[PGT] Oilers 3 Flames 2 in OT

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by sch19lks

I’m assuming that’s Bader, his model is junk. Based on points and nothing else. Bader is beyond a hack

Any analysis of his model that actually supports your criticism, or you just don't like the results so it must be bad?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But even if this guy's NHLe wasn't junk what does 30 point NHLe players do for us in terms of a league where stars mean everything in contending?

Mean they would score 30 points based on what they did that season in the league they are in. NHL equivalency

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But even if this guy's NHLe wasn't junk what does 30 point NHLe players do for us in terms of a league where stars mean everything in contending?

First of all, stars don't 'mean everything in contending'. It is a team game and you need stars as well as depth. TBL has had the same 5 stars for almost a decade, but they won twice, when the rest of their roster was also at its strongest (but not every year they have had the stars). Also, see Edmonton.

As for the 8 prospects with an NHLe of 30+, the idea is to acquire good players. The draft is a snapshot in time, you also want/need to see progression. A poster above said the Flames' prospect pool is 'middle of the pack', but in fact it is higher than that by most accounts, and - more importantly - rising. Not only did the Flames have a great draft in 2024 (one step in the right direction), but many of the players in their prospect pool had terrific years - there is significant progression all over. So even if we were 'middle of the pack' we aren't any more, and we are moving in the right direction.

Building a contender means acquiring and developing good players. This was a tremendous season for the franchise, with respect to developing good players.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Building a contender means acquiring and developing good players. This was a tremendous season for the franchise, with respect to developing good players.

I agree for the franchise. At the draft it was a win, and the progression of the class has been as expected, maybe a bit better.

At the NHL level the results will be in the middle.

We've seen some players perform above expectations (Wolf, Bahl, Coronato, arguably Kadri), and we've also seen some players perform below expectations (Sharangovich, Backlund, arguably Andersson, Zary and Coleman).

Depending on how it shakes out with the pick forfeiture, that will be a big setback. No getting around that.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s not me giving you permission, or an issue with you disagreeing with me, it’s just me using my brain and you… not? I guess?

It’s not that the analytics are “nothing,” it’s that you don’t know what they mean and don’t know how to apply them. Case in point: bringing up xGF to justify your bad bottom 5 take.

Just think about it for a second. If the Flames lose 6-1 instead of 3-1, that’s the GSAE dropping in action, and yet xGF has no relevance and it didn’t impact their record.

You’re just not actually thinking about what a realistic change looks like. Boston, with just three more goals, has let in THIRTY more goals. THIRTY. Their goal difference is -27 WORSE than the Flames (-51… wild)…. and they’re seventh.

Saying if we let in 12 more goals we’d be bottom five is just you not actually thinking about it at all. Which is fine, but don’t act like it’s anything but a you issue.

You know that % at the end of expected goals for means it's a share of the games total expected goals? So being 5th worst means the Flames have the 5th worst ratio of expected goals for and expected goals against in the NHL. I'm unsure how that is not relevant to saying they are a bottom five team without Wolf.

Again, you keep telling me I am stupid, so I want to confirm we are talking about the same thing here. I'm genuinely curious how giving up more expected goals than you generate isn't a relevant piece of information.