Let'sGoBlues | WPGv4
Membre depuis
30 jun 2016
Équipe préférée
Blues de St-Louis
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Sujets de discussion
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 10 heures
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 10 heures
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 13 heures
Sujet: Get That D
Forum: Armchair-GM 9 oct à 12 h 32
Forum: Armchair-GM 9 oct à 12 h 12
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bcarlo25</b></div><div>They do okay i guess, but trusting their model is just dumb. And it isn’t just one or two. It’s a lot of them. There are some things that they just don’t understand, which is mystifying because a four year old could grasp these concepts. Let’s take a look at my guy Charlie McAvoy. They had him with a 3.4% chance of signing a three year deal. Any knowledge of the situation would indicate there was a much higher likelihood of a three year deal than that. They gave him a 10.8% chance of signing a 5 year deal. Any knowledge of the NHL would indicate there was roughly a zero percent chance he would sign a deal taking him directly to UFA without buying out any UFA years. They had him at 6.5 for 3 years. Very wrong.

Karlsson at 9.7. Way off
Rantanen for 6 years they had at 8.3 a million off, but that’s significant.
Marner for 6 years they had at 8.8. Way off.
Laine they had 4.8 or something for 2 years. Way off.
They had werenski with a 1.6% chance of signing for three years.

EW seems to have no understanding of how term effects AAV with RFAs. It is useful if one has zero knowledge of the NHL and are curious as to what a player will sign for. For people that pay attention to the league, and I think the vast majority of posters here are firmly in that category, it’s absolute trash.</div></div>

I think their 3.4% probability of McAvoy signing a 3-yr deal was based solely on precedent - i.e. they don't feed their model with current events/ahead-of-the-curve trends. Maybe the next RFA projections would account for all the bridge deals that happened this go-around.

I guess I'd argue that they can be "way off" and not "wrong" at the same time. They just put out projections based on how GMs paid guys in the past (not their own personal guesses). That's obviously changing right now.

The way I'd use their info is as a starting point, and then modify their number based on what we know about the individual situation. Ex: there is plenty of data to suggest Marner should've signed for 6 x 8.8 (look at Kane's 2nd contract) but we all knew he would get more because of how it started to play out. Ex. once one guy signed a bridge deal this year, the probability for other guys to follow suit went way up.
Forum: Armchair-GM 9 oct à 12 h 04
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Isles777</b></div><div>There’s nothing left for Dobson to prove at the junior level. He already won two memorial cups. Another thing both lamoriello and trotz mentioned - they don’t want his junior team running him into the ground with an insane amount of ice time.

I’m sure there are players that benefited from more time in juniors and will continue to do so. Dobson has outgrown that league, and that’s according to people that are much more knowledgeable of the situation than both of us.

Barzal needed to go back, he looked out of place when he was with the islanders and that year he went back to Seattle and led his team to a title. I would compare barzals situation to ty smith - they both were making uncharacteristic plays in camp which resulted in their teams sending them back to juniors.

Like I said, look at the amount of players making positive impacts in the NHL a year after they were drafted : Charlie mcavoy, Brandon Carlo, Miro heiskanen, Zach werenski, Samuel girard, Cale makar, Ivan provorov , Mikhail sergachev, etc</div></div>

Yep I'm sure they'll make the right decision, I just don't think it can be very harmful to send a guy down again - there are always things to improve upon. That being said, it sounds like you're saying they've made room for him and expect him to be ready for an NHL role so that's a good sign for him. I think there are plenty of guys that made negative impacts by coming up too soon just like there are plenty of guys that made positive impacts - depends on the player. Guys like Chychrun/Ryan Murray/Yak/Tage Thompson/Zacha, etc. probably were stunted a little by coming up too soon.

BTW I think the Isles did really well in the 2018 draft - didn't think either Wahlstrom or Dobson would be OTB for them. And Wilde and Iskhakov were great high-risk picks in the 2nd after they already had some top talent in the bag from the 1st.
Forum: Armchair-GM 9 oct à 11 h 22