on the road.

OgoBoHo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2012, 12:43 PM
  #18
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
The value of drawing penalties:

Quote:
Dustin Brown clearly out-classes the rest of the league.

Edit: incidentally, 380 non-coincidental penalties drawn is worth roughly $33M in 2012 dollars relative to the league average and quite a bit more relative to replacement-level. Forwards draw more penalties than defensemen, so their replacement-level is a little higher, but still likely not much into positive territory. Dustin Brown has made roughly $15M so far in his career, making him one of the biggest deals in the entire league.
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2012/...-aka-stats-the

In other words, Dustin Brown has been worth about $5 million/year since the lockout just based on his ability to draw penalties.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2012, 03:53 PM
  #19
Al Swearengen
Smug Nation National
 
Al Swearengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
The value of drawing penalties:



http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2012/...-aka-stats-the

In other words, Dustin Brown has been worth about $5 million/year since the lockout just based on his ability to draw penalties.
Bookmarked that. Nice.

Al Swearengen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2012, 04:11 PM
  #20
DFAC
Registered User
 
DFAC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,417
vCash: 500
The Nucks are 89-0-3 in their last 92 when leading after 2 periods...crazy.

DFAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 02:08 AM
  #21
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,305
vCash: 500
So whatever happened to that +/- tracker we had earlier in the year? Was that ever a good idea then?

vanuck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:30 PM
  #22
HockeyAnalysis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
It's been brought up a few times that Henrik and Daniels zone start ratio has not shown up in their point totals.
You may be interested in this where I look at the effect of zone starts on players stats and specifically look at the Sedin's and Malhotra since they have such crazy zone starts.
Henrik Sedin gets a lot of offensive zone faceoffs and as a result 19.6% of his fenwick against events come within the 10 seconds after an offensive/defensive zone faceoff but only 8.0% of his on-ice goals do. In real numbers, Henrik Sedin was on the ice for 2634 fenwick for events and 523 occurred within 10 seconds of an offensive/defensive zone faceoff. He was also on the ice for 212 goals for while only 17 occurred within 10 seconds of an offensive/defensive zone faceoff.

Manny Malhotra is the opposite of Henrik Sedin and gets a lot of defensive zone faceoffs. As a result, 17.3% of all his fenwick events against occur within the 10 seconds after an offensive/defensive zone faceoff, but only 4% of his on-ice goals against do. In real numbers, Malhotra was on the ice for 1710 fenwick events against at 5v5 over the past 3 seasons, but 296 came within 10 seconds of an offensive/defensive zone face off. He was also on the ice for 75 goals against, but only 3 came within 10 seconds of an offensive/defensive zone faceoff.
It's interesting because the shooting percentage on shots taken within 10 seconds of an offensive zone start (at 5v5) is on average about 3% while the rest of the time it is closer to 9%. Zone starts will affect corsi stats far more than goal stats.

HockeyAnalysis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:57 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.