I keep a lot of statistics. I like to share them now and again. If I had more time, I'd share more.
As it is, time is limited, so after poring over my enormous spreadsheet I have chosen a few stats that I thought might catch the eyes and imagination of some of the Habs fans I know.
1. PK Subban Powerplay Efficiency (2.048 GF/60)
PK ended last season 8 minutes after he basically willed the Canadiens into another period of playoff hockey with what was becoming a reliable feature of his game: the PP goal.
This season has been different. Drastically so. Barely over two goals per 60 minutes of PP hockey. If you assume that all powerplays are 2 minutes (which they are not because goals end PPs) then that gives him an efficiency rating of 6.8% on the PP.
More astounding perhaps is that PK is near bottom on the team in this regard. Weber is on while the team clicks at a 5.045 rate and the much maligned Plekanec is doubling Subban's efficiency.
2. Jaroslav Spacek limiting goals against (0.968 GA/60)
Speaking of much maligned, the "fitter" and oft-injured Spacek has made goal prevention his early season highlight. 0.968 GA is much better than the team average and only second to Palushaj who has yet to be on for a goal against of any kind.
3. Lars Eller's crooked shot (45.5% of chances on target)
As you may or may not know by now, a scoring chance is a shot or indeed a missed shot from within a defined area of the ice. Lars Eller has had moments this season where he made everyone think we should have thrown more to St. Louis in that trade. However, this hasn't necessarily been reflected in wins or even goals.
One of the reason may be that Eller has missed the net 12 out of the 22 times he's had the chance to release a shot from the "slot". This is unusual when you compare to players like Plekanec, Cole, Cammalleri and Kostitsyn who all have been putting more than 2/3 of these golden opportunities on target.
4. Carey Price's Win Threshold (0.902)
Remember the old days when people defending one goalie or another would invoke the win threshold -- the save percentage required to win games.
In the past, this was pulled out because sometimes the low scoring and free shot giving Canadiens would be asking a very high percentage of their goalies. I thought it was worth highlighting that the Canadiens now seem to have got this area of their game in order. The average win threshold has been 0.902, which means plenty of games where Carey only needed to post 0.900 to win (He's 2-2-1 in those).
5. Scott Gomez's ghost (0.051 goal created/60)
Frame of reference, we have two players creating more than 1 goal per 60 minutes played, and two more over 0.9. With 122 minutes played (23 of which have been on the PP) over 8 games, one might well expect a player who routinely gets trotted out on a scoring line to have played more than a bit part in one PP goal.
At his current rate, Gomez would have to play 472 more games to duplicate the contribution Pacioretty has made in less than quarter of a season.
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Lion of October
The Real Player of the Month
It's not Carey Price's fault that the Molson Cup system is flawed, but it is. One has to retain the Molson Cup as a goalie, rather than win it, because the points work that way.
A forward has to win the accolade, and a defenceman would have to raise heaven and earth to get the nod.
The last 12 years in Montreal saw ten goalies get the annual prize, only interrupted by Koivu in 05-06 and Kovalev in 07-08. The last defenceman to win in Montreal: Larry Robinson, 1981.
This isn't unique to the Habs. Such luminaries as Martin Gerber, Ottawa, Vesa Toskala, Toronto and Alex Auld, Vancouver have won the Molson Cup; they're in the net for 60 minutes and are making 90% of saves in most wins, they are top of mind for star selectors.
I don't have a mission to change the Molson Cup. The fans seem to like it (all 200 that vote each game). Rather, I think it only fair that when a player misses out for the recognition he probably deserved over a given month, that he be recognized somewhere.
So, there you have it: Lion of the Month.
With all due respect to Carey Price, who did earn his three star selections, a 4-4-2 record with a 0.900 save percentage and a 2.59 GAA doesn't flatter the team. It leads me to think that perhaps someone was better.
The other candidates: Max Pacioretty and Tomas Plekanec
Pacioretty
Pacioretty jumps out as a choice because we've taken note of his play on this site. 3 times he was named player of the game by us (without significant disagreement) and 5 times he made the dome. A case could have been made for more domes, which is not necessarily the case for Carey Price (who had 7).
His success was recorded in more than our own observations. Max led the team in almost every offensive category in October. He is tied for first in goals (4) and points (9) with Pleks for a start. He's second on the team in total goals created since the start and is first if you pro-rate by minutes played. he's also by far and away the leader at creating goals at even strength.
And for all those who believe that shots drive the whole game, it's worth noting that max is leading the team with shots on net and scoring chances, and is second in overall attempts on net.
In short, he's been "the" offensive catalyst for the team most nights.
Plekanec
Plekanec has quietly crept up the rankings in most of the statistics as well. He currently sits tied for the lead in points and goals as mentioned and leads the team in goals created. Though he was slow off the mark (or a bit unlucky) to start, he now leads the team in goals created on the PP and is showing he might get used to controlling the point of the PP given enough chance to settle in.
Of course we know that in addition to leading the PP, he also takes tough checking assignments and plays a lot of PK. This might not be a plus for him at this point, however.
Pleks has scored more important goals than anyone also. 2 gamewinners of 4 and last game's empty netter saved some blushes that looked to be around the corner.
Price
My low down on Price is that he has had 3 excellent games, 1 very good game, 3 average games and 3 below average ones. This averages out to above average in games, and that's why he led in star points, of course.
However, 10 starts in 11 games gave him much more ice time to get these nods than anyone else, and if this use level continues, pretty much regardless of results, he'll win the Molson Cup.
Because I keep some deeper stats, I know that Price has allowed a goal by the time the other team has had a mere 3.7 scoring chances on average. Knowing how the team in front of him has trouble coming back (not recently), allowing a goal on the first or second scoring chance on net on 6 of 10 occasions counts as a minus for me.
Lion of October: Max Pacioretty
A close race, but on balance, I'd have to rate Pacioretty as the player of October. This is entirely on the merit of his play on the ice and his production of offense for the team. It's entirely reasonable that people want to focus on the recent wins, but Pacioretty as the strongest player in all the losses represented October's positives better than anyone else.
Remarkable to think then that he is also coming back from a broken neck and concussion. Remarkable also that he carried his streaky form from January and February of last season, when such an injury could have easily seen him revert to Max 1.0.
A forward has to win the accolade, and a defenceman would have to raise heaven and earth to get the nod.
The last 12 years in Montreal saw ten goalies get the annual prize, only interrupted by Koivu in 05-06 and Kovalev in 07-08. The last defenceman to win in Montreal: Larry Robinson, 1981.
This isn't unique to the Habs. Such luminaries as Martin Gerber, Ottawa, Vesa Toskala, Toronto and Alex Auld, Vancouver have won the Molson Cup; they're in the net for 60 minutes and are making 90% of saves in most wins, they are top of mind for star selectors.
I don't have a mission to change the Molson Cup. The fans seem to like it (all 200 that vote each game). Rather, I think it only fair that when a player misses out for the recognition he probably deserved over a given month, that he be recognized somewhere.
So, there you have it: Lion of the Month.
With all due respect to Carey Price, who did earn his three star selections, a 4-4-2 record with a 0.900 save percentage and a 2.59 GAA doesn't flatter the team. It leads me to think that perhaps someone was better.
The other candidates: Max Pacioretty and Tomas Plekanec
Pacioretty
Pacioretty jumps out as a choice because we've taken note of his play on this site. 3 times he was named player of the game by us (without significant disagreement) and 5 times he made the dome. A case could have been made for more domes, which is not necessarily the case for Carey Price (who had 7).
His success was recorded in more than our own observations. Max led the team in almost every offensive category in October. He is tied for first in goals (4) and points (9) with Pleks for a start. He's second on the team in total goals created since the start and is first if you pro-rate by minutes played. he's also by far and away the leader at creating goals at even strength.
And for all those who believe that shots drive the whole game, it's worth noting that max is leading the team with shots on net and scoring chances, and is second in overall attempts on net.
In short, he's been "the" offensive catalyst for the team most nights.
Plekanec
Plekanec has quietly crept up the rankings in most of the statistics as well. He currently sits tied for the lead in points and goals as mentioned and leads the team in goals created. Though he was slow off the mark (or a bit unlucky) to start, he now leads the team in goals created on the PP and is showing he might get used to controlling the point of the PP given enough chance to settle in.
Of course we know that in addition to leading the PP, he also takes tough checking assignments and plays a lot of PK. This might not be a plus for him at this point, however.
Pleks has scored more important goals than anyone also. 2 gamewinners of 4 and last game's empty netter saved some blushes that looked to be around the corner.
Price
My low down on Price is that he has had 3 excellent games, 1 very good game, 3 average games and 3 below average ones. This averages out to above average in games, and that's why he led in star points, of course.
However, 10 starts in 11 games gave him much more ice time to get these nods than anyone else, and if this use level continues, pretty much regardless of results, he'll win the Molson Cup.
Because I keep some deeper stats, I know that Price has allowed a goal by the time the other team has had a mere 3.7 scoring chances on average. Knowing how the team in front of him has trouble coming back (not recently), allowing a goal on the first or second scoring chance on net on 6 of 10 occasions counts as a minus for me.
Lion of October: Max Pacioretty
A close race, but on balance, I'd have to rate Pacioretty as the player of October. This is entirely on the merit of his play on the ice and his production of offense for the team. It's entirely reasonable that people want to focus on the recent wins, but Pacioretty as the strongest player in all the losses represented October's positives better than anyone else.
Remarkable to think then that he is also coming back from a broken neck and concussion. Remarkable also that he carried his streaky form from January and February of last season, when such an injury could have easily seen him revert to Max 1.0.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
The Importance of Context
Hockey blogging and stats dredging were born around the same time. Since that time, there has been an expanding following for "advanced" statistics. From the Oilogosphere, the adoption of Corsi, Fenwick, scoring chances and other new ways of twisting the NHL stats record have popped up.
I like to think I was a relatively early adopter of these things. I was excited about the possibilities of Corsi before Toronto missed the playoffs for the 2nd season in a row. I was liking where the future of player analysis was going.
What I've noticed lately, however, is that I am increasingly jaded with the whole lot of them. I still track the numbers and keep a record. I still think there is value to the data. I suppose what I am finding is that I am finding many people to stretch interpretation beyond its bounds. Sometimes simple numbers like shots (on net or off net) are given far too much importance and stretched too thin.
What prompted me to write this piece was a simple segue link from Habs Eyes on the Prize:
In Winnipeg, it was a bit different. The Canadiens scored on their second shot of the game off a steal in the neutral zone. It was a killer play, but in the world of trying to find enough stats in order to create a meaningful sample, it was only a single shot on net, a single positive point towards Corsi. In the context of the game, however, it caused Winnipeg to change gameplan -- something which opened them up to further breakthrough passes.
Remember limitations
You can see the importance of context here. We all watch the Canadiens a fair bit and know that when they get a lead they are not a team that risks much to press for a bigger lead. Their preference is to guard 1-0 or 2-1 than to find breathing room at the risk of leaving that tying goalscoring chance to the opponent.
We may or may not agree with the strategy (my nerves don't agree), but the time for that discussion is later. The point here is that we don't need to leave that observation out of our interpretations of things.
Did Montreal play better against Toronto than they did against Winnipeg? Well, no. If the goal is to win by scoring, the Toronto game for all the defensive poise and nice breakouts did not produce a single seam cutting pass like the Moen PK effort. There was not a rush with a wide open goalscorer getting a clear shot like Pacioretty's goal. There were only shots in volume hoping to go in.
If every win and loss this season follow the pattern of the first two games (unlikely, but bear with me), then let's please not extol the virtues of the positive Fenwick/Corsi man too much. Rather we might need to consider a better way to evaluate a team that buttons up when it's winning and only pours on shots when it's not. Remembering of course that winning is better than not winning.
I still encourage everyone to read up on these stats. I encourage everyone to get their fill of Olivier and Chris Boucher's efforts (and they're big efforts). But if you can be left feeling that the stats do not gibe with what you have just seen, question the statistics as well as observer bias.
The answer to everything has not yet been found. And it's only questioning that will get us there.
To be completely fair to Boucher, his piece is not one of the pieces I am talking about. He approaches his data like a scientist in a discussion section of a published paper. It's all questions and few presumptions. Sorry Chris that it was your piece that set me off then.
Apology aside now. Let's look simply at the Canadiens first two games.
Stats without context
In the first game the Habs lost to the Toronto Maple Leafs yet outshot them and pretty widely outstretched the Leafs in Fenwick and Corsi. If you only looked at that one element of the game then the Habs were the better team. If the Habs played like this all season, we'd hear how good they were and how they were incredibly unlucky not to score.
In their second game, the Habs were widely outshot, their Fenwick was overall worse than the Jets and so was their Corsi. it was the reverse in terms of these statistics of the Toronto game. The Habs should have lost and if they played like this all season we'd be hearing (like we did in the playoffs of 2010) how lucky the team was and how they didn't deserve anything they were getting.
A dash of context
OK, now how about some context.
In the Toronto game, I would take that above analysis for the first period. The Habs did outplay Toronto and were unlucky (somewhat) not to be winning. They'd have been quite unlucky to be losing. They were a bit unlucky to be losing 33 seconds into the second period, in fact, when they allowed a short-handed goal. But after that, the game changed to the observer. The Leafs seemed to find a new gear and the Canadiens mustered almost nothing of threat for 30 minutes or more. For more than half the game, the Canadiens were in fact the far worse team despite the average Corsi. The NHL record says they had 4 shots to the Leafs 8 in the second period. Olivier recorded chances though as 0 to 12.
I like to think I was a relatively early adopter of these things. I was excited about the possibilities of Corsi before Toronto missed the playoffs for the 2nd season in a row. I was liking where the future of player analysis was going.
What I've noticed lately, however, is that I am increasingly jaded with the whole lot of them. I still track the numbers and keep a record. I still think there is value to the data. I suppose what I am finding is that I am finding many people to stretch interpretation beyond its bounds. Sometimes simple numbers like shots (on net or off net) are given far too much importance and stretched too thin.
What prompted me to write this piece was a simple segue link from Habs Eyes on the Prize:
In Winnipeg, it was a bit different. The Canadiens scored on their second shot of the game off a steal in the neutral zone. It was a killer play, but in the world of trying to find enough stats in order to create a meaningful sample, it was only a single shot on net, a single positive point towards Corsi. In the context of the game, however, it caused Winnipeg to change gameplan -- something which opened them up to further breakthrough passes.
Remember limitations
You can see the importance of context here. We all watch the Canadiens a fair bit and know that when they get a lead they are not a team that risks much to press for a bigger lead. Their preference is to guard 1-0 or 2-1 than to find breathing room at the risk of leaving that tying goalscoring chance to the opponent.
We may or may not agree with the strategy (my nerves don't agree), but the time for that discussion is later. The point here is that we don't need to leave that observation out of our interpretations of things.
Did Montreal play better against Toronto than they did against Winnipeg? Well, no. If the goal is to win by scoring, the Toronto game for all the defensive poise and nice breakouts did not produce a single seam cutting pass like the Moen PK effort. There was not a rush with a wide open goalscorer getting a clear shot like Pacioretty's goal. There were only shots in volume hoping to go in.
If every win and loss this season follow the pattern of the first two games (unlikely, but bear with me), then let's please not extol the virtues of the positive Fenwick/Corsi man too much. Rather we might need to consider a better way to evaluate a team that buttons up when it's winning and only pours on shots when it's not. Remembering of course that winning is better than not winning.
I still encourage everyone to read up on these stats. I encourage everyone to get their fill of Olivier and Chris Boucher's efforts (and they're big efforts). But if you can be left feeling that the stats do not gibe with what you have just seen, question the statistics as well as observer bias.
The answer to everything has not yet been found. And it's only questioning that will get us there.
"Chris Boucher's analysis shows the Habs played better against the Toronto Maple Leafs than the Winnipeg Jets."
To be completely fair to Boucher, his piece is not one of the pieces I am talking about. He approaches his data like a scientist in a discussion section of a published paper. It's all questions and few presumptions. Sorry Chris that it was your piece that set me off then.
Apology aside now. Let's look simply at the Canadiens first two games.
Stats without context
In the first game the Habs lost to the Toronto Maple Leafs yet outshot them and pretty widely outstretched the Leafs in Fenwick and Corsi. If you only looked at that one element of the game then the Habs were the better team. If the Habs played like this all season, we'd hear how good they were and how they were incredibly unlucky not to score.
In their second game, the Habs were widely outshot, their Fenwick was overall worse than the Jets and so was their Corsi. it was the reverse in terms of these statistics of the Toronto game. The Habs should have lost and if they played like this all season we'd be hearing (like we did in the playoffs of 2010) how lucky the team was and how they didn't deserve anything they were getting.
A dash of context
OK, now how about some context.
In the Toronto game, I would take that above analysis for the first period. The Habs did outplay Toronto and were unlucky (somewhat) not to be winning. They'd have been quite unlucky to be losing. They were a bit unlucky to be losing 33 seconds into the second period, in fact, when they allowed a short-handed goal. But after that, the game changed to the observer. The Leafs seemed to find a new gear and the Canadiens mustered almost nothing of threat for 30 minutes or more. For more than half the game, the Canadiens were in fact the far worse team despite the average Corsi. The NHL record says they had 4 shots to the Leafs 8 in the second period. Olivier recorded chances though as 0 to 12.
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
Ready For A Comedown?
Carey Price in 2011-12
You may all remember a time when Canadiens fans argued about the high ceiling of potential for goalies and the choices to be made in the organization.
That time has passed, but we should not forget the lessons that have been imparted on us simple fans by those who saw the future back then.
Good seasons we were told, great seasons, are not to be taken as signs of progression or as benchmarks. Rather we should be happy they occurred and get ready for the comedown.
I argued many times to the contrary in the past, but I have been humbled by witnessing the true trajectory that goalies who post a save percentage over the NHL average face. I will not be fooled into thinking this can be sustained again.
Carey posted a save percentage that we were told just last year was pretty much unsustainable. Those people were dead on about the Habs goalie who posted the unworldly 0.924? Is Carey immune to this argument? We were told that none were.
Carey played above expectation, saving more shots than would be expected based on NHL averages. This we have been told by statisticians talking on other goalies (and Gomez's opposite situation) can't continue. He's too far above and must come down.
The way I see it, as simple fans we need to just accept that a comedown is coming. We should again listen to all those voices we heard in seasons past. Can't you hear them now?
That time has passed, but we should not forget the lessons that have been imparted on us simple fans by those who saw the future back then.
Good seasons we were told, great seasons, are not to be taken as signs of progression or as benchmarks. Rather we should be happy they occurred and get ready for the comedown.
I argued many times to the contrary in the past, but I have been humbled by witnessing the true trajectory that goalies who post a save percentage over the NHL average face. I will not be fooled into thinking this can be sustained again.
Carey posted a save percentage that we were told just last year was pretty much unsustainable. Those people were dead on about the Habs goalie who posted the unworldly 0.924? Is Carey immune to this argument? We were told that none were.
Carey played above expectation, saving more shots than would be expected based on NHL averages. This we have been told by statisticians talking on other goalies (and Gomez's opposite situation) can't continue. He's too far above and must come down.
The way I see it, as simple fans we need to just accept that a comedown is coming. We should again listen to all those voices we heard in seasons past. Can't you hear them now?
Friday, July 22, 2011
Giveaway King
NHL.com says Ilya Kovalchuk is the NHL's giveaway king.
Scott Cullen says it's Joe Thornton.
NHL.com would say Hal Gill is the worst in Montreal, Cullen would say Spacek.
But there's a revelation here. The NHL tracks giveaways for the whole team, but NHL.com does not. At some point, the website takes certain stats kept for goalies and throws them on the trash heap.
Last season, Hal Gill had a whopping 62 giveaways. But even he was eclipsed by the free-passing Carey Price for whom the league noted 77 giveaways.
77 giveaways for our goalie places him at the distinguished rank of 11th in a tie with Drew Doughty. It's unclear if he was surpassed by other goalies (because I neither have the time nor the interest to compile that many stats), but chances are based on games played and impressions that very few if any beat him to the mark.
Considering also that every one of Carey Price's giveaways was in the defensive zone and that unlike Thornton who offset his GvA with 114 takeaways, Carey had a single act of out of crease thievery. Never mind that he, unlike defenders, is rarely obligated to handle the puck. He must surely be the leader in unnecessary giveaways if nothing else.
For me, no discussion of giveaways in the NHL should take place without mention of our local leader in this regard. And, hey, who wouldn't want to be in the heady company of guys like Kovalchuk, Thornton, St. Louis and Keith with all the trophies they've won. Price is keeping some good company with his puck handling.
Scott Cullen says it's Joe Thornton.
NHL.com would say Hal Gill is the worst in Montreal, Cullen would say Spacek.
But there's a revelation here. The NHL tracks giveaways for the whole team, but NHL.com does not. At some point, the website takes certain stats kept for goalies and throws them on the trash heap.
Last season, Hal Gill had a whopping 62 giveaways. But even he was eclipsed by the free-passing Carey Price for whom the league noted 77 giveaways.
77 giveaways for our goalie places him at the distinguished rank of 11th in a tie with Drew Doughty. It's unclear if he was surpassed by other goalies (because I neither have the time nor the interest to compile that many stats), but chances are based on games played and impressions that very few if any beat him to the mark.
Considering also that every one of Carey Price's giveaways was in the defensive zone and that unlike Thornton who offset his GvA with 114 takeaways, Carey had a single act of out of crease thievery. Never mind that he, unlike defenders, is rarely obligated to handle the puck. He must surely be the leader in unnecessary giveaways if nothing else.
For me, no discussion of giveaways in the NHL should take place without mention of our local leader in this regard. And, hey, who wouldn't want to be in the heady company of guys like Kovalchuk, Thornton, St. Louis and Keith with all the trophies they've won. Price is keeping some good company with his puck handling.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Gorging On Shooting Stats
The other day I read that Josh Gorges better look out at arbitration, because he is in fact the worst defenceman in the entire league at putting shots on net – or at least he was last season.
The stats compiled by Scott Cullen at TSN rely on two statistics – shots on goal and missed shots. Add them together and one can get an idea of how many shots released by a player actually hit the net. Josh Gorges was the worst Dman in the league with a meager 51.3% of his shots actually hitting the net. I’m not sure this will really be the breaking point for Gorges, however, as he only directed 39 shots on or off the net anyway.
Still, the article did inspire me to delve a little deeper into the stats I collected this past season. For your summertime pleasure, then, I present a look into chances, shots and attempts for the 2010-11 Montreal Canadiens (regular season).
Shots on net
Credit to Scott Cullen for a good topical subject. To go further, however, I am going to look at all shots (not just the ones recorded on the NHL’s main page) from the season, including those that were blocked by defenders.
Sadly for Josh Gorges, the news gets worse. When we factor in his 23 blocked attempts, we actually find that he only got 32% of the shots released from his stick on net. I don’t know how the NHL stacks up in this regard, but I can tell you only Andreas Engqvist was worse on the Habs, and he only had 4 attempts.
% shots/attempt
Top tier (>60%): Moen (72%), Lapierre, White, Desharnais, Pouliot
Second tier (51-60%): Dawes, O’Byrne, Pacioretty, Mara, Darche, Gionta, Plekanec, Gomez, Cammalleri, Halpern, Pyatt, Markov, Kostitsyn, Subban
Third tier (41-50%): Palushaj, Nash, Wisniewski, Hamrlik, Eller, Gill, Picard, Boyd
Bottom tier (<40%): Weber, Spacek, Sopel, Gorges, Engqvist (25%)
From this data, I think we can infer a few things. First, forwards have clearer sightlines and so generally convert more of their attempts into shots on net. Second, getting shots on net is not really a great measure of player quality (sorry, Scott Cullen). I think we all watched enough of Travis Moen, Maxim Lapierre and Ryan White to know we’d rather see a few missed shots if it means a player who is actually capable of beating a goalie can have the puck on his stick once in a while.
Chances on net
Just as a blocked shot or a missed shot may be a waste, so too could an ill-advised shot from a bad angle, a low percentage shot.
Thanks to Olivier at En Attendant les Nordiques we now have two seasons worth of analysis on which shots came from dangerous positions.
% chances/attempt
Outlier (>50%): Palushaj (67%)
Top tier (41-50%): Kostitsyn, Cammalleri, Moen, Lapierre, Plekanec, Darche, Desharnais, Eller, Gionta, Pouliot
Second tier (31-40%): Dawes, Halpern, Pacioretty, Gomez, Boyd
Third tier (21-30%): White, Pyatt, Engqvist, Markov
Fourth tier (11-20%): Wisniewski, Subban, Picard
Bottom tier (1-10%): Hamrlik, Gorges, Weber, Gill, Spacek
No chances (0%) Sopel, Mara, Nash, O’Byrne
Kostitsyn and Cammalleri’s presence at second and third is telling because most think of those two as the best pure shooters on the team. Given that a scoring chance in Olivier’s analysis is defined as an attempt (on net, missed or blocked) from a dangerous area, this data shows how these two guys excel at getting in position (or at least in not shooting from bad positions).
Defencemen don’t have the same opportunity to get into “chance” territory. But consider that 22% of Andrei Markov’s attempts were scoring chances … positioning again, and we can just see the PP pinch.
Chances needed to score
A common exclamation in my household is: “How many chances does this guy need to be fed to put one in?” The mark of a scorer is reliability in good positions. But like shooting percentage, this stat gives insight into the luck (good or bad) that was at play as well.
Chances/goal
Top tier (<5): Jeff Halpern (3.73), Subban, Wisniewski, Desharnais, Picard, Gill, Pacioretty
Second tier (5-10): Gorges, Darche, Hamrlik, Boyd, White, Pouliot, Gionta, Plekanec, Markov, Cammalleri, Kostitsyn, Lapierre, Eller
Bottom tier (>10): Moen, Spacek, Gomez, Weber, Pyatt (17.00)
Conspicuous in these lists are players at the top and bottom that are no longer around: Pyatt for his utter futility around the net given good chances and Halpern, Picard and Wisniewski based on the bet they might never replicate this form. Gomez too should be ashamed of his presence on this list, as it’s hard to blame everyone else for one’s poor stats when one take nearly 13 chances to score a goal.
Chance creation while on ice
In fairness to Josh Gorges, his job when he’s on the ice is not shot or chance creation. In fact, when he’s on the ice as part of a 5-man unit, he is usually the 5th (sometimes the 4th) player responsible for that aspect of the game.
To evaluate Gorges contribution to offense is difficult. Really it is about how he creates space for his teammates through quick and crisp defensive play and transition. Of course, there’s not one measure of this. If there were, we wouldn’t need to waste our time with things like Corsi.
One measure that comes close to this is zone shift. Unfortunately, I don’t track that. So my proxy for this activity today will be percentage of attempts that are scored as scoring chances while a player is on the ice – the idea being that each player is ultimately driving to create scoring with his team unit and avoid non-chances, so this percentage gives one look into the quest.
% ChFON/AttFON
Top tier (>50%): Cammalleri (54%)
Second tier (41-50%): Plekanec, Wisniewski, Kostitsyn, Gionta, Subban, Markov
Third tier (31-40%): Desharnais, Gomez, Hamrlik, Darche, Pacioretty, Weber, Gorges, Spacek, Gill, Picard, Moen, Sopel, Lapierre
Fourth tier (21-30%): Boyd, Halpern, Mara, Pouliot, Pyatt, Eller, White, Palushaj
Bottom tier (<20%): O’Byrne, Nash, Dawes, Engqvist (8%)
Maybe it’s the way we watch the game, but it’s uncanny how this list pans out. I think of Cammalleri as really the only undisputed star on the Habs, and there I he is, miles ahead. The next tier lists the guys I would say have better than average offensive instincts. That fourth tier has a lot of “steer clears”.
The big surprise (though obviously not to Habs management) is Pouliot. While he ranked highly in converting his own attempts into scoring chances, it seems those he played with were simply bad. Apparently management didn’t think his hands were clean in this debacle.
This look into shots is no more definitive than Scott Cullen's work, but it does at least give Josh Gorges a little bit of hope. It appears from this at least that shots/attempt is the area in which he performed worst last season. In fact, in some of the other areas he did quite well. And to vindicate management decisions here, he does appear to be better than Mara, Sopel and some of the other former Habs.
Apart from Gorges, there's more insights, I'm sure. Cammalleri looks good in most lists and Markov looks the class at the back end. So at least logic isn't defied. Further than this, I'll leave the conclusions to you all.
The stats compiled by Scott Cullen at TSN rely on two statistics – shots on goal and missed shots. Add them together and one can get an idea of how many shots released by a player actually hit the net. Josh Gorges was the worst Dman in the league with a meager 51.3% of his shots actually hitting the net. I’m not sure this will really be the breaking point for Gorges, however, as he only directed 39 shots on or off the net anyway.
Still, the article did inspire me to delve a little deeper into the stats I collected this past season. For your summertime pleasure, then, I present a look into chances, shots and attempts for the 2010-11 Montreal Canadiens (regular season).
Shots on net
Credit to Scott Cullen for a good topical subject. To go further, however, I am going to look at all shots (not just the ones recorded on the NHL’s main page) from the season, including those that were blocked by defenders.
Sadly for Josh Gorges, the news gets worse. When we factor in his 23 blocked attempts, we actually find that he only got 32% of the shots released from his stick on net. I don’t know how the NHL stacks up in this regard, but I can tell you only Andreas Engqvist was worse on the Habs, and he only had 4 attempts.
% shots/attempt
Top tier (>60%): Moen (72%), Lapierre, White, Desharnais, Pouliot
Second tier (51-60%): Dawes, O’Byrne, Pacioretty, Mara, Darche, Gionta, Plekanec, Gomez, Cammalleri, Halpern, Pyatt, Markov, Kostitsyn, Subban
Third tier (41-50%): Palushaj, Nash, Wisniewski, Hamrlik, Eller, Gill, Picard, Boyd
Bottom tier (<40%): Weber, Spacek, Sopel, Gorges, Engqvist (25%)
From this data, I think we can infer a few things. First, forwards have clearer sightlines and so generally convert more of their attempts into shots on net. Second, getting shots on net is not really a great measure of player quality (sorry, Scott Cullen). I think we all watched enough of Travis Moen, Maxim Lapierre and Ryan White to know we’d rather see a few missed shots if it means a player who is actually capable of beating a goalie can have the puck on his stick once in a while.
