Yes there definitely was a time when I praised those players. But I read constantly and I change my mind when I get new information, which I used to think was the bare minimum qualification for being an adult.
- James_Tanner

thats a poo poo answer jimmy. great deals, great contracts. the gm is a genius. now a diff story.

Yes what you're saying is in line with traditional thinking. Depth is something teams have preached forever, but it's in fact the wrong way to go about it.

Of course there is no guarantee of winning, but the team with the most elite players has the best chace to do so.

As for rookies, no one said anything about superstars. Those are a bonus. But you can ditch Richardson and play Hayton, save half a million bucks and not notice a difference.
- James_Tanner

imagine how good they could be with rundblad, gormley,and franson on the back end. add arcobella to the bottom 6 all at league min. That would be a coup no other Gm could even dream about

So wat your saying is once you have to pay marner and Mathews big money vs on ELC. It will make them better? Shouldn’t your theory work better now when they are being paid nothing and can fill roster with better players. Just because they are getting paid doesn’t mean they will be better. While I am not saying they reached their ceiling but I don’t think you can expect a huge point jump from marner or Mathews.

Also, look at when blackhawks has to pay Kane and toews they never one a single round in playoffs. I believe Ovechkin is the Highest paid player to win the cup and his contract was paid how many years ago. To think u need to pay players crazy money has never worked in nhl. And depth teams or teams with players below elite have done much better then the teams you are talking about. Teams with out elite players blues, Vegas, boston, Nashville, islanders, flames, ducks and Minnesota All have been playoffs teams for long time without having a superstar.

@Tanner
- Bigdog1991

You have completely missed my point. Obviously there could never be a better situation in a cap league than having elite players on their ELC deals.

"Yes there definitely was a time when I praised those players. But I read constantly and I change my mind when I get new information, which I used to think was the bare minimum qualification for being an adult."
- James Tanner

Isn't this another way of saying "my knowledge base that I insisted was accurate while insulting anybody with an opinion that was outside my dogma, was so far off I've done a complete 180° degree turn and now I'm arguing the opposite because I read opinons of other people who are smarter than me (appeal to authorities)"

I mean changing your opinion or thought process is great but you then need to acknowledge how wrong you were, how off your thoughts and opinions on hockey were and how rude and insulting you were to others whose opinions you now share, despite previously calling it ignorance or insisting their opinion is due to a lack of reading? Hell couldn't you just admit that you rely solely on stats you clearly don't understand? Wanting credibility for changing your thought process has a cost and it's owning up to your previous BS
- Takemedrunkimhome

You're not using the word dogma correctly. Also, every single person I've ever been rude to deserved it. Also, why are you taking every single thing as an all encompassing situation.

Just because I changed my mind about paying players like Jason Demers - who does in fact put up good numbers - doesn't mean I've changed my mind about everything I've ever though.

This is a really bad post dude, even for here.

"Teams focus on depth, but they shouldn't.

The focus should be on getting as many star players as you can. The Leafs are the first team in the NHL to follow through on this knowledge with a "studs and duds" salary cap structure.

Once they sign Marner, they'll have 3 players over ten million. A lot of people think this won't work, but they are wrong. They fail to understand that the real problem NHL teams suffer from is paying out money to mid-range players. "

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid

How many star players play on SJ compared to St-Louis last season? How about Tampa vs Columbus? Why is it that a team like Pittsburgh that have constantly and 3-4 star players over the past 10-15 years only ever seem to win when their goalies go on a hot streak?

Or a team like Edmonton that has had multiple 1st overall picks and star players only made the playoffs 1 in the past decade, let alone actually win anything?

If you really think that star players and nobodies wins you championships then you should be blogging for the NBA. As important as star players are to a team it's impossible to win in the NHL without being able to roll 3 lines constantly
- Pasky

Obviously I'm colouring outside the lines here, so I do expect posts like this, but you should be aware that the NBA, in terms of effect of star players, is the most similar to the NHL.

Edmonton is actually a perfect example: If they had of realized what I'm saying, they'd traded an elite player for a position they were weak at, and it turned into arguable a top five worst trade of all time. Maybe even #1 or 2/.

imagine how good they could be with rundblad, gormley,and franson on the back end. add arcobella to the bottom 6 all at league min. That would be a coup no other Gm could even dream about
- daryl stanley

I you're a pathetic troll but ironically you're making a good point. If the Coyotes swapped Franson out for Goligoski they'd come out way ahead.

If they swapped out Runblad for Demers, same thing. Arcobella was actually a decent NHL player, he was small and if he was five years younger, he'd be loving todays NHL.

You're not using the word dogma correctly. Also, every single person I've ever been rude to deserved it. Also, why are you taking every single thing as an all encompassing situation.

Just because I changed my mind about paying players like Jason Demers - who does in fact put up good numbers - doesn't mean I've changed my mind about everything I've ever though.

This is a really bad post dude, even for here.
- James_Tanner

I agree your post is bad, sadly you'll just insult people today only to change your mind a few years from now. Everybody sees it

Let's ignore today's installment of let's-make-a-childishly-stupid-overstatement ("It's a game where the impact of elite players and goalies is massive and everyone else barely matters.") and really think about the greater argument. Nashville gave away Subban because they are rich on defense and they've been trying to get a legit 2C (many would say they needed a legit 1C depending on how one feels about Johansen) for years. To summarize, They needed to clear a bunch of cap space to sign Duchene, 9 million is a huge over payment for Subban at this point in his career and they won't miss Subban nearly as much as other teams would.

None of the above applies to Kopitar and the Kings. LA doesn't need to clear a bunch of cap space and they aren't flush with high scoring, elite centers. There's not a chance in hell they would give away Kopitar in the same fashion that the Preds gave away Subban, The situations aren't even close to analogous. Hell, there are many anecdotal reports (to say the least) that Subban is grating in the room, especially over time, which may be another reason Nashville made that move. Kopitar wears a 'C' which they took from a Conn Smythe winner to give to him.

The rest of what you say about AZ is pretty much correct but how did the genius Chayka allow that to happen? Is it possible for you to write about hockey without all the hyperbolic crap and actually think through an argument before you make it? I won't even ask for some consistency with things you've written in the past.

James Tanner, tell me what underlying stats say about Subban. If you monatize a player's worth using stats where does Subban fall? What is his age? Do you think the NHL allows him to get away with "checks" that are really forearm shivers bc of his salary, the color of his skin or what? Bc I don't know how basically an elbow is the same as using your shoulder. He's not, maybe for two, three seasons tops, a $9million player.

Would you rather have Subban or
Burns, Karlsson, Werenski, McAvoy, Krug, Parayko, Doughty, Carlsson, Josi, Ellis, S.Jones, Dunn, Gardenier, Dahlin, Giardano, Hedman, OEL, Trouba, Morrisey etc etc..... $9million for a declining game where you are gambling and likely only going to get one elite season and it'll probably be a high shooting pct and a high PDO.

I still can't believe montreal traded subban.

Imagine if the Leafs traded rielly for ryan suter?

you got money for this blog?

I actually listened with an open mind and thought, maybe you're right James. But I'm having a hard time mathematically confirming your conclusion.

I'd really like to see you push this theory with the math that validates it. I can't find a searchable evaluation of WAR/GAR besides Evolving-Hockey, so that's what I'm using. My results do not line up with your theory.

If you look at GAR and WAR stats for elite players versus typical NHL players making between 2-6 million, the statistical improvement above replacement actually does not justify their contracts.

I'm beginning to think perhaps the opposite is true, that solid depth acquisitions with economical cap hits are the real difference makers. Players like Carl Gunnarson, Oskar Sundqvist, Vince Dunn, Pat Maroon, and Tyler Bozak all seem to be big economical contributors.

If you trade out those above for replacement level players and then add a big name with the savings, your team would actually go down in wins using the WAR or GAR model. You'd actually go down significantly (several wins would be lost) if you swapped those out for Kopitar. That move in and of itself would probably cause missing the playoffs.

Subban is one year removed from a Norris nomination. He had one down year and a bunch of players trolled him by calling him the most overrated player and everyone bought in. I'd at least give it another season to see if he bounces back before calling it a career for the guy. Plenty of stars have been called over/in decline and bounced right back to elite status.

Subban is one year removed from a Norris nomination. He had one down year and a bunch of players trolled him by calling him the most overrated player and everyone bought in. I'd at least give it another season to see if he bounces back before calling it a career for the guy. Plenty of stars have been called over/in decline and bounced right back to elite status.
- mgriffen

remember like 7 years ago when everyone thought ovi was done? he won what, 6 rockets since then?

Of course the Leafs offer was better.

They have better players.

They're the best team ever.

Forever.

In everything.
- Scabeh

Praise Jesus

I don’t see Kopitar waiving to go anywhere. The Kings love their hockey community in the Hermosa Beach area. Weird that you don’t know that you being such an informed, well-paid hockey nerd and all

remember like 7 years ago when everyone thought ovi was done? he won what, 6 rockets since then?
- BestRapperAlive

They said Crosby was done way back when too. Toews just posted career high numbers too. People are always waiting to say you're done. Subban's getting a new start and he'll be their top D man. I think he'll do great.

It might sound crazy, but if you think about it really isn't.

11% of the NHL impacts the game with a range between the best elite player and the worst elite player that is insanely bigger than the rest of the NHL.

