Confirmed with Link: [VAN/CAL] Canucks to acquire Lindholm (CAL) for Kuzmenko, Brzustewicz, Jurmo, 1st 2024, & Conditional 4th 2024

[PuckMunchkin]

What on earth?

Garland is literally having the worst season of his career since his rookie year.

Ugh... You are still holding on this this dreadful take. What on earth right back at you for this.

Pettersson is having the same season as last year but has looked worse doing it.

Same year playing with Shitmenko and the one legged Russian. Yeah... What a honest argument you are making here. (edit I do agree that he has not looked consistently as good as last year)

Suter is basically hovering around his career numbers.

20% shooter... MS please....

Lafferty's numbers are pretty much identical to last year.

20% shooter... Are you kidding me?

Zadorov had 14 goals last year and you're calling this his career year?

Goals is how you judge his play? Lets just call this a agree to disagree case then.

I think he is playing the best hockey of his career, apart from his sniping.

DeSmith's numbers are below his career averages and his GSAA won't catch the best 2 seasons of his career.

Demko has the best numbers of his career but I'd say that's more a function of the vastly improved team defense and that he was more impressive in 20-21 and 21-22.

So you are taking in to account the environment when it suits you?

Ok. Fine. I'll give you goaltending. Lets say it is sustainable and we will be getting similar goaltending next year at the same cost.

You should probably pick that up.



edit. Sorry for being overtly confrontational @MS - Was unnecessary.

 

[andora]

Ugh... You are still holding on this this dreadful take. What on earth right back at you for this.

Same year playing with Shitmenko and the one legged Russian. Yeah... What a honest argument you are making here. (edit I do agree that he has not looked consistently as good as last year)

20% shooter... MS please....

20% shooter... Are you kidding me?

Goals is how you judge his play? Lets just call this a agree to disagree case then.

I think he is playing the best hockey of his career, apart from his sniping.

So you are taking in to account the environment when it suits you?

Ok. Fine. I'll give you goaltending. Lets say it is sustainable and we will be getting similar goaltending next year at the same cost.


You should probably pick that up.



edit. Sorry for being overtly confrontational @MS - Was unnecessary.

Honest question - is shooting percentage conventionally synonymous with the term career year?

Also re: zadorov imo the best he has ever played was 2 yrs ago under sutter with gudbranson 3rd pair

 

[MS]

Ugh... You are still holding on this this dreadful take. What on earth right back at you for this.

Same year playing with Shitmenko and the one legged Russian. Yeah... What a honest argument you are making here. (edit I do agree that he has not looked consistently as good as last year)

20% shooter... MS please....

20% shooter... Are you kidding me?

Goals is how you judge his play? Lets just call this a agree to disagree case then.

I think he is playing the best hockey of his career, apart from his sniping.

So you are taking in to account the environment when it suits you?

Ok. Fine. I'll give you goaltending. Lets say it is sustainable and we will be getting similar goaltending next year at the same cost.


You should probably pick that up.



edit. Sorry for being overtly confrontational @MS - Was unnecessary.

Your arguments are all sunk in bias.

We're getting a career year from JT Miller and Dakota Joshua. Hughes is having a 'career year' but it's unclear if that's just his level now as an improving young player.

Most everyone else is performing around expected levels.

The fact we've been mostly healthy has been huge. Career years, not as much.

And trying to argue that guys like Garland and Zadorov are having careers is just wacky.

 

[MS]

We had like 3-4 insane blowout games contributing to like 20ish of that +55. Remove those games and our record would still be pretty much the same.

Edit: 4 games contributed to +25

Yeah, I keep trying to explain this to people and it keeps whooshing over their heads.

Our PDO and goal differential are huge because we had a string of crazy blowouts to start the season. .

If you have a PDO of 105 or whatever and a record in one-goal games of 25-8-3 or something .... that PDO is clearly contributing to results and your record will regress when it regresses.

But our record in 1-goal games is ... pretty average. Our 'huge PDO' was largely generated in those crazy blowouts early in the year. It's been mostly 'wasted' PDO because it hasn't contributed directly to wins.

There's this weird thing where if we had performed worse and won the 3 games we won 24-2 only by a score of 7-3 or something ... we'd have the same exact record but the spreadsheet junkies would think it was much more sustainable. It makes zero sense.

 

[andora]

Yeah, I keep trying to explain this to people and it keeps whooshing over their heads.

Our PDO and goal differential are huge because we had a string of crazy blowouts to start the season. .

If you have a PDO of 105 or whatever and a record in one-goal games of 25-8-3 or something .... that PDO is clearly contributing to results and your record will regress when it regresses.

But our record in 1-goal games is ... pretty average. Our 'huge PDO' was largely generated in those crazy blowouts early in the year. It's been mostly 'wasted' PDO because it hasn't contributed directly to wins.

There's this weird thing where if we had performed worse and won the 3 games we won 24-2 only by a score of 7-3 or something ... we'd have the same exact record but the spreadsheet junkies would think it was much more sustainable. It makes zero sense.

Last paragraph sums up the twilight zone part of it. Add in if we took 6 more garbage shots a game

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Your arguments are all sunk in bias.

Explain how everyone shooting 20% is sunk in bias?

We're getting a career year from JT Miller and Dakota Joshua. Hughes is having a 'career year' but it's unclear if that's just his level now as an improving young player.

Most everyone else is performing around expected levels.

The fact we've been mostly healthy has been huge. Career years, not as much.

And trying to argue that guys like Garland and Zadorov are having careers is just wacky.

Reasonable. While I disagree.

Except the Garland take. But so be it...

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Yeah, I keep trying to explain this to people and it keeps whooshing over their heads.

Our PDO and goal differential are huge because we had a string of crazy blowouts to start the season. .

If you have a PDO of 105 or whatever and a record in one-goal games of 25-8-3 or something .... that PDO is clearly contributing to results and your record will regress when it regresses.

But our record in 1-goal games is ... pretty average. Our 'huge PDO' was largely generated in those crazy blowouts early in the year. It's been mostly 'wasted' PDO because it hasn't contributed directly to wins.

There's this weird thing where if we had performed worse and won the 3 games we won 24-2 only by a score of 7-3 or something ... we'd have the same exact record but the spreadsheet junkies would think it was much more sustainable. It makes zero sense.

I think this explains how you ended up being so horribly wrong on Kuz.

 

[Hansen]

What on earth?

Garland is literally having the worst season of his career since his rookie year.

Pettersson is having the same season as last year but has looked worse doing it.

Suter is basically hovering around his career numbers.

Lafferty's numbers are pretty much identical to last year.

Zadorov had 14 goals last year and you're calling this his career year?

DeSmith's numbers are below his career averages and his GSAA won't catch the best 2 seasons of his career.

Demko has the best numbers of his career but I'd say that's more a function of the vastly improved team defense and that he was more impressive in 20-21 and 21-22.

If you go back to the 35ish game mark lots of guys were tracking for career years, theres been a bit of a return to reality that you really have to keep a pulse on the stat sheet to observe

 

[PuckMunchkin]

If you go back to the 35ish game mark lots of guys were tracking for career years, theres been a bit of a return to reality that you really have to keep a pulse on the stat sheet to observe

Yep.

 

[credulous]

Yeah, I keep trying to explain this to people and it keeps whooshing over their heads.

Our PDO and goal differential are huge because we had a string of crazy blowouts to start the season. .

this isn't true at all. the canucks (5v5) pdo is higher since dec 1 than it is full season. if you go month by month it breaks down as follows:

october 9gp 106.2
november 15gp 102.5
december 12gp 107.1
jan 13gp 103.7

 

[MS]

Explain how everyone shooting 20% is sunk in bias?

Reasonable. While I disagree.

Except the Garland take. But so be it...

Garland's career year was the year he scored 52 ES points/82. He's been at that level for the past couple months but was poor for the first two months of the season and there's no way he's going to hit the value provided that year.

Zadorov shot 11% last year for 14 goals and is shooting 2% this year and you're somehow calling this his career year. He was also just as good defensively in Calgary.

this isn't true at all. the canucks (5v5) pdo is higher since dec 1 than it is full season. if you go month by month it breaks down as follows:

october 9gp 106.2
november 15gp 102.5
december 12gp 107.1
jan 13gp 103.7

Literally 40% of our goal differential comes from 3 blowouts. Our PDO in the first two months of the season actually would have been <100 without those games and would be *significantly* lower if we'd just won them by normal 3-1 type scores.

 

[MS]

If you go back to the 35ish game mark lots of guys were tracking for career years, theres been a bit of a return to reality that you really have to keep a pulse on the stat sheet to observe

No argument there. The first 20 games in particular were ridiculous.

But what I said at that point was that the goal differential and the individual totals would regress but that we'd keep winning games because we were outplaying the opposition most nights ... and that's exactly what's happened.

We're winning because we're good. The only way a big regression is going to happen is if key players get injured. And that's certainly more than possible.

 

[Vector]

Let’s not stawman, including myself here. We’re also getting very far afield of the thread topic.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Yeah, I keep trying to explain this to people and it keeps whooshing over their heads.

Our PDO and goal differential are huge because we had a string of crazy blowouts to start the season. .

If you have a PDO of 105 or whatever and a record in one-goal games of 25-8-3 or something .... that PDO is clearly contributing to results and your record will regress when it regresses.

But our record in 1-goal games is ... pretty average. Our 'huge PDO' was largely generated in those crazy blowouts early in the year. It's been mostly 'wasted' PDO because it hasn't contributed directly to wins.

There's this weird thing where if we had performed worse and won the 3 games we won 24-2 only by a score of 7-3 or something ... we'd have the same exact record but the spreadsheet junkies would think it was much more sustainable. It makes zero sense.

Yeah. I looked at all of our highest PDO games, and of the 18 games where our PDO was above 1.10 there were only 3 that were 1 goal games. Like you said the blowout discrepancy plays a part as well. We’ve won 6 games with at least a 4 goal lead but havn’t lost any games by 4. We also have 6 shutouts this year and have only been shutout once. Something else to keep in mind is that we have the lowest amount of low danger shots per game. Having 2-3 less low danger shots per game that have a 2-5% chance of a goal than the average team also increases the PDO.

I don’t know if it’s sustainable to stay first in the league, but the way we have been playing, and how our coaching and management team have performed I have confidence we will be a top 10 team again next year. Unless there are significant injuries or regressions

Sam Lafferty has 7 points against Edmonton and San Jose. Him shooting 20% has not been a factor in us winning games.

 

[MS]

Yeah. I looked at all of our highest PDO games, and of the 18 games where our PDO was above 1.10 there were only 3 that were 1 goal games. Like you said the blowout discrepancy plays a part as well. We’ve won 6 games with at least a 4 goal lead but havn’t lost any games by 4. We also have 6 shutouts this year and have only been shutout once. Something else to keep in mind is that we have the lowest amount of low danger shots per game. Having 2-3 less low danger shots per game that have a 2-5% chance of a goal than the average team also increases the PDO.

I don’t know if it’s sustainable to stay first in the league, but the way we have been playing, and how our coaching and management team have performed I have confidence we will be a top 10 team again next year. Unless there are significant injuries or regressions

Sam Lafferty has 7 points against Edmonton and San Jose. Him shooting 20% has not been a factor in us winning games.

Exactly.

The PDO thing is all a great big mirage. It's probably inflated some individual totals a bit but it's not why we're winning games.

 

[timw33]

Exactly.

The PDO thing is all a great big mirage. It's probably inflated some individual totals a bit but it's not why we're winning games.

It's driving me nuts. Fans of other teams are assuming that we're throwing low danger point shots that comically bounce off 4 players like a game of Plinko and into the net when the reality is they are just just being more selective to try and generate quality over quantity.

 

[MS]

It's driving me nuts. Fans of other teams are assuming that we're throwing low danger point shots that comically bounce off 4 players like a game of Plinko and into the net when the reality is they are just just being more selective to try and generate quality over quantity.

Yeah, I went through the numbers a little while back and almost every player on the team is down from prior years in terms of SOG despite playing on a better team that is spending more time in the offensive zone.

There might be some luck to some of those 20%s but it isn't remotely the entire explanation. There's a lot of stuff happening under the surface to generate these results that isn't explained by people with a rudimentary understanding of math shouting REGRESSION TO THE MEAN.

 

[Bgav]

It's driving me nuts. Fans of other teams are assuming that we're throwing low danger point shots that comically bounce off 4 players like a game of Plinko and into the net when the reality is they are just just being more selective to try and generate quality over quantity.

Don't read the the oilers board

 

[Rowlet]

Don't read the the oilers board

Truly the most miserable people in hockey. They have the best player in the world and they can't stand it, I honestly think they'd rather be last than 2nd.

 

[Raistlin]

Yeah. I looked at all of our highest PDO games, and of the 18 games where our PDO was above 1.10 there were only 3 that were 1 goal games. Like you said the blowout discrepancy plays a part as well. We’ve won 6 games with at least a 4 goal lead but havn’t lost any games by 4. We also have 6 shutouts this year and have only been shutout once. Something else to keep in mind is that we have the lowest amount of low danger shots per game. Having 2-3 less low danger shots per game that have a 2-5% chance of a goal than the average team also increases the PDO.

I don’t know if it’s sustainable to stay first in the league, but the way we have been playing, and how our coaching and management team have performed I have confidence we will be a top 10 team again next year. Unless there are significant injuries or regressions

Sam Lafferty has 7 points against Edmonton and San Jose. Him shooting 20% has not been a factor in us winning games.

and this is why all the PDO talk in the main boards are pointless, no one there is going to break down what contributes to the high PDO on a game by game basis. lets be honest, there is a LOT of jealous talk trying to knock the team down a notch. I was a doomer, nothing informed me that this team will perform that much better than last year. Hronek was nothing special in his limited games, and the defense and bottom 6 was a giant enigma wrapped in a riddle. But this season is buoyed largely by something VERY sustainable. Good management, pro scouting and good coaching. Eventually all good coaching will fall on deaf ears, management will reach a certain point in the competition cycle where they fail to adjust quick enough and fall behind the curve. But right now, we are climbing up the apex of the curve, there should be a window where we see the zenith of the team's facilities. we extend the zenith by development and keeping our top echelon of prospects. I love that we did not give up a extra 1st for Tanev. that 1st is for next year if they replicate a good level of success.

Regarding shooting percentage.

As another poster said, 1 bottom 6 guy shooting 20% is luck, when 4 of them are doing so, its likely a system the team is employing. The process to maintain a high shooting % is a strategy instilled by the coach, you see them fighting every chance to get to the middle of the ice. With Quinn, he can consistently set you or himself up for a shot from there. Correct me if I'm wrong, that middle of the ice is not really considered a high danger chance if its from a distance right? HD chances are more a factor of distance from net. From a probability standpoint, if you sacrifice 3 shots from anywhere and wait for something from the middle, your team shooting % will skyrocket, that shot will "spray" in a myriad of possible angles after the initial save, then, all you need is quick hands and elite finishing. We. Got. Them.

Other teams can try our approach, its no secret, but its not a matter of luck to pull it off, just like its not a simple matter of luck for McDrai to dominate PP. You need the right type of skill combination to use this strategy, and a big part is a Makar or Quinn gaining the zone and keeping the puck in. after that middle of the ice shot goes off, Miller/boeser/EP/Lindholm can tip with the best of them, and half of them have ungodly quick hands.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

and this is why all the PDO talk in the main boards are pointless, no one there is going to break down what contributes to the high PDO on a game by game basis. lets be honest, there is a LOT of jealous talk trying to knock the team down a notch. I was a doomer, nothing informed me that this team will perform that much better than last year. Hronek was nothing special in his limited games, and the defense and bottom 6 was a giant enigma wrapped in a riddle. But this season is buoyed largely by something VERY sustainable. Good management, pro scouting and good coaching. Eventually all good coaching will fall on deaf ears, management will reach a certain point in the competition cycle where they fail to adjust quick enough and fall behind the curve. But right now, we are climbing up the apex of the curve, there should be a window where we see the zenith of the team's facilities. we extend the zenith by development and keeping our top echelon of prospects. I love that we did not give up a extra 1st for Tanev. that 1st is for next year if they replicate a good level of success.

