lol
2017-2018 NHL Thread
- Thread starter Kin
- Start date
lol
Nik the Trik said:
Wow, there was no way anybody could have predicted this.
bustaheims
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
"Let me tell you, kids, the most important thing I learned - always look like you're crying when calls don't go your way."
Kin
New member
So here's sort of a half-formed thought. One of the things we heard a lot from small-market fans, and anyone who was just generally pro-ownership, during the last two lockout negotiations was that having a cap was necessary for smaller teams to be competitive financially and would prevent them having to relocate. Now, however, in the last few years 3 of the 7 Canadian teams have effectively threatened to relocate unless they get a new building at great taxpayer expense.
So i wonder if these things aren't connected. By making running an NHL team largely idiot proof in terms of $$$ and making it more viable in smaller markets(nobody is seriously suggesting any of these teams aren't profitable) hasn't the NHL effectively given teams a lot more leverage in negotiating with cities and incentive to relocate? After all, if a NHL team can possibly stay afloat in cities like Winnipeg or Quebec City then there are going to be more cities that can be used as threats to locate too. Moreover, if we look at Malcolm Gladwell's "Painting" analogy when it comes to how NHL teams are valued then all you really need is one billioniare in a place like Quebec City or Kansas City or wherever to be willing to throw some money around and, because the risk has been greatly mitigated, take a team to wherever they want? Doesn't this just drive up the price of teams making them more likely to sell?
This is an argument I've always made re: the Buffalo Bills and their fans resentment towards Toronto. They can be as mad at Bon Jovi or Larry Tannenbaum or whoever as they want...they're not going to change the fundamental economic realities of a NFL team in Toronto having more economic upside than one in Buffalo. If we, as good sane people, take the position that sports arenas shouldn't be built with public money then we do sort of have to expect owners to gravitate towards putting teams in the best markets for them.
I think that in the past the Atlanta failure probably was what kept a lot of teams staying put. After all, if a big market has a chance to be a spectacular failure then there's no real reason to risk a somewhat profitable situation. If, however, the worst a team can do is not that bad then anyone who wants to write a huge check to existing owners can do so with little regard for a consequential downside.
So I get Sens fans might be mad at some of the stuff Melnyk has said but...sorry, a team in Houston might be more financially successful than one in Ottawa. Sure, it might not be, but if all you have to stop someone finding out is your belief in the civic goodwill of benevolent billionaires...best of luck keeping your hockey club.
So i wonder if these things aren't connected. By making running an NHL team largely idiot proof in terms of $$$ and making it more viable in smaller markets(nobody is seriously suggesting any of these teams aren't profitable) hasn't the NHL effectively given teams a lot more leverage in negotiating with cities and incentive to relocate? After all, if a NHL team can possibly stay afloat in cities like Winnipeg or Quebec City then there are going to be more cities that can be used as threats to locate too. Moreover, if we look at Malcolm Gladwell's "Painting" analogy when it comes to how NHL teams are valued then all you really need is one billioniare in a place like Quebec City or Kansas City or wherever to be willing to throw some money around and, because the risk has been greatly mitigated, take a team to wherever they want? Doesn't this just drive up the price of teams making them more likely to sell?
This is an argument I've always made re: the Buffalo Bills and their fans resentment towards Toronto. They can be as mad at Bon Jovi or Larry Tannenbaum or whoever as they want...they're not going to change the fundamental economic realities of a NFL team in Toronto having more economic upside than one in Buffalo. If we, as good sane people, take the position that sports arenas shouldn't be built with public money then we do sort of have to expect owners to gravitate towards putting teams in the best markets for them.
I think that in the past the Atlanta failure probably was what kept a lot of teams staying put. After all, if a big market has a chance to be a spectacular failure then there's no real reason to risk a somewhat profitable situation. If, however, the worst a team can do is not that bad then anyone who wants to write a huge check to existing owners can do so with little regard for a consequential downside.
So I get Sens fans might be mad at some of the stuff Melnyk has said but...sorry, a team in Houston might be more financially successful than one in Ottawa. Sure, it might not be, but if all you have to stop someone finding out is your belief in the civic goodwill of benevolent billionaires...best of luck keeping your hockey club.
disco
New member
https://twitter.com/PeteBlackburn/status/943356876686872576
Knights defeat Bolts
Just listening to Gerard Gallant on Hockey Central. They're havin' fun, they're workin' hard, and in this League you got a chance to win every night.
They're something to be said for loosey-goosey and no expectations. And when you gather a group of castaways together from the four corners of the League, immediately with something in common... well, 22-9-2 at Christmas is the result.
Knights defeat Bolts
Just listening to Gerard Gallant on Hockey Central. They're havin' fun, they're workin' hard, and in this League you got a chance to win every night.
They're something to be said for loosey-goosey and no expectations. And when you gather a group of castaways together from the four corners of the League, immediately with something in common... well, 22-9-2 at Christmas is the result.
bustaheims
Active member
herman said:
I was hoping to find more detailed split numbers, but my research skills using my quasi-vacation mode brain could not discover anything. I have to imagine they're putting up some unsustainable ES Sv% and S% numbers at home.
disco said:https://twitter.com/PeteBlackburn/status/943356876686872576
Knights defeat Bolts
Just listening to Gerard Gallant on Hockey Central. They're havin' fun, they're workin' hard, and in this League you got a chance to win every night.
They're something to be said for loosey-goosey and no expectations. And when you gather a group of castaways together from the four corners of the League, immediately with something in common... well, 22-9-2 at Christmas is the result.
Tell that to literally every other expansion team ever.
bustaheims said:
Naturalstattrick.com has them.
Home:
50.9% CF, 60.3% GF, 9.93 Sh%, 93.3 Sv%
Away:
49.7% CF, 43.3% GF, 7.25 Sh%, 90.3 Sv%
2nd best PDO at home, 3rd worst PDO on the road. Weird.
CarltonTheBear said:
That save percentage is largely influenced by Maxime Legace, their 4th string goalie. He started in 11 of their 16 away games and put up an .864 save percentage in them. The team still somehow managed to go 4-6-1 in those games.
Man, Vegas is really interesting to look at this season. Here's what their schedule looked like when you break it down into stretches of home/away games ( H | A ):
0 | 2
7 | 0
1 | 8
3 | 4
7 | 2
So they had 2 really long stretches where they played all or almost all their games at home, and 1 really long stretch where they played almost all their games on the road. That long stretch of road games also coincided with their goalies all dropping dead at the same time.
0 | 2
7 | 0
1 | 8
3 | 4
7 | 2
So they had 2 really long stretches where they played all or almost all their games at home, and 1 really long stretch where they played almost all their games on the road. That long stretch of road games also coincided with their goalies all dropping dead at the same time.
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
That GF% feels like it should drop at least ~5% over the course of the season if their Corsi stays around where it is now.. the Sv% and S% aren't as high as I as imagined, but they'll both probably drop off some. The road GF% and Sv% should improve some, though.
Kin
New member
Bender said:
Yeah, let's not forget that between the cap minimum and the particular rules of this expansion draft this team has advantages in terms of instant competitiveness that others didn't. There's no magic or genius at work here, just a team entering a league built on parity and jerry-rigged for parity.
hockeyfan1
New member
Happy for the Islanders on the new arena deal:
Here's the story:
https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/12/20/new-york-islanders-win-bid-to-leave-brooklyn-build-new-arena-in-belmont-park.html
Here's the story:
https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/12/20/new-york-islanders-win-bid-to-leave-brooklyn-build-new-arena-in-belmont-park.html