He didn’t sign a KHL player, he signed Versteeg and then he left for the KHL afterwards...

Yeah, but I thought that even if you did that you had to retain caphit.

Not true

Chicago management has officially hired MTLRebuild as a Special Advisor.

Johnny Boychuk is available @50% retained for a 3rd round pick.

@rangersandislesfan @Turner33 @ricochetii @DontToewsMe19 @Rodzikhockey93 @mhockey91@Math @TrueNorth @Daryl @TonyStrecher @NateElder12 @Icegirl @Mr_cap @l9guysports @TabooPenguo @Florida @GronkNation @Ethereal @flamesfan419 @alwaysnextyear @jmac490 @Zach @HotsamBatcho @MrBooth @Max @MacWinnon @TMLSage @phillyjabroni

EDIT: I MADE A NEW THREAD TO DISCUSS THIS TOPIC. PLEASE COMMENT IN THE "2018-19 GM GAME OFFICIAL SCORING THREAD". WE WILL ACCEPT ALL COMMENTS IN THAT THREAD UNTIL THE RULES ARE OFFICIAL AND THEN THE THREAD WILL SOLEY BE FOR BOG USE AT THE START OF THE SEASON. THANKS!

Before we publish official scoring rules that will be used to provide monthly power rankings over the course of the season, we want to give the GMs a chance to review the scoring model and make suggestions. We have come up with the following scoring categories that we think will best represent individual player success, and we have created a spreadsheet that automatically retrieves the data for each team for these scoring categories (with the exception of goalie stats, those will need to be manually input by our designated scorekeeper, likely myself or @BoltsPoint21).

Proposed Scoring Categories: All stats provided by Corsica.Hockey.
Skater Stats:
EV Production: Even strength production will be calculated from each roster player’s goals (G), primary assists (A1), and secondary assists (A2) at even strength according to the formula below.
.....EV Prod = ((0.75 * G) + (0.7 * A1) + (0.55 * A2))

PP Production: Power play production will be calculated the same way as EV production, but using PP Points.

CF%: Corsi-For percentage is essentially the percentage of shot attempts that belong the the player’s team while he is on the ice. It is calculated from Corsi-for (CF) and Corsi-Against (CA).
.....CF% = CF / (CF + CA)

xGF%: Expected Goals-For percentage is similar to CF% but instead of just counting shot attempts, it factors in shot quality to smooth some of the lucky/unlucky moments that tend to occur throughout the season.
.....xGF% = xGF/ (xGF + xGA)

Goalie Stats: require a minimum of 15 GP, failure to meet the GP threshold will result in the NHL season averages being applied for each goaltending category. EDIT: The BOG may consider using a harsher penalty than assigning the average to deter contending teams from settling for average goaltending. The spirit of this rule is to force teams to ice NHL goalies, and not to reward teams with no goalies at all.
SV%: Individual goalie save percentage

dSV%: Differential save percentage is the difference between a goalie’s actual SV% and the percentage of saves that would be expected given the shot quality that the goalie is faced with (xSV%).
.....dSV% = SV% - xSV%

GSAA: Goals Saved Above Average is quantifies how many more goals a team would have given up if they replaced their netminder with a “league average” goaltender.

Proposed Composition of Power Rankings:

EV Prod = 30%
PP Prod = 20%
CF% = 10%
xGF% = 10%
SV% = 10%
dSV% = 10%
GSAA = 10%


Process to use scoring tracker:

- BOG will ask GMs for a roster at the end of each month.
- BOG will input each team’s roster into the spreadsheet and check for quality.
- BOG will pull monthly data from Corsica.hockey into the raw data tabs.
- Tracking sheet will rank each team 1-31 based on the weighted categories shown above. The standings are additive over the entire season (e.g. the November rankings will account for October and November metrics, and so on).
- BOG will publish the full score tracking spreadsheet each month (view-only)

Notes:
- This scoring method will likely eliminate the need to establish any special rules for playoffs (i.e. round-by-round simulations, etc), so the end-of-season rankings will be used to determine final standings and draft order.
- Non-NHL players that appear on a team's roster will not be given any credit for scoring categories, although the original rules still apply about icing a competitive team and limiting the number of non-NHL players on each roster. The BOG will use its discretion to warn GMs of a non-compliant team.

Please DM me on twitter @ak_tune or reply in this thread with any questions/concerns/suggestions and I’ll be happy to explain anything in more detail. We hope to have the official scoring rules finalized in September.

Thanks,
BOG

@BoltsPoint21
@matt59
@krakowitz
@A_K
@TheCommissioner

Just to clarify, would the proposed model eliminate this process altogether, or will there be human element to the playoffs?

Still up for debate. For the purposes of formulating trade conditions, GMs can assume that the scoring model will at least play a part in the playoff process, but we may decide to use a combination of the model + GM votes. What would you prefer?

So the only work I'd have to do is submit a roster at the end of each month?

@A_K

I might have to double check, but expected statistics are a predictive model and not a reflection of a player's actual statistical performance, are they not?
Not sure I see any value in applying metrics to ratings based on what "should" happen. All statistics applied to ratings should be based on the results, not the quality of their play.

Is that clear, or do I need to explain better?
Do you have an argument that would convince me otherwise?

Edit: I can see the value of using a different, predictive model for the playoffs. I'm talking about regular season and standings purposes here.

Looking at it, it looks like raw production is what they are counting which is why raw goals, assists, etc weigh so heavily. xGF% is technically the only predictive model used and even then I'd use the term "predictive" lightly. IMO, it's a small/fair add to help calculate factors such as players in this game facing tougher or easier competition IRL and accounting for the "unluckiness" factor that may not exist if you had that player on your team in ourgame. For instance, Gallagher had an xGF% of 56.5% this past season but a GF% of 47.7%. This is primarily due to him playing significant amount of negative minutes with Plekanec as his main partner and being on a team that was overall bad. It wouldn't make sense for whoever owns Gallgher in the game to be punished if they have him playing with Tarasenko/Schenn because his IRL stats reflect negatively. xGF% would do a better job at showing the individuals IRL on ice contributions than something like GF% (which is just +/-). That's the way I view it anyway.

The way I understand it, xGF is a predictive stat but it is also descriptive of real, past events. Our intention was to use xGF as a sort of checks and balances with actual production, as some players show better underlying numbers than their production totals may express. But I definitely understand your concern - actually discussing this with a few people within the game right now. If anyone wants to add am opinion here, the more the merrier

https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/10/01/expected-goals-are-a-better-predictor-of-future-scoring-than-corsi-goals/

I am not against using xGF. But I think that it should only count 5% instead of 10%.
Give the additional weighting to REAL Goals/assists.

To follow this up, it acts as a "shot quality" model that incorporates various factors to spit out a predictive stat that is formulated based on those factors (shot type, distance, angle, etc.)

For example, examining this past season's production of William Karlsson, he finished with 42 goals, but was only expected to hit 25. He shot 23.4% this last year, one of the highest in the league. The model predicts, based on shot quality, that William Karlsson was expected to have 25.77 goals this past season, which translates to a 14 SH% or 25.76 goals. As we can see, 14 SH% is more rational and sustainable than 23.4% percent.

The model's creator (Manny) wrote this article back in 2016: http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/03/03/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-i/

@A_K

I'll take a closer look and get back to you. From what you guys are saying, it doesn't sound suitable for our purposes.
What would make sense, is a relative-to-team adjustment.
Predicting individual performance fluctuations, and whether a player is/could be up/down, doesn't have an impact team performance unless/until it happens. It only really serves to evaluate that player on their own.

Additionally. If I believe a player will produce better results, and I'm correct, I should be rewarded. The expected results might boost a GM's numbers if a player is performing poorly, but it would also lower the numbers of a GM who has accurately predicted that a player will outperform expectations.
The first scenario is a crutch. The latter is good player evaluation.

Now if we can modify a player's real world results to predict/reflect what they would produce with different linemates or on different teams, that would serve our purposes.
Expected values are useful for standard fantasy leagues, where scoring is based on an accumulation of individual results, but we are more concerned with a team picture than with a collection of individual snapshots.

(I have a new phone and its going to take some time for my keyboard to adjust, so if you spot a random word that seems out of place and is confusing, let me know. I try to catch them as I'm going, but inevitably end up having to cutest (see?) ... correct things later. )

Edit: Wondering if it might make more sense to incorporate WAR stats in place of xStats. It's probably one of the better ways to rate a player's impact on team performance.
What do you guys think?

Anybody care to comment on the Florida situation? Has a new GM been found yet?

@A_K @TheCommissioner

Yeah, they need a GM.

On the agenda. announcement coming soon.

Shouldn't there have been a trade freeze on the Ty Smith trade, meaning both the Hall and the Dobson trades are invalid and should both be undone.

Those trades are currently being discussed with the GMs involved

Looking to package Baertschi(+) for an upgrade

Ryan O’Rielly is otb for those who didn’t know, looking for something like the same return BUF got for him irl. Contact me on Twitter or on my team page with offers. Thx

Going all in. All prospects are available, excluding Samsonov and Bowey. Anyone else is fair game. Looking for any upgrade out there that I can fit under the cap