Chances on net
Just as a blocked shot or a missed shot may be a waste, so too could an ill-advised shot from a bad angle, a low percentage shot.
Thanks to Olivier at En Attendant les Nordiques we now have two seasons worth of analysis on which shots came from dangerous positions.
% chances/attempt
Outlier (>50%): Palushaj (67%)
Top tier (41-50%): Kostitsyn, Cammalleri, Moen, Lapierre, Plekanec, Darche, Desharnais, Eller, Gionta, Pouliot
Second tier (31-40%): Dawes, Halpern, Pacioretty, Gomez, Boyd
Third tier (21-30%): White, Pyatt, Engqvist, Markov
Fourth tier (11-20%): Wisniewski, Subban, Picard
Bottom tier (1-10%): Hamrlik, Gorges, Weber, Gill, Spacek
No chances (0%) Sopel, Mara, Nash, O’Byrne
Kostitsyn and Cammalleri’s presence at second and third is telling because most think of those two as the best pure shooters on the team. Given that a scoring chance in Olivier’s analysis is defined as an attempt (on net, missed or blocked) from a dangerous area, this data shows how these two guys excel at getting in position (or at least in not shooting from bad positions).
Defencemen don’t have the same opportunity to get into “chance” territory. But consider that 22% of Andrei Markov’s attempts were scoring chances … positioning again, and we can just see the PP pinch.
Chances needed to score
A common exclamation in my household is: “How many chances does this guy need to be fed to put one in?” The mark of a scorer is reliability in good positions. But like shooting percentage, this stat gives insight into the luck (good or bad) that was at play as well.
Chances/goal
Top tier (<5): Jeff Halpern (3.73), Subban, Wisniewski, Desharnais, Picard, Gill, Pacioretty
Second tier (5-10): Gorges, Darche, Hamrlik, Boyd, White, Pouliot, Gionta, Plekanec, Markov, Cammalleri, Kostitsyn, Lapierre, Eller
Bottom tier (>10): Moen, Spacek, Gomez, Weber, Pyatt (17.00)
Conspicuous in these lists are players at the top and bottom that are no longer around: Pyatt for his utter futility around the net given good chances and Halpern, Picard and Wisniewski based on the bet they might never replicate this form. Gomez too should be ashamed of his presence on this list, as it’s hard to blame everyone else for one’s poor stats when one take nearly 13 chances to score a goal.
Chance creation while on ice
In fairness to Josh Gorges, his job when he’s on the ice is not shot or chance creation. In fact, when he’s on the ice as part of a 5-man unit, he is usually the 5th (sometimes the 4th) player responsible for that aspect of the game.
To evaluate Gorges contribution to offense is difficult. Really it is about how he creates space for his teammates through quick and crisp defensive play and transition. Of course, there’s not one measure of this. If there were, we wouldn’t need to waste our time with things like Corsi.
One measure that comes close to this is zone shift. Unfortunately, I don’t track that. So my proxy for this activity today will be percentage of attempts that are scored as scoring chances while a player is on the ice – the idea being that each player is ultimately driving to create scoring with his team unit and avoid non-chances, so this percentage gives one look into the quest.
% ChFON/AttFON
Top tier (>50%): Cammalleri (54%)
Second tier (41-50%): Plekanec, Wisniewski, Kostitsyn, Gionta, Subban, Markov
Third tier (31-40%): Desharnais, Gomez, Hamrlik, Darche, Pacioretty, Weber, Gorges, Spacek, Gill, Picard, Moen, Sopel, Lapierre
Fourth tier (21-30%): Boyd, Halpern, Mara, Pouliot, Pyatt, Eller, White, Palushaj
Bottom tier (<20%): O’Byrne, Nash, Dawes, Engqvist (8%)
Maybe it’s the way we watch the game, but it’s uncanny how this list pans out. I think of Cammalleri as really the only undisputed star on the Habs, and there I he is, miles ahead. The next tier lists the guys I would say have better than average offensive instincts. That fourth tier has a lot of “steer clears”.
The big surprise (though obviously not to Habs management) is Pouliot. While he ranked highly in converting his own attempts into scoring chances, it seems those he played with were simply bad. Apparently management didn’t think his hands were clean in this debacle.
This look into shots is no more definitive than Scott Cullen's work, but it does at least give Josh Gorges a little bit of hope. It appears from this at least that shots/attempt is the area in which he performed worst last season. In fact, in some of the other areas he did quite well. And to vindicate management decisions here, he does appear to be better than Mara, Sopel and some of the other former Habs.
Apart from Gorges, there's more insights, I'm sure. Cammalleri looks good in most lists and Markov looks the class at the back end. So at least logic isn't defied. Further than this, I'll leave the conclusions to you all.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Game #1-1
Habs & Bruins Summaries
Because it's playoff time, I think we need to look at more than just goals and assists. Here are the extended summaries for both the Habs and Bruins.
Montreal Canadiens
Despite what looked like a serial bombardment, no one actually comes out looking too badly. It's worth noting Plekanec had a heck of a game if he came out on top of Fenwick, since he was on the ice for plenty of possession against - this means he was on for plenty of blocked shots and shots for.
Boston Bruins
Most informative for the Bruins is the colouration of Fenwick and Ch +/-. they do not match. This largely shows what we all saw - that Boston had lots of shots and missed shots, but not that many chances. Kaberle was a particular standout in getting the balance wrong as he outshot the Habs, but got quite badly outchanced. They ;ll know this now, but will they be able to correct?
Thanks is due to NHL.com for tracking so many things and to Olivier at En Attendant le Nordiques who diligently tracks scoring chances for and against to share with all Canadiens fans.
Legend:
GP: Game played
G: Goals
A: Assists
P: Points
PM: [Goals for (ES + SH)] - [goals against (ES + PP)], aka plus/minus
Ch +/-: [Chances for] - [chances against] at ES
Fenwick: [Shots on and off net for] - [Shots on and off net against] at ES
Corsi: [Shots on and off net for + those blocked] - [Shots on and off net against + blocked shots] at ES
Montreal Canadiens
Despite what looked like a serial bombardment, no one actually comes out looking too badly. It's worth noting Plekanec had a heck of a game if he came out on top of Fenwick, since he was on the ice for plenty of possession against - this means he was on for plenty of blocked shots and shots for.
Boston Bruins
Most informative for the Bruins is the colouration of Fenwick and Ch +/-. they do not match. This largely shows what we all saw - that Boston had lots of shots and missed shots, but not that many chances. Kaberle was a particular standout in getting the balance wrong as he outshot the Habs, but got quite badly outchanced. They ;ll know this now, but will they be able to correct?
Thanks is due to NHL.com for tracking so many things and to Olivier at En Attendant le Nordiques who diligently tracks scoring chances for and against to share with all Canadiens fans.
Legend:
GP: Game played
G: Goals
A: Assists
P: Points
PM: [Goals for (ES + SH)] - [goals against (ES + PP)], aka plus/minus
Ch +/-: [Chances for] - [chances against] at ES
Fenwick: [Shots on and off net for] - [Shots on and off net against] at ES
Corsi: [Shots on and off net for + those blocked] - [Shots on and off net against + blocked shots] at ES
Monday, February 14, 2011
The Hierarchy Of Canadiens Forwards
The other night David Desharnais was the best player on the ice for the Canadiens. Undrafted, discarded, discounted, hardened by challenge and 18 games into an NHL career, David became the top rookie forward on the team with that display.
It seems Jaroslav Halak provided an ironic parting gift. The return on his trade is facing a Carey Price scenario from an undrafted Halak emulator. The first rounder is tested by the untouted, and results are starting to trump sentiment just as before.
Desharnais's stats are staring to impress. These are his stats and rankings among Canadiens forwards compared to those of his fellow rookie:
Desharnais has great numbers, and he’s displayed some great talent the past couple of games. But though it’s pretty certain he could at least survive in this league now, what’s not clear is how this looks after a big slump to match his hot streak. I like his attitude and I like his creativity, but I wouldn’t like the team’s chances really if they entered the playoffs with DD on the second line.
Like Plekanec, Eller has shown the ability to put distance between himself and teammates (only in the opposite direction). Whatever he is doing hasn’t been working. The lessons he is being exposed to are good, but he must show he can learn from them. The only category where he even flirts with the position he currently occupies in the top 6 is Corsi. Corsi is useful for some things, but when every other indicator tells you something else, you dismiss it. Eller is not just unlucky, he’s unprepared.
At this point, a healthy Cammalleri and a much more enticing Desharnais mean Eller will be demoted and won’t see NHL playoff action. This may be good for Eller, it will certainly be good for the Habs.
Habs forwards by tiers
Interesting as this is, how one rookie fares against another for this Canadiens team is probably about as important as Guy Carbonneau's playoff ties at this point. The really important stuff will happen with the non-rookie forwards, particularly those on "scoring lines".
Eller is relevant within this conversation, as he currently occupies a plum position on what some may still be calling the second line. Desharnais' recent displays vault him into consideration here too.
For forwards entering into scoring line discussions, I looked at much the same stats as those above and have included the ranks below. Using those, I broke the forwards into tiers. There's no big surprises (bar maybe one), but the numbers might interest some of you, and certainly fuel some discussion.
Star forward
1) Plekanec
(2nd goals, 1st points, 1st GC, 1st ESGC, 3rd GC/60, 2nd ESGC/60, 6th GF/60, 2nd ESGF/60, 9th CORSI, 1st LIW/60, 8th GA/60, 7th ESGA/60, 2nd ES+-/60)
Plekanec is pretty much the best forward from both an offensive and defensive perspective this season. This makes him by far and away the best forward on the team, probably even the best player at any position, and certainly the only star forward on the team at the moment. It’s impressive that he has been able distance himself like this from his peers, even with all the continued PK duty that he was supposed to be relieved of. The C isn’t sewn on his chest, but it is on his heart.
Top-liners
2) Cammalleri
(3rd goals, 2nd points, 3rd GC, 5th ESGC, 6th GC/60, 8th ESGC/60, 5th GF/60, 8th ESGF/60, 10th CORSI, 5th LIW/60, 2nd GA/60, 3rd ESGA/60, 4th ES+-/60)
Cammalleri isn’t even having a particularly good year by his standards, but his numbers still show that he’s a cut above the rest, even if he’s a cut below Pleks. Playing with Plekanec has its benefits, as Camms defensive numbers show, but he’s no disaster on defence, as he obviously plays the winger’s assignment better than others.
3) Gionta
(1st goals, 2nd points, 2nd GC, 2nd ESGC, 8th GC/60, 3rd ESGC/60, 8th GF/60, 10th ESGF/60, CORSI, 3rd LIW/60, 7th GA/60, 9th ESGA/60, 8th ES+-/60)
Gionta is the second best offensive forward and has been average in the defensive aspects of the game this season. His clutch play is second to none sometimes, yet when he’s not needed to score a clutch goal, it seems his luck has been averaging out. Add to this, the distinct lack of assists, and he is a clear level below Plekanec.
Scoring forwards
4) Kostitsyn
(4th goals, 4th points, 4th GC, 3rd ESGC, 7th GC/60, 4th ESGC/60, 9th GF/60, 9th ESGF/60, 8th CORSI, 2nd LIW/60, 3rd GA/60, 4th ESGA/60, 6th ES+-/60)
Considering lines have yet to be juggled to get the most from the Belarussian, he’s done OK. Goals created at ES is a strength for him, and defence is near top among forwards. The deciding factor to elevate Andrei is his ability to be the best forward on the ice. Not an ability shared by all on this team.
5) Pouliot
(5th goals, 6th points, 6th GC, 4th ESGC, 4th GC/60, 1st ESGC/60, 7th GF/60, 6th ESGF/60, 4th CORSI, 8th LIW/60, 5th GA/60, 8th ESGA/60, 5th ES+-/60)
Stats show Pouliot has been very proficient considering his lot this year. Without significant time with a full-time passer, he’s slowly made a season for himself and pretty consistently now heads out on the second best line of the night. Tobalev and I think he should proclaim his total disinterest in playing anything but first line hockey. Seems to be a strategy that can work.
6th forward
6) Pacioretty
(6th goals, 9th points, 8th GC, 8th ESGC, 2nd GC/60, 10th ESGC/60, 1st GF/60, 4th ESGF/60, 2nd CORSI, 4th LIW/60, 11th GA/60, 13th ESGA/60, 9th ES+-/60)
Pacioretty is in a class of his own I feel. Since his renaissance, he has been quite a spark offensively. He currently leads the team in goals for when on the ice. However, unlike Kostitsyn and Pouliot, he hasn’t shown sustained offensive generation on his own. Nor has he shown that he can limit the risk he takes up from to curtail goals against. He’s young, this is normal.
Second tier forwards
7) Gomez
(9th goals, 4th points, 5th GC, 7th ESGC, 9th GC/60, 12th ESGC/60, 10th GF/60, 12th ESGF/60, 7th CORSI, 7th LIW/60, 9th GA/60, 11th ESGA/60, 13th ES+-/60)
Slump once, bad luck. Slump twice, start looking for reasons. We know that Gomez can do lots right. He has a knack for skating through the neutral zone, he can pass very well, and he knows the time to hold the puck at the back end instead of starting a dead-end rush. These he can do. He sits here at second tier forward because over time that is proving to be too little. His defenders will invoke luck, but his shooting percentage isn’t lacking a regression to the norm because he’s bounced too many shots of goalies flailing stick nubs, it’s because his shots are easy to save. If you invoke luck after 60 games, you’d better have a pretty good explanation as to why Mathieu Darche is miles better at GF and GA/60, as to why those who supposedly play better competition anyway are putting better numbers at both ends. Sooner or later, the answer has to be the player himself. The case is mounting here. And Gomez is falling behind three forwards he was previously ahead of.
8) Darche
(7th goals, 7th points, 7th GC, 6th ESGC, 5th GC/60, 5th ESGC/60, 2nd GF/60, 5th ESGF/60, 5th CORSI, 9th LIW/60, 4th GA/60, 2nd ESGA/60, 3rd ES+-/60)
Darche at any time is probably the 6th best forward on the team. He is pretty reliable for a good shift at both ends, and the numbers show that. The reason he will never jump a tier is that he rarely exceeds this sort of baseline scoring forward play. Others beat Darche for the exceptional games, and the potential that those are around the corner at any time. A team needs reliable forwards. On the third line. That’s where Darche fits.
9) Desharnais
(Stas above)
Needs work
10) Eller
(Stats above)
No need to mention
As a group the rest have proven very well that they occupy the checking role and shouldn't be asked to take on more. Halpern, Moen, Pyatt and White are all useful players, but not in a discussion about scoring.
It seems Jaroslav Halak provided an ironic parting gift. The return on his trade is facing a Carey Price scenario from an undrafted Halak emulator. The first rounder is tested by the untouted, and results are starting to trump sentiment just as before.
