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

Line ups

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-10-2013, 02:24 AM
  #76
GermanJetsFan
*PEW* *PEW* *PEW*
 
GermanJetsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Darmstadt, GER
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,012
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by koth View Post
For the Germans: why did you decide to start following the Thrashers/Jets? The Atlanta Thrashers seems like an odd team to decide to follow since they were so bad for so long.
I didn't follow the NHL until I started playing NHL 2004. I loved the game so much and played it in an online league, in which you played a whole 82-games season against each other with salary cap and trading and so on. When I joined the league, there was only two or three teams left for me to choose and one of them was the Thrashers. I decided to take them because it was the only one of the three with a true star-player (Kovy). I started the season as the GM of the Thrashers and sloooowly began to build an interest about the real Thrashers. It was the only team in the NHL I had a real connection to, because of that online league so I started to like, follow and finally, to love them Even though they sucked

GermanJetsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 03:21 AM
  #77
Bogosian
Registered User
 
Bogosian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: Germany
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by koth View Post
For the Germans: why did you decide to start following the Thrashers/Jets? The Atlanta Thrashers seems like an odd team to decide to follow since they were so bad for so long.
It's actually pretty simple. For the majority of time, my hometown team - Kassel Huskies - were the underdog in the first german hockey league (DEL), so it was pretty clear to me, that i would cheer for one of the underdogs in the NHL.

Interesting sidenote:
The whole Budget of the Kassel Huskies was between 3-4 Million for everything (Players, Office Staff, Equipment, Traveling & Arena maintenance). Kinda funny, if you look at the Salary of an NHL Player.

Bogosian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 04:16 AM
  #78
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,703
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
I understand usage/sheltering affecting +/-. But at some point "luck" has to be thrown out as an excuse. OK, so maybe player A is lucky, and player B is Joe Btfsplk (complete with a black cloud over his head). If I was coach, I'd go with the "lucky" guy, until his "luck" runs out. Do whatever it takes to win.

A question for the advanced stats community... has it ever occured to anybody that maybe, just maybe, some players "make their own luck"...

E.g. We had a higher save % with Clitsome on the ice. I remember Clitsome covering up on multiple 2-on-1's last season (thank you Dustin Byfuglien ). Clitsome defended beautifully, often intercepting passes between the 2 attacking forwards. The shots that they did get onto Pavs were often from well out, instead of from 10 feet out with no defender in sight. Well of course Pavs had a better save % on those. And we all know that he's terrible when there's lateral movement required (one attacking forward successfully passes to another).

As far as I'm concerned, that's not "luck", that's good defense by Grant Clitsome. Until advanced statistics can properly handle that, pardon me if I remain skeptical.
At some point yes... but the problem is the magnitude of the sample size needs to be so big it gets absolutely ridiculous to use goals +/-.

You don't go with the lucky guy if you are smart. If you are smart, you go with the better guy.
Let's say you play a game where you win or lose money when you pick one of two doors. Door #1 is 55% chance to win each time and door #2 is 35% chance to win each time. Each time being independent of the last. The gamemaster gets to chose for your first round, chooses #2 for you and you win some $.
Do you choose door #2 again because you won last time?
That's what this is all about. Luck is simply getting a result that you had a lower probability of receiving.
I'm saying go for the one with the better probability; you are saying go for the results you got from the small sample.

The rest is about to be long so if anyone wants the Colenotes / TL;DR version...
If you actually think that player skill is a larger role in %s than randomness, then you have to believe:
*2012-13 TML was one of the most offensively gifted teams to exist since 2007 and Nazeem Kadri was the most skilled 2-way player in the NHL
*LA Kings and St L Blues went from one of the top to one of the bottom defensive teams in the league
*2012-13 Derek Meech and Ian White are top 15 defensive defensemen
*2011-12 Maxwell and Machacek were more talented than Crosby, Stamkos, etc.
*2011-12 Flood is above average defensively and Bogosian is far below average defensively




Now for the longer version... Proof.
Yes regression and these things have been looked at, pretty indepthly since at least 2009.
The result is PDO always regresses to the mean, regardless of who you are. Top players in PDO are bottom players the next year all the time. Doesn't matter whether they are marginal or strong players.
Quote:
This plot shows how much future PDO regresses to the mean relative to PDO though a certain number of shots (both for and against.) For example, PDO through the first 1000 shots regresses 87% to the mean over the rest of the season - a team with a 1030 PDO through 1000 shots expects a PDO of 1004 for the rest of the season.

Basically, whatever you think you know about your team's supposed ability to maintain high shooting and save percentages, they are very likely to crash back to league average regardless of how many shots you've observed. Internalize this chart and you can make a lot of money betting against people who are convinced there's mysticism in scoring goals.
If something is an actual skill then it will be repeatable and will follow a developmental arc as players get better and eventually worse with age. One example of this is point production:

... but neither On-Ice SH% or On-Ice SV% are like this at all. Even if you index to the team's average.

Eric T. From BSH (Flyers version of AIH) has done a lot recent work in this... here are some key points:
Lack of repeatability and skill in On-Ice Sh%
Quote:
Here's the scatterplot showing the relationship between on-ice shooting percentage over the first three years and on-ice shooting percentage over the next three years, complete with the line of best fit:

You'll notice that the line doesn't have a slope of one; it's much flatter than that. If you take a guy with an 11% on-ice shooting percentage in the first three years, the best-fit estimation of his next three years isn't 11%; it's (0.3485 * 11 + 5.3525) = 9.2%. Coincidentally enough, this is almost exactly 67% closer to the mean than the starting value was.
So there is no groundbreaking news here. The laws of arithmetic apply to hockey. In any measurement where the repeatability is not extremely high, predictions can be improved by regressing to the mean -- that's pretty much what a low repeatability means, after all.
Lack of repeatability and skill in On-Ice Sv%
Quote:
Let's turn to analyzing defensemen, whom we might expect would be more responsible for a team's save percentage. Here's the analogous plot for the 97 defensemen who were on the ice for at least 1000 shots in each three-year period.

Hm. That's still pretty unimpressive. If you just close your eyes and put 97 random dots on a piece of paper, there's a 15% chance of seeing a correlation that strong just by pure chance.
Even if we assume that this correlation is real, our best estimate of future on-ice save percentage would be regressed 85% of the way back to the mean -- which means the projections for those guys way out at 93.7% over a three-year span would be just two tenths of a point above the mean. And the individual talent the player possesses would be even lower than that; playing in certain rinks or with certain goalies or in certain systems could have an impact that large.
So while there may be a sliver of repeatable talent for defensemen preventing the opponents from getting high-percentage shots, after three years of data we aren't even close to being able to reliably tell who's good at it.
And like with forwards, making judgments about defensemen based on the number of goals scored against them is a mistake that ends up crediting or blaming the player for factors entirely out of their control.
This adjustment isn't confined to stats-based analysis by any means. Our memories are tuned to remember the occasional high-impact play much more strongly than all of the low-impact stuff that happens in between. We will remember a defenseman's turnover or missed coverage that leads to a goal but probably forget if the shot hits the goalie in the chest, so the team's save percentage with him on the ice affects how many of his mistakes we remember and how we judge him.


More articles if you want to delve in deeper:

Eric T: Shooting percentage regression, Factoring regression into analysis, Fooled by randomness: How to evaluate defensemen

Gabe Desjardins: PDO: If you were going to understand just one NHL statistic, Advanced Metrics: PDO and regression to the mean, Luck vs Shot Quality in Shooting Percentage, Advanced Metrics: How useful is raw +/-?, On-Ice Shooting Percentage as a Player Talent

"Snark": SSW: With so much luck, when are stats useful?

Tyler Dellow: This time is different, Points v. Scoring, PDO Numbers

Vic Ferrari: Real Effects and Team Shooting Percentage at Even Strength

Jared Likens: Even Strength Shooting Percentage, How Much of Shooting Percentage Is Skill?, On Luck, Skill and Sample Size in Shooting Percentage


I leave with this with two last things:
Quote:
Variance is inevitable. The key to making good evaluations is understanding where it comes from, what it means, and how to account for it.


