Toggle sidebar

The Advanced Stats Thread Episode VIII:

Status
Not open for further replies.
GoAwayPanarin

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,587
51,701
In High Altitoad
Dactyl said:
Yes they have
Click to expand...

Where?

RB has argued that they aren't worth the contract that they'll get which is an entirely different point and I've seen others worry about signing EK long term because of how he'll hold up throughout the duration of his contract.

Haven't seen one person say they don't want to sign either guy because the team isn't ready to win yet.
 
Kaapo Cabana

Kaapo Cabana

Next name: Admiral Kakkbar
Sep 5, 2014
5,021
4,132
Philadelphia
Dactyl said:
At what point does “he’s overpaid but it’s just 2 years so it’s not a problem” become a problem?
Click to expand...
How much do you think Vesey should have gotten paid?

or, do you think we should have just traded him ( I would agree if that was the case)

sorry to de-rail, we can go to the Vesey thread
 
Irishguy42

Irishguy42

Mr. Preachy
Sep 11, 2015
26,819
19,074
NJ
silverfish said:
Damn. I post a bomb Vesey analysis and you guys just go and post and post until it's on the previous page and now no one will see my baby :(
Click to expand...
Yeah, but thanks to your bump, I went and saw it. It was good. Exactly what I thought the results would be.

vkMfQug.gif


Also, if that's what you consider special enough to be your child, you should consider orphanages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: East Coast Bias and silverfish
JimmyG89

JimmyG89

Registered User
May 1, 2010
9,534
7,809
Best thing that can happen with the Vesey deal: He plays relatively well as a bottom 6 guy and gets traded in 18 months to a team that likes him. Deal takes him to UFA. He won't see another NYR contract if I had to guess.
 
Kaapo Cabana

Kaapo Cabana

Next name: Admiral Kakkbar
Sep 5, 2014
5,021
4,132
Philadelphia
Dactyl said:
Trade him to a dumber team then. He wouldn’t be hard to replace.
Click to expand...
Great I thought they should have done this to, but they didn't.

Lets say he would have been replaced by a guy making $925k a year for arguments sake (max ELC)

That is a savings of 1.35M/year on the cap for 2 years

Thats a whopping 1.7% of the salary cap this year.

The cap will most likely go up more than 1.7% next year.

If 1.7% of the cap for 2 years (less the 2nd year) is what you are getting all worked up about, then I'd hate to see your reaction if a real problem comes along.

I don't think very highly of Jimmy Vesey either, But this deal is not hurting the team
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangers743, Harbour Dog and Go Away Staal
Harbour Dog

Harbour Dog

Registered User
Jul 16, 2015
10,298
12,942
St. John's
Dr Chin Richalds said:
Great I thought they should have done this to, but they didn't.

Lets say he would have been replaced by a guy making $925k a year for arguments sake (max ELC)

That is a savings of 1.35M/year on the cap for 2 years

Thats a whopping 1.7% of the salary cap this year.

The cap will most likely go up more than 1.7% next year.

If 1.7% of the cap for 2 years (less the 2nd year) is what you are getting all worked up about, then I'd hate to see your reaction if a real problem comes along.

I don't think very highly of Jimmy Vesey either, But this deal is not hurting the team
Click to expand...

And odds are that the guy we replace him with will also be a small dip in production, and not have the chance to improve (however slight).

This thread is making me feel like a Vesey apologist; I need to go shower again.
 
silverfish

silverfish

got perma'd
Jun 24, 2008
34,644
4,353
under the bridge
Harbour Dog said:
And odds are that the guy we replace him with will also be a small dip in production, and not have the chance to improve (however slight).

This thread is making me feel like a Vesey apologist; I need to go shower again.
Click to expand...
Do you think if given equal ice time, Duclair, for example, would produce more or less than Vesey? Points-per-60 and shot attempt metrics seem to suggest that Duclair will out perform Vesey at close to 1/4 the cost this year.

You guys ever look at Vesey's PP production? Lmfao. He's so bad. 3 points in 115 minutes last year. 1.56 points per 60 on the PP ranks 277th out of 283 players to play at least 100 minutes.

$2.275 AAV :laugh:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dactyl, Phnxldr and Machinehead
Harbour Dog

Harbour Dog

Registered User
Jul 16, 2015
10,298
12,942
St. John's
silverfish said:
Do you think if given equal ice time, Duclair, for example, would produce more or less than Vesey? Points-per-60 and shot attempt metrics seem to suggest that Duclair will out perform Vesey at close to 1/4 the cost this year.
Click to expand...

