Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded

UFA	YEARS	CAP HIT
Stastny, Paul	1	$850,000
Kessel, Phil	1	$850,000

ROSTER SIZE	SALARY CAP	CAP HIT	OVERAGES	BONUSES	CAP SPACE
23	$83,500,000	$75,995,833	$0	$15,000	$7,504,167

Left Wing	Centre	Right Wing
Huberdeau, Jonathan $10,500,000$10,500,000 LW, RW NMC UFA - 8	Lindholm, Elias $4,850,000$4,850,000 C, RW UFA - 1	Kadri, Nazem $7,000,000$7,000,000 C NMC UFA - 6
Sharangovich, Yegor $3,100,000$3,100,000 C, LW, RW UFA - 2	Backlund, Mikael $5,350,000$5,350,000 C NMC UFA - 1	Mangiapane, Andrew $5,800,000$5,800,000 RW, LW M-NTC UFA - 2
Dubé, Dillon $2,300,000$2,300,000 LW, RW, C RFA - 1	Coleman, Blake $4,900,000$4,900,000 RW, LW NTC UFA - 4	Duehr, Walker $825,000$825,000 RW UFA - 2
Ruzicka, Adam $762,500$762,500 LW, C UFA - 1	Stastny, Paul $850,000$850,000 C, LW UFA	Klapka, Adam $832,500$832,500 RW, C RFA - 1
Hunt, Dryden $775,000$775,000 LW, RW UFA - 2		Kessel, Phil $850,000$850,000 RW UFA

Left Defense	Right Defense	Goaltender
Hanifin, Noah $1,237,500$1,237,500 LD M-NTC UFA - 1	Andersson, Rasmus $4,550,000$4,550,000 RD UFA - 3	Markström, Jacob $6,000,000$6,000,000 G NMC UFA - 3
Kylington, Oliver $2,500,000$2,500,000 LD/RD UFA - 1	Weegar, MacKenzie $6,250,000$6,250,000 LD/RD NTC UFA - 8	Wolf, Dustin $813,333$813,333 ($15,000$15K) G RFA - 1
Zadorov, Nikita $3,750,000$3,750,000 LD/RD UFA - 1	Tanev, Christopher $1,125,000$1,125,000 RD M-NTC UFA - 1
Oesterle, Jordan $925,000$925,000 LD/RD UFA - 1

Sep. 19, 2023 at 6:25 p.m.

#1

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Vladar has a negative GSAx in every season he's played and has a 2.2M cap hit. I know there's the Vladar to Colorado rumour on twitter but I am not interested in him at all and especially not if we're giving up a 3rd + Foudy. What makes you think he's worth a 2nd rounder in value?

GiggywithGibby and TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 6:45 p.m.

#2

GiggywithGibby

Future Ducks legend

Joined: Jun. 2022

Posts: 10,806

Likes: 7,631

A trade comparable (if you can call it that) is Aiden Hill. He went for a 4th rounder. Aiden Hill was at least good at the time of the trade and a bit cheaper.

At best, Vladar would return a 5th, likely less.

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 6:46 p.m.

#3

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Vladar has a negative GSAx in every season he's played and has a 2.2M cap hit. I know there's the Vladar to Colorado rumour on twitter but I am not interested in him at all and especially not if we're giving up a 3rd + Foudy. What makes you think he's worth a 2nd rounder in value?

He's played 2 seasons in the NHL, both as a backup and GSAx is far from a perfect stat. Maybe go watch some of his games before making a judgement on him, the team failed him way more often than he failed the team.

KingofRnR liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 6:49 p.m.

#4

KingofRnR

Thread Starter

TrevorA

Joined: Jan. 2021

Posts: 7,362

Likes: 2,058

Edited Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:21 p.m.

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Vladar has a negative GSAx in every season he's played and has a 2.2M cap hit. I know there's the Vladar to Colorado rumour on twitter but I am not interested in him at all and especially not if we're giving up a 3rd + Foudy. What makes you think he's worth a 2nd rounder in value?

Comps are Georgiev, Nedeljokovic, Adin Hill, Vanecek, etc. who all performed and were similar ages when they were Traded for 2nds or the Equivalent and had similar performance and signed similar $2-3mil contracts

Goalie Market isn’t hot right now, but when Training Camp Starts and Injuries happen, it should go up. DeSmith was Traded to VAN today, so what available options out there are any better right now!?

I’m not high on Foudy tbh, a Right Shot Centre Prospect would just be a good organizational depth pickup imo (Nolan Patrick is currently available for Free). I’d actually prefer Calgary Born Logan O’Connor, but we have a bunch of Right Shot Bottom-6 Forwards available to us already

Quoting: GiggywithGibby

A trade comparable (if you can call it that) is Aiden Hill. He went for a 4th rounder. Aiden Hill was at least good at the time of the trade and a bit cheaper.

At best, Vladar would return a 5th, likely less.

Thats way too low a valuation. He’ll bring a 3rd + 3rd/4th/Prospect minimum.

Actually Hill brought ARI a 2nd and then VEG fleeced SJS/Grier acquiring him for just a 4th. Grier has got to be the worst GM in the NHL, no!?

I mean ANA just Traded a 4th for Lyubushkin for heavens sake and Vladar’s worth far more than him

Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:01 p.m.

#5

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

He's played 2 seasons in the NHL, both as a backup and GSAx is far from a perfect stat. Maybe go watch some of his games before making a judgement on him, the team failed him way more often than he failed the team.

Tbh that could be the case. I think Markstrom has always played against Colorado in the games ive watched so im just going off of what the stats say. Maybe Ill watch a couple Vladar games this season

But for now GSAx is by far the best goalie stat available and its not making him look very good

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:13 p.m.

#6

NMAvsFan

Representing the 505

Joined: Sep. 2020

Posts: 4,555

Likes: 3,740

The Avs shouldn't be spending assets to get such an expensive backup unless Francouz is out the rest of the season. And if Cagary needs the cap space, don't expect much in return.

Avsfantrumpetman and TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:28 p.m.

#7

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: KingofRnR

Comps are Georgiev, Nedeljokovic, Adin Hill, Vanecek, etc. who all performed and were similar ages when they were Traded for 2nds or the Equivalent and had similar performance and signed similar $2-3mil contracts

Goalie Market isn’t hot right now, but when Training Camp Starts and Injuries happen, it should go up. DeSmith was Traded to VAN today, so what available options out there are any better right now!?

I’m not high on Foudy tbh, a Right Shot Centre Prospect would just be a good organizational depth pickup imo (Nolan Patrick is currently available for Free). I’d actually prefer Calgary Born Logan O’Connor, but we have a bunch of Right Shot Bottom-6 Forwards available to us already

Georgiev had a career +4.01GSAx in 129GP when he was traded (+0.0311GSAx/GP)
Nedeljkovic had a career +12.25GSAx in 29GP when he was traded (+0.4224GSAx/GP)
Hill had a career -1.38GSAx in 49GP when he was traded (-0.0282GSAx/GP)

Vanecek had a career -10.34GSAx in 79GP when he was traded (-0.1309GSAx/GP)

Vladar currently has a career -13.61GSAx in 55GP (-0.2475GSAx/GP)

Vladar is the weakest by far out of all of those goalies you listed. Hes still somewhat young so maybe he can develop into a better goalie but based on what hes done so far I dont think hes in the same tier as those guys at all

As for other goalie options: Halak is still available as a UFA, Stolarz if Knight comes back in time, Rittich, Daccord if Driedger is healthy, Delia, Lyon, Lankinen depending on Askarov, 2 of Tokarski/UPL/Comrie depending on how Levi does, Stalock if Dostal gets the backup role, etc

Not all of those guys are better than Vladar (even though a lot of them were last season), but if the acquisition cost is significantly less (or free via waivers) then they would be better options imo

TJTwolf and GiggywithGibby liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:40 p.m.

#8

KingofRnR

Thread Starter

TrevorA

Joined: Jan. 2021

Posts: 7,362

Likes: 2,058

Edited Sep. 19, 2023 at 7:45 p.m.

Quoting: NMAvsFan

The Avs shouldn't be spending assets to get such an expensive backup unless Francouz is out the rest of the season. And if Cagary needs the cap space, don't expect much in return.

I agree for COL it comes down to how long Francouz will be out and how much they’re willing to pay and give up for a replacement, but Vladar’s better and more valuable than all the guys currently available, hence why he got the contract he did

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Georgiev had a career +4.01GSAx in 129GP when he was traded (+0.0311GSAx/GP)
Nedeljkovic had a career +12.25GSAx in 29GP when he was traded (+0.4224GSAx/GP)
Hill had a career -1.38GSAx in 49GP when he was traded (-0.0282GSAx/GP)

Vanecek had a career -10.34GSAx in 79GP when he was traded (-0.1309GSAx/GP)

Vladar currently has a career -13.61GSAx in 55GP (-0.2475GSAx/GP)

Vladar is the weakest by far out of all of those goalies you listed. Hes still somewhat young so maybe he can develop into a better goalie but based on what hes done so far I dont think hes in the same tier as those guys at all

As for other goalie options: Halak is still available as a UFA, Stolarz if Knight comes back in time, Rittich, Daccord if Driedger is healthy, Delia, Lyon, Lankinen depending on Askarov, 2 of Tokarski/UPL/Comrie depending on how Levi does, Stalock if Dostal gets the backup role, etc

Not all of those guys are better than Vladar (even though a lot of them were last season), but if the acquisition cost is significantly less (or free via waivers) then they would be better options imo

Watch Vladar play and take in to consideration the Team & specifically the Coach he played for last season.

Vladar’s a Winner and should play and produce just as well as Georgiev & Hill did last season, but Goalies and their consistency can be a bit erratic, hence why they don’t always generate great returns, yet I’m confident he’s worth more now than the 3rd we paid for him

Sep. 19, 2023 at 8:44 p.m.

#9

Xqb15a

Joined: Aug. 2020

Posts: 11,816

Likes: 9,398

COL isn’t paying that price for a backup goalie, they’d rather just roll with Annunen. CF acting like Frankie is out for the season which he isn’t. The reason COL is looking at the market is they want Annunen playing regularly and if they do grab a back up it will be a for guy making league minimum they can bury in the minors (ECHL) and not waste the cap space.

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 19, 2023 at 9:55 p.m.

#10

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Tbh that could be the case. I think Markstrom has always played against Colorado in the games ive watched so im just going off of what the stats say. Maybe Ill watch a couple Vladar games this season

But for now GSAx is by far the best goalie stat available and its not making him look very good

Eye test is almost always king and it should absolutely be noted that Georgiev had a negative GSAx the 2 seasons prior to being traded to Colorado. I find it to be a very volatile stat that can be hard to predict goalies success.

As for Vladar, out of all goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5, he faced some of the lowest SA in the league on average last year, as well as the lowest LDSA/60 and the 3rd lowest HDSA/60 (8.63/60). Whereas Georgiev for example had a middling HDSA/60 and one of the highest LDSA/60 (13.77)

GSAx is xGA-GA. xGA is determined based on xG of all Fenwick shots, which is essentially shots given a % chance of going in. A goalie that faces very few low quality shots will not add a lot of low value xGA to their total and those small numbers add up over a season.

KingofRnR liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 12:27 a.m.

#11

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

Eye test is almost always king and it should absolutely be noted that Georgiev had a negative GSAx the 2 seasons prior to being traded to Colorado. I find it to be a very volatile stat that can be hard to predict goalies success.

As for Vladar, out of all goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5, he faced some of the lowest SA in the league on average last year, as well as the lowest LDSA/60 and the 3rd lowest HDSA/60 (8.63/60). Whereas Georgiev for example had a middling HDSA/60 and one of the highest LDSA/60 (13.77)

GSAx is xGA-GA. xGA is determined based on xG of all Fenwick shots, which is essentially shots given a % chance of going in. A goalie that faces very few low quality shots will not add a lot of low value xGA to their total and those small numbers add up over a season.

xGA already accounts for the danger level of the shots against, that's the whole point of assigning an expected goal value to each shot location/timing/rebound/etc. That's a huge reason why GSAx is the best goaltending stat available. Comparing low/med/high danger shots against is already accounted for when comparing GSAx which isn't the case when comparing raw SV% numbers for example

Eye test is good if you watch every single game and have tons of experience as a goaltending scout. For the vast majority of hockey fans they don't fit that description and watching a few games here and there isn't a big enough sample size to value that opinion over advanced stats accumulated over a goalies entire career

Georgiev had a negative GSAx for 2 seasons but also had a positive GSAx the previous 3 seasons. Overall in his career he was a + GSAx goalie which Vladar has never been. There was a risk when they traded for Georgiev that he wouldn't bounce back and would continue to underperform like he did his last 2 years with NYR, luckily for Colorado he did bounce back, but with Vladar there is no history of him performing well at the NHL level so that's not a risk I would be willing to take for that acquisition cost and cap hit

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 1:02 a.m.

#12

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

xGA already accounts for the danger level of the shots against, that's the whole point of assigning an expected goal value to each shot location/timing/rebound/etc. That's a huge reason why GSAx is the best goaltending stat available. Comparing low/med/high danger shots against is already accounted for when comparing GSAx which isn't the case when comparing raw SV% numbers for example

Eye test is good if you watch every single game and have tons of experience as a goaltending scout. For the vast majority of hockey fans they don't fit that description and watching a few games here and there isn't a big enough sample size to value that opinion over advanced stats accumulated over a goalies entire career

Georgiev had a negative GSAx for 2 seasons but also had a positive GSAx the previous 3 seasons. Overall in his career he was a + GSAx goalie which Vladar has never been. There was a risk when they traded for Georgiev that he wouldn't bounce back and would continue to underperform like he did his last 2 years with NYR, luckily for Colorado he did bounce back, but with Vladar there is no history of him performing well at the NHL level so that's not a risk I would be willing to take for that acquisition cost and cap hit

Why are you just repeating back to me what xGA is? I know what it is an I explained it quite thoroughly in my post. What I don't think you get is low quality shots still add up. It's like the old saying "every penny counts." Vladar faced 5 less low danger shots than Georgiev a game last year. those 5 easy saves add up over 10-20 games.

Here is a list of all of Vladar's games from last year. You don't need to watch the whole game through either, just go to youtube type in "Flames vs Team X" and the date of the game and watch the ~10 minute highlight real. Hell you could choose all 6 games where he had more than 3 goals against and you will still see that most of the goals were not on him

KingofRnR liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 1:14 a.m.

#13

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

Why are you just repeating back to me what xGA is? I know what it is an I explained it quite thoroughly in my post. What I don't think you get is low quality shots still add up. It's like the old saying "every penny counts." Vladar faced 5 less low danger shots than Georgiev a game last year. those 5 easy saves add up over 10-20 games.

Here is a list of all of Vladar's games from last year. You don't need to watch the whole game through either, just go to youtube type in "Flames vs Team X" and the date of the game and watch the ~10 minute highlight real. Hell you could choose all 6 games where he had more than 3 goals against and you will still see that most of the goals were not on him

xGA already accounts for that. I'm not sure what your point is

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 3:59 a.m.

#14

TJTwolf

Joined: Jan. 2017

Posts: 9,982

Likes: 4,807

Halak!

NMAvsFan liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 7:27 a.m.

#15

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

xGA already accounts for that. I'm not sure what your point is

xGA is literally just the sum of the percentage of each shot against. How exactly does it account for some goalies making more easy saves than others?

Sep. 20, 2023 at 9:23 a.m.

#16

NMAvsFan

Representing the 505

Joined: Sep. 2020

Posts: 4,555

Likes: 3,740

Quoting: TJTwolf

Halak!

Might as well. Chances are, they won't play their backup much anyhow while Frankie is out so no need to spend assets or take on an expensive contract that can't be buried when Frankie comes back.

TJTwolf liked this.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 12:38 p.m.

#17

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

xGA is literally just the sum of the percentage of each shot against. How exactly does it account for some goalies making more easy saves than others?

Easy saves still have a small percentage change of going in, so it's not like every low danger shot is free stat padding for GSAx. If that was the case then every goalie would have positive GSAx on low danger shots (which obviously isn't true - and if it was then the xG model would be updated to better reflect the percentage chance of low danger shots going in). It's literally the entire reason they weigh the shots against by their xG values to compensate for that

Plus for Vladar last season he actually had a negative GSAx on low danger shots. So if he faced more low danger shots and kept playing the way he was then his GSAx would have been even worse

Sep. 20, 2023 at 1:46 p.m.

#18

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Easy saves still have a small percentage change of going in, so it's not like every low danger shot is free stat padding for GSAx. If that was the case then every goalie would have positive GSAx on low danger shots (which obviously isn't true - and if it was then the xG model would be updated to better reflect the percentage chance of low danger shots going in). It's literally the entire reason they weigh the shots against by their xG values to compensate for that

Plus for Vladar last season he actually had a negative GSAx on low danger shots. So if he faced more low danger shots and kept playing the way he was then his GSAx would have been even worse

They do have a small chance of going in, no ones arguing that but we are speaking hypothetically here. When a goalie faces 13 LD shots a game for 20 games vs 8 in that same amount period that is a difference of 100 shots. Even at 1% that is still +1 on GSAx. LD shots range from 1-8% in probability of going in so in theory over a 20 game sample size that is a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx.

Now I am not taking anything away from Georgiev here as he did have a very solid year but of the 55 goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5 he lead the league with 680 LD shots against and Vladar finished 55th with 168.

As for his LD GSAx, he let in 6 LDGA at 5v5 and 6 on the PK. I personally avoid using special teams as they can vastly swing numbers from the norm all across the board (ie a high penalty game vs Edmonton vs a high penalty game vs Philly could completely distort the truth). So looking at 5v5 I think thats a rather small sample size to justifiably say it will absolutely continue to trend downwards.

Sep. 20, 2023 at 2:09 p.m.

#19

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

They do have a small chance of going in, no ones arguing that but we are speaking hypothetically here. When a goalie faces 13 LD shots a game for 20 games vs 8 in that same amount period that is a difference of 100 shots. Even at 1% that is still +1 on GSAx. LD shots range from 1-8% in probability of going in so in theory over a 20 game sample size that is a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx.

Now I am not taking anything away from Georgiev here as he did have a very solid year but of the 55 goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5 he lead the league with 680 LD shots against and Vladar finished 55th with 168.

As for his LD GSAx, he let in 6 LDGA at 5v5 and 6 on the PK. I personally avoid using special teams as they can vastly swing numbers from the norm all across the board (ie a high penalty game vs Edmonton vs a high penalty game vs Philly could completely distort the truth). So looking at 5v5 I think thats a rather small sample size to justifiably say it will absolutely continue to trend downwards.

Its not necessarily a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx. It's a +1 to +8 difference in xGA, and depending on how many actual goals the goalie let's in on those shots then the GSAx can be up to +1 to +8. If the goalie saves every single one of those low danger shots then he deserves that GSAx. If he makes the expected number of saves for those low danger shots then his GSAx would be 0. If you trust the xG model to provide an accurate probability of a goal for each shot location then GSAx is completely up to the goalies ability

Why are you so sure that more low danger shots against leads to a higher GSAx? Do you think xG models overestimate the probability of low danger shots resulting in goals?

For the Georgiev comparison it doesn't even make sense cause he also had a negative GSAx on shots from low danger areas so it's not like he's getting free GSAx stat padding from that. He was just good enough at medium and high danger chances which more than made up for that

Sep. 20, 2023 at 2:51 p.m.

#20

Ledge_And_Dairy

Joined: Jun. 2019

Posts: 39,635

Likes: 20,416

Quoting: UpsideDownQue

Its not necessarily a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx. It's a +1 to +8 difference in xGA, and depending on how many actual goals the goalie let's in on those shots then the GSAx can be up to +1 to +8. If the goalie saves every single one of those low danger shots then he deserves that GSAx. If he makes the expected number of saves for those low danger shots then his GSAx would be 0. If you trust the xG model to provide an accurate probability of a goal for each shot location then GSAx is completely up to the goalies ability

Why are you so sure that more low danger shots against leads to a higher GSAx? Do you think xG models overestimate the probability of low danger shots resulting in goals?

For the Georgiev comparison it doesn't even make sense cause he also had a negative GSAx on shots from low danger areas so it's not like he's getting free GSAx stat padding from that. He was just good enough at medium and high danger chances which more than made up for that

Ok yes it is a +1 to +8 on xGA but the thing is it changes the weight of values. If you face less low danger shots the weight of high and mid danger shots takes up a larger portion of the percentage. This may or may not effect the overall xGA but it will effect the overall GA, which in turn will effect the GSAx

Sep. 20, 2023 at 3:17 p.m.

#21

UpsideDownQue

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,440

Likes: 6,061

Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy

Ok yes it is a +1 to +8 on xGA but the thing is it changes the weight of values. If you face less low danger shots the weight of high and mid danger shots takes up a larger portion of the percentage. This may or may not effect the overall xGA but it will effect the overall GA, which in turn will effect the GSAx

That is already accounted for. If the xG model is accurate then it affects the weight of xGA and the actual GA probability equally. They cancel each other out when calculating GSAx, so the final GSAx stat is completely up to the goalies ability

Draft	Round 1	Round 2	Round 3	Round 4	Round 5	Round 6	Round 7
2024
2025
2026

DISPLAY SETTING

BETTING ODDS

LOCALE

ARCHIVE

CBA

CALCULATORS

FANTASY HOCKEY TOOLS

TOOLS

PLAYERS

WESTERN CONFERENCE

EASTERN CONFERENCE

INTERACTIVE FEATURES

Forums/Armchair-GM

Description

Free Agent Signings

Trades

CGY

COL

Buried

Embed Code

Text-Embed

Question:

Options: