2017/2018 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Those are all overcome if you use it to compare guys that you know play comparable roles / situations.

In Backlund's case he is a guy who you know actually plays against other teams top lines / always in tough situations and then you comparable to guys on better teams, not as tough situations and those stats are similar.

Not sure how that would say anything bad against Backlund.

It doesn't say anything bad about Backlund. But even when you are trying to compare players in similar roles, there are still way too many variables.

ROR's situation is nothing like Turris' or Krejci's or Kadri's, even though they are all considered to be in checking roles.

ROR's stats are a function of Buffalo, not the player.

And we haven't even started on the fact that PP stats also matter for a player.

I know you will defend the stats until the cows come home. And I know that you can take them in context (More than most). But most people don't. Period.

[Enoch Root]

Plus the best players tend to have better p/60

There is a correlation between the best players and P/60, obviously.

But Guetzel isn't one of the 5 best players in the league. He is a good player who happens to be playing with Crosby. Put him on Buffalo and see what his P/60 looks like.

[Drunk Uncle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

5 on 5 pts per 60 is so over-used. People are using it here like it is some sort of measure of how good the player is. There are WAY too many variables to make those kinds of conclusions.

Take the same player, put them on a better team with better linemates, and in more positive situations, and their p/60 is going to go up. Not because they just became a better player, but because their situation is different.

Completely agree you don't want to rely on this stat to form your whole frame of reference for who you want to trade for. You definitely need to match up the reason for the numbers with an eye test (be it: crappy line mates, all d-zone starts, garbage luck, terrible line matches, defensive coaching styles that limit offense etc.).

It does provide a frame of reference though when you combine the list with the eye test. For example, one thing that matches the eye test for me is that Hoffman is a pp specialist and not someone you rely on for even strength goals. That shows in his points per 60 min.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It doesn't say anything bad about Backlund. But even when you are trying to compare players in similar roles, there are still way too many variables.

ROR's situation is nothing like Turris' or Krejci's or Kadri's, even though they are all considered to be in checking roles.

ROR's stats are a function of Buffalo, not the player.

And we haven't even started on the fact that PP stats also matter for a player.

I know you will defend the stats until the cows come home. And I know that you can take them in context (More than most). But most people don't. Period.

Like everything the whole picture does need to be looked at.

The one thing with PP stats is I think those really can be skewed by team, PP Coach, and opportunity.

In the 3 seasons prior to coming to Calgary Troy Brouwer was 15th in the NHL in PP goals, 1 behind John Tavares and tied with Giroux and Malkin, and 72nd in ES points.

In that same time period he was 142nd in the NHL in ES strength goals, and 178th in ES points.

Based on the results in Calgary I think one of those sets of stats is more telling of his true talent. The Flames were burned by a guy they thought was a good powerplay producer, who just happened to be playing on elite Powerplays in Washington and St.Louis.

On the flip side you have guys like Gaudreau and McDavid who are both top 5 producers at ES over the last 3 years, but then barely crack the top 50 on the PP. Are they bad powerplay players or are they stuck under bad coaches with terrible special teams systems?

Granted it was clear for Brouwer that playing with Backstrom and Ovy on that PP in Washington would skew things. It's less clear when you look at really skilled guys like McDavid, and Gaudreau that produce at ES but have poor PPs.

So what I don't know with ROR is if he's actually a guy who drives that Buffalo powerplay to be good, or if he's just an outcome of a good system like Brouwer was. Him, Eichel, & Ristolainen all have similar PP point totals over the last 3 years, and then Reinhart/Okposo have similar efficiency on the PP. The 5 of them also have identical p/60 on the PP. So tough to tell what/who is driving those results.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is a correlation between the best players and P/60, obviously.

But Guetzel isn't one of the 5 best players in the league. He is a good player who happens to be playing with Crosby. Put him on Buffalo and see what his P/60 looks like.

That is no different than regular points though. Lots of guys end up having great seasons because they play with a great linemate.

You always need to use common sense / eye test to determine who is driving the good results on the line.

That doesn't change if you use points, goals, assists, p/60, gf/60, etc. They are all just another tool in the toolkit.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Those are all overcome if you use it to compare guys that you know play comparable roles / situations. Plus that critique is not any different than traditional measure of points/goals/assists.

In Backlund's case he is a guy who you know actually plays against other teams top lines / always in tough situations and then you comparable to guys on better teams, not as tough situations and those stats are similar.

Not sure how that would be anything but positive for Backlund.

Plus the best players tend to have better p/60, just helps you normalize for ice time and games missed.

For example here is the top 10 in Even Strength pts/60 the last two years.

16/17:

1)Sheary (Considering his centers were the next two guys maybe not that surprising, also probably not surprising the Pens won the cup)
2)Malkin
3)Crosby
4)Guentzel
5)McDavid
6)Scheifele
7)Marchand
8)Laine
9)Kane
10)Kucherov
22)Gaudreau

17/18

1)McDavid
2)Marchand
3)MacKinnon
4)Mark Stone
5)Marchessault
6)Malkin
7)Giroux
8)Matthews
9)Kucherov
10)Schwartz
14)Gaudreau

So what you're saying is that BT needs to get a bunch of guys whose firsrt or last name starts with the letter M?

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by transplant99

So what you're saying is that BT needs to get a bunch of guys whose firsrt or last name starts with the letter M?

Or figure our why ours aren't getting it done...

Mike Smith
Matthew Tkachuk
Sean Monahan
Mark Giordano
Mikael Backlund
Michael Ferland
Michael Frolik
Matt Stajan
Michael Stone
Mark Jankowski
Marek Hrivik
Matt Bartkowski

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

So what you're saying is that BT needs to get a bunch of guys whose firsrt or last name starts with the letter M?

Seems legit.

[alan21]

Mack Eichel
Midney Crosby
Marey Price
Merik Karlsson

Am I missing any obvious ones?

[haiku]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Out: Hamilton
In: Mantha,

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I love how any trade that's remotely in the realm of being realistic from the point of view of the other team is called out.

This thread is absolute bananas.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Tavares signing in Calgary is not very likely.

But it's still more likely than 90 per cent of the trade proposals made in this thread.

Originally Posted by jayswin

No kidding, I saw one proposal on CP that was Dougie Hamilton for Anthony Mantha.

says things banana
but then how can cliff suggest
dougie for mantha

[NiklasSundblad]

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

Just for reference in the conversation as of late, here is a site that shows the overall 'take home' for hockey players dependant on cities/states/provinces:
https://gavingroup.ca/nhl-tax-calculator/

Don't forget that players also pay 3-5% to their agent, and 10-15% to Escrow (rarely get any back).

So the math on a $10M salary in Calgary is:
Escrow (assume 15%): $1,500,000
Remaining: $8,500,000
Taxes (47.6% in AB): $4,046,849
Agent (assume 3%): $300,000
Takehome: $4,153,151

I know its like 'boo hoo, Millionaires!', but I do think its interesting how fast a $10M contract turns into $4.

....Now think about the players that make $1M a year:
Escrow (assume 15%): $150,000
Remaining: $850,000
Taxes (47.6% in AB): $374,849
Agent (assume 3%): $30,000
Takehome: $445,151

These guys have an average career of, what, 4 seasons? So many of these kids are done at 28 with no education with career take home of $1,780,604

Its a lot....but not a ton.

Just some stuff to think about.

Not to derail, this is interesting. Does anyone know what the NHLPA pension looks like for players that are eligible (I remember hearing 400 GP was the threshold a long time ago.)

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Agree to disagree I guess.

The Flames have to many holes in their make-up for one guy to take an also ran to cup contender...thats a long leap.

A cup contender is a team that makes the playoffs, that's how slim the margins are between teams in a cap era.

Calgary could make the playoffs with Taveras, therefore they would have some chance to win the Cup.

Calgary could arguably have made the playoffs if Smith had not gotten hurt.

[Saqe]

Not sure if this is anything new but Friedman saying Hamilton and Bennett would be in play:

https://frshockey.com/nhl/flames/fri...mpression=true

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by NiklasSundblad

Not to derail, this is interesting. Does anyone know what the NHLPA pension looks like for players that are eligible (I remember hearing 400 GP was the threshold a long time ago.)

They have new defined benefit. 10 years of service (800 credited games) give them a max of $210,000 (2016$) at 62. It's pro-rated, so someone with 3 years of service would get around $63,000.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Not sure if this is anything new but Friedman saying Hamilton and Bennett would be in play:

https://frshockey.com/nhl/flames/fri...mpression=true

I wouldn’t be surprised if they trade Hamilton. They don’t trust him at all. I think they’ll regret it and I think they’re wrong not to trust him. He has the 4th best PP60 at 5 v 5 over the last 3 seasons behind Karlsson, Burns and Hedman. The guy is really, really good.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Nelson

I wouldn’t be surprised if they trade Hamilton. They don’t trust him at all. I think they’ll regret it and I think they’re wrong not to trust him. He has the 4th best PP60 at 5 v 5 over the last 3 seasons behind Karlsson, Burns and Hedman. The guy is really, really good.

I am not buying they trade Hamilton for draft picks.

[dammage79]

Will not be shocked if Hamilton is traded. You can address bigger problems moving him. Just has to be the right trade. In that department. I trust Treliving to make that call.

I'm not too keen on seeing Bennett moved as I think it's too early still. But, again I trust if they move Bennett with the assumption that his greatest need is a fresh start, then I guess it's for the best. I just feel that our greatest weapon come playoff time is Sam Bennett.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I am not buying they trade Hamilton for draft picks.

You know who I would trade Hamilton for, as well as Gaudreau, Monahan, and Tkachuk? GM Steve Yzerman (with the FLA tax breaks in the NHL world).

[getbak]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I am not buying they trade Hamilton for draft picks.

Only a fool would trade Hamilton for nothing but draft picks.


I'm sure it's like Friedman suggested, teams are making offers on Hamilton, but the price will be very high to actually get something done. The price on Bennett won't likely be as high, but they're not going to throw him in the bargain bin either.

[Toonage]

Friedman hinted at this on the 31 Thoughts podcast too. About Hamilton that is. Theres smoke folks.