SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

westleysnipez

westleysnipez
Member Since
Jun. 9, 2022
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
2nd Favourite Team
Seattle Kraken
Forum Posts
1368
Posts per Day
2.0
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 13 at 5:03 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 13 at 3:23 p.m.
Thread: Hanifin Colorado Tanev Vancouver
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KingofRnR</b></div><div>LOL - Get outta here, you don’t have a clue my friend. I was off on Zadorov because of the timing and a 3rd + 5th isn’t terribly far off from the 2nd UNRETAINED I was predicting

I don’t remember proposing much on Lindholm, so not sure how I could have been wrong there

You know how much demand and interest there is for Tanev right!? And that’s he’s been #1/2/3 on all Trade Boards

We shall see, but I guarantee they = Hanifin &amp; Tanev either extend or get shipped out by the TDL. Conroy isn’t interested in another Johnny Gaudreau fiasco and take those “Reports” with a grain of salt. All these Hockey People/Insiders/Journalists have Quotas to fill, Click Bait to Write and Viewers to Attract and Entertain so write up whatever Rumors and Scenarios they see fit</div></div>

I do have a clue, I predicted the Zadorov trade value and Lindholm. Tanev unretained is a 2nd +

I do understand the interest in Tanev, I'm saying that this is the price teams are willing to pay. Tanev is 34 and a UFA. Teams last season were paying a 1st + 3rd for mid-20s RFA defensemen with an extra year left. The idea that you think you can get as much value as that for Tanev is ridiculous. A 2nd + (or a late 1st if retained or a team doesn't have a 2nd) is the value of Tanev.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 11 at 7:24 p.m.
Thread: Hanifin Colorado Tanev Vancouver
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KingofRnR</b></div><div>The Flames want a decent Player or Prospect back in addition to the Pick, so something better than a C-Tier and given the interest and demand for his services, I’m certain they’ll get it</div></div>

According to all the reports, they're asking for a prospect or a roster player, if the Flames were wanting something more than a C-Iter prospect, it would have been specified as "A top prospect" or "a middle-six/top-six roster player," no reports have. You were wrong about the Zadorov and Lindholm trades, you're wrong about this one, too. Listen to the reports. No one has been willing to trade a 2nd + C-Tier prospect, most of the reports are teams wanting to just deal the 2nd to Calgary. We'll see as we get closer to the deadline whether teams are willing to increase their offers or if the Flames just let Tanev walk in July.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 9 at 8:08 p.m.
Thread: Hanifin Colorado Tanev Vancouver
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KingofRnR</b></div><div>Ha! Play Cole at RD then lol

Either way Tanev &gt;&gt; Cole and VAN could definitely use another RD to bolster their defence over and above what they currently have</div></div>

Nah, Cole has been the better defender so far this season. He's already been played on the right side a few times and been decent.

<a href="https://i.imgur.com/m92lype.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Chris Tanev's</a> market value is about 4.2M

<a href="https://i.imgur.com/wdLAMQW.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Ian Cole's</a> market value is about 3.9M

Tanev would be an upgrade over a player like Friedman, but if the Canucks are giving up Cole, they're not adding much more. If a defenseman is being sent back the other way, it's going to be Friedman.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 5 at 8:53 p.m.
Thread: Lets f ing go
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JeffGorton</b></div><div>I gave you individual analytics that proves Savard has been better than Myers while being is a less favorable circumstance. You just chose to ignore them Last 3 years btw, Savard has had the better CF in 2 of them. Hes had the better xGF/60 in all 3</div></div>

I didn't ignore it, I said I highly doubted the stats. I couldn't check before because I was on mobile, but now that I've access to the data, let's go over things.

<a href="https://i.imgur.com/34efoj1.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Tyler Myers' Player Card</a> with data from Evolving Hockey &amp; CapFriendly.

<a href="https://i.imgur.com/X03nbFI.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">David Savard's Player Card</a> with data from Evolving Hockey &amp; CapFriendly.

Evolving Hockey is the source for GAR, SPAR, and WAR for those who may not know.

We can see from the data points collected that Tyler Myers, while not a 6M player, provides far better market value than Savard (2.4M vs. 0.8M) and is the more complete player. His surplus value is also lower, because Savard is signed for an extra year and is likely to further decline, whereas Myers' contract ends this season. Myers is the better defenseman.

Also, you bring up xGF, but for two defensemen who score fewer than 5 goals in a season, I don't think it's worth pointing out. That amounts to 2 goal differential over an 82-game span, relatively meaningless. That's like measuring the coast in centimeters vs. inches.

The Matheson-Savard pairing is responsible for the 4th most Shot Attempts Against/60 (72.06) [min. 200 mins played].
Zadorov-Myers pairing is ranked 21st by the same metric (63.08).

The Matheson-Savard pairing is responsible for the 32nd most Goals Against/60 (2.66) [min. 200 mins played].
Zadorov-Myers is ranked 83rd by the same metric (1.75).

Source: https://moneypuck.com/lines.htm

It's very evident that Savard is the worse player.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 5 at 4:07 p.m.
Thread: Lets f ing go
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JeffGorton</b></div><div>This is why with analytics you look further than just a few games in a month.
Myers is a -6.2 GAR while Savard is -5.
Savard is -.8 WAR while Myers is -1
Savard difference between EVO and EVD is -1.5, Myers is -2.3

They both suck defensively but Savard at least provides some offence to make up the defensive liability. Savard is also on one of the worst 5v5 teams in the league while Myers is surrounded by PDO merchants. If you were to switch them, Savard would look so much better and Myers would look so much worse</div></div>

Yeah, I strongly doubt that. Myers has been good when he's able to play a Top-4 role and not forced into 23+ mins/night. Savard struggles just playing Top-4 minutes.

Savard has been plain bad all season, January was just the peak of his bad play. It's not because he's on a bad team, it's because he's fallen off hard the last two seasons. Abysmal CF% at 5v5 his whole career except for when he was a rental on Tampa, and that was due to him having sheltered minutes. Savard's career CF% is 47, with MTL it's been in the low 40s. Meanwhile, Myers had a better CF% on worse Vancouver teams.

Also it's hilarious how people like you continue to whine about Vancouver's PDO nearly 60% of the way through the season.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 4 at 2:06 a.m.
Thread: Flames trades
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>YesThisIsFlo</b></div><div>I think there's a real chance someone ponies up a 1st for Tanev at the deadline, but it just won't be the Canucks. Not a big enough needle mover for their roster to justify it, honestly.</div></div>

I agree. Tanev slides in likely as our 3rd RHD, Hronek &gt; Myers &gt; Tanev - for those who may disagree, Myers played more ATOI than Tanev by almost 2 mins in 2019-20, had better CF%, xGA, and GF%; this was also the team that came within 1 game of beating Vegas in the 2nd round.

Canucks are better off targeting a cheap RHD like Bogosian, Ruhwedel, or Lybushkin; someone with a lower cap hit who still plays reliably/physically. They're not as good as Tanev, but a mid-round pick is closer to how they'd improve VAN.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 4 at 12:49 a.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>My apologies for not instantly identifying what you were talking about.

Primary assist/60 vs who?

My apologies for not instantly understanding what comment I’ve made in the past you were talking about in your ramblings.

Again, context and nuance matters to people who actually understand what they’re talking about.

Jack Hughes is a play driver. He’s the one carrying the puck in, shooting it, making the passes that lead to shots. You can see this in his metrics in entries, shot creation, passing etc. or by just watching the game. Since he is the one generating chances for both him and his teammates, the amount of xGoals generated with him on the ice is more meaningful.

Kuzmenko is a slow finisher (one of the slowest skaters in the league). He is not the one taking it in, generating his own chances, or making the passes that lead to chances. Again you can see this in his metrics or by just watching the game. So since he is not the one creating these chances, it is not as meaningful the amount of xGoals generated while on the ice.

And again, if you were interested in nuance or a meaningful discussion or simply had an understanding of what you were talking about, that would matter to you.

But instead you spout metrics you barely understand in hopes of finding what you think is some kind of “gotcha”

Kuzmenko is ahead in primary assists/60 vs who? Certainly not Jack Hughes who’s at 1.8 compared to Kuzmenkos 0.7 at all strengths and 1 vs 0.6 at even strength.</div></div>

It's hilarious how you cannot resist insisting upon yourself.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 3 at 11:40 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>Ahh yes.

On ice xGF (because again you don’t know the difference)

I assume I pointed out that Since Kuzmenko is a sniper and not a play driver, he isn’t the reason those xGF are being generating. Same as toffoli on jacks wing. If you want to use those metrics in comparisons between Jack and Oetterson, go ahead. But again, that requires a nuanced understanding of what we’re talking about</div></div>

With the number of times you've moved the goal posts you've gotta be across the parking lot by now.

" ̶x̶G̶F̶%̶ ̶d̶o̶e̶s̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶"

This is you saying it does.

"̶O̶h̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶p̶o̶w̶e̶r̶p̶l̶a̶y̶!̶"

It's 5v5 xGF%

̶I̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶b̶e̶c̶a̶u̶s̶e̶ ̶h̶e̶'̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶n̶i̶p̶e̶r̶,̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶a̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶y̶ ̶d̶r̶i̶v̶e̶r̶!̶

And then we pointed out he was ahead in 1a/60 and you got all mad and called me delusional as you do when you lose a debate.


Really dude, you've mixed up multiple stats and brought the same standard arguments you always do because it's the same four stats that you think you kind of understand but don't.