Jump to content


Richdg's Photo

Richdg

Member Since 03 May 2012
Offline Last Active Oct 14 2014 04:34 PM
*----

#2302363 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 11:33 PM

Just because he doesn't eat the s*** sandwhich put on his plate by arrogant fans/management doesn't mean he doesn't cheer for the team to win.



No need to be rude. I don't careif people agree with me or not. That is their right. Those that don't like what I post are always free to not read it. But they do and react. If my posts where not hitting a nerve, they wouldn't post.


#2302361 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 11:17 PM

So you have proven that you flunked statistics 101. What a load of crap. All of your number are totals i.e. total points, total goals, etc. So lets's look at Datsyuk. He missed alot of games this year due to injury. As a result he gets a "red" mark in points, shots, goals, etc. because his totals are down and all of his totals are down for the year because of injury. From this you conclude that he is declining. And who cares about having individual players that put up great numbers. It's a team sport and the Wings were once again near the top of the league in scoring.

Fail.



Clearly you failed reading. dat has zero reds this year. His number were up from last year. A season where he was also hurt (notice a trend here) and only played 59 games. I didn't even list goals. There were 3 things for each player listed: Games played, total points, and shots. That is it. In every case, using linear regression (stats lingo for you) our slope is linear, strong, negative, with outliers. BTW I just got a B+ in Statistics from GVSU last semester! please try again, but you will fail.


#2302344 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 07:44 PM

How do you build a successful NHL team you ask? It's simple. I don't get why people think Ken Holland's so smart??



Forwards:

6mil-6mil-5mil
5mil-6mil-5mil
1mil-1mil-1mil
1mil-1mil-1mil
1mil, 1mil

Defensemen:

5mil-5mil
5mil-5mil
1mil-1mil
1mil

Goalies:

5mil
1mil



...THAT's how you structure a 70 million dollar salary cap in today's NHL. There are 11 players that you give about 5mil to (and three of them you could give 6mil to) - your top six forwards, your top four defensemen and your goalie. I don't care if you draft and develop them, if you trade for them, or if you sign them. You get them. That's where you need your elite talent.

...As for the rest of the guys, your bottom six forwards, your bottom pairing defenseman, your backup goalie, and your healthy scratches. None of these guys should be making more than 1mil a season. Most of them should be cheap, young, big, strong, fast, tough, hard-working ready-to-play draft picks that you make. They don't need to be able to score. They just need to be those things. And you can find those things anywhere in the draft if you're looking for them. If one of the guy's blows up and is in line for a big contract...you let him walk...and you call up the next guy.

Simple as that.


What you are talking about is completely impossible. For example. Our #5 D is either ericsson or Quincy. Both are over 3 million per season. Your buddy Stoll is in the 2.5+ range as a 3rd or 4th liner. The cold hard trueth is, guys in the league for more than 3 years will make 2+ million as bench players.


#2302299 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 12:01 PM

Before anyone jumps off of a bridge, this has nothing to do with any team. It is a general set of thoughts. What would I do in terms of team make up and roster control/spending if I was running a NHL team. Keeping some things in mind: 23 man roster and a 70 million $ cap, here we go.

1. Player experience/roster management. Ok we have a 23 man roster. It is impossible to have all 23 players between 27 and 32, which is the prime of most players careers. Not to mention the cost of having a team like that. My ideal roster would have 2 rookies, 2 second year, 2 third year, 2 fourth year, 2 5th, 2 6th, 2 7th, 2 8th, 2 9th, 2 10th, 2 11th, and 1 guy with 12 or more. By doing this you are keeping young and cheap plays coming in and managing the costs. If the average rookie is 22 when he makes the roster, this still keeps the majority of the players between 26 and 32. The prime playing years. Some of course come earlier and some later.

2. managing the cap. If you divide 70 million by 23, you spend 3 million per player. if you actual payroll looked like that you would have a pretty poor team. Also most rookies and young players don't make nor do they need to make 3 million per year. So where and how much do i spend? The backup goalie, 7th Dman, and the 13th and 14th forwards are all at 1 million or less. That is 4 guys of the 23. leaving 66 million to spend on 19 players. The starting goalie is in a 5 million per slot. The 1-6 Dman make the oppisite amount. IE the 1 makes 6, the 2 makes 5, the 3 makes 4, the 4 makes 3, the 5 makes 2 and the 6 makes 1. At this point I have allocated 30 million of the 70 and covered 11 players. Leaving 40 million for the remaining 12 forwards. The 4th line guys make 2 million each. This leaves 9 players and 34 million left to spend. The 6 remaining RW and LW each get paid 3 million. This leaves 3 players and 16 million to spend. The 1 and 2 C get 6 million each, and the 3rd C makes 4 million. That allocates all 70 million allowed for the cap.

