[Rumour] Dreger: Markstrom trade won't happen unless NJ includes Mercer and higher draft pick

[SemicolonD]

I'm still laughing at Fitz' comments, you absolutely have to believe he's feeling the pressure big time. The fact that this dude spamming the board said he thinks Fitz outlasts Conroy is one of the funniest things I've heard all year.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by butterfly

“It came out on red last time. Best guess is the same!”

except red (vs black) does not have a starting point. A goalie's stats do have a starting point. Assuming the same production for a goalie is not the same as assuming 'red' or heads twice in a row (and I suspect you know that)

Goals saved above expected is a stat that contains a ####-ton of noise but you are accepting these numbers like they are an undeniable truth. The randomness that is shown on that graph could be entirely the result of factors that are entirely outside the control of the goalies (i.e. team-related)

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by butterfly

“It came out on red last time. Best guess is the same!”

There is, in fact, no better guess than that – in roulette. The house has the same edge no matter what bet you make.

If there is any correlation at all from year X to year X+1, then ‘the same’ has an advantage over other bets.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You didn't include the data table. You included some calculations based on the data table.

Look, this is supposed to cover the NHL from 2007 to 2021, but there are only 130 data points in total according to the summary. What happened to all the other cases in which a goalie played two consecutive years in the NHL during that time?

Without knowing the criteria on which the data were selected, I cannot assign any value at all to the results. The fact that they were presented in a visually misleading way, however, suggests to me that someone is selling snake oil.

Fair point. Here is the article I stole it from. They were trying to see if some of the noise could be reduced by including playoffs:

https://hockeyandstuff.weebly.com/ch...re-predictable

[Lanny_McDonald]

Very disappointed Markstrom wasn't moved. Opportunity lost here.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by SemicolonD

I'm still laughing at Fitz' comments, you absolutely have to believe he's feeling the pressure big time. The fact that this dude spamming the board said he thinks Fitz outlasts Conroy is one of the funniest things I've heard all year.

People suggesting Fitz is going to circle back on Marstrom in the summer, I'm not even convinced Fitz will still have his job in the summer.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by butterfly

It is absolutely possible. Which other stat would you prefer to analyze?

I am not presenting ANY stat as gospel (because I understand how far they are still from being particularly informative). You have been hanging your view on this one for some time

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

There is, in fact, no better guess than that – in roulette. The house has the same edge no matter what bet you make.

If there is any correlation at all from year X to year X+1, then ‘the same’ has an advantage over other bets.

In roulette it doesn’t matter, as you said. So after 30 reds in a row, all numbers are equally likely to come out. Betting on the same color has zero advantage.

With this dataset there is an extremely weak positive correlation. So, in the absence of perfect data, I must agree with you. However, it amounts to a couple goals a year.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

What point are you trying to make here - no one was making that argument. Mercer has been good so far in his young career. He hasn't been 1st line good, so let's not anoint him with anything just yet.

A number of posters were comparing their goals from this year.

I agree it is not relevant, but some here thought it was.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Fair point. Here is the article I stole it from. They were trying to see if some of the noise could be reduced by including playoffs:

https://hockeyandstuff.weebly.com/ch...re-predictable

OK. So what we learn from this is that using publicly available counting stats, we can't make any useful predictions about goalies.

But that doesn't mean goaltending is just random noise. It means that it is dependent upon variables that are not captured in the data available for that study.

By the way, I have to seriously question their use of GSAx as far back as 2007. I certainly had never heard of that stat then, and it was not in common use until the last few years. So I have to cast a skeptical eye on the input data from the earlier years of the sample. Was the metric for expected goals exactly the same in 2007 as in 2021? Are we, in fact, comparing apples with apples? Impossible to say without a lot more information than the article gives.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by butterfly

In roulette it doesn’t matter, as you said. So after 30 reds in a row, all numbers are equally likely to come out. Betting on the same color has zero advantage.

With this dataset there is an extremely weak positive correlation. So, in the absence of perfect data, I must agree with you. However, it amounts to a couple goals a year.

What I am saying is that the best predictor of a goalie's (or any athlete's) performance is their past performance (i.e. no change)

That is nothing like predicting red or black - they aren't comparable data items

[Groot]

dgibb10 posting is like Fitz trading for Allen. Absolutely useless and accomplishes nothing while embarassing his franchise.

Just stop arguing with the troll. There is no end and the deadline is over, who cares what he thinks/says.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

OK. So what we learn from this is that using publicly available counting stats, we can't make any useful predictions about goalies.

But that doesn't mean goaltending is just random noise. It means that it is dependent upon variables that are not captured in the data available for that study.

By the way, I have to seriously question their use of GSAx as far back as 2007. I certainly had never heard of that stat then, and it was not in common use until the last few years. So I have to cast a skeptical eye on the input data from the earlier years of the sample. Was the metric for expected goals exactly the same in 2007 as in 2021? Are we, in fact, comparing apples with apples? Impossible to say without a lot more information than the article gives.

No, it doesn’t mean that it is dependent upon variables that are not captured. If you think so, please provide evidence. Otherwise, I could use the same logic to argue that winning the lottery requires skill.

With respect to GSAE, it is possible to assign values to it prior to the development of the statistic, as has been done with WAR and historical baseball seasons.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

What I am saying is that the best predictor of a goalie's (or any athlete's) performance is their past performance (i.e. no change)

That is nothing like predicting red or black - they aren't comparable data items

There are reasonably predictable aging curves for forwards and defense in hockey, and there aren’t for goaltenders. It is much better to spend money on those positions than in net.

When you predict red or black, not only is recency the best bet you can make, it is simultaneously the worst bet you can make. It’s the definition of randomness.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Very disappointed Markstrom wasn't moved. Opportunity lost here.

I'm shocked you feel that way

That with all the "Make. The. Trade." posts..

Don't make trades just for the sake of making trades. NJ even admitted they'll be back goalie hunting in the summer. There will be more opportunities.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by butterfly

There are reasonably predictable aging curves for forwards and defense in hockey, and there aren’t for goaltenders. It is much better to spend money on those positions than in net.

You have no basis for your conclusion here - good goalies are valuable, whether you want to believe it or not

When you predict red or black, not only is recency the best bet you can make, it is simultaneously the worst bet you can make. It’s the definition of randomness.

Yes, and thus it is not like predicting an athlete's performance. But you keep using it in your arguments.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You have no basis for your conclusion here - good goalies are valuable, whether you want to believe it or not



Yes, and thus it is not like predicting an athlete's performance. But you keep using it in your arguments.

I didn’t argue that good goalies are not valuable. I argued that there is no way to predict who will be one.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by butterfly

I didn’t argue that good goalies are not valuable. I argued that there is no way to predict who will be one.

And goalie scouts would strongly disagree

[Flamescuprun2018]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

Theory:

NJ's brass figures they'll finish below the Flames in the standings and be in position to draft Tij Iginla, proceeding to then only offer him straight up for Markstrom without the additional pieces

Not beyond the realm of possibility. The way Tij is trending I would consider trading for NJs (high 1st in 2024) for Marky 1:1 over a late 1st pick (2025) and Holtz that was offered. They are heading for top 10 territory in this draft.

We will never know if it was a 1st offered and whether it was 2024 or 2025. The way Devils were trending I suspected they figured 2025 would be the less valuable piece especially after a year of Marky boasting them in standings.

Conny has a few options to get Tij at the draft. Would be ironic if this ends up the play.

Keep your cool Conny. Fitz will quiet down.

[Flamesfan05]

Hopefully Markstrom continues to play well so they can get a haul for him at the draft

Holding on to him for next season would be stupid. His value could evaporate fast