Derrico Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 I wasn't referring to you Blue. Also, Tank is right on, this was before even the Halak signing that some said a number of rookie D in particular are going to have a huge impact on the team. Maybe, but I wouldn't want to rest my hopes on unproven rooks. Sorry for derailing the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 No, but they were middle of the pack last year and I don't think they've done anything to get worse. Did any of their individual players have unsustainably high numbers to bring them to that middle of the pack? In other words, are they likely to get worse simply because of natural regression to the mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) I wasn't referring to you Blue. Also, Tank is right on, this was before even the Halak signing that some said a number of rookie D in particular are going to have a huge impact on the team. Maybe, but I wouldn't want to rest my hopes on unproven rooks. Sorry for derailing the thread. Greetings! Strome, Reinhart, Pulock may be unproven for the most part but that doesn't mean they can't have a positive impact. Remember that last year the NYI had something like a .898 sv% from their GT and if you add in better GT (Which we all knew they would) plus Strome, Reinhart, and hopefully Pulock, it drags the NYI out of the bottom 5. Also I forgot Scott Mayfield. Another guy who could have a positive impact. NYI are really a team to watch this year. Edited July 24, 2014 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) I wasn't referring to you Blue. Also, Tank is right on, this was before even the Halak signing that some said a number of rookie D in particular are going to have a huge impact on the team. Maybe, but I wouldn't want to rest my hopes on unproven rooks. Sorry for derailing the thread. Don't be ridiculous, if you weren't referring to me, then it's not all about me. My mother couldn't be wrong, could she? Did any of their individual players have unsustainably high numbers to bring them to that middle of the pack? In other words, are they likely to get worse simply because of natural regression to the mean. Good question, to which I have no answer. I will say that possession stats are much less subject to regression than percentages and scoring simply because the sample of shot attempts over a season is large enough to purge much of the noise. Fluke seasons still happen, but they're more rare. Here's to hoping the Isles exceeded their talents :beer: Edited July 24, 2014 by TrueBluePhD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 Good question, to which I have no answer. I will say that possession stats are much less subject to regression than percentages and scoring simply because the sample of shot attempts over a season is large enough to purge much of the noise. Fluke seasons still happen, but they're more rare. Here's to hoping the Isles exceeded their talents :beer: I will be grasping at straws until you guarantee me Jack Eichel with the Islands Pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.