2024/2025 Trade Rumours and Speculation thread

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Cambardi

Has anybody been thankful we didn't get any thing from NJ? That team, is hot garbage. I don't know - I just feel like we really dodged some trash there.

so over rated

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by Groot

In Oct and Nov Sharky had 5 goals in 23 games. 0.217 G/GP for a season pace of 17.8 goals.

Since Dec 1, he has scored 23 goals in 43 games. 0.535 G/GP for a season pace of 43.9 goals.

I fully believe that he has the ability to be a perennial 35+ goal scorer. And with basically a 44 goal pace since Dec. 1 and I think still a higher ceiling, I would not at all be surprised to see him flirt with 50 goals in a couple seasons.

To get to 50, based on his current season as a baseline for future seasons, he would either have to either generate WAY more shots and chances than he does right now, or B) score on 30% of his shots like it's the 1980s.

He has 17.5 expected goals. (or a pace of about 22/82).

He does not generate anything close to enough chances to be a 50 goal scorer.

[HitterD]

Easy Tyler, no need to be a wet blanket in every single one of your posts

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by HitterD

Easy Tyler, no need to be a wet blanket in every single one of your posts

Calgary fans seem to be very confused by relatively simple, well documented concepts such as shooting % regression to the mean and expected goals.

It's as tale as old as time, if you want to look for the guy whos gonna regress, you look for the guy shooting 20% out of the blue (Blake Coleman, Yegor Sharangovich, Andrei Kuzmenko in calgary or from last year), or far above expectation

If you want to look for the candidate to improve, you look for the guy shooting way below his career rates, or far (Mangiapane, Backlund although he's old so age regression plays in, Huberdeau).

[HitterD]

It’s just that easy. Tale as old as time I tell ya.

[PepsiFree]

“Calgary fans don’t understand shooting percentage. Let me illustrate this by pointing to a player with two seasons under his belt where I suggest that he’ll regress to where his shooting percentage was for 43 games and not where it’s been for the other 94 games.”

We’re working with an analytical genius.

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by HitterD

It’s just that easy. Tale as old as time I tell ya.

Calgary literally has the peak example on their roster.

Andrei Kuzmenko

I was having this exact conversation with Vancouver fans last year, who ASSURED me that kuzmenko's shooting% was sustainable, and that he wasn't going to regress.

and what do ya know, the shooting % regressed and kuzmenko was a cap dump

[Tbull8]

It’s even funnier when you block him and you see him just posting over and over but have no idea what it’s about. If everyone does it he’s just talking to himself haha

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Kuzmenko has been better than Lindholm.

It can be argued that 7 points in 18 games Lindhom was the cap dump.

A cap dump the Canucks paid through the nose for.

Kuzmenko's shot has been as deadly as advertised when he's drawn in. Too bad he's been sick/injured in succession.

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

“Calgary fans don’t understand shooting percentage. Let me illustrate this by pointing to a player with two seasons under his belt where I suggest that he’ll regress to where his shooting percentage was for 43 games and not where it’s been for the other 94 games.”

We’re working with an analytical genius.

If you want to bank on the fact that Andrei Kuzmenko is the best shooter in NHL history, go right ahead.

[Lanny'sDaMan]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

It’s even funnier when you block him and you see him just posting over and over but have no idea what it’s about. If everyone does it he’s just talking to himself haha

LOL It really looks like a freakin toddler screaming his little entitled face off, while I'm standing on the other side of soundproof glass watching the tantrum but not hearing the sounds

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dgibb10

Calgary fans seem to be very confused by relatively simple, well documented concepts such as shooting % regression to the mean and expected goals.

It's as tale as old as time, if you want to look for the guy whos gonna regress, you look for the guy shooting 20% out of the blue (Blake Coleman, Yegor Sharangovich, Andrei Kuzmenko in calgary or from last year), or far above expectation

If you want to look for the candidate to improve, you look for the guy shooting way below his career rates, or far (Mangiapane, Backlund although he's old so age regression plays in, Huberdeau).

Sharangovich is shooting a bit above norm...but it's actually more of a correction for what was a low shooting percentage last year.

His 9.92% shooting percentage last year is just as far off his career average, as his 19.44% shooting percentage is this year.

If he was shooting his career average which was 14.5% then he'd have 21 goals instead of 28. But generally any player that has a career season is being driven by abnormal shooting percentages.

And in terms of Blake Coleman he has 7 empty net goals...I doubt anybody is really expecting him to repeat his goal totals year over year.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by dgibb10

Calgary fans seem to be very confused by relatively simple, well documented concepts such as shooting % regression to the mean and expected goals.

It's as tale as old as time, if you want to look for the guy whos gonna regress, you look for the guy shooting 20% out of the blue (Blake Coleman, Yegor Sharangovich, Andrei Kuzmenko in calgary or from last year), or far above expectation

If you want to look for the candidate to improve, you look for the guy shooting way below his career rates, or far (Mangiapane, Backlund although he's old so age regression plays in, Huberdeau).

I totally agree with the concept as proposed and for a dude like Coleman, yup very likely (we have him on his contract - it is what it is anyways - so really not too worried about unintended consequences)


for Sharangovich- sure unlikely to be a 20% shooter going forward, but credit is due to the Flames they 'bought' him after a 9% season and he's not that either. his previous 2 years and career average suggest 14-15%. I know the 'eye test' is fraught with problems- but the guy has some finish/a nice shot that stands out to me in a way that isn't true of every guy the Flames (or any team for that matter) has had with a bit of a hot streak season , so I think this guy can be an NHL goal scorer


(as for Kuzmenko I guess we don't know what he is- he's an imperfect hockey player for sure, but I guess all we know is over 137 NHL games his shooting percentage is 22% is he that? probably not especially as there are no NHL players active with a lengthy career at that level- maybe he's a 16% guy, maybe not, dunno...)

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Mods, dump this insecure clown already.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by dgibb10

If you want to bank on the fact that Andrei Kuzmenko is the best shooter in NHL history, go right ahead.

hey now no-one is claiming he is Craig Simpson, now Charlie Simmer? maybe

[Tbull8]

Everyone just needs to block him. Whats the point in arguing back with a guy who is never changing his tune. Just block him so we can talk about him but never see his responses haha

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Sharangovich is shooting a bit above norm...but it's actually more of a correction for what was a low shooting percentage last year.

His 9.92% shooting percentage last year is just as far off his career average, as his 19.44% shooting percentage is this year.

If he was shooting his career average which was 14.5% then he'd have 21 goals instead of 28. But generally any player that has a career season is being driven by abnormal shooting percentages.

And in terms of Blake Coleman he has 7 empty net goals...I doubt anybody is really expecting him to repeat his goal totals year over year.

I 100% agree that the 9% was a low. 15% is where I expect him to stay around, because he does have a very good shot.

That shooting% with his current chance generation would put him at 21 like you said, or as a 26 goal, 52 point pace guy with some power play opportunities. (or virtually identical to what he was in Jersey)

Yegor is a very good player, but the shooting% has a LOT of people fooled into thinking he's significantly improved across the board

Kuzmenko I could see as high as an 18% guy, but even there he's still probably not worth 5.5 mill with his lack of other skills.

Overall, I completely agree with your points

[Paulie Walnuts]

How is this clown allowed to go on.

[Tbull8]

Stop giving him attention haha. Just block

[dgibb10]

Originally Posted by looooob

I totally agree with the concept as proposed and for a dude like Coleman, yup very likely (we have him on his contract - it is what it is anyways - so really not too worried about unintended consequences)


for Sharangovich- sure unlikely to be a 20% shooter going forward, but credit is due to the Flames they 'bought' him after a 9% season and he's not that either. his previous 2 years and career average suggest 14-15%. I know the 'eye test' is fraught with problems- but the guy has some finish/a nice shot that stands out to me in a way that isn't true of every guy the Flames (or any team for that matter) has had with a bit of a hot streak season , so I think this guy can be an NHL goal scorer


(as for Kuzmenko I guess we don't know what he is- he's an imperfect hockey player for sure, but I guess all we know is over 137 NHL games his shooting percentage is 22% is he that? probably not especially as there are no NHL players active with a lengthy career at that level- maybe he's a 16% guy, maybe not, dunno...)

I agree with virtually all of this.

Yegor 100% has a very good shot, and is a very good player. But high shooting% has a number of calgary fans vastly overrating him now (really, mentions of him as a perennial 35+ goal scorer?)

In all, he's played exactly how I expected him to play in calgary, with some shooting% luck to boost it.

If he ends up as a consistent 25g/50p guy, thats where I expect to slot Yegor at.