Last edited by garret9: 07-10-2013 at 04:24 AM.
garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 04:30 AM
  #79
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,844
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan5oh View Post
There's so many factors in play this year it's ridiculous. Our "core" lineup is as follows:

Ladd - Little - Wheeler
Kane - Jokinen - Setoguchi
x - y - Frolik
Wright - Slater - Thorburn
Peluso

Enstrom - Buff
Clitsome - Bogosian
Stuart - Redmond/Postma
Pardy

[...deletia...]

So only Scheifele and Trouba can pass through waivers. There are no other young players I'd consider for our opening day roster that are waiver exempt. There's lots of moving parts, and many things to consider. Generally quality players who qualify for waivers will get a shot at the big club past opening night. That should pretty much fill up our roster, but we'll see what moves Chevy makes as he has cap space now that Burmi is gone.

I think we'll be losing some young quality players to waivers. I'ts not such a bad thing that Burmi went to the KHL. It really sucks that there are a few players who never had a good chance at the NHL(Kulda, Redmond due to injury, O'Dell, Cormier to a lesser extent) are now subject to waivers, lowering their trade value dramatically. We'll be feeding the waiver wire this year, and there's a good chance some players will be claimed.
Thorburn and Jokinen are not waiver-exempt, but they're effectively "waiver-proof"; as in no GM in his right mind would claim either of them on waivers.

I don't see how Chevy could keep Thorburn up, if it means one of our young assets could be lost. Face it, we're not re-signing Thorburn next season, and if we lose him to waivers this year, no problem. The "5-on-5-penalty-kill" is painfull to watch. And Peluso can actually score the occasional goal, too

Ditto for not signing Jokinen next year. Jokinen would effectively be a "rental" player for this season, paid for with one of our young prospects. Sending him down to the AHL would also bury $925,000 of his cap hit. If we can keep him up, without risking losing a young prospect to waivers, fine. Otherwise send Jokinen down to St. John's.

knorthern knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 05:08 AM
  #80
Jay Gatsby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wolfsburg, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 34
vCash: 1681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogosian View Post
It's actually pretty simple. For the majority of time, my hometown team - Kassel Huskies - were the underdog in the first german hockey league (DEL), so it was pretty clear to me, that i would cheer for one of the underdogs in the NHL.

Interesting sidenote:
The whole Budget of the Kassel Huskies was between 3-4 Million for everything (Players, Office Staff, Equipment, Traveling & Arena maintenance). Kinda funny, if you look at the Salary of an NHL Player.
I loved the games between Kassel and Wolfsburg, great battles all the way to the end. I hope the Huskies make it back to the DEL one day :-) I'm writing for a Newspaper in the Hockey Department in Wolfsburg, and I'm looking forward to a "Husky-Comeback feature story"

Jay Gatsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 05:38 AM
  #81
maximus tacitus
KeepKane and CarryIn
 
maximus tacitus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Clutchinsonville
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,824
vCash: 50
Jesus, maybe the Jets should get Draisaitl next year - HFJets board can be a 12 month long Octoberfest

maximus tacitus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 05:56 AM
  #82
Bogosian
Registered User
 
Bogosian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: Germany
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Gatsby View Post
I loved the games between Kassel and Wolfsburg, great battles all the way to the end. I hope the Huskies make it back to the DEL one day :-) I'm writing for a Newspaper in the Hockey Department in Wolfsburg, and I'm looking forward to a "Husky-Comeback feature story"
It was a good rivalry, that's for sure. Unfortunately the Huskies lost every important game/series against Wolfsburg. And yeah, we are on a good way. Too bad that the DEB is in selfdestruction mode. We should do it like Switzerland, but that's another story and it doesn't belong in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maximus tacitus View Post
Jesus, maybe the Jets should get Draisaitl next year - HFJets board can be a 12 month long Octoberfest
Sounds good to me.

Bogosian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 06:10 AM
  #83
Jay Gatsby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wolfsburg, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 34
vCash: 1681
I actually saw Draisaitl play a number of times, very interesting player.

