The Hockey PDOcast - Dom's models and Andy's odds

Episode Date: October 12, 2022

Dimitri is joined by guests Dom Luszczyszyn of The Athletic and Andy MacNeil of VSiN. They discuss the most interesting findings from Dom's sophisticated models. Andy MacNeil uses his sports betting background to assess some of the Stanley Cup favourites this season. Andy and Dom also use their expertise to discuss how the odds stack up for each of the major NHL Awards.This podcast is produced by Dominic Sramaty. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

dressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey Pediocast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey-Pediocast. My name is Dmitri Pilipovich. And joining me again as we sort out through these technical difficulties, it's my good buddy, Doml was chish and Dom. What's going on, man? Oh, it's been so long since I've talked to you.

It's a pleasure to be here. Oh, you sound amazing. No more echo, no more reverberations. It's good old Dom, so I'm excited about this. also joining us. You heard the echoes too because I thought that was just on my end. I was trying to talk to it. It was so odd. Oh no. It was absolutely. I think everyone was hearing it. So I'm glad that we've sorted that out by the looks of it. Also joining us, our pal Andy McNeil. Andy, what's going on? Hey, yeah, I think I think I don't feel as bad now that I was so awkward trying to answer your questions

because I couldn't hear half of them and I could only hear myself talking when I was talking. So I'm glad we're through that and we can talk about hockey now. Let's do it. So let's start it back up from the top. I'm going to repeat it just because I really want to get this conversation going as smooth as possible. So what I was saying was, I was listening to the Low Post podcast, and they were talking about how in the NBA there's a concern this season that the bad teams are going to be especially

incentivized to just completely blow it up and strip it down. And anyone that's performing well and actually helping them try to win games, try to trade them a way to increase their odds of getting the number one overall pick because it's a generational talent in this year's class. And we can kind of apply a similar principle, of course, a different league, but a similar principle in the NHL this season with Connor Bardard and how good he looks and how teams are just salivating over the idea of potentially adding him into the mix and instantly getting better next season because he's already that good. Dom, how do we model for this? How do we recalibrate the models? Because I remember last year, actually, you and I

at a similar point in the season, had a conversation. At that point, it looked like it was going to be the sabres and the coyotes, kind of divvying it out between who's going to be the worst team and who was going to get the number one overall odds. And we decided that at some point you couldn't really even drop their projection beyond, but below 60 points because it would be, you know, too egregious. You have to assume some level of competency. How do we do that this season, acknowledging that it might even be kind of applied

to a larger extreme with the desire to get a Connor Medard. yeah like last year and like most years there's a reason we don't go down to 60 points and we saw it with the sabers last year it's because sometimes they surprised and sabers did they had around 75 points and they went above their projection even though a lot of people thought that they would be so much worse and that's the thing even at the bottom sometimes teams do surprise and you have to project for those surprises and keep that in mind and not put a number that is too low where they're saying even at the bottom sometimes teams do surprise and you have to project for those surprises and keep that in mind and not put a number that is too low where there is not enough space on the low end for those usual disappointments, but this year is obviously a bit different where there is not only a generational talent, but a very deep, deep trap where right off the bat, there seems to be four teams, five teams that are already incentivized to lose. And one of them, in particular Chicago Blackhawks, have been so extremely blatant about it that it is a bit difficult.

And already tonight, I think they're odd. against the avalanche, obviously the best or whatever, the best team of the league, is already plus 350, which I've never seen ever on an opening night. And it's a hard thing to model because there are still some good players in a team that are keeping it afloat.

And generally speaking, I assume they will play the entire season, but this year for the first time, I have baked in some logic that they will be traded. So guys like Kane, Taves, don't mean that's going to see you, normally I would project them to play 70 to 80 games, but for the Blackhawks, because my

model projection was so off market, I just said might as well be logical here and project Kane to play 40 or 50 games instead, because there's a very good chance he's traded, and once I did that, they were closer to where they should be, but even then, there's a lot of people who think that somewhere around 65, 67 points is still too high, and I'm not sure how to model that because I do think the Blackhawks might still struggle to hit that bar. Yeah, Andy, in the 2014-15 season, when Connor McDavid was going to be available and teams were really doing everything they possibly could,

including the Sabres, trading away Michael Neuver at some point because he was actually giving them a bubbly average goaltending. And I remember there was a coyote Sabres game in there that year, I believe in Buffalo, where the fans were cheering for the coyotes to win so that it would improve the Sabres odds at the draft. That year, Buffalo finished with 54 points. the coyotes finish with 56 points, and the Oilers finish with 62.

