He. That doesn't add up. Boyd, what's your source on that +8 number?

EDIT: Wait, don't you get a minus for being on the ice during a shorty? Cus that might explain it. I know we gave up a lot of shorty's last season but that still seems staggering to go to a -19 from a +8 at ES.
- Victoro311

You get a minus with your goalie pulled and Kessel was -11 in that scenario.

One of many reasons why plus minus is a flawed stat.

Yeah there's no (frank)ing way we gave up 27 shorties. We probably gave up close to 10. You are right, the plus minus figure makes no sense unless we let up a goal literally every time Phil was on the ice for a 4v4.
- Victoro311

Pretty sure it’s this: when we pull the goalie it’s not considered even strength on those charts because it’s not 5v5, 4v4, or 3v3 but if the opposition scores and it’s 6 vs 5 you still collect a minus and Pitt has got to be a bottom 5 team when they pull the goalie, we have been awful with the goalie pulled the past couple seasons

You need two club elected arbitrations for a second buyout window. We are not eligible.
- burgh4life87

Buzzkill

Yes, you do, but we didn't give up 27 shorties.... DID WE?

Kinda takes some of the shine off those PP numbers if we did

Hockey Reference has him on the ice for 56 even strength Goals For

And on the ice for 75 even strength or (our PP ie:shortie) Goals Against, There's the -19

His Corsi was also 47.4 on 65.6% offensive zone starts
- RoloTahmasee

Another flawed stat. A majority of shift starts are on the fly.

You get a minus with your goalie pulled and Kessel was -11 in that scenario.

One of many reasons why plus minus is a flawed stat.
- Feds91Stammer

Ahhhh Feds 😂 I just left the office and was typing a similar scenario. Nice work with the actual figure

Buzzkill
- Tojo.

Buyouts Outside of the Regular Period
Clubs whom have 1 or more arbitration filings may be permitted to perform a buyout outside of the regular window. This gives teams another opportunity to become cap compliant following an arbitration case.

Clubs are permitted to perform a buyout outside the regular period during the 48 hour period beginning on the third day after the final of [CBA 13(c)ii]:
Settlement of the Club's final arbitration case, or
Receipt of the Club's last arbitration award

Requirements:
A buyout can only be performed on a player who was on the clubs reserve list at 3:00pm on the most recent trade deadline
The player must have a cap hit of at least $3,455,438 for the 2019 offseason

There is an exception to this buyout period (CBA Reference: Section 11.18; 12.3) if the arbitation was Club-elected (as opposed to player-elected) and the player did not receive a qualifying offer. In this case, a minimum of two arbitration cases are necessary to trigger the buy-out period outside the regular window.

The number of arbitration filings required to open the buy-out window outside the regular period are as follows:

Mininum Number of Arbitration Cases Required to Trigger a Buyout Window Outside of the Regular Period
Arbitration Case Min. Number of Arbitration Cases
Player-Elected 1
Club-Elected [Player received a Qualifying Offer] 1
Club-Elected [Player did not receive a Qualifying Offer] 2

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-faq

Because he's losing a step and needs to adjust since he can't blow by defenders anymore.

Because he wasn't that good of a 5v5 player, so I wouldn't say it was working. How the first and third lines played was working (playoffs aside, where nothing worked)

They'll miss him on that PP though
- Tojo.

I'm good with +8 5v5 players that are also elite on the PP.

Ahhhh Feds 😂 I just left the office and was typing a similar scenario. Nice work with the actual figure
- WSCTeton17

Haha I just got settled in to my man cave at home.

Buyouts Outside of the Regular Period
Clubs whom have 1 or more arbitration filings may be permitted to perform a buyout outside of the regular window. This gives teams another opportunity to become cap compliant following an arbitration case.

Clubs are permitted to perform a buyout outside the regular period during the 48 hour period beginning on the third day after the final of
- Feds91Stammer[CBA 13(c)ii]:
Settlement of the Club's final arbitration case, or
Receipt of the Club's last arbitration award

Requirements:
A buyout can only be performed on a player who was on the clubs reserve list at 3:00pm on the most recent trade deadline
The player must have a cap hit of at least $3,455,438 for the 2019 offseason

There is an exception to this buyout period (CBA Reference: Section 11.18; 12.3) if the arbitation was Club-elected (as opposed to player-elected) and the player did not receive a qualifying offer. In this case, a minimum of two arbitration cases are necessary to trigger the buy-out period outside the regular window.

The number of arbitration filings required to open the buy-out window outside the regular period are as follows:

Mininum Number of Arbitration Cases Required to Trigger a Buyout Window Outside of the Regular Period
Arbitration Case Min. Number of Arbitration Cases
Player-Elected 1
Club-Elected [Player received a Qualifying Offer] 1
Club-Elected [Player did not receive a Qualifying Offer] 2

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-faq

Thanks, I always thought it was 2 cases. Also it sucks JJ still cant be bought out

Haha I just got settled in to my man cave at home.


- Feds91Stammer

Your moms basement looks nice!

Nerd

If Phil was +8 5v5 how did he end up -19 ? Serious question.....

27 goal swing couldn't be all 4v4 and shorties against?
- RoloTahmasee

Because he was a -11 with an empty net.
And the Penguins allowed 13 short handed goals with him on the ice.

Also, Phil was a plus 8 at 5v5. A -14 at 4v4 and 3v3. Also he was on the ice for 13 short handed goals.

He. That doesn't add up. Boyd, what's your source on that +8 number?

EDIT: Wait, don't you get a minus for being on the ice during a shorty? Cus that might explain it. I know we gave up a lot of shorty's last season but that still seems staggering to go to a -19 from a +8 at ES.
- Victoro311

You get a minus if the opposing team scores an empty netter and if you're on the ice from a shorty.

Pens Fowards 5v5 Goal Differential 18/19

Sid: +39
Jake: +29
Kessel: +8
Rust: +7
Malkin: -2
Simon: +9
Horny: +8
Cullen: 0
ZAR: +8
Pearson: -4
Sheahan: -10
Bjugstad: +4
Brassard: -6
McCann: 0
Wilson: +2
Hags: +1
Blueger: +4
Grant: +3
Johnson: +2
Sprong: -6
Dea: +1
Blandisi: 0

Your moms basement looks nice!

Nerd
- sammy87

Thanks

Haha I just got settled in to my man cave at home.


- Feds91Stammer

I dig it & you moved so this is a new cave?

https://thesportsdaily.co...er-turned-playmaker-p1b1/

This was an article from the end of March when everyone was female doging and moaning that Phil wasn't scoring... but he was in fact still producing dangerous chances, at some point better than any time in his career.

Pretty sure it’s this: when we pull the goalie it’s not considered even strength on those charts because it’s not 5v5, 4v4, or 3v3 but if the opposition scores and it’s 6 vs 5 you still collect a minus and Pitt has got to be a bottom 5 team when they pull the goalie, we have been awful with the goalie pulled the past couple seasons
- WSCTeton17

+/- gives a player a minus when an ENG is scored against, Natural Stat Trick just recently added the empty net filters to their site and I asked them via twitter a while abck, ENGs were lumped into the 5v5.

You get a minus with your goalie pulled and Kessel was -11 in that scenario.

One of many reasons why plus minus is a flawed stat.
- Feds91Stammer

Agree on +/-

Sid was on the ice for just as many SHG and ENG as Kessel, yet he was a +39 at 5v5.

Agree on +/-

Sid was on the ice for just as many SHG and ENG as Kessel, yet he was a +39 at 5v5.
- Tojo.

That's because Sidney Crosby is a top 3 two-way center in the NHL. I don't believe anyone is claiming that Kessel is anywhere near Sid in terms of 2-way hockey.

I dig it & you moved so this is a new cave?
- WSCTeton17

Sure is.

Agree on +/-

Sid was on the ice for just as many SHG and ENG as Kessel, yet he was a +39 at 5v5.
- Tojo.

And Sid is still the best player in the world outside of McDavid imo.

Buyouts Outside of the Regular Period
Clubs whom have 1 or more arbitration filings may be permitted to perform a buyout outside of the regular window. This gives teams another opportunity to become cap compliant following an arbitration case.

Clubs are permitted to perform a buyout outside the regular period during the 48 hour period beginning on the third day after the final of
- Feds91Stammer[CBA 13(c)ii]:
Settlement of the Club's final arbitration case, or
Receipt of the Club's last arbitration award

Requirements:
A buyout can only be performed on a player who was on the clubs reserve list at 3:00pm on the most recent trade deadline
The player must have a cap hit of at least $3,455,438 for the 2019 offseason

There is an exception to this buyout period (CBA Reference: Section 11.18; 12.3) if the arbitation was Club-elected (as opposed to player-elected) and the player did not receive a qualifying offer. In this case, a minimum of two arbitration cases are necessary to trigger the buy-out period outside the regular window.

The number of arbitration filings required to open the buy-out window outside the regular period are as follows:

Mininum Number of Arbitration Cases Required to Trigger a Buyout Window Outside of the Regular Period
Arbitration Case Min. Number of Arbitration Cases
Player-Elected 1
Club-Elected [Player received a Qualifying Offer] 1
Club-Elected [Player did not receive a Qualifying Offer] 2

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-faq

Ok thanks, but it looks like we still aren't getting a buyout because ZAR isn't getting enough money.

Ok thanks, but it looks like we still aren't getting a buyout because ZAR isn't getting enough money.
- Tojo.

The dollar amount is for the player being bought out which in JJs case he doesn't meet it.

A Guddy buyout would work though (very very unlikely of course)

https://www.capfriendly.c...r/erik-gudbranson#results

I'm good with +8 5v5 players that are also elite on the PP.
- j.boyd919

My argument was always he needed to change something at 5v5. BTW, when he was with Malkin, they were only +3. Seems low for 2 ppg players. Of course they were -4 the previous year when JJ wasn't there to drag them down.

I think they'd have been better off with a good ES player, unfortunately they got Galchenyuk. But I also saw Phil declining, so that takes some of the sting away from me.