The Hockey PDOcast - Episode 380: Narrative Street

Episode Date: January 12, 2021

Dom Luszczyszyn and Rob Pizzola join the show to discuss what we can learn from this unique season, the complicating factors to consider when picking winners, and some of the best bets on the board. Topics include: Weird results in shortened seasons The importance of home ice advantage and travel Balancing human element and statistical modeling Range of outcomes in 1st half vs. 2nd half Matchup trends and opponent familiarity Whether defensive teams will have early advantage Betting on bad teams Best bets and team point totals Player props and individual awards If you're interested in the Blue Wire Hustle program discussed at the top of the show, you can submit your application here: http://bwhustle.com/join Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices 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.

Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen? Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer. So join me, Rocky Theos, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl Defensive Inn, Max Crosby, as we invite your favorite athlete, celebrities, influencers, entertainers in for an episode of games, laughs, and, of course, the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there. Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X. Don't miss it. This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.

These days, everything is go, go, go. It's non-stop hustle all the time. Work, friends, family. Expect you to be on 24-7? Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill. Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged. It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies. It is literally made to chill.

Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind. So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill. Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drizzly or Instacart. Celebrate responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado. Progressing to the mean since 2015, it's the HockeyPedioCast. With your host, Dimitri Philipovic. Hockeypedio cast.

My name is Dimitri Filipovich. joining me is not only one but two special guests. It's Dom Lusjician and Rob Bzolo. What's going on, guys? I actually don't know how Dom's last name is pronounced, and that was really nice and clean. Can you do that one more time? Yeah, it's Dom Luchician.

Luscian. There we go, right? It's a solid nine out of ten pronunciation. I was on the athletics podcast. We have a new podcast, and Haley, I've never. heard her pronounce my name. I think I did puck talks with her once

and she practiced a lot and I think it just spaced out because it was one of my first puck talks and this girl nailed it 11 out of 10 pronunciation. I was literally like flabbergasted by how good it was. So you need a good pronunciation.

That's what you listen to. I've had, first off, I've had you on the podcast a bunch so I'd hope I'd be getting it by now. We've come a long way since they'll lose chicken days. And yeah, I've both you guys have come to my swanky Airbnbs whenever I've been in Toronto and done podcast with me. So we're doing it virtually this time.

And yeah, it's going to be fun. I thought everyone's doing kind of picks and prediction shows with the season starting on Wednesday. And rather than just making the usual list of just going by each award and saying which four teams we think are going to make the playoffs in each division, I thought it would be more fun to do kind of like a gambling element to it and actually provide some actionable advice for listening. because I know that that's definitely a growing, it's a growing fan base in the NHL. It's certainly not where it is in other leagues, but I think there is some interest in it.

So you two both know what you're talking about much more than I do in this avenue. So I'm looking forward to it. Let's start with strategy. You know, forgetting all the other factors that make this a unique circumstance, and there's so many to choose from, right? Seven teams haven't played in like 10 months. There's no fans in most of the ranks. There's a pandemic still raging on, and I'm sure that we're going to see stretches where players just are out of the lineup and teams aren't or fielding weird combinations of players.

How much does the 56 game format increase the range of outcomes, or maybe, to phrase it differently, decrease our confidence in true talent actually winning out and teams winding up where they should be? Because I know that in the 48 game season during the 2013 lockout, there was some really wonky results, especially in terms of like PDO. driven performances like the Leafs, for example. Yeah, the Leafs were the number one team on my mind. Me and Rob, obviously from Toronto, we watched that team often, and that team in 2012-13 was hot trash. And somehow they not only made the playoffs, but they took the Bruins to seven games somehow.

Still not sure how it happened. But that season was the reason I got into analytics because, or maybe it was the season before, but I saw the, this team with my eyes that made zero sense. And I'm like, there needs to be a better way. And I think we're going to see a fair bit of that this year. Every year around the 56 game mark, there's still teams that are hanging around that maybe have no business to. I remember last year, I think Winnipeg was still in a very comfortable position. And then 14 games later, they had a rough ending. They were sort of on the bubble instead. And I do think there'll be an element to that.

I think the whole COVID thing, the fact is a condensed schedule with a lot of tired teams, it's going to be very interesting and a lot of, probably a lot of pain for the people putting money on it. Maybe, maybe not. I mean, the element of the unknown is, I kind of like it a little bit in betting sometimes. So the reality is when you're betting into a market, you're betting against other people, You just have to be able to predict these outcomes better than other people who are betting into the same market. So I think if you have decent hypotheses and you're prepared going into the year, that can work to your advantage.

But then as someone with a statistical background, I'm sure I'm going to be pulling my hair out at times this year. Just really trying to understand some of the factors that are in play, how this condensed schedule is going to impact teams. I look at a team like Dallas who is already going to be delayed to start the year and starting to try to quantify the impact of having that schedule condensed even more as they try to make up games going on later into the year. So there's going to be a number of things. Do younger teams have an advantage now versus teams that are a little bit older? I have all these these things that I'm kind of thinking about going into the year. And we're not going to really be able to, you know, we're going to have to make a judgment call at some point early in the season as to whether these are real or not. and whether or not they should be incorporated or whether they shouldn't be.

And that's a little bit scary, but I kind of like, I don't want to say thrive, but, you know, I've, yeah, I guess maybe, like I flourish under having to make those tough decisions. So I guess I am looking forward to it. Just the unknown, but there will be times where I'm certainly pulling my hair out this year. Yeah, I do agree with all of that. the thing I was thinking about is betting early on a team and then having their entire team

or like three guys sidelined with something. And I think there's a more area for that this year. But yeah, just knowing more than the people you're betting against is basically the biggest thing. But even that, Dom, it can work in your favor,

it can work against you. You might bet on a team and then the opposing team has players out with COVID. So it's really just a coin flip from that perspective. But yeah, I mean, there's going to be a lot of times this year where you're going, you know, anyone who's choosing to bet into early markets, there's way more unknown than there has been in years past. And you always have to take some level of risk, right?

Like, you know, goalies are not, you know, not certain until after pregame skates. And even in that case, they're not certain. but we still bet before goalies are confirmed in a lot of cases because we want to get out ahead of where the market is going to take a line. So it's just kind of like a balancing act, but yeah, it can work in your favor or it can work against you. I'm just speaking historically of things mostly not working in my favor. We'll get into more of that in a minute here. So this is Rob, you're kind of mentioning having a working hypothesis and then going off of that, especially to get early action. And like something that I've been thinking a lot about in preparation for this season.

And we're seeing it in the NBA a little bit where it feels like at least there's been some really lopsided results or some kind of like wacky blowouts where you just see a team down by like 60 points. And you're just like, okay, like this probably would not have happened during a regular season for any number of reasons. I wonder if we're going to see a more extreme gap between the good and the bad teams this season. because if you're a bad team that's rebuilding, this kind of is the best year to just bottom out, right? Because you're only going to suck for four months. It's going to fly by. There's no fans in the rink.

So you're not upsetting people, really. I've seen Elliot Friedman talk about how certain owners want to put their best foot forward this year because they want next season when fans are allowed to get excitement and to kind of do right by the fans and have them lining up. to buy season tickets again. But I think fans are pretty smart for the most part. If you are a rebuilding team, you probably know, like, our best outcome here is just suck for a couple months.

I'll still enjoy watching our young players. And then we're going to have a top five pick in the summer. And so I wonder if not the teams would ever just like openly tanked like that, but I do wonder once the season gets going, if we're going to see the bad teams be extra bad because it's kind of like the most palatable season to do so. I don't believe so personally. And the reason I would say no to that is. Try telling that to the players, right?

I mean, at the end of the day, there's some level of professional pride, at least I think so, where even someone on the Red Wings is going into this year and saying, you know, top four in the division, that's possible. You know, senators, kings, like all these bottom feeding teams, I do believe that those players are legitimately going into the year thinking that they can make the playoffs, especially in a season with this variance. I do think there's going to be all sorts of quirky things that happen this year. like how does a team play a back to back to back for example?

And if they're trailing, you know, four nothing early on in the first period or in the first period at any point, do they just, you know, let the fourth, third and fourth liners play very well knowing that the next night they're going to play the exact same team in a similar situation and maybe they'll be a little bit more rested. So like there's all these things that play a factor. But I don't necessarily think we're going to see like a higher range between the teams than we have in years past. At least I'm going into the year,

hoping that we don't thrust. I'm going to be pretty far off. Okay, so here I'll give you an example. I don't think the players, certainly I think the players, when they're on the ice, they try their hardest. But I think there might be situations

where a team can sort of strategically be precautionary with a star player and maybe keep them out. And if you're out for four to six weeks, that's going to be, what, 20 games of the season or something? Like, I, you know, not to make light of the matter, like, I really hope he gets well and we see him on the ice,

because I'm sure he wants to play, but like how is Chicago going to handle the Jonathan Tave situation? Like, do we know with any certainty that he's going to be back at all this year? Like I've yet to sort of see any reports. It kind of seems up in the air. And as the season gets going, it seems like especially if they're going to be bad,

it becomes more likely that he's going to be held out for an extended period of time as opposed to rushing him back in the lineup. It's valid. I mean, the reality is, though, there's so much variance in hockey that Chicago could come out and win seven. of their first 10 games or eight of their first 10 games.

And then all of a sudden the conversation flips on his head to, you know, we need to try to get Taves back in the lineup as quickly as possible type of thing. So I do agree there's probably some element of that. And there's all sorts of things that, I mean, it's just something that we really haven't experienced before. I mean, yes, we have experienced shortened seasons. But now the COVID factor on top of that, it's kind of like a league of its own at at this point.

So I can see that being the case. it's really tough going into the year to really try to figure out how this this year is going to play out. But yeah. Well, I guess if you're a fringe team, you're looking at that 56 game sprint and thinking, we don't need to be that good for that long to make a little run here, right? Like, it seems like if anything, it might have kind of emboldened you to really try to go for it this year because maybe in an 82 game season, you feel like your talent wouldn't win out. but in this case, you might actually have a bit of an advantage.

Well, I mean, for me, just historically speaking, the range on teams prior to the NHL trade deadline is much less than post deadline. There is like a motivational factor. We could, because I think teams are going to be in it longer, in the races longer, so to speak, and have something to play for longer, you still get that, that parody that I think has driven the NHL for a long time. And I don't think we're going to get to a state halfway through the year where we know that a bunch of teams are out of it. And all of a sudden it just becomes that team getting blasted by everyone that they face, which happened to pretty much, you know, happens to a handful of teams every single season. So we'll see. I mean, I do think that this condensed schedule and the way that the divisions are set up, I think it just lends itself to so much more variance this year. And I think like we might end up at the end of the year

scratching our heads wondering like how how did this happen? How did some of these things actually happen this year? So I will embrace the variance this year. That's me every single season. How did this happen? How do you feel about it, Don? What do you think? I'm trying to think of like which team has the most,

how did this happen energy going into the season. And I guess I can't really think of anything now because it hasn't happened yet, but right if you if you could think of them then you'd probably be much higher on them this season yeah um okay i'll give you guys a second sort of working theory that i have right now and tell me what you think about this one so i think teams like say Columbus and maybe even more so the islanders have a bit of an advantage heading into the into the start of the season at least because all we're hearing is you know there's no preseason games there's very limited practice time especially teams that

have gone through a lot of change, how long is it going to take them to sort of figure out what their best lineup combinations are, figure out how to best use their players, what their system is. Especially with a team like the Islanders, I find it hard to believe that in game two of the season, they're going to be trying to figure out how to best play. Like, it seems like they already have this ironed out system, ironed out structure. They're bringing back pretty much all the same players. They're just going to roll out and do what they've been doing the past couple of years.

Now, you know, especially for a team like the Islanders, it's pretty thin. If they have a big injury like they had with Adam Pellick last year and he's out for an extended period of time, they're probably pretty screwed and there's no coming back from that. But it feels like, especially for those kind of max effort defensive teams, doing this over 56 games probably seems like a much more palatable option than stretching it out and trying to kind of hold on for 82. You know, what's interesting about that is the Islanders started so strong last year and then sort of faded. And in the bubble, they were one of the strongest teams right at the gate, too. And so I do feel like there's something there to that hypothesis where those teams that have that structure that have the continuity can get right into the swing of things quicker than, say, a team like Toronto, where everyone is different around the edges of that core.

It's interesting for sure, especially the point you bring up about like the defensive teams, because typically early on in the season, anything post layoff, you tend to have lower scoring games a little bit earlier before teams start to get into it. And I think that kind of does work to those team strengths, especially the Islanders and the jackets, if other teams are like Islanders and Jackets, not having a lot of top end scores, so to speak, and being able to play that grind-it-out type of game. There could be something there.

I mean, it's not something I'm quantifying right now. I'll tell you that. So if there is, I mean, I hope. there's nothing there actually say. I would include the stars there as well except for the fact

that they don't have Tyler Sagan or Ben Bishop to start the year. But I feel like those teams that, like it'll be easier for them to navigate three games in three nights because they're splitting

their minutes so evenly. You're not going to see like much of their detriment, I think, in a regular season where I'm kind of ripping my hair out wondering why Dennis Gariano and Rupa Hintz aren't playing

more. Everyone's just playing like 15 minutes a night on that team. And it feels like, they'll probably be fresher for it, I imagine. Obviously, unique circumstances in Dallas, especially given the fact that we don't even know when their season's going to start,

but just using them kind of as an example of teams that front load their minutes versus kind of taking that more balanced approach. I wonder if we'll see some changes in coaching styles this year, though, based off of the season as well, where you see coaches that have historically rode their top guys for heavier minutes, start to dial it back and play like a longer-term game.

