SDS

The famous post-game skating scene from Miracle…

Who do you play for?

I mean I’m not aware of anyone who uses multiple accounts every day.

Not many. No every day regulars.

That really sucked. I normally roll with the punches, but eye-yi-yi.

I’ve never noticed it in Florida. It bothered me greatly when I first started watching.

Have people discussed this weird camera angle?

Fair enough, but regardless if their overall talent level is lower than the median, it’s not “they are an expansion team therefore you should never lose to them“ bad. Their -12 goal differential shows they aren’t getting blown off the ice in their losses.

Nice.

I didn’t make the expansion draft rules. Unless the point is they purposely took players lower on each roster.

This characterization that Seattle should be awful because they are an expansion team is a horrible take. They took a middle roster player from every team in the NHL. By definition, they should have talent equivalent to a team ranked in the teens. An update to your characterization of expansion teams is long overdue.

He did.

It truly boggles the mind.

Read. The. Article.

I’m just curious if anyone is reading the article before pontificating…

The Department of Hockey Analytics first looked to see if bigger players performed better using the most obvious measure of performance: points. And there it was: bigger players did produce more. From the 1967-68 to 1979-80 seasons, that is. During that time, forwards less than 200 pounds scored at a clip of 0.55 points per game. The rate of production ticks up until it gets to 0.68 points per game for players in the 210-220 pound range. Over 80 games (which was the season length by the end of this time frame), this translates into 10 additional points. After 1980, however, we could find no effect. Nothing. Zero. Performance is pretty much flat across the height and weight spectrum. If anything, there’s a gradual decrease as players get bigger. The graph depicts scoring for forwards at the beginning of the expansion era along with scoring in the post-lockout era. The line depicts the best guess as to the relationship between size and scoring based on the data. However, since there is some variation in the data, the shaded area shows the region in which the true relationship most likely lies. I find it completely unsurprising that the same group of people who regularly reference hockey in the 70s, also regularly reference fighting and size as keys components in a winning hockey team. https://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2014/03/13/hockey_analytics_does_size_really_matter_in_the_nhl.html

Not really all that young. We are the 11th youngest, but we are dead center in between the youngest team and the oldest team.

This premise with some of these fans is literally, "Talent is irrelevant."

What a weird comment after a 2 to 1 victory.

I know that he carried an extra set of lunch money in his shoe.

It would also severely impact the number of pull-ups he can’t do.

You are free to type this all up. Are used a premade service. I’d be happy to replace it with someone’s own creation.

Crappy titles lead to confusion on the reader’s part.