Regarding shooting percentage.

The high shooting % is also a mentality instilled by the coach, you see them fighting every chance to get to the middle of the ice, with Quinn, he can consistently set you or himself up for a shot from there. Correct me if I'm wrong, that middle of the ice is not really considered a high danger chance if its from a distance right? HD chances are more a factor of distance from net. From a probability standpoint, if you sacrifice 3 shots from anywhere and wait for something from the middle, your team shooting % will skyrocket, that shot will "spray" in a myriad of possible angles after the initial save, then, all you need is quick hands and elite finishing. We. Got. Them.

Other teams can try our approach, its no secret, but its not a matter of luck to pull it off, just like its not a simple matter of luck for McDrai to dominate PP. You need the right type of skill combination to use this strategy, and a big part is a Makar or Quinn gaining the zone and keeping the puck in. after that middle of the ice shot goes off, Miller/boeser/EP/Lindholm can tip with the best of them, and half of them have ungodly quick hands.

This so weird to read...

But I wont argue it anymore...

 

[mriswith]

Garland is one of those players we are never going to properly appreciate. People still want to dump him for nothing in the offseason, it's madness.

He's on track to put up his 2nd best season of his career.

The pace is a little bit behind that target, but right now he looks pretty much exactly like he did the first couple months of his 50 ES point season where he completely carried the 2nd line and it'd be shocking if he regressed back to what he looked like to start the season when he'd requested a trade, didn't want to be here and it was very evident on the ice.

This so weird to read...

But I wont argue it anymore...

There's a lot of weird arguments this year. We're 1st in the league and people were still rating 2/3 of the roster as B's, C's and D's in the report card thread. Apparently we need to be a 150 point team to be seen as slightly overachieving on our forum.

For sustainability, if we believe our team is not unreasonably lucky so far, then we got both GM of the year and Jack Adams performances and if we get elite front office performance like this moving forward then we will be an elite team in perpetuity. If this is the high water mark for the front office and they're average moving forward, we'll drop back to being a wild card tier team.

I lean more towards the former than the latter because our coaching staff looks like solid gold but other than that it's hard to be confident in either assessment this early.

But people still don't really have the cap integrated into their thinking. Say all of our players performances are sustainable - we're going to have 7 20% shooters putting up 1st line production again next year, half of them in the bottom six. Internal raises alone to the same roster would demand 15% - 20% of the total cap.

Since it's a cap league, in theory that means 15% - 20% loss of performance due to attrition even if we maintain the same level of performance across the entire roster.

If mgmt picks the right targets to lose and to keep a lot of that loss can be mitigated, and if coaching can keep getting most of the roster playing at the top 1/3 of their potential then probably all of the loss can be mitigated, but I don't see enough people acknowledging how tough the decisions are going to be this summer. But tbh I don't blame anyone who doesn't want to think about this stuff, I'm barely thinking about it and mostly just enjoying the ride while it's here.

 

[Kryten]

Garland is one of those players we are never going to properly appreciate. People still want to dump him for nothing in the offseason, it's madness.

He's on track to put up his 2nd best season of his career

Did you mean 2nd worst?

 

[mriswith]

Did you mean 2nd worst?

Nope. 2nd best. He's scoring at a 1st line rate.

Context: I only care about his ES performance, don't care at all about his 1st unit Ari PP production that we don't need and he won't get the opportunity for anyways.

Overvaluing PP production is how he ended up with that absolutely bizarre interview at the end of his 1st year here where he was down on himself, thought he had a poor year and talked about needing to do better next year after putting up borderline all star numbers at ES.

Someone could argue 3rd best and be correct because there's one Ari year he's slightly trailing at ES but I discount that because he's getting less ice time this year and the putrid first 1.5 months that I think were due to external factors will drag his stats down less after another 30 games, and don't affect my expectations for him moving forward.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Exactly.

The PDO thing is all a great big mirage. It's probably inflated some individual totals a bit but it's not why we're winning games.

I think you just invented the new "unique points" argument.