So when we're talking about these lines, you know, we've got Arizona, I believe, 64.5, Chicago, 68 and a half, and then you get, like, Montreal and Philly in the low 70s. Should we be looking at that? Was that 2014-15 season just such an entire aberration in that regard in terms of how bad those teams really got? Or do you think that the fact that Badares kind of coming around and we're generally considering them to be the best prospect since McDavid, that we should be thinking about that in terms of what we expect for how badly these teams really could bottom out. Yeah, so I think we're probably on that same sort of path. I mean, when you look, if the Chicago Blackhawks do move on from Patrick Kane and Jonathan Taves,

this is going to be a horrible hockey team, maybe one of the worst offensive teams in the modern area. It's made up of entirely fringe NHLers, right, outside of really Kane and Taves. So, I mean, I think we could be looking at some really bad teams in Chicago and Arizona. And I would assume that the Bidar sweet stakes have something to do with that. But I honestly don't really worry myself a whole lot. Like, Dom, I baked in some logic. I think I've got Kane and Paves, you know, only playing until the trade deadline, maybe a little earlier than that and, you know, tried to account for that happening.

but I'm not going to stretch things too far from a betting perspective because I'm not I'm not really rushing out here to bet on these teams to go under 66 points or 64 points or whatever the total is right now right so it's because that that's pretty tough to do like you guys mentioned so I like to just approach things on a game-to-game basis from a from the betting side of things and take things like that because I like to approach things on a game-to-game basis from a bet from the betting side of things and take things like that because because you don't really need to worry about what's happening next, right? It's just every game is its own handicap, and that's how I kind of approach things throughout the season in regards to these really bad teams. Tom, I know that your model had the Flyers' third lowest after Arizona and Chicago. It's still like a pretty big gap between those teams.

We'll see how it goes in year one of John Tortorella. I feel like there's plenty of potential for combustion. And if you look at this roster, obviously with Sean Couturey and Ryan L is being injured right out of the gate, it's fairly similar to the group we saw last year. I guess you're kind of baking in. Hopefully Kevin Hayes will be able to play a full season and he will be a difference maker for them.

They added Tony DeAngelo. But beyond that, it's a team that was in the bottom five in pretty much every single metric class season. And I know that the athletic did a fan poll and Fires fans, 1.7% of them, graded themselves as being, optimistic about this team's outlook. What do you think the odds are of this team of kind of rather than sort of just being

mediocre, kind of being bad every once in a while, but still being competent? Like, I feel like we should acknowledge a slight possibility at least that things just go so badly off the rails with this team and everything combusts and they potentially join that group that we're talking about here at the bottom. Yeah, they definitely could, especially without Sean Couturee. I think of all the bottom team. the Flyers' vibes are the most off. And as much as we like to model things,

sometimes the vibes tell a lot, and there's a reason that their entire fan base is so pessimistic about this team. At the same time, I think last year was a bit of a worst-case scenario for them, and I don't think even if the team has become worse this off-season, that they will be that bad again. I think, sadly, for Flyers fans who want to tank, this team has a lot of competent players compared to teams like Chicago and Arizona. And with Tordorale behind the bench, that first year coach bump, I think they might not be in,

it's a very real possibility they might not be in the thick of that race because there's a bit too much challenge. They still have Kine, Therby, Atkinson, Hayes, as you mentioned. They have some OKD with Pravrov and Sanheim and DeAngelo is fine on the power play as well. So teams like Arizona and Chicago, they don't have as much. Chicago obviously has Kane, but you know they're doing everything they can to get rid of him. And Billy just has a bit more.

Yes, I guess the bar is very low to clear in that regard. So, yeah, you got me there. Andy, like looking at the opposite end of things, right, the obvious kind of opposite extreme here, thinking about the incentive for the top teams, I think the Leafs are kind of in their own discussion here because I think the incentive is pretty clear to stay out of the Atlantic Division bracket

and try to play a wildguard team in round one so for them to try to finish atop the Atlantic and get as many points they can in the regular season, that makes a lot of sense. When you look at a team like Colorado, though, for example, who obviously just won the Cup last year, is it fair to kind of wonder about what their own incentive is going to be

throughout this regular season in terms of pacing themselves and potentially not needing to have, have, you know, Kail McCarr and Devon Dave's out there for 27 minutes a night in a random back-to-back regular season game when they clearly have higher aspirations moving forward. Yeah, I don't know. Like, I do wonder about that. But I think, like, I mean, you look at, you look at Colorado last year, the, the injuries

kind of, kind of pace them for themselves, I guess, you know what I mean? Like, Landiskeye missed 31 games, Nishu Kna, Chisky missed 20 games, or 20 games, McKinnon, 17, Taves, 16, cadre, 11, Ranted, 7, even McCar missed a handful of games. Like, I think, you know, there's a couple of different ways this could go. I do wonder about that, but, I mean, you know, I'm not a mind reader, so I just, I just try to stick with what I know. And I think this is obviously an elite hockey team,

and maybe we haven't seen, you know, really the best of this, this group yet. Like McKinnon scored what, 40 goals the last time he played a full 82 game season. So I don't know. It's going to be really interesting to see just how they, like you said, how they pace themselves, how they play each and every night. So I'm excited to find out. Dom, what do you think about that?

Because, you know, Andy alluded to it. We saw it last season. Obviously some of it wasn't intentionally their own doing. It kind of worked out this way. Their entire team was missing because of the COVID protocols for a while. they had injuries here and there throughout. It's not like they planned any of necessarily, but it did work out neatly in the regard that a lot of their top players

actually wound up playing somewhere between like 65 and 70 games as opposed to the full 82, and potentially that helped them in the postseason. On a night-to-night basis, if you know that they've got their full lineup in store, you're clearly going to just expect them to beat anyone they're facing in any given night regardless of where they're playing. But if you're kind of prognosicating for the full season and thinking about, all right, can this team win,

the president's trophy. What are our realistic expectations for what this regular season is going to look like for them after having won the cup the past year? How do we kind of weigh all of those different factors? I think a lot depends on who comes in and takes over the second line center job. I think Nazan Kadri has been bill, and they seem to believe that Alex New Hook can fill them. And apparently he looks very strong in preseason and it should be able to. And I think the quicker he accommodates himself to that role, the better the team is suited for competing for the President's trophy and the Cup. Again, I think from top to bottom, they maybe lost some depth in the off season, but they're still probably the strongest team in the league, and they

have definitely the strongest core with their top guys, and I think just by virtue of having that, they will be in competition for the top seed. Night to night, after winning it all last year, I think there is definitely a possibility that they take it easy and understand that they're good enough to make the playoffs regardless of effort level or whatever. We've seen it with Tampa the past two years where they sort of turn it on come playoffs time. We've seen it in the past with teams like Washington and Pittsburgh. And I think Colorado might do the same thing where the regular season they know it doesn't matter and not as much to them anyways. And they can beat pretty much anything in the league regardless of whether they're giving it at all, every night, especially over 82 games.

So I think they're in the running, but we'll see if they will be right at the top. Well, Dom, I remember this time last year, we had a conversation about the stickiness of metrics from year to year, especially with regards to defensive metrics. And at the time, we were talking, I think, about the Seattle Cracket, and they had all these players who, at their previous stops, had strong defensive metrics, and they were coming together

and kind of what we should expect from that, whether that can carry over. We're going to see some interesting kind of test cases for that, this season, I guess, because some teams who have traditionally been on the extremes of defensive metrics in Dallas, Winnipeg, and then I guess Boston as well, kind of had a bit of a coaching carousel. How do we think about that heading into this season? Do we, especially in terms of applying previous metrics to our expectations of those teams. You got a team like the Bruins who, you know, they're going to have Patrice Bergeron's back. Brad Marshine's going to be out to start

the year. So, Charlie McAvoy, so we need to bake that in. But they've also had this kind of defensive structure or nucleus under Bruce Cassidy for years where it felt like regardless of who was playing, they were going to be one of the stingy's teams in the league. Now they changed their coach and the personnel changes a little bit. I know that your model was quite high on them heading into this season. Do you feel like it's kind of missing that potential thing?

It's just kind of expecting them to kind of carry it over from one year to the next? Or what do you think about that? Yeah, I think so for sure. I think coaching is a huge and tangible element that a lot of models won't be able to pick up on until there's actually games played under that coach. And it's definitely a worry for a team like the Bruins, because Bruce Cassidy, when he came in, he changed the team significantly. They were good under Clodulean, but they couldn't finish.

They couldn't turn their strong possession into tangible results. and he changed that completely, and it was a bit of surprise to see him get fired this summer, and I'm a bit worried at how high my model is on them for that reason, but at the same time, these are still very talented players. The Bruins added a few pieces, and they look deeper than they have in a few years, so it's probably somewhere in the middle

where they're probably, they might not be as good as they have in the past because of that coaching change, but at the same time, they made some additions that make them a stronger team than the one Bruce Cassidy coached last year. Yeah, I guess you could also say that Jim Montgomery coming in, the last time we saw him coaching the Dallas Stars, they had a pretty strong defensive results as well. So you could apply that a little bit here.

Andy, what do you think about that in terms of the Bruins outlook this season? And I guess teams in general that have switched coaches and were on one of those extremes previously. Well, just kind of like my general thoughts on that, I mean, I like to look into kind of the coach speak and whatnot when a guy gets hired to see, you know, what his plans are. And Jim Montgomery didn't do a whole lot of talking when he was hired by the Bruins. But I do remember him saying when he was hired by the Dallas Stars a few years back that he likes to let his horses run and whatnot. So I think, you know, it's going to be something to monitor throughout the season.

I don't really feel that I can quantify it in any way to really price it in to my projections year over year. I guess in a lot of cases when there is a situation like this, I'm kind of just cautiously optimistic, right? That things will work out that way for a team. So, I mean, I'd like to see where it goes, but I need that 15 to 20 games before I really kind of put stock into anything. Okay, fellas, we're going to take a quick break here. You are listening to the HockeyPedio cast on the Sports Night Radio Network. All right, we're back with more from the HockeyPedio cast. Andy, let's get into some actionable stuff here for the listeners.

Let's give out some of our favorite things we're eyeing, heading into the season. It can be individual player point props. It can be awards, props. It can be team lines. Give me anything that you got that really kind of catches your eye as actionable for listeners. All right. Well, I like the Washington Capitals to win the Metropolitan Division. Oh, spicy.

That's 5-50, 8-1. You might even find a little better than that out there. I think that should be priced around 5 to 1. Washington is a team on the rise. No, I'm just kidding. They're a broken-down shell of themselves. but hey, they're a great offensive team. They're a really underrated defensive team.

I don't think Darcy Kemper gets talked about enough. I think, you know, he must be coming into this season with a huge trip on his shoulder, given that he battled through the eye injury and everything. And, you know, it was good enough for the Colorado Avalanche in the end, which obviously, you know, wasn't all that hard, I guess. But he's one of the best regular season goaltenders. is eight percentage the last three to four years,

matches up with a lot of the best trophy favorites. And I think Washington, like I said, is an underrated defensive team. I like the moves that they made in the off season. So I like them to go over their point total as well. I think it's sitting around 95 and a half points at a few shops, and they're a 101 point team, in my opinion. And the second best team in the Metro,

although the New York Rangers did look pretty good on night one there. But yeah, Washington is a team that I like. I also like them to make the playoffs. I think that line has moved a bit. Probably it was sitting at around minus 160, which I think is ridiculous, given that I think they have, you know, upwards of an 80% chance of making the playoffs.

As do I do the Boston Bruins in a similar position. Their odds were around minus 160 to make the playoffs. I think they'll make it upwards of 80, 85% of the time. and both of those lines have moved, but, you know, I mean, it might not be super attractive to lay a minus 100 or a minus 190 and have to wait six months to collect your money, but those are pretty safe bets, all things considered. Yeah, on the goalie point, I know that, you know,

they were pretty fed up with the level of play they got from their goalies last year, and they couldn't wait to walk them out the door and bring Kemper in this off-season. And so I think just some level of stability from that and kind of knowing what to expect from them on a night-to-night basis is going to help that team quite a bit. I think winning the Metro is a bit too spicy for me, just purely because I have very high hopes for a number of teams in there.

And maybe it's just, you know, we kind of being unfair to the Capitals because we kind of know what to expect from this point and it's not the sexy pick. But I think the odds certainly are there. Dom, what do you think about the Capitals and what do you think about the Metro in general? My model is a bit higher on the capitals than it usually is compared to the market. Usually it is a team that the model likes to fade and calls for the under,

and then the season plays out. The capitals get 100 points. So I just ignore usually what it says about the capitals. But this year, because of Kemper, it is higher than the market price. I think their over-under was around 94 points, something like that. And I'm at around 97. So not as high as Andy. So it's not enough for me to...

to put a bet out, but I do like the Boston one he was mentioning. And in terms of the Metro, if there were a bet to, I guess, lay there, I am sort of shocked the Islanders are plus money to miss the playoffs because they missed the playoffs by a lot last year, and they didn't get better. They got worse, if you consider how old the team is and how the field of playoff teams improved around them. So it was a bit shocking to me if the plus 110 for them to miss the playoffs, I think that is a pretty smart bet because I think they are probably north of 60%

to miss the playoffs. I second that. I will say the Metro is certainly tough. I guess the counter here would be the context of last season where they start with how many games on the road. And then it was ultimately, it was a joke that the league allowed them to play some of those games with how many active players. they really had and what their lineup looked like for a number of those games before they kind of

actually put into play as a COVID protocol and started kind of rescheduling games and they were one of the few teams that was shafted because of that before the league adjusted and so if you look at their not necessarily second half splits but especially like that that good chunk in the middle back half of the season it started to normalize much more to being a relatively stingy defensive team that was getting great goaltending and not giving up a ton and that's kind of what we've come to expect from them now you know, Barry Trots is gone, and they didn't really add much in terms of personnel throughout the offseason.

So I get the skepticism. I do think that the context is important. Like, if they come out and they're just winning a bunch of two-one games again, I got to say, I will not be surprised at all. Yeah, yeah. I've had a long history of my model about like the fading them out. And last year was the first year where I was like, hey, this team might actually be good again, then they weren't.

So I'm back on the fade trade. because I just, I don't see it, especially after they let Trots go. And I think the big thing for me is last year they got Vesna Calibur goaltending from Melia Sorokin and still missed the playoffs. So I just, I don't know how much offense there can be there to be confident given just how strong the top eight teams in the, in the E-Star, and how much better Ottawa, Detroit, the Devils, and Columbus look as well. Yeah, I will say that I think Matt Barzal's over-under for points this season is

listed at 63 and a half. And that seems egregiously low for a player that talented, who is like the number one guy on a team's offense. But I guess that kind of ties into what you're saying there about the concerns. Dom, give me, give me one of your favorite ones in terms of where your model kind of disagrees the most with what a team's line has said. Or it can be a player prop as well. I mean, it's not fair that Andy got two and then mentioned my biggest one with the Bruins, but I won't blame him too much because I gave you a lay on. I'll let him have

that one, and if Andy's a Bruins fan talking up the Bruins, I got to go with my guys and talk up the Minnesota Wild. There we go. My model has loved for two years straight and has made me a lot of money, and the market

still isn't as fond of them as I think they should be. I think they're when I wrote my best bets for futures article a few weeks ago, they're over under was around 9,9 and a half. And I think that's moved since to over 100, but I still have them around like 10, 607 points. And there's still room to hit that over.

And the wild since Caprisop came have been on the league's most exciting teams. And I think they've played around 110, 112 point pace for two straight seasons now. And I think even losing Kevin Fiala, they're not getting the respect. they deserve, but that's just always the case of the Wild, and they're my ride or die. And it's not just they're over-under. I like them to win the division, the conference, the Cup, obviously too much smaller degrees. But I think if you want a longer shot, the Wild at 20-to-1 is pretty good.

And if you don't think that they'll beat one of the teams in the East, then the conference is fine as well. That obviously depends on how you see them stacking up to the ablanch. I don't think it's favorable by any means, but the Avalanche did lose a lot of talent the off season that I don't mind the wild odds this year. Yeah, Andy, yesterday when I did players, I'm excited to watch the season.

I talked a lot about Matt Boldy and how I feel like him and Marco Rossi and kind of step in and cover for some of what they're losing with Kevin Fiala's departure. I feel like the perception for this team, especially heading into the off season, was very doom and gloom because last year felt, like, especially after they acquired Mark Andre Fleri,

it was like, all right, we're going to go for it this year. We're going to push our chips in. This is the final year before the buyouts for Paris and Souter kind of become extremely prohibitive and take up 15% of our cap. And then they lose in round one, and then they wind up trading Kevin Fiala for futures, basically. And it feels like people are sort of have been expecting them to take a step back or have missed their window to really kind of compete for a Stanley Cup.

But I look at this roster and I think there's still so much there in place, like like Dawn was saying, to compete. And if you believe that, that's going to be the case. going to hit this over and potentially even challenge Colorado for the central division title, it seems like Caprizov, I think you can get him at like 12 to 1 or something for the heart, maybe even Devin Evanston at 20 to 1 for Jack Adams. It feels like just because of that perception that this team isn't supposed to be as good if they wind up bucking that and actually providing the results,

you're going to be able to fill in that narrative as well of, all right, the coach or the best player kind of carry this team and overcame this obstacle that they had up against the cap. yeah so i'm not as high on the wild as dom is i don't think anybody probably is out there he's uh he's all of us he's all about the minnesota wild as he said there is his favorite team he doesn't like any other team he doesn't cheer for any other team definitely not the charles um but uh yeah so i mean like for me the wild i mean like they're always good but they're never good enough and i kind of think they're still in that stage they're probably heading towards being

one of the elite Stanley Cup contenders they're probably heading towards being an elite Stanley Cup contender in a few years maybe even sooner than that but I think they're still in that kind of transitional phase they're there they can compete they have a chance but like I said I'm not as high on them

and I don't wonder when you mentioned a player like Carrillo Street up as a as a hard trophy bet like are we not in the have to do something amazing or else Connor McDavid is going to win the Hart Trophy kind of era. Like, you know what I mean?

Like, he's going to put up 130 points with his eyes closed and he's going to be the Hart Trophy favorite unless Austin Matthews scores 60 plus goals unless Igor Sesterkin, you know, post a 95% percentage or something wild like that, right? So does Kirill Caprisoff have that ceiling? Like, was last year?

Like, I mean, 108 points last year. Yeah. That seems pretty high. Can he top that? Like, I don't know. Right? So, like, I don't... I don't...

I don't... I've got a really hard time with the Hart trophy bet. I... Some people might disagree with this, maybe the price, but I thought it was a fun bet. I bet on Kail McCar at 15 to 1

to win the Hart trophy, because I think he's capable of putting up 100 points, and I think that would grab a lot of attention, obviously, and the voters just seem enamored with that guy right now. But, um... But, yeah, I mean, I'm not as, I'm not as high on the wild.

Yeah, I guess the argument for Caprizo would be, yeah, he scored 47 goals last year. Let's say he scores 50 and the wild sort of exceed expectations, or at least that public narrative of them taking a step back and actually get better and win more than they did last year and compete with potentially even winning the Central Division in the regular season. I feel like you could craft an argument there pretty handily for Caprizov. Dom, let me give you one of my favorite player props this season. And Andy, you can jump on this one as well.

Jack Hughes over 73.5 points. I guess whenever you take these player props in terms of the points, you're baking in like, okay, if this guy misses time and we've seen Jack Hughes miss significant time, that's going to hurt his chances of reaching this. Last year when he was fully healthy, we saw him, I made this case yesterday, we saw him fully healthy for 35 games in the middle of the year. He had 48 points in those, and honestly, he could have very easily had 55, 60 if his team had finished any of the chances he was created.

creating. He was absolutely everywhere. They were running everything through him. And most importantly, I know that you had a tweet a while back about when he figures out how to shoot, it's going to be over. Well, his shot rate has gone up from 12 per 60 as a rookie to 14. Last year, he was shooting about attempting nearly 19 shots per 60 minutes of play, which was top 20 in the league, and his shooting percentage escalated from 5.7 to 7.7 to 15.8 last year. So he kind of answered all those questions. I know people are really high on the New Jersey. Devils. And we can talk about them as a whole here if you guys want for seemingly the 10th straight offseason where they won the offseason trophy yet again. I'm also quite high on them because

I don't see a scenario where they use seven goalies who combined for an 880, say, percentage and give up 60 more goals than expected like they did last year. And if that normalizes a little bit, all of a sudden the team is going to look significantly different. But I think Hughes, like Andy said, it's kind of silly to make any sort of heart or Art Ross. bets that aren't Connor McDavid because if he's healthy, he's going to run away with those most likely, especially the points title. But I think Hughes's odds are so exorbitant in that regard. And I feel like there is a range of outcomes where he stays healthy for 82. He's the player that we saw last year. And the New Jersey Devils actually finally put it together and take that step

and compete. And all of a sudden, you've got a pretty interesting case for a lot of different awards. Yeah, I am very high on the Devils going to this year, much more than my model is, which already puts them right in the cusp of the playoff race. Yesterday, I tweeted what I think the standings will look like this year based purely off vibes. And some of the things I put out were insane because it was more fun that way. And one of those insane things was the devil being second in the division with 103 points and having this massive leap.

And I just genuinely believe in this team. And specifically in Jack Hughes, the way he looked two years ago, on that night when I made that tweet was he looked like one of the best players in the world. He just wasn't scoring. He fell over from the force of his own slap shot. It was hilarious to watch. And as soon as he figured it out, it felt like it'd be over for everyone, as I said. And last year we saw that.

I think this year he continues on that path. So if the devils take this huge leap and that is led by Jack Hughes and he scores maybe 100 points and gets in that range, then I think he can be someone who can, 10 for the heart and his odds are 38 to 1 right now. So I think it's worth a flyer, given the talent level he has. We all obviously think it's going to be Nick David and Matthews at the top, and those are probably still the safe bet.

But if we're thinking long shots, I like his game a lot, and I think big things are going to happen for the devil's here that has a lot of people paying attention to Hughes. And if he's healthy, which is always a question for him, I think 73 points is light work for him. Andy, the Devils gave up 14 short-handed goals last year. When they were on the power play, they gave up 14 goals against. Like, I don't think, I guess I did quantify how bad their goaltending was,

but it's almost tough to wrap your mind around just how kind of miserable it was to be playing in that type of environment. And I think we should temperate expectations on what you're going to get from McKenzie Blackwood and VTegovinacheck, but I feel like not that would be a step into the right direction. and that feels like a reasonable ask. For sure. So, like, last year,

against the Devils and obviously had some help with the goal-tending issues and whatnot, but betting against the devil turned out to be one of the best bets that I made. I went under their 90-5 point total, and that was because I projected they would finish with 86 points. And if I recall, that was a relatively pessimistic forecast, and I was still way off, right? So, you know, and I bet them to miss the playoffs at minus 220. So fast forward to this year, you can bet them to miss the playoffs at what, minus 170-ish.

I think it's a good bet. I think the devils make the playoffs one out of every five times. You know, I think this is like an 86, 87-point hockey team. Like Dom said, they're, you know, on the fringes of the playoff conversation, just like the Ottawa Senators. plus, I, I just don't, I don't see them making this much, that much of an improvement that often, right? So, if it's possible, it can happen, but I think it's one of the stronger bets for the

Devils to miss the playoffs at around minus 170. I'm high on the Devils. I think they're going to be incredibly fun to watch. I like all the Jack Hughes futures at the same time. It is concerning to me, Dom, that I kind of like Lindy Ruff for his coach fired at plus 750. So that's probably like an indictment against this team. Well, here we go.

Here's the thing. If he's the first coach fire, they're going to have that amazing first coach bump. They bring in Barry Trott. And then they run away. They run away and beat Andy's 86 point projection with E. With ease. Are you sure we want that, though, because Barry Trots comes in and one hell of a coach, no doubt. But all of a sudden puts Jack Hughes on that map or is a plan of, listen, you've got to sit on the bench and watch how to back check before you get out there.

I want Jack Hughes playing as freely and as wildly as possible. I don't think that's necessarily the case. I think that is Trots working to the Islander's skill set at the time, which was not very high, respectfully. When he was with the Capitol, that was a very exciting team to watch. And I think the devils are a strong rush team, and they could use maybe a bit more structure like what Trots can bring to table. and if rough is the first one fired and it happens quickly, I like this bet even more.

My model is on markets. I don't actually have a bet on the doubles, but I feel like they have strong vibes this year, my gut feeling. I like it. All right, do either you have any other ones we got about four or five minutes left here before we sign out? Now is the time to voice any potential ones that you want to get out there. Don, you want to go first, or do you want me to take this one?

you can you can go ahead while i right this through what it what is here okay i uh i i think this one has moved a bit i'm not quite sure it might it might have moved a point or so but uh Seattle cracking over i think it's 82 and a half regular season points now um i've got them around 87 points i think they're they're better than the the sharks and the ducks um i think they're right in line with, you know, the Canucks, I think, have a higher ceiling, but the Cracken are too far behind the Canucks in my projected standings. I think this is, like I said, an 87-point hockey team, like the moves that they made over the off-season, you know,

even if Philip Grabauer didn't do anything to change his game, he's probably not going to be as bad as he was last year. So I like the Cracken to go over their regular season point total, and I like them to win tonight against the Anaheim Ducks at around plus 105 or plus 110. I have the same for Cracken. I'm around 87 points as well. Well, you were notoriously right on them last year, right? Yeah, me and Annie. Don't just blame. No, no, no. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. I was the second lowest.

And of all the models, I was the second lowest on the Cracken, I believe. So don't throw me under the bus like that. Congrats on being the second best class. So it's the same thing with the heart where, for the Norris, I think we all believe that it'll kale McCar for the next 10 years, but over the last 10, there's been 10 different winners, and I really like Miro Hayskin and I think he's getting a lot of hype. It seems like the ties are turning for it to be, to be trained on you're going to love this. I think it's his turn to win it this year.

And he's 16, 17 to 1. He's going to be finally playing top power play minutes, which should boost his point totals and get people to actually pay attention to the fact that he is a very elite defenseman at both ends the ice. And even if he doesn't win, I think he'll be nominated this year. And if he's at 17 to 1 now, those are very good odds

that you can maybe hedge off of close to the end of the season because I think he'll be right in the thick of the race. Yeah, I think they're going to let them cook. They're going to funnel much more of the offense through them and let them actually use his skating offensively. And you know what? I think Dallas last year at 98 points that I believe the line I saw for them was 94. I kind of like that over.

It's not a very exciting one. But listen, I think it's going to be a massive coaching upgrade. Say what you will about Pete DeBur, but I thought what Rick Bonas did last year was deplorable. And so I think it's a massive boost for them. I think they're going to be significantly higher-paced. And I like that over. So, all right, guys. Well, I think that's all the time we have for this today.

We're going to have to kind of circle back as the season gets going. You and I did that last year and revisited some of our preseason favorites, and that was always a fun show to kind of look back at what we got right and wrong. So we're going to certainly make sure to do that. Thanks, guys, for taking the time. Enjoy this first kind of full night of the NHL season, and we're going to check back in with both of you. So take care.

Yeah, thanks for having us. Thanks for having me on.