Free Agency 2012

On a different note, there is one rumour I would like to be true. It appears we may be negociating with Shane Doan's people...

DRIZ wrote:
I think this is where I don't understand the +/- ratings. Jackman was on the stingiest team in the league for goals given up. He played most of his minutes against the top line and on the penalty kill. He was our no1 stay at home d-man and he gets a -21 rating....it dosen't work out!!

That said, I would rather have seen us use his cap hit elsewhere. $3.5m is rather steep!!!

Driz......your Jackman was a +20.....I was talking about Calgarys Tim not Barret

Driz......your Jackman was a +20.....I was talking about Calgarys Tim not Barret [/quote]

Oooooohhhhh .

Even with his +20...I still think we overpaid

DRIZ wrote:

Even with his +20...I still think we overpaid

Would you rather have Ryan Suter's or Duncan Keith's +15? Or Brent Burns' +8? Or Mark Streit's -27?

Admittedly they all put up better numbers G+A than Jackman but still.....

Driz ignore Leafys overcomplicated take on +/- and listen to Buffs simple guide.

If you have a negative rating your team has conceded more goals than it has scored whilst you have been on the ice.
If you have a positive rating your team has scored more goals than it has conceded whilst you have been on the ice.

Certain factors can impact on this.
Shorthanded goals do count
Power Play goals do not
Empty Net Goals do not
Penalty Shots do not

Easy.

J-Iggy wrote:He was a -21, but most of the Flames were a big - last season. Also, a lot of that was from that Boston game when they scored nine goals, i think he was a -7 in that game

Happy days

I'd still have Wideman back in Boston though (yes, I realise I'm probably the only Bruins fan who thinks that way). Poor bugger scored the winning goal in a playoff game and the fans still booed him. Morons.

BuffonIdol wrote:Driz ignore Leafys overcomplicated take on +/- and listen to simple Buffs simple guide.

If you have a negative rating your team has conceded more goals than it has scored whilst you have been on the ice.
If you have a positive rating your team has scored more goals than it has conceded whilst you have been on the ice.

Certain factors can impact on this.
Shorthanded goals do count
Power Play goals do not
Empty Net Goals do not
Penalty Shots do not

Easy.

Easier -

Every goal your team scores while you are on the ice, you get +1
Every goal your team concedes while you are on the ice, you get -1
But only when you are at even strength or penalty killing.
Add it up at the end.

leafygiraffe wrote:

BuffonIdol wrote:Driz ignore Leafys overcomplicated take on +/- and listen to simple Buffs simple guide.

If you have a negative rating your team has conceded more goals than it has scored whilst you have been on the ice.
If you have a positive rating your team has scored more goals than it has conceded whilst you have been on the ice.

Certain factors can impact on this.
Shorthanded goals do count
Power Play goals do not
Empty Net Goals do not
Penalty Shots do not

Easy.

Easier -

Every goal your team scores while you are on the ice, you get +1
Every goal your team concedes while you are on the ice, you get -1
But only when you are at even strength or penalty killing.
Add it up at the end.

Even easier-

If you are shit you get -
If you are good you get a +
Just like school.

The reason any team should want Wideman on their team

I just knew you were going to post that one

mchomer wrote:

Even easier-

If you are shit you get -
If you are good you get a +
Just like school.

Surely in today's luvvy duvvy eco hippy everyone is equal school, if you are good you get a 0, and if you are shit you get a 0. Then you play football for England.

Calamity Jane wrote:I just knew you were going to post that one

Someone had to

mc_homer wrote:

Calamity Jane wrote:I just knew you were going to post that one

Someone had to

I'd heard about this, but that is the first time i've seen it.....it's awesome

I keep replaying it about 10 times already, but I still can't work out how he managed it....I'd still have him back

EN Goals do affect a dudes +/-, by the way, because it is still 6 on 6.

Alexei Emelin signed a 2 year deal with the Habs.

The Monster to Detroit. Two year contract $1.5m per year.

Sportsnet live stream on free agency here. Currently talking Sens.

John Mitchell to the Avs. Two years.

Ray Whitney for 2 years to the Stars very happy with that even if he is old lol

Tanner Glass to Pens
Arron Asham to NYR
Filip Kuba to Panthers
Penner staying in LA

Wake me up when something important happens.

Jason Garrison off to the Canucks

Sheldon Souray off to Anaheim

Chris mason going back to Nashville..... ahhhh free agency dont u just miss it?

We've got a fighter. Prust signed for a year.

It's fair to say I'm not enamoured with the extremely early activity of the Habs

Whitney I was happy about but Rome? Not sure I understand that move especially for 3 years.

Nieuwendyk said he is hopeful of Dillon making the team and is going to give him every opportunity to succeed. With this in mind we now have 9 Dmen ready for the NHL so something has to give. My guess is after Goligoski, Robidas, Daley and Larsen the rest will fight for the last couple of spots with the ones who don't make it going to the AHL so we could see Pardy buried there. That or a trade is coming!

rugby-leafhockeyrocker wrote:

Sheldon Souray off to Anaheim

11 million over 3 years. 35 years old. Thoughts, Homer?