SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

50% is the max per transaction. I believe only two retained salary transactions can exist on a contract (I’ll have to check on that). But you can absolutely retain 50%, trade to another team, and then that team can retain 50% (of what remains on the contract) on the next trade. Teams are each limited to 3 retained salary transactions. And the total amount retained by any team can not exceed 15% of the salary cap upper limit. EDIT: And yes, only two retained salaries can exist on a contract. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/how-the-nhls-new-salary-trading-system-works/article7033878/

Just wanted to see if Tiktoks embed on the new setup https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeaYwD9H/ Plus, I like this clip of Stech!

26 years old, huh? Wow, how time flies... (wonder how many that is in bison/ox years? ) Happy Birthday, Cap!

The BCCDC recommends that every grocery purchase be made using the card “tap” function, all shopping be done alone, people bag their own groceries, and a host of other recommendations meant to limit potential Covid-19 exposures. So, anyone who’s paid with cash (or typed their PIN), gone grocery shopping with a spouse/child, or let someone else bag their groceries, is pretty much as guilty as Micaela, when it comes to not doing everything possible to mitigate risk. This young woman has been following the rules and complying with most of the recommendations. She’s not some anti-masker. She only leaves her house to walk her dog and to occasionally buy groceries (which she lightheartedly referred to as the highlight of her social life during the pandemic). It’s true that the NHL does recommend that players and their families have their groceries delivered, but it’s not a requirement. Micaela apparently felt delivery was okay for packaged and nonperishable foods, but that she wanted to shop in person for her fresh food. I’m sure she’s not the only Canuck spouse who doesn’t like having someone else pick out and deliver all her fresh fruits/veggies, meats, etc, and prefers to go to the store for these and some other items. Mrs. Gaudette’s comments and tone during her podcast appearance were regrettable, but hardly deserving of the level of condemnation she has received, especially in some dark corners on social media. I really don’t think we need to burn this young woman at the stake for wanting to go to the grocery store. And if we are going to condemn people by this kind of standard (I’m not saying you are doing this, @Dazzle, just speaking more in general here), then we’ll need a light a pretty big bonfire. I’d expect close to 5 million people in this Province deserve immolation alongside Micaela, when it comes to their failure to comply with every single one of the many Covid-19 recommendations, whether they’re the ones coming from the NHL (in Gaudette’s case), or the BCCDC (for all of us in BC).

The fine art market can be kinda obscene, but it’s just a market, like any other. And honestly, $80 million for a Rothko (or $440,000 for the JonOne piece from the OP) almost makes more sense to me than things you see in other markets, like Tesla’s p/e ratio, or even the price of a crappy teardown house in Vancouver. And don’t even get me started on stuff like NFTs.

It would be nice, for once, if we were the team that traded a respected vet with an expiring contract, at the deadline, and then he re-signed with us after the playoffs. I’m not sure Edler is the right candidate, but hopefully they’re at least having discussions. It can be done respectfully, and there are benefits for both sides. Obviously, the club gets an asset. But also the player gets a kick at the can to chase a Cup, and while he still has a chance to be a contributor, before age gets the best of him.

Hopefully he’ll get called up at some point and play a stretch of games with the big club. Time to use the remainder of this season to audition system depth and see where we need to make acquisitions, and where we might have “homegrown” options to fill next season’s lineup spots. Especially given the cap pressures and the likely need to fill several lineup positions with cheaper contracts, in light of the new Demko contract, and once the numbers come in on the pending extensions for Petey and Huggy.

