Holl hasn't worked because he isn't more than a 5D so the contract was always going to be poor value. Much like Chiarot. Those caliber of dmen are available EVERY offseason for cheap on one year deals. No reason to get a marginally more proven depth dman on a risky contract.

I screamed Bench Ben like 8x last night then he goes and makes that play. He’s a constant aggravation

That's why I said Yzerman was being stupid throwing some of these contracts out and all I heard from DET fans on here was how it didn't matter because they had cap space. Now Detroit is loaded with quality young players entering their primes where Yzerman restricted his cap space to sign them all to optimal long term deals.

Well idk about all that. Raymond and Seider need new deals and they’re earning them, so far that’s it.

Way to prove you don't watch hockey

If you think Chiarot and Holl are worth their contracts, you have the hockey knowledge of charred bowel movements.

Chiarot has been fantastic this season and is a big reason they are currently in the first WC spot; Holl costs very little and has stepped in nicely every time he has asked.

They still have lots of cap space (with lots more coming next year) and will have literally 0 issue re-signing any of their RFAs...you're clueless.

Benny was unbelievable last night and I had said that long before OT. Idk what it takes with this fan base to look past the name on the sweater.

He's playing like an ordinary dman. Gets challenging deployment with ordinary production and outscored at 5v5. Only difference between this year and last year is his on ice shooting% is outrageously high. And he's still not producing any more individually. He would pass through waivers easily. Poor value to any competent front office. Glad you think he helps though.

I'd wager my house if you looked at him shift by shift he was not very most of that game. He made an excellent play in the third and then kept the puck alive in OT so Larkin and Kane could work their magic.

He's paid like an ordinary DMan lol

They typical argument of the ignoramous, with no alternative plan or suggestion.

Get lost.

Judging by your analysis you should not be wagering anything.

What cracks me up about people like you is that you arrogantly rush to tell every teams fan base about their team while obviously not actually watching that team at all. You can't understand hockey by looking at numbers on a paper no matter how hard you squint. Watch other teams play, gain some perspective. Or don't and just keep looking foolish and ignorant.

I watch every team. But ultimately I trust data infinitely more than any person's opinion. Because proper interpretation of the data is superior to 100% of individual opinions. And unless you have a professional job in an NHL organization or are able to leisurely watch thousands of hours of NHL games every year, there's a 0% chance you are able to watch a sufficient amount of every team or player either.

Lol, I knew it. Proper interpretation of data! What a joke. What data would that be? Are you actually making the argument that you don't have to watch the game to understand it? You can't possibly be that arrogant and silly can you? There is no publicly available advanced stats that return 100 % reliable results. All of it requires context and interpretation. Something you simply cannot get without watching the game. Either way, stop trying to convince Wings fans that your sad little campaign against Yzerman has any basis in fact.

The collective value of the open source materials is greater than any single opinion. I also never said I "didn't watch the game." That's a false equivalency on your part to discredit me. Merely that it is impossible to watch enough video to have a sound opinion over the data available. And nothing from the data resembles positively for Chiarot either before his signing nor now. I don't have any personal vendetta against Yzerman. I do think Detroit is an utter cesspool of a city though as proven by any data.

Hockey analytics are at such a young stage of their development that they are deeply flawed. Maybe 25 years from now you will be correct that the value of the data will outweigh even most of the best scouts of the game. But in its current state, analytical data can only scratch the surface of telling you the story, and can often be flawed for such a number of reasons. Yes, it will likely tell us that McDavid is creating a number of chances for while on the ice. But it might fail to grade harshly enough on the egregious turnover that leads to the other teams GWG. And that is only using one of the most obvious examples of analytics lining up with the eye test, mostly. Most players are not that simple to analyze.

Personally, I'd be disappointed if one more year of Fabbri at $2.5M didn't return higher than a 3rd.

They're not that young. The nature of the sport and league itself is randomness and parity. Making the data even more reliable compared to eye tests. And as I already stated, there is close to a 0% chance anyone on this site is watching enough hockey to hold a useful eye test opinion in the first place. I'm just willing to admit that fact whereas fans that probably only watch their own team have zero frame of reference without analytics.

I watch 2 games most nights. I trust my eye test more than I trust analytics. I don’t expect you to trust my eye test more than analytics though if you believe in them. I just think they’re deeply flawed. Certain metrics can tell you part of the story, but I personally only like to use them to confirm or challenge something I thought I saw. As a stand-alone, I think they have a long way to come. So many variables to take into account. As you say with randomness, how can you incorporate xyz into a model to account for everything, limit randomness from the metrics and so on - long way from that.