SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Creating a Dynasty

Created by: AndrewLadd
Team: 2019-20 San Jose Sharks
Initial Creation Date: May 15, 2019
Published: May 15, 2019
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
Now all the NHL refs get to play for their favorite team!
(All found here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_on-ice_officials#Current_officials)
Free Agent Signings
CREATEDYEARSCAP HIT
McCauley, Wes
1$800,000
Pollock, Kevin
1$800,000
Morton, Dean
1$800,000
ORourke, Dan
1$800,000
Rank, Garrett
1$800,000
McIsaac, Jon
1$800,000
Sutherland, Kelly
1$800,000
Walsh, Ian
1$800,000
Luxmore, TJ
1$800,000
Furlatt, Eric
1$800,000
Dwyer, Gord
1$800,000
Charron, Francis
1$800,000
Murray, Jonny
1$800,000
Murphy, Brian
1$800,000
Alphonso, Shandor
1$800,000
Driscoll, Scott
1$800,000
Knorr, Trent
1$800,000
Miller, Steve
1$800,000
Rehman, Kyle
1$800,000
Rody, Vaughan
1$800,000
Buyouts
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2019
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
2020
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the OTT
2021
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
20$83,000,000$40,034,203$660,750$0$42,965,797
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Sutherland, Kelly
$800,000$800,000
McCauley, Wes
$800,000$800,000
Luxmore, TJ
$800,000$800,000
Rank, Garrett
$800,000$800,000
Pollock, Kevin
$800,000$800,000
Furlatt, Eric
$800,000$800,000
McIsaac, Jon
$800,000$800,000
Morton, Dean
$800,000$800,000
Dwyer, Gord
$800,000$800,000
ORourke, Dan
$800,000$800,000
Charron, Francis
$800,000$800,000
Walsh, Ian
$800,000$800,000
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Alphonso, Shandor
$800,000$800,000
Driscoll, Scott
$800,000$800,000
Murray, Jonny
$800,000$800,000
Knorr, Trent
$800,000$800,000
Murphy, Brian
$800,000$800,000
Miller, Steve
$800,000$800,000
Rehman, Kyle
$800,000$800,000
Rody, Vaughan
$800,000$800,000

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
May 15, 2019 at 11:49 p.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2018
Posts: 9,352
Likes: 2,738
5 Stars
AndrewLadd liked this.
May 15, 2019 at 11:50 p.m.
#2
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2018
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 353
Haha so good
AndrewLadd liked this.
May 16, 2019 at 12:15 a.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 18,913
Likes: 9,205
Edited May 16, 2019 at 12:21 a.m.
67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

There was no deliberate pass. Timo batted it down right at Bouwmeester's skates and tried to play the puck. The next guy to touch it was Nyquist who was BEHIND the net when Timo batted down the puck. There is no way that was a deliberate pass to Nyquist. Good call by the refs.
Petrock83, TheBeardOfBurns, BlueSeeker and 1 other person liked this.
May 16, 2019 at 1:21 a.m.
#4
Jah1722
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2018
Posts: 5,403
Likes: 2,894
Quoting: ChiHawk
67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

There was no deliberate pass. Timo batted it down right at Bouwmeester's skates and tried to play the puck. The next guy to touch it was Nyquist who was BEHIND the net when Timo batted down the puck. There is no way that was a deliberate pass to Nyquist. Good call by the refs.


Problem with this is that’s not how it’s called. Any player knocking down the puck with the hand and then played by a teammate outside the defensive zone is always whistled down.
May 16, 2019 at 8:12 a.m.
#5
Thread Starter
Bo Horvat enjoyer
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2019
Posts: 10,711
Likes: 11,932
Quoting: ChiHawk
67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

There was no deliberate pass. Timo batted it down right at Bouwmeester's skates and tried to play the puck. The next guy to touch it was Nyquist who was BEHIND the net when Timo batted down the puck. There is no way that was a deliberate pass to Nyquist. Good call by the refs.


Dang maybe I should add you to this team
May 16, 2019 at 10:12 a.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 18,913
Likes: 9,205
Quoting: klondikebar
Dang maybe I should add you to this team


And the entire NHL office

It's a conspiracy...It's a conspiracy!!!! LMAO
May 16, 2019 at 12:39 p.m.
#7
sjsharks82
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 208
Likes: 49
Obviously, the hand pass controversy was big, BUT what about:

1. Obvious puck over glass missed.
2. Head shot against Braun missed.
3. Nasty slash on Haley's wrist missed.
4. Bouwmeester actually clearly trips Meier seconds before the goal. missed.

There were a minimum of four no doubt penalties against the blues that should have been called. We cannot look at one big call that went the sharks way without ignoring 4 blatant missed calls that went against them.
May 16, 2019 at 12:41 p.m.
#8
Thread Starter
Bo Horvat enjoyer
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2019
Posts: 10,711
Likes: 11,932
Quoting: slepler
Obviously, the hand pass controversy was big, BUT what about:

1. Obvious puck over glass missed.
2. Head shot against Braun missed.
3. Nasty slash on Haley's wrist missed.
4. Bouwmeester actually clearly trips Meier seconds before the goal. missed.

There were a minimum of four no doubt penalties against the blues that should have been called. We cannot look at one big call that went the sharks way without ignoring 4 blatant missed calls that went against them.


Yeah but the Sharks get the calls that mean the most, cough cough 5 minute major
May 16, 2019 at 1:16 p.m.
#9
sjsharks82
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 208
Likes: 49
Quoting: klondikebar
Yeah but the Sharks get the calls that mean the most, cough cough 5 minute major


define "mean the most"? In game two, with the sharks up 1-0 in games, vegas jumps out to a 3-0 lead. sharks roar back to tie 3-3. Then, they score a 4-3 go ahead goal. They have all the momentum, all the energy and are up 4-3 in the 2nd period. If they win, they take a 2-0 lead in the series and have a 90% win probability.... So what happens?

Refs waive off the goal and assess a penalty to couture. Replays show that the call was terrible as fleury did a triple axel to embellish and was way out beyond the blue paint, but because of the penalty, it's not reviewable. On the ensuing PP, Vegas scores to go up 4-3 and ultimately wins the game. I would argue that call as as big as the PP. After all, the refs straight up took a goal away from the sharks that migth have changed the whole series. On the penalty, the refs didnt give the sharks 4 goals.

What I'm saying is that everyone looks at a key call and jumps to the conclusion that it's the reason the result happened. I would argue there are many calls during games that are equally important but happen at different junctures yet have a similar impact on the outcome of a game. That couture call in game 2 was HUGE, yet gets forgotten. The missed 4 penalties in last night's game, especially the puck over glass when the Sharks were leading in the second period was huge as perron scored shortly after and the blues grabbed the momentum.

So, while I would argue that the sharks have gotten some big calls in high visibility times, I would argue about whether they mean more, statistically and probabilistically, than the calls that have gone against them. The win probability changes from those calls may not be that much higher than the win probability changes from calls that went against the sharks earlier in games or in the series.

Game 2 counts just as much as game 7. and 4 PPs that should have happened for the sharks counts just as much as a missed hand pass (give the sharks 8 PP minutes in regulation and that means STL cannot score for those 8 mins and the sharks score around 1 goal expected and win in regulation 5-3). Our congnitive bias and inability to understand statistics and probability leads to a hyperfocus on the 5 min penalty or the hand pass, but it's mathematically dubious.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll