Runaway Train

I’m worried about you, I’m worried about me

The curves around midnight aren’t easy to see

To try and get off now is about as insane

As those who wave lanterns at runaway trains

-Rodney Crowell

I wonder if these kids who go high in the draft have any idea about the kind of impact they have on their bosses. Should RNH and Taylor Hall become impact players and bring glory to the Oilers, GM Steve Tambellini and coach Tom Renney (plus others) will see their stock rise in the NHL men’s club and possibly have a long run of success in Edmonton.

I think this week got away from Tom Renney a little, and I’m not at all certain it was his fault. Although we speculate on what he meant, let’s review his words.

  • Renney: “It’s important to know that we’re coaching to win, too. As much as those three kids with Ryan can help generate offence, it’s also a case of what you take, but what you leave."
  • Renney: “We have to work that angle, as well, and make sure that he continues to make a solid contribution to our team, so at the end of the day when you look at his situation specifically, we look at the body of work here and determine whether he’s going to stay here or we have to send him back. I want to make sure that we’re able to go after our games as well at that same time not having given the kid the short-end of the stick in terms of his evaluation to be here.”

Source is here. All of these Renney quotes are reflected in Robin Brownlee’s recent item here at ON–the head coach is asking them to do their homework, eat their veggies, do the due diligence.

I think Renney’s tactics were also a little about getting the kids to re-focus in the offensive end. There was a "too cute" look to their performances lately, trying to make a quick move in tight to get a better chance. The problem is that NHL defensemen will shut that down tighter than a drum in a heartbeat, so boring things like getting it deep or shooting it instead of stickhandling are the better percentage play.

Last night’s RNH goal is an example of what the kid can do–it was a quick release made at a point in the sortie when a pass was still an option and the play was still developing–and probably brought a smile from the coach.

I talked to Jason Gregor on Nation Radio yesterday and he had a great explanation for all the fuss surrounding coach Renney’s words about RNH. Gregor was at the media scrum (it was about 5 reporters) and explained it this way:

  • Gregor: "He (Renney) was throwing out a few ideas and I think a few guys jumped the gun on it. He said it was an option (HS) he might look at, but you’re not going to sit down a guy who has 40% of your goals."
  • Gregor: "He told all three kids that ‘you guys are in great position with the puck, you have to shoot the puck.’"

I think Jason nailed it. This isn’t much ado about nothing, but it’s also not the story it turned into after the fact. Tom Renney’s job is to win hockey games and not screw up RNH’s development. If the kid isn’t performing at a level that suggests he can contribute this season they should send him away. And the decision about whether or not to send him back is close, so it is understandable that the coach is considering options like a healthy scratch.


We’ve talked at length about the value of elevating kids during their entry level contract. Some feel RNH should go back to junior no matter what, others feel he needs to prove that he can contribute at least offensively.

Here’s a bulletin: this kid can do things in all three zones. He is a brilliant turnover machine, going stealth at times or simply picking a pocket at other times. He’s made more Doug Weight saucer brilliant passes in 7 games than I’ve seen since the actual Doug Weight, and last night he murdered New York City with a splendid release that Joe Sakic would have been proud to own.

Tom Renney, being of sound mind, will keep Nugent-Hopkins this season and play the living daylights out of him. However, he should also have the freedom to HS RNH or any player if he feels that’s an option that will help his player and team win hockey games.

Should the Oilers send RNH back to junior, then I believe we can openly question their stated mission: that winning is what this season is all about and all things will be about winning hockey games (over development). NOTHING Tom Renney has said this fall suggests that is a possibility. Look, the kid has not only passed he’s getting straight A’s. What can we complain about? A few faceoffs? An unusual haircut? An overbite? 

Really, I’ve got nothing. He’s already doing things some of the older kids haven’t figured out and he’s doing them in defensive and offensive zones. He can’t fight and he can’t play goal. After that, we’re just going to have to watch him.

In Edmonton.

  • I’ve been to 3 games so far and I can say this about Omark, the play dies on his stick almost every time he has the puck, whether he gets pushed off the puck, makes a bad pass or just dumps the puck in, he makes very low percentage plays and away from the puck he seems out of position. I wouldn’t complain about Omark if he made better plays with the puck then he has, if his scoring chance’s were more then his give away’s. I do like his effort in the offensive zone but away from the puck he definitely doesn’t try as hard and that drives me nut’s. To bad because I thought he might have a break out year.

    At the games this year that I’ve been to, I like to watch Potter play, and while Potter has been an early surprise so far, I cant help but admire Smid! To me he’s been one of the best Oilers this year!
    I also cant help but cringe every time Whitney’s on the ice, he has been caught out of position at least 5 times, has had the most glaring give aways. Gave up the most odd man rush’s, He has to get better soon.

  • Wanyes bastard child

    I love how a first overall pick with 7 points in 7 games – including 5 goals – and who has demonstrated amazing stick skills, agility, speed and judgment, is being judged as a “close call” to send back to the minors.

    Phbbt. Don’t manufacture drama where there is none.

  • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

    @ Captain Obvious. It’s not that I don’t like Omark, it’s that I don’t like having players in offensive roles that don’t produce.

  • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

    I was thinking about Barker from last night some more and some comments made this morning from Lowetide and friends earlier in this article. From my previous experience I would almost think Barker was on anti-depresant meds… seriously… a lack of emotion, lack of drive, just kinda Being there but not being in the game. For anybody who’s ever been on them and tried to play hockey it’s tough… I have been there. Heck that season guys could even give me a good whack and I would be like… oh well… any other season there would have been a hack back. Charting Barkers career from high first round draft pick, winning the Stanley Cup, getting a HUGE contract, and then ultimately getting traded and waved would depress me too. Just my 2 cents.

    • It isn’t a conspiracy. Here are some things that we know are true.

      1) We know perceptions are affected by expectations.
      2) We know expectations are affected by discourse.
      3) We know that people retrospectively redefine narratives based upon outcomes.

      The question isn’t whether this happens. It is a fact that it does and it doesn’t require a conspiracy The only question is whether these very common phenomenon are occurring in this case. I’ve given some preliminary reasons that it is. I first noticed it happening last season. What I’ve only recently noticed is that others have independently observed these phenomena in this case.

      I know that know one likes to be told that their thoughts are not free but you’re thoughts are not free.

      • Is it mid-term season in the Sociology department, or is your thinking this convoluted all the time?

        He isnt a very good player. He isnt effective offensively and he is a defensive zone nightmare. That’s why he was slated to be the extra forward, that’s why the coach doesnt trust him, that’s why he’s finding so much time in the Press Box.

        I cant believe that you cant look at his benchings and press box time and link them to his complete and utter lack of ability to grasp the coach’s defensive system. He is irresponsible away from the puck. He gives up more than he creates. He was fine when the motto was ELPH, but when wins matter Omark shouldnt be on the ice.

        • melancholyculkin

          This is exactly what Captian Obvious is getting at. Your conclusions are not supported by the available data and yet you keep stating them as if they are a fact. It’s called the illusion of validity.

          Over a much larger sample size than 5 games the data says that Omark can score. He scored 27 points in 51 games last year. A pace that when projected out over a full season matches golden boy Jordan Eberle’s output. He did this while getting killed by the percentages. 957 PDO.

          He scored over a PPG in the Swedish Elite League 3 years ago, and .643 PPG in the KHL two years ago. Then he came over and scored over a PPG in the AHL.

          Everywhere that Omark has played he has produced offense. So stating unequivocally that Omark isn’t effective offensively is ignoring the evidence.

          Omark was a positive Corsi player last year. Even adjusting for zone start he’s break even. So I’m not quite sure where the idea that he’s giving it all back is coming from. It’s also not in his scoring chance numbers:

          Middle of the pack. Other than a couple bad games to start this year, where is the evidence that Omark is a defensive liability? There isn’t any that I can find.

          Oiler fans don’t like Omark because he doesn’t have long hair or give cliche-filled interviews.

  • OldSchool

    Archaeologuy, do you know what a tautology is?

    Assuming you don’t, it means that you can’t use the coaches decision as evidence that the coaches decision was correct.

    • I was calling for the coach to bench him before he ever did.

      Can I use evidence like, he missed his assignment against Bouwmeester vs Calgary, or his horrendous +/-, or the fact that his defensive disabilities have been noticed since training camp 1 year ago?

      Can I use his terrible shooting % as proof that he makes low % plays, or do I just have to suffice with his Goal totals?

      What I’m asking is, what else would you like to overlook in order to try and disqualify the right answer?

      • melancholyculkin

        So because Corsi challenges your narrative suddenly it’s useless?

        If Omark was truly so terrible defensively it would reflected in his shot against numbers and his scoring chance WOWY. It is not.

        The argument that Renney is right because Omark sucks, and that Omark sucks because Renney is right is pretty cirular.

        I think Renney is a good coach and mostly like the way he’s using running the bench this year, but the decision to play guys like Jones and Eager over Omark is baffling and flies in the face of the data.

        You can’t use Omark’s sh% as evidence about low percentage plays because the sample size is too small. Randomness soaks sh% data, so much larger sample size is needed to draw any conlusions.

        The larger sample size of Omarks play in Europe and the minors suggests that he is better than a 6.5% shooter.

        If Omark only made low percentage plays then it would be reflected in low scoring chance numbers. It is not. Omark was middle of the pack in terms of creating scoring chances last year.

        None of your arguments have any data to back them up. They rely solely on your own biased “saw him bad” analysis.

        • Ok. So his performance in the NHL cant be judged unless it’s judged favourably? Is that what I’m getting from you? Data is inconclusive unless it suggests he’s middle of the pack?

          Sample size is too small unless it tells us Omark is just fine? Shooting percentage, goals, plus/minus, or the coach’s decisions have 0 weight on the analysis of Linus Q. Omark? Good luck with that evaluation carrying any weight. It’s a nice excercise though, evaluating a player’s effectiveness without ever using his performance on the ice as a determining factor in your judgement.

          Do you want to know why Eager and Jones are playing and Omark isnt? They are successful in the roles the coaching staff have given them and Omark is not. That is it. Pretty simple.

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            “Sample size is too small unless it tells us Omark is just fine?”

            I was just going to say that, funny how sample size is big enough in some cases but too small in others.

            We wont have to worry about it much longer though, wont be long now before Omark is out of the league.

          • Interesting take. I definitely would put money on Omark having an NHL career.

            The idea that a guy with his track record is done without having played a full season yet is absurd.

            Omark has played with Belanger and Paajarvi all season. His results are virtually identical to theirs, but he is the problem?

            This is exactly the type of player Detroit steals from other teams who didn’t understand what they had.

            The team doesn’t put him in a good position to succeed offensively, and then they are surprised when he doesn’t succeed offensively. It’s embarrassing.

          • He averaged more PP time per game than Smyth has. He’s been put in a position to succeed at a specific role. He just hasnt so far.

            Omark is the kind of player that Detroit keeps their distance from because he’s apparently difficult to coach and coasts in his own zone.

          • You mean the same Smyth that plays on the same PP unit as Omark and also has no PP points? Weird. Same unit as MPS, who coincidentally also has no PP points. Must all be Omarks fault I guess right?

            Are you basing your entire evaluation of his PP contribution on a 14 minute stretch in which NONE of his linemates scored either?

            What about last year when Gagner led Oiler forwards in PP minutes with about 200 minutes and had 9 points while Omark had 8 points in 134 minutes? Omark scored at close to the rate of Hall and Eberle, but now after a 14 minutes stretch he can’t contribute?

            Can I accurately describe your opinion here as being 2nd unit PP minutes is all an offensive player needs to say he had a great opportunity to put up offense, no matter how he is used at evens?

          • What is Paajarvi’s role? They are on the same line, and play on the same PP unit and play similar minutes. By your definition of his role MPS should go too.

            You leaping all over the place. I love discussing this, but I’m not interesting in debating a moving target.

            Here is a recap of the last few of posts:

            Me: They are not using him in an appropriate role

            you: yes they are because of X

            ME: X doesn’t make sense because of Y

            you: well he needs to play the role he’s given

            Why so circular? Let me repeat the basic question – why do you expect offense from him when NOBODY else playing in the same role is producing offense either?

          • Crackenbury

            Paajarvi brings size, skill, pk and pp potential. He’s multi-dimensional and has lots of upside. Omark is a one-trick pony whose only trick isnt working right now.

          • Yet where are the results? Paajarvi scored at a slower pace than Omark last year, and he hasn’t done anything yet this year.

            Lets look at what you say he brings:

            Size – he is bigger yet Omark plays a more aggressive physical game.

            Skill – not as much as Omark

            PK potential – granted

            PP potential – again not as much as Omark

            Omark wins more puck battles than MPS and he disrupts the defense more than MPS – at this point in time the ONLY things MPS has over Omark is size and speed. Everyone wants to credit him with defensive play and point out Omark’s -16 while ignoring the fact that MPS was -13. Gagner was -17.

            My point here isn’t that MPS isn’t worth keeping, it’s to point out that while everyone is crapping all over Omark he is far from alone.

            He has played 5 games this season. It gets even more frustrating when people who usually unceasingly advocate patience suddenly have none because something about Omark happens to rub them the wrong way.

          • Crackenbury

            You’re obviously a fairly bright guy. Your argument supporting Omark is well thought out and probably valid considering its only been 5 games. It doesn’t change my opinion that Omark doesn’t serve much of a purpose on this team. There are too many skilled players ahead of him in the lineup that bring more to the table.

          • Who specifically?

            On the right you have Hemsky and Eberle. Jones is not more skilled and I will never agree that brings more to the table except that he happens to be taller.

            Where will Hemsky be next year? Do you think he will be back? I hops so, but it’s far from certain. Who is our 2RW then?

            On the left you have Hall and Smyth. MPS is placed ahead of him on most people’s lists, but he hasn’t done any more than Omark has yet.

            How long will Smyth be around? Even on the left side the argument could be made for Omark as the second liner long term, and if you want to put MPS ahead of him they are still both second liners depending on the status of Hemsky and Smyth.

            For that matter, the Horcoff/Smyth line has been wading in the muck to the point that I would now consider them a classic 3rd line checking group, making the Omark/Paajarvi line already the second line.

            Anyways, I don’t see how you can be so certain that we have a bunch of guys ahead of him for years to come. We don’t.

            One other thing I don’t get about Renney – Omark has had his best results overseas playing LW and Paajarvi apparently had his best results playing RW. Why don’t they try switching them for a few games?

          • Crackenbury

            Or bring up Hartikainen, switch Paarjarvi to RW and move Omark to a team that can use him as a top 6 forward. He’ll never play top 6 on this team and his lack of size makes him ineffective as a 3rd or 4th liner.

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            If it was up to me, PRV would be getting close to seeing some time in the AHL.

            I think Omark is a candidate to be out of the league soon because he is 24, PRV is 20. If in 3-4 years Paajarvi is still a 30-40 point player, he better have established himself as a defensive stalwart… or I’ll be talking about how he is also closing in on a one way ticket back to Europe.

          • Omark is the kind of player that Detroit keeps their distance from because he’s apparently difficult to coach and coasts in his own zone.

            You mean like Hudler, who has been given chance after chance, or their new prized prospect Tatar?

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            I don’t mean soon as in the next 2 weeks, I mean soon as in the next 18 months or so.

            I’m sure he’ll get a shot somewhere else before packing up and heading home.

          • melancholyculkin

            Your assertions are that Omark cannot score, not just that he hasn’t scored, but that he is incapable of scoring.

            You are basing this, as far as I can tell, on the 5 games that Omark has played this year.

            I am looking at Omark’s history of professional hockey and seeing that he has a history of scoring, and that he has scored in the NHL. These are facts. They are not based an anything other than what Omark has done on the ice.

            I’m not making this stuff about shooting percentage being prone to randomness and normalizing over time up. It has been investigated numerous times:


            The data isn’t inconclusive, it supports the conclusion that Omark can contribute offensively and is at least a break even player defensively.

            “evaluating a player’s effectiveness without ever using his performance on the ice”

            Do you have any idea what things the data I’m using measures? It measures Omark’s performance on the ice. If he couldn’t score then he wouldn’t have a history of scoring. If he was such a liability defensively then he would be giving up shots and scoring chances at a rate worse than average. He isn’t. The data that measures his performance on the ice all say that your assertions are wrong.

            Again, you are providing no evidence to the contrary other than your own biased observations and some circular logic about Tom Renney being right because Tom Renney is right.

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            I don’t think anyone thinks he CANT score… ie he’s incapable of scoring… we think he’s incapable of scoring at a rate needed to justify his ice time.

            And no that isn’t based off 0 goals in 5 games, it’s based off 5 goals in 56 games.

          • melancholyculkin

            Which is where sh% comes in. Again the argument is circular. Omark’s shooting percentage is low because he can’t score, and he can’t score because his shooting percentage is low. Do you see the fallacy?

            Omark has a history of high shooting percentages. We know that randomness and luck have a huge influence on shooting percentage. Last season Omark had an onsh% of 6.85. We know that onsh% regresses strongly towards 8.5%. So with time, the Omark should stop getting killed by the percentages and the puck will go in more often for him.

            His underlying numbers were strong last year, so the only problem was his low sh%. There are two explanations for this. Omark has “no finish” and his success in Europe and the AHL is all a mirage, or he was unlucky. The former is possible, but seeing how he has a history of high sh% and we know that shooting percentage is highly influenced by luck and randomness and evens out over time, I’ll go with where the data is leading me and bet on the latter.

            Fun fact: Omark scored 1.78 P/60 at 5v5 last season. A rate identical to Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle.

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            You keep telling me he has a history of high shooting % … yet I’ve never seen you site a source showing this high shooting %.

            I’ve also never seen anything that shows that shooting % translates from Europe to the NHL.

            Go ahead and keep giving him credit for something he’s never done before… I’ll wait for him to actually do it.

          • melancholyculkin

            He shot 8.99% in the Swedish Elite league in 2006-07, 18.70% in 2008-09, 19.05% in the KHL in 2009-10 and 19.44% in the AHL through 28 games last year.

            So there’s that.

          • You’re going back to that well?

            How about the fact that he put up points at the same rate as Hall last year?

            It took Gagner 58 games, getting a lot more playing time than Omark gets, to score his 5th goal, and that was during his best offensive season. Run him out of town too.

            When did it become ok to cherry pick 1 stat so narrowly? This conversation felt like decent discussion until I read this comment.

            Now it all makes sense. All NHLers should be judged entirely by their first 50 games in the league. If they are snake bit or used incorrectly by their coach, too bad. Screw them, they can go play in Russia, because they will never adjust to the league and become effective players. Especially if after 5 games into their next season they don’t have any points yet. All good players put up a minimum of 2 points in every 5 game segment of their career.

            This will probably be my last response ever to the “5 goals last year” argument because I consider it beyond idiotic.

          • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

            Like I said to the other fellow, you go ahead and give him credit for something he hasn’t accomplished yet. I’ll wait until his shooting % sky rockets before I give him credit for it.

          • Yeah, why would I question the validity of the stats you use and how you interpret them when you say things like Linus Omark has scored in the NHL before?

            You’re right, he has scored in the NHL before. 5 times. That’s 1 whole goal more than Smid in his career. Quite the scoring machine.

          • melancholyculkin

            1.78 P/60 at 5v5 last year. The same as Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle.

            0.53 PPG. Tied for 153 in the league for all forwards who played at least 40 games. The same scoring rate as Brad Marchand and James Van Riemsdyk, and in the same neighbourhood as Travis Zajac, Blake Wheeler and Derek Stepan.

            All this while getting killed by the percentages with a 957 PDO.

            What else do you need before you admit that Omark has produced offense in the NHL?

          • I’ve already argued for his ineffectiveness offensively and defensively. His inability to grasp the defensive system. His lack of success in the roles he was given. And a myriad of other points. That you choose to ignore them us not my problem.

    • And who should come out if he goes back in? He isnt good enough to crack the roster when it’s softened by injury. What is going to happen when the Oilers get their best RW back in Hemsky?

      Omark isnt good enough to play on this team. There really isnt any other conclusion that can be reached.

  • If I remember correctly Bowmeester wasn’t Omark’s guy. Bowmeester was the fourth man on the rush and Omark was the fifth guy back. If I recall correctly Eberle wiffed on that play.

    But none of that is to the point. I don’t have a problem with Eberle playing instead of Omark, I have a problem with Ryan Jones playing instead of Omark. Ryan Jones should be battling Ben Eager and Pettrell for playing time (and losing).

    If it were me when Hemsky comes back I’d put Lander in the AHL and Belanger with Eager/Jones and Petrell, and Gagner centering Paajarvi and Omark. I’d roll four lines and adjust playing time to game circumstances.

    • Problem here is about roles and success. Jones has a role on the PK and on the Horc line, and to a great degree they have been successful. Omark had a roll on the PP and with Paajarvi, and to a large extent has been unsuccessful.

      While the Horc-Smyth-Jones combo is successful (and Jones is scoring goals) I dont see him moved to make room for Omark.

  • Fabian Brunnstrom

    Brunnstrom is an absurd comparable, he never came within a mile of the success Omark had overseas. He couldn’t even make the SEL until he was 22.

    You make some good points about Omark, because it’s true, so far this season he hasn’t has the results.

    The problem is he clearly has a track record demonstrating that he should probably be able to score in the NHL. You can’t just write that off because it fits your narrative to ignore it.

    No, it doesn’t guarantee he will score, but dismissing it as irrelevant doesn’t help your case. It just makes you seem unwilling to look at all the data.

    Why don’t you just admit you dislike him and leave it at that?

  • I feel sorry for Omark, hes not playing bad at all, and hes obviously not on this organizations radar for the future. The organization needs to either play him or trade him, cause I think its poor asset management to destroy his value if hes eating shrimp cocktail with Teddy Peckman. I hope the organization can trade him to good team, and that he turns into an effective player elsewhere. The overall data on Omark shows he could be an effective second line player capable of putting up 40-50 points per year somewhere, but it doesn`t appear its going to happen here.

    The way I see it is that team needs to be working towards having 7-8 core players. You look at Chicago, they have Kane, Toews, Sharp, Hossa, Bolland, Keith, Seabrook, and Crawford.
    If your looking at the Oilers two years down the road can you honestly say that Omark is in the mix. He`s a complimentary player, not a cornerstone. The cornerstones moving forward are Hall, Eberle, RNH, Hemsky, Whitney (if healthy or still here), probably a probably one of Klefbaum, Marincin, or Gernat, one of Pitlick or Hamilton. The goalie we don`t know if that will be Dubby, Bunz or someone else.

    The debate on Omark is how best to handle him from an asset management position. Right now, I don`t believe hes a liability defensively, and if Renney`s sits him in the pressbox then we are not going to see a good return for him. Handled properly he could yield a mid second round draft pick. The way he`s being handled he won`t yield that.

  • Cowbell_Feva

    Arch-guy, I usually agree with you because you call a spade a spade, and don’t read much into bullsh*t statistical reviews-rather you get your take from actually watching the game yourself.

    I don’t quite agree with you on RNH’s speed-or lack thereof- however. I find him to have excellent speed..when he needs it. He seems to already have the defensive zone figured out and many times has stripped players behind the Oilers net and carried the puck out using his speed. Case in point against NYR he literally used great speed to break out of his zone in the 3rd and created a 2 on 1 with Eberle- singlehandedly based on his speed. There was a man that used to wear 66 in Pittsburgh that conserved his energy wisely and used it only when needed.

    Now I know he is no Mario, but I’m not sure anyone can knock his speed. Now Andy Sutton maybe..

  • Crackenbury

    I’m a numbers guy by trade, but not when it comes to sports. Knowing how a stat can be found to support pretty much either side of an argument I prefer to let my eyes be the judge and my eyes tell me Omark “Sucks the Hind Banana”. He is totally redundant on this team and serves no purpose. Get what you can for him and move on.

  • Omark has talent. Alot of undervalue him. Me too at times. I get frustrated with the lack of push back from him in game situations. He has to give me less of the slick youtube guy and more of the hard on the puck guy we have seen from him. Right now numbers don’t favor him to be in the lineup. But things change as we saw last year. Dosen’t hurt to have Omark in the pressbox for a few games. Neither will hurt MP or any other Oiler including RNH.

    Part of my concern as always is player burnout during the long NHL season. Keeping a guy like Omark hungry for the time being serves the greater purpose of winning games. Be assured though Omark is a vital and important asset to the Edmonton Oilers organization.

  • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

    @ Arch do you remember who else had a low shooting percentage but was supposed to revert back to the mean? (and actually had a proven, higher NHL shooting percentage… Rather then the make believe higher shooting percentage that we. Keep getting fed to us). POS

  • OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F


    See, that wasn’t much harder then just talking about how high it was. Now, if he can just get anywhere close to that in NHL we’ll be onto something… Ill believe it when I see it though.