SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

NYR trade 20-21 team

Créé par: Frasier_Crane
Équipe: 2020-21 Hurricanes de la Caroline
Date de création initiale: 3 avr. 2020
Publié: 3 avr. 2020
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
1950 000 $
22 000 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
11 000 000 $
Transactions
NYR
  1. Drury, Jack [Liste de réserve]
  2. Choix de 2e ronde en 2020 (CAR)
Rachats de contrats
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2020
Logo de TOR
Logo de NYR
Logo de CAR
Logo de BUF
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de TOR
2021
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de STL
2022
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
Logo de CAR
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2281 500 000 $81 787 322 $1 367 073 $3 687 500 $-287 322 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance2 650 000 $$3M)
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
8 460 250 $8 460 250 $
C
UFA - 4
Logo de Rangers de New York
3 250 000 $3 250 000 $
AG, AD, C
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
5 400 000 $5 400 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 4
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
4 750 000 $4 750 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance537 500 $$538K)
AD
RFA - 2
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
C, AG
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
3 375 000 $3 375 000 $
AG, AD, C
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
2 100 000 $2 100 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
C
UFA
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
5 300 000 $5 300 000 $
DG
UFA - 5
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
5 750 000 $5 750 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
3 125 000 $3 125 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
DG
UFA - 4
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
4 025 000 $4 025 000 $
DD
UFA - 4
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
3 400 000 $3 400 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance500 000 $$500K)
DG/DD
RFA - 1
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
4 050 000 $4 050 000 $
DG
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
950 000 $950 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Hurricanes de la Caroline
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
3 avr. 2020 à 23 h 16
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 37,916
Mentions "j'aime": 19,293
Drury seems decent but I dont think NYR does this
Frasier_Crane a aimé ceci.
3 avr. 2020 à 23 h 17
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
This is what Tyler Toffoli got as a UFA. Rangers decline lol. Swap with a 1st and you're getting started.
3 avr. 2020 à 23 h 31
#3
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2020
Messages: 246
Mentions "j'aime": 35
Quoting: Sagecoll
This is what Tyler Toffoli got as a UFA. Rangers decline lol. Swap with a 1st and you're getting started.


i was looking at the toffoli trade the other day. i know i was being moderate with this trade, i wanted to see what carolina fans had to say about it. the toronto 1st and drury would be a very good haul for the rangers.
3 avr. 2020 à 23 h 45
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Frasier_Crane
i was looking at the toffoli trade the other day. i know i was being moderate with this trade, i wanted to see what carolina fans had to say about it. the toronto 1st and drury would be a very good haul for the rangers.


that's basically what Zucker got...i wouldn't call it very good. At best, fair. Buch's analytics are off the charts.
4 avr. 2020 à 6 h 29
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
that's basically what Zucker got...i wouldn't call it very good. At best, fair. Buch's analytics are off the charts.


I am the biggest analytical head on the website, what are you looking at? Using EH, his defensive numbers are average at best, going forward his numbers improve, but his finish isn't there. There's no way Carolina move someone as promising as Drury for a middle 6 winger like Buch when they have so many middle six wingers coming through the system. He will NEVER knock TT off that top line, because TT was around the PPG mark and he and Aho live in each others heads. Buch is a fine player, nothing against him, but there is no way, no how Carolina offer anything like this and no way they have interest in a reject from a team below them in the standings.
4 avr. 2020 à 11 h 15
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
I am the biggest analytical head on the website, what are you looking at? Using EH, his defensive numbers are average at best, going forward his numbers improve, but his finish isn't there. There's no way Carolina move someone as promising as Drury for a middle 6 winger like Buch when they have so many middle six wingers coming through the system. He will NEVER knock TT off that top line, because TT was around the PPG mark and he and Aho live in each others heads. Buch is a fine player, nothing against him, but there is no way, no how Carolina offer anything like this and no way they have interest in a reject from a team below them in the standings.



Addressing some points here... particularly looking at some points you made regarding finishing, defensive numbers, etc.

Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-54-42-AM
Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-53-13-AM
Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-11-14-32-AM

Also frankly I'm not sure Drury is even a top 5 prospect in the Carolina organization. Personally I have Suzuki, Honka, Puistola, Bean, and Rees ahead of him. A lot of people also have Bokk ahead of him. But it's weird that some Canes fans haven't connected the dots that it's really Abruzzese driving the Harvard offense that's pushing Drury's point total. He's contributed on like 80% of Drury's points lol.
Frasier_Crane a aimé ceci.
4 avr. 2020 à 14 h 19
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
Addressing some points here... particularly looking at some points you made regarding finishing, defensive numbers, etc.

Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-54-42-AM
Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-53-13-AM
Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-11-14-32-AM

Also frankly I'm not sure Drury is even a top 5 prospect in the Carolina organization. Personally I have Suzuki, Honka, Puistola, Bean, and Rees ahead of him. A lot of people also have Bokk ahead of him. But it's weird that some Canes fans haven't connected the dots that it's really Abruzzese driving the Harvard offense that's pushing Drury's point total. He's contributed on like 80% of Drury's points lol.


Some interesting graphs, yet no numbers. You refuse to acknowledge that the rangers have better transitional numbers without buch, as well as give up more goals with Buch on the ice. Buch has a dx_GA that is just not good. He's also got some fairly scary offensive numbers if you take away Kreider Panarin and Mika Z. Like his totals just dissipate. This is the Strome argument all over again. The aspects he's good for are where Carolina are already strong.

As for the point on Drury, you could not be further from the truth. Carolina's top 5 prospects rank Bean, Bokk, Drury, Rees, Puistola. Honka is a great player, but he's been.... questionable. Suzuki played like 25 games this year due to a scary eye injury, his talent level at this point is still in question. People don't understand looking at Drury's "analytics" (quotations around analytics because... there is a very scarce amount) his underlying numbers are better than Abruzzese. Not to mention that Drury is also a C prospect. Those are very sparse, especially ones with the quality of someone like Drury. He's not gonna be the new Necas, but he could very well fill the shoes of someone like a Jordan Staal in the Canes organisation. A top 6 C who's good going both ways.
4 avr. 2020 à 14 h 33
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
Some interesting graphs, yet no numbers.


I hope you can understand how absolutely insane this comment is. It literally invalidates any credibility you have. I've shown you the offense and the defense...if you want to talk analytics that's great. But I'm not seeing you do that....
5 avr. 2020 à 8 h 43
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
I hope you can understand how absolutely insane this comment is. It literally invalidates any credibility you have. I've shown you the offense and the defense...if you want to talk analytics that's great. But I'm not seeing you do that....


You wanna talk analytics? Buch is bottom 50 in dxGA. Buch is also towards the bottom in the offensive counterpart DxGF. You question my credibility, yet I gave you a hundred stats, and you didn't answer. If you don't understand the stats, don't start the argument.
5 avr. 2020 à 11 h 19
#10
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
You wanna talk analytics? Buch is bottom 50 in dxGA. Buch is also towards the bottom in the offensive counterpart DxGF. You question my credibility, yet I gave you a hundred stats, and you didn't answer. If you don't understand the stats, don't start the argument.


gotta admit i'm really unsure what you mean by "bottom 50" in dxGA or "towards the bottom offensive counterpart dxGF"

Are you taking raw expected goal totals without accounting for ice time? (Obviously being an analytics expert you know all that will just tell you who's been on the ice the most) I'd like to understand what numbers you're looking at that's informing your opinion.

Here are my numbers:

Screen-Shot-2020-04-05-at-10-59-54-AM

You can find them here: https://evolving-hockey.com/?_inputs_&std_sk_range=%22Seasons%22&std_sk_pos=%22F%22&std_sk_str=%225v5%22&std_sk_season=%2220192020%22&std_sk_span=%22Regular%22&std_sk_group=%22Team%2C%20Season%22&std_sk_type=%22Rates%22&dir=%22Skater%20Tables%22&std_sk_toi=%2250%22&std_sk_table=%22On-Ice%22&std_sk_team=%22All%22&std_sk_adj=%22Score%20%26%20Venue%22&std_sk_info=null&std_sk_players=%22Pavel%20Buchnevich%22

If we take a look at the league you'll notice that Buchnevich is 30th best in the league at xGF/60 (that's how I knew whatever #'s you were citing were trash) and he was 334th in xGA/60. which I think comes out to 98th worst in the league. However, as an analytical person you know that raw xGA rates don't actually indicate the quality of the Forwards defensive play, they indicate the quality of the defensemen playing behind him...

SO I went to look at RAPM which actually contextualizes xGF/xGA and other components with proper weighting for things like score (leading vs. trailing and by how much) zone starts, quality of competition, home vs. away, playing a back to back vs. not, strength state (5v5 vs. 4v4 vs 3v3) and then displays those over a standard distribution.

You saw the graph of it with xGF and xGA, i'll circle where you can see them:

Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-53-13-AM

If you're wondering where those figures rate league wide:
xGF: 9th
xGA: 89th
xG +/-: 9th
quite a move up from where he was.

Again, I'm curious....where'd you get your numbers from again?
5 avr. 2020 à 14 h 0
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
gotta admit i'm really unsure what you mean by "bottom 50" in dxGA or "towards the bottom offensive counterpart dxGF"

Are you taking raw expected goal totals without accounting for ice time? (Obviously being an analytics expert you know all that will just tell you who's been on the ice the most) I'd like to understand what numbers you're looking at that's informing your opinion.

Here are my numbers:

Screen-Shot-2020-04-05-at-10-59-54-AM

You can find them here: https://evolving-hockey.com/?_inputs_&std_sk_range=%22Seasons%22&std_sk_pos=%22F%22&std_sk_str=%225v5%22&std_sk_season=%2220192020%22&std_sk_span=%22Regular%22&std_sk_group=%22Team%2C%20Season%22&std_sk_type=%22Rates%22&dir=%22Skater%20Tables%22&std_sk_toi=%2250%22&std_sk_table=%22On-Ice%22&std_sk_team=%22All%22&std_sk_adj=%22Score%20%26%20Venue%22&std_sk_info=null&std_sk_players=%22Pavel%20Buchnevich%22

If we take a look at the league you'll notice that Buchnevich is 30th best in the league at xGF/60 (that's how I knew whatever #'s you were citing were trash) and he was 334th in xGA/60. which I think comes out to 98th worst in the league. However, as an analytical person you know that raw xGA rates don't actually indicate the quality of the Forwards defensive play, they indicate the quality of the defensemen playing behind him...

SO I went to look at RAPM which actually contextualizes xGF/xGA and other components with proper weighting for things like score (leading vs. trailing and by how much) zone starts, quality of competition, home vs. away, playing a back to back vs. not, strength state (5v5 vs. 4v4 vs 3v3) and then displays those over a standard distribution.

You saw the graph of it with xGF and xGA, i'll circle where you can see them:

Screen-Shot-2020-04-04-at-10-53-13-AM

If you're wondering where those figures rate league wide:
xGF: 9th
xGA: 89th
xG +/-: 9th
quite a move up from where he was.

Again, I'm curious....where'd you get your numbers from again?


Take the delta of his xGF and his teams xGF, take the delta of his xGA and his teams xGA. If you are wondering how to find them, feel free to look at EH, that is a very nice site for things like this.
Take the difference between his xGF with the team and the teams without him, and he is, again, bottom 50 in the NHL. This means that the team is expected to score more goals without him than with him. With a top heavy team like new york, you'd expect that. Panarin, Zibanejad, Kreider etc will be the biggest threats, and will likely throw in the outliers, so I can see why you may not like it offensively.

However, you said yourself, Buch is bottom 60 in xGA. When you compare that to what the Rangers are without Buchnevich, they numbers are so contrasting that saying he is one of the worst analytical defensive players in the league is not out of question. You can find the team numbers on www.chartinghockey.com, or find a comparison on corsica.hockey. Both extraordinary sites for analytics. However, neither has the evidence to contradict what Buch's liabilitys are defensively. Also looking at raw stats.... he was on the ice for more goals against than all but 5 of his teammates? (Per Fox Sports, very good for the depth base stats. All of this combined contradicts the RAPM stats. You can say it's based on his ice time, but it's not like it's a limited sample size, or have you forgotten what that means?

So tell me again, where was my credibility in question?
5 avr. 2020 à 17 h 4
#12
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
Take the delta of his xGF and his teams xGF, take the delta of his xGA and his teams xGA. If you are wondering how to find them, feel free to look at EH, that is a very nice site for things like this.
Take the difference between his xGF with the team and the teams without him, and he is, again, bottom 50 in the NHL. This means that the team is expected to score more goals without him than with him. With a top heavy team like new york, you'd expect that. Panarin, Zibanejad, Kreider etc will be the biggest threats, and will likely throw in the outliers, so I can see why you may not like it offensively.

However, you said yourself, Buch is bottom 60 in xGA. When you compare that to what the Rangers are without Buchnevich, they numbers are so contrasting that saying he is one of the worst analytical defensive players in the league is not out of question. You can find the team numbers on www.chartinghockey.com, or find a comparison on corsica.hockey. Both extraordinary sites for analytics. However, neither has the evidence to contradict what Buch's liabilitys are defensively. Also looking at raw stats.... he was on the ice for more goals against than all but 5 of his teammates? (Per Fox Sports, very good for the depth base stats. All of this combined contradicts the RAPM stats. You can say it's based on his ice time, but it's not like it's a limited sample size, or have you forgotten what that means?

So tell me again, where was my credibility in question?


I’m saying show me your numbers. I’ve showed you all the numbers. All of which clearly conveys how Buch is a ridiculously good play driver at both ends.

Show me the numbers. Because tbh I don’t trust your math.

If you want to see his on-ice affect on the team at both ends it’s right here: https://hockeyviz.com/player/buchnpa95/NYR/1920

As is his wowy so you can see the negligible affect his teammates have.
6 avr. 2020 à 6 h 16
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
I’m saying show me your numbers. I’ve showed you all the numbers. All of which clearly conveys how Buch is a ridiculously good play driver at both ends.

Show me the numbers. Because tbh I don’t trust your math.

If you want to see his on-ice affect on the team at both ends it’s right here: https://hockeyviz.com/player/buchnpa95/NYR/1920

As is his wowy so you can see the negligible affect his teammates have.


If you don't trust my math, feel free to do it yourself!
6 avr. 2020 à 9 h 44
#14
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
If you don't trust my math, feel free to do it yourself!


I have and have shown my work and my numbers don't show anything that you claim. You haven't shown a thing. It's not looking good for your credibility...
6 avr. 2020 à 9 h 49
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
I have and have shown my work and my numbers don't show anything that you claim. You haven't shown a thing. It's not looking good for your credibility...


Yet I have walked you through the calculations and left you to do the math for yourself, and it's my credibility in question? I suggest a recalculation. It's not looking good for your analytical understanding.
6 avr. 2020 à 9 h 54
#16
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 6,728
Mentions "j'aime": 1,559
Quoting: Caniac2000
Yet I have walked you through the calculations and left you to do the math for yourself, and it's my credibility in question? I suggest a recalculation. It's not looking good for your analytical understanding.


Correct. Show your work.
6 avr. 2020 à 11 h 34
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 19,134
Mentions "j'aime": 4,979
Quoting: Sagecoll
Correct. Show your work.


I've shown you my work. I've walked you through the calculations. Now all you gotta do is put in the numbers! I made it all easy
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage