carpandean

This. I believe that it has been shown that, all else equal, higher shot against rates tend to lead to higher save percentages. With the bend, but don't break defense that allowed a ridiculous number of shots against from the outside, everyone came here and looked good.

True ... but the Sabres were still playing against the field in this case. For them, it was 20% that they win and pick first vs. 80% chance that the (anyone in the) field wins and they pick second. The Sabres losing was not unusual or unexpected; quite the opposite. In fact, there was a 60% chance of them losing both last year and this year. Now, what the Oilers did was thoroughly unexpected (though, clearly possible.) There was a only 0.5% chance of them winning the four that they did (and that was larger than it would be now due to the first two having the "can't move more than four spots" rule, which gave them a 48.2% chance of retaining the first pick vs. the current 20%.) Even if you look at the last six drafts, there was only a 2% chance of them picking first four times.

Spoonfed what, exactly? 1) Nobody had to tell me that the post-2007 "core" was made of players who were better suited to be complementary, not the heart of the team. 2) It was pretty clear that getting top-tier talent through trade is extremely difficult (certainly, if you expect to get all of your top talent through it) and through free agency is pretty much impossible these days. 3) Tearing down, acquiring assets and building through drafting and trading seemed a very reasonable approach (again, came to that conclusion myself, long before they did it.) 4) Every in-the-know scout spoke of two potentially-generational players before this year even started. The second-rated one, though projected slightly below the other (and with the uncertainty of projections could end up being better), stepped into a new level of competition this year and absolutely dominated. In any year, he would be an exceptional acquisition. 5) Even a basic working knowledge of probabilities and logic should tell you that you can't set as a goal something (getting McDavid) that you can achieve at best a 1-in-5 chance at obtaining (the rest is up to luck), but you can aim for something (achieving 30th) that both gives you a 100% of one of those two and the highest chance at the bonus prize. Again, didn't need help to figure out that Jack Eichel's existence in this draft is what made "tanking" worth it. Without him, it's 20% (at best) chance of McDavid and 80% chance at Marner, Stohm or Hannifin (probably spelled one wrong, but they are far enough below the other two to not make it worth looking up.) 6) Without anyone having to spoon-feed me anything, I knew that what was achieved over a week ago in Columbus was by far the most important part of it; we eliminated the 66.5% chance of picking third. That was far-and-away more important than the extra 6.5% at McDavid or even beating those 5-to-1 odds against finishing first. I would have to be unable to think for myself (i.e., need to be spoon fed) to accept that McDavid was the one and only goal this year, because it takes about two seconds to blow big holes in that argument.

Never been a fan of the C-LW-RW line notation, but I'd make an exception for the Jack-Evander-Tyler line.

You can't trade money anymore. That was a Gretzky-era thing (which is why the "any player can be traded" argument doesn't really work.) I believe that it went away with the salary cap (don't quote me on that.) The closest thing that you can do now is retain some cap/salary in player trades.

Just one?! Weak. :P

Please.

Well, he did have a better chance of winning last year. ;)

Is it too late for an "almost surely you can't be serious" joke?

Well, we're the least free state, so that's like #1.

I disagree. Hit your thumb with a hammer and your arm will reflexively jerk back just like that. Seems like a totally normal reaction to ...

I guess that I could see McDavid and Eichel, because they would instantly know which teams they are going to. However, since there really isn't a consensus #3, the rest of the guys wouldn't know anything except who they're not going to.

That #1 goal by Nyquist was like a scene out of a movie where the hotshot comes in and won't pass to any of his teammates, so they walk away pissed off and he eventually learns that he needs them, too.

Porn is free ... at least, that's what I've heard. :angel:

If this were a V8 commercial, something would have just bonked you on the head. Of course you go!

Season (series for Tanks) finale charts posted. Input sheet overview: As for the playoff target line, I definitely think that this year was an outlier. Too many teams giving away points at the bottom (an extreme year on that end, too.) I have it set at 93 and it's usually not off (in either direction) by more than a point or two. Edit: by quick count, three teams with 9 wins in the second half of the season (of note is that Sabres had 14 in the first half, Coyotes had 15, but the Maple Leafs had 21!)

Bad news: 27 years old, 0 playoff games (team's fault, as much as his.) Last playoff experience? 2007-08 AHL Calder Cup Run. Good news: The Wolves won that (I believe) and his numbers looked good, so he certainly didn't choke under pressure. Also, these most recent games are probably the only really meaningful games that he's played in since, so playing well in them is a very good sign. Maybe, he elevates under pressure, but simply hasn't had the opportunity to show it.

If you're team Latvia, you want Nolan coaching a Olympic run, because he can get that s**t talent to play hard enough over a short period to beat some better teams and give Canada a game of it. If you're team Canada (or USA or any other talented team), well ... they could have hired Nolan, but they chose Babcock. We've had a Team Latvia; time to get on with building a Team Canada. Seriously, though, not surprised by the move and have no problem with it. Just because Ted was in a tough spot doesn't mean that he couldn't have show Tim that he wasn't someone that he could work with. This is the perfect time to make a change.

Thanks. Makes sense.

Do you have a source for that? I can't find one and the video first appeared in February 2015. Did his friend really hold onto it for five months before it go leaked?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUDmfdTxLew While I doubt it will happen, I could see losing in that fashion making him want to go back for one more shot at the title, but does that sound like someone who wants to stay in college for three more years?

So ... I shouldn't retire my tank charts yet? ;)

I would guess that 19 is #2 behind 9 as the most popular number for skilled players to pick as the come up.

Would you believe that I just put "tank victory" into Google? 'Cause that's how it happened. If I remember correctly, you just grad the URL from the top and paste it into your post without and code []'s. Here, let's try ... Edit: yup, that's it.