To Watch Beyond Goal 1?

Last night the Habs allowed the Thrashers the first goal.

Then for the 4th time this season, they simply couldn't do anything to answer that.

Should we be surprised? I'd say no.

If you want to look for a weakness on this Canadiens team, beyond the PP and their "second" centre that is, the proven inability to be beaten by a first goal might be it.

This season, the record is clear enough:

2-7-0 now after being scored on first.
That includes 4 shutouts against, and 6 occasions where they never even tied the game up again.

Even the two games they won were quirky in that they scored rather quickly to negate that early lead. Vs. Phoenix, they answered within 5 minutes and had the lead within 8 minutes. In Buffalo, they answered the first goal within the minute, and the same for the second.

This season, at least, this is a team that plays like champions with a lead, but rather like chumps when chasing.


There's a history here too.

In the playoffs last spring, the Canadiens let the opponents score first 8 times. They lost 7 of those games in very similar fashion to the above scenarios, again being shutout 4 times over.

Last regular season, the team was ranked 23rd among the 30 in win percentage when trailing after the first period (It isn't exactly the same thing as being scored on first necessarily, but for someone who just wants to make a quick point without doing lots of work, it's a good approximation for now). A piddly 0.256 percentage, once again indicating their propensity to find brick walls to run into.


Rivals

As all the talk these days seems to be intent on declaring the Habs true contenders based on their November run, this must be a factor to consider, a serious chink in the armor.

Good teams, well the best teams, win from in front and win from behind (again, I'll use trailing after the first to illustrate): Washington, Philadelphia, Chicago are all above 0.400 when needing to come back after 20 minutes. Washington is above 0.600.


Being beaten

All athletes will tell you there are different types of competitor. Among them these that can be beaten with an early flourish and those you can never turn your back on. My own experience is that the resilient ones, the ones you can never count out are the opponents you have to worry about. Those that win from in front when everything goes right but give up when they trail are easy enough to build a strategy for. There's no strategy to put down the ones that keep getting up.

Yesterday, I was listening to some radio guys go on about the Canadiens resilience and their apparent ability to bounce back from anything. This was evidenced by good games after bad they proposed. I think this is at serious odds with the in-game findings that show an almost total requirement for that first goal. With it, they are league contenders, without it, they are peers of the Islanders.

I only hope that the coaches and the team take these frequent shutouts as lessons for future use. To find, I suppose, ways not to fall into the typical defensive traps that leading teams create to make the appearance of offensive generation. Heck, they could learn those lessons from their own wins.


Yes, losses happen and we mustn't fret. Trends in losses, however, are worth paying attention to. If the Habs don't buck this trend, they may have enough trouble making the playoffs, let alone contending in them.

At least, I suppose, we could all save on a lot of hours watching the games if first goals continue to spell out results.

Eastern Conference Playoffs Looking for Sweeps, Upsets and Regular season Records

A lot has been published about the optimal opponents for each team come playoff time. I don't want to theorize too much on the topic this time around. Instead, I offer you some data for you to chew on by yourselves:

First up is the head-to-head table for all possible contenders from the Eastern Conference this season (please note, OT/SO goals for/against not counted).



As you can see, most top teams deserve to be there as they have accrued points against playoff-bound rivals.

What you might also spot is that there are some curious results: both plum match-ups (New Jersey getting Pittsburgh, say) and ones to avoid (New Jersey getting Philly).


From this, you can piece together how well each team did solely against playoff teams from the East.



Of note here seems to be that Buffalo are in above their heads, and it seems to be at Ottawa's expense.


Finally, and probably most important for those in imminently scheduled playoff pools like me is the record against teams that they could possibly face in the first round:



Pittsburgh, leaving the standings behind, must be licking their chops for their first round entrance.

Does Halak Get The Easy Marks?

Let's dispel a myth shall we?

In what have become ever more numerous attempts to stir the pot with this goalie thing again (as if winning few games is too boring for the press to take), the publication of Price's really poor goal support has been coming to light.

As you know, I am trying to get to the bottom of what is going on there (no scientist jumps to mere coincidence without a few questions). Until then, I just wanted to address one of the things I think it isn't – Halak getting more than his fair share of easy starts.

To get to the bottom of it, I had a look at the records of each goalie vs. the teams they have played. To be fairer than most analysts, I have omitted the games in question as contribution to the total. So, the Philadelphia Flyers who are a 19-19-3 team with the game against us, are actually a 19-18-3 (or above 0.500 in the standings team) here.

Games vs. teams above 0.500 in the standings

	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts	W%	Real W%
Canadiens	32	14	16	2	30	0.469	0.438
Price	19	7	10	2	16	0.421	0.368
Halak	13	7	6	0	14	0.538	0.538

Games vs. teams below 0.500 in the standings

	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts	W%	Real W%
Canadiens	12	7	4	1	15	0.625	0.583
Price	8	3	4	1	7	0.438	0.375
Halak	4	4	0	0	8	1.000	1.000

Now, from looking at that, it seems that Price got more than his share of games against teams below 0.500 based on his pro-rated share of all starts. His 61% share of all starts should have meant he started 7 games against the bottom feeders. he started 8. Halak is in fact missing a start if you go by this theory.

But hang on, we all know the standings are a complete mess. Teams above 0.500 in the standings like the Islanders by this method are well below once you equate their OTLs with losses. So once again, this time with real wins and losses:

Games vs. teams above 0.500 in real terms

	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts	W%	Real W%
Canadiens	22	6	15	1	13	0.295	0.273
Price	15	5	9	1	11	0.367	0.333
Halak	7	1	6	0	2	0.143	0.143

Games vs. teams below 0.500 in real terms

	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts	W%	Real W%
Canadiens	22	15	5	2	32	0.727	0.682
Price	12	5	5	2	12	0.500	0.417
Halak	10	10	0	0	20	1.000	1.000

In this case, it seems that Halak has had an extra start or two handed to him. His 17 from 44 would suggest he deserved 8 or 9 starts, and he had 10. Price, missed out on 1 or 2 then. However, if you were the coach of the 10-0-0 goalie when facing the real dregs, would you put in the 5-5-2 guy just to boost his record? I thought so. Plus, Carey needed the rest in some cases, which probably contributed to his much more combative efforts against top teams than Halak.

There might be some reason beyond play on the ice, GAA and save percentage that explains the discrepancy in Canadiens goaltenders' wins, but I don't think that Halak getting all the plum assignments has that much to do with it after looking at this, do you?