Jay Gatsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 06:17 AM
  #84
KrisowszyJetsPL
Registered User
 
KrisowszyJetsPL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: S-in City
Country: Poland
Posts: 149
vCash: 500
Sooo many Germans, Canadiens...I'm only one?? Jets fan from Poland

Damnnn

Buttt it's about lines:

LLW

Kane-Jokinen/Scheifele-Setoguchi (ok ok in my BeAGM in nhl13 Scheifele is #1 C sooo I belive in this kid - MVP Playoffs )

X-Scheifele/Jokinen-Frolik (I would like some Raymond guy orrr maybe our on prospekt...damn we can take a spot some our younger guys and wait and see what they can do in Big Club)

Wright-Slater-...Thor??

D:

Entrom-Buff when Buff is on the ice send with him somebody who take care his black fat ass everytime, nooo experiment!
Clit-more-Bogo (prefer with Buff but after full season I'll completly bold )
Stuart-Trouba (**** play Trouba, take THE kidS a chancee!!)

Redmond, Postma

Kulda is in KHL sooo I think. He doesnt comeback next season. For what? For seating on the bench because our mr. Candy prefers Meech and other very promising "young" AHL-studs?? and play them

Pavs
Alvaro


Sorry for my english. I do my best . Thats why I prefer reading...

Anddd YES draft Draisaitl

KrisowszyJetsPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 08:03 AM
  #85
irunthepeg
THE ONE WHO KNOCKS
 
irunthepeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Peg, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,406
vCash: 50
I'd definitely love Mason Raymond on the 3rd line, bring in another former Moose.

irunthepeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 08:10 AM
  #86
ps241
The Danish Dash!
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 11,025
vCash: 50
Garret that is some intense work. I will need to go over it tonight after the kids go to bed. Thanks though I love the work you put in and always find the posts educational.

ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 08:20 AM
  #87
Guerzy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,295
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by WordUp View Post
I'd definitely love Mason Raymond on the 3rd line, bring in another former Moose.
I think he'd be a great fit. He has his flaws, but we could use his speed, PK'ing, and some offense from the 3rd line LW spot. Between Setoguchi, Frolik and Raymond, that's 3 solid top 9 guys. If Setoguchi runs cold on the 2nd line, move Frolik or Raymond up, at least we would have the option to shuffle things around that way.

I am really hoping Chevy and Raymond have a mutual agreement in place of some sort in that both sides want eachother, and we're just kind of waiting to sign our key RFA. But, now that Burmistrov isn't here on the books, perhaps we can use his slotted salary towards Raymond, or a 3rd line forward in general.

I liked Tangradi to an extent last season when he seemed to embrace the more physical role, but I am really unsure about him still. I still view him as a really solid AHL'er, but a fringe NHL'er. If he can't put up some offensive numbers, especially on a team built like ours where we NEED some production from the 3rd line, I'm just not sold on him as the type of 3rd line guy we need.

I am really hoping we can sign Mason Raymond, or add another respectable NHL'er in that 3rd line role.

__________________
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=43225&dateline=141082  3903
"The ‘now’ is very good in Chicago. The ‘now’ back in the days when they were drafting first, second and third? It wasn’t very good. But the core of fans that stuck with them, if you asked them now, I betcha they’d say it was worth it.” - Kevin Cheveldayoff
Guerzy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 12:07 PM
  #88
broinwhyteridge
bro license revoked!
 
broinwhyteridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Thorburn and Jokinen are not waiver-exempt, but they're effectively "waiver-proof"; as in no GM in his right mind would claim either of them on waivers.

The "5-on-5-penalty-kill" is painfull to watch.
Ain't that the truth....

broinwhyteridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 12:19 PM
  #89
allan5oh
#Dive4Five #31Buyout
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6,405
vCash: 50
One thing that I've been mulling for a while is putting Jim Slater on the 3rd line. With Burmistrovs exit this suddenly becomes a possibility. Jets/Thrashers fans have always felt he's held back by offensively inept wingers.