So I'm interested to see that for sure. is, you know, things that we've seen historically with certain coaches or teams. And if that changes going into the year, which I imagine it will. And then I'm also interested, looking back on this at the end of the year, I feel like teams that are more well-balanced are better set up for this type of season where a team that's very top-heavy potentially loses a star for the course of three or four weeks. and that just basically kills their entire season. So there's so many things to really talk about in regards to this year.

But, man, it could be all over the place. I wonder if it's sort of the opposite, though, if they might ride their top players more because it's a shorter season. I know it's condensed and whatnot, but a guy like McDavid, he's playing 66% fewer minutes just from the virtue of going from 80s. two games of 56 games. So he'll probably be fresher by the playoffs than he normally would.

So I wonder if that's also an element there. Yeah. And then obviously how they're how they're doing in the standings is going to impact their play as well, right? I mean, if Edmonton is chasing, which I think Edmonton's going to be battling for a playoff spot by the end of the year, probably forces them to ride those guys a little bit harder in every circumstance, whether that's back to back or third game in four nights.

We have like some five and sevens this year, which historically, you don't. don't see very much of. So I think, yeah, a lot of it's going to depend on the situation that teams are in. And I think that, you know, the same thing goes for goalie play, right? Where we'll probably see teams take a little bit more of a balanced approach to start the season and then things will, you know, it's just life, but you'll adapt based off of, of the situation that your team is in down the stretch. Well, what do we think about trends of kind of familiarity with the opponent?

it right like if you're playing someone eight times out of 56 but also maybe squeezing those in and you're playing three straight times against the same team do you like what are we expecting there in terms of potential adjustments or trends or what people are going to be doing differently

you want to feel this one rob it's a tough one like I know I know pretty much with certainty that the majority of coaches in the league will ride like goaltender trends so you might see like a certain goalie always playing against another team just because of his historical numbers against that team, whether it's a sample

of four games or 20 games, it doesn't matter to most of these guys. So I think you will see like specific goalies matched up against specific teams pretty regularly. It's hard to do, obviously, with the schedule as well. But I think a lot of these teams are probably already going into the year having their goalie starts planned out, maybe even for the course of the entire first month of the season, saying this is what we're going to do in these situations. And they've really, they've really, you know, gone down into detail from that perspective. But aside from that, I mean, I don't know how the, I don't know how in-game strategy is going to change. I don't know if the teams even have time to really, you know, change your style of play over the course of this year with limited practice.

And, you know, some teams are potentially separating players and practices as well, not to give them time with one another for potential COVID risks. and stuff like that. It is actually going to be a crazy year. Yeah, it's going to be interesting. I think that's one of the things I'm looking into most this year because we usually have only like five games, four games at the top of the matchup, I guess, board, where Toronto would normally play Boston four or five times this year.

They'll play Montreal, Edmonton, Calgary, nine or ten times. And I do wonder what that, familiarity will look like if there is going to be something there where certain teams match up with others better and it shows up in the data because generally you don't really you care a little bit about prior games against the opponent but generally it's not going to be something that actually shows up and in the playoffs they have more time to scout the other opponent they're right in their building it's day after day so you see that play out more but during the season i'm less Shervin, I think this year will be interesting for it.

I really think so too. I'm very interested by the fact that you brought up playoffs because to me, betting the playoffs and regular season are a different breed. You know, Dom, we talk offline a lot, but like I watched game one of Capitals Islanders last year in the playoffs. And, you know, my numbers had those teams. I had the Capitals better going into that series. to the point where I would have wagered on the Capitals every single game in that series

if I was using my regular season model. But I could watch Game One of that series and say Washington has almost no chance to win this series. Like they are going to get badly, badly outplayed at five on five this entire series. And I do think that there is something to team versus team that we typically don't have to account for over the length of an 82 game season where you're playing pretty much everyone in the league. And now teams playing each other eight or nine times, I do think we are going to see some teams that just based off their style of play pose a problem for other teams.

And it'll be more prevalent this season because of the way that the schedule is set up. Well, we saw like Dallas definitively played Calgary, Colorado, and Vegas differently. Like they approached based on strengths and weaknesses strategically differently. Now, I wonder, in a sense, I hope this is a one-year aberration and we get back to normal and there's not much to take from this year. But in another way, just this conversation has me thinking that this could be like one of the most informative seasons we've had in terms of being able to actually identify like systems and trends and what works and what doesn't versus various opponents because we're going to see all these games stacked together in such a short period of time. We should be able to quantify what travel is worth in the NHL this year versus. versus having fans in arenas versus just having last change like we had in the playoffs last year.

So I agree with you, Dimitri. I think this is like a great learning opportunity this year. We're getting a bunch of scenarios that we've not encountered before. Now, the challenge is that we're still not going to have a huge sample by the end of the season, right? I mean, it'll be meaningful, but not something that we can set in stone. But I agree. I think this is like a great learning opportunity this season. I kind of hope it's not an aberration.

I kind of like this. I know I'm usually like the guy who like wants complete fairness. And I wrote before they resumed the bubble, how ridiculous it was that Pittsburgh and Edmonton would need to play a buy-in considering they. basically made the playoffs and the pause. So it was kind of screwed them over. But I think if we know what the rules are beforehand,

something like they're doing this year seems like it would be very fun. I know they always talk about building rivalries and having all these games within the division, I think would be something that I would like to see going forward. Mostly though, because I am just so excited

for that Canadian division. I think it'll be peak chaos. Of course. Of course. we like this format, Dom we're Leafs fans. Yeah, yeah. If the Leafs were put with Boston and Pittsburgh and Philly, I'd probably have like a little bit of a different vibe going into the year. Maybe, yeah. But like that stuff changes every year. And I don't have any doubts that Vancouver and Edmonton are going to become those powers too.

So it's not really something that I'm thinking about in that way. I think it just would be, it's just so fun from a Canadian perspective to have. everyone together. Well, I mean, to that, I would say, tell that to Miami Dolphins, Buffalo Bills, and New York Chets fans who had the goat in their division for, you know, 15 years. Like, I get it. At least it's not 14 divisions like the NFL. I'm intrigued by it.

It's not something that like personally I'd love to see going forward. I think the same matchups will get stale at some point. I do. I think you'll just miss seeing certain teams play one another. Like, I will miss seeing Toronto and Boston and Toronto and Buffalo play in the regular season. If it's only once or twice, that's,

I mean, that's just me. Everyone's entitled to their opinion on it. But I, I know, obviously understand the reasons why this is happening and I don't question them. I'm just, yeah,

I think I might get tired of seeing the same team play three nights in a row at some point. Yeah, for sure. I don't doubt that. I think just in a, if we were to do this again next year, there we could still have room for those other games, but have a predominantly division-based schedule. Yeah.

