The Capstan Shafts

by Lowetide

One of the fun things to look forward to each season is the emergence of new talents in the NHL. I remember when Esa Tikkanen arrived, he was unique and was worth watching even on a team of future Hall of Famers. This year, at least at the start of the year, the Edmonton Oilers are going to be low on rookies.

THE ATHLETIC!

I’m proud to be writing for The Athletic, and pleased to be part of a great team with Daniel Nugent-Bowman and Jonathan Willis. Here is our recent work.

PROJECTED OILERS ROSTER ($2.5M CAP ROOM)

I thought Evan Bouchard would be on the final list, but at this point it’ll be a recall that gets him to Edmonton in 2020-21. Remember a year ago, when Holland bought out Sekera to make room for young blue? He went the opposite way this time. Put another way, even if Bouchard blows the doors off in training camp, there’s no clear path to the NHL this fall. I believe Bouchard is going to be a terrific NHL player, but do find it curious that the organization’s big free-agent addition duplicates his skills. Curious. I wouldn’t worry too much about it, injuries hit defense like mad and Larsson’s back basically guarantees the 7D and AHL recalls will play during the 2020-21 season.

William Lagesson should make the team and would be a candidate to move up the depth chart with injuries to LH defense. I think most believe he’ll be a depth defenseman and that’s fair, he isn’t as dynamic as Ethan Bear or Caleb Jones. His Bakersfield on-ice goal differentials at even strength shone like diamonds, and I think he may merely be late to the party as opposed to a fringe addition to the two main pieces.

Jesse Puljujarvi is a player we’ve seen before, but the benefit of some time away for player and team should offer everyone a reset. I think the third line has a good chance to be Ennis-Turris-Puljujarvi, with the assignment to outscore, not just score. That’s going to be a challenge, but a 12-minutes a night challenge, a less than fatal assignment the big Finn should be able to handle.

Is he done? I don’t think so. The rumour of Alex Chiasson for Anders Bjork makes too much sense unless the Oilers are far more convinced of Tyler Benson than management is showing. I don’t hear his name mentioned often, and that tells me the club believes the future includes other names, mostly on defense. I suspect we’re not far from a trade that sends away a significant defender for a scoring winger. Possibly this offseason. There’s a trade to be made.

What about Nuge? Sounds like a long-term deal is being thrown around and I think that’s a good thing. RNH is the one lottery pick whose mindset has always included some two-way acumen and those things have exceptional value. If they didn’t have him, the Oilers would have to invent him. He’s also mature enough to play a role despite being an exceptional talent as a stand alone. He won’t ever be captain of the Oilers, but in his works and conduct it’s easy to see he’s a leader on a traditionally young team.

Holland is fixing the overuse of youth though, you can see it in the roster above and the quality (Bouchard) that is NHL ready below. I would have Bouchard on this roster in 2020-21, but the only way that happens is an Adam Larsson trade. Seems a bit late in the process to be dealing your top shutdown option, but if an opportunity came along it could happen just this way.

What would I do here? In the feature article from The Athletic above, I offer some value free agents who are still available. It might require some dollars out via trade but there’s some fine bets available today for just money, and perhaps not a lot of money. As days go down, some of these young wingers are going to be looking for opportunity over money, and Holland remains without a strong solution (aside from Nuge) on McDavid’s left wing. Go left, young man, cash 30 and then get paid. That should be an easy sell.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

A big day on the Lowdown, as we have terrific guests with news to break. It all starts at 10, TSN1260, with Frank Seravalli from TSN joining me at 10:20. The last two weeks he’s been on the show Frank has dropped major Oilers news on us, perhaps he will again today. Reid Fowler from Draft Kings pops in at 11 to talk NFL weekend, and Andrew Peard, Oil Kings announcer, will join me at 11:25 to talk about the WHL’s season which now has a firm starting date. 10-1260 text, @Lowetide on twitter. See you on the radio!

182 comments
0

You may also like

0 0 votes
Article Rating
182 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BornInAGretzkyJersey

Kinger_Oil.redux,

I don’t think semantics means what you think it means.

I think you’re confusing semantics with syntax.

Holland can spend over the cap after placing Kelf on LTIR, up to the delta between the available cap space and Kelfbom’s AAV.

I’m pretty sure you get how this works until you type a reply, because what you type is inaccurate, or at the very least, imprecise. You get the concept but go walkabout on the details.

Kinger_Oil.redux

BornInAGretzkyJersey:
Kinger_Oil.redux,

Or to rephrase my previous reply, your sequence is out of order.

Reorganize thus:

5
6
7
then
1-4

And then you’ve got it licked.

– Right, thanks: basically back to where we started, semantics aside, done correctly, dollar for dollar, Klef’s salary of $4.2MM can be replaced with the same dollars by other players.

– They can spend to the full cap amount on day 1 of the season on healthy players.

– that’s all we ought to care about: Klef’s injury, while it sucks, his dollars can be spent on other players to replace him. And when he comes back, we need to get rid of that excess $4.2MM

rickithebear

hunter1909: Very droll.

