carpandean

Agreed. The top-bottom two-tone was pretty neat, but they would have looked better with gray (silver) pants.

Also, while Corsi might be an important stat for player evaluation, it's still going to be behind Goals/Assists/Points. So, taking a lot of bad shots might not be worth it, since it will hurt the latter. As TBP said, it will probably affect marginal players the most, since the won't be scoring anyway, so they might as well pump the Corsi.

I was thinking that the second part is basically ... you can't measure a system without affecting it and, thus, tainting your measurements.

Don't know if "turned into" is the right term ... seems to imply that it was originally going a different direction. This season was a planned loss since early last season.

They need to change the wording for SAT Rel on NHL.com: Shot attempts Rel = Shot attempts for player - Shot attempts for team when player is not on the ice Unfortunately (confusingly), they have a stat, SAT For, and another stat, SAT. The former is only shots attempts by the player's team while the player is on the ice; the latter is the net shot attempts (player's team SA - opponent's SA) while the player is on the ice. SAT Rel is based on the SAT stat, not the SAT For stat. In other words, "Shot attempts for player" is actually the SAT stat (net shots attempted) while player is on the ice, not the SAT For stat for the player, and likewise for the team. The funny thing is that the Sabres' players dominate this stat, since it subtracts off one really big negative number from a smaller negative number. For example, Deslauriers has a STAT of -309, but leads the league with a STAT Rel of +712. In other words, while there have been 309 more shot attempts against than shot attempts for while he was on the ice, there were actually 1,021 more shots against than shots for while he wasn't on the ice. Seems pretty useless to not scale each by TOI or something like that.

Sounds like a joint venture between nhl.com and hockeyfights.com. Some combination of size (height, weight), hits, roughing minors, fighting majors, strength of opponents, average fight-card rating, etc. Then, of course, you have to figure out what correlates to winning: a team's top rated NQ players, the average (over the roster or by TOI) NQ rating, the interaction of NQ and Corsi/Fenwick relative (a.k.a., the Gordie Howe Effect), ... ETA: 7,777th post!

Straight up for Auston Matthews? (Side note: wouldn't the joke name for Las Vegas be Lost Wages?) Yeah, but one big takeaway that might be important is how well he played right before his contract expired versus right after he signed the new one. You want to judge him on how he plays there, but that limits your observations to a time period in which he is playing for a contract. Basically, what you see may not be what you get.

I don't have the actual studies to point you to, but the short answers are: (1) yes, including more than just shots that reach the goal and/or goalie has been shown to be a better indicator, and (2) faceoffs have been shown to have little effect on possession (it's very short lived, as good puck possession teams get it back quickly when they lose one, bad puck possession teams give it up quickly when they win one.)

To keep more teams in the playoff race longer. It makes it so that it doesn't cost anything to win a minute or two later (OT vs. end of regulation), but it does cost something to lose a minute or two earlier. So, teams will lock a game down late if it's tied to ensure that they get at least a point. Edmonton was on their heals for the whole third period just playing defense to try and get at least one point.

These Oilers shootouts are so nerve racking. They had 9 different players shooting with the game on their stick before one finally scored. It was just like the one against the Sharks (except the one round in that game where both teams scored.) Two big points, though.

But Kane + Bogosian will almost surely get you more scoring and hitting over the next few years (and beyond, depending on re-signings) than Myers + Armia. The wild card would be Lemieux, but he's far from a guarantee to be anything significant (see Kassian, Zack.)

Oddly enough, the gray bits don't bother me very much. They would, however, look more out of place with royal blue. I like the dark blue much better in person than on TV. They really do look almost black at times. I wouldn't mind something between dark navy and bright royal.

Not as the primary, but twice as alternate jerseys: From the mouth of one of the big three during the Golisano era (TG, LQ, DD), it was for merchandise sales purposes (at least, that was one of the biggest reasons.) Navy sells better than royal. Apparently, the slug was a big fashion seller outside of Buffalo (and even outside of hockey markets, all together.)

I hadn't, but I actually just realized that the 65-point line doesn't belong there, anyway. That should unclutter things a bit.

Sabres now need to win out in order to reach the 93-point pace axis.

Yeah, 20% McDavid, 80% Eichel sounds much better than 13.5% McDavid, 20% Eichel, 66.5% someone else. Of course, there's another big drop-off from 29th to 28th. While the chance of McDavid, specifically, doesn't fall much (11.5% vs. 13.5%), the chance of of getting either one is cut by 2/3 again: 30th: 100% chance of McDavid or Eichel 29th: 33.5% chance of McDavid or Eichel 28th: 11.5% chance of McDavid or Eichel

It was just gas. ;)

I made it, but in looking back at the original, I kinda like the bottom of the sea feel that it has.

Trying out a new version of the tank chart. Like the playoffs chart, Tank 2 is net of a position (last place). You do lose games-in-hand on the worst team (for example, Edmonton won last night, but that cannot be reflected since the Sabres' 52nd game has not been played yet), but it shows the differences better.

I didn't think that they could possibly break -30 again. We may yet see the dragon this year.

Don't laugh to hard at the Leafs ... it's still possible that the Sabres finish 29th and the Leafs win the draft Lottery. :sick:

The Leafs just fell onto the Tank chart.

Taking over as the worst record in the league and the worst Sabres record since at least the 2004-05 lockout in the very same game. Impressive.

I haven't gone back and looked, but I suspect that we have more good, young talent in the system than they did in 2009. I know that they had a couple of fun to watch, but not very effective "young kids" teams, though, so maybe I'm wrong.

He's going for the hard deck. Let's get down there first and nail him, Mav. No way, Jester, you're mine.