Yeah, I'm with it. Are there any other, you know, strategy or theory things that we should touch on before we get into actual bets? For me, the biggest one is just what is home ice worth in the NHL this year? And I've done some work on European soccer. leagues where teams are traveling but there are no fans and the NBA, which we have a limited sample of so far where there's travel but no fans to see whether or not there still is a home field or home court.

And so far there is. It's just much, much smaller than historical, which kind of aligns with what I would, like I believe travel is worth something. Like a team having to take a flight versus a team being at home makes a different. It's where we get into like the scenarios of the back-to-back that are played in the same venue, which you rarely ever see in the NHL. Is the away team at a disadvantage playing the second of a back-to-back in the same venue? I don't know.

So it's all these things that, like, you have to take an educated guest going into the year, and I'm going to do that. But it's really tough and challenging. So, I mean, yeah. Well, it seems like from what I've gathered, from like listening to basketball podcast and stuff, it seems like the players feel like, you know, in the bubble, they did a good job of sort of making it feel like this kind of like spectacle in a way, right? Or like that was a really controlled environment, whereas then you get to these empty rinks that aren't really as prepared for just having that one product there every single night. And it's kind of like depressing because it's just got like an echo in it and there's no one there. and it's just weird, and it leads to weird results and kind of ties into what we were saying earlier.

But I do think it will have a bigger impact than the bubble performance we saw because it was such a controlled setting to the NHL's credit in terms of preparing it for what it exactly was. Well, I mean, I went into the playoffs last year, and I was wrong, completely wrong with my guess. But it was that there is going to be a home ice advantage because teams have, you know, the home team has the last change in hockey. And there has to be some sort of fundamental advantage for the coach to be able to put up of the players that he wants to put out in about 30% of the game against the opposing team. The reality is that that wasn't the case. By the end of the playoffs last year, it was pretty much determined that there was no home ice. And in fact, there was an argument to be made that there was negative home ice advantage in which like the coaches are so bad and don't know how to match or like overthink the game so much that it's costing their team. So now, like, I have that in the back of my mind as well.

You can't really compare just last year because it was a bubble. The teams weren't traveling. That's an added element this year as well. Man, it just becomes so challenging to quantify it. And like, even the difference of 1% can be so impactful for your numbers as a whole when you're betting into markets that are as tight as the, the major league sports markets. So, man.

I will say that I was convinced home ice was worthless. And I said, Rob, I don't think we should do home ice. He's like, no, there's home ice. I'm like, the coaches have the stage, man. That has got to be worth something. You're telling me. So yes, I will back that up. But I will say, Dom, I think I was quicker to get off of home ice.

Yeah. Like it became the inverse argument. end of the playoffs. I'm like, Dom, there's no, there's no home ice here. Like we, and he's like, you know, no, there's like the last change. So it was like, it was, the sample size was was so small that I wasn't ready until, because I was tracking like what the home teams were winning like compared to my numbers and my numbers were still like. Recognized employees with custom ink. Show customer appreciation with custom ink. Outfit your teams with custom ink. Easily add your logo to your favorite products and brands at custom ink.com. Make custom ink your custom gear partner with

great customer service, quality products, and all in pricing, along with personalized help when you need it and an easy to use website when you don't. All backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee. Do it all today at custom ink.com. It's still like in range that it just, I figured, okay, maybe I'm just betting the wrong away teams. And then it just kept going to, going wrong. I'm like, okay, I'm just going to take this out. This is stupid. I think what was challenging is for the playoffs last year, I started the playoffs really well. Like I think of like the first 30 bets I made in the playoffs. I won like 22 of them or something like that. So even though I was factoring in, it felt like what I was doing was correct. But then you slowly

start looking into it and you're like, oh, no, there's definitely something I'm accounting for here. that is not a real factor. But yeah. Hey, everyone. I want to tell you about Blue Wire Hustle, a brand new program where you can host your very own podcast

here at Blue Wire. Hustle was created to give everyone the opportunity to take their podcast at the next level. Or, if you always wanted to host a podcast but never knew where to start, hustle is the perfect place for you.

As part of the program, you'll receive personal cover art, Q&As of Blue Wire's top podcasters, access to our community discord, and an e-learning course full of tips and tricks. And on top of that, will help you get your show pushed out to Apple, Spotify, Google, Stitcher, and all the other

listening platforms where you typically get your podcasts. And the best part is, you'll get all of this for only $15 a month. That's essentially the same rate as any other hosting say would charge you just for the initial setup without all those perks. So whether you're starting from scratch or have an existing show that you want to grow, Hustle is an open door to leveling up your sports experience. Acceptance into this program is limited, so get your application in today. To apply, go to BWHustle.com slash join.

Check out the description box for this podcast to find out more, but that's BWHustle.com slash join. Well, how do you, okay, this is kind of a theoretical thing, but I'm really curious because how do you balance the human element of sports betting? And so you had the example of the Islanders Capital Series, right? Your model is saying the Capitals are the better team here. They should be winning these games. then you watch it and you're like, all right, this is, it's just not, it's not going to happen. The Islanders have them beat for whatever reason, whether it's strategic, whether the

capitals aren't taking it seriously, whatever's going on. Or like even stretching it out for Dom, like year over year, if you're super down on a team and they keep proving you wrong, how do you balance that like the past results in your relationship with them to just kind of like the pure math and what the model is spitting out to you and sort of what like, like, not trying to tinker with it too much because then you are kind of ruining the special sauce of the model. I have a different answer from Rob, and that's just because I'm in the public sphere with this stuff, and my answer is I just write about it.

If a fan base is telling me, I think your model is wrong about this team, I listen to them, and I watch the teams. I'm like, you know what, maybe there's something here. When I write about this team, I will say, the model doesn't like this team, but here's all this other stuff that I am watching and that I'm reading and that I'm listening. And here's why the model is saying something bad about this team. So for the longest time,

those are the Washington Capitals. And what is very clear is they play a very East-West game and make passes that an XG model won't really do well with accounting for. And I do other stuff to account for that, but it might not be enough. So I'll look at a player's point totals, his finishing talent, how much he actually drives goal differential. And that was all fine and dandy until last year when my model didn't like the Capitals at all. And I'm looking into it.

And I'm like, this top six isn't doing anything. It's the bottom six that's really crushing things. I remember I was talking to Robbie's like, why does your model hate the Capitals? What's going on here? I'm like, have you seen like their top six bottom six splits? It's so weird. Like, do you really think that Richard Ponick and Travis Boyer are the ones leading the Capitol's goal differential or what's going on here? And then over the second half, the Capitals started tanking.

Playoffs, they look like they look terrible. And so I think there was something there. But I wouldn't be surprised if this year the Capitals go back to being better with a new coach, although I saw some interesting quotes about Labulet wanting to play North South with this team, which seems strange. I pretty much approach it the exact same way, except I don't write about it. Like, I do everything that Dom does, except for me, it's in my best interest to keep things as private as possible for the most part. But yeah, it's why, like, why are my eyes telling me something different from what my model

is saying? And it's just investigating that, right? What is causing this difference? And I think once you just start digging into it, you can really start to understand where there's limitations and what you're doing with your model. But it allows for continuous improvement, right? You can just start, like, I'm lucky enough that I'm a horrible programmer myself, but I work with a partner who's extremely skilled in programming. And he can essentially backtest all of my theories for me where I'll go to him and say, this is not lining up. I think we should change these things and he's able to simulate, you know, tons of seasons from the past,

accommodating for that change and whether or not it improves our error metrics in the model. So, you know, it's pretty much the same approach to Dom takes. I'm very open to my model is not perfect. It's not. And it never needs to be. It's, again, it just needs to be better than what, how other people are modeling games. That's my goal. And if you're not looking for continuous improvement and not looking to challenge the, the,

outputs of your model, then frankly, you're going nowhere. I mean, I see it regularly and you really need to understand what's happening and admit when there's something you're not accounting for, maybe are accounting for that just doesn't make sense. Yeah, the goal is always to be the least wrong. Yeah. You're not trying to be the most right. It's the least wrong. And you need to be open and really in tune with what your model is doing and how it's calculating. things and whereas blind spots might be. Like for me, I hate my goalie model so much. I hate it.

It's so there's just something that bothers me so much about like seeing some of the goalies rated higher than other goalies. And as I was like halfway through writing previews, I'm like, I need to do something here. And I literally changed my goalie model halfway through writing my previews because I am an insane person. I did this over like a full day. I was literally like slaving away at this.

And what I essentially, the theory I had is that we have two main goalie numbers and that's goals saved above expected and goals saved above average. And our underlying assumption is that goals saved above expected is completely agnostic of defense. It controls for the goalie completely. And I don't think that's right. I think there's something in goals saved above average that the goalies are doing that we're not accounting for. It's the same with the capital's problem where there's something in

XG that's not accounting for things and we need goals percentage to sort of figure it out. So it was a matter of figuring out what the ratio is between goals stable of expectation, goal save above average to sort of get a number I hated less. Yep. I mean, I agree. Like there are certain things that fundamentally when you're modeling hockey, you just know are wrong. Like, I've had a point last year, early last year, where I had Curtis McElaney rated as a better goaltender than Andre Vasilewski. I'm not as big a hockey fan as I used to be, but I still watch games every night. Like, that's not right.

It's 100% not right. So, like, you have to say, what is accounting for this? I actually don't think that the public metrics that we have for Vasilevsky are really indicative of his true performance in general, especially. when you're, you know, looking at the game, watching the game, and Vasilevsky, to me, very clearly passes the eye test. But that's the kind of stuff where it's like a lot of people will just run that and publish that. Like it's, this is what my model says. Like, and it's like, no, like, that's not right. And I need to figure out why that's happening specifically and how we,

we go about adjusting that. And it's another thing where when you have that and you can, you can watch the betting market and the way that lines move when changes happen in a game based off the news that becomes available. And if Curtis McElagney is starting for the Tampa Bay Lightning, the line is going to move 20 cents towards the other team, almost every time. So the market is considering him a substantial downgrade. And that doesn't mean that the market is always right. But these are people that are betting a lot of money on these games and a lot of money on their

opinions. And it's worth something. It's at least worth looking into to say, why is this? this line moving against me every single time, Tampa Bay's backup goalie is in. So those are just like good examples of things that you just always have to be progressive in thinking, I guess. Yeah, I always called the goaltending issue with the Vasilevsky problem because he looks amazing.

And then I had someone from an NHL team like confirmed to me like this opposite. He's like, yeah, Vaselowski is like probably in a tier of his own. I'm like, you know what that this is this is what I needed. this is the step I needed to take to go in a better direction. The model still doesn't love Vasleski. It just likes him more than it did before, and that's fine for now. I had something else I want to say on that. Well, here, I have something kind of related tangentially, you know,

because we're talking about the human element and stuff and modeling. Rob, you must kind of run into this quite a bit with football. So I'll give you an example. Let's say there's a game on a Sunday and your model's telling you that a team should not be getting as many points as they are. Let's say they're one of the worst teams in the league, but you're like getting three free points or whatever. But at the same time, they might have a terrible quarterback and might be just an absolutely awful dreadful team to watch. And you kind of don't want to be stuck there on Sunday watching them play going, oh my God, I can't believe I committed to this. And the reason why I bring that up is I think as we kind of spin forward to the over-unders and the point totals, I think they're pretty tight for the most part. I would say that the Red Wings one really sticks out to me as being way too loose in terms of how many free points they're giving you. But it is a team that won 17 of 71 games last year, got outscored by 123 and is going to be trotting Mark Stahl out there in a top four role. And you might get into the third week of the season and you're just kind of banging your head

against the table wondering why you did it, even though the theory or the process or your model, was correct in evaluating that they probably should have a higher over-under than Vegas projected amount. It's a very good question. My approach for NFL is not the same as NHL. So I'll focus more on the NHL for people that are here or listening. But just in general, I find that teams that are at the extreme end of the range, it's very challenging to make them as good or as bad as they actually are in general.

I think that's where average and median comes into play in a lot of cases. But we're not streaming this as video, even though we can all see each other. But I actually have this up on my desk. I'll show you guys. It says, don't bet on bad teams unless other bad team in brackets. And this is like an NFL thing for me because I find it very difficult to make the New York Jets as bad as they actually are using the data that I have in general to work with. and I kind of, this NFL offseason just went into a deep dive of like, these are all the historical bets I've made here.

What if I stripped out all the ones that ended up being on really bad football teams and my ROI just literally almost doubled? I'm like, what am I been doing for years here? And I find that it's just very challenging to get to that point. And especially when we're looking at season win totals, for example, I project the Red Wings to be much higher. than their season win total. I think there's, or season point totals like 41 and a half or something like that.

I think it's 40, 42 and a half, yeah. All right. And I come in somewhere around like 46 or 47, which is a substantial edge in terms of actual points, but there's so much that can go wrong for a bad team, especially a team later in the year that maybe like they could be out of it very quickly. They get a lot of younger guys more playing time. They start trading pieces away and things of that nature. And that's not accounted for a lot of times when people are making their preseason projection

on a team. They're expecting that this is going to be the roster for the entire season. And I'm going to simulate this out. With that said, I still have bet over on Detroit this year because there's enough of a margin there for me. And just in general, like the Red Wings were semi-competitive when Jimmy Howard didn't start last year. I can't even believe how many games Jim Howard lost. It is, I couldn't believe it when I looked it up. but it's absurd the amount of starts that Jimmy Howard lost for them.

And even to like to have Thomas Grice there, I mean, it's a monumental upgrade to have him for half of the games this season. So from that point of view, I was confident in it. I don't want to say confident. As confident as he can be. Yeah. Yeah.

The teams at the range is are trouble usually. I wish I had that sticky note in 2016-17. Me and Rob go way back. We've been talking about betting for a while now and I would say that I was betting on the avalanche and he's like, what are you doing? Don't do that. I'm like, I'm going to do it.

And they lost, I think, 15 games in a row and I think I bet on them every game, hoping that this would be the time they turn around and the human element wasn't there. I didn't have the sticky note. I think that would have really helped. I think I might do that actually. I might have like a professional sign made up

and put it like above my TV. Like just so like I really like hammer at home because I do get burned a lot because I can't make the teams that bad. And it's so difficult. I remember last year with the Red Wings, I'm like, here we go again, betting on the Red Wings.

And I definitely blacklisted them at one point, which I almost never do. But that team was so bad. I'm like, I need to do it. Because in general, I believe hockey is such a high variance game that a team like the Red Wings can win.

but that team was such a huge outlier that I just couldn't stomach it anymore. But there's a difference between this year's Red Wings and last years. I think there was a lot of addition by subtraction that is going to really help them be at least somewhat better this year. I think over 41.5, I'm not, I can't do the math in my head, but that's probably a very, very low point total that would be very difficult to do on true talent alone. And they don't have Jimmy Howard anymore. They improved goaltending. As bad as Mark Stahl is, they had like five other defensemen that were just as bad last year, and now they only have one.

So that's a big deal for me. And I think that's the biggest difference I have between the point totals and my own model. I'm a little higher than Rob, which is concerning for me. But I think you just got to stomach those bad bets sometimes. The thing is, so for hockey, it's a little bit different. different in general. And to me, I don't, I don't mind betting on bad teams in hot. Like, I'm not happy to an extent. If I end up on, let's say, I'm not showing an edge, thankfully, but if I end up on Chicago against Tampa Bay in their first game of the season,

I'm not, I'm not going to be happy, like to end up on that side. But I'll bet it because there's so much variance in the sport in general. And I talked about it earlier, maybe about half an hour ago, but prior to trade deadline in general, the range is not really that large between these teams. It's more so late in the year where you get these motivational components where if I go back to when I first started betting hockey seriously,

which I think was 2017, I had like an 18% ROI before trade deadline, which is actually absurd. It's the best season I would have had ever. And if I just gave it up there, it would have been the best season I have ever had. But I just kept going. and then betting on these teams that were out of the playoffs,

nothing to play for later in the year and lost a lot of money back. And I made the same mistake the following year. And I was just like, what am I doing? There's something I'm not accounting for here. So this is like something that I'm always thinking about. And I think early on in the year, it's fine. There is a motivational component to hockey, though, that is not captured by, I think, a lot of people and their models later on in the year,

which just leads them to continue. bet on these bad teams. And, you know, historically as betters are, that's why I say the NFL is very different than the NHL, where, like, in the NFL, week 17, for example, where teams rest their starters against teams that need to play to get into the playoffs, that's been like a very traditionally profitable spot to bet on a team. In hockey, it's not.

So the markets are not, not the same. And it's not comparing apples to apples. But, yeah, I mean, we've spent enough. talking, I think, about Red Wings on this podcast. Jimmy Howard was 2, 23, and 2 last year. With a minus 27 goals saved above expected. I probably bet at least 15 of those losses. Same.

Yep. I think there was a stretch where between Red Wings wins, there was like six coaches fired. And one of them wasn't Detroit's. No. No. Unreal. Unreal.

All right. Yeah, the Red Wings, oh my God, the Red Wings are one of my best bets. Is there any other teams that you feel like either the market is kind of wildly variant on or different than you? Or kind of like, do you feel like a team like the Avalanche is kind of getting exploited because there's such a trendy team and everyone wants to be on the side of cheering for them? Or is there anything that kind of sticks out to you in terms of the team totals and over-unders? The thing that sticks out to me is how much better they are. I remember back in the day, this was such an exploitable market because all the totals were so bad. And every year, like, my edges on these point totals have shrunk to the point where I'm barely even betting them anymore. Like, Detroit is my best bet and I hate it.

And I think after that, there's only a couple more. I like, I don't know what the Pittsburgh line is now, but over 64 and a half, I thought was good. I think a lot of people are underrating the penguins. sharks. I think there's the human element there and I think Carlson's going to be the healthiest he's been in a while, but I think 55.5 points is a little generous for them. And then it wouldn't be a Dom betting preview without saying bet the under on the Islanders. I agree with all three. I mean, they're not my biggest edges, but I agree. In terms of the market like being sharper, that's just happened across sports.

betting now, especially in the U.S. with regulation and just more people betting, and it's much more difficult to win betting at sports. So that's not a surprise. For me, 63.5 on Vancouver, I like under there.

I think that's too high. On them in general. They played at a 63.3 pace last year for 56 games. So like, we all think they're probably going to be worse just because they're thinner and they got worse at net. but yeah they are playing an easier schedule

than they'll be playing last year but are they they were in the Pacific division oh that's true yeah yeah i think do we factor that in like for the abs and the knights they have eight games against the ducks kings sharks and coyotes yeah yeah i i you're simming the you're simming this yeah it is right dom yeah i send the schedule and i wrote an article on the athletic of teams

that have a better projected point total than their actual true talent and the abs were up there because of how weak their their schedule is and I think I had them as like a 106 point team true talent wise and I haven't projected for a 109 or 110 point pace yeah I agree with that I'm just is there anyone else Rob there's a few up like I like Dallas under um at 66 and a half um already with the condensed schedule injuries to start the season. Luckily for them, they do have a good goaltending tandem, and that has to be factored in this year as teams that have two good coals in general, but with Bishop starting hurt,

I think that plays a factor. So those are the teams that I would say like the lowest on relative to market. Highest Detroit, I like Carolina over 68 and a half, which seems to be trendy and it's a little bit scary, but Carolina to me is so deep. As long as, I mean, they lost Dougie Hamilton for a large stretch of time and previously, and that's hurt them. But overall, to me, Carolina is a very deep team and, like, a realistic cup contender that I don't think a lot of casual average fans would consider a realistic cup contender.

I'm surprised I haven't seen more trendy picks of Carolina winning that division over Tampa Bay, like, especially in the regular season, at least, until Kutrov comes back for the playoffs. but I feel like just motivation-wise and depth-wise, like there's a case to be made that Carolina should be right there with him, I think. I don't love their depth. I think, well, once they move Special Cup to the second line, like their top six looks really strong, but I want to see Martin Nettches actually blossom into the player.

We know he could be first, and a lot of the other players I don't love. Like, they don't turn expectant goals into goals very well. Jordan Stahl is the king of underperforming in that way. That's always been the problem for them. I think very simple. They're on the opposite end of the spectrum. Of Washington.

Of Washington, yeah. Washington was always the team that seemed to be overperforming their XG. And Carolina was the team that, I mean, granted, if you watch Carolina games, they dominate play, but they're also just shoveling a lot of garbage at the net. And like, you talked about the east to west with Washington. Washington, like we all know about like the Ovechkin one-timer and like that's stapled into our brains. Carolina doesn't really move the puck cross-ice a whole lot. It's more so just like drive the net and get it there. And so I think that plays a factor into it.

I think they improved a little in in that regard last year, especially with Aho and Terabinen, but definitely in prior years. That was a big issue for Carolina. I went into this exercise thinking I was going to be all over the Chicago under because I think, there's a case that they're going to be the worst team in the league this season, especially if Tate doesn't play. But their line going to drop to 51 and a half last I checked. And that's like, that's really low. But I will say, going from Crawford and Leonard to Delia and Malcolm Subban is like,

catastrophically bad, I think. And there's a, like, they're going to be the worst defensive team in the league with the worst goalie tandem most likely. I mean, you can't really project that performance. But I just think, like, even their best players right now are, horrible defensive liabilities. I can't imagine there's going to be a lot of games where they give up less than four goals.

Yeah, I mean, I'm at 51.1 points for Chicago this year. Subjectively, that feels too high. And I feel like the ceiling on that team is very low. Like, there's a lot, that's probably, I guess it's all factored into the Sim all together in general, but I'm not high on Chicago whatsoever. And when I was, like, I was,

when I said Chicago playing Tampa in the first game and I'm crossing my finger, I'll bet Chicago and crossing my fingers that I don't because I really won't like it. Like I really won't like it. I'll be a depressing first bat of the year. I think I have to rerun my model because I last time was like a week or two ago and Chicago's probably had like 17 injuries since. But I am higher than 51 on them. I do account for some of the players who don't have NHL games.

I think Ian Mitchell is someone in Chicago. Blackhawks fans are very high on and my model seem to like him based on his NHLE, which is a terrible way to model, but it's it's the only way you can really model. Especially for a defenseman. Yeah, especially for a defenseman. But at the same time, they're high on him. And I don't think the Blackhawks are that bad. I think their first line could be very exciting.

And they don't have any terrible defensemen in terms of like overall value. They're just, they don't have any good. good defenseman. I think that's the biggest Chicago Blackhawks problem. I think it might be exacerbated by the goaltending this year, but we'll see. That's the problem for me is that Chicago, we know, well, I don't want to say we know anything going into the year, but we know Chicago is very much like a trade chances type of team, right? Yeah. That's what they're going to do. And they frankly won a playoff series against Edmonton because Corey Crawford stole it for the most part. And unless Delia really surprises in some form and turns into, I mean, it's possible.

It's entirely possible. We have seen, you know, coales that we don't have a large sample on that have excelled in limited amount of games. Andrew Hammond would ring a bell for me in the past. But I just don't see that style of play ending well. And I'm not sure that they have the players to play any titles. style. Yeah.

I was looking at some of the player props and, you know, award stuff obvious well. I can kind of pivot to that a bit here. But I wonder if, like, do we need to be accounting for the fact that I feel like the North Division, the Canadian Division, is like the best possible scenario if you're a star offensive player? Because you're probably playing against, just think about the teams you're going to be playing on a regular basis, whether it's Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Winnipeg, although obviously

hell of bucks in that. it feels like there's going to be an environment there for a lot of goals to be scored. And I wonder if the point totals and goal totals or the Rocket Richard odds for like Austin Matthews account for that yet. I'm not sure if they do, but I know a lot of projections from like, because I do fancy projections as well, I don't think a lot of people factored that in. And someone tweeted it to me. I'm like, yeah, that makes sense.

I should do that. So I did that. And if you see any edges on players from the North Division, that's probably why. I had, I think, McDavid projected for two or three more points, Matthews for another goal or two. And it's just from playing some of the worst defensive teams in the league. The goal-tending isn't overtly strong other than Hellebuck and Markstrom, and depending on how you feel about Kerry Price. So, yeah, there's a lot, there's a big market for North Division players to exceed their

totals. There's also a market for West Division players to underplay their totals. And that's probably not expected. You're probably thinking Nathan McKinnon versus San Jose, L.A., and Anaheim, 21 times a year. I don't know how many times they play, but sign me up, right? And the issue is that other than San Jose, there is not a bad defensive team in the West. And that probably means more or fewer goals for for Colorado. It might mean more wins, but it'll be close. closer wins and tighter games because they have to play Vegas, they have to play St. Louis. They have to play Minnesota, who's always a great defensive team. Arizona has that strong goaltending duo and Anaheim has John Gibson.

So that's something that really does need to be accounted for. And I'm not sure if the markets have or not. So the markets have, candidly, they have as soon as you released your projection. So this is what happens. And I always have to message Dom on the side asking him when he's going to first release his projection so that I can get bets in beforehand. But the markets we see now are significantly different from what they first opened up as where there was honestly like insane value to be had all over the place because I do think

that there's no real market specialist in hockey right now. Like it's not really a major focus for sports books in general. they can open up hockey props at very small limits, like literally $100 limits. So there's not a lot of liability there. As soon as Dom's numbers come out, whether it's just the sports books themselves adjusting it or people start betting based off of that, which is probably the more likely scenario, then we just start to see things move into range. So there's still some value to be had out there.

but the prices like now relative to what they were pre-dom release are very different. I don't know, though. I think McDavid's point total was still like 80 and a half, and that's high, but I would not feel comfortable being on the other side of that, let's say. So I don't know. Like it's almost like what we were saying about with the two extremes and the ranges where it's like it's really hard to account for what that climate really could be like even adjusting for the fact that it probably will be inflated scoring wise.

What I particularly noticed in just looking at odds today was the gap between McDavid and Nathan McKinnon in odds now relative to when they were first posted. So like the first Art Ross odds I saw early in the year had McKinnon very high, like neck and neck with McDavid. And now they don't. Not even close. So I think that is starting to get like. But again, Dom is simulating an actual schedule.

So once those projections go out, it's accounting for strength of schedule. And I think just a lot of people piggybacking that in market to get the prices to where they are now. That's not to say that some of these can't be beat now. But yeah, significant value or significant changes, I should say, in these markets. What did McDavid start at? Because I just opened up my file and I see that I haven't at 84 points. So if he's still at 80 and a half, then there's still room there.

So the player scoring props markets, I believe, have been more recent. Like they didn't pick up until a week ago or so. But the trophy odds, not for six weeks. I will say, though, I don't know what McDavid's odds are for the heart. I feel like he had to have to do something insane to win it, though, because it's such a narrative award. I feel like for McKinnon, I think he's like plus 500 for the heart. And considering he finished second twice in the past three years, is probably going to be on the best trendiest team in the league

and there's this growing groundswell sentiment to annoy him as the number one player in the world. I feel like the standards for what he has to accomplish offensively are wildly different than what McDavid does to win that award. I agree with you, but to me it's as simple as if the Oilers make the playoffs, I think McDavid wins the heart. Because I think it's very likely that he's going to lead the league in total points. Unless he's not.

Yeah. Yeah. So I agree with everything you're saying, Dimitri, and I think that's one one important thing to take a look at when you're betting on awards. There are some awards that are just handed out for the actual stats themselves, like the Rock and the Sharp. I mean, you're just projecting goals. But the Norris, right? The heart, the Vezina. These are voted on by people. So you have to like account for how you think voters would vote in those scenarios. And to me, it's. I think it's almost a shoe in that if Edmonton gets into the playoffs, which I think they will, that McDavid ends up winning the heart. Yeah, and he's playing in that North Division. You'll get more goals and points. I think the other thing is McDavid is one of those guys. And we saw when Crosby was not named the best player in the world,

what he did the year after. He made sure that no one ever questioned him again. And I think McDavid has that same sort of unique drive you see in the best players across sport where he saw McKin in the playoffs. He saw Drysidal win the Hartnard Ross, his teammate, and he sees what everyone's writing about him. He came off a lengthy rehab to just even start last year. He's going to be much healthier.

I think he puts up the best season he's ever had this year. That's what I am thinking this year. I love Dom going down the statistically savvy and a narrative street going down the narrative street over here. I agree with you, though Dom. Maybe we watched too much last dance, but I agree. I will say, I was looking at the awards,

odds, and the Norris one. I actually had to refresh my browser three times because Charlie McAvoy was at plus 2,800, and ahead of him was Ryan Graves, and I was like, all right, I know people are high on the Colorado Avalanche, but what set of circumstances would have to happen

for like the fifth best defenseman on the Colorado Avalanche to win the Norris. And I was like, there's something's off here. So I don't know. I think that was my favorite that I saw. Is there anything that really sticks out to you as kind of a fun long shot prop? Not necessarily long shot. I will say Charlie McAvoy opened at like 66 to 1.

So his odds of it actually been cut in half. This is what I'm talking about. Like everyone's like, oh, you know, you can't beat the books and 99% of betters lose. Vegas wasn't built overnight. But a lot of these props, like, they are definitely beatable. when you see, like, I'm not saying McAvoy's going to win the Norris, but that's obviously like, but at those odds, yeah. Exactly.

For me, that Quinn Hughes stands out 16 to 1 for Norris. It would be a pretty big leap, obviously, but I can see putting up a lot of points. People who vote on Norris might be driven by a defenseman that puts up a lot of points, good story. What, like, am I in love with it? know. I mean, if you're looking to bet a flyer, though, like take a flyer on a defenseman, that's probably what I'd say now. I'm going down Narrative Street once again. It's the Norris. We know how... You're living. When did you buy real estate on Narrative Street?

All the Bitcoin profits. Yeah. I love the term narrative street. I'm going to make sure I use that all year. That could just be our thing. The three of us just saying, is it a thing? I think it's a football thing. I feel like I've heard that on like football podcast. heard it. I honestly, I might have coined it. Okay. You're a visionary. I can't say that I did. But I've been using Narrative Street for like going on a decade now. Okay. It's possible that I've coined it. This is the big year for Narrative Street because I'm going to make it so. The Norris is all about it being his turn and we saw what happened to playoffs with Seth Jones. He played an hour and people didn't really care how good that hour was.

I think if he is anywhere in the top 10 scoring, he's going to be nominated. And Columbus makes the playoffs. That's also an important factor on narrative street. But he's got a lot of overwhelming sentiment to annoy him. Oh, man. I mean, there is a scenario here.

So I bet Seth Jones, but only because I don't want Dom like, at the end of the year. Like I told you, you should have bet Seth Jones. I did bet Seth Jones. There's a scenario where like the Leafs, I'm a Leafs fan,

I'll put it out there. I'm not trying to be a homer here. But where Morgan Riley gets a ton of points this year against the defenses that he's facing. He's 20 to 1. The Leafs, like when you talk about the gap, or at least what people view as the gap

between the top team and the next best team within the division, people think the Leafs are going to run away with that division. If they do, and he puts up a lot of points, I think he's most certainly in the conversation this year. Yeah, and he'll look more quote unquote defensively responsible play next to T.J. Brody. That too.

Yeah, but he does have to play Connor McDavid like eight times after McDavid took his soul in a game last year. So that'll be a tough one. I don't know. Jake Muzzin's going to play Connem of McDavid, and people aren't going to remember that. That's true. I'd be more interested in like, I think Matthews is plus 1,400 or something for the heart,

especially now that he's going to be killing penalties, like all of a sudden he's been good. Like his defensive metrics have been good, but now that he kills penalties, we know he's good at defense. And once you bring that into the equation, I mean, that's the total package there. Yeah. All right. Well, let's get out of here. I think we can put a ball on it. I'll let you guys go.

John, you can go first, plug some stuff. where can people check you out and all that good stuff and then we'll let Rob go after? I just wrote so many things for athletic. So many things. A season preview on every team. Top 100 players.

I made Harmon write my best Betts article because I just didn't have time so they're all there. Yeah, just Google my name. I'm sure you can spell it. It's really easy and should all be there. Rob, but we can people check out. You can just follow me

on Twitter at Rob Pazola. It's double Z for the Americans, double Z for the Canadians. I don't really have anything to promote, honestly. I just bet. Hoping to have a good hockey season, hoping Bitcoin doesn't fall apart,

and that's pretty much my right at this point. You should be promoting narrative street and the origin story. I'm really going to have to look back into that, because I used to work at the score, obviously, and I used to write football articles, and I think that's where Narrative Street first started. But I don't think that they're still published on site anymore.

So I don't know how I can trace back like the first time that I used Narrative Street. I should have trademarked it. I mean, everyone uses it now. Don may have never. Everyone uses it. Oh, Dom's going to be sprinkling into every article this year. Every article. All right, guys, thanks for taking the time.

This was a blast and enjoy the season and good luck. And we'll chat sometime down the road. Yeah. Thanks for having us, man. The Hockey PEDEOCast with Dmitri Filipovich. Follow on Twitter at Dim Philipovich and on SoundCloud at soundcloud.com slash hockeypediocast.