SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Coyotes Usage: Team seems about finished

Team: 2018-19 Arizona Coyotes
Initial Creation Date: Jul. 12, 2018
Published: Jul. 12, 2018
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Buyouts
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2019
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the PIT
2020
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
2021
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
Logo of the ARI
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
23$79,500,000$62,946,943$0$4,692,500$16,553,057

Roster

Left WingCentreRight Wing
$885,833$885,833 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
LW, RW
UFA - 2
$6,500,000$6,500,000
C, RW
UFA - 3
$3,350,000$3,350,000
LW, RW
M-NTC
UFA - 3
$839,167$839,167 (Performance Bonus$212,500$212K)
C
UFA - 1
$4,900,000$4,900,000
LW, C, RW
UFA - 2
$2,800,000$2,800,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
$1,500,000$1,500,000
RW, LW
UFA - 2
$863,333$863,333 (Performance Bonus$2,475,000$2M)
C
UFA - 2
$821,666$821,666 (Performance Bonus$230,000$230K)
RW, LW
UFA - 2
$863,333$863,333 (Performance Bonus$500,000$500K)
RW, LW
UFA - 1
$1,000,000$1,000,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
$675,000$675,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
$1,250,000$1,250,000
C
NMC
UFA - 2
$5,275,000$5,275,000
RW
NMC
UFA - 3
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
$5,500,000$5,500,000
LD
UFA - 1
$4,100,000$4,100,000
LD/RD
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1
$4,250,000$4,250,000
G
UFA - 3
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$425,000$425K)
LD/RD
UFA - 1
$3,937,500$3,937,500
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 3
$1,850,000$1,850,000
G
UFA - 2
$650,000$650,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
$5,475,000$5,475,000
LD/RD
NMC
UFA - 3
$1,375,000$1,375,000
LD/RD
UFA - 2
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
$5,500,000$5,500,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Jul. 12, 2018 at 3:46 p.m.
#1
Chicago AGM
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 913
Likes: 68
Hino is a RW, not C, despite what it says here.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 3:47 p.m.
#2
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Grabner and Panik are WAY too high in the lineup.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:04 p.m.
#3
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Grabner and Panik are WAY too high in the lineup.


Michael Grabner had 2.09 S/gp in bottom-six minutes in defensive usage. He's also what's known as a "chance maker" from Alex Novet's goal scoring style analysis from hockeygraphs, which means we can expect above-average shooting percentages from him. Coupled with top-line minutes alongside a couple of terrific playmakers, and we could see him pot 30 goals this year. He's not much more than a pure gunner, but he's a solid one, and that's the piece that was missing for the Yotes at 1RW.

Richard Panik, meanwhile, in 35 games with Arizona last year, posted a +6.1 Corsi Rel and a +6.4 Fenwick Rel in even usage while still netting 8 goals and 19 points on reasonable shooting. He's a solid top-six play driver/checker in the Backlund/Frolik model. Perfectly adequate for a second line role where his linemates do most of the scoring.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:06 p.m.
#4
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Quoting: The_Ultimate_Pielord
Michael Grabner had 2.09 S/gp in bottom-six minutes in defensive usage. He's also what's known as a "chance maker" from Alex Novet's goal scoring style analysis from hockeygraphs, which means we can expect above-average shooting percentages from him. Coupled with top-line minutes alongside a couple of terrific playmakers, and we could see him pot 30 goals this year. He's not much more than a pure gunner, but he's a solid one, and that's the piece that was missing for the Yotes at 1RW.

Richard Panik, meanwhile, in 35 games with Arizona last year, posted a +6.1 Corsi Rel and a +6.4 Fenwick Rel in even usage while still netting 8 goals and 19 points on reasonable shooting. He's a solid top-six play driver/checker in the Backlund/Frolik model. Perfectly adequate for a second line role where his linemates do most of the scoring.


Grabner couldn't even crack the NJ roster for playoffs and I don't think there is another team in the league that would put Panik in a top 6 role.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:22 p.m.
#5
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Grabner couldn't even crack the NJ roster for playoffs and I don't think there is another team in the league that would put Panik in a top 6 role.


NHL GMs and coaches are not an authority on player evaluation. Reasons for this include:
A well-regarded GM gave a 4-year deal to a 24-year old with <0.33 AHL pts/gp
Cody McLeod, 0th percentile in Shot Contributions/60 and Shot Assists/60 was given an NHL contract.
Grabner's 27 goals ranked 2nd among players who played for the Devils last year, tied for 46th in the NHL with Patrick Marleau, Mika Zibanejad, Matt Duchene and Jonathan Huberdeau. Worth noting he generally had fewer minutes and lower-quality teammates than his goal scoring comparables.
Panik's possession metrics with Arizona were easily in elite territory, even on a poor team. It's pretty clear that Panik is an elite driver of possession that any team planning to run a defense/possession focused forward in their top-6 would do well to use..
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:39 p.m.
#6
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Quoting: The_Ultimate_Pielord
NHL GMs and coaches are not an authority on player evaluation. Reasons for this include:
A well-regarded GM gave a 4-year deal to a 24-year old with <0.33 AHL pts/gp
Cody McLeod, 0th percentile in Shot Contributions/60 and Shot Assists/60 was given an NHL contract.
Grabner's 27 goals ranked 2nd among players who played for the Devils last year, tied for 46th in the NHL with Patrick Marleau, Mika Zibanejad, Matt Duchene and Jonathan Huberdeau. Worth noting he generally had fewer minutes and lower-quality teammates than his goal scoring comparables.
Panik's possession metrics with Arizona were easily in elite territory, even on a poor team. It's pretty clear that Panik is an elite driver of possession that any team planning to run a defense/possession focused forward in their top-6 would do well to use..


Worth noting, Grabner plays against the other teams inferior players. If he plays against top lines he is going to be shredded!
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:47 p.m.
#7
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Worth noting, Grabner plays against the other teams inferior players. If he plays against top lines he is going to be shredded!


A) Quality of Teammates (QoT) has a bigger impact on players than Quality of Competition (QoC), largely due to it's larger actual variance. Unless a player is very deliberately matched, QoC doesn't vary enough to make a major difference.
B) Michael Grabner's career ozS% is 43.7. Last year it was 46.2. ozS% is a metric used to describe how often a player starts in the offensive zone versus the defensive zone, with 50% beng even. This shows that Grabner isn't being sheltered with easy assignments in terms of when he's put on the ice. He isn't a sheltered pure scorer like JVR.
Grabner can handle the competition he'll face in that role. His possession is iffy, but Keller and Stepan can carry him a bit and just rely on him to finish plays. Grabner's good in transition, too.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 4:51 p.m.
#8
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Quoting: The_Ultimate_Pielord
A) Quality of Teammates (QoT) has a bigger impact on players than Quality of Competition (QoC), largely due to it's larger actual variance. Unless a player is very deliberately matched, QoC doesn't vary enough to make a major difference.
B) Michael Grabner's career ozS% is 43.7. Last year it was 46.2. ozS% is a metric used to describe how often a player starts in the offensive zone versus the defensive zone, with 50% beng even. This shows that Grabner isn't being sheltered with easy assignments in terms of when he's put on the ice. He isn't a sheltered pure scorer like JVR.
Grabner can handle the competition he'll face in that role. His possession is iffy, but Keller and Stepan can carry him a bit and just rely on him to finish plays. Grabner's good in transition, too.


Throw all the analytical crap out you want, he is not a top 6 player. He never has been and never will be. Highs of 40 and 36 points in his career with the next high at 26. He isn't good.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 5:02 p.m.
#9
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Throw all the analytical crap out you want, he is not a top 6 player. He never has been and never will be. Highs of 40 and 36 points in his career with the next high at 26. He isn't good.


1. Points are not a particularly valuable statistic, especially for players who specialize in something other than offence, like Panik. The possession numbers are a much better indication of what he provides.
2. 35 points (last year's total for Panik) is far from unworkable for a 2nd-line player in today's NHL. Michael Frolik only netted 25 as part of Calgary's excellent 3M line, while Anthony Beauvillier only netted 36 on what was probably offensively the best 2nd line in hockey alongside Mathew Barzal and Jordan Eberle.

Also, analytics are also nearly universally more useful than the eye test. Simply evaluating players based on watching the games opens conclusions up to a whole mass of cognitive biases, headlined by schema's effects on memory and the classic confirmation bias. Analytics remove a large amount of this bias and allow the formation of conclusions based fully on actual empirical results.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 5:23 p.m.
#10
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Edited Jul. 12, 2018 at 5:28 p.m.
Quoting: The_Ultimate_Pielord
1. Points are not a particularly valuable statistic, especially for players who specialize in something other than offence, like Panik. The possession numbers are a much better indication of what he provides.
2. 35 points (last year's total for Panik) is far from unworkable for a 2nd-line player in today's NHL. Michael Frolik only netted 25 as part of Calgary's excellent 3M line, while Anthony Beauvillier only netted 36 on what was probably offensively the best 2nd line in hockey alongside Mathew Barzal and Jordan Eberle.

Also, analytics are also nearly universally more useful than the eye test. Simply evaluating players based on watching the games opens conclusions up to a whole mass of cognitive biases, headlined by schema's effects on memory and the classic confirmation bias. Analytics remove a large amount of this bias and allow the formation of conclusions based fully on actual empirical results.


Sorry, I was referring to Grabner.

But I am pretty sure points mean your team is putting the puck in the net and the name of the game is to our score your opponent.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 5:42 p.m.
#11
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Sorry, I was referring to Grabner.

But I am pretty sure points mean your team is putting the puck in the net and the name of the game is to our score your opponent.


Grabner puts the puck in the back of the net himself, generally. Not exactly a playmaker, but Stepan/Keller provides enough playmaking for the line.

Points are iffy for a few reasons: 1. Secondary assists are mostly noise, especially for forwards. (Grabner's low secondary assist numbers lower his points totals) 2. sh% and on-ice sh% vary wildly and are often luck-driven. 3. Suppressing goals against is just as valuable as driving goals for. 4. Goals for can be driven by things that don't fully show up in points, like possession/transition (strong suits of Panik).
Jul. 12, 2018 at 7:18 p.m.
#12
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167


Hanzal: injured.
Gagner 10 goals on 6.1 shooting percentage. That suggests his goals total will likely double. 20 goals, 40 points on an awful team is pretty nice for that cap hit.
The 1 mil crowd:
Made the list due to lack of risk. No major flops because being a major flop on a 1-year $1 million deal is pretty much impossible.Hartnell also managed 24 points in a fourth-line role, which is pretty respectable, especially with 13 goals. Great value for a no-risk contract.
Shattenkirk: 0.5 ppg before injury. On pace for 41 points over a full season, as a defenceman, on a bad team. Very good return for under $7 million on a UFA signing.
MDZ: dragged down by awful Canucks team.
Wiercioch: No-risk signing.
Mason and Elliott: Goalies are voodoo. Getting consistency from netminders is virtually impossible. They had down years, it happens.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 7:18 p.m.
#13
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Quoting: The_Ultimate_Pielord
A) One of the more well-respected GMs in the league gave an AHL enforcer a 4-year deal at 1M AAV. They are not an authority, Vegas proved that. When a team that shouldn't have had anyone better than another team's 9th-best player makes the cup finals after winning their division with only a 100.5 PDO, you know a lot of GMs in this league aren't much better than the ones here on CF.
B) Grabner only really does a few things (he's a pretty good transition player, kills some penalties, not awful in his own end) but one of them, scoring, is one of the most important things a player can offer. More playmaking isn't really necessary for a line featuring Clayton Keller and Derek Stepan. That line just needs a guy to finish plays and put the puck in the net. The 27-goal chance maker who's never had this level of opportunity in his career is probably a good pick for that. He also hasn't had a top-6 role in his career. He'll probably get some more assists from having Keller and Stepan there to boost his numbers.
What evidence do you have that Grabner isn't hockey smart, or that he can't play with the best in the league?
What skills are Panik lacking? The numbers clearly show he's got the skills to drive possession at an elite level while still providing a little bit of offense and being solid in his own end. That's plenty of skills for a 2RW who's linemates can carry the scoring load.


No, you are looking for scoring depth from your 2nd line and Panik will NOT provide that.

Grabner was given the chance in NYI to be a top 6F and failed and has subsequently spent this rest of his career buried down the lineup because obviously he isn’t good enough to play with the top players or else he would have been put there! This really isn’t hard to see but you are so blinded by your moneyball garbage that you can’t see that these guys aren’t that good.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 7:31 p.m.
#14
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
No, you are looking for scoring depth from your 2nd line and Panik will NOT provide that.

Grabner was given the chance in NYI to be a top 6F and failed and has subsequently spent this rest of his career buried down the lineup because obviously he isn’t good enough to play with the top players or else he would have been put there! This really isn’t hard to see but you are so blinded by your moneyball garbage that you can’t see that these guys aren’t that good.


Quoting: DirtyDangles
No, you are looking for scoring depth from your 2nd line and Panik will NOT provide that.

Grabner was given the chance in NYI to be a top 6F and failed and has subsequently spent this rest of his career buried down the lineup because obviously he isn’t good enough to play with the top players or else he would have been put there! This really isn’t hard to see but you are so blinded by your moneyball garbage that you can’t see that these guys aren’t that good.


2nd lines can do lots of things! The other team doesn't stop attacking when you put out your second line, they still need play drivers/checker. The addition of Panik makes the line more versatile and overall more useful. Keeps you from having to shelter it, opening up more opportunities for the first and third lines.

Michael Grabner had >15 mins of TOI/game (the definition of a top-6 forward) twice in NYI. One year he had 52 points (solid, would be tied for 88th this year, or low-end top line, though his high goals number would've made him higher). The second he suffered from both a low personal shooting percentage (11.9 is a tad low for a chance maker) and on-ice shooting percentage (7.9 is a bit below normal). He also didn't have linemates that were setting the world on fire (47 and 45 points from them) and, to top it off, it was a down year for him. His scoring rapidly regained form the next year. His only truly awful years were the year he was used on the fourth line and his year in TOR. Aside from those two, there's little to suggest top-line Grabner is incapable of scoring 30 (he's never been used as a top-line guy, by aTOI, at any point in his career).
Jul. 12, 2018 at 7:35 p.m.
#15
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
All I hear are excuses!


The no-risk signings weren't good because the players would be good, they were good because the players could have been good, and if they weren't, it didn't matter. A bunch of them didn't pan out, nature of the beast. Hartnell did pan out, validating the practice.
Shooting percentage regression is a well-known phenomenon. If we're calling that an excuse, I guess we can pencil William Karlsson in for another 40-goal season, eh? By the way, how's TJ Oshie's next 30-goal season coming?
Injuries are mostly just rotten luck. All the analytics in the world can't stop dumb luck from screwing you.
Goalies are always inconsistent. Therefore, judging a goalie from a 1 season sample is pretty pointless.
Jul. 12, 2018 at 7:50 p.m.
#16
Thread Starter
I put math in hockey
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 624
Likes: 167
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Huh, maybe because NO COACH/GM thinks he can do it! Jesus Christ man! People who are way smarter than you when it comes to hockey clearly know more!


An NHL GM last year traded Jonathan Marchessault and Reilly Smith (2/3rds of one of the best lines in hockey) for effectively Alex Petrovic (3rd pair dman) and a 4th-round pick. Another this year gave an AHL enforcer a 4-year NHL deal. A third gave Cody McLeod, an abysmal player in every way, one of the worst if not the worst in the NHL, a contract to play for them. A fourth one gave a 4-year deal to a 32-year-old who's 5v5 game died years ago. That one was also rebuilding. A fifth traded a for a winger to play center so he could play a center on the wing. That move was predicated on the coach's decision to play the center on the wing despite the center consistently having better results as a center than as a winger. A 6th traded this year's MVP for a decent top-pair defenceman. A 7th traded a first rounder right before his team bottomed out.

Yeah, NHL GMs aren't the best authorities.

Coaching highlights include: the aforementioned refusal to play the center at center, the decision to play Johnny Boychuck ahead of the younger and more effective Ryan Pulock, and Randy Carlyle's entire career in Toronto, which was an absolute smorgasbord of bad coaching.
But perhaps the best indictment of coaching decisions and Gming decisions comes from the Vegas Golden Knights. A team composed of depth pieces made the cup finals. Why?
FLA's GM horrifically undervalued 2/3rds of their top line
CBJ's coach refused to give opportunities to the other 1/3rd
Their 2C was refused top-six opportunities
Their 3RW was hugely undervalued by his organization, and had not been given an extended NHL stay
Their #1D was never used in a top-4
Neither was either part of their (excellent) 2nd pairing.
Vegas's run should damn well have put to bed the idea that NHL coaches and GMs are an authority. The NHL is a massive old boys' club and the effectiveness of their talent evaluators is severely compromised because of this. Appealing to them as an authority in an argument is not a valid point.
NateElder12 liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll