JoeSchmoe

Granato didn't move the needle with Krueger as the HC... He probably won't with a guy like Boudreau either.

As well, I don't want old guard guy locking down Dahlin, Cozens, and our other young guys into rigid systems.

My biggest worry though as I mentioned in my initial post, is they bring in an old guard guy and he'll try to ride his washed up vets who's contracts we're stuck with just like they all seem to do. With the cap being what it is, KA is no question going to have to bring in some low cost veteran fillers with zero upside again this off season, and old guard guy is going to ride them until we're out of the playoffs.

Results no different, but the lineup he had to work with most certainly is.

How bad was UPL?

I like him, and what he's been able to get out of this group. Especially the young guys. With Eichel out of the lineup, we shouldn't even be in any of these games. Dahlin is starting to look like the 1st overall we drafted. Mittelstadt, Thompson, and Aspland are showing signs they could be the 3rd line on a cup contending team. Though still a work in progress, Skinner is starting to show signs of his former self. The big one for me though is he's playing the young guys in favour of the old washouts. You see this all through the league... It's like a respect thing where coaches play the old guys even when they're terrible. You bring in an old guard guy like Boudreau, and I guarantee you he's going to be playing the Eakins, Sobotkas, and Bogosians of the world in favour of Cozens, Quinn, and Peterka. So I say IF we finish the season playing like we are now, Granato should get the job.

We win this with an NHL goalie. Like most games since RK left, I got my entertainment out of this one.

Do you guys think we'll find out that Tokarski needs eye surgery at the end of the season?

Ever since he got a chance this year he's been good.

And now Mittelstadt! Who knew?!

And Dunleavy makes it sound like a routine play. 🤨 RJ would have hyped that for what it was.

Variable isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's what you value when assessing a player. Remember, the widely established XGF% shows that we should be worse under Granato than Krueger, which I think we can all universally agree is not close to being the case. But someone that favours high danger chances would say we're better under Granato. No different than someone thinking Okposo has really gained speed, but his friend thinking he still doesn't create enough scoring chances.

That's why the HDCF is higher. Pucks to the slot. I know you'll probably disagree, but I tend to think that once you start using other advanced stats to explain why another advanced stat isn't "working", you are in effect making the case why the eye test is the best stat of them all. Again, I'll harken back to how humans can beat some of the world's most powerful super computers at chess. Moreover, the game of hockey is many orders more dynamic than chess, so using numeric methods to evaluate hockey players and teams would be even more difficult than creating a chessmaster. The stats do have greater value when GMs are playing the game of comparing large numbers of players and are looking to mine for value picks and seeing how players compare using isolated metrics. This is related to how machines are better at processing large amounts of data than humans. If you're going to play the Moneyball, you're going to be these stats! But a smart GM might want to eyeball his picks before throwing down the cash for a contract.

I'd lock up Ullmark for a minimum of 3 years but shoot for 5 if it can help with the cap. I know it's still early, but UPL isn't looking anywhere near an effective NHL goalie. There's still time, but he's looking far from the lock many have him pegged as.

The XGF% is lower under Granato than Krueger?!?! We couldn't get the puck to the slot under Krueger, nor did the team actually go there.

I'm saying as much as people want to live in a world where they can use finite stats to exactly predict outcomes, the game of hockey is too "analog" for this to more accurate than the human eye, which can account for far more variables with far more dynamic weighting.

I'm an engineer that works in a world of numbers all day long. GF is a product of an infinite number of variables. XGF is a product of a finite number of variables. The eye test has the uncanny ability to process a nearly infinite number of variables that XGF cannot. It's kind of like how humans can beat a supercomputer at chess. Eye test wise, they're playing much better than before, and deserving of the 8pts in 5 games. (Though NJ could have maybe had a few more goals last night.)

Reinhart is a viable 2C. If top 6 wingers are available that are better/cheaper options than the C's available, I'd for sure go that option.

Remember that if Granato significantly bumped things up in practice, the results from increased fitness and skill development wouldn't show overnight. Advanced stats wise though, their FTW/60 (fun to watch per 60 minutes played) has gone up a whopping 93%!

Hockey is too dynamic of a game for rigid systems to be successful. Yes, certain situations are "static" enough to run some set plays and systems. However, once the game opens up, the players should be free to react in the best way they see fit for the situation. At most, a coach could employ some general principles to follow in these situations.

I just mean the NHL skill was always there, he just needed the game reps to put it all together.

Sure he had a few gaffes here and there but Tage Thompson has been an NHLer since his stint in Rochester where he lit it up. He just needed the big league experience to fine tune things, which we're watching now (he is still learning). Unfortunately, Krueger never gave him the chance.

At the end of the summer season, I'd typically take 2-3 weeks off, and in the fall mainly stick to 1 a days. But from winter to the end of the summer it's 2-3 training sessions per day. On "3 a days" it would typically be 1 weight session and 2 lighter cardio sessions, usually both on the water in the summer, or on the rowing machine and cross training in the winter. "2 a days" we're usually 1 tougher cardio workout and 1 lighter one. Coming from a lower-middle class family I had to do this, plus work to support myself. I couldn't stick with it beyond my early twenties as eventually I needed to grow up and get a real job. Nearly everyone that did end up making it didn't have to work like a lot of us did meaning they could rest while the rest of us worked (I delivered appliances). There were others on the fringes like myself that had the financial backing such that they could stick with it into their late twenties until they got their shot. One guy that went through when I did... and eventually made later on still has never had a real job and he's in his mid-40s.

I read your posts, and appreciate the live updates, though I typically check scores first then come on here for the board interpretation of what's going on. I actually reread this thread multiple times to try to find out why Quinn wasn't in the lineup. Scheduled rest?

I posted in another thread, that they should be able to play every other day, and the odd day back to back, plus practice every day at a decently high tempo. As a former rower that spent time in the national team system (but never made it), training 2-3 times a day 6 days a week is the norm if you expect to win. The work that goes into playing a game with 15-20 TOI, wouldn't be that hard to recover from physically for a world class athlete if they're in decent shape. Maybe mentally, or from a bumps and bruises perspective they might want more rest. Still, I say push them hard and see what they're capable of.