I use to be able to take 128,000 pieces of equipment, memorize operation SOE ( step # 302), all manuals, performance limit specs,

Visualize complex machine action,
To vizualize Electric motor case size, Run of Mine crusher feeder motor frame, Motor: Loads, breakouts, Life,Zibration, shaft load, Xplosion encasement, other critical specs.
When our R.o.M motor that feeds all Coal into the power plant Failed,
The Asst Plant Mgr could come up to me and say We have found a Potential motor that can be refurbished in N. Carolina. But it is not a match for ours. You have 15 min to let us know If we can ask the Company to run a weekend shift to run the 1 motor thru.

The answer was yes and saved millions of dollars.

I used to be able to have my Rainman, Beautifulmind sessions from 10 pm to 4 a.m. developing all 50+ hockey theories in my head.
Thru 3+D graphing andMillions of pieces of data retention.
Thankfully Lowetide and HF boards and my notes provide me re visits f my theories.
I am no longer able to Hold 7-10 thoughts at a time.
I no longer remember conversations that ended a min ago. But they will come back 2-10 days later.
I confuse my wife and Children’s names.

It sucks not being me.
A product of either Daily Oral Chemo intacke or early onset.

Droll is sometimes life!

rickithebear

jp: Funny they wouldn’t themselves use xGA to generate a real GSAA value.

Whether it’s better remains to be seen. At least it’s something actually different from SV%.

Yrs ago on here I presented gm by gm Goalie performance using average LD and High danger SH success counts to give a xSave%.
So we could have a Simple look at Goalie performance.
It is a soft measure. Based on non scoreable & Scoreable shots.

But a quick look at video of all shots leads to only open shot data.
We see open shot counts by Mid 1990 NJD defence Of 0.
Brodeur faced gm were with table goalie movement Zero shots would be scoreable.
His style of stand-up play made many non scoreable shots open shots.

Seeing the manpower required By pro football focus to look at 32 tm x 16gm = 512 gm of plays.
I sure as heck cannot look at:
( 2 tm x 30sh/gm) = 60 SH/gm
( 31 tm x 82gm) 2542 gm
2542gm x 60 = 152,520 shots in a season.

But we can do a soft ( partial) look at expected counts ( items of value)
Ex.
A soft look at Assists per goals for teams last y.
The range was 1.549 – 1.751 = a soft avg of 1.650
The soft median was 1.636

Clearly Assists are over valued to the direct affect.
When we look at Hockies pass Completion rate.
Assist do not have the same Goal diff affect of a direct Open shot in net space.
The NHL point system must reflect the +ve goal Diff Value of goals, 1st assist, 2nd assist.

Once again the only proper valuation is based on Open Corsi ( open shot analysis)

Xdata in hockey is my science.
Ie My gig. Back to 05/06.
The entire hockey Community railed against my xData approach.
Starting with 3D player situation averages for comp, team, ZS.
Allways taking a regression approach rather than mutivariable analytics Science approach that looks for hifghest % of mistake free performance.

I told E. Perry that xG was a compete lack of understanding the critical value of the data.
Their are 3 zone structure positions.
Fwd drive CF, OpenSHF, GF Thru A. penetrating OZ/HD area and Ipen SH targeting.
Fwds drive CA by NZ transition defence.

Dmen help CA when Fwds have run a NZ pressure allowing zone Entrynpreseure.
Dmen can reduce shot density by preventing homepkate penetration and central x,y location in HDcarea.
Dmen Can reduce corsi scorability thru Puck,pressure blocks, forced misses, +ve hit goalie rates.

Goalies can have a strong GA affect by mai taking avg hit goalie rate by height and + ve Opensh Save % compared to xSave% established by openSh success density maps based on partnership of X,Y Location in Oz plane and y,z location In open net elevation.

Their are 3 seperate position averages. With each player having their own xAvg with HDarwa and Open sh actions.

PDO is an assumption that their are only 2 avg that regress to a common
Their are 7 averages on the ice.
3 fwd,, averages,
2 Dmen Avg to their def side,
A goalies +ve/-ve Save% to each Defensive side which have seperate xSave% baselines.

OriginalPouzar

jp: Thanks for passing this on. Holland has also said a few times he’s proceeding this off season as if Klefbom won’t be available, so I was going on the assumption he expected Klefbom on LTIR.

If there’s a material chance (can’t think of a better word) that Klefbom will be back then obviously Holland won’t spend that money elsewhere. (that would be a damn nice Dcorp with Klefbom added to it by the way)

I’m not sure about your (and Holland’s?) mention of off-season LTIR. I’ve only ever suggested what I believe the Oilers could do while still being compliant on day 1 (that is, using Klefbom’s in-season LTIR). If he was out for the year they could leverage about $3M of his $4.17M salary to another player (or players).

Good morning – the comment about off-season LTIR was in response to the many ideas (not just in this community but across Oilers social media and fandom) that the Oilers simply have an additional $4M and could go use it to sign, say Duclair right now or Hoffman.

The idea that “Kris Russell plus Klef’s LTIR = Taylor Hall’s $8M”.

hunter1909

Decidedly Skeptical Fan: I know … same here. Old age and the accompanying short term memory loss are brutal.

Very droll.

rickithebear

Lead farmer you have been nailing it with Facts!
Some Facts include Closed shots as scoreable Data by Hockey analytic Community. ( flawed)
Not your Fault.
I am Really enjoying your posting!

SM Ligga
U19
Jarventie (18) aug , 2002; OTt #33 2020; 4gm 1G 3A

U21
O. Kivemaki (20) mar 24, 2000, DET #191 2018; 5gm 2G 3A
R. Iskhakov (20) Jul 22, 2000, NYI #43 2018; 5gm 2G 3A (1.00)

U23
Puljujarvi (22) May 1998, EDM #4 2016; 4gm 5G 2A (1.75 ppg)
Bemstrom (21) June 1999; CBJ #117 2017; 6gm 5G 2A (1.17)
Turkulainen (22) Sep 22, 1998; Undrafted 4gm 1G 3A (1.00)
J. Ikonen (22) may 1998; Undrafted; 4gm 1G 3A (1.00)
E. Luostarinen (22) Sept 1998; Car #42 2017; signed FLD; 3gm 2G 1A (1.00)

Valamaki (22) Oct 1998; CGY #16 2017; 4gm 0G 4A (1.00)
Video will tell us weather his ev production is a 4th option (as a Dman) or occupying fwd structure ( as a Rover) at even,
All PP points are 2.7 times easier than even – advantage situation.
So thought of as Fwd play.

His AHL hints at strong def play.
He shows front net Success mechanisms like Nurse, Benning.
But as Nurse proves Rovers suck!

Ribs

Great reading, gents. Thanks!

jp

G Money:
Moneypuck.com has an expected sv% that I think properly implements that concept. They also have I think the best expected goals model out there (it’s the only one I know of that does something called flurry adjustment).

I know it’s good ’cause it’s written in Python, all the best stuff is

Also, somebody asked yesterday what the point of using even strength sv% is.

My answer to that is if you break down goalie sv% broadly speaking, the ev sv% tends to be the most stable and reliable, while pk sv% moves as rapidly as DSF’s goalposts.

So if you see a goalie having a good season but it’s because their pk sv% is riding high, you’re basically looking at the goalie equivalent of having a high PDO.

Yes, no question that IF you break down SV% into EV/PP/PK then the EV component is most reliable. Being the game state with the most events, and possibly also other factors.

My question I guess was: is there value in breaking out EV SV% from Overall SV%?

jp

Georgexs: Yeah, GSAA and SV% are telling the same story.

NST has another column called x GA for goalies. No mention of it in their glossary.

I checked and it seems to be the weighted shot idea (using average SV% for HDSA, MDSA, and LDSA to calculate a goalie’s expected goals against). You can use that number to calculate a shot weighted GSAA.

I’m not sure if that ends up being a better way to evaluate goalies. Or team defensive play.

Funny they wouldn’t themselves use xGA to generate a real GSAA value.

Whether it’s better remains to be seen. At least it’s something actually different from SV%.

G Money

Moneypuck.com has an expected sv% that I think properly implements that concept. They also have I think the best expected goals model out there (it’s the only one I know of that does something called flurry adjustment).

I know it’s good ’cause it’s written in Python, all the best stuff is 😀

Also, somebody asked yesterday what the point of using even strength sv% is.

My answer to that is if you break down goalie sv% broadly speaking, the ev sv% tends to be the most stable and reliable, while pk sv% moves as rapidly as DSF’s goalposts.

So if you see a goalie having a good season but it’s because their pk sv% is riding high, you’re basically looking at the goalie equivalent of having a high PDO.

G Money

Georgexs: This also ties back to Leadfarmer’s comment from last night: “GSAA is much better than SV% In catching outliers (subpar goalie on good D team, good goalie on bad D team)…”

A good D team would presumably allow fewer shots. A subpar goalie would have a SV% below league average. That means his GSAA would be negative. Below league average SV% and negative GSAA go hand in hand.

A bad D team would presumably allow more shots. A good goalie would have a SV% above league average. That means his GSAA would be positive. Above league average SV% and positive GSAA go hand in hand.

It’s just arithmetic.

Hi George,

That’s some good sleuthing.

If that’s all NST is doing in calculating GSAA, a linear transform between sv% and league average sv%, then they’re not adding any information.

I suppose I ought to know that, but I’m not as deeply familiar with public data sources (other than PuckIQ) as I used to be, as my professional work these days has me fully immersed in nonpublic data.

NST’s GSAA arguably is providing negative information, because GSAA is a raw value, kind of like goals against. If I told you goalie X had 14 goals against, it’s almost valueless information without knowing how much he played and on how many shots those 14 goals came.

In the same vein, even a properly calculated raw GSAA value isn’t that useful, it should really be normalized, probably to something like per 100 shots, otherwise it just ends up being highly correlated with TOI as well as sv%.

The key assumption, though, is the “properly computed” part. A properly computed GSAA in my opinion is essentially an expected goals metric, but reversed to apply to goalies.

So that league average sv% piece of the equation becomes not a league wide measure across all teams, but specific to each shot, as it is with expected goals.

Given that precondition, the rest of my comments apply – although the resulting measure will still be correlated with save percent, the value lies in looking for the divergences. (And overall gives a better measure of goalie impact as it reduces the influence of the defence playing in front of that goalie).

Orion

Georgexs:
Interesting. Here are the weighted GSAA numbers from NST:

Top 10 goalies

Connor Hellebuyck,24.7
Corey Crawford,16.0
Tuukka Rask,15.5
Robin Lehner,14.3
Darcy Kuemper,13.2
Ben Bishop,12.0
Mikko Koskinen,11.7
Andrei Vasilevskiy,11.7
Anton Khudobin,11.3
Jacob Markstrom,10.7

Bottom 10 Goalies

Martin Jones,-9.2
Sergei Bobrovsky,-10.7
Craig Anderson,-10.7
Mike Smith,-10.8
Alex Stalock,-12.0
Louis Domingue,-12.2
Pekka Rinne,-12.8
Braden Holtby,-16.4
Devan Dubnyk,-22.0
Jimmy Howard,-23.8

Intuitively it seems like the weighted GSAA would be better than GSAA, since at least it tries to add another evaluation of the goalie’s skill level.

Wouldn’t a weighted SV% be even better though? I don’t see how the number of shots is a good way to evaluate goalies, because that has very little to do with the goalie himself (unless he gives up a lot of rebounds). If you have two below-average goalies with the same SV%, and one has a lower GSAA, it looks like he’s a worse goalie, but really he just faced more shots…or am I wrong?

Decidedly Skeptical Fan

Harpers Hair: I can’t even remember the last time I was angry.

I know … same here. Old age and the accompanying short term memory loss are brutal.

Georgexs

Interesting. Here are the weighted GSAA numbers from NST:

Top 10 goalies

Connor Hellebuyck, 24.7
Corey Crawford, 16.0
Tuukka Rask, 15.5
Robin Lehner, 14.3
Darcy Kuemper, 13.2
Ben Bishop, 12.0
Mikko Koskinen, 11.7
Andrei Vasilevskiy, 11.7
Anton Khudobin, 11.3
Jacob Markstrom, 10.7

Bottom 10 Goalies

Martin Jones, -9.2
Sergei Bobrovsky, -10.7
Craig Anderson, -10.7
Mike Smith, -10.8
Alex Stalock, -12.0
Louis Domingue, -12.2
Pekka Rinne, -12.8
Braden Holtby, -16.4
Devan Dubnyk, -22.0
Jimmy Howard, -23.8

Georgexs

jp: I’d noticed also that NST GSAA was directly proportional to SV%. I assumed that there was another “real” GSAA out there that actually did something useful.

Is that it? Is GSAA literally pointless?

Yeah, GSAA and SV% are telling the same story.

NST has another column called x GA for goalies. No mention of it in their glossary.

I checked and it seems to be the weighted shot idea (using average SV% for HDSA, MDSA, and LDSA to calculate a goalie’s expected goals against). You can use that number to calculate a shot weighted GSAA.

I’m not sure if that ends up being a better way to evaluate goalies. Or team defensive play.

jp

Georgexs: I thought there was more going on with GSAA, that it divided shots into categories (LD, MD, HD) and used the average SV% in each category to arrive at an expectation of the goals that should have been allowed given the mixture of shots the goalie faced. But, as you can see, it’s much simpler than that.

I’d noticed also that NST GSAA was directly proportional to SV%. I assumed that there was another “real” GSAA out there that actually did something useful.

Is that it? Is GSAA literally pointless?

jp

OriginalPouzar: I don’t think Holland is going to be using Klef’s likely LTIR as a way to take on additional cap commitments that would put the team over the cap.

He was on the B. McCown show with John Shannon yesterday and, again, reiterated that things are still up in the air with Klef and he knows that, even if he isn’t there to start the season, that might not be for the entire season.

If the Oilers load up in the off-season and use off-season LTIR for Klef and he comes back, they’ll be effed. Holland intimated the same.

Bear is going to get squeezed on a bridge and they’ll need to either shed the likes of Chiasson and/or do a few season-eve moves to get compliant (i.e. send Yamamoto down and maybe another they are fine risk on waivers).

Thanks for passing this on. Holland has also said a few times he’s proceeding this off season as if Klefbom won’t be available, so I was going on the assumption he expected Klefbom on LTIR.

If there’s a material chance (can’t think of a better word) that Klefbom will be back then obviously Holland won’t spend that money elsewhere. (that would be a damn nice Dcorp with Klefbom added to it by the way)

I’m not sure about your (and Holland’s?) mention of off-season LTIR. I’ve only ever suggested what I believe the Oilers could do while still being compliant on day 1 (that is, using Klefbom’s in-season LTIR). If he was out for the year they could leverage about $3M of his $4.17M salary to another player (or players).

Georgexs

Harpers Hair: All of this is true but doesn’t account for where the shots are coming from.

Some teams by talent and design are adept at keeping shots to the outside and others allow many slot shots i.e. high danger areas.

So, to refine things a bit further, you need to look at GSAA from HD shots.

The numbers are available.

One thing at a time. Sheesh. You were pro-GSAA just yesterday. Reminds me of… Slip out the back, Jack. Make a new plan, Stan.

If you refine things the way you’re suggesting, you get:

SV%

Koskinen, 0.917
Markstrom, 0.918

HDSV%

Koskinen, 0.838
Markstrom, 0.838

MDSV%

Koskinen, 0.909
Markstrom, 0.906

LDSV%

Koskinen, 0.971
Markstrom, 0.965

Koskinen had equal or better results in every category.

Bonus point if you can see how he still ended up behind Markstrom overall.

Your idea is closer to what I thought NST GSAA was doing, but it isn’t.

The weighted shot approach to evaluating goalies has problems too.

I’m sure, given the above, you can think of some.

Side

Georgexs: Does HH come across as angry? Given his references (Shelter Tears or whatever, recipes, his garden in springtime), he seems to be enjoying life. His efforts here seem to add to that enjoyment. His delusion, if anything, is that he’s going to help us see through our delusion.

JMO.

He’s definitely had some angry outbursts on here a few times at night. Possibly Shelter Pond fueled, though.

Harpers Hair

Georgexs:
G Money said this yesterday in his thoughts on GSAA and SV%:

“But emphasizing the high correlation perhaps misses the point. Where things get interesting with these stats is exactly when they diverge significantly.”

I decided to look up how GSAA is calculated on NST and Hockey-Reference.

FromNST:

“Goals Saved Above Average, the difference between the goalie’s Goals Against and a Goals Against with the same Shots Against and the average SV% (within the selected filters). Average SV%*Shots Against – Goals Against”

And from Hockey-Reference:

“Goals Saved Above Average, the goals this goalie prevented given his save percentage and shots faced vs. the league average save percentage on the same number of shots. Min. 4 shots faced per team game needed to qualify.”

They’re both performing the same calculation:

GSAA = (1 – League Average SV%) * SA – GA

where SA and GA are the shots faced by and the goals allowed by an individual goaltender.

The difference in the numbers is apparently in how they calculate league average SV%, I’m guessing one includes empty net goals and the other doesn’t.

If you take out a pencil and do some algebra, you can rewrite the above to this:

GSAA = (1 – League Average SV%) * SA – (1 – SV%) * SA

(where SV% is the individual goaltender’s SV%)

which leads to

GSAA = SA * (SV% – League Average SV%)

I thought there was more going on with GSAA, that it divided shots into categories (LD, MD, HD) and used the average SV% in each category to arrive at an expectation of the goals that should have been allowed given the mixture of shots the goalie faced. But, as you can see, it’s much simpler than that.

NST had League Average SV% at .910 last season.

Plugging that in, we can calculate a goalie’s GSAA for 19-20 as:

GSAA = SA * (SV% – 0.910)

Let’s run the calculation for a few goalies we’re all familiar with:

Koskinen’s GSAA = 1173 * (0.917 – 0.910) = 9.11

Smith’s GSAA = 1087 * (0.902 – 0.910) = -7.67

Markstrom’s GSAA = 1420 * (0.918 – 0.910) = 11.45

Rittich’s GSAA = 1478 * (0.907 – 0.910) = -4.3

Demko’s GSAA = 821 * (0.905 – 0.910) = -3.73

Holtby’s GSAA = 1384 * (0.897 – 0.910) = -16.81

You can clearly see why the two stats are so strongly correlated. They’re basically a function of each other. If two goalies have the same SV%, the only reason they would have a different GSAA is because they faced a different number of shots.

Koskinen and Markstrom had nearly the same SV%. Why was Markstrom’s GSAA higher? Because he had a slightly higher SV% and because he faced more shots. There’s no unexplained random factor here.

Getting back to GMoney’s comment (and if you’re around, my apologies for not addressing you directly; I don’t know your comings and goings), it’s straightforward to explain the divergence in cases where the two stats diverge. If two goalies have identical SV%, the reason their GSAA is different is because they faced a different number of shots. But they’ll both fall on the same side of GSAA (positive or negative) depending on whether they beat league average SV% or not. There’s nothing to delve into.

It’s just arithmetic.

This also ties back to Leadfarmer’s comment from last night: “GSAA is much better than SV% In catching outliers (subpar goalie on good D team, good goalie on bad D team)…”

A good D team would presumably allow fewer shots. A subpar goalie would have a SV% below league average. That means his GSAA would be negative. Below league average SV% and negative GSAA go hand in hand.

A bad D team would presumably allow more shots. A good goalie would have a SV% above league average. That means his GSAA would be positive. Above league average SV% and positive GSAA go hand in hand.

It’s just arithmetic.

All of this is true but doesn’t account for where the shots are coming from.

Some teams by talent and design are adept at keeping shots to the outside and others allow many slot shots i.e. high danger areas.

So, to refine things a bit further, you need to look at GSAA from HD shots.

The numbers are available.

Harpers Hair

Georgexs: Does HH come across as angry? Given his references (Shelter Tears or whatever, recipes, his garden in springtime), he seems to be enjoying life. His efforts here seem to add to that enjoyment. His delusion, if anything, is that he’s going to help us see through our delusion.

JMO.

I can’t even remember the last time I was angry.

Georgexs

Side: HH is not a troll because that implies he’s deliberately antagonizing for his own amusement. He’s a grown ass man with a +30 year grudge and obsession towards a professional sports team and he uses this site to relieve his anger and frustration for +12 hours a day.

I think he genuinely needs help.

Does HH come across as angry? Given his references (Shelter Tears or whatever, recipes, his garden in springtime), he seems to be enjoying life. His efforts here seem to add to that enjoyment. His delusion, if anything, is that he’s going to help us see through our delusion.

JMO.

Georgexs

If you actually try the calculations above and you get different numbers, blame rounding.

League Average SV% was 0.909543.

Koskinen’s SV% was 0.917306.

Georgexs

G Money said this yesterday in his thoughts on GSAA and SV%:

“But emphasizing the high correlation perhaps misses the point. Where things get interesting with these stats is exactly when they diverge significantly.”

I decided to look up how GSAA is calculated on NST and Hockey-Reference.

From NST:

“Goals Saved Above Average, the difference between the goalie’s Goals Against and a Goals Against with the same Shots Against and the average SV% (within the selected filters). Average SV%*Shots Against – Goals Against”

And from Hockey-Reference:

“Goals Saved Above Average, the goals this goalie prevented given his save percentage and shots faced vs. the league average save percentage on the same number of shots. Min. 4 shots faced per team game needed to qualify.”

They’re both performing the same calculation:

GSAA = (1 – League Average SV%) * SA – GA

where SA and GA are the shots faced by and the goals allowed by an individual goaltender.

The difference in the numbers is apparently in how they calculate league average SV%, I’m guessing one includes empty net goals and the other doesn’t.

If you take out a pencil and do some algebra, you can rewrite the above to this:

GSAA = (1 – League Average SV%) * SA – (1 – SV%) * SA

(where SV% is the individual goaltender’s SV%)

which leads to

GSAA = SA * (SV% – League Average SV%)

I thought there was more going on with GSAA, that it divided shots into categories (LD, MD, HD) and used the average SV% in each category to arrive at an expectation of the goals that should have been allowed given the mixture of shots the goalie faced. But, as you can see, it’s much simpler than that.

NST had League Average SV% at .910 last season.

Plugging that in, we can calculate a goalie’s GSAA for 19-20 as:

GSAA = SA * (SV% – 0.910)

Let’s run the calculation for a few goalies we’re all familiar with:

Koskinen’s GSAA = 1173 * (0.917 – 0.910) = 9.11

Smith’s GSAA = 1087 * (0.902 – 0.910) = -7.67

Markstrom’s GSAA = 1420 * (0.918 – 0.910) = 11.45

Rittich’s GSAA = 1478 * (0.907 – 0.910) = -4.3

Demko’s GSAA = 821 * (0.905 – 0.910) = -3.73

Holtby’s GSAA = 1384 * (0.897 – 0.910) = -16.81

You can clearly see why the two stats are so strongly correlated. They’re basically a function of each other. If two goalies have the same SV%, the only reason they would have a different GSAA is because they faced a different number of shots.

Koskinen and Markstrom had nearly the same SV%. Why was Markstrom’s GSAA higher? Because he had a slightly higher SV% and because he faced more shots. There’s no unexplained random factor here.

Getting back to GMoney’s comment (and if you’re around, my apologies for not addressing you directly; I don’t know your comings and goings), it’s straightforward to explain the divergence in cases where the two stats diverge. If two goalies have identical SV%, the reason their GSAA is different is because they faced a different number of shots. But they’ll both fall on the same side of GSAA (positive or negative) depending on whether they beat league average SV% or not. There’s nothing to delve into.

It’s just arithmetic.

This also ties back to Leadfarmer’s comment from last night: “GSAA is much better than SV% In catching outliers (subpar goalie on good D team, good goalie on bad D team)…”

A good D team would presumably allow fewer shots. A subpar goalie would have a SV% below league average. That means his GSAA would be negative. Below league average SV% and negative GSAA go hand in hand.

A bad D team would presumably allow more shots. A good goalie would have a SV% above league average. That means his GSAA would be positive. Above league average SV% and positive GSAA go hand in hand.

It’s just arithmetic.

DevilsLettuce

By the end of next season Horcoff will fall out the top 10 in all time Oilers points and Brogan Rafferty’s favorite player Ales Hemsky will be a 10th.

BornInAGretzkyJersey

defmn,

I thought it was funny.

I mean, Willy has been taking one for the team for years… what’s one more time?

defmn

OriginalPouzar: Yes, I know it was a joke and my response wasn’t intended to be taken at face value either….

Ah, sorry about that. just kept reading all these posts about the $700,000 needed to maximize Klef’s LTIR and it seemed pretty simple to me. Give it to Lagesson and everybody can put the calculators away.

buck yoakam

defmn,

Thats so true!…also, not a lot of friends showing up for the pyjama party on Tuesday…kinda sad…

OriginalPouzar

OriginalPouzar: but what about Bear……?

Yes, I know it was a joke and my response wasn’t intended to be taken at face value either….

BornInAGretzkyJersey

Kinger_Oil.redux,

Or to rephrase my previous reply, your sequence is out of order.

Reorganize thus:

5
6
7
then
1-4

And then you’ve got it licked.

BornInAGretzkyJersey

Kinger_Oil.redux,

It would seem your proposed scenario is to use off-season LTIR, and not in-season LTIR. Two separate contingencies.

To use in-season LTIR, the team must be cap compliant on day one of the season — INCLUDING Kelfbom’s cap hit — to take full advantage of any cap relief, and hopefully for the duration of the season. Otherwise, any monies allocated elsewhere would have to be accounted for prior to his return. This is important so as to not impede the accrual of daily cap hit to use to acquire rental player(s) at the trade deadline. Off-season LTIR is not conducive to this, but for those nuances I’d need Speeds confirm.

Also, in an effort to be precise, the salary cap ceiling this year is $81.5MM. The Oilers have $341,326 in overages from last year’s bonuses and potentially up to $730,000 this year to account for.

defmn

OriginalPouzar: but what about Bear……?

They use a portion of the $4.17 LTIR from Klefbom to sign him.

It was a joke OP to make the math easier to understand.

OriginalPouzar

defmn: The Oilers have $732,509 in cap space according to CapFriendly. If I were Laggesson I would insist on that exact amount for my next contract just so as to make the LTIR for Klef less complicated for everybody.

but what about Bear……?

Side

Old Timer:
HH is a troll and nothing more.

HH is not a troll because that implies he’s deliberately antagonizing for his own amusement. He’s a grown ass man with a +30 year grudge and obsession towards a professional sports team and he uses this site to relieve his anger and frustration for +12 hours a day.

I think he genuinely needs help.

defmn

The Trade Guy: Why are you like this?

It’s related to his liver casserole recipe which is a little bit complex but mostly just sour & bitter. 😉

defmn

BornInAGretzkyJersey:
Kinger_Oil.redux,

The Oilers have 22/23 on the roster right now, per CapFriendly.

If they take this exact roster to day one, they can LTIR Klef’s contract minus the available cap space (~$700k) and sign whomever — Lagesson and Bear, plus.

It’s not at all — semantics, math or otherwise — what you said in the post I replied to:

“– If Klef doesn’t play, they get $4.17MM of relief when he goes to LTIR

– The combination of the $700K remaining cap space and Klef’s LTIR can be used to pay Bear and/or other players: so $4.17 + $700K = $5MM for additional players”

To repeat, it’s Klefbom’s salary MINUS the available cap space on day one.So $4.167M – $0.732M… you’re the guy in finance.You do the math lol.Three and change.So not “$5MM for additional players.”

The Oilers have $732,509 in cap space according to CapFriendly. If I were Laggesson I would insist on that exact amount for my next contract just so as to make the LTIR for Klef less complicated for everybody. 😉

The Trade Guy

Harpers Hair: Not at all.

Giving a newly drafted prospect a few games at the start of a season in heavily sheltered minutes is pretty common with shitty teams.

That Bouchard was left wanting is not surprising but even you keep saying he needs “cover” to start the next season on the third pairing.

Tells me everything I need to know about the player and you.

Why are you like this?

OriginalPouzar

Kinger_Oil.redux: – Practically they do. It’s called base salary relief

– There is some legal language but the essence of it is” if you have a player on IR you can get other players”

– Intuitively this makes sense. Having a player on IR shouldn’t mean that you can’t get a replacement.

– As long as the players that are able to play aren’t over the cap a team is fine.

– The oilers can spend $80mm on actual players this season

– Klef injury does not mean that the Oilers can only spend 76$ mm on players this year. That would be highly unfair

– And if klef comes back at some point they would have to shed $4mm in order to be under the cap.

– Again if I’m wrong Amd Klefs injury means that the team can only pay active players 76mm this seasonI would be open to hearing this and understanding why.

Of course Klef going on LTIR doesn’t reduce the cap by $4M – it also doesn’t increase the cap by $4M as your posts infer.

OriginalPouzar

Harpers Hair: Not at all.

Giving a newly drafted prospect a few games at the start of a season in heavily sheltered minutes is pretty common with shitty teams.

That Bouchard was left wanting is not surprising but even you keep saying he needs “cover” to start the next season on the third pairing.

Tells me everything I need to know about the player and you.

That is not garbage time which is what you were stated. You were simply wrong when you stated it.

Kinger_Oil.redux

BornInAGretzkyJersey:

– MAybe I’m missing something, so I will show my train of thought, and tell me where I’m wrong, based on a $80MM salary cap (I know its actually $80.7, but it’s easier to go through this way)

1) They sign Bear on Friday for $1.7MM.

2) They have a total cap at that point of $81MM, so no more $700K unusable space

3) They are $1MM over the cap, but this is permissible in off-season.

4) They sign another, winger for $3.2MM this off-season. Now they are $4.2MM over the cap

5) Klef is deemed medically unfit to play by doctors, and needs a year to recover

6) They are granted this “salary relief pool” This pool is determined the day Klef is placed on LTIR. The salary relief pool = Klefs salary of $4,2MM

7) So then on 1st day of season, they have a compliant team: the team is paying salary for NHL players of $80MM, and Klefs $4,2MM salary has been replaced by Bear + New guy

– And next year, if Klef comes back, they need to shed $4.2MM of salary

– So what am I missing? I could for sure be missing something

pts2pndr

stephenw24,

🙂👏👏👏👌

Sierra

jp,

Thanks for the response.

wintoon

HH is a troll and nothing more.

Kinger_Oil.redux

OriginalPouzar: Sorry, with respect, that is not how LTIR works – they don’t just get a free $4.17M

– Practically they do. It’s called base salary relief

– There is some legal language but the essence of it is” if you have a player on IR you can get other players”

– Intuitively this makes sense. Having a player on IR shouldn’t mean that you can’t get a replacement.

– As long as the players that are able to play aren’t over the cap a team is fine.

– The oilers can spend $80mm on actual players this season

– Klef injury does not mean that the Oilers can only spend 76$ mm on players this year. That would be highly unfair

– And if klef comes back at some point they would have to shed $4mm in order to be under the cap.

– Again if I’m wrong Amd Klefs injury means that the team can only pay active players 76mm this season I would be open to hearing this and understanding why.

Harpers Hair

Tweet
See new Tweets
Conversation
Elliotte Friedman
@FriedgeHNIC
Hearing Mike Hoffman is considering a one-year deal for his next NHL home. If he does that, there’s a good chance that he and Taylor Hall head to market next summer as the leaders in goals per game for all free agents 31 and under. Déjà vu all over again.

Orion

OriginalPouzar: Absolutely, assuming he is playing well enough to warrant insertion in the lineup – I don’t see him playing over Russell in a fully healthy lineup though but injuries will happen and there will be an opportunity to insert him and, at that time, its up to him.

I’m not sure the trust level of Coaches T. and P. – they didn’t have it last year when they had the opportunity to see what they had in him – and chose to run out Brandon Manning for 8 straight games, where he performed worse and worse as the games went on.

If a LD gets injured, boom, he’s in.If a RD gets injured it will be interesting to see if Bouch is recalled (assuming they aren’t starting with 8 healthy D on the roster) or if Jones/Russell flip over to the right side and Lagesson gets ice.

Yeah their preference for Manning is the type of thing I hope they don’t repeat, unless there’s a clear-cut reason for it.

Harpers Hair

OriginalPouzar: How does any of that apply to you simply spewing incorrect info about “garbage time” – can you admit that you posted that, without knowledge, and were were simply wrong?

Not at all.

Giving a newly drafted prospect a few games at the start of a season in heavily sheltered minutes is pretty common with shitty teams.

That Bouchard was left wanting is not surprising but even you keep saying he needs “cover” to start the next season on the third pairing.

Tells me everything I need to know about the player and you.

OriginalPouzar

Orion:
What do people think about the Oilers giving Lagesson a serious look this year?If he plays well enough in training camp, and keeps showing well enough early in the year, let him run with it as a 6/7 and find out what he can do.Obviously they shouldn’t force it, but if he gets to 40 games that also gives them a dman for the expansion draft.

Lots of people are saying the Oilers should get another depth LD, which would be great, but if they get someone who’s just barely good enough to block his path, he probably becomes a group 6 free agent next year and walks.

I know he’s probably not more than a #6 dman but it would be nice to find out before assuming that.

Absolutely, assuming he is playing well enough to warrant insertion in the lineup – I don’t see him playing over Russell in a fully healthy lineup though but injuries will happen and there will be an opportunity to insert him and, at that time, its up to him.

I’m not sure the trust level of Coaches T. and P. – they didn’t have it last year when they had the opportunity to see what they had in him – and chose to run out Brandon Manning for 8 straight games, where he performed worse and worse as the games went on.

If a LD gets injured, boom, he’s in. If a RD gets injured it will be interesting to see if Bouch is recalled (assuming they aren’t starting with 8 healthy D on the roster) or if Jones/Russell flip over to the right side and Lagesson gets ice.