First thing you have to understand is that yes, this might be completely insane in a league without a salary cap.

But not only is the NHL a league with a salary cap, it's a league where (unlike soccer) team depth isn't a factor in winning. You can google strong link game and get some interesting reading material.

The bottom line is that winning in the NHL is driven by elite players, who have outsized impacts on the game.

People have been writing for years about how the difference between second line players and AHL players is basically down to minutes and opportunity.

So if you have Justin Ablekator who makes $4.25 million, and you compare him to a player who is worse, but cheaper, it makes sense to take the cheaper player every time.

If you do that with three players, you will slightly down grade your roster, but have enough money left over to buy an elite player.

If the Coyotes lineup was Kopitar- Hayton - Garland
instead of Grabner - Soderberg - Richardson don't think think they improved their team?

One thing you're not consider is how marginal differences at the professional level are.

The worst player in the NHL, if you met him, would be better at playing hockey than anyone you've ever met is at doing their best skill. The NHL is the best of the best.

But the difference between McDavid and Polak is smaller than the difference between Polak and a random mens league player.

So while marginal gains are extremely important, adding elite players and subbing your mid-range guys out with ELCs and AHL tweeners making the league minimum is the best way to improve your team.

This is the next big change that analytics will have on the NHL, and in like two or three years you'll be like "wow Tanner was actually right"
- James_Tanner

How do you explain the oilers then? And comparing professional players to people that play for fun is rather pointless.

I don’t see Kopitar waiving to go anywhere. The Kings love their hockey community in the Hermosa Beach area. Weird that you don’t know that you being such an informed, well-paid hockey nerd and all
- WSCTeton17

Agreed, highly doubt he waives. Especially to disappear from all living memory into the desert.

You're not using the word dogma correctly. Also, every single person I've ever been rude to deserved it. Also, why are you taking every single thing as an all encompassing situation.

Just because I changed my mind about paying players like Jason Demers - who does in fact put up good numbers - doesn't mean I've changed my mind about everything I've ever though.

This is a really bad post dude, even for here.
- James_Tanner

Worrying about his word usage is missing the point of the comment. And it's not a really bad post. It's quite relevant.
Let's take your argument back one more step. Those people were rude to you because YOU deserved it. And this OP is completely correct that you insulted them for having the audacity to say your opinion (which you tried to pass off as fact, I was there) was incorrect. Now you agree with those people and instead of having the class to admit your error, you insult them again.
Take a look in the mirror when you make statements like this James. You don't seem like a good person to me.

I you're a pathetic troll but ironically you're making a good point. If the Coyotes swapped Franson out for Goligoski they'd come out way ahead.

If they swapped out Runblad for Demers, same thing. Arcobella was actually a decent NHL player, he was small and if he was five years younger, he'd be loving todays NHL.
- James_Tanner

Troll really hurts my feelings.

Then why isn’t rundblad in the nhl? Can you give just 1 valid answer? Same for Franson.

"Yes there definitely was a time when I praised those players. But I read constantly and I change my mind when I get new information, which I used to think was the bare minimum qualification for being an adult."
- James Tanner

Isn't this another way of saying "my knowledge base that I insisted was accurate while insulting anybody with an opinion that was outside my dogma, was so far off I've done a complete 180° degree turn and now I'm arguing the opposite because I read opinons of other people who are smarter than me (appeal to authorities)"

I mean changing your opinion or thought process is great but you then need to acknowledge how wrong you were, how off your thoughts and opinions on hockey were and how rude and insulting you were to others whose opinions you now share, despite previously calling it ignorance or insisting their opinion is due to a lack of reading? Hell couldn't you just admit that you rely solely on stats you clearly don't understand? Wanting credibility for changing your thought process has a cost and it's owning up to your previous BS
- Takemedrunkimhome

Great post!
And summarizes Jimmy knowledge of anything(really).
flip/flop master. He will post something within a week that completely contradicts what he is posting today! When you point this out to him, He simply attempts some lame frat boy comment, That also completely contradicts what he attempts to spew in these blogs about the above average intellect he claims to possess.

Troll really hurts my feelings.

Then why isn’t rundblad in the nhl? Can you give just 1 valid answer? Same for Franson.
- daryl stanley

Because GMs are dumb and Franson being the slowest human on skates is just an illusion.

Because GMs are dumb and Franson being the slowest human on skates is just an illusion.
- Garnie

This is not even satire, that's exactly what he said when Franson couldn't get a contract

This is not even satire, that's exactly what he said when Franson couldn't get a contract
- BestRapperAlive

There is obviously a group think situation going on - Franson clearly deserves to be in the NHL. Maybe GMs are dumb - at least half of them are terrible at their jobs, and the rest of them get free pick of guys like Franson.