Desharnais's stats are staring to impress. These are his stats and rankings among Canadiens forwards compared to those of his fellow rookie:
Desharnais has great numbers, and he’s displayed some great talent the past couple of games. But though it’s pretty certain he could at least survive in this league now, what’s not clear is how this looks after a big slump to match his hot streak. I like his attitude and I like his creativity, but I wouldn’t like the team’s chances really if they entered the playoffs with DD on the second line.
Like Plekanec, Eller has shown the ability to put distance between himself and teammates (only in the opposite direction). Whatever he is doing hasn’t been working. The lessons he is being exposed to are good, but he must show he can learn from them. The only category where he even flirts with the position he currently occupies in the top 6 is Corsi. Corsi is useful for some things, but when every other indicator tells you something else, you dismiss it. Eller is not just unlucky, he’s unprepared.
At this point, a healthy Cammalleri and a much more enticing Desharnais mean Eller will be demoted and won’t see NHL playoff action. This may be good for Eller, it will certainly be good for the Habs.
Habs forwards by tiers
Interesting as this is, how one rookie fares against another for this Canadiens team is probably about as important as Guy Carbonneau's playoff ties at this point. The really important stuff will happen with the non-rookie forwards, particularly those on "scoring lines".
Eller is relevant within this conversation, as he currently occupies a plum position on what some may still be calling the second line. Desharnais' recent displays vault him into consideration here too.
For forwards entering into scoring line discussions, I looked at much the same stats as those above and have included the ranks below. Using those, I broke the forwards into tiers. There's no big surprises (bar maybe one), but the numbers might interest some of you, and certainly fuel some discussion.
Star forward
1) Plekanec
(2nd goals, 1st points, 1st GC, 1st ESGC, 3rd GC/60, 2nd ESGC/60, 6th GF/60, 2nd ESGF/60, 9th CORSI, 1st LIW/60, 8th GA/60, 7th ESGA/60, 2nd ES+-/60)
Plekanec is pretty much the best forward from both an offensive and defensive perspective this season. This makes him by far and away the best forward on the team, probably even the best player at any position, and certainly the only star forward on the team at the moment. It’s impressive that he has been able distance himself like this from his peers, even with all the continued PK duty that he was supposed to be relieved of. The C isn’t sewn on his chest, but it is on his heart.
Top-liners
2) Cammalleri
(3rd goals, 2nd points, 3rd GC, 5th ESGC, 6th GC/60, 8th ESGC/60, 5th GF/60, 8th ESGF/60, 10th CORSI, 5th LIW/60, 2nd GA/60, 3rd ESGA/60, 4th ES+-/60)
Cammalleri isn’t even having a particularly good year by his standards, but his numbers still show that he’s a cut above the rest, even if he’s a cut below Pleks. Playing with Plekanec has its benefits, as Camms defensive numbers show, but he’s no disaster on defence, as he obviously plays the winger’s assignment better than others.
3) Gionta
(1st goals, 2nd points, 2nd GC, 2nd ESGC, 8th GC/60, 3rd ESGC/60, 8th GF/60, 10th ESGF/60, CORSI, 3rd LIW/60, 7th GA/60, 9th ESGA/60, 8th ES+-/60)
Gionta is the second best offensive forward and has been average in the defensive aspects of the game this season. His clutch play is second to none sometimes, yet when he’s not needed to score a clutch goal, it seems his luck has been averaging out. Add to this, the distinct lack of assists, and he is a clear level below Plekanec.
Scoring forwards
4) Kostitsyn
(4th goals, 4th points, 4th GC, 3rd ESGC, 7th GC/60, 4th ESGC/60, 9th GF/60, 9th ESGF/60, 8th CORSI, 2nd LIW/60, 3rd GA/60, 4th ESGA/60, 6th ES+-/60)
Considering lines have yet to be juggled to get the most from the Belarussian, he’s done OK. Goals created at ES is a strength for him, and defence is near top among forwards. The deciding factor to elevate Andrei is his ability to be the best forward on the ice. Not an ability shared by all on this team.
5) Pouliot
(5th goals, 6th points, 6th GC, 4th ESGC, 4th GC/60, 1st ESGC/60, 7th GF/60, 6th ESGF/60, 4th CORSI, 8th LIW/60, 5th GA/60, 8th ESGA/60, 5th ES+-/60)
Stats show Pouliot has been very proficient considering his lot this year. Without significant time with a full-time passer, he’s slowly made a season for himself and pretty consistently now heads out on the second best line of the night. Tobalev and I think he should proclaim his total disinterest in playing anything but first line hockey. Seems to be a strategy that can work.
6th forward
6) Pacioretty
(6th goals, 9th points, 8th GC, 8th ESGC, 2nd GC/60, 10th ESGC/60, 1st GF/60, 4th ESGF/60, 2nd CORSI, 4th LIW/60, 11th GA/60, 13th ESGA/60, 9th ES+-/60)
Pacioretty is in a class of his own I feel. Since his renaissance, he has been quite a spark offensively. He currently leads the team in goals for when on the ice. However, unlike Kostitsyn and Pouliot, he hasn’t shown sustained offensive generation on his own. Nor has he shown that he can limit the risk he takes up from to curtail goals against. He’s young, this is normal.
Second tier forwards
7) Gomez
(9th goals, 4th points, 5th GC, 7th ESGC, 9th GC/60, 12th ESGC/60, 10th GF/60, 12th ESGF/60, 7th CORSI, 7th LIW/60, 9th GA/60, 11th ESGA/60, 13th ES+-/60)
Slump once, bad luck. Slump twice, start looking for reasons. We know that Gomez can do lots right. He has a knack for skating through the neutral zone, he can pass very well, and he knows the time to hold the puck at the back end instead of starting a dead-end rush. These he can do. He sits here at second tier forward because over time that is proving to be too little. His defenders will invoke luck, but his shooting percentage isn’t lacking a regression to the norm because he’s bounced too many shots of goalies flailing stick nubs, it’s because his shots are easy to save. If you invoke luck after 60 games, you’d better have a pretty good explanation as to why Mathieu Darche is miles better at GF and GA/60, as to why those who supposedly play better competition anyway are putting better numbers at both ends. Sooner or later, the answer has to be the player himself. The case is mounting here. And Gomez is falling behind three forwards he was previously ahead of.
8) Darche
(7th goals, 7th points, 7th GC, 6th ESGC, 5th GC/60, 5th ESGC/60, 2nd GF/60, 5th ESGF/60, 5th CORSI, 9th LIW/60, 4th GA/60, 2nd ESGA/60, 3rd ES+-/60)
Darche at any time is probably the 6th best forward on the team. He is pretty reliable for a good shift at both ends, and the numbers show that. The reason he will never jump a tier is that he rarely exceeds this sort of baseline scoring forward play. Others beat Darche for the exceptional games, and the potential that those are around the corner at any time. A team needs reliable forwards. On the third line. That’s where Darche fits.
9) Desharnais
(Stas above)
Needs work
10) Eller
(Stats above)
No need to mention
As a group the rest have proven very well that they occupy the checking role and shouldn't be asked to take on more. Halpern, Moen, Pyatt and White are all useful players, but not in a discussion about scoring.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Price vs. Price
40 Games By Stats
Carey Price just played his 40th game of the season on Saturday night. An accomplishment in itself for the oft-beleaguered netminder of 2009. As it happens 40 games provides an interesting point to have a more in-depth look at Carey's stats.
As a whole, we rated Carey as a solid A last week, and heard arguments for A-. Overall, I think we'd all have to admit there's been some brilliant goaltending along the way. That's not to say there aren't lingering concerns from our previous roller coaster seasons with the young goalie. Is this an excellent season? Or did Carey just have one excellent stretch? On to the stats...
The 20-20 dichotomy
The 20th the game of the season was Carey Price's 4th shutout. It propelled him to unthinkable numbers: 2.05 GAA and 0.932 Sv%. It was his 19th dome in 19 starts. 12 wins from 19. Critics, we heard were silenced.
At the turn of the 40th, that 31st save clinched a 22nd win and firmed his above average output of 2.37 in GAA and 0.919 in Sv%. At 40 games it is still critic-silencing stuff. He's a winning goalie challenging in important stats categories. Yet his early excellence prompts some examination.
What does it take to get from 0.932 to 0.919? How many goals a game does a goalie have to allow to slip from 2.05 every 60 minutes to 2.37?
Team output?
This is the favourite of many. While it is certainly true that in some games Carey received incredibly poor support from his teammates. the averages tell us that it went both ways. In fact, if you look below, you can see that the Habs scored more goals, allowed fewer shots and fewer chances over the 20 games. If all else was equal, one might have expected a stabilization in stats, if not an improvement.
Looking at things this way is far too simplistic, i realise. But it remains that this is one of the things to examine in this puzzle. It is not the main part of any explanation it seems, from a quick check at least.
A return to earth?
Some stats, no matter how much we want to believe otherwise, are probably just too good to be true. In stats circles, there's endless talk about regression to the mean (they don't like Tim Thomas all the time). In Carey's case, the stat that stood out like a sore thumb was his SHSv%. Over the years I have kept an eye on these things, and can tell you that anything over 0.850 in this category is exceptional. For a goalie to post 0.917 over a season would thoroughly smash established marks and norms. All to say, it probably wasn't going to last.
Since the 20 game mark, Carey has posted a very very good 0.869 on the PK. However, the return to very good from out of this world is at least partially responsible for the drop in all numbers.
A slip in preparation?
At the beginning of the season (at least after those preseason debacles), I marvelled at Carey Price's preparation. Every game, he would come in and just look an impenetrable fortress. His numbers tell the tale.
Below are two charts. The first shows his stats by period. One can see clearly here that in the first twenty games, Carey was truly outstanding at the beginning of games. Over 0.948 for two periods. The second chart shows the stats I have been tracking on when goals go in. Again, Carey was just amazing at Game 20 here. He was allowing the first goal only after an average of nearly 15 shots were taken (and nearly 7 quality scoring chances) -- this gave him game starting numbers of 0.937 and 0.869 for chances. Both outstanding.
But has something happened? The second twenty show little change in play after the second period, but now Carey is a 0.910ish goalie in the first frames. What's more, he's been allowing goals after just 9 shots instead of 15, and 3.6 chances instead of 6.65, dropping his starting game numbers significantly.
Perhaps this is only luck, or a regression to the mean as well. But I'd swear that he's looked different.
The next 20 games are critical
This is all very interesting, but I don't think this sample answers many questions for us just yet. I find it too difficult to dissect from the numbers just now. The slip in preparation teamed with a return to earth seem most likely to hold the key explanation, but we've yet to see.
The biggest question has to be about what that first stretch of the season was. Was it a pleasant surprise? A fortuitously timed one-off streak? Or was it Carey taking his play to a new level? The next 20 games will help us answer which streak (the incredible one or the latest below average spell of ten games) is the real outlier in his play.
For anyone who watched those first 20-30 games as closely as I did, it is tempting to suggest that the real Carey Price played in October and November. But getting real answers takes time. This is an interim update, the final analysis is yet to come.
As a whole, we rated Carey as a solid A last week, and heard arguments for A-. Overall, I think we'd all have to admit there's been some brilliant goaltending along the way. That's not to say there aren't lingering concerns from our previous roller coaster seasons with the young goalie. Is this an excellent season? Or did Carey just have one excellent stretch? On to the stats...
The 20-20 dichotomy
The 20th the game of the season was Carey Price's 4th shutout. It propelled him to unthinkable numbers: 2.05 GAA and 0.932 Sv%. It was his 19th dome in 19 starts. 12 wins from 19. Critics, we heard were silenced.
At the turn of the 40th, that 31st save clinched a 22nd win and firmed his above average output of 2.37 in GAA and 0.919 in Sv%. At 40 games it is still critic-silencing stuff. He's a winning goalie challenging in important stats categories. Yet his early excellence prompts some examination.
What does it take to get from 0.932 to 0.919? How many goals a game does a goalie have to allow to slip from 2.05 every 60 minutes to 2.37?
Team output?
This is the favourite of many. While it is certainly true that in some games Carey received incredibly poor support from his teammates. the averages tell us that it went both ways. In fact, if you look below, you can see that the Habs scored more goals, allowed fewer shots and fewer chances over the 20 games. If all else was equal, one might have expected a stabilization in stats, if not an improvement.
Looking at things this way is far too simplistic, i realise. But it remains that this is one of the things to examine in this puzzle. It is not the main part of any explanation it seems, from a quick check at least.
A return to earth?
Some stats, no matter how much we want to believe otherwise, are probably just too good to be true. In stats circles, there's endless talk about regression to the mean (they don't like Tim Thomas all the time). In Carey's case, the stat that stood out like a sore thumb was his SHSv%. Over the years I have kept an eye on these things, and can tell you that anything over 0.850 in this category is exceptional. For a goalie to post 0.917 over a season would thoroughly smash established marks and norms. All to say, it probably wasn't going to last.
Since the 20 game mark, Carey has posted a very very good 0.869 on the PK. However, the return to very good from out of this world is at least partially responsible for the drop in all numbers.
A slip in preparation?
At the beginning of the season (at least after those preseason debacles), I marvelled at Carey Price's preparation. Every game, he would come in and just look an impenetrable fortress. His numbers tell the tale.
Below are two charts. The first shows his stats by period. One can see clearly here that in the first twenty games, Carey was truly outstanding at the beginning of games. Over 0.948 for two periods. The second chart shows the stats I have been tracking on when goals go in. Again, Carey was just amazing at Game 20 here. He was allowing the first goal only after an average of nearly 15 shots were taken (and nearly 7 quality scoring chances) -- this gave him game starting numbers of 0.937 and 0.869 for chances. Both outstanding.
But has something happened? The second twenty show little change in play after the second period, but now Carey is a 0.910ish goalie in the first frames. What's more, he's been allowing goals after just 9 shots instead of 15, and 3.6 chances instead of 6.65, dropping his starting game numbers significantly.
Perhaps this is only luck, or a regression to the mean as well. But I'd swear that he's looked different.
The next 20 games are critical
This is all very interesting, but I don't think this sample answers many questions for us just yet. I find it too difficult to dissect from the numbers just now. The slip in preparation teamed with a return to earth seem most likely to hold the key explanation, but we've yet to see.
The biggest question has to be about what that first stretch of the season was. Was it a pleasant surprise? A fortuitously timed one-off streak? Or was it Carey taking his play to a new level? The next 20 games will help us answer which streak (the incredible one or the latest below average spell of ten games) is the real outlier in his play.
For anyone who watched those first 20-30 games as closely as I did, it is tempting to suggest that the real Carey Price played in October and November. But getting real answers takes time. This is an interim update, the final analysis is yet to come.
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Working Stats
Whatever happens with the score tonight, Oilers fans will find a new stat to show they were the better team.
Tonight the Habs face the Oilers, and their army of stat-generating mathematicians.
I exaggerate, of course. Oilers fans can be very critical of their team. But it remains true that the Oilogosphere is the burning orb around which the new world of NHL statistics was born and now orbits.
We Habs fans are doing a relatively good job catching up, but are a relative Pluto compared to those who have been extolling the virtues of Dustin Penner for years.
If you want to have a different read for this game, and I've noticed other blogs like referring their game prep elsewhere, then having a good trawl through the Oilogosphere is as fun as any other trip you can take. They speak in a different language, sometimes. One where words like Fenwick and Zone starts flow off the tongue. But to any burgeoning stats fan, it's a good read.
Cult of Hockeey - sidebar especially (Dave Staples)
Irreverent Oiler Fans - archives now (Vic Ferrari)
The Copper and Blue (Derek Zona, Jonathan Willis, et al)
Lowetide
mc79 (Tyler Dellow, Colin Campbell whistleblower)
Battle of Alberta (Matt Fenwick, et al)
...
And for the Habs fans with tunnel vision like myself. Stick to the Habs with Olivier's numerical looks at the Habs:
En Attendant les Nordiques (Olivier)
Enjoy the game, and while Corsi may not be kind, let's hope the Habs win the most important statistical category (and least important for goalies...), the normalized win-loss differential.
Tonight the Habs face the Oilers, and their army of stat-generating mathematicians.
I exaggerate, of course. Oilers fans can be very critical of their team. But it remains true that the Oilogosphere is the burning orb around which the new world of NHL statistics was born and now orbits.
We Habs fans are doing a relatively good job catching up, but are a relative Pluto compared to those who have been extolling the virtues of Dustin Penner for years.
If you want to have a different read for this game, and I've noticed other blogs like referring their game prep elsewhere, then having a good trawl through the Oilogosphere is as fun as any other trip you can take. They speak in a different language, sometimes. One where words like Fenwick and Zone starts flow off the tongue. But to any burgeoning stats fan, it's a good read.
Cult of Hockeey - sidebar especially (Dave Staples)
Irreverent Oiler Fans - archives now (Vic Ferrari)
The Copper and Blue (Derek Zona, Jonathan Willis, et al)
Lowetide
mc79 (Tyler Dellow, Colin Campbell whistleblower)
Battle of Alberta (Matt Fenwick, et al)
...
And for the Habs fans with tunnel vision like myself. Stick to the Habs with Olivier's numerical looks at the Habs:
En Attendant les Nordiques (Olivier)
Enjoy the game, and while Corsi may not be kind, let's hope the Habs win the most important statistical category (and least important for goalies...), the normalized win-loss differential.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Scoring Forwards At The Quarter Pole
Moving on now to the forwards. First up are the "scoring forwards" who as a group have 32 goals over 20 games.
Grade:
Gomez gets a B for the balance of his work. he is part of the good defensive start, the rebirth of Carey Price and the outstanding PK. But he loses a lot of marks for not being the guy. At a certain point it is not enough to be a Corsi machine (some might be beginning to think he's only trying to be a Corsi machine). He's the top salary earner on the team and we have him down for 3 domes and no game pucks. Stats aside, that means he hasn't been outshining his compatriots. If he doesn't want to sink into true mediocrity, he needs to find some extra inspiration.
Mike Cammalleri
Grade:
Apart from these stats we track many others. Most informative for Cammalleri is the goals created record we have. Though he's been in on 14 goals, he's been a minor play in most of those. The same must be said for his plus/minus to date, he was on for a lot of Plekanec to Kostitsyn plays. Of course he opens the ice for them, and that gives him marks.
You might say that I have been harshest on Cammalleri, and I think that would be accurate. But as a top winger with a top quality passer, missing the net or having shots blocked, or just running into dead ends on the PP must be worked out. He's picked it up recently, and that's been noted. His goal last game was sniper stuff.
Tomas Plekanec
Grade:
His first quarter represents a great start. Point-per-game pace is not the least of his achievements, but he is also the leading goalscorer, the leading penalty-killer and a pretty good model of consistency. He doesn't get an A+ yet, because as scary as it seems, he can be better.
Brian Gionta
Grade:
But take a look at Gionta from Game 5 onwards. He's been outchancing, outshooting, and out-attempting all his opponents. That and 5 goals and 10 points in 16 games is about right for the captain's historical pacing. Of course, this chart doesn't show it all, as his shooting percentage (low) and PK work are also important stats.
Andrei Kostitsyn
Grade:
For a guy who isn't a machine-gunner like Cammalleri and Gionta, his Fenwick and Corsi are quite telling. For every shot he takes, there are still more held back as he waits for seams. This is important, because teams with non-discriminating shooters need some danglers, else the defensive plan becomes rather straightforward. Kostitsyn's rise mean other teams can indeed focus on one line, but can't altogether ignore the next.
Benoit Pouliot
Grade:
A look at his work in chart form shows he's a net asset. And remembering this is his second NHL season, looking at 20 goal and 40 point pace is very sound for a third line winger. .
The legend again:Scott Gomez
G, A, Pts - you know already
PM - Plus/minus
Ch +/- - Differential in scoring chances at even strength (these chances combined by Olivier are basically shots, misses and blocked shots that happen from danger areas)
Fenwick - Shots and missed shots for minus those against at ES
Corsi - Shots, missed shots and blocked shots for minus those against at ES
Dome - Dome for that game = 1
Grade:
B-
Who is this player, Scott Gomez? Those that look at points alone would say a third line forward. Those who add in salary would call him a liability. Those who look at things like Corsi thought, call him a horse.Gomez gets a B for the balance of his work. he is part of the good defensive start, the rebirth of Carey Price and the outstanding PK. But he loses a lot of marks for not being the guy. At a certain point it is not enough to be a Corsi machine (some might be beginning to think he's only trying to be a Corsi machine). He's the top salary earner on the team and we have him down for 3 domes and no game pucks. Stats aside, that means he hasn't been outshining his compatriots. If he doesn't want to sink into true mediocrity, he needs to find some extra inspiration.
Mike Cammalleri
Grade:
B
Cammalleri is second on the team in scoring, third in goals and first in plus/minus. It's a strong B. To the traditional fan, looking at traditional scoring summaries and traditional gamelogs, he's having a nice start. But of all the mirages on the team, Cammalleri's might be most misleading.Apart from these stats we track many others. Most informative for Cammalleri is the goals created record we have. Though he's been in on 14 goals, he's been a minor play in most of those. The same must be said for his plus/minus to date, he was on for a lot of Plekanec to Kostitsyn plays. Of course he opens the ice for them, and that gives him marks.
You might say that I have been harshest on Cammalleri, and I think that would be accurate. But as a top winger with a top quality passer, missing the net or having shots blocked, or just running into dead ends on the PP must be worked out. He's picked it up recently, and that's been noted. His goal last game was sniper stuff.
Tomas Plekanec
Grade:
A
Can anyone believe the Andre Savard regime drafted this player? In fairness, they didn't commit a very high pick, and picked Duncan Milroy before him, so they may have lucked out a bit. And the Canadiens development? Tomas has mopped up all the lessons.His first quarter represents a great start. Point-per-game pace is not the least of his achievements, but he is also the leading goalscorer, the leading penalty-killer and a pretty good model of consistency. He doesn't get an A+ yet, because as scary as it seems, he can be better.
Brian Gionta
Grade:
B+
A very very slow start had me thinking that something had changed with Gionta, and I pondered whether the only superficial change (the C on his sweater) was weighing him down.But take a look at Gionta from Game 5 onwards. He's been outchancing, outshooting, and out-attempting all his opponents. That and 5 goals and 10 points in 16 games is about right for the captain's historical pacing. Of course, this chart doesn't show it all, as his shooting percentage (low) and PK work are also important stats.
Andrei Kostitsyn
Grade:
A
Andrei has been the revelation of the season. At least Carey Price had supporters who thought this would happen. Andrei's fans were probably thinking half of what he's done so far was a successful start.For a guy who isn't a machine-gunner like Cammalleri and Gionta, his Fenwick and Corsi are quite telling. For every shot he takes, there are still more held back as he waits for seams. This is important, because teams with non-discriminating shooters need some danglers, else the defensive plan becomes rather straightforward. Kostitsyn's rise mean other teams can indeed focus on one line, but can't altogether ignore the next.
Benoit Pouliot
Grade:
B+
Yes, I'm calling him a scoring winger. And yes, I'm giving him a good grade.Pouliot was questioned to an insulting degree before the season and his first quarter has gone a long way to answer his critics. Largely without a good shift or a centre other than Halpern, he has made chances and buried chances.A look at his work in chart form shows he's a net asset. And remembering this is his second NHL season, looking at 20 goal and 40 point pace is very sound for a third line winger. .
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Negotiating On Price:
Habs New Arguments
Price and his agent have played their opening gambit (in our imaginations)and the Canadiens have answered (in our imaginations again). I think we can all agree that unless Gauthier comes up with some stats wizardry or another #1 goalie, the Price team is looking good to pull salary towards their notion of fair dues.
The negotiation now turns to Gauthier and his team to argue the negative (or if they're inventive, the positive) so the salary cap burden of Price is more what they had in mind when they thought he would be the much cheaper option.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Habs arguments
Other stats
Have you met our new numbers man, Ken Morin? He was only officially hired yesterday, but he came with some numbers in hand which we thought would be handy for these discussions.
You mentioned a 0.912 save percentage. We fully acknowledge that number, but would like to say right off the bat that we don’t exclude playoffs from our analyses, so we’ll be going ahead with a 0.910 number, just so you know.
Just a quick look at other stats from this season. You already mentioned Carey’s 0.912 from the season which ranked him 21st in the league. We’d like to just highlight a few stats to add context:
(min 16 GP)
41 GP (33rd)
39 GS (32nd)
13 W (37th)
0.33 W per start (55th)
0.33 W per 60 min (54th)
2.77 GAA (36th)
0 SO (T 48th)
You present Carey as an established starter with top 20 numbers. Based on what we see, we think he is right where he should be, but is still a developing youngster climbing the ranks. We think it would be fair to pay him as such.
Trends
We have addressed a lot so far, but a common element of 2nd contract negotiations has been conspicuously absent from these talks. Usually, we can all look at a player and draw upward trends. We find the talk about pedigree a bit disingenuous when we consider the decline since season one with Carey.
Our analysis reveals that since his 48th game in the NHL (the 7th game in the 2008 Boston series), where Carey was a 2.49, 0.920 goalie, he has but for very brief bumps been declining or standing still. If this were game 92 we were talking about, there wouldn’t be any reason for concern, but this is 106 games later now – 2 entire NHL seasons.
From game 49 to game 108 (last game of 2009) Carey declined to a 2.76, 0.910 goalie. Since that time, he has stemmed the decline but only to maintain that level.
Again, we are not suggesting this is anyway abnormal for a young goalie, but suggest that paying Carey as a seasoned pro, or a near-elite at this stage is off the mark. He is learning, but learning slowly. We also hope and assume there is still learning to be done and that he’ll be working on this into the upcoming season, if not beyond. As such, we don’t think we should be paying the price as he were the finished article.
Save percentage breakdown
M. Morin has been doing some excellent work, he really has. He has showed us a lot about how to look at save percentage. That is, to see how a goalie comes to his 91% of shots saved.
When we look at when goals are scored, we can see a massive gulf in between what goaltender we get at the beginning of a game compared to the end. Whereas, after a goal is allowed, Carey is on par with those you say are his peers (2.53, 0.920), for the start of games, he has an entirely different set of peers (3.30, 0.892).
Again we’re fully on board with the learning and will support Carey as long as it takes. But this is taken from this past season, and is further evidence of the fact that learning is not done. We think this bolsters our suggestion that paying for the finished article at this point is premature.
Support
Throughout his career until now, we have provided Carey with the best support and opportunities ever afforded to a goaltender of his age. We have showed our support by trading Halak and by signing in a veteran back up willing and able to support 60 games from Carey.
We continue to show this support and will do as he continues to learn his trade at this high level. Knowing Carey the way we do, and knowing what he needs from our years together, we think we offer him the best environment there is to thrive at the moment.
Opportunity
Currently Montreal stands as one of two teams (if we assume Huet and Niemi haven’t been settled on) where there is a starting position. Rather than looking on starts as a burden, we think starts are an asset to your client. We don’t think he can get this opportunity anywhere else in the NHL at the present time.
In the balance
Gauthier digs deep here. But is it enough to overcome the fact he chose Price long ago and would rely on Auld and an AHLer if Price were to opt out?
The negotiation now turns to Gauthier and his team to argue the negative (or if they're inventive, the positive) so the salary cap burden of Price is more what they had in mind when they thought he would be the much cheaper option.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Habs arguments
Other stats
Have you met our new numbers man, Ken Morin? He was only officially hired yesterday, but he came with some numbers in hand which we thought would be handy for these discussions.
You mentioned a 0.912 save percentage. We fully acknowledge that number, but would like to say right off the bat that we don’t exclude playoffs from our analyses, so we’ll be going ahead with a 0.910 number, just so you know.
Just a quick look at other stats from this season. You already mentioned Carey’s 0.912 from the season which ranked him 21st in the league. We’d like to just highlight a few stats to add context:
(min 16 GP)
41 GP (33rd)
39 GS (32nd)
13 W (37th)
0.33 W per start (55th)
0.33 W per 60 min (54th)
2.77 GAA (36th)
0 SO (T 48th)
You present Carey as an established starter with top 20 numbers. Based on what we see, we think he is right where he should be, but is still a developing youngster climbing the ranks. We think it would be fair to pay him as such.
Trends
We have addressed a lot so far, but a common element of 2nd contract negotiations has been conspicuously absent from these talks. Usually, we can all look at a player and draw upward trends. We find the talk about pedigree a bit disingenuous when we consider the decline since season one with Carey.
Our analysis reveals that since his 48th game in the NHL (the 7th game in the 2008 Boston series), where Carey was a 2.49, 0.920 goalie, he has but for very brief bumps been declining or standing still. If this were game 92 we were talking about, there wouldn’t be any reason for concern, but this is 106 games later now – 2 entire NHL seasons.
From game 49 to game 108 (last game of 2009) Carey declined to a 2.76, 0.910 goalie. Since that time, he has stemmed the decline but only to maintain that level.
Again, we are not suggesting this is anyway abnormal for a young goalie, but suggest that paying Carey as a seasoned pro, or a near-elite at this stage is off the mark. He is learning, but learning slowly. We also hope and assume there is still learning to be done and that he’ll be working on this into the upcoming season, if not beyond. As such, we don’t think we should be paying the price as he were the finished article.
Save percentage breakdown
M. Morin has been doing some excellent work, he really has. He has showed us a lot about how to look at save percentage. That is, to see how a goalie comes to his 91% of shots saved.
When we look at when goals are scored, we can see a massive gulf in between what goaltender we get at the beginning of a game compared to the end. Whereas, after a goal is allowed, Carey is on par with those you say are his peers (2.53, 0.920), for the start of games, he has an entirely different set of peers (3.30, 0.892).
Again we’re fully on board with the learning and will support Carey as long as it takes. But this is taken from this past season, and is further evidence of the fact that learning is not done. We think this bolsters our suggestion that paying for the finished article at this point is premature.
Support
Throughout his career until now, we have provided Carey with the best support and opportunities ever afforded to a goaltender of his age. We have showed our support by trading Halak and by signing in a veteran back up willing and able to support 60 games from Carey.
We continue to show this support and will do as he continues to learn his trade at this high level. Knowing Carey the way we do, and knowing what he needs from our years together, we think we offer him the best environment there is to thrive at the moment.
Opportunity
Currently Montreal stands as one of two teams (if we assume Huet and Niemi haven’t been settled on) where there is a starting position. Rather than looking on starts as a burden, we think starts are an asset to your client. We don’t think he can get this opportunity anywhere else in the NHL at the present time.
In the balance
Gauthier digs deep here. But is it enough to overcome the fact he chose Price long ago and would rely on Auld and an AHLer if Price were to opt out?
Thursday, January 14, 2010
The Habs By Numbers
Goals Created
Prior to this season, we at Lions in Winter decided to conduct a little experiment and gather some statistics of our own. As a start, we decided to take on the offensive part of the game and take a deeper look into the value of goals and assists, and to keep a record of how each goal scored by a member of the Canadiens was created over the course of the season.
Midway through the season, we have come up with some interesting results. Interesting enough at this point that we wanted to start sharing them with you.
Goals created
Anyone who has ever tried to argue for the value of an offensive player will know the strengths and weaknesses of goals and assists. Points, and the scoring leaders, give equal value to assists and goals, more frustratingly to second assists and goals.
Having watched my fair share of hockey, I can tell you I've seen second assists that were equally as important or more important than the goalscoring act in creating the open net; however, I think you'd all agree this is the exception rather than the rule. The same applies to first assists, though to a much lesser degree really (as we're finding).
Our desire to paint a clearer picture of goals created was born of this dissatisfaction.
Those of you who follow the new wave in NHL statistics will know that goals created has been tracked and analyzed before this. In most circles, Allan Ryder gets credit for doing the pioneering work on this. Tom Awad, who is now the darling of Behind the Net for his GVT numbers, also uses goals created as a way to discern offensive contribution. Hockey Reference, a more mainstream statistical site, has a column called goals created on its player pages as well.
In deciding how we would proceed with our own project, we did a careful search of the backstory on this statistic. Much of what we found was exactly in line with our own thinking – the reasoning for wanting to record and promote this statistic, for example. But there was a let-down, a gap if you like. All the methods that had been proposed in the past, and indeed, those being used in the present are based on factors. In all cases, these numbers were picked out of the air. Allan Ryder bases his calculations on the assumption that goalscoring is 50% of goal creation, with one or two assists making up the other 50%. Tom Awad has decided that a goal is worth 1.5 times an assist. Hockey reference, like Ryder thinks an assist is half a goal.
All of these assumptions are fine, and the calculations do drive a different list of offensive players to the top. And, since the list seems intuitive (at the top, anyway), the statisticians are pleased with their assumptions.
There are obvious limits to what it can tell you, though; especially in the cases where these calculations are just applied to every goal (unassisted to two assister) equally by using compiled scoring stats across the league. In fact, in these cases, I found that it told me absolutely nothing new. Once I got used to how the factors shuffled goals and assists, I could pick out who was the winner from the scoring leaders simply based on their goal:assist balance. It might as well be called G + 0.5A.
The Lions in Winter Approach
With our grasp on what we liked from the established models and what we didn't like, we took some (indirect) advice from Allan Ryder and began to sort out our new method:
That was the easy part. The next part was the important bit. We needed to create a way to actually break free of the NHL's record to add more data, more richness of information. The way we do it is by scoring the goals individually, by allocating points (an equal amount are available for each goal) to as many players as are involved. Importantly, this is a collaboration, so this isn't just what Topham saw, but what multiple people saw (averaged to give the score).
Now there's an obvious objection to this method: that it's subjective. It's something that can't be denied. But I have some thoughts on that:
1) The NHL already uses subjective statistics (hits, shots, giveaways, etc.) and we're perfectly happy with these, because we can appreciate the value while recognizing their limits.
2) Scientific research quantifies qualitative data like this all the time. Frankly, if it's good enough for the scientific papers I edit for healthcare decision makers, then it's good enough for a fun statistic in hockey.
3) There are many people who want more than goals, assists, PIM to spice up their reading and arguments. The league is already recording most "factual" events (with the notable exception of possession time), and sites like behindthenet.ca are mining just about as much as can be mined. Our goals created adds another category (albeit only for the Habs for now). Those who are satisfied with scoring leaders won't have that taken away from them, they will just have an extra stat to hold up beside that.
In taking things in this direction, we have taken that good advice seriously by losing nothing from what we had already, but have also added richness by capturing how a panel of evaluators thought contributions to each goal were made.
This gives our finding novelty (nobody has done this in this way before) and relevance, in that we are recording what happened, not what the NHL recorded multiplied by an imagined factor.
By products of the LIW approach
Strangely, our method also has something for those who promise to be it's biggest critics. By attaching value to goal contributions we have also accumulated a wealth of data on the average value of a goal and an assist. What's more, because we have recorded the data diligently, we can further sub-divide this by situation and category. So, for those who want to stick with a factor, we will at least be providing a better factor. We couldn't have designed the study much better had we only wanted to look for the value of assists, to be honest.
In addition, our approach can also be translated much more simply. For example, we can see who we rewarded extra assists to on a goal (beyond two) and we can see those assists that were just fluke touches and didn't enter into our contribution tally. We can see how many goals a player made a contribution on, and how many they didn't. We can see how many they were the major force behind a goal and how many times they were bit-part players.
So you see, even if don't believe in the number beside Cammalleri or Plekanec (though be open-minded, you can), you can believe in the value of the data...
Goals created on the Canadiens
Without further ado then, a taster on this data. I promise we will publish more, and do more with this as the season goes on...
Goals created leaders (Games 1-47)
As you can see, Cammalleri is a beast. And this looks less impressive after his mini slump these last few games. He and Plekanec account for 30% of all offensive production together. On game winning goals, they account for 45%. Incredible to think where we'd be without that signing and the accompanied turnaround.
Habs fan contributions
As we've said this is a collaborative project, so we are always open to more collaborators. If you are interested in helping us with ideas or by inputing your assessment of goals, get in touch via liwblog@gmail.com.
Midway through the season, we have come up with some interesting results. Interesting enough at this point that we wanted to start sharing them with you.
Goals created
Anyone who has ever tried to argue for the value of an offensive player will know the strengths and weaknesses of goals and assists. Points, and the scoring leaders, give equal value to assists and goals, more frustratingly to second assists and goals.
Having watched my fair share of hockey, I can tell you I've seen second assists that were equally as important or more important than the goalscoring act in creating the open net; however, I think you'd all agree this is the exception rather than the rule. The same applies to first assists, though to a much lesser degree really (as we're finding).
Our desire to paint a clearer picture of goals created was born of this dissatisfaction.
Those of you who follow the new wave in NHL statistics will know that goals created has been tracked and analyzed before this. In most circles, Allan Ryder gets credit for doing the pioneering work on this. Tom Awad, who is now the darling of Behind the Net for his GVT numbers, also uses goals created as a way to discern offensive contribution. Hockey Reference, a more mainstream statistical site, has a column called goals created on its player pages as well.
In deciding how we would proceed with our own project, we did a careful search of the backstory on this statistic. Much of what we found was exactly in line with our own thinking – the reasoning for wanting to record and promote this statistic, for example. But there was a let-down, a gap if you like. All the methods that had been proposed in the past, and indeed, those being used in the present are based on factors. In all cases, these numbers were picked out of the air. Allan Ryder bases his calculations on the assumption that goalscoring is 50% of goal creation, with one or two assists making up the other 50%. Tom Awad has decided that a goal is worth 1.5 times an assist. Hockey reference, like Ryder thinks an assist is half a goal.
All of these assumptions are fine, and the calculations do drive a different list of offensive players to the top. And, since the list seems intuitive (at the top, anyway), the statisticians are pleased with their assumptions.
There are obvious limits to what it can tell you, though; especially in the cases where these calculations are just applied to every goal (unassisted to two assister) equally by using compiled scoring stats across the league. In fact, in these cases, I found that it told me absolutely nothing new. Once I got used to how the factors shuffled goals and assists, I could pick out who was the winner from the scoring leaders simply based on their goal:assist balance. It might as well be called G + 0.5A.
The Lions in Winter Approach
With our grasp on what we liked from the established models and what we didn't like, we took some (indirect) advice from Allan Ryder and began to sort out our new method:
"A good statistic captures a great deal of data without destroying too much information."The first condition in our new approach is that we would be recording everything about each goal. This included when it was scored, at what strength, against whom, and who contributed. In addition, we recorded (in parallel) how the NHL scored the goal (number of assists).
That was the easy part. The next part was the important bit. We needed to create a way to actually break free of the NHL's record to add more data, more richness of information. The way we do it is by scoring the goals individually, by allocating points (an equal amount are available for each goal) to as many players as are involved. Importantly, this is a collaboration, so this isn't just what Topham saw, but what multiple people saw (averaged to give the score).
Now there's an obvious objection to this method: that it's subjective. It's something that can't be denied. But I have some thoughts on that:
1) The NHL already uses subjective statistics (hits, shots, giveaways, etc.) and we're perfectly happy with these, because we can appreciate the value while recognizing their limits.
2) Scientific research quantifies qualitative data like this all the time. Frankly, if it's good enough for the scientific papers I edit for healthcare decision makers, then it's good enough for a fun statistic in hockey.
3) There are many people who want more than goals, assists, PIM to spice up their reading and arguments. The league is already recording most "factual" events (with the notable exception of possession time), and sites like behindthenet.ca are mining just about as much as can be mined. Our goals created adds another category (albeit only for the Habs for now). Those who are satisfied with scoring leaders won't have that taken away from them, they will just have an extra stat to hold up beside that.
In taking things in this direction, we have taken that good advice seriously by losing nothing from what we had already, but have also added richness by capturing how a panel of evaluators thought contributions to each goal were made.
This gives our finding novelty (nobody has done this in this way before) and relevance, in that we are recording what happened, not what the NHL recorded multiplied by an imagined factor.
By products of the LIW approach
Strangely, our method also has something for those who promise to be it's biggest critics. By attaching value to goal contributions we have also accumulated a wealth of data on the average value of a goal and an assist. What's more, because we have recorded the data diligently, we can further sub-divide this by situation and category. So, for those who want to stick with a factor, we will at least be providing a better factor. We couldn't have designed the study much better had we only wanted to look for the value of assists, to be honest.
In addition, our approach can also be translated much more simply. For example, we can see who we rewarded extra assists to on a goal (beyond two) and we can see those assists that were just fluke touches and didn't enter into our contribution tally. We can see how many goals a player made a contribution on, and how many they didn't. We can see how many they were the major force behind a goal and how many times they were bit-part players.
So you see, even if don't believe in the number beside Cammalleri or Plekanec (though be open-minded, you can), you can believe in the value of the data...
Goals created on the Canadiens
Without further ado then, a taster on this data. I promise we will publish more, and do more with this as the season goes on...
Goals created leaders (Games 1-47)
| Player | G | A1 | A2 | LIW GC | % team total |
| Cammalleri | 20 | 14 | 3 | 18.4 | 16% |
| Plekanec | 10 | 19 | 17 | 15.8 | 14% |
| Gomez | 6 | 15 | 9 | 11.7 | 10% |
| A Kostitsyn | 12 | 9 | 4 | 10.6 | 9% |
| Bergeron | 10 | 4 | 9 | 8.6 | 8% |
| Metropolit | 10 | 5 | 5 | 7.1 | 6% |
| Gionta | 10 | 3 | 5 | 7.0 | 6% |
| Hamrlik | 5 | 8 | 3 | 5.1 | 4% |
| Moen | 7 | 1 | 2 | 4.5 | 4% |
| Markov | 3 | 6 | 4 | 4.5 | 4% |
As you can see, Cammalleri is a beast. And this looks less impressive after his mini slump these last few games. He and Plekanec account for 30% of all offensive production together. On game winning goals, they account for 45%. Incredible to think where we'd be without that signing and the accompanied turnaround.
Habs fan contributions
As we've said this is a collaborative project, so we are always open to more collaborators. If you are interested in helping us with ideas or by inputing your assessment of goals, get in touch via liwblog@gmail.com.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Latendresse Vs. Pouliot
Season Preview All Over Again
In the style of the beloved season previews, I offer to you Benoit Pouliot's belated preview next to the now very optimistic-looking one we did for Latendresse in September. While it certainly shows we lost a good player who many of us thought had some promise, it also reveals some surprises about the new Canadiens forward.
Guillaume Latendresse
Legend
Stats notes
You could go many ways in interpreting these stats. Many numbers show clear decline, despite the progress that Gui is touted for. On the other hand, there is some stability within them too. The things to note:
1) Gui shoots straight
It's perhaps not that surprising that the skill that got him to the NHL is the one that stands out. 12.0% in an off year is not a stat I'd ever sneeze at.
2) Good production at even strength, considering
About a goal every 60 minutes of ice time is a good average to carry in you NHL career. Considering Gui's been bumped around lines a lot, not been given primo PP time and played with chance sink Kostopoulos a lot last year, then I find that encouraging. Hopefully he keeps up the pace.
3) Wonky even strength profile
As much as I'd like to think that Gui is one of the best defensive forwards on the team, the fact that I do have eyes helps me over the feeling. His profile shows us the danger of taking things out of context. Last season, Gui played at all the right times and missed the worst Price/Halak had to offer. Has it skewed the profile? Is Guillaume really 2nd best in Corsi? Perhaps the Canadiens lost all those games because he was injured? Impossible to tell for certain in a one-off experiment, but again, we do all have eyes, and sense.
As we've mentioned, 2009-10 is a big season for Latendresse. Because let's face it, another 14-16 goal campaign, while fine, certainly doesn't add to the lustre of the future 30-goal man argument. And, if it is to be 15 goals a year from here on in, then someone, somewhere is bound to surpass him, at least in terms of potential.
His shooting accuracy teamed with a new approach to shooting more should help. His defensive game and any improvement in the purpose of his hitting will make this line a very threatening one.
Tobalev on Latendresse
For some reason I am excited about Latendresse this year. Maybe it is because I see him as the best of the players from my home province, maybe it's because he is one of the longest serving Habs, or maybe it is because I actually sense a big season coming on. Whatever happens with goals and assists, Latendresse is still a player that wants to play for the Habs and generally tries pretty hard, despite some talent shortcomings.
Unfortunately for Gui, however, nothing is guaranteed. There are signs, after all that point to him not having that great of a season. His production levels have been stable for 3 years, he seems to be getting slower and he may very well get crowded out of the top-6/PP.
On the positive side, I think his new status on the team (best Quebecer) will help him, especially early in the season. Many fans and new teammates will look to him now as a leader and not just a prospect. If he can get in Martin’s good books and get himself onto a scoring line early on then I could see him there all year. If he makes the most of these chances when provided, the outlook could brighten in a hurry – I really think he could score 25 goals.
The more likely scenario, however, is that he gets bounced between the top 3 lines and into/out of the PP (thanks to injuries, slumps etc.). This will hurt his production and that is why I think he’ll likely top out at 30-35 points with most of those coming as goals.
Where Latendresse will start 2009-10: Carrying the torch for millions
Where Latendresse will end 2009-10: With a new appreciation for what he can do in this league
Points: 21 G, 24 A, 45 Pts
Benoit Pouliot
Legend
Stats notes
The first impression when looking at these stats side by side is something like: "My goodness, we were fleeced..." But as we know statistics do need interpreting. And, as we all recall, Guillaume's stats from last year flattered him. As this was a trade, we'll do this a bit differently, pointing out a few differences I think it is absolutely vital to note. Note also, that being a Habs fan who wants to view this trade in a positive light, I'll leave the negative comparisons to you readers to make:
1) Shot totals
Prior to this season, Benoit Pouliot managed a measly 45 shots in 51 games. Guillaume had that many shots in his NHL career well before his 20th birthday. It's worth noting because whether it be linemates, coaching or something else, Pouliot has just never had the chance to let loose his shot (of similar accuracy based on %) compared to Gui. Is he a Sergei Kostitsyn who holds and hold and holds? Perhaps, but the scouts in 2005 didn't think so.
2) Defensive numbers
Guillaume from his profile showed a good defensive player (though we mentioned this was puzzling to those who had observed him). Pouliot really does one up him. Now before you go and say that Benoit has benefited from being on the Wild, do first consider that his 1.53 GA/60 was third on the team after Boogaard and Kolanos. Other young forwards like Clutterbuck (2.11) and James Sheppard (2.84) lagged behind his defensive responsibility greatly. What's more only Pouliot came out positive on +/- from the youngsters. Not all bad from the guy with 14 previous games under his belt.
3) Games played
I alluded to experience in shots. Well, Pouliot (from the same draft year as Latendresse) has played 167 less games in all. This is also critical for waivers. Benoit Pouliot signed his first NHL contract in May 2006 at age 19. As such, it set the clock on his waiver exemption to 4 seasons or 160 games (whichever came first). Given that he's nowhere near reaching 160 games anytime soon, it means the time limit on him seeing waivers will be the outset of next season. Of course, for the Canadiens, this provides another player they can ship up and down to Hamilton (like Sergei Kostitsyn, Pyatt, White, etc.). Guillaume Latendresse would have had to clear waivers to go to Hamilton, which had been the case since his 160th game early last season. No matter how few goals he scored, how badly he sulked or how much he needed a wake up call – Gainey's hands were tied on Guillaume. Don't underestimate this factor in the trade that just occurred.
A simple glance at the stats says loss for Gainey in this file. But under a bit more scrutiny, Gainey has manufactured a bit more flex with his roster by simply trading one 2-goalscorer with potential to do more for another. When injuries heal, I truly think this flexibility will tip the balance in the Habs favour, espeically if Sulkatron-2000 was going to react to benching anything like he reacted to be being traded.
Statistics adapted from nhl.com, behindthenet.ca, Olivier
Guillaume Latendresse
| NHL Season | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | PPG | GWG | G/60 | Pts/60 | Sh | S% | PIM |
| 08-09 (MTL) | 56 | 14 | 12 | 26 | +4 | 1 | 2 | 1.10 | 2.05 | 117 | 12.0 | 45 |
| 07-08 (MTL) | 73 | 16 | 11 | 27 | -2 | 2 | 3 | 1.07 | 1.81 | 116 | 13.8 | 41 |
| 06-07 (MTL) | 80 | 16 | 13 | 29 | -20 | 5 | 3 | 0.95 | 1.73 | 121 | 13.2 | 47 |
| Even-strength profile | |
 |
|
Stats notes
You could go many ways in interpreting these stats. Many numbers show clear decline, despite the progress that Gui is touted for. On the other hand, there is some stability within them too. The things to note:
1) Gui shoots straight
It's perhaps not that surprising that the skill that got him to the NHL is the one that stands out. 12.0% in an off year is not a stat I'd ever sneeze at.
2) Good production at even strength, considering
About a goal every 60 minutes of ice time is a good average to carry in you NHL career. Considering Gui's been bumped around lines a lot, not been given primo PP time and played with chance sink Kostopoulos a lot last year, then I find that encouraging. Hopefully he keeps up the pace.
3) Wonky even strength profile
As much as I'd like to think that Gui is one of the best defensive forwards on the team, the fact that I do have eyes helps me over the feeling. His profile shows us the danger of taking things out of context. Last season, Gui played at all the right times and missed the worst Price/Halak had to offer. Has it skewed the profile? Is Guillaume really 2nd best in Corsi? Perhaps the Canadiens lost all those games because he was injured? Impossible to tell for certain in a one-off experiment, but again, we do all have eyes, and sense.
As we've mentioned, 2009-10 is a big season for Latendresse. Because let's face it, another 14-16 goal campaign, while fine, certainly doesn't add to the lustre of the future 30-goal man argument. And, if it is to be 15 goals a year from here on in, then someone, somewhere is bound to surpass him, at least in terms of potential.
His shooting accuracy teamed with a new approach to shooting more should help. His defensive game and any improvement in the purpose of his hitting will make this line a very threatening one.
Tobalev on Latendresse
For some reason I am excited about Latendresse this year. Maybe it is because I see him as the best of the players from my home province, maybe it's because he is one of the longest serving Habs, or maybe it is because I actually sense a big season coming on. Whatever happens with goals and assists, Latendresse is still a player that wants to play for the Habs and generally tries pretty hard, despite some talent shortcomings.
Unfortunately for Gui, however, nothing is guaranteed. There are signs, after all that point to him not having that great of a season. His production levels have been stable for 3 years, he seems to be getting slower and he may very well get crowded out of the top-6/PP.
On the positive side, I think his new status on the team (best Quebecer) will help him, especially early in the season. Many fans and new teammates will look to him now as a leader and not just a prospect. If he can get in Martin’s good books and get himself onto a scoring line early on then I could see him there all year. If he makes the most of these chances when provided, the outlook could brighten in a hurry – I really think he could score 25 goals.
The more likely scenario, however, is that he gets bounced between the top 3 lines and into/out of the PP (thanks to injuries, slumps etc.). This will hurt his production and that is why I think he’ll likely top out at 30-35 points with most of those coming as goals.
Where Latendresse will start 2009-10: Carrying the torch for millions
Where Latendresse will end 2009-10: With a new appreciation for what he can do in this league
Points: 21 G, 24 A, 45 Pts
Benoit Pouliot
| NHL Season | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | PPG | GWG | G/60 | Pts/60 | Sh | S% | PIM |
| 08-09 (MIN) | 37 | 5 | 6 | 11 | +1 | 2 | 1 | 0.68 | 1.51 | 34 | 14.7 | 18 |
| 07-08 (MIN) | 11 | 2 | 1 | 3 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 1.24 | 1.86 | 10 | 20.0 | 0 |
| 06-07 (MIN) | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Even-strength profile | |
 |
|
Stats notes
The first impression when looking at these stats side by side is something like: "My goodness, we were fleeced..." But as we know statistics do need interpreting. And, as we all recall, Guillaume's stats from last year flattered him. As this was a trade, we'll do this a bit differently, pointing out a few differences I think it is absolutely vital to note. Note also, that being a Habs fan who wants to view this trade in a positive light, I'll leave the negative comparisons to you readers to make:
1) Shot totals
Prior to this season, Benoit Pouliot managed a measly 45 shots in 51 games. Guillaume had that many shots in his NHL career well before his 20th birthday. It's worth noting because whether it be linemates, coaching or something else, Pouliot has just never had the chance to let loose his shot (of similar accuracy based on %) compared to Gui. Is he a Sergei Kostitsyn who holds and hold and holds? Perhaps, but the scouts in 2005 didn't think so.
2) Defensive numbers
Guillaume from his profile showed a good defensive player (though we mentioned this was puzzling to those who had observed him). Pouliot really does one up him. Now before you go and say that Benoit has benefited from being on the Wild, do first consider that his 1.53 GA/60 was third on the team after Boogaard and Kolanos. Other young forwards like Clutterbuck (2.11) and James Sheppard (2.84) lagged behind his defensive responsibility greatly. What's more only Pouliot came out positive on +/- from the youngsters. Not all bad from the guy with 14 previous games under his belt.
3) Games played
I alluded to experience in shots. Well, Pouliot (from the same draft year as Latendresse) has played 167 less games in all. This is also critical for waivers. Benoit Pouliot signed his first NHL contract in May 2006 at age 19. As such, it set the clock on his waiver exemption to 4 seasons or 160 games (whichever came first). Given that he's nowhere near reaching 160 games anytime soon, it means the time limit on him seeing waivers will be the outset of next season. Of course, for the Canadiens, this provides another player they can ship up and down to Hamilton (like Sergei Kostitsyn, Pyatt, White, etc.). Guillaume Latendresse would have had to clear waivers to go to Hamilton, which had been the case since his 160th game early last season. No matter how few goals he scored, how badly he sulked or how much he needed a wake up call – Gainey's hands were tied on Guillaume. Don't underestimate this factor in the trade that just occurred.
A simple glance at the stats says loss for Gainey in this file. But under a bit more scrutiny, Gainey has manufactured a bit more flex with his roster by simply trading one 2-goalscorer with potential to do more for another. When injuries heal, I truly think this flexibility will tip the balance in the Habs favour, espeically if Sulkatron-2000 was going to react to benching anything like he reacted to be being traded.
Statistics adapted from nhl.com, behindthenet.ca, Olivier
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Canadiens Season Preview:
Second Line Offense
Next up, here is the preview of the Canadiens second line:
Latendresse – Plekanec – Cammalleri
Tomas Plekanec
Legend
Stats notes
Had I written this report on Plekanec in either of the seasons previous to this one, it's fair to say it would have been glowing. Though last season was disappointing, the numbers Tomas put up still tell the tale of what kind of player he is and can be:
1) His CORSI number was high relative to his peers
Yes Plekanec had a decline in numbers, but what his Corsi shows me is what I'd read from his play – that actually his play varies little in goalscoring slump or spree. Relative to the team, Tomas was actually a player the Canadiens could count on last season to tip the play (if not goals) in their favour. Team chance differential was 5.2 shots a game more in their favour for the minutes Plekanec was on the ice than not. What that meant in real terms is that when Tomas was on, chances were just about even at both ends, when he was off the Habs were letting the other team drive.
2) 69 goals in 3 seasons – 3 20+ goal seasons
No other Habs player can boast this kind of production, or indeed consistency.
3) 19 assists last season
When The Score Forecaster asked me for a stat to sum up 2008-09 for the Habs, I chose Plekanec's 19 assists as the standout. Can you imagine any other top line centre on a line that ended up scoring 69 goals, who actually prefers passing to shooting, ending a season with 0.25 assists a game? And it really is this aberration that makes Plekanec's season look like the absolute dud that it did. Chip in another ten (which might have happened if Kovalev weren't examining his soul and Kostitsyn undertaking police interviews at the time when Tomas got hottest) and he'd be under his potential, but closer to the ballpark.
For those alarmed that we've entrusted another season of scoring duties to a fading Plekanec, pull up your boots. As the second line centre, 20 goals a season is respectable across this league. What's more less top checking against him has always been a boon for PLeks. The stats don't point to another 2007-08 really, but 20+ goals and 30-40 assists should easily be in the cards.
Tobalev on Plekanec:
Kovalev is gone, Koivu is gone and the list goes on. That means, Tomas, that it is time to step up and be a dominant player/leader on this team. Pleks is no longer a shining prospect or ‘pleasant surprise’, he is now being counted on for real – or else. After what was a hard year for the Czech, he must come into this season with a positive, winning attitude. I am tired of seeing a defeated man after a missed shot or a hanging head following another loss. He has the speed, ability and talent to excel at this level and I think Gainey has got him plenty of help this year to bring all of that out of him.
I expect Pleks to bounce back to 07-08 form this year and forget all about last season. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if he actually out-scored Gomez and was indeed our #1 centre. I don’t however, think that will happen, not this year. What I do think, though, is that he will put up 60 (give or take) points and somewhere near 20 goals. I think we’ll see a more confident player than the one that used to live in the shadows and this should translate into a much more balanced attack. I think where we will really notice him this year is on the special teams. I believe that he will be one of our top penalty-killers and I am certain that he will play a regular shift on the PP all season long.
Where Plekanec will start 2009-10: Trade rumour pages
Where Plekanec will end 2009-10: With many more fans on his side
Points: 23 G, 36 A, 59 Pts
Mike Cammalleri
Legend
Stats notes
Unlike Pleks, Mike can look at his numbers from last season and count on flattery. Here is what stands out for me:
1) Superb overall production
3.46 points per 60 minutes for Mike, 1.64 goals per 60, 3.3 goals for his team for every 60 minutes he's on the ice. These numbers stack up with the elite. His 19 powerplay goals would have surpassed the Canadiens at the half-season mark. To think his even strength.
2) Defence I can live with
There's always a trade off with offensive players like this – the expectation that a machine-gunning approach at one end will inevitably lead to lots of goals and chances at the other. The pleasant surprise is that Mike might have learned to tame that in Calgary. He managed to allow less than the average chances slip by with his linemates and even though he was playing in front of the for-once porous Kiprusoff (0.903's not a Vezina submission anymore), he was in the average at GA when on the ice.
3) Similarity between CGY 08-09 and LA 06-07
All this "Can he play without Iginla?" is ridiculous considering he has two 80 point seasons and two 30+ goal seasons in 3 years. His 2008-09 campaign answered the critics for 2006-07, and proved he can be a near 1.5 G/60 type guy. Maybe it's Iginla who should be worrying?
An offensive player through and through, who we hope might have learned something from a year in Sutterton. This year will tell if he's a year-on, year-off type player, and will probably see him settling to the production zone he'll keep up for these prime years. A look further back in his history will show that 19 goals is more anomalous than perhaps 39 or 34 were. Mind you, flirting with even in the +/- might also be out of the ordinary.
Tobalev on Cammalleri
Mike did well to cash out this summer as he really saved his best season for when it counted. I for one hope that he can repeat his 39-goal performance this season, but I can’t really see it happening. It seems that players’ production levels head south when they play for the Habs (Tanguay, Samsonov, Bonk, Johnson etc.) and I think I see it happening all over again. So the question is will the fans and media be happy with 35 goals? 30? My guess is no, so it all comes down to Mike. Kovalev was the perfect player for this environment as he always bounced back from criticism and boos, whereas Samsonov was the polar opposite. I predict that Mike will fall somewhere in between the two; somewhere where his play will be affected by the negativity, but not so much that he won’t score at all.
I would look for Mike to lead our team in goals and be a driving-force on the PP. Don’t expect too much in his own end, however, from the career -30 man. I could see him getting 40+ goals, but I could also see him getting below 30 as it all depends on his start and how the city warms to him. If he can create some chemistry with Gomez, Gionta, Plekanec or Kostitsyn before November 1st then he (as well as all of us) will enjoy his time in Montreal that much more.
Where Cammalleri will start 2009-10: First potential Canadiens 40-goal man in a decade
Where Cammalleri will end 2009-10: PP engine and more rounded ES player
Points: 33 G, 36 A, 69 Pts
Guillaume Latendresse
Legend
Stats notes
You could go many ways in interpreting these stats. Many numbers show clear decline, despite the progress that Gui is touted for. On the other hand, there is some stability within them too. The things to note:
1) Gui shoots straight
It's perhaps not that surprising that the skill that got him to the NHL is the one that stands out. 12.0% in an off year is not a stat I'd ever sneeze at.
2) Good production at even strength, considering
About a goal every 60 minutes of ice time is a good average to carry in you NHL career. Considering Gui's been bumped around lines a lot, not been given primo PP time and played with chance sink Kostopoulos a lot last year, then I find that encouraging. Hopefully he keeps up the pace.
3) Wonky even strength profile
As much as I'd like to think that Gui is one of the best defensive forwards on the team, the fact that I do have eyes helps me over the feeling. His profile shows us the danger of taking things out of context. Last season, Gui played at all the right times and missed the worst Price/Halak had to offer. Has it skewed the profile? Is Guillaume really 2nd best in Corsi? Perhaps the Canadiens lost all those games because he was injured? Impossible to tell for certain in a one-off experiment, but again, we do all have eyes, and sense.
As we've mentioned, 2009-10 is a big season for Latendresse. Because let's face it, another 14-16 goal campaign, while fine, certainly doesn't add to the lustre of the future 30-goal man argument. And, if it is to be 15 goals a year from here on in, then someone, somewhere is bound to surpass him, at least in terms of potential.
His shooting accuracy teamed with a new approach to shooting more should help. His defensive game and any improvement in the purpose of his hitting will make this line a very threatening one.
Tobalev on Latendresse
For some reason I am excited about Latendresse this year. Maybe it is because I see him as the best of the players from my home province, maybe it's because he is one of the longest serving Habs, or maybe it is because I actually sense a big season coming on. Whatever happens with goals and assists, Latendresse is still a player that wants to play for the Habs and generally tries pretty hard, despite some talent shortcomings.
Unfortunately for Gui, however, nothing is guaranteed. There are signs, after all that point to him not having that great of a season. His production levels have been stable for 3 years, he seems to be getting slower and he may very well get crowded out of the top-6/PP.
On the positive side, I think his new status on the team (best Quebecer) will help him, especially early in the season. Many fans and new teammates will look to him now as a leader and not just a prospect. If he can get in Martin’s good books and get himself onto a scoring line early on then I could see him there all year. If he makes the most of these chances when provided, the outlook could brighten in a hurry – I really think he could score 25 goals.
The more likely scenario, however, is that he gets bounced between the top 3 lines and into/out of the PP (thanks to injuries, slumps etc.). This will hurt his production and that is why I think he’ll likely top out at 30-35 points with most of those coming as goals.
Where Latendresse will start 2009-10: Carrying the torch for millions
Where Latendresse will end 2009-10: With a new appreciation for what he can do in this league
Points: 21 G, 24 A, 45 Pts
As a line
Just as Gomez was the point of departure for line #1, so Plekanec is pencilled in first for line #2. Cammalleri is next in, since he's a top line forward, and we opted not to put him on the "#1" line this time. Even so, Cammalleri's profile overall points to him being able to do things independently, and I think that could be a good thing for Plekanec. The difference in approach (i.e., using the puck quickly vs. holding the puck) should also suit PLeks, who's often quick to be in the right place when loose pucks appear.
Third man in to line #2 is the lucky dip. Between Sergei Kostitsyn, D'Agostini, Pacioretty and Latendresse. In the end, Guillaume's profile just stands up like a second liner. His goal rate is good and could improve, his accurate shot could be handy if Cammalleri creates masses of rebounds. Latendresse also adds a bit of size, and maybe even grit if he decides to – something the other three can't offer to the same extent. I feel it's his place to lose in the next few days.
Statistics adapted from nhl.com, behindthenet.ca, Olivier
Latendresse – Plekanec – Cammalleri
Tomas Plekanec
| NHL Season | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | PPG | GWG | G/60 | Pts/60 | Sh | S% | PIM |
| 08-09 (MTL) | 80 | 20 | 19 | 39 | -9 | 6 | 2 | 0.87 | 1.69 | 202 | 9.9 | 54 |
| 07-08 (MTL) | 81 | 29 | 40 | 69 | +15 | 12 | 6 | 1.19 | 2.83 | 186 | 15.6 | 42 |
| 06-07 (MTL) | 81 | 20 | 27 | 47 | +10 | 5 | 1 | 0.93 | 2.18 | 150 | 13.3 | 36 |
| Even-strength profile | |
 |
|
Stats notes
Had I written this report on Plekanec in either of the seasons previous to this one, it's fair to say it would have been glowing. Though last season was disappointing, the numbers Tomas put up still tell the tale of what kind of player he is and can be:
1) His CORSI number was high relative to his peers
Yes Plekanec had a decline in numbers, but what his Corsi shows me is what I'd read from his play – that actually his play varies little in goalscoring slump or spree. Relative to the team, Tomas was actually a player the Canadiens could count on last season to tip the play (if not goals) in their favour. Team chance differential was 5.2 shots a game more in their favour for the minutes Plekanec was on the ice than not. What that meant in real terms is that when Tomas was on, chances were just about even at both ends, when he was off the Habs were letting the other team drive.
2) 69 goals in 3 seasons – 3 20+ goal seasons
No other Habs player can boast this kind of production, or indeed consistency.
3) 19 assists last season
When The Score Forecaster asked me for a stat to sum up 2008-09 for the Habs, I chose Plekanec's 19 assists as the standout. Can you imagine any other top line centre on a line that ended up scoring 69 goals, who actually prefers passing to shooting, ending a season with 0.25 assists a game? And it really is this aberration that makes Plekanec's season look like the absolute dud that it did. Chip in another ten (which might have happened if Kovalev weren't examining his soul and Kostitsyn undertaking police interviews at the time when Tomas got hottest) and he'd be under his potential, but closer to the ballpark.
For those alarmed that we've entrusted another season of scoring duties to a fading Plekanec, pull up your boots. As the second line centre, 20 goals a season is respectable across this league. What's more less top checking against him has always been a boon for PLeks. The stats don't point to another 2007-08 really, but 20+ goals and 30-40 assists should easily be in the cards.
Tobalev on Plekanec:
Kovalev is gone, Koivu is gone and the list goes on. That means, Tomas, that it is time to step up and be a dominant player/leader on this team. Pleks is no longer a shining prospect or ‘pleasant surprise’, he is now being counted on for real – or else. After what was a hard year for the Czech, he must come into this season with a positive, winning attitude. I am tired of seeing a defeated man after a missed shot or a hanging head following another loss. He has the speed, ability and talent to excel at this level and I think Gainey has got him plenty of help this year to bring all of that out of him.
I expect Pleks to bounce back to 07-08 form this year and forget all about last season. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if he actually out-scored Gomez and was indeed our #1 centre. I don’t however, think that will happen, not this year. What I do think, though, is that he will put up 60 (give or take) points and somewhere near 20 goals. I think we’ll see a more confident player than the one that used to live in the shadows and this should translate into a much more balanced attack. I think where we will really notice him this year is on the special teams. I believe that he will be one of our top penalty-killers and I am certain that he will play a regular shift on the PP all season long.
Where Plekanec will start 2009-10: Trade rumour pages
Where Plekanec will end 2009-10: With many more fans on his side
Points: 23 G, 36 A, 59 Pts
Mike Cammalleri
| NHL Season | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | PPG | GWG | G/60 | Pts/60 | Sh | S% | PIM |
| 08-09 (CGY) | 81 | 39 | 43 | 82 | -2 | 19 | 6 | 1.64 | 3.46 | 255 | 15.0 | 44 |
| 07-08 (LA) | 63 | 19 | 28 | 47 | -16 | 10 | 1 | 0.91 | 2.26 | 210 | 9.0 | 30 |
| 06-07 (LA) | 81 | 34 | 46 | 80 | +5 | 16 | 5 | 1.40 | 3.28 | 299 | 11.4 | 48 |
| Even-strength profile | |
 |
|
Stats notes
Unlike Pleks, Mike can look at his numbers from last season and count on flattery. Here is what stands out for me:
1) Superb overall production
3.46 points per 60 minutes for Mike, 1.64 goals per 60, 3.3 goals for his team for every 60 minutes he's on the ice. These numbers stack up with the elite. His 19 powerplay goals would have surpassed the Canadiens at the half-season mark. To think his even strength.
2) Defence I can live with
There's always a trade off with offensive players like this – the expectation that a machine-gunning approach at one end will inevitably lead to lots of goals and chances at the other. The pleasant surprise is that Mike might have learned to tame that in Calgary. He managed to allow less than the average chances slip by with his linemates and even though he was playing in front of the for-once porous Kiprusoff (0.903's not a Vezina submission anymore), he was in the average at GA when on the ice.
3) Similarity between CGY 08-09 and LA 06-07
All this "Can he play without Iginla?" is ridiculous considering he has two 80 point seasons and two 30+ goal seasons in 3 years. His 2008-09 campaign answered the critics for 2006-07, and proved he can be a near 1.5 G/60 type guy. Maybe it's Iginla who should be worrying?
An offensive player through and through, who we hope might have learned something from a year in Sutterton. This year will tell if he's a year-on, year-off type player, and will probably see him settling to the production zone he'll keep up for these prime years. A look further back in his history will show that 19 goals is more anomalous than perhaps 39 or 34 were. Mind you, flirting with even in the +/- might also be out of the ordinary.
Tobalev on Cammalleri
Mike did well to cash out this summer as he really saved his best season for when it counted. I for one hope that he can repeat his 39-goal performance this season, but I can’t really see it happening. It seems that players’ production levels head south when they play for the Habs (Tanguay, Samsonov, Bonk, Johnson etc.) and I think I see it happening all over again. So the question is will the fans and media be happy with 35 goals? 30? My guess is no, so it all comes down to Mike. Kovalev was the perfect player for this environment as he always bounced back from criticism and boos, whereas Samsonov was the polar opposite. I predict that Mike will fall somewhere in between the two; somewhere where his play will be affected by the negativity, but not so much that he won’t score at all.
I would look for Mike to lead our team in goals and be a driving-force on the PP. Don’t expect too much in his own end, however, from the career -30 man. I could see him getting 40+ goals, but I could also see him getting below 30 as it all depends on his start and how the city warms to him. If he can create some chemistry with Gomez, Gionta, Plekanec or Kostitsyn before November 1st then he (as well as all of us) will enjoy his time in Montreal that much more.
Where Cammalleri will start 2009-10: First potential Canadiens 40-goal man in a decade
Where Cammalleri will end 2009-10: PP engine and more rounded ES player
Points: 33 G, 36 A, 69 Pts
Guillaume Latendresse
| NHL Season | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | PPG | GWG | G/60 | Pts/60 | Sh | S% | PIM |
| 08-09 (MTL) | 56 | 14 | 12 | 26 | +4 | 1 | 2 | 1.10 | 2.05 | 117 | 12.0 | 45 |
| 07-08 (MTL) | 73 | 16 | 11 | 27 | -2 | 2 | 3 | 1.07 | 1.81 | 116 | 13.8 | 41 |
| 06-07 (MTL) | 80 | 16 | 13 | 29 | -20 | 5 | 3 | 0.95 | 1.73 | 121 | 13.2 | 47 |
| Even-strength profile | |
|
|
Stats notes
You could go many ways in interpreting these stats. Many numbers show clear decline, despite the progress that Gui is touted for. On the other hand, there is some stability within them too. The things to note:
1) Gui shoots straight
It's perhaps not that surprising that the skill that got him to the NHL is the one that stands out. 12.0% in an off year is not a stat I'd ever sneeze at.
2) Good production at even strength, considering
About a goal every 60 minutes of ice time is a good average to carry in you NHL career. Considering Gui's been bumped around lines a lot, not been given primo PP time and played with chance sink Kostopoulos a lot last year, then I find that encouraging. Hopefully he keeps up the pace.
3) Wonky even strength profile
As much as I'd like to think that Gui is one of the best defensive forwards on the team, the fact that I do have eyes helps me over the feeling. His profile shows us the danger of taking things out of context. Last season, Gui played at all the right times and missed the worst Price/Halak had to offer. Has it skewed the profile? Is Guillaume really 2nd best in Corsi? Perhaps the Canadiens lost all those games because he was injured? Impossible to tell for certain in a one-off experiment, but again, we do all have eyes, and sense.
As we've mentioned, 2009-10 is a big season for Latendresse. Because let's face it, another 14-16 goal campaign, while fine, certainly doesn't add to the lustre of the future 30-goal man argument. And, if it is to be 15 goals a year from here on in, then someone, somewhere is bound to surpass him, at least in terms of potential.
His shooting accuracy teamed with a new approach to shooting more should help. His defensive game and any improvement in the purpose of his hitting will make this line a very threatening one.
Tobalev on Latendresse
For some reason I am excited about Latendresse this year. Maybe it is because I see him as the best of the players from my home province, maybe it's because he is one of the longest serving Habs, or maybe it is because I actually sense a big season coming on. Whatever happens with goals and assists, Latendresse is still a player that wants to play for the Habs and generally tries pretty hard, despite some talent shortcomings.
Unfortunately for Gui, however, nothing is guaranteed. There are signs, after all that point to him not having that great of a season. His production levels have been stable for 3 years, he seems to be getting slower and he may very well get crowded out of the top-6/PP.
On the positive side, I think his new status on the team (best Quebecer) will help him, especially early in the season. Many fans and new teammates will look to him now as a leader and not just a prospect. If he can get in Martin’s good books and get himself onto a scoring line early on then I could see him there all year. If he makes the most of these chances when provided, the outlook could brighten in a hurry – I really think he could score 25 goals.
The more likely scenario, however, is that he gets bounced between the top 3 lines and into/out of the PP (thanks to injuries, slumps etc.). This will hurt his production and that is why I think he’ll likely top out at 30-35 points with most of those coming as goals.
Where Latendresse will start 2009-10: Carrying the torch for millions
Where Latendresse will end 2009-10: With a new appreciation for what he can do in this league
Points: 21 G, 24 A, 45 Pts
As a line
| Line #2 | Effect O/D | |
| C – Tomas Plekanec |  |
|
| RW – Mike Cammalleri |  |
|
| LW – Guillaume Latendresse | |
|
Just as Gomez was the point of departure for line #1, so Plekanec is pencilled in first for line #2. Cammalleri is next in, since he's a top line forward, and we opted not to put him on the "#1" line this time. Even so, Cammalleri's profile overall points to him being able to do things independently, and I think that could be a good thing for Plekanec. The difference in approach (i.e., using the puck quickly vs. holding the puck) should also suit PLeks, who's often quick to be in the right place when loose pucks appear.
Third man in to line #2 is the lucky dip. Between Sergei Kostitsyn, D'Agostini, Pacioretty and Latendresse. In the end, Guillaume's profile just stands up like a second liner. His goal rate is good and could improve, his accurate shot could be handy if Cammalleri creates masses of rebounds. Latendresse also adds a bit of size, and maybe even grit if he decides to – something the other three can't offer to the same extent. I feel it's his place to lose in the next few days.
Statistics adapted from nhl.com, behindthenet.ca, Olivier
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)