Around the League - 2015-2016 (Part VIII)

[Mortimer Snerd]

Nichushkin was not a bad pick

Neither was Honka. The jury is still out on Gurianov and Tufte.

 

[Gm0ney]

So, the reason is that he still holds out hope that goaltending that has been bottom of the NHL over the past three seasons will improve. Lehtonen just posted .906 and .903 seasons, and is 33. Sort of an interesting risk. I'm interested in the double standard. Everyone says that the Stars have had poor goaltending. Nill decided to roll the dice with 33 year olds that look over the hill and chew up a ton of cap space. Somehow that's a good idea if you are Nill, I guess.

So after a terrible year from your long-time, above-average starter, going out and getting a Stanley Cup winning goalie with an NHL SV% run of .912, .920, .914, .924, .913, .914 is some kind of risky roll of the dice in your eyes?

But signing a guy coming off a .906 season to a 5 year, $3.9M deal, then watching him put up a .905, a .901 and sitting on your hands while hoping the guy you drafted in 2012 pans out is the pinnacle of good management?

 

[Bartho]

It's quite clear some people aren't interested in honest discourse. I might as well be reading about the American election.

 

[Whileee]

Nichushkin was not a bad pick

Maybe, maybe not. He's in the KHL instead of the NHL coming out of his ELC. Domi seems like a better option. So does Morrissey, in my view.

How would posters on this board have reacted if Chevy had picked Nichushkin instead of Domi and he ended up in Russia this year?

 

[mcpw]

Maybe, maybe not. He's in the KHL instead of the NHL coming out of his ELC. Domi seems like a better option. So does Morrissey, in my view.

How would posters on this board have reacted if Chevy had picked Nichushkin instead of Domi and he ended up in Russia this year?

And Wennberg looks better than Morrissey. Doesn't make Morrissey a bad pick.

The fact that Nichushkin recently signed in the KHL doesn't change the quality of the pick. "Posters on this board" would likely have emotions blur their objectivity and say "should have picked XY instead".

 

[KCjetsfan]

Awesome. Useless empty space everywhere, ton of scrolling needed if you're not in front of a 36'' screen. God, I hate "modern" webdesign.

designed for mobile devices.

their 'hover menu' on desktop is horrendous with all the wasted white space. i can probably live with the rest, although I don't really care for it, but that part just irks me.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

It's quite clear some people aren't interested in honest discourse. I might as well be reading about the American election.

The thing about bias is that it makes you believe that your side is the only one being honest.

 

[Whileee]

So after a terrible year from your long-time, above-average starter, going out and getting a Stanley Cup winning goalie with an NHL SV% run of .912, .920, .914, .924, .913, .914 is some kind of risky roll of the dice in your eyes?

But signing a guy coming off a .906 season to a 5 year, $3.9M deal, then watching him put up a .905, a .901 and sitting on your hands while hoping the guy you drafted in 2012 pans out is the pinnacle of good management?

Nill had the option of buying out one or both of his expensive, under performing 33 year old goalies this summer after league-bottom goaltending over the past 3 seasons. He chose not to buy them out. Do you endorse his decision? If so, why?

Looking at the numbers doesn't mean you have to stop watching games and live scouting. Also, since we are looking at stats, what would you expect in terms of performance from goalies at age 31+. (Hint: they don't usually maintain, and rarely improve... https://hockey-graphs.com/2014/03/21/how-well-do-goalies-age-a-look-at-a-goalie-aging-curve/ )

Buying players that are on the downside of performance isn't a smart way to "fix" a problem.

Not buying out either goalie is easily as questionable as not buying out Pavs, especially considering that the Stars are in their prime competing window and have some cap constraints and the Jets are not.

 

[Whileee]

Neither was Honka. The jury is still out on Gurianov and Tufte.

Nichushkin, Honka and Gurianov vs. Morrissey, Ehlers and Connor. Stars had higher average pick over the three years. Who drafted better? Is it really so hard to admit?

 

[Whileee]

The thing about bias is that it makes you believe that your side is the only one being honest.

I've acknowledged and posted many mistakes that Chevy has made, and I'm admittedly a Jets fan. You can look it up.

It's fascinating that some posters seem to have such a hard time even acknowledging a single mistake by a rival GM, don't you think?

 

[Whileee]

The thing about bias is that it makes you believe that your side is the only one being honest.

I agree.

 

[mcpw]

I've acknowledged and posted many mistakes that Chevy has made, and I'm admittedly a Jets fan. You can look it up.

It's fascinating that some posters seem to have such a hard time even acknowledging a single mistake by a rival GM, don't you think?

Honestly, I don't know what Jim Nill has done to you...
Yes, he didn't address the goaltending issue in the most ideal way.
Yes, his late round picks don't seem so swell.

But what is it with moving goal posts?

First you write:

Nill's drafting has been atrocious, wouldn't you agree?

I think one of his warts has been poor drafting, especially in the first round. You can't get away with that for very long.

Mortimer and I point out that Nill's first round picks haven't been "atrocious" or "poor" at all (yes, Guryanov just had a Draisaitl season, but way too early to judge). Then you move the goal posts:

Nichushkin, Honka and Gurianov vs. Morrissey, Ehlers and Connor. Stars had higher average pick over the three years. Who drafted better? Is it really so hard to admit?

I guess anything worse than Chevy's draft record is either "poor" or "atrocious". Today I learned.

Oh, and please acknowledge the difference between the Lehtonen buyout cap hit and the nonexisting cap hit for using a compliance buyout on Pavelec.
"Get out of jail free" -- "nah, it's so comfortable in here"

 

[Gm0ney]

Nill had the option of buying out one or both of his expensive, under performing 33 year old goalies this summer after league-bottom goaltending over the past 3 seasons. He chose not to buy them out. Do you endorse his decision? If so, why?

Looking at the numbers doesn't mean you have to stop watching games and live scouting. Also, since we are looking at stats, what would expect in terms of performance from goalies at age 31+. (Hint: they don't usually maintain, and rarely improve... https://hockey-graphs.com/2014/03/21/how-well-do-goalies-age-a-look-at-a-goalie-aging-curve/ )

Buying players that are on the downside of performance isn't a smart way to "fix" a problem.

Not buying out either goalie is easily as questionable as not buying out Pavs, especially considering that the Stars are in their prime competing window and have some cap constraints and the Jets are not.

No, I think I suggested a few months ago that Nill should buy out one of those guys - they made enough from their playoff games to cover the bill. Free up the cash to try something else.

Buy you're saying that not buying out Niemi after one year or Lehtonen after two - in the offseason where their team finished 2nd in the NHL and went 2 rounds into the playoffs - is as questionable as Chevy's handling of the Pavelec situation over half a decade of subpar performance? I find that to be a ridiculous position to take. But maybe that's just my bias talking...?

 

[Evil Little]

I think part of the reason that many continue to heap praise on Nill despite his committing many of the same mistakes that Cheveldayoff has--except, you know, with two Pavelecs--is that he's been so adept at that which Jets fans have become so insecure: trading.

For that, I commend whichever skilled wit came up with the hashtag 'whatdidchevydotoday?' for informing the discussion years down the road, relevant or not.

 

[CaptainChef]

If Chevy had drafted like Nill he would be roasted. If he spent $10.5 million on league bottom goaltending, he would be roasted. If he traded decent assets to rent Russell he would be roasted.

I wouldn't trade the Jets roster plus prospects plus contract / cap situation for the Stars', all things considered.

In any case, this discussion started around Nill's drafting. I agree he's made some very good trades, but a franchise is living on borrowed time if you whiff on first round picks. Truth is that the Jets have clearly out-drafted the Stars since Nill has been their GM.

Chiming in on yesterday's Nill vs Chevy discussions. Yes, if Chevy had all the first rounds mehs that Dallas does, he'd be roasted. But then again, Dallas first-rounders have ranged from 10-25 in the last 5 years; we've picked 2nd, 9th twice and twice in the mid-teens. That's a pretty big difference. Chevy wins here for sure, but not as lopsided as folks are making it out to be.

Trader Nill has definitely been superior. Great moves to get quality players like Sequin, Sharp & Spezza. Genius really until he went for Russell and gave up those good assets at the TD. Chevy's got only one big trade to hang his hat on, but it was a definite win.

Don't really fault Nill for the goalies either. At least he's tried to improve - a lot more than could be said about Chevy. Niemi came to the Stars after 5 years of .213-.224 tending for the Sharks -- that's pretty dang good. Lehtonen had 4 years where he went .913-.921 from 2010-1014 (no slouch either). Neither of those save % rival Pavs terrible performance during those years. So yes, Nil wins hand down on that one.

 

[mcpw]

Plot twist

 

[Flair Hay]

So after a terrible year from your long-time, above-average starter, going out and getting a Stanley Cup winning goalie with an NHL SV% run of .912, .920, .914, .924, .913, .914 is some kind of risky roll of the dice in your eyes?

But signing a guy coming off a .906 season to a 5 year, $3.9M deal, then watching him put up a .905, a .901 and sitting on your hands while hoping the guy you drafted in 2012 pans out is the pinnacle of good management?

There was a reason the sharks ditched Niemi and payed a first for the Kings backup...

 

[Whileee]

Honestly, I don't know what Jim Nill has done to you...
Yes, he didn't address the goaltending issue in the most ideal way.
Yes, his late round picks don't seem so swell.

But what is it with moving goal posts?

First you write:

Mortimer and I point out that Nill's first round picks haven't been "atrocious" or "poor" at all (yes, Guryanov just had a Draisaitl season, but way too early to judge). Then you move the goal posts:

I guess anything worse than Chevy's draft record is either "poor" or "atrocious". Today I learned.

Oh, and please acknowledge the difference between the Lehtonen buyout cap hit and the nonexisting cap hit for using a compliance buyout on Pavelec.
"Get out of jail free" -- "nah, it's so comfortable in here"

I've been consistently critical of Nill's drafting, and suspect of how he's put together his line-up (weak D and goaltending). That's relevant because they are a competitor in the Central division. I was being a bit more civil in how I described his draft picks in my discourse when others disagreed. But the goalposts haven't been moved in terms of my opinion.

The cap was never really an issue for the Jets, so I'm still not sure why everyone is concerned about Pavs' cap hit. The problem with Pavs is that he's still on the roster, regardless of the buy-out. I've been as critical as anyone of Pavs and can't recall ever defending his contract. Chevy has messed up badly on the Pavs file. I just didn't think that not buying him out was a different / separate issue as some seem to think.

Deciding not to buy out Lehtonen or Niemi and preserving cap space is an issue for the Stars now (buying out Lehtonen would have saved about $4 million in cap space this season, and $3 million next season). I'm not sure why some don't seem to think so. The most rational explanation is that Nill thinks that they will provide adequate goaltending despite some recent evidence to the contrary. This is exactly what Chevy has been roasted for over the years, yet many of those same folks seem to want to give Nill a pass.

 

[Whileee]

Chiming in on yesterday's Nill vs Chevy discussions. Yes, if Chevy had all the first rounds mehs that Dallas does, he'd be roasted. But then again, Dallas first-rounders have ranged from 10-25 in the last 5 years; we've picked 2nd, 9th twice and twice in the mid-teens. That's a pretty big difference. Chevy wins here for sure, but not as lopsided as folks are making it out to be.

Trader Nill has definitely been superior. Great moves to get quality players like Sequin, Sharp & Spezza. Genius really until he went for Russell and gave up those good assets at the TD. Chevy's got only one big trade to hang his hat on, but it was a definite win.