Not saying it will happen long term, but I expect Noel to at least give it a shot at one point. All depends on who Chevy picks up.

allan5oh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 01:10 PM
  #90
Tintin's Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,127
vCash: 500
I'd rather see Scheifele start in St. John's rather than get placed on the 3rd line and become Noel's whipping boy because he glances west while travelling north-south. Not sure what this bodes for our 2nd line to stat the season. Love Jokinen but he's not the answer to play with Kane. I hope Scheifele does not get "Burmi'd" by Noel this year.

BUT IF Jets get 2nd line C for thsi season, will we likely just need them for one season until Scheif can slide in and start setting up Kane? Overpay Grabo for one year?

Ladd Little Wheeler

Kane - ???- Setoguchi

???- Jokinen Frolik

Wright Slater Thorburn

x's: Peluso, Tangradi

I like how Noel does the D pairings:

Enstrom Byfuglien

Clitsome Bogosian

Stuart Postma/Redmond/Trouba

x's: Pardy, Redmond, Trouba

Tintin's Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 01:10 PM
  #91
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Would love a Mason Raymond signing, too.

Kane/Little/Wheeler
Ladd/Scheif/Seto
Raymond (if signed)/Olli/Frolik
Wright/Slater/Peluso
Thorbs

Toby/Bogo
Clitty/Buff
Stuart/Trouba
Pardy/Postman

Pavs
Big Al

I have huge reservations about Scheif and Olli, whether they can contribute at a level needed to get into the playoffs. Scheif may still be a year away, and Olli may be a year away from exiting the NHL.

Chevy has done a decent job of upgrading the wings, imo, and Scheifele's vision and playmaking ability should enhance and support them. Its just a question of whether he's physically ready. Olli isn't a great playmaker, imo, so I have trouble putting him on any line other than 3rd (and that's not a great fit either). Slater in the 3rd hole may be ok, but then Olli likely plays a bigger role. He might be up for the challenge, but if he's not, its a big concern for me.

Bob E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 02:30 PM
  #92
Kruddler
Registered User
 
Kruddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 68
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogosian44 View Post
I like the way that looks but how is Frolik in terms of his playmaking abilities? All 3 have great speed but ideally I'd like to see a natural playmaker in between Kane and Seto.
HF's write-up from his early years (where he was a C) has this to say:
"Talent Analysis

He has displayed exceptional playmaking ability along with a gifted sense for the game. His combination of agile speed and a solid shot can produce plenty of razzle-dazzle in the open ice. He needs to get stronger to handle the size of NHL defensemen."

I'd love to see a top 6 of:

Little/Ladd/Wheeler
Kane/Frolik/Seto

Kruddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 02:41 PM
  #93
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,703
vCash: 50
If Scheif isn't ready for top6 I might go with Frolik over Jokinen.

I think Jokinen does better scoring than last season due to regression of sh% but neither Jokinen nor Setoguchi have been players who can outshoot/outchance their opponents. I'd be scared that having them together would have them pinned in their own zone too much like it was with Kane-Jokinen-Miettinen.

Don't expect much more scoring from Frolik than Burmistrov however, if Noel uses Frolik like he did Burmistrov. Their scoring rates are similar when used similarly.

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 03:12 PM
  #94
sting13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rheged View Post
As it stands now, with the big 3 signed to reasonable deals, I see it looking something like this:

CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
Andrew Ladd ($4.400m) / Bryan Little ($4.000m) / Blake Wheeler ($4.750m)
Evander Kane ($5.250m) / Olli Jokinen ($4.500m) / Devin Setoguchi ($3.000m)
Eric Tangradi ($0.850m) / Mark Scheifele ($1.563m) / Michael Frolik ($2.333m)
Eric O'Dell ($0.800m) / Jim Slater ($1.600m) / James Wright ($0.650m)
Anthony Peluso ($0.700m) / Chris Thorburn ($0.867m)
DEFENSEMEN
Tobias Enstrom ($5.750m) / Dustin Byfuglien ($5.200m)
Grant Clitsome ($2.067m) / Zach Bogosian ($4.350m)
Mark Stuart ($1.700m) / Paul Postma ($0.950m)
Jacob Trouba ($1.828m)
GOALTENDERS
Ondrej Pavelec ($3.900m)
Al Montoya ($0.601m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $61,608,500; BONUSES: $1,225,000
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $3,916,500

******************************

I think I'm pretty low on RFA numbers likely, and I've AHLed / assumed traded a couple guys.