There’s some strawmanning going on here. Firstly, Matt Cane has never, to my knowledge, claimed that Tyler Myers, Jay Beagle, or Brandon Sutter, are “bad players.” I actually made a point, in my original post, of saying that I wasn’t suggesting Myers was a “bad player.” The quote was never intended as a criticism of any particular NHL player, or anyone’s favourite Canuck. I used it to help explain the reasons why traditional “zone starts” (ie: faceoffs based rather than shift based) are considered to be flawed and rather problematic as analytical tools. Cane certainly never said that all defensive players, or even defensive players, in general, are “bad players.” I’d suggest you read the links I originally posted (I’ll link them again at the bottom). The issue with “bad players” is that they can skew the data for OZF%/NZF%/DZF%, which is why Cane argues that “true zone starts” (AKA “shift starts”) are more reliable (albeit still flawed—the work toward “game states” analysis may be more promising), when evaluating or comparing players, and considering things like the impact of deployment on events metrics (like Corsi). Also, you should know that Matt Cane is currently employed as the Director of Hockey Analytics for the New Jersey Devils, and so he’s not just some “public/blogger/media type” who engages in “Corsi gazing.” Again, I really recommend reading the links to his work on the topic: https://puckplusplus.com/2015/01/15/how-much-do-zone-starts-matter-i-maybe-not-as-much-as-we-thought/ https://puckplusplus.com/2015/01/20/how-much-do-zone-starts-matter-part-ii-a-lot-on-their-own-not-that-much-in-aggregate/

He was a really heavy drinker, for many years. Especially up until his 1981 car accident. Lafleur would regularly drive drunk, but he would never get ticketed. The cops in Quebec would often just give him a police escort, and make sure he got wherever he was going. One night though, after heavy drinking, Lafleur drove his car off the road, through a chain link fence, and wrapped it around a metal post. He was so drunk, he’d passed out behind the wheel. Lucky for him, because the metal post went right through the steering wheel, and embedded itself in the driver’s seat, but miraculously it mostly missed Guy, since he’d already passed out and slumped over. It just grazed him, and sliced off part of an ear, which would require plastic surgery. (However, Lafleur was still so drunk, when brought to the hospital, the doctors refused to operate, and waited until his blood alcohol went down to safer levels.) After that brush with death, Guy said that he would cut back on his partying.

Probably they meant to write “corps,” instead of “core.” It’s an easy mistake to make, and a homophone/heterograph that regularly causes some confusion. (As in, Harrington played 70+ games in a season a few years back, so it’s fair to say he was “an important part of CBJ’s D [corps].” However, as a ~13 minutes TOI/GP player, he’s never been, and likely never will be, anything close to a “core” defenceman for CBJ or any NHL team.)

Yeah, Detroit has the cap space to do some interesting things. For example, you have to think Brandon Sutter at around $1M would be an attractive piece for many playoff teams. Canucks retain 50%, send to Detroit, they retain 50%, and then on the contender for ~$1M deadline cap hit (which only requires about $250k of actual cap space). At those numbers, you have to imagine a decent return could be split between the Canucks and Red Wings. If I’m Detroit, I’m setting prices right now for cap retention on rentals, and opening the market for any teams looking to make trades.

Have to wonder if Detroit is going to weaponize their cap space to add picks and prospects. Maybe they’ll be a middleman for a bunch of deadline trades, retaining 50% on any rentals moving between teams, and picking up futures as a “handling fee.” IIRC, they have around 35M of deadline cap space, so they could be pretty active, if they decide to.

Gonna be interesting to see if Ghost gets claimed. His contract is front loaded, so if a team takes him, they only pay $3.25M annual salary for the remaining years on that $4.5M cap hit.

Bah, I’m in bed, but regrettably, still awake at this ungodly hour (my kid just had a nightmare), so since my night’s sleep is ruined, I’ll try to reply to you too! I don’t think comparing raw xGF counts between players is offering much value, especially without also considering games played or TOI. You could look at xGF/60, I suppose, if you wanted to compare them, but probably you’d need to look at a lot more, before you’ll get a good picture of these players’ offensive on-ice impacts. Also, why compare just the xGF I posted and not mention the xGA or the xGF%? If you’re comparing Myers and Hedman, why not consider the other stats too, especially since, when comparing between the two players, the xGA and xGF% numbers for Myers and Hedman (at least the ones I added... still not sure about those Hockey Reference stats) have some pretty significant differences? Moving on to oiSV%. There’s really very little evidence, if any, of skaters “driving” save percentage. There are only a handful of players who you might make a case for (and even then, it’d be a fairly dubious claim), and Myers certainly isn’t one of them. If I have time tomorrow, I’ll try to link an article or an analytics blog post that shows this clearly. For now, I hope you’ll take my word for it (it’s actually something I dug into quite a bit, several years back, so I’m pretty confident on this). But for now, if you still think Myers is driving oiSv%, I’d suggest looking over his career, and see how Myers’ oiSv% ranks among his teammates, year for year. I think you’ll find he’s all over the place. Top of the team chart some years, other years middle of the pack, and sometimes near the very bottom. Hopefully this will convince you that Myers doesn’t drive save percentage. If he did, you’d expect to see a very clear pattern where his on-ice Sv% consistently outperformed his goalies’ Sv%, season after season. Zone starts: see my post above, and maybe check out the links, if interested. High danger chances: no, they don’t take into account things like PP expiration. Stats like HDC and HDCF% are just simple event counts, rates, and percentages. There’s really nothing more exotic to them than that. The NHL tracks shot location coordinates, and any unblocked shot, inside the scoring chance area (also referred to as “home plate”—see image) and from either the slot or inside the crease, is a high danger chance. Every unblocked shot inside “home plate” is a scoring chance.