3. Now i have never been inside of RW HQ. But I am sure they have a plan along these lines somewhere. Every company does. You have to know where the money is going etc..... Now some may want to spend more accross the board on the top line. So be it, everyone has their own opinions. But in the end, you still have to have 23 players and can only spend 70.

later I will take these thoughts and tie these with the wings and their roster. I am sure that will be fun! LOL!



4. Of course as time moves forward the cap will increase. As the cap goes from 70-72 million I would add that money to the 3rd center. that spot is now budgeted for 6 million. later as the cap adds the next 6 million, I would increase the budgeted amounts for the top 6 RW/LW. each of those 6 positions now make 4 million. After that, all additional cap increases would get divided equally amoung the top 3 C, top 2 D, and the starting goalie.


#2302240 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 05:10 PM

Before anyone jumps off of a bridge, this has nothing to do with any team. It is a general set of thoughts. What would I do in terms of team make up and roster control/spending if I was running a NHL team. Keeping some things in mind: 23 man roster and a 70 million $ cap, here we go.

1. Player experience/roster management. Ok we have a 23 man roster. It is impossible to have all 23 players between 27 and 32, which is the prime of most players careers. Not to mention the cost of having a team like that. My ideal roster would have 2 rookies, 2 second year, 2 third year, 2 fourth year, 2 5th, 2 6th, 2 7th, 2 8th, 2 9th, 2 10th, 2 11th, and 1 guy with 12 or more. By doing this you are keeping young and cheap plays coming in and managing the costs. If the average rookie is 22 when he makes the roster, this still keeps the majority of the players between 26 and 32. The prime playing years. Some of course come earlier and some later.

2. managing the cap. If you divide 70 million by 23, you spend 3 million per player. if you actual payroll looked like that you would have a pretty poor team. Also most rookies and young players don't make nor do they need to make 3 million per year. So where and how much do i spend? The backup goalie, 7th Dman, and the 13th and 14th forwards are all at 1 million or less. That is 4 guys of the 23. leaving 66 million to spend on 19 players. The starting goalie is in a 5 million per slot. The 1-6 Dman make the oppisite amount. IE the 1 makes 6, the 2 makes 5, the 3 makes 4, the 4 makes 3, the 5 makes 2 and the 6 makes 1. At this point I have allocated 30 million of the 70 and covered 11 players. Leaving 40 million for the remaining 12 forwards. The 4th line guys make 2 million each. This leaves 9 players and 34 million left to spend. The 6 remaining RW and LW each get paid 3 million. This leaves 3 players and 16 million to spend. The 1 and 2 C get 6 million each, and the 3rd C makes 4 million. That allocates all 70 million allowed for the cap.

3. Now i have never been inside of RW HQ. But I am sure they have a plan along these lines somewhere. Every company does. You have to know where the money is going etc..... Now some may want to spend more accross the board on the top line. So be it, everyone has their own opinions. But in the end, you still have to have 23 players and can only spend 70.

later I will take these thoughts and tie these with the wings and their roster. I am sure that will be fun! LOL!


#2302230 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 03:14 PM

LOL its called scoring percentage dude (pretty sure i said that in my original post....its reading not fantasy haha). Percentage of points scored per games played. Example: 80 pts in 80 games played would be 100% and 40 pts in 80 games played would be 50%......LOL did u really think i was just pulling random numbers out of a hat?????

Next ur gonna post a thread about how we dont have a good farm and Suter is only famous for his name :hehe:



Actually, now that I understand what you where trying to say, it proves my point. If dat was at 125% scoring in 2008 and is at 95% scoring in 2012, that is a 30% DECLINE! Not to mention he is playing fewer and fewer games each year. In 08 and 09 Dat had 97 points. he played 82 games in 08 and 81 games in 09. Now he is down to the mid and lower 70's in games played. So thanks for making my point.


#2302162 Which current NHL players do our top prospects compare to?

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 12:16 AM

The problem with our "prospects" is, we really don't know if they are. As of today, most are just names. Pick any of the rating sites you want, most rate our prospects with a high of Smith on down. But everyone of those sites gives a strong cya on each guy. For example, Hockeysfuture.com gives Smith a 8.0 rating which is equl to a potentail #2 D. But at the same time they also give him a grade of C, which means "may make it, but could drop 2 points". At 6 points Smith goes from a future #2 to a journeyman #6 or 7 Dman. Everyone else on our list has already made it to the NHL: maursk and nyquist or has yet to play a professional game. Could all of them develop? Yes. Could they all flame out? Yes. Most are 3+ years away from any of us being able to tell, one way or the other. The problem is, we need the help now.
  • Nev likes this


#2302155 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 11:25 PM

Just wondering the favorite flavor of kool aid? Cherry or strawberry? Either way, there is some massive consumption going on......