Our D depth probably has Trouba in the AHL at least to start, and I'd like to see us sign at least one more top-9 quality center, so that Scheifele isn't shoehorned into that spot.

If both those 2 at least start the season in the AHL we're looking at around 5 million in cap dollars to work with. Grabovski is the only center left in free agency that I would give term to, but even then I probably don't want to do more than 3-4 years since that's likely what were looking at in terms of players coming off of ELC's. There's also potential for 1 more winger signed under this scenario, if you want to push Tangradi down to the 4th line and not be forced to use O'Dell immediately. I would probably look to just sign a random bottom six winger for a year at < 1 million.

CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
Andrew Ladd ($4.400m) / Bryan Little ($4.000m) / Blake Wheeler ($4.750m)
Evander Kane ($5.250m) / Mikhail Grabovski ($4.000m) / Devin Setoguchi ($3.000m)
Matt D'Agostini ($0.950m) / Olli Jokinen ($4.500m) / Michael Frolik ($2.333m)
Eric Tangradi ($0.850m) / Jim Slater ($1.600m) / James Wright ($0.650m)
Eric O'Dell ($0.800m) / Anthony Peluso ($0.700m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Tobias Enstrom ($5.750m) / Dustin Byfuglien ($5.200m)
Grant Clitsome ($2.067m) / Zach Bogosian ($4.350m)
Mark Stuart ($1.700m) / Paul Postma ($0.950m)
Adam Pardy ($0.600m) /
GOALTENDERS
Ondrej Pavelec ($3.900m)
Al Montoya ($0.601m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $62,901,000; BONUSES: $0
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $1,399,000

******************************

Ulitmately, I'm not sure Grabovski wants to sign here, and really not sure it would work out all that much better than Burmistrov, may be wrong but they strike me as fairly similar players. With no Grabovski I think our best bet is to just re-sign Antropov for a year at a low cap hit and let him and Jokinen platoon as middle-6 centers. That would insulate Scheifele if he's not ready to have the minutes yet, but still allow him significant time as a call-up when Antropov inevitably gets injured, and if Scheifele is ready for the 2nd/3rd line C spot they could just move Antro to wing for the time being.
Matt D'Agostini today signed with the Penguins.

sting13 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 04:39 PM
  #95
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,844
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
At some point yes... but the problem is the magnitude of the sample size needs to be so big it gets absolutely ridiculous to use goals +/-.

You don't go with the lucky guy if you are smart. If you are smart, you go with the better guy.
Let's say you play a game where you win or lose money when you pick one of two doors. Door #1 is 55% chance to win each time and door #2 is 35% chance to win each time.
55% + 35% = 90%. I don't think I want to play that game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
That's what this is all about. Luck is simply getting a result that you had a lower probability of receiving.
I'm saying go for the one with the better probability; you are saying go for the results you got from the small sample.
Wasn't the first half of the season enough of a sample for Noel to move Jokinen to 3rd line, and promote Burmistrov? The dogged belief in "retrogression to the mean" eventually crosses the line into "Gambler's Fallacy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
Quote:
The Gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy (because its most famous example happened in a Monte Carlo Casino in 1913), and also referred to as the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the belief that if deviations from expected behaviour are observed in repeated independent trials of some random process, future deviations in the opposite direction are then more likely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
The rest is about to be long so if anyone wants the Colenotes / TL;DR version...
If you actually think that player skill is a larger role in %s than randomness, then you have to believe:
*2012-13 TML was one of the most offensively gifted teams to exist since 2007 and Nazeem Kadri was the most skilled 2-way player in the NHL
*LA Kings and St L Blues went from one of the top to one of the bottom defensive teams in the league
*2012-13 Derek Meech and Ian White are top 15 defensive defensemen
*2011-12 Maxwell and Machacek were more talented than Crosby, Stamkos, etc.
*2011-12 Flood is above average defensively and Bogosian is far below average defensively
That's a straw man. I do take things in context, i.e. sheltered minutes versus playing against opponents' top lines, small sample sizes, etc. We'll just have to agree to disagree on "luck". Possession is part of the picture, and I see possession stats as being perfectly valid. But I'm getting very annoyed with losing and all the excuses, excuses, excuses about Claude Noel, and his "strategy".

knorthern knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2013, 05:37 PM
  #96
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,703
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
55% + 35% = 90%. I don't think I want to play that game.
It wasn't supposed to be a good game or reach 100% and was besides the point. I originally typed 35 and 45 just to be even sillier but decided to make one more than 50 haha.
It was slight silliness due to the fact that this originally stemmed from me stating Jokinen should have been a minus player, but his level of play was better than his +/- would indicate.

Quote:
Wasn't the first half of the season enough of a sample for Noel to move Jokinen to 3rd line, and promote Burmistrov? The dogged belief in "retrogression to the mean" eventually crosses the line into "Gambler's Fallacy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
I think I must have miss represented or worded something.
I don't know why Jokinen was thrown to the 3rd line. Probably due to poor play, but his play never picked up and he went to back to the second line. That's off the point.
I wasn't pulling a monte carlo because I'm not saying what happened to the past is going to affect the results of the future in independent events. I'm saying that there are weighted probabilities that if the events were to repeat multiple times you are more likely to get a different result.
Ex: in the game, the winner of the last result isn't affecting the result of the next round... BUT the probability still resides the better chance being door #1 even though the small sample of events show otherwise.

I'm essentially saying plus/minus of Jokinen was like the round(s) before hand being a deviation of the true value of win percentages (level of play).

Quote:
That's a straw man. I do take things in context, i.e. sheltered minutes versus playing against opponents' top lines, small sample sizes, etc. We'll just have to agree to disagree on "luck". Possession is part of the picture, and I see possession stats as being perfectly valid. But I'm getting very annoyed with losing and all the excuses, excuses, excuses about Claude Noel, and his "strategy".
Not really a straw man.
If SH% and SV% is indication of skill you can't pick and choose which situations you agree with. It has to be repeatable and an indication or it's not. Yes skill may be involved but if it is affected more by randomness than you can't use it as evidence to indicate a skill or play level, especially when the result is a gross outlier of the players career.
The point is Jokinen actually had better possession, better shooting differential and outplayed his opponents than what his +/- indicates and even better than *some* points in his career. You can't and shouldn't bank that those %s which are bottom 10 in the league and almost half that as any other point in his career.


+/- isn't completely useless and helps indicate things, but when you see someone being top or bottom 10 in PDO red flags and alarms should be flashing pretty brightly.
Jokinen's PDO indicates that given the same level of play, a similar season would most likely have him with a much +/-, everything else equal. That's what the luck part is.
If it is the least probabilistic result than it's neither something that should be banked on or used without extreme discretion for analytical purposes.


Last edited by garret9: 07-10-2013 at 05:45 PM.
garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2013, 03:14 AM
  #97
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,844
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
I wasn't pulling a monte carlo because I'm not saying what happened to the past is going to affect the results of the future in independent events. I'm saying that there are weighted probabilities that if the events were to repeat multiple times you are more likely to get a different result.
Ex: in the game, the winner of the last result isn't affecting the result of the next round... BUT the probability still resides the better chance being door #1 even though the small sample of events show otherwise.

I'm essentially saying plus/minus of Jokinen was like the round(s) before hand being a deviation of the true value of win percentages (level of play).
The other possibility (the one that I favour) is that advanced stats is missing something and the calculated "weighted probabilities" were wrong. I.e. Jokinen's first-half performance was "the real thing", and so was his second-half performance. That's why there was no "retrogression to the mean". For the sake of our playoff hopes, I hope you're right and I'm wrong, and Olli goes on a year-long "lucky streak" to balance last year's "unlucky streak". But my gut feeling is that we may have to sink or swim with Scheifele and/or O'Dell this year. And if Claude sticks too loyally with Olli... oh well, Chevy gets a higher draft pick

knorthern knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2013, 03:28 AM
  #98
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,703
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
The other possibility (the one that I favour) is that advanced stats is missing something and the calculated "weighted probabilities" were wrong. I.e. Jokinen's first-half performance was "the real thing", and so was his second-half performance. That's why there was no "retrogression to the mean". For the sake of our playoff hopes, I hope you're right and I'm wrong, and Olli goes on a year-long "lucky streak" to balance last year's "unlucky streak". But my gut feeling is that we may have to sink or swim with Scheifele and/or O'Dell this year. And if Claude sticks too loyally with Olli... oh well, Chevy gets a higher draft pick
Still not getting it...

I'm not saying he has a second-half performance to balance out the unlucky performance.

Let's say I had a RNG (random number generator) that goes from -20 to 0, therefore the average value over a long period of time for that set would be -10. It picks -19. Would you gamble on the next value being around -19 (+/- 1) all things being equal or likely higher the next time it selects a number
It has nothing to do with making up the last time or retrogressioin. It's just *likely* to be higher because you have a 17/20 probability it is and a 3/20 probability that it isn't.

Same with Jokinen.
His -19 isn't true indication of how he played as it is the very low probability result for the performance he gave and you can know that for certain due to his PDO.
PDO isn't controlled by players and this is a fact that is now widely known.
It's not a repeatable stat its random variance caused by goals being a low occurrance-event. If there were thousands of goals a season when a player is on the ice, it would be completely different.
I think you should read those linked articles.

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2013, 10:09 PM
  #99
Sixty Minute Man
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Winnipeg, Mb
Country: Canada
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
Andrew Ladd ($4.400m) / Bryan Little ($4.000m) / Blake Wheeler ($5.000m)
Evander Kane ($5.250m) / Mikhail Grabovski ($4.500m) / Devin Setoguchi ($3.000m)
Mason Raymond ($2.250m) / Olli Jokinen ($4.500m) / Michael Frolik ($2.333m)
Eric Tangradi ($0.750m) / Jim Slater ($1.600m) / Matt Halischuk ($0.650m)
James Wright ($0.650m)
DEFENSEMEN
Tobias Enstrom ($5.750m) / Dustin Byfuglien ($5.200m)
Grant Clitsome ($2.067m) / Zach Bogosian ($4.500m)
Adam Pardy ($0.600m) / Jacob Trouba ($1.828m)
Paul Postma ($0.605m) / Zach Redmond ($0.715m)
GOALTENDERS
Ondrej Pavelec ($3.900m)
Al Montoya ($0.601m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $64,648,500; BONUSES: $650,000
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $301,500

This looks great, except for our goal tending, but I highly expect Wheeler to get Kane money and I don't think Raymond or Grabovski to sign for this unless we give them lots of term. Also means we'd have to drop Stuart & Thorburn and have Scheifele in St. Johns.

Sixty Minute Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2013, 11:33 PM
  #100
ATLbound
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 602
vCash: 500
Here is a few combo's I like...

The normal...

Ladd-Little-Wheeler
Kane-Scheif-Seto
Halischuk-Jokinen-Frolik
Tangradi-Slater-Wright
Peluso/ Thorburn

Another good one...

Ladd-Little-Seto
Kane-Scheif-Wheeler

*Bottom 6 remain the same.

And 1 more...
Kane-Little-Seto
Ladd-Scheif-Wheeler

Bottom line I don't see Jokinen fitting in well with any of the top 6. I like him better with less minutes, playing with 2 speedy hard workers. He can still be effective, and responsible. I like him as our 3C. I don't want to see Scheif get a shot on the 3rd line. Atleast Just to start, things change, players play good, and a bad, as does the team. Scheif and Jokinen could swap out...

If LLW hits a bad slump at all, Little would be a great fit with Kane and Seto. Be one of the fastest lines in the NHL. 2 Shooters, and 1 VERY underrated passer, and 2 way centre.

ATLbound 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 10:51 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.