@oldnews I’m not going to quote your whole post. It’s very late, and I’ve had a really long day, so I might do a full quote and response another day, but for now, I’m just going to jot down a few ideas, and save a little board space by avoiding the big quote and reply. (Although, knowing me, this post will probably ramble on anyway, so I’m probably fooling myself if I think I’m going to save much space.) You’re right that there are two types of “zone starts.” I tend to think of the faceoff based ones as “traditional zone starts” because the stat initially just looked at faceoffs. The “shift start” type used to get referred to as “true zone starts” and more recently, it’s kind of become convention to refer to “shift starts” just as zone starts, and the older, “traditional zone starts” as “faceoff percentages” (as in DZF%, NZF%, OZF%). But I agree that it can be confusing. And I probably should have been more clear about the stat I was using, in that earlier post. I disagree about the older stat being more meaningful, when it come to analyzing players, and making adjustments to metrics, based on deployment. Rather than write an essay here, I’ll just add a couple links that do a pretty good job explaining my own views on the two stats, and the overall impact of zone starts, when it comes to impacts/adjustments to Corsi, etc: https://puckplusplus.com/2015/01/15/how-much-do-zone-starts-matter-i-maybe-not-as-much-as-we-thought/ https://puckplusplus.com/2015/01/20/how-much-do-zone-starts-matter-part-ii-a-lot-on-their-own-not-that-much-in-aggregate/ (These are blog posts from Matt Cane, B.Eng, M.Sc Applied Mathematics, who’s done some good work on this topic,) I do think both stats have value, and help us to get a better picture of what type of minuets players play, and how coaches attempt to control deployment. But when it comes to Myers’ faceoff based zone start counts, I’m not sure they are all that favourable, compared to his “shift starts.” To quote Matt Cane, “The main issue with the current [faceoffs count based] approach to measuring zone starts is that the measurement is often skewed (and sometimes heavily) by the performance and talent of the player in question. Bad players tend to end up with more defensive zone faceoffs because their opponents tend to get more shot attempts against them, which leads to more opportunities for their goalie to freeze the puck and more defensive zone faceoffs.” When Cane looked at how many “traditional zone starts each true zone start is worth,” he came up with the following: So, we can attempt to plug in Myers’ “shift starts” and see how many DZ/NZ/OZ faceoffs he’d be expected to have, based on his shift deployment, and the averages for faceoffs per shift type. Again, it’s late, and my eyes are having trouble staying open, so I’m not going to do any calcs tonight, but I suspect if you ran those numbers, the results would show that Myers is ending up with more defensive zone faceoffs than expected, based on averages for his “shift start” deployment. And this might not reflect well on him, in terms of his effectiveness when starting shifts in the defensive zone. (In particular, Myers has some poor icing numbers (62 icings for, 27 against, which is the worst differential on the Canucks’ D), so it’s possible that a far number of his defensive zone (shift) starts are resulting in icings, and creating additional, mid-shift DZFs, which are increasing his DZF%.) To quote Cane again, “often a player’s zone start percentage is impacted by their own performance: bad players end up with more defensive zone faceoffs due to their inability to drive possession, which incorrectly inflates their defensive zone start percentages. This also helps to create a false link between zone start percentages and possession numbers, leading people to incorrectly infer that tough zone starts are a key driver behind a player’s results.” (Just to be clear, even though the quote says “bad players,” I don’t think of Myers as a bad player. I like his PK value. I do have some questions about his EV defensive value, and see some concerning indicators in his overall stats profile. But he’s a legit NHLer. I also don’t think his full value can be measured with stats alone, which is true for most players.) Sorry, this post is pretty rough and disjointed. I just wanted to give you a reply, and some of where I’m coming from, when it comes to the discussion on zone starts. I’d like to come back and really dig into this stuff, and also clean up the mess I’ve written here, but unfortunately, tomorrow is going to be another busy day, and next week’s not much better, so I’m not sure I’ll ever get to it. Regardless, hopefully at least this gives you something to chew on, and maybe furthers the discussion (and I think the links are a good read for anyone interested in these kinds of stats.) Cheers!

I have to wonder about the accuracy of the expected goals stats from hockey-reference.com (I’m assuming those are the ones being used)? According to what’s been posted here: Myers: 13.4 xGF, 14.3 xGA, -0.9 E+/- Hedman: 11.1 xGF, 14.9 xGA, -3.8 E+/- But when I look at other stats websites: naturalstattrick.com (5v5): Myers: 23.38 xGF, 30.38 xGA, 43.49 xGF% Hedman: 22.29 xGF, 20.5 xGA, 52.08 xGF% naturalstattrick.com (5v5 score and venue adjusted): Myers: 22.98 xGF, 30.97 xGA, 42.60 xGF% Hedman: 22.7 xGF, 20 xGA, 53.16 xGF% evolving-hockey.com (5v5) Myers: 23.66 xGF, 32.71 xGA, 41.97 xGF% Hedman: 24.06 xGF, 21.19 xGA, 53.17 xGF% evolving-hockey.com (5v5 score and venue adjusted): Myers: 23.46 xGF, 33.23 xGA, 41.38 xGF% Hedman: 24.41 xGF, 20.87 xGA, 53.91 xGF% And even the raw counts (GF/GA) from NHL.com: Myers: 26 On-ice EV GF, 34 On-ice EV GA Hedman: 37 On-ice EV GF, 23 On-ice EV GA (Worth noting that EV stats include empty net situations, and TBL leads the league by scoring 11 EN goals, of which I’m sure Hedman was on-ice for quite a few. Could probably also say the reverse, when it comes to Myers and his EV GA.) Those xG numbers from hockey-reference.com just look so wonky, compared to everything else I’ve looked at.

Well, no. You can never be sure about anything in the NHL. Even if something is written in stone, they can just unilaterally decide to change it and retroactively apply it, whenever and however they want. (But yeah, under the current framework, Tryamkin is exempt from expansion, and will remain so, even if he signs a contract for 2021-22.)

Time to convert Eriksson to a defenceman and get Sweet Loui back into the lineup!

Yes! This is really something I’d love to see. I’d be extremely interested to hear the players’ opinions on Tryamkin and what they think he could bring to the current lineup. I doubt anyone in media would ask players this question (at least not right now), but I’d love to hear their answers. Maybe next camp, if Tryamkin is signed, we’ll actually get some feedback from the players, regarding what they think of the big guy, and potentially having him join the lineup.

So, after an assembly where the school “discussed the topic of respect for woman and the importance of bystander behaviour and speaking up to report incidents of inappropriate behaviour,” and screened a video where “Brisbane Boys’ College Captain Mason Black spoke about being proactive in stopping incidents of sexual assault and harassment,” grades 7-12 boys were asked to “stand as a symbolic gesture of apology for the behaviours of their gender that have hurt or offended girls and women.” That’s what the outrage is about? I hope that my boys get to participate in an assembly like this. Seems like an important topic and something that young men ages 12-18 should be learning about at school. And as far as being asked to stand up for a “symbolic apology,” I would be bothered by that at all. I’d expect my boys would not be confused by this, and they would take it as intended. And if they were confused, it would be a good starting point for a discussion at home. Where I’m seeing cancel culture, snowflakes, and a society a soft as 10-ply, is with these parents who are claiming their kids were somehow damaged by this assembly, the school being forced to apologize and send out letters to parents, support services being offered for any of the boys who were in attendance and subjected to this “forced apology,” and the manufactured outrage in how the media is covering this story, and the way it’s being spread through social media.

Argh! Just when I when gonna head to bed, I go on CDC, get an notification from a mention, head over to this thread, and... I really don’t have a dog in this fight, but this X+/- stuff piqued my interest. First off, let me admit, X+/- isn’t a stat I use, and I have no idea about their actual methodology, or if there’s been anything published on it, other than a few vague blurbs. I generally use xGF%, which is ostensibly measuring the same thing. But wow, is there ever a big difference in the results. So nearly all the Tampa Bay Lightning have negative X+/- then? That seems a little sus. Especially when you look at their xGF%, and 2/3 of that team is over 50% (so positive). Weird. And then you look at the Canucks, and it’s pretty much the reverse. 19/28 of the Canucks have positive X+/-, but only 6/28 have an xGF% over 50. Weird. I’m really not sure about X+/-. Those results look kinda wonky, which makes me seriously question their model. But, even if we accept X+/-, how does one explain Myers having the 5th worst X+/- on the Canucks, and 23 Canucks players, including 6 defensemen, having better X+/- stats than Myers this season? Makes you think.

“Tell me you don’t understand zonestarts, without telling me you don’t understand zonestarts.” OK, let’s get something straight: Myers does not start the majority of his shifts in the defensive zone. At 5v5, maybe 10% of his shifts start in the defensive zone. Myers’ 5v5 shifts this season: Offensive zone starts: 63 Neutral zone starts: 122 Defensive zone starts: 73 On the fly starts: 460 Total: 718 So, percentage of shifts Myers starts in the defensive zone = 73/718 = 10.17% (Pretty close to my 10% guess at the top.) Zonestarts are **REALLY** not understood well on CDC. Offensive zonestart percentage = offensive zonestarts / (offensive + defensive zonestarts) It’s actually a pretty misleading number. People think the percentage is for all shifts, but it’s actually just looking at a small sliver of the total shifts (offensive and defensive zonestarts). Most players start way more shifts on the fly and in the neutral zone. Offensive and defensive zonestarts make up only a small percentage of total shifts. So, they just don’t really factor in too much, when considering things like CF% (other than some extreme deployment, and even then, the adjustments are fairly small). For Myers’ offensive zonestart percentage, I doubt you’d adjust his CF% more than maybe +0.25-0.5%, so it’s basically negligible. This is why most stats sites don’t even offer zonestart adjusted stats any more. It was determined a long time ago that zonestarts don’t really account for much, and for the vast majority of players, the adjustment is tiny and not worse even considering, when evaluating or comparing players, on stats like CF%, etc. Myers’ CF% is worse than nearly all of the players listed by the OP (I think Morrissey was worse), but even accounting for deployment (which again, is basically negligible difference), it’s still really bad. And on the Canucks D, here’s how Myers stacks up, relative to his teammates. CF%Rel: -2.35 (2nd worst) FF%Rel: -4.64 (2nd worst) SF%Rel: -3.88 (2nd worst) xGF%Rel: -5.67 (worst) SCF%Rel: -3.61 (worst) HDCF%Rel: -5.75 (2nd worst) Penalty differential: -11; 12 taken, 1 drawn (worst) I’m not here to drag Myers, but any claim that he has a positive statistical profile, is either not understanding the stats, or misleading people. His underlying numbers are not good.

Hmm... same day as the Staal trade? (Trudeau is a diehard Habs fan)

Definitely a possibility. Not something I’d want, unless the return was undeniably good. But might almost be worth it, just to watch the collected heads exploding around these boards. However, if, by some chance, the Canucks make a deadline trade to acquire a fairly high profile top-4 Dman, possibly from a team lacking enough expansion protection slots, it could change the equation for next season. Tryamkin and his agent might try to force a trade, if the 2021-22 Canucks roster didn’t appear to have any room for him in the lineup. This is part of the reason why I hope they get a deal worked out sooner, rather than later. Get Tryamkin under contract for 2021-22 ASAP, and then continue to look for other ways to improve next year’s roster.

Sorry about the nosebleed! I might have got one as well, while writing that monstrosity of a post.