#2302135 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 09:21 PM

The issue with Pulkkinen is he'll likely be limited to a pure offensive force. He's got a great shot and solid offensive instincts, but he lacks speed and defensive awareness. I think he could wind up as a solid top 6 guy, but I'm not sure about the "great forward" tag that Rich mentioned. You could toss him on a line that covers up his lack of speed/defense... a good complimentary player, I think. Could throw guys like Tatar and Tvrdon into the conversation too, but I have more faith in Nyquist, Jarnkrok and Jurco.



Sure there is, which is why I'm skeptical about Jurco. Nyquist has shown he can excel at the AHL level, and looked right in place on a line with Datsyuk. Jarnkrok's playing in the SEL, which is right on par or higher with the AHL. At times during the currenty IIHF tournament, he's looked like the best player on Sweden. I agree that you can never fully predict how good a player will be, but Nyquist and Jarnkrok have looked right in place with NHL caliber players.




#2302132 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 09:17 PM

Holy Jesus am I ever sick of clicking on a new thread, all excited to read something new and then seeing the SAME things posted by the SAME people. I still love LGW but some of the new posters (yes my post count is low but I'm not brand new) are driving me insane.

Also, number9 took the words right out of my mouth. "Can't win it all every year..."



Then don't read and post on it. Pretty simple.

Didn't you already over sing this tune on another thread...like...a couple days ago? No matter, I'll happily present you the real truth again.

First off, Cleary and Bertuzzi CAN play in the top 6, but they will likely see time in both the bottom and top 6 to make room for our YOUNG players (yes despite your oversights we do have them). We also may add another top 6 forward like Parise through FA this year which would also force those two into the bottom 6.

Now let's look at scoring percentage...since injuries will inherently impact and flaw all the stats you chose.

Datsyuk (Top 6)
2007/2008 = 118%
2008/2009 = 119%
2009/2010 = 87% - down year
2010/2011 = 105%
2011/2012 = 95%

Zetterberg (Top 6)
2007/2008 = 122%
2008/2009 = 94%
2009/2010 = 94%
2010/2011 = 100%
2011/2012 = 84% - down year

Franzen (Top 6)
2007/2008 = 52% - down year
2008/2009 = 83%
2009/2010 = 77%
2010/2011 = 72%
2011/2012 = 72%

Cleary (In and out of the Top 6)
2007/2008 = 66%
2008/2009 = 54%
2009/2010 = 53%
2010/2011 = 67%
2011/2012 = 44% - down year (nagging injury)

Bertuzzi (In and out of the Top 6)
2007/2008 = 58%
2008/2009 = 66%
2009/2010 = 53%
2010/2011 = 55%
2011/2012 = 53%

Those numbers are the definition of strong top 6 players and VERY consistent play.... 87% (Datsyuk) 84% (Zetterberg) are also arguably not AT ALL down years for a top 6 forward. Yet, because Datsyuk and Zetterberg are among the top 10 forwards in the league (offensively AND defensively, and yes even at this age) we'll call those down years for them :) You also conveniently left Filppula, Nyquist, and Hudler out of your evaluation....Those are 3 young players who WILL be on this team next year. (Hudler the only one who may get cut, but who would be likely replaced by an upgrade anyway)

Nyquist (In and out of the Top 6)
2011/2012 = 38%

Filppula (Top 6)
2007/2008 = 46%
2008/2009 = 50%
2009/2010 = 63%
2010/2011 = 54%
2011/2012 = 81% - (break out year?)

Hudler (In and out of the top 6)
2007/2008 = 51%
2008/2009 = 69%
2009/2010 = did not play
2010/2011 = 50%
2011/2012 = 61%

Hate to burst your bubble but we have one of the highest scoring and most capable Top 6's in the league....And players like Nyquist/Filpulla/Hudler are getting better and taking on larger roles in the Top 6, While Datsyuk and Zetterberg continually show us Lidstrom-like ageless play....And even if we add no one to the top 6 this offseason...that still leaves us with 8 players who are capable of playing in the top 6...

While our team does have its problems and things that should be modified, the fact is the problem is not Datsyuk or Zetterberg......Your whole argument seems to rest on the fact that you think we need All-stars like Yzerman/Federov and Datsyuk/Zetterberg in order to win cups.....Guess what? It's not about the name on the back, it's about the logo on the front. This is a TEAM game, and no player or pair of players can carry any team to a cup....We need a well rounded team with all the right role-players and leaders....and right now we need size and grit in the bottom 6, a back up goalie, and maybe a sniper....not a new Datsyuk or Zetterberg

Where is crymson when you need him to knock some sense into people


I provid proof with real actual numbers and you talk about some % that is tied to what exactly? Some fantasy league % doesn't win games. Goals do. Either by scoring them or preventing them. Thought you would know that.


#2302089 Iginla

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 04:14 PM

So corked bats, cut baseballs and playing the puck from the bench is ok as long as you don't get caught? :huh:



Are you 12? no it isn't ok. It is against the rules. But does it happen? yes all the time. The HOF's in every sport are filled with guys who broke the rules.


#2302088 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 04:12 PM

The easy part is to say: "we need to upgrade at x, y, z postions". the harder part is doing it. Lets look at a few things.

1. we don't have much to trade. Burt-old and no trade clause, Dat-old and no trade cluase, Z not really old yetbut how many are willing to take on the remianing 9 years of his contract, franzen-same problem, Ericcson-no trade clause. No 2-3 players in our minors are going to bring a big name. The only real pieces we could trade are Filppula and Kornwall.
2. trying to rebuild via FA is always a crap shoot. You never know how it will turn out. You also tend to overpay for players.

3. The draft. In many ways we got very very lucky. getting 3 superstars: dat, Z and Hommer, that late in a draft is PURE luck. Not going to happen again. But looking past those 3, how mnay superstars or even stars have we drafted in the past decade? Not many. Howard was in the past decade, but after him the next best would be Filppula. good yes, but star?


#2302085 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 03:56 PM

Honestly, I feel like that "pair" is going to stem out of Nyquist, Jarnkrok and/or Jurco. Some people doubt their upside, but I firmly believe that the first two are for sure, solid two-way players. I'd still like to see what happens with Jurco, but I think he's got a lot of upside.



Hard to say with guys that have yet to play a single professional hockey game. There is a huge step from juniors to the minors, and an even bigger step from the minors to the NHL.


#2302066 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 01:36 PM

Made this handy little spread sheet. it covers the 5 of our top 6 forwards that are signed for next season. has the names, ages, and 3 stats for each year from 2008 through 2012. Those stats are: GP=games played, PTS=points, and shts=shoots on goal. Black numbers are no change or improved, red numbers are declines.
Name----Age--------------------2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
--------------------------------GP PTS shts GP PTS shts GP PTS shts GP PTS shts GP PTS shts

Zetterberg--32-------------75 92 358 77 73 309 74 70 309 80 80 306 82 69 267

Datsyk----34---------------- 82 97 264 81 97 248 80 70 203 56 59 137 70 67 164

Franzen----33---------------72 38 199 71 59 246 27 21 91 76 55 248 77 56 211

Burtuzzi----37---------------68 40 121 66 44 127 82 44 216 81 45 138 71 38 118

Cleary---34------------------63 42 177 74 40 163 64 34 140 68 46 192 75 33 199

Now for some follow up. Of the 15 numbers for each player, dat has 9 reds. meaning he is declinging just about every year, in just about every catagory. it would be worse but his numbers this year are improved over 2011 when he was hurt. But his 2012 numbers are worse than his 2010 numbers. Second in red numbers is Z. he has 7 out of 15 in red. Cleary has 6 out 15 in red. Burt also has 6 out of 15 in red. franzen has declined the fewest times. Only 5 red numbers. The number that stands out to me the most, is dat's decline in shots. In 2008 he took 264 shots. Then followed by 248, 203, 137, and finally 164 this past year. Granted he played 12 fewer games, but he had 103 fewer shots! That is a 38% drop!

None of us want to se a bad RW team. We all want to win Cups every year. But we also have to face facts. The fact is we need to find our next pair of great forwards that can lead us for the next 10 years. We started this run with Yzerman and federov, then continued it with dat and Z. No where in our organization do we have 2 guys that are potential 80 point per year guys. This is Holland's big challenge. Do we trade? Sign FA's? move up in the draft somewhere?
My personnel opinion is they need to be C's. A wing by himself can't do it. A good sniper-like parise is, can't score if no one can get him the puck. One last thing. Please understand the difference between good and great. dat and Z are still good players. They are not great players anymore. They will continue to work hard, provide leadership, and score 60 to 75 points for a few more years. But they are not guys that can carry a team anymore. help carry yes, but we have to find the next pair to do the heavy lifting.


Chart was fixed, loaded poorly.....


#2302056 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by Richdg on 18 May 2012 - 12:48 PM

O6 and Euro6? Um...you think the travel is bad now. Try that commute.

I'll pass.



Some version of that will happen. Just a matter of when. Going to Europe isn't that bad. yes they trips will be 2 weeks long, but still it will work. BTW the Super series in Rugby has worse travel. they go for 3-4 weeks at a time. back to the point, you also do it unbalanced. Play the team on your continent say 45-50 times, then go overseas for 2 trips for another 12 games, then have them come to you home. So really only 2 long trips per team.