Don't really fault Nill for the goalies either. At least he's tried to improve - a lot more than could be said about Chevy. Niemi came to the Stars after 5 years of .213-.224 tending for the Sharks -- that's pretty dang good. Lehtonen had 4 years where he went .913-.921 from 2010-1014 (no slouch either). Neither of those save % rival Pavs terrible performance during those years. So yes, Nil wins hand down on that one.

In Nill's first three years he drafted on average higher (#10, #14, #12) than the Jets (#13, #9, #17). Those are the years I was comparing, because 2016 just happened and the Jets won a lottery pick.

Nill's trading has been very good, with Seguin being the crowning achievement. However, I don't think you could expect the Jets (or any other less desirable market) to be able to compete for those types of deals. Spezza had a no-trade list that reportedly included many if not all Canadian teams, and a few others. Moreover, Spezza was going into the last year of his contract, so he would only have had value for a team with the cap space and assurance that he would re-sign. Nill had a bunch of cap space to work with, and a very attractive market that was a benefit. Sharp reportedly could limit trade options to 10 teams, meaning that Nill was only competing with 9 other GMs to trade for him. It seems quite likely that many of those teams wouldn't have had the cap space (remember, contending teams had severe cap constraints at that time), so Nill likely had very little competition in the trade for Sharp. Either that, or Stan Bowman went temporarily insane.

It sounds like you are inclined to grade Nill based on "effort". Interesting standard to apply to a GM, all things considered.

https://hockey-graphs.com/2014/03/21/how-well-do-goalies-age-a-look-at-a-goalie-aging-curve/

Some take home messages from this statistical analysis on goalies and aging...

Conclusion: I’m going to use the Linear aging curve going forward in my Hockey Marcels, but no matter which one you use a few points are still clear:
1. Goalies don’t improve as they get older
2. By age 30, goalie decline starts to get REALLY noticable
3. By mid-30s, even with the aging line, goalies rapidly start to fall apart.

With a few 27-32 year old goalies hitting free agency this year, teams should REALLY be careful how much and how long they pay guys who are hitting the roughest years in their careers.

*Note: Who thinks that Niemi and Lehtonen are likely to improve this season at age 33?

 

[Gm0ney]

I've been consistently critical of Nill's drafting, and suspect of how he's put together his line-up (weak D and goaltending). That's relevant because they are a competitor in the Central division. I was being a bit more civil in how I described his draft picks in my discourse when others disagreed. But the goalposts haven't been moved in terms of my opinion.

The cap was never really an issue for the Jets, so I'm still not sure why everyone is concerned about Pavs' cap hit. The problem with Pavs is that he's still on the roster, regardless of the buy-out. I've been as critical as anyone of Pavs and can't recall ever defending his contract. Chevy has messed up badly on the Pavs file. I just didn't think that not buying him out was a different / separate issue as some seem to think.

Deciding not to buy out Lehtonen or Niemi and preserving cap space is an issue for the Stars now (buying out Lehtonen would have saved . I'm not sure why some don't seem to think so. The most rational explanation is that Nill thinks that they will provide adequate goaltending despite some recent evidence to the contrary. This is exactly what Chevy has been roasted for over the years, yet many of those same folks seem to want to give Nill a pass.

The Dallas Stars have nearly $6M in cap space right now, so I'm not sure how it's an issue with them. Maybe Nill thinks he can move one of his current goalies if he's successful in acquiring another. If he can't land Bishop or whoever he's after, then I guess Plan B is to hope his two historically proven starters can handle the load. Whatever the case, I don't imagine Nill is going to stand pat for 3 more years - he's going to keep trying to fix the problem. I think this last point is in stark contrast to how Chevy's handled the Pavelec situation these last 5 years.

 

[SLAYER]

Plot twist

Nice.

 

[Gm0ney]

I think part of the reason that many continue to heap praise on Nill despite his committing many of the same mistakes that Cheveldayoff has--except, you know, with two Pavelecs--is that he's been so adept at that which Jets fans have become so insecure: trading.

For that, I commend whichever skilled wit came up with the hashtag 'whatdidchevydotoday?' for informing the discussion years down the road, relevant or not.

My point is that Jim Nill didn't sit around hoping for Lehtonen to bounce back, he tried to address the problem directly. I feel that's worthy of a little praise. Ultimately it didn't work out (they only made it to the 7th game of round 2 of the playoffs and failed to win the Stanley Cup).

 

[CaptainChef]

Deciding not to buy out Lehtonen or Niemi and preserving cap space is an issue for the Stars now (buying out Lehtonen would have saved . I'm not sure why some don't seem to think so. The most rational explanation is that Nill thinks that they will provide adequate goaltending despite some recent evidence to the contrary. This is exactly what Chevy has been roasted for over the years, yet many of those same folks seem to want to give Nill a pass.

You seem to be ignoring the obvious here. Neither is anywhere near Pavs for mediocrity.

Niemi had one bad season (.905) after posting .912-.924 save % for the previous seven. Definitely not a buy-out candidate.

Lehtonen has had two subpar seasons (.903-905) after 4 good seasons (.914-.921). At 5.9 per, yes he's overpaid but he's nowhere near Pavs level of bad.

Pavs for comparison has been sub .906 for 4 of the last 5 years.

 

[Whileee]

You seem to be ignoring the obvious here. Neither is anywhere near Pavs for mediocrity.

Niemi had one bad season (.905) after posting .912-.924 save % for the previous seven. Definitely not a buy-out candidate.

Lehtonen has had two subpar seasons (.903-905) after 4 good seasons (.914-.921). At 5.9 per, yes he's overpaid but he's nowhere near Pavs level of bad.

Pavs for comparison has been sub .906 for 4 of the last 5 years.

Nobody's defending Chevy.

A few people are defending Nill's handling of the Stars' goaltending situation, and in particular praising his decision to sign Niemi to a 3 x $4.5M contract, because, well, he did something. But let's look a bit deeper to assess the decision to sign Niemi.

When Niemi was signed he was 31 years old (an age when most goalies are declining). In the previous two seasons, here is how Niemi stacked up among NHL goalies (with more than 15 games started):

2013-14: Even strength Sv% = 0.919 (42nd in NHL), Short-handed Sv% = 0.863 (52nd in NHL)
2014-15: EV Sv% = 0.922 (30th in NHL), SH Sv% = 0.863 (39th in NHL)

Niemi's Sv% in both seasons was raised by the fact that he faced fewer power plays than many goalies. In those two seasons, only 13-14% of his shots came on the PP (vs. about 20% for Pavs a couple of seasons ago, as an example).

This analysis in 2014 looked at goalies' save percentage adjusted for shot distance (i.e. "adjusted" save percentage) http://canucksarmy.com/2014/10/16/adjusted-save-percentage-measuring-the-impact-defense-has-on-goaltending-statistics. Guess what... Niemi ranked 28th at 0.909 (NHL average was 0.914 and Pavs was at 0.905. So Niemi was a bit better than Pavs, but closer to Pavs than to the NHL average).

It took me about 15 minutes to dig this information up, and it wasn't difficult. I think that when we are looking at raw sv% it can be misleading.

Do you still think that signing Niemi was a good idea, based on his previous stats?

In 2015/16 Niemi was 35th in EV sv% and 48th in SH sv%.

So, to recap... Niemi posted three consecutive seasons of both EV sv% and SH sv% ranking 30-50th in the NHL. He is 33 and has two more seasons on his contract at $4.5M. Do you still think he wasn't a good candidate for a buy-out?

 

[Whileee]

My point is that Jim Nill didn't sit around hoping for Lehtonen to bounce back, he tried to address the problem directly. I feel that's worthy of a little praise. Ultimately it didn't work out (they only made it to the 7th game of round 2 of the playoffs and failed to win the Stanley Cup).

See above... he addressed the problem directly by signing a 31 year old goalie who ranked between 30th and 50th in save percentage (adjusting for special teams) the previous two seasons. Bravo, I guess...