[News] Flames are done for the day

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Found the study, the first result when I searched NHL player peak lol:

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...er_performance



I don’t know if it counts because it’s not a tweet from a mathematician but it seems to make sense to me.

I don't know why it's always one side in this discussion that's always so agravated (oh wow not a mathematician), but in Enoch Root told me not to just look at point scoring... Which this article you have provided does.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I’d bet the curve moves a lot. By definition you don’t play 1000 games without having 3X as long a career as most players. Who by definition peaked at 24 or so.

Well I don't know about that by either, because you would assume the older players that make up the tail-end of Micah's distribution are more likely to be those regular or even 1000+ game NHL players. i.e., a player who is 35 likely played in this league when he was 25.

[Enoch Root]

Ashasx: what is your definition of value? How would you define value for a hockey player?

Does that study define it? It measures impact on xG/60 on offense. Is that the measure? Is the conversation over?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't know why it's always one side in this discussion that's always so agravated (oh wow not a mathematician), but in Enoch Root told me not to just look at point scoring... Which this article you have provided does.

Who is aggravated? We’re talking about ages that NHL players play near their peak, does anyone here actually care or think they have enough to know whether they’re definitively right? lol

Do you like the data in the article or nah?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Who is aggravated? We’re talking about ages that NHL players play near their peak, does anyone here actually care or think they have enough to know whether they’re definitively right? lol

Do you like the data in the article or nah?

From what I read, I actually do like it. But like others have stated here, I think it's just telling one story (and I don't think the authors are trying to extrapolate beyond that).

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Ashasx: what is your definition of value? How would you define value for a hockey player?

Does that study define it? It measures impact on xG/60 on offense. Is that the measure? Is the conversation over?

I not exactly sure which study you are referring to since it seems like we have a couple on the go here in this thread now, but I think xGF and xGA are valid measures (and I think actually scoring is a valid measure too, xGF/GA just tries to eliminate some randomness).

WAR is also a fine measure that attempts to simplify a lot of that but I think then that makes it difficult to separate offensive and defensive impacts

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It’s totally out of line to call his play garbage. Also unnecessary and irrelevant.

Huberdeau has been the victim of poor fit with linemates and general poor play by linemates for most of the season. I constantly see him doing good things and having his passes wasted.

But even if he wasn’t doing those things, “garbage” is a garbage comment.

Everything said on the FOI board is "unnecessary and irrelevant". It's sports.

The entire board calls Markstrom all sorts of things, I can't call a player's play garbage? Relative to what he was previously, he has been garbage. People can make a bunch of excuses, he's being paid to make other players, and the whole team, better. There's a different standard for his play vs basically every other team member.

Is "garbage" some sort of slur that I'm not aware of?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Coach

Everything said on the FOI board is "unnecessary and irrelevant". It's sports.

The entire board calls Markstrom all sorts of things, I can't call a player's play garbage? Relative to what he was previously, he has been garbage. People can make a bunch of excuses, he's being paid to make other players, and the whole team, better. There's a different standard for his play vs basically every other team member.

Is "garbage" some sort of slur that I'm not aware of?

It’s pretty offensive - essentially saying someone ought to be thrown out and discarded like trash. And no, there’s no different standard, just observations of what happens during play. You are looking at points, I’m looking at what happens on the ice.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

From what I read, I actually do like it. But like others have stated here, I think it's just telling one story (and I don't think the authors are trying to extrapolate beyond that).

It’s also ten years old capturing a period of time ten years before that, so as I said I’m sure things have changed.

I do think elite players and guys that keep up high averages through their mid/late twenties hold onto them longer, though. I haven’t seen much that disputes that and it matches the “eye test” or whatever we’re calling anecdotal evidence. I would have to guess that big contributors to any drop off are guys in that mid/lower range of production and guys that run into injury trouble that can impact their game.

I don’t see a lot of reason why high skill offensive guys that don’t really excessively on foot speed or strength would drop off much into their early/mid 30s.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s also ten years old capturing a period of time ten years before that, so as I said I’m sure things have changed.

I do think elite players and guys that keep up high averages through their mid/late twenties hold onto them longer, though. I haven’t seen much that disputes that and it matches the “eye test” or whatever we’re calling anecdotal evidence. I would have to guess that big contributors to any drop off are guys in that mid/lower range of production and guys that run into injury trouble that can impact their game.

I don’t see a lot of reason why high skill offensive guys that don’t really excessively on foot speed or strength would drop off much into their early/mid 30s.

The overall demographics of the league will play a role too. If its a younger league with more young players pushing for jobs those windows of production will be shorter. If it's an older league they can be longer although in an older league there tends to be less scoring. Years from now I expect Covid will have a bit of a blip as it messed up young players for what will be 3 seasons. So may explain why a 26 year old McDavid might have his highest producing seasons after 25...might not.

I looked just at goal scoring for forwards a few years back and for the majority of players the peak goal scoring season happened by age 25. But most of the guys who consistently had scored did so well into their 30's. But it was those players who only have one 30 goal season by age 25 who likely fall off at the end of their 20's. As with anything there will be exceptions. Hence I have always believed that it's important to have your best forwards in that 22 to 28 age group. Defence that window can extend as players typically have a better all around game with more experience even if their point totals fall off a bit. Get too far outside that and I believe it will be harder to be an elite team.

So a team like Colorado has Makar, MacKinnon, and Raatanen in that range. Tampa Bay is starting to move outside of that now with Stamkos, Hedman, and Kucherov although Point is still there. Pittsburgh now in my opinion is too far outside with their top guys to be an elite team. If the elite players are really good you can be elite until they are early to mid 30's. Boston being a juggernaut this year is a surprise though...part if it is Krejci and Bergeron delivering huge value. But over say a 15 year period there will be outliers that fall well outside the profile of an elite team.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It’s pretty offensive - essentially saying someone ought to be thrown out and discarded like trash. And no, there’s no different standard, just observations of what happens during play. You are looking at points, I’m looking at what happens on the ice.

Saying someone's play is garbage is far from calling them a garbage person or something.

On-ice play is up for grabs, IMO. It's just a little hyperbole. Yeesh.

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

This!!!!!
Some of the “sell” crowd is baffling.
“I wanted the team to sell!!!!! This is a failure!!!! I am outraged” without regard to what was offered.
Guaranteed, if the offer made sense, the transaction takes place.

To those of you that are bitching, please let me know when you want to sell your house/car

If I put my house on the market today...I would get market value. It wouldn't necessarily be what I hoped I would get. The only reason I should hold on selling is if there are strong indications that the market is going up. Over the last two weeks we saw the market peak and the Flames were seemingly late to making a decision. The value of players in the context of draft picks is going down between now and the draft. The best one can hope for is that the flames get a higher value hockey deal at the draft or catch a team disappointed with their player being taken that then throws away picks for players (unlikely). Those of us that are unhappy with the overall direction are disappointed because this was likely the best opportunity the team had to maximize draft capital.

[Jiri Hrdina]

The main issue with your post is you are assuming they wanted draft picks.
I don't think that's what they were trying to do.

[Bonded]

Wasn’t Chychrun the only player with term that moved? Weaker return than I expected

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Wasn’t Chychrun the only player with term that moved? Weaker return than I expected

Hronek did too. He has one year after this at 4.4 a year than he's RFA. Hanifin probably falls somewhere between Hronek and Chychryn.