HFBoards

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

Pavelec re-signs: 5 years / 3.9 cap hit

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-26-2012, 08:26 AM
  #151
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpsideDown View Post
I'm not trying to be a negatron but there are some patterns beginning to form and I don't like it. In the biggest three moves since the team got here the Jets have gone away from the norm ie twice at the draft they passed on the best player available in the first round. Now they clearly overpaid for upside on a shaky tender. They could have got a proven goalie for that kind of money or started Gus for half the dough. As bad as they made him out to be in Toronto he had a better winning percentage than Pavs last year while playing on a worse team.

I think they have gambled big time on three occasions for no reason. Certainly time will tell but it is very concerning.
Sorry i think your a bit off the mark.

1 sxheifele was a bit of a reach based on tsn or iss lists but you should be aware there were about 25 picks in the last two first rounds that were "reaches" so lets stop avting like were the only team that follows our own lisr.

2 triubas an extrodinarily low risk pick and if you compare where he was ranked that was not a reach. And when a third of the league passes on the "bpa" i think that should speak for itself.

3.pavs contract looks scary id you go odf nothing but stats. The problem is goaltending stats are influenced bybso much the goalie has no control over that using stats solely for you analysis ia goinf to be brutal. No one thougjt the yotes signimg mike smitj was a good idea, jis statline certainly said it wasn't but look how that turnd out.

Grind is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:56 AM
  #152
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Yeah, except for their highly detailed look at Pavelec relative to his peers. The article posted is based on numbers.

No one wants Pavelec to be a bust, but based on his body of work, it's a higher risk contract than many here seem to believe.
So they use numbers so there analysis is not flawed?

When they are comparing goalie salaries, are they looking strictly at the dollar amount, or are they looking at when the contract was signed, and what % of the salary cap the contract took up?

They are only looking at $ amount, so goalies that signed contracts when the cap was lower are going to look like much better deals than Pavelec's because for all we know the discussions with Pavelec's agent were based on an assumption of a higher salary cap.

Also, when these guys did their "analysis" on the goalies contracts to put them into tiers, did they bother to look at which goalies were only signing RFA contracts that didn't buy any UFA years?

Doesn't look like it to me. Pretty big thing to miss IMO.

So to me, these guys chose to ignore the impact a higher salary cap can have on escalating salaries and chose to compare 4 million today with contracts signed under lower caps, and conveniently decided to ignore the additional cost to acquiring UFA years by comparing Pavelec to players whose contract did not cover any UFA years.

Pretty hack writing in my opinion.


Last edited by Huffer: 06-26-2012 at 10:45 AM.
Huffer is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 10:07 AM
  #153
Howard Chuck
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Howard Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,441
vCash: 50
Big thumbs up here. I love Pav's attitude (and performance). I always remember last year when we went through scoring slumps and player after player commented that Pavs saved them in each of the games that they won. They were absolutely correct about it as well. You could see the anger in Pavs when they lost a game, he seems to absolutely HATE to lose. Good quality.

I think Chevy is building a team with work ethic, which is probably difficult to see from a fan's perspective, but the coaches and management know who's young and working their butts off, as opposed to the coasters.

Howard Chuck is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 11:22 AM
  #154
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
So they use numbers so there analysis is not flawed?

When they are comparing goalie salaries, are they looking strictly at the dollar amount, or are they looking at when the contract was signed, and what % of the salary cap the contract took up?

They are only looking at $ amount, so goalies that signed contracts when the cap was lower are going to look like much better deals than Pavelec's because for all we know the discussions with Pavelec's agent were based on an assumption of a higher salary cap.

Also, when these guys did their "analysis" on the goalies contracts to put them into tiers, did they bother to look at which goalies were only signing RFA contracts that didn't buy any UFA years?

Doesn't look like it to me. Pretty big thing to miss IMO.

So to me, these guys chose to ignore the impact a higher salary cap can have on escalating salaries and chose to compare 4 million today with contracts signed under lower caps, and conveniently decided to ignore the additional cost to acquiring UFA years by comparing Pavelec to players whose contract did not cover any UFA years.

Pretty hack writing in my opinion.
I read these guys a lot last year, and normally i thought they did a much better job then they've done here. I don't know if it is this writer in particular (seems to be the same guy that reviewed the draft, which was pretty off in my opinion) but this does not seem indicative to most of the analyses I've found on their site.

the work they've done on scoring chances and advanced stats have been pretty good for the most part.

Unfortunately, i have zero faith in stats showing how good a goalie can be. Mike Smith on Tampa vs Mike Smith on Pheonix, Bryzgalov on Pheonix vs Bryzgalov on Philly, and Elliot on St louis Vs Elliot anywhere else in his career, should prove that there's clearly more beyond the goal tenders ability affecting their stats, unless your buying into a Coincidence of both players just magically "finding their game" in pheonix(and st louis).

If "the system" or "coaching" in Pheonix and St Louis (hitchcock) was big enough factor to improve these goalies respective stats (eliot, smith, bryzgalov for ex) then it has to be acknowledged that Winnipeg's "system" could have been a strong factor to limit pavs from getting "worthy" stats.

I"m not discrediting stats, they have their place. I love fenwick and corsi for looking at the talent of a team and the players, and I think their very useful tools. To me, there's just no stat that tracks the quality of the shots on goal, which is integral to defining how good a goalie is. If your only giving up perimeter shots you goalies save % is going to be pretty high comparative to if your giving an average of 5+ 2 on 1's a game.

I love advanced stats, but I just don't have faith in statistical analyses of goaltenders. As with everything, they need to be confined with qualitative study to get the full picture.

For an example, think of how many Goalies have rocketed onto the seen, put up fantastic numbers, and then just crashed back to mediocrity with 2 years.

Grind is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 11:33 AM
  #155
BomberJets
Registered User
 
BomberJets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 17
vCash: 500
Without Pavelec there would have been no race to the playoffs last year. If he can be played less and the team can play d when they're in the d zone IMO he will steadily improve his numbers.

BomberJets is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:06 PM
  #156
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
I read these guys a lot last year, and normally i thought they did a much better job then they've done here. I don't know if it is this writer in particular (seems to be the same guy that reviewed the draft, which was pretty off in my opinion) but this does not seem indicative to most of the analyses I've found on their site.

the work they've done on scoring chances and advanced stats have been pretty good for the most part.

Unfortunately, i have zero faith in stats showing how good a goalie can be. Mike Smith on Tampa vs Mike Smith on Pheonix, Bryzgalov on Pheonix vs Bryzgalov on Philly, and Elliot on St louis Vs Elliot anywhere else in his career, should prove that there's clearly more beyond the goal tenders ability affecting their stats, unless your buying into a Coincidence of both players just magically "finding their game" in pheonix(and st louis).

If "the system" or "coaching" in Pheonix and St Louis (hitchcock) was big enough factor to improve these goalies respective stats (eliot, smith, bryzgalov for ex) then it has to be acknowledged that Winnipeg's "system" could have been a strong factor to limit pavs from getting "worthy" stats.

I"m not discrediting stats, they have their place. I love fenwick and corsi for looking at the talent of a team and the players, and I think their very useful tools. To me, there's just no stat that tracks the quality of the shots on goal, which is integral to defining how good a goalie is. If your only giving up perimeter shots you goalies save % is going to be pretty high comparative to if your giving an average of 5+ 2 on 1's a game.

I love advanced stats, but I just don't have faith in statistical analyses of goaltenders. As with everything, they need to be confined with qualitative study to get the full picture.

For an example, think of how many Goalies have rocketed onto the seen, put up fantastic numbers, and then just crashed back to mediocrity with 2 years.
Independent Goalie Rating being presented at the MIT Sports Analytic conference. Makes for an interesting read.

http://www.goaliestore.com/board/doc...ted-shots.html

cutchemist42 is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:11 PM
  #157
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
So they use numbers so there analysis is not flawed?

When they are comparing goalie salaries, are they looking strictly at the dollar amount, or are they looking at when the contract was signed, and what % of the salary cap the contract took up?

They are only looking at $ amount, so goalies that signed contracts when the cap was lower are going to look like much better deals than Pavelec's because for all we know the discussions with Pavelec's agent were based on an assumption of a higher salary cap.

Also, when these guys did their "analysis" on the goalies contracts to put them into tiers, did they bother to look at which goalies were only signing RFA contracts that didn't buy any UFA years?

Doesn't look like it to me. Pretty big thing to miss IMO.

So to me, these guys chose to ignore the impact a higher salary cap can have on escalating salaries and chose to compare 4 million today with contracts signed under lower caps, and conveniently decided to ignore the additional cost to acquiring UFA years by comparing Pavelec to players whose contract did not cover any UFA years.

Pretty hack writing in my opinion.
Buying UFA years means nothing right now. It will only have value in hindsight, because of the exact reasons we are having this discussion.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:18 PM
  #158
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Buying UFA years means nothing right now. It will only have value in hindsight, because of the exact reasons we are having this discussion.
I don't agree. When GM's and agents are sitting at the table and trying to come up with a contract, anytime you are getting a players UFA years, you are going to pay a premium.

Pretending that a contract that only accounts for RFA years and leaves the player as an RFA is equal to a contract that accounts for UFA years and leaves the player as a UFA is either misguided, ignorant, or reeks of someone with an agenda to complain.

Huffer is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:23 PM
  #159
WheatiesHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
It was good and fair deal for both parties. Happy that Pavelec remains in the Jets camp. Losing Pavelec would have been worse than a disaster for the Jets. Team still need to find a great back up good for about 30 games.

WheatiesHockey is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:40 PM
  #160
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I don't agree. When GM's and agents are sitting at the table and trying to come up with a contract, anytime you are getting a players UFA years, you are going to pay a premium.

Pretending that a contract that only accounts for RFA years and leaves the player as an RFA is equal to a contract that accounts for UFA years and leaves the player as a UFA is either misguided, ignorant, or reeks of someone with an agenda to complain.
Ahh, so if someone disagrees with you they are one or all of those things. Nice of you to clear the air for everyone.

I think what I said was over your head. Eating UFA years is only worth something if the player was going to get paid more. That is kind of the point of the discussion. Feel free to throw more insults.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:48 PM
  #161
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Buying UFA years means nothing right now. It will only have value in hindsight, because of the exact reasons we are having this discussion.
IMO, signing a contract is not done in a vacuum - and many things are considered in each individual case.

Contract term is very important - as is salary structure - and in each contract is always a give and take.

Understanding the implications of the term is key to many teams, so buying UFA yrs is very important.

Bob E is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:51 PM
  #162
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
IMO, signing a contract is not done in a vacuum - and many things are considered in each individual case.

Contract term is very important - as is salary structure - and in each contract is always a give and take.

Understanding the implications of the term is key to many teams, so buying UFA yrs is very important.
I understand the concept, but it only has value if you aren't overpaying for those UFA years. Some of us are on the fence regarding the potential of Pavelec based on his play to date. Claiming that value now is impossible. That is all I am saying.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:53 PM
  #163
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Ahh, so if someone disagrees with you they are one or all of those things. Nice of you to clear the air for everyone.

I think what I said was over your head. Eating UFA years is only worth something if the player was going to get paid more. That is kind of the point of the discussion. Feel free to throw more insults.
I didn't direct that at you, those are my opinions of the writers. I feel that they are writing with an agenda, and it was the same as their writing about the Trouba pick.

Nice of you to counter with " it's over my head".

A players UFA years are more valuable then their RFA years. If a team wants to buy some of them, they have to pay a premium.

Edit:

Regarding the UFA years only being worth more if the player is going to get paid more, that concept is true for every contract over 1 year. I.E. Any contract you sign over 1 year in length presents the situation where the player is either going to be under-performing in relation to the contract, or over-performing.

In regards to this situation, it is no different. Pavelec is either going to be under-performing or over-performing over time in relation to this contract.

But in regards to UFA years, both the Jets, and Pavelec's camp had an idea on what his market value was today. I would guess that the Jets decided that even if the contract was a little higher than they might have wanted, that they felt that the addition of UFA years made it a little more worthwhile. I would bet that they feel that the odds are greater that Pavelec's next contract in say 3 years (if they didn't get additional UFA years) would have been higher than say 3.5 million (maybe what his non UFA year(s) contract would be), compared to the odds that it would not.

Unless the team (and the player) felt that a player was trending downward, the player is always going to be in a position to demand a premium on their UFA years.


Last edited by Huffer: 06-26-2012 at 01:15 PM.
Huffer is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 12:53 PM
  #164
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Ahh, so if someone disagrees with you they are one or all of those things. Nice of you to clear the air for everyone.

I think what I said was over your head. Eating UFA years is only worth something if the player was going to get paid more. That is kind of the point of the discussion. Feel free to throw more insults.
You're right it only matters if he IS going to get paid more in UFA.
Never the less there is a risk that would happen. Removing the possibility of that risk has to be worth something. Whether it's worth enough to make up the contract difference, that's debatable, but you have to acknowledge that reducing the risk of a negative outcome to zero has value.

Imagine if I had two revolvers pointed at you, and told you one was empty, and the other had a single bullet in it. I then told you you could pay me 20 dollars and I'd fire the empty one at you, or you could pay me nothing and we take the 1/6 chance that the bullet doesn't line up.

I don't know about you, but I'd pony up 20 bucks pretty quick.

Grind is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:03 PM
  #165
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
You're right it only matters if he IS going to get paid more in UFA.
Never the less there is a risk that would happen. Removing the possibility of that risk has to be worth something. Whether it's worth enough to make up the contract difference, that's debatable, but you have to acknowledge that reducing the risk of a negative outcome to zero has value.

Imagine if I had two revolvers pointed at you, and told you one was empty, and the other had a single bullet in it. I then told you you could pay me 20 dollars and I'd fire the empty one at you, or you could pay me nothing and we take the 1/6 chance that the bullet doesn't line up.

I don't know about you, but I'd pony up 20 bucks pretty quick.
I totally understand why the Jets were forced to overpay. Right now the 5 years is the bigger risk than the money. I hope Pavelec comes through and turns into a top 10 goalie.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:04 PM
  #166
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I didn't direct that at you, those are my opinions of the writers. I feel that they are writing with an agenda, and it was the same as their writing about the Trouba pick.

Nice of you to counter with " it's over my head".

A players UFA years are more valuable then their RFA years. If a team wants to buy some of them, they have to pay a premium.
Ok, I misunderstood if that wasn't directed at me. You quoted me and didn't refute what I had said.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:16 PM
  #167
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
I understand the concept, but it only has value if you aren't overpaying for those UFA years. Some of us are on the fence regarding the potential of Pavelec based on his play to date. Claiming that value now is impossible. That is all I am saying.
I know what you're saying, and the gamble the jets are taking is Pavs continues to develop, no doubt.

I guess what I'm thinking is... would Pav on the open market in 3 yrs be worth what the jets are paying him in this contract? The odds are... he would be (with contracts and salary cap $ continuing to rise), unless his play really falters in the next few yrs. So, to me, seems like a reasonable contract and 'gamble'.

Bob E is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:25 PM
  #168
WheatiesHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
Based on today's contract standards it was a fair deal for both parties.
Chevy did the right thing. Pavelec is 24 and he going to get better as a goaltender. The trick now is to find some inexpensive great kid as a back up from the junior or university ranks.
Chevy pays players what they are worth and that is it.

WheatiesHockey is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:26 PM
  #169
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
You're right it only matters if he IS going to get paid more in UFA.
Never the less there is a risk that would happen. Removing the possibility of that risk has to be worth something. Whether it's worth enough to make up the contract difference, that's debatable, but you have to acknowledge that reducing the risk of a negative outcome to zero has value.

Imagine if I had two revolvers pointed at you, and told you one was empty, and the other had a single bullet in it. I then told you you could pay me 20 dollars and I'd fire the empty one at you, or you could pay me nothing and we take the 1/6 chance that the bullet doesn't line up.

I don't know about you, but I'd pony up 20 bucks pretty quick.
Only difference in this case is you might get 'stuck' with Pavs contract for multiple years if he plays poorly and he's earning more than his 'value'.

Paying for 2 UFA yrs shows his desire to stay in Wpg. The only way this becomes a problem is he plays poorly and we're 'stuck' with his contract.

Jets management, and Pav's group, does not anticipate that happening.

Bob E is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:35 PM
  #170
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Ok, I misunderstood if that wasn't directed at me. You quoted me and didn't refute what I had said.
I think we are talking about 2 different things.

If I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that your concerns with the deal is more on the length, and that there is a concern that over the length of the contract Pacelec may not be worth it.

Is that correct?

If so, that's as reasonable as any other opinion.

My point about the writing wasn't that I thought it was flawed because I think Pavelec is going to improve and become an amazing goaltender.

I just don't really like their analysis because I feel like they missed 2 important angles to consider when trying to compare player salaries over time. (Standardizing all the contracts to a % of cap, and analyzing the difference in contracts that didn't purchase any UFA years).

Huffer is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:37 PM
  #171
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
Only difference in this case is you might get 'stuck' with Pavs contract for multiple years if he plays poorly and he's earning more than his 'value'.

Paying for 2 UFA yrs shows his desire to stay in Wpg. The only way this becomes a problem is he plays poorly and we're 'stuck' with his contract.

Jets management, and Pav's group, does not anticipate that happening.

exactly, comparitive to having paid the 20 dollars, spinning the chamber just for fun and finding out the bullet didn't line up.

wasted money. WHich is what this could be become. Personally i'm of the mind the stats don't tell the whole story, but neither does winning the play of the year. The true worth is somewhere between his stats and our love affair with him. And personally, IMO, that worth projected over the next 5 years, + the negation of the "risk" of UFA bidding/overpaying, is worth his contract. There's about an equal chance all ways that it turns out as A) fair, B) a Steal, C) Overpayment.

I"m on the mindset i would have preferred another "show me" contract but i'm pretty sure he just came off of one of those, and was probably playing hardball with term. That being the case, i think this is the best we could have hoped for.

Grind is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:39 PM
  #172
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I think we are talking about 2 different things.

If I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that your concerns with the deal is more on the length, and that there is a concern that over the length of the contract Pacelec may not be worth it.

Is that correct?

If so, that's as reasonable as any other opinion.

My point about the writing wasn't that I thought it was flawed because I think Pavelec is going to improve and become an amazing goaltender.

I just don't really like their analysis because I feel like they missed 2 important angles to consider when trying to compare player salaries over time. (Standardizing all the contracts to a % of cap, and analyzing the difference in contracts that didn't purchase any UFA years).
also, did the present their stats at the time the contract was handed out? I can't remember. I would think they would have (or this is a huuuge oversight). Im just wondering cus Johnny quick, for example, really only started turning heads last year. Brian Elliot was coming off horrible numbers when he got his contract. Mike smith was also coming off horrible numbers when he got his contract. This needs to be kept in mind.

Grind is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:45 PM
  #173
Do or Die
Registered User
 
Do or Die's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 66
vCash: 500
Jet brass have always maintained that the chequebook would be opened up, when required. Given the state of the organization's goaltending.....this deal simply had to be made. Yeah, the price is a little high based on the raw numbers, but the 2 highest years cover off UFA years, making this a pretty fair deal, alround....

Pavs faded a bit, in the stretch, facing a max workload, for the first time - but considering the team around him, certainly demonstrated that he has talent. This guy is young, has great upside, and wants to be here.....in short, the kind of player you want to lock up, for a while.....

This deal also sends the right message...about this organization.... to the other players, the league......and of course, Jet fans.

Do or Die is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 01:56 PM
  #174
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
also, did the present their stats at the time the contract was handed out? I can't remember. I would think they would have (or this is a huuuge oversight). Im just wondering cus Johnny quick, for example, really only started turning heads last year. Brian Elliot was coming off horrible numbers when he got his contract. Mike smith was also coming off horrible numbers when he got his contract. This needs to be kept in mind.
Good Point Grind. So this is a 3rd thing I think the writers missed.

1) Standardize all the contracts to a % of cap
2) Analysis of which contracts were only for RFA years and which accounted for UFA years as well
3) What stage were each of the goalies at when they signed their deals? It's great to look at them now, but what were their stats to date at the time of signing their contracts?

Huffer is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 02:09 PM
  #175
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
Good Point Grind. So this is a 3rd thing I think the writers missed.

1) Standardize all the contracts to a % of cap
2) Analysis of which contracts were only for RFA years and which accounted for UFA years as well
3) What stage were each of the goalies at when they signed their deals? It's great to look at them now, but what were their stats to date at the time of signing their contracts?
PRecisely.

I think we overpayed for stats, and if i was looking at this for say another team, i'd be like wow wtf. That being said, and as i've reiterated many times, i don't put a lot of stock in goalies stats. Is that valid? i don't know. Is it a "convenient" way to defend my opiniont? yes, and i acknowledge that. I'm sure if the stats lined up i'd be leaning on them more heavily. I don't know, i just feel pav's is better then his statline. Just like i feel Bryzgalov is a better goalie then his stat line last year. Just like i feel Brian Elliot is a worse goalie then his stat line.

If pavs pushes his sv % north of .915 this conversation stops happening.

I have all the faith in the world he can.

Grind 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 10:07 PM.

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.