Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread: Movie Poster Edition VII- "Deadline"

[CycloneSweep]

That doesn’t sound like billions of dollars that people often imply.

I hate having to defend Musk but his family wasn’t stinking rich. His dad had a minority stake in an emerald mine and good luck finding out how much he made from that investment.

Elon made a series of incredible investments on his own, can’t deny that.

People see him as like the inventor of Tesla and Space X and it’s like yeah he owns it but he pays smart people to do the smart stuff it’s not him. He isn’t as smart as his fan think but he isn’t as dumb as his haters think

 

[bobbythebrain]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No a f***ing chance bro

No sh**. Clearly it's Chiarelli

 

[Lay Z Boy GM]

People see him as like the inventor of Tesla and Space X and it’s like yeah he owns it but he pays smart people to do the smart stuff it’s not him. He isn’t as smart as his fan think but he isn’t as dumb as his haters think

That’s fair. He worked his way up to Tesla too, I think he had a lot of stake in PayPal?

He honestly just seems like he’s on the spectrum to me. Smart in some ways, not so much in other ways, difficulty socializing.

 

[CycloneSweep]

That’s fair. He worked his way up to Tesla too, I think he had a lot of stake in PayPal?

He honestly just seems like he’s on the spectrum to me. Smart in some ways, not so much in other ways, difficulty socializing.

Intelligent but not wise.

 

[belair]

Usually with players like that, you can also look at their stats away from certain players. One of the reason the analytics community liked Pulju so much last year is that McDavid produced more chances and allowed less when Pulju was with him. That wasn’t quite the case this year but just using it for an example.

That’s why looking at trends are so important and often guys like Jfresh base it off a 3 year rolling average.

Klingberg has been bad defensively everywhere and with everyone. That’s a sign that he is in fact, a bad defensive player. It could also be a sign that he plays way more than he should. Klingberg as a top 4 d gets blown up defensively. Now if he was on the third pair with sheltered minutes I’m sure it would go up.

The analytics are good and honestly are better than the eye test for the majority of hockey fans because there is so much that we don’t see or don’t realize it’s effective. Like Ceci. People think Ceci gets blown up against tough competition and is getting wreck d when in fact he isn’t. That’s not an objective thing, it’s the truth.

The eye test says he sucks and allows more goals when he is in the ice but it’s simply not true.

Again these are tools and are based to be a snapshot on how the player is performing. You can then start watching the player to better shape your judgement.

For most analytics the following is true. The guys at the 100% are the best in the league (McDavid is there for example) guys who are at the bottom (Jack Johnson) are bad hockey players. Now guys in the middle for the most part there is tons of nuance and deep dives into their numbers better shape it.

Too many people treat them like they are evil and wrong when it’s a tool.

I don't view them as evil. And I agree that they're a tool. They provide a compilation of stats that have been interpreted in a specific way by these sources of information. The issue I've had with them in the past is how they're interpreted here. They're commonly used as the be-all, end-all in a conversation. If a player has poor metrics, we rarely get a discussion about why, which is imperative.

Duncan Keith was a tremendous example of a player who was viewed as one of the worst statistical defensemen in the league when he was acquired by Edmonton. And not only did he come here to take a key role in our top four, he had a significant positive impact on a green Evan Bouchard.

When it comes to Klingberg, he's not some unique player. He's always been a puck-moving offensive defenseman. If you put him in a situation where he's playing with skilled forwards on strong transition team, there's a good chance he thrives. I don't agree that limiting a player's opportunity necessarily helps their game. For a player like Klingberg, it probably hinders it.

I just have to laugh at some of the conclusions that these stats have come to in the past. Like Adam Larsson 'benefitting' from his time paired with Caleb Jones. They get interpreted in very interesting ways.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

Intelligent but not wise.

That’s fair.

 

[CycloneSweep]

I don't view them as evil. And I agree that they're a tool. They provide a compilation of stats that have been interpreted in a specific way by these sources of information. The issue I've had with them in the past is how they're interpreted here. They're commonly used as the be-all, end-all in a conversation. If a player has poor metrics, we rarely get a discussion about why, which is imperative.

Duncan Keith was a tremendous example of a player who was viewed as one of the worst statistical defensemen in the league when he was acquired by Edmonton. And not only did he come here to take a key role in our top four, he had a significant positive impact on a green Evan Bouchard.

When it comes to Klingberg, he's not some unique player. He's always been a puck-moving offensive defenseman. If you put him in a situation where he's playing with skilled forwards on strong transition team, there's a good chance he thrives. I don't agree that limiting a player's opportunity necessarily helps their game. For a player like Klingberg, it probably hinders it.

I just have to laugh at some of the conclusions that these stats have come to in the past. Like Adam Larsson 'benefitting' from his time paired with Caleb Jones. They get interpreted in very interesting ways.

It’s why sample size is important.

With Keith his numbers were awful but a lot rightfully predicted he would be better not playing top pair and elite comp.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

It’s why sample size is important.

With Keith his numbers were awful but a lot rightfully predicted he would be better not playing top pair and elite comp.

That was a problem in and of itself though. A 2nd pairing that needed to be sheltered meant a top pairing that got grossly overworked, and no defenseman in NHL history was overworked more than 2021-22 Darnell Nurse.

 

[McDoused]

When did this become the Elon Musk thread?

 

[benum]

Klingberg is likely similar to Barrie. If you can shelter them on the 3rd pairing and give them PP time they can contribute well. If you try to play them up higher, they will get crushed. I suspect Barrie is better at this point but it could be close. (We’ll see if someone tries it with Klingberg)

 

[Anarchism]

Barbashev.....21 mins played 2 apples, 3 shots, 4 hits, 3 blocks, 2 takeaways.

 

[tinfish]

Barbashev.....21 mins played 2 apples, 3 shots, 4 hits, 3 blocks, 2 takeaways.

Yeah but why did'nt we trade for Andrew Peeke

 

[Anarchism]

Yeah but why did'nt we trade for Andrew Peeke

Because we traded for Ekholm....


Which bandwagon were you on -- injured's or Selfish's?

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

I don't view them as evil. And I agree that they're a tool. They provide a compilation of stats that have been interpreted in a specific way by these sources of information. The issue I've had with them in the past is how they're interpreted here. They're commonly used as the be-all, end-all in a conversation. If a player has poor metrics, we rarely get a discussion about why, which is imperative.

Duncan Keith was a tremendous example of a player who was viewed as one of the worst statistical defensemen in the league when he was acquired by Edmonton. And not only did he come here to take a key role in our top four, he had a significant positive impact on a green Evan Bouchard.

When it comes to Klingberg, he's not some unique player. He's always been a puck-moving offensive defenseman. If you put him in a situation where he's playing with skilled forwards on strong transition team, there's a good chance he thrives. I don't agree that limiting a player's opportunity necessarily helps their game. For a player like Klingberg, it probably hinders it.

I just have to laugh at some of the conclusions that these stats have come to in the past. Like Adam Larsson 'benefitting' from his time paired with Caleb Jones. They get interpreted in very interesting ways.

Bang on. There is value for sure with this macro raw data to give some insight into team and individual performance within a relative context. Unfortunately often used to make wrong conclusions which for some come out as unimpeachable, declarative facts which are often incomplete or just wrong conclusions. Good to counter and aid and calibrate the eye test in evaluating a high chaos collision sport played at speed. When one gets outcomes like Caleb Jones carrying Adam Larsson as a defense partner, it's time to reset your spreadsheet and start watching games again.

 

[Fourier]

Klingberg is likely similar to Barrie. If you can shelter them on the 3rd pairing and give them PP time they can contribute well. If you try to play them up higher, they will get crushed. I suspect Barrie is better at this point but it could be close. (We’ll see if someone tries it with Klingberg)

I honestly believe Barrie is better at this point. What kills Klingberg's value for me is his contract. Put him in teh role you describe for $3.5M and things might be different. I say might because I would still worry that much of his tool kit will be underutilized in this role and that his defensive liabilities will negate his offensive skills playing with lower end forwards 5 vs 5.

Bang on. There is value for sure with this macro raw data to give some insight into team and individual performance within a relative context. Unfortunately often used to make wrong conclusions which for some come out as unimpeachable, declarative facts which are often incomplete or just wrong conclusions. Good to counter and aid and calibrate the eye test in evaluating a high chaos collision sport played at speed. When one gets outcomes like Caleb Jones carrying Adam Larsson as a defense partner, it's time to reset your spreadsheet and start watching games again.

Context is key but very often omitted.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

If this is of any significant length, the West is truly wide the f*** open

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

I honestly believe Barrie is better at this point. What kills Klingberg's value for me is his contract. Put him in teh role you describe for $3.5M and things might be different. I say might because I would still worry that much of his tool kit will be underutilized in this role and that his defensive liabilities will negate his offensive skills playing with lower end forwards 5 vs 5.


Context is key but very often omitted.

Fully agree, often see a lot of subjective cherry picking of information/data to bend the universe into a conclusion that supports a self narrative.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Fully agree, often see a lot of subjective cherry picking of information/data to bend the universe into a conclusion that supports a self narrative.

Often subjective data combining subjective cherry picking.

But get a nerd to an actual live game and ask them to explain what the 2 teams forechecking or defensive systems being employed in real time are and the players employment and effectiveness are within said systems and it’s silence.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

Bang on. There is value for sure with this macro raw data to give some insight into team and individual performance within a relative context. Unfortunately often used to make wrong conclusions which for some come out as unimpeachable, declarative facts which are often incomplete or just wrong conclusions. Good to counter and aid and calibrate the eye test in evaluating a high chaos collision sport played at speed. When one gets outcomes like Caleb Jones carrying Adam Larsson as a defense partner, it's time to reset your spreadsheet and start watching games again.

While I agree context should always be used with analytics and they're just a tool to help contextualize what you're seeing on ice, but when have analytics ever said that Caleb Jones is carrying Adam Larsson? If anything Larsson's analytics on the Oilers were favourable compared to his actual on ice play and results especially from 2017-20. We don't need to make up narratives that never happened just to make analytics seem worse than they are.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

While I agree context should always be used with analytics and they're just a tool to help contextualize what you're seeing on ice, but when have analytics ever said that Caleb Jones is carrying Adam Larsson? If anything Larsson's analytics on the Oilers were favourable compared to his actual on ice play and results especially from 2017-20. We don't need to make up narratives that never happened just to make analytics seem worse than they are.

“Jesse Puljujarvi makes Connor McDavid better”

I read that a million times last season.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

“Jesse Puljujarvi makes Connor McDavid better”

I read that a million times last season.

Puljujarvi played pretty damn well last season especially the first half of the season before he got long COVID, and his analytics reflected that. Like the guy had 26 points in 35 games or something at one point while being +20 or something. Puljujarvi played horribly this season and his analytics have absolutely cratered to reflect that. Him having 14 points and -11 in 58 games is a far far far cry from the player who was playing out of his mind the first half of 2020-21. They're actually doing a pretty damn good job of recording the gap in his gameplay from last season to this season.

Also not a single advanced stat ever indicated Puljujarvi was even close to McDavid's level.

 

[fresh meat]

If this is of any significant length, the West is truly wide the f*** open

Did you misread this and think Makar is out indefinitely? Because Josh Manson being out indefinitely does not make an entire conference wide open

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

Well, it's never too early to start talking what Holland's summer plan needs to be.

It's going to have to be cap creative, but thankfully we have a lot of key players locked in. Fingers crossed the cap goes up by more than 1m.

Bouch and McLeod. Sadly he'll have to try and squeeze them on 2 year bridge deals, unless either are willing to sign a stupidly kind long-term deal.

Kostin, I love his play, but he's going to have to come in at another show-me price.

The key players to try and upgrade on are Soup and Ceci. Campbell I don't see as being realistic unless SJ is taking him in a mass overpay for Karlsson. All else failing, trying to find a top 6 RW would be great.

I hope we take better advantage of guys needing 1 year show-me deals or vets willing to sign league min to chase a cup. If we can upgrade some key positions, we will badly need these value deals.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Puljujarvi played pretty damn well last season especially the first half of the season before he got long COVID, and his analytics reflected that. Like the guy had 26 points in 35 games or something at one point while being +20 or something. Puljujarvi played horribly this season and his analytics have absolutely cratered to reflect that. Him having 14 points and -11 in 58 games is a far far far cry from the player who was playing out of his mind the first half of 2020-21. They're actually doing a pretty damn good job of recording the gap in his gameplay from last season to this season.

Also not a single advanced stat ever indicated Puljujarvi was even close to McDavid's level.

It was stated ad nauseoum that PJ made McDavid better. Statements like this are commonplace in the nerd community as they try to legitimize their WAR charts and player cards.

Even today some of the nerds on Twitter were saying what a disaster trade for the Oilers.

I’m not saying advanced stats are all garbage and context is king but I am tired of getting preached to from the lofty perch up on high the nerds claim their unassailable mathematical high ground as absolutes.

It is getting ridiculous with these player cards and WAR charts.

 

[Fourier]

Often subjective data combining subjective cherry picking.

But get a nerd to an actual live game and ask them to explain what the 2 teams forechecking or defensive systems being employed in real time are and the players employment and effectiveness are within said systems and it’s silence.

I don't think this is true. Some nerds actually understand the things they are studying. But even if they don't have a firm grasp of what you are describing that does not mean they can't be useful. The job of the analytic department can be to provide data in a form that is useful to the hockey people and help them to interpret the results.

The problem is actually the opposite of what you describe. It is people who don't understand what the numbers are actually saying and the limitations in that regard that tends to be the biggest issue on these boards. Good data can be badly interpreted and bad data even more so.