I think that in the role I hope to see them in (bottom 6er that doesn't get hard matchups) they would produce similarly. I fully expect Vesey to outperform his shot attempt metrics slightly. If we were trying to fit a guy in with more skilled players, I'd want Duclair easily.

Who's to say we never tried for Duclair though?

If we were going to be against the cap this year or next, I would absolutely hate this signing. But the reality is we aren't, and if by some miracle we need room for Karlsson, then Vesey will have enough value that we won't have to add a pick to move him.
 
silverfish

silverfish

got perma'd
Jun 24, 2008
34,644
4,353
under the bridge
Harbour Dog said:
I think that in the role I hope to see them in (bottom 6er that doesn't get hard matchups) they would produce similarly. I fully expect Vesey to outperform his shot attempt metrics slightly. If we were trying to fit a guy in with more skilled players, I'd want Duclair easily.

Who's to say we never tried for Duclair though?

If we were going to be against the cap this year or next, I would absolutely hate this signing. But the reality is we aren't, and if by some miracle we need room for Karlsson, then Vesey will have enough value that we won't have to add a pick to move him.
Click to expand...
I can't respond to this without going OT :(
 
Harbour Dog

Harbour Dog

Registered User
Jul 16, 2015
10,298
12,942
St. John's
silverfish said:
I can't respond to this without going OT :(
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I really hate defending the contract anyway, because you're absolutely right; it's terrible.

What he would of got through arbitration would of also been terrible.

But it will very movable should push come to shove.
 
silverfish

silverfish

got perma'd
Jun 24, 2008
34,644
4,353
under the bridge
Harbour Dog said:
Fair enough.

I really hate defending the contract anyway, because you're absolutely right; it's terrible.

What he would of got through arbitration would of also been terrible.

But it will very movable should push come to shove.
Click to expand...
I mean, in a vacuum, if I told you that the Rangers signed this guy to a 2 year, $2.275m AAV:

Last two years, ranks 5v5, forwards who have played 1500 minutes. I'll even open the sample to help him.

n = 252

Box stats:
p60 - 210
g60 - 85
A60 - 242

Teammate relative:
relTCF% - 228
relTxGF% - 232
relTGF% - 236

Forget where we are as an organization. Forget our current cap situation. Forget all of that. Your front office just signed that player to this contract. How do you feel? He's a useless player everywhere from 10 ft from the net, and we've already proven that he's only slightly above average there anyway. I don't know why this guy is on my team.
 
Harbour Dog

Harbour Dog

Registered User
Jul 16, 2015
10,298
12,942
St. John's
silverfish said:
I mean, in a vacuum, if I told you that the Rangers signed this guy to a 2 year, $2.275m AAV:

Last two years, ranks 5v5, forwards who have played 1500 minutes. I'll even open the sample to help him.

n = 252

Box stats:
p60 - 210
g60 - 85
A60 - 242

Teammate relative:
relTCF% - 228
relTxGF% - 232
relTGF% - 236

Forget where we are as an organization. Forget our current cap situation. Forget all of that. Your front office just signed that player to this contract. How do you feel? He's a useless player everywhere from 10 ft from the net, and we've already proven that he's only slightly above average there anyway. I don't know why this guy is on my team.
Click to expand...

Nice to see all the numbers laid out, and I agree entirely; he is a detriment when he is on the ice. This is a bad signing.

I had completely resigned myself to the fact that we were going to be re-upping him though, and the contract he got (being only two years and a slight overpayment on what he would of gotten through arbitration) is less shitty than I had feared.

If we were spending to the cap this year, then I would be very angry that we had decided to allocate space this way. But I still think that despite his play, he'll put up 15-20 goals and some GM will give us something in the neighbourhood of a 4th rounder for him at this deadline or next
 
Machinehead

Machinehead

GoAwayTrouba
Jan 21, 2011
142,467
112,865
NYC
silverfish said:
I mean, in a vacuum, if I told you that the Rangers signed this guy to a 2 year, $2.275m AAV:

Last two years, ranks 5v5, forwards who have played 1500 minutes. I'll even open the sample to help him.

n = 252

Box stats:
p60 - 210
g60 - 85
A60 - 242

Teammate relative:
relTCF% - 228
relTxGF% - 232
relTGF% - 236

Forget where we are as an organization. Forget our current cap situation. Forget all of that. Your front office just signed that player to this contract. How do you feel? He's a useless player everywhere from 10 ft from the net, and we've already proven that he's only slightly above average there anyway. I don't know why this guy is on my team.
Click to expand...

Gem from Raspewtin when I saw him this past weekend: "the problem with this rebuild is that it gives this front office license to do all sorts of stupid shit and escape criticism because 'we're rebuilding anyway."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dactyl
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom