Rumor mill is that he may retire and go the coaching route.
- Blackstrom2

Wouldn't surprise me. Older player, just won the Cup again. Go out a winner. He'd be giving up some money though.

I would suggest you read the blog more.

As far as my team is concerned, they had a solid season last year and made the playoffs. The Flyers have been one of the most successful franchises in the NHL. They currently have a number of really good young players and have one of the best prospect bases in the NHL. So that would make you wrong on both counts. What else do you have?
- MJL

Do you really believe that? No cups since the 70's? LMAO.

Do you really believe that? No cups since the 70's? LMAO.
- Crushers68

C'mon, you can do better than that!


You need to find a better angle. That's not going to work.

Blah blah blah, the Stanley Cup champions didn't deserve to make the playoffs. The Carolina Hurricanes were soooooo much better on paper, because goalies don't count on paper.

Blah blah blah, the Stanley Cup champions should have lost round 1. After being completely dominated and an embarrassment to DC, the NHL, the NHLPA and me, James Tanner (resulting in losing 2 games in overtime) it took a "miracle" for this .600 team to win 4 out of 5 games.

Blah blah blah, the Stanley Cup champions should have lost round 2. THE PENGUINS ARE THE GREATEST TEAM EVER! Corsi says so!

Blah blah blah, the Stanley Cup champions should have lost round 3. Their 12 forwards and 6 defensemen were clearly inferior to the Lighting's 12 forwards and 6 defenseman. I feel like I'm missing something. 12 and 6, 12 and 6, nope, I got it all.

Blah blah blah, the Stanley Cup champions should have lost the Finals. The league is broken when a lottery team whens the Stanley Cup!

I award the coveted Corsi Cup to the Penguins. Clearly the best group of forwards and defensemen at 5v5 on paper in the entire league.
- Red001

No one is saying the league is broken. In fact, I think many of us like the unpredictable nature of the playoffs. But just pretending the team that wins is the best team is silly.

No one is saying the league is broken. In fact, I think many of us like the unpredictable nature of the playoffs. But just pretending the team that wins is the best team is silly.
- james_tanner1

No, it's the opposite. Pretending that the team that wins is not the best team is what is silly.

No, it's the opposite. Pretending that the team that wins is not the best team is what is silly.
- MJL

This is when it's clear you're just trolling me. There is no way you believe that. No way anyone believes that. haha

This is when it's clear you're just trolling me. There is no way you believe that. No way anyone believes that. haha
- james_tanner1

Nope, no trolling involved. I'm actually making a repeated futile attempt to educate you on the sport of hockey. Actually that belief is universal. All the haha's won't change that.

Nope, no trolling involved. I'm actually making a repeated futile attempt to educate you on the sport of hockey. Actually that belief is universal. All the haha's won't change that.
- MJL

I enjoy your many attempts and their futility, that is for sure! Please note the hahah's I throw down are just showing that I'm making a joke and not meant to Nelson you. Realistically it is an objective fact that the best team doesn't always win. I would be more apt to listen to your ideas if you accepted as facts things that are certain and beyond the realm of debate. Upsets happen. That is how sports work. The 7 2 offsuit will hit a straight sometimes and bust the AA or the KK. Its not that you never make good points, its that accepting them when you do not believe in objective truth is difficult. I still love you though.

I enjoy your many attempts and their futility, that is for sure! Please note the hahah's I throw down are just showing that I'm making a joke and not meant to Nelson you. Realistically it is an objective fact that the best team doesn't always win. I would be more apt to listen to your ideas if you accepted as facts things that are certain and beyond the realm of debate. Upsets happen. That is how sports work. The 7 2 offsuit will hit a straight sometimes and bust the AA or the KK. Its not that you never make good points, its that accepting them when you do not believe in objective truth is difficult. I still love you though.
- james_tanner1

What you don't understand is that an upset may be something that is not expected but it happens because the better team won. You completely dismiss the actual results and the things that really make a difference in favor of analytics that are secondary and suspect. The team that makes in through the NHL playoffs and wins the Cup is the best team. That is an objective fact. Wins and losses are the best stat and the only stat that really matters. There are lots of variables that go into winning and losing. There are many variables that are different from scheduling, injuries, and others. The true measure is head to head play of the best teams.

The problem is your repeated claim to an opinion as indisputable facts. It all comes down to your complete lack of understanding how to apply analytics and use them.

It's not personal, I don't know you. You could never "nelson" me. You don't have the standing for it.

No, it's the opposite. Pretending that the team that wins is not the best team is what is silly.
- MJL

If it were one game playoff, like in the NFL, Tanner would be right. I mean, come on, does anyone honestly think the 1980 US Olympic team could beat the Soviets in a 7 game series? Germany beat Canada 4 of 7 in the last Olympics? How about the 68 Jets?

But when you have one clearly superior team, as Tanner seems to infer the Jackets, Penguins and Lightning were, they will win a best of seven 100 out of 100 times.

The joke of Tanner is that he ignores goaltending and special teams when proclaiming the best team, despite the fact that often a third of the game is not at 5v5. Chalk that up to luck, I guess. It's quite comical and highly entertaining to read his blogs.

If it were one game playoff, like in the NFL, Tanner would be right. I mean, come on, does anyone honestly think the 1980 US Olympic team could beat the Soviets in a 7 game series? Germany beat Canada 4 of 7 in the last Olympics? How about the 68 Jets?

But when you have one clearly superior team, as Tanner seems to infer the Jackets, Penguins and Lightning were, they will win a best of seven 100 out of 100 times.

The joke of Tanner is that he ignores goaltending and special teams when proclaiming the best team, despite the fact that often a third of the game is not at 5v5. Chalk that up to luck, I guess. It's quite comical and highly entertaining to read his blogs.
- Red001

A couple of things: You mistakenly think 7 games is a big enough sample for luck to be overcome. It's not even close. Even if we played best of 21 there would still be occasional upsets.

Secondly, I don't ignore special teams or goaltending. Those two things are extremely volatile and all they add is noise to your analysis.

But they are two separate things, so lets see if I can explain this.

1. Goaltending.

In the NHL, any goalie capable of making the NHL can go on a crazy streak where he is momentarily the best player in the NHL. (Or in Fleury's case, of all time).

When this happens, because the goalie is the biggest factor in a hockey game, teams that are terrible can have great success.

In the NHL, a team reduced to using it's fourth string goalie for even a few weeks would more than likely ruin their season. The Vegas team thrived despite this. Add in a goalie they were paid to take who is 32 and universally considered on the downslope of his career has a season for the ages. Its awesome this happened, but if we were to look at the history of this happening, we'd see that the outcome that actually occurred is so rare as to likely never happen again.

Since Vegas doesn't have Price, Bobrovsky or Holtby, when we evaluate their chances for making the playoffs next year, it makes sense to evaluate them as if they will get NHL average goaltending, which would, based on their roster, make them a borderline playoff team.

We ignore goaltending in our evaluations because we know that the probability of average goaltending is higher than getting randomly great goaltending. No matter how good the goalie, he eventually returns to average, so it's better overall to know which teams are good irrespective of their goalies.

That took a while I'll do special teams another time.

A couple of things: You mistakenly think 7 games is a big enough sample for luck to be overcome. It's not even close. Even if we played best of 21 there would still be occasional upsets.

Secondly, I don't ignore special teams or goaltending. Those two things are extremely volatile and all they add is noise to your analysis.

But they are two separate things, so lets see if I can explain this.

1. Goaltending.

In the NHL, any goalie capable of making the NHL can go on a crazy streak where he is momentarily the best player in the NHL. (Or in Fleury's case, of all time).

When this happens, because the goalie is the biggest factor in a hockey game, teams that are terrible can have great success.

In the NHL, a team reduced to using it's fourth string goalie for even a few weeks would more than likely ruin their season. The Vegas team thrived despite this. Add in a goalie they were paid to take who is 32 and universally considered on the downslope of his career has a season for the ages. Its awesome this happened, but if we were to look at the history of this happening, we'd see that the outcome that actually occurred is so rare as to likely never happen again.

Since Vegas doesn't have Price, Bobrovsky or Holtby, when we evaluate their chances for making the playoffs next year, it makes sense to evaluate them as if they will get NHL average goaltending, which would, based on their roster, make them a borderline playoff team.

We ignore goaltending in our evaluations because we know that the probability of average goaltending is higher than getting randomly great goaltending. No matter how good the goalie, he eventually returns to average, so it's better overall to know which teams are good irrespective of their goalies.

That took a while I'll do special teams another time.
- james_tanner1

This response is comically flawed and really is a perfect example of how you lack understanding and feel for the game of hockey.

You claim that because looking at the performance of goalie historically and statistically tells us what might be likely, ignore what actually did happen in your analysis. That's the jist of it. You approach and outlook is absurd.
Anyone with any eye for the game was able to watch Vegas play and see how they were much more than just a goaltender. How they jelled and played so well as a team man to man. How they checked and pressured all over the ice. How they attacked with a relentless forecheck and played so well within their system that they looked like the fastest team on the ice.

What makes sense is to evaluate what they actually are, not what they should be or might be due to some flawed statistical data. To look at any team in any other way is incredibly asinine.

A seven game series is more than enough of a sample size to eliminate luck as a factor. Special teams are huge in hockey games and should never be excluded from any analysis. To do so is incompetency.

You also state that "we" ignore goaltending as if you're some kind of spokesman for a group. Nobody ignores goaltending with the exception of yourself.

Not sure if Barrie Trotz is coming back.
But Barry Trotz might ?

C'mon, you can do better than that!


You need to find a better angle. That's not going to work.
- MJL

No "angle".......REALITY!

GO LEAFS GO

No "angle".......REALITY!
- Crushers68

Yea, still not working.

I have a god's honest question...

Does Trotz have a neck?

I think it's on equal footing as bigfoot and nessie. I don't believe it exists.

I have a god's honest question...

Does Trotz have a neck?

I think it's on equal footing as bigfoot and nessie. I don't believe it exists.
- simethos

Neck? Pfft, does he have ears?

Not sure if Barrie Trotz is coming back.
But Barry Trotz might ?
- wrister

he misspells names on purpose to get comments like this. just fyi.

he misspells names on purpose to get comments like this. just fyi.
- Blackstrom2

No, he just knows a guy named Barrie that spells it that way. What can you do? And honestly, who cares?

No, he just knows a guy named Barrie that spells it that way. What can you do? And honestly, who cares?
- james_tanner1

Because he is the head coach for the team you blog for.
Give him the respect and take the time to spell his name correctly.

I haven't heard this in any rumors or anything. But what does everyone think about the idea of signing Kovy? It would bolster Washington's already amazing offense. He wants to win a cup and right now the Caps could repeat. It's extra incentive to get him cheap and even more so to get Carl to not want to leave... Thoughts?

MJL, come out of the basement, and put your Hot Pockets down. Your team still sucks, and there is more to life than trolling hockey blogs.

Because he is the head coach for the team you blog for.
Give him the respect and take the time to spell his name correctly.
- wrister

He does it on purpose to bait people. Then he can comment on the types of people who correct spelling. He's set it up about a million times.