Today, we received confirmation that at least some of the Canadiens management team watch the same games that we do, and even share some of the same notions about winning hockey.
Tomas Plekanec won a hefty raise by repeating his 20-odd goalscorer, 70-odd point man routine from a couple of years ago. He earned the privelege of Pierre Gauthier's phone call with an offer with his outstanding contributions throughout his tenure, the season, and particularly the Pittsburgh series.
This case draws a line in the sand between Plekanec and Jaroslav Halak for value to the team. Whereas the management figures they can do almost as well with Carey Price or someone else with adjustments to other positions, the Plekanec signing tells me they haven't seen an offensive centreman capable of playing as many roles as Pleks becoming available in the very near future.
Largely, I agree with this assessment. And, I'm glad that some other erroneous contracts didn't force this one off the books before a phone call could be made. $5 million a season is a lot for a number two centre (if reports are correct), but Plekanec himself earns this money (relative to high paid players in the NHL).
The move does however make the prospect of free agency less of a reality this summer. Looking down the list of players, this probably isn't a bad thing. That said, if a large scoring winger must be brought in, then the GM will have to get creative. Time for him to earn his money, I suppose.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Free Pizza For Everyone
As the NHL and TSN prepare for Thursday's awards cermonies and Friday's draft, the rst of the world is watching the World Cup.
I count myself in with the rest. And so, apart from being roused by the occasional trading of a team's major cog, I neglect my coverage of signings like Mathieu Darche for now.
I think it's only right. After all, for all the drama of teams shifting salary, it somehow just doesn't quite stack up to entire nations going at each other, some coming through in impressive fashion and others completely falling to pieces.
This morning was a case in point. This morning, an embattled French team took to the field in South Africa to face the home Bafana Bafana squad. I didn't need to watch the game, or the red card, or the bad loser's refusal to shake hands to embrace the feeling of this result.
South Africa 2:1 France
There's a beauty in that. Two coutries who qualified for the tournament through FIFA's own special allowances playing their way out. One group had their heads held high, one group left biting each others' heads off.
France, you see, deserved this fate. Having wrongly avoided being put to a penalty shoot-out in order to qualify courtesy of a goal made possible by Thierry Henry's offside hand to foot pass. Since that time, the Irish and those who thought FIFA took the easy way out have been hoping for the pendulum to swing back into the collective mid-riff of the French.
The momentum seemd to change early. France, a pre-tournament power if only for their star power, slipped and slogged away against an uninspired (on the day) Uruguayan side.
A loss to Mexico followed, with an effort that was questionable all around. From there, as you'd expect, flowed criticism, rifts in the squad, plenty of whining, a players strike, resignation of high ups in the French football federation, public humiliation, an injunction from President Sarkozy, more humiliation, and finally a loss to the lowest ranked team to be pulled from Pot A in this, and probably all, World Cups.
If you're Irish you call it justice. If you're just about anyone else, comedy.
Ireland come out with high groiund and pizza
Meanwhile, the Irish National football team (the other team I know to work in-fighting into match preparation - 2002: Keane, Roy) is enjoying this World Cup, perhaps more than they would have had the hand ball been flagged down by the linesman wishing to make up for his botched offside call. They'll have plenty of time now to relish the high ground.
Last week, sombreros and tequila were the order of the day in Dublin as France went up against Mexico in group match. If there was ever a day for Corona to outsell tehe black stuff on the river Liffey, it was on the evening of the French defeat that nearly sealed their fate.
Today, the Irish will be eating Pizza to their hearts' content, I imagine, as Pizza Hut is offereing free pizza following the French exit.
The results in sport don't always fall in the way that we want. Nor do they always fall on the side of fairness. But sometimes, it appears that they do.
Whatever the teams, the results. You just can't top the drama that's unfolding in South Africa. That it seems is my round-about apology for putting hockey on the backburner for a few days...
I count myself in with the rest. And so, apart from being roused by the occasional trading of a team's major cog, I neglect my coverage of signings like Mathieu Darche for now.
I think it's only right. After all, for all the drama of teams shifting salary, it somehow just doesn't quite stack up to entire nations going at each other, some coming through in impressive fashion and others completely falling to pieces.
This morning was a case in point. This morning, an embattled French team took to the field in South Africa to face the home Bafana Bafana squad. I didn't need to watch the game, or the red card, or the bad loser's refusal to shake hands to embrace the feeling of this result.
South Africa 2:1 France
There's a beauty in that. Two coutries who qualified for the tournament through FIFA's own special allowances playing their way out. One group had their heads held high, one group left biting each others' heads off.
France, you see, deserved this fate. Having wrongly avoided being put to a penalty shoot-out in order to qualify courtesy of a goal made possible by Thierry Henry's offside hand to foot pass. Since that time, the Irish and those who thought FIFA took the easy way out have been hoping for the pendulum to swing back into the collective mid-riff of the French.
The momentum seemd to change early. France, a pre-tournament power if only for their star power, slipped and slogged away against an uninspired (on the day) Uruguayan side.
A loss to Mexico followed, with an effort that was questionable all around. From there, as you'd expect, flowed criticism, rifts in the squad, plenty of whining, a players strike, resignation of high ups in the French football federation, public humiliation, an injunction from President Sarkozy, more humiliation, and finally a loss to the lowest ranked team to be pulled from Pot A in this, and probably all, World Cups.
If you're Irish you call it justice. If you're just about anyone else, comedy.
Ireland come out with high groiund and pizza
Meanwhile, the Irish National football team (the other team I know to work in-fighting into match preparation - 2002: Keane, Roy) is enjoying this World Cup, perhaps more than they would have had the hand ball been flagged down by the linesman wishing to make up for his botched offside call. They'll have plenty of time now to relish the high ground.
Last week, sombreros and tequila were the order of the day in Dublin as France went up against Mexico in group match. If there was ever a day for Corona to outsell tehe black stuff on the river Liffey, it was on the evening of the French defeat that nearly sealed their fate.
Today, the Irish will be eating Pizza to their hearts' content, I imagine, as Pizza Hut is offereing free pizza following the French exit.
The results in sport don't always fall in the way that we want. Nor do they always fall on the side of fairness. But sometimes, it appears that they do.
Whatever the teams, the results. You just can't top the drama that's unfolding in South Africa. That it seems is my round-about apology for putting hockey on the backburner for a few days...
Friday, June 18, 2010
What If Those Were Price's Numbers?
26-13-5, 2.40, 0.924
9-9-0, 2.55, 0.923
56-34-7, 2.62, 0.919
Those are the numbers at issue here. Regular season, playoffs and career to date. They look pretty good. Too good apparrently for the Canadiens in their cap situation.
I can accept that argument (I don't like it), but humour me here. What if those numbers belonged to a first round draft pick from 2005 named Carey Price?
Would the Canadiens have been able to get away with trading him for a package? (I think we can all admit, it would have been an even better one)
Or, would the Canadiens have been forced to find a way to fit in his millions?
Is it worth thinking about?.
9-9-0, 2.55, 0.923
56-34-7, 2.62, 0.919
Those are the numbers at issue here. Regular season, playoffs and career to date. They look pretty good. Too good apparrently for the Canadiens in their cap situation.
I can accept that argument (I don't like it), but humour me here. What if those numbers belonged to a first round draft pick from 2005 named Carey Price?
Would the Canadiens have been able to get away with trading him for a package? (I think we can all admit, it would have been an even better one)
Or, would the Canadiens have been forced to find a way to fit in his millions?
Is it worth thinking about?.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Habs Management Get Fleeced in Unnecessary Trade
So we can put an end to discussions of RFA goaltending dilemmas. Today, Pierre Gauthier traded save percentage ace Jaroslav Halak for 2 St. Louis prospects in a move more reminiscent of the Montreal Expos than anything from the more illustrious periods of Canadiens history.
No explanations have been disclosed, but one must assume there was something in the contract talks that made this move necessary. Perhaps the young goalie was asking the moon.
But as much as I like Plekanec and all the other free agents, Halak's contract should have been the first one onto the books this summer. Adjustments should have been made afterwards.
It would even make sense in terms of trading, as a young star with a contract will most often fetch more than a young star without one (witness return on this trade).
More worrying, perhaps is that the team did not get a goaltender in return (though we still have months for that) as entrusting the full starting load to Carey Price at the moment is a gamble at best.
The return
Lars Eller is a forward from Denmark who once had his touts, but whose name hasn't been heard in these parts for some time. He's already been slotted in on the Canadiens page on Hockey's Future, with the discouraging rank of "Other Notable"
Here's what the scout said on him there:
Blah.
Ian Schultz is even less exciting, and to be honest, this is the first time I've ever heard his name.
Hockey's Future has a line on him too:
Not a great return. Not considering Halak's save percentage had been over 0.920 for near 8 months and his career record in the NHL suggests he might flirt with those numbers again.
No explanations have been disclosed, but one must assume there was something in the contract talks that made this move necessary. Perhaps the young goalie was asking the moon.
But as much as I like Plekanec and all the other free agents, Halak's contract should have been the first one onto the books this summer. Adjustments should have been made afterwards.
It would even make sense in terms of trading, as a young star with a contract will most often fetch more than a young star without one (witness return on this trade).
More worrying, perhaps is that the team did not get a goaltender in return (though we still have months for that) as entrusting the full starting load to Carey Price at the moment is a gamble at best.
The return
Lars Eller is a forward from Denmark who once had his touts, but whose name hasn't been heard in these parts for some time. He's already been slotted in on the Canadiens page on Hockey's Future, with the discouraging rank of "Other Notable"
Here's what the scout said on him there:
Eller has decent size, is a good skater with very good technical skills. He also works hard and is in general very well-rounded as a player. His scoring touch is pretty good, but Eller is much more noticeable as a playmaker. He has really good hockey sense and has that special ability to find openings that few other players can. A team player, he plays a good two-way game, but could still use some fine-tuning in his defensive game and play without the puck.
Eller is projected to become a two-way forward, second line, in the NHL one day.
Blah.
Ian Schultz is even less exciting, and to be honest, this is the first time I've ever heard his name.
Hockey's Future has a line on him too:
Schultz gets noticed for his physical play more than for his offensive skill. Schultz could eventually become a power forward, but he may also develop into a solid grinding winger.
Not a great return. Not considering Halak's save percentage had been over 0.920 for near 8 months and his career record in the NHL suggests he might flirt with those numbers again.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
The Value Of Assists
As hockey statistics continue to expand, new measures and multiplication factors are thought up every day. But for all the sophistication that is emerging regarding shots, saves and the like, we are still left as fans with the albatross of the NHL scoring leaders at the heart of everything.
As you well know, the NHL scoring leaders is a blunt tool to assess a player’s worth. A simple record of who touched the puck last, second to last and third to last as pucks flew by goaltenders into the net. It does little to instruct us on who created the goals, who made the play that unlocked the D or the goalie.
As you know, we at LIW took issue with this and undertook to examine each goal the Montreal Canadiens scored over an entire season. Instead of simply assigning equal points to the last three guys who touched the puck (as scoring leaders does), we decided to evaluate each goal on its own merits, assigning points to each of the players involved (not limiting the contributors at three, but sometimes stopping short as well). We called it goals created.
The product of this analysis was very interesting, and I promise to share it with you soon in an upcoming post. But today I wanted to talk about one of the by-products of the statistical compilation that we undertook: the average value of each component part (i.e., G, A1, A2, others). In particular, I wanted to address the value of the second assist.
What is the value of an assist?
I think we've all exclaimed at one point or another the silliness of assigning the same weight to some assists as a goalscorer gets for an unassisted goal. I think we can all remember thinking that perhaps goals and assists are not worth the same amount just because the stats page tells they do, and that some goals, some assists are better than others.
As I looked at the statistics we were gathering, I was curious to see what might have been written on this topic in the past. As it turns out, there is quite a bit.
The general consensus seems to be that a second assist is worth less than a goal and less than a first assist, but to what extent is (and will remain) unclear. James Mirtle chimed in on this a few years ago. And the new stats community has been in on the discussion. But it seems the area where this has seen the most light is among those who attempt to make the NHL statistics speak to player contribution through mathematical manipulation ¬ specifically Allan Ryder of Goals Created.
Allan writes an extensive thesis on how he thinks players contribute to the results (wins) on the ice. If you’re keen you can find some of his full work here. If you want to stick to assists today, then he wrote on those for the Globe and Mail a few years back too.
After reading all the fretting over the inadequacy of the NHL scoring methods, it came a quite a surprise that statistical experts have come to one of three conclusions on this:
Obviously, point one is outdated and has been completely misproven by the work of Olivier in the Habs camp and many others like him around the league. Point two is an improvement, but discounting second assists altogether might be as wrong as counting them equally in the first place. The third approach is the step in the right direction, but it stops short of illuminating anything, as it is unclear how much data and research plays a part in the divining of those numbers.
In his lengthy 2004 report on player contribution, Allan Ryder wrote:
Goal distribution
Historical statistics for the NHL show that typically 5% of goals are unassisted, 20% of goals have one assist and the other 75% have the full two. This means there are 1.7 assists per goal scored.
This season, the Montreal Canadiens scored a total of 256 goals.
193 of the goals had 2 assists credited (75%)
45 of the goals had 1 assist credited (18%)
18 goals were unassisted (7%)
These numbers mean there were 1.68 assists per goal this year in Montreal.
That looks just about right, considering what we should expect. I agree the sample would be better with goals from all teams included, but at least the Habs aren’t some unassisted goalscoring anomaly to waste a season worth of data collection.
Value of goals
It seems that those who suggested a goalscorer should get about 50% of credit on all NHL goals might be vindicated. A season's worth of Habs goals puts goalscoring credit at about 54%, pretty close to half.
Interesting to note, however, is that not all goals are created equally. Shorthanded goals show a trend to being more goalscorer driven (not surprising), and PP goals have the goalscorer sharing much more credit with his teammates.
All in all, the goalscoring picture is about where we might have thought with a number out of the air. So far so good.
Value of assists
This is where things get interesting. With about 46% of credit left to dole out, an equitable soul might place the first and second assists at about 23% each. The most daring of stats guessers put the ratio at 3:2
(or 0.28 and 0.18, or thereabouts).
Total numbers showing 0.33 and 0.13 put these estimates way off.
Data for ES and PP all show the same - that a first assist is a major contribution to a goal, a second assist is a minor one.
What does this mean?
If this data is indicative of the way things happen elsewhere, then as suspected, the NHL scoring leaders do not do a very good job of representing player contribution.
While we already know that goals are better than assists, we can tease that information just by looking at the scoring breakdown. But if there is a massive difference between first and second assist then scoring summaries that don't split into two sets of helpers must be severely questioned.
This we mostly knew already. Hence the rise of the player contribution systems from both Allan Ryder and Tom Awad. There are implications for these systems too. Awad for example feeds all assists into his GVT at the same value, and may have a value for goals (0.43) that underestimates the triggerman.
The last, and probably most important thing, this data tells me is that generalizing values to situation (whether it be ES, PP or SH, or 1assists, 2 assists goals) creates error. If we as fans want to get to the bottom of player contribution, then we have have work to do.
As you well know, the NHL scoring leaders is a blunt tool to assess a player’s worth. A simple record of who touched the puck last, second to last and third to last as pucks flew by goaltenders into the net. It does little to instruct us on who created the goals, who made the play that unlocked the D or the goalie.
As you know, we at LIW took issue with this and undertook to examine each goal the Montreal Canadiens scored over an entire season. Instead of simply assigning equal points to the last three guys who touched the puck (as scoring leaders does), we decided to evaluate each goal on its own merits, assigning points to each of the players involved (not limiting the contributors at three, but sometimes stopping short as well). We called it goals created.
The product of this analysis was very interesting, and I promise to share it with you soon in an upcoming post. But today I wanted to talk about one of the by-products of the statistical compilation that we undertook: the average value of each component part (i.e., G, A1, A2, others). In particular, I wanted to address the value of the second assist.
What is the value of an assist?
I think we've all exclaimed at one point or another the silliness of assigning the same weight to some assists as a goalscorer gets for an unassisted goal. I think we can all remember thinking that perhaps goals and assists are not worth the same amount just because the stats page tells they do, and that some goals, some assists are better than others.
As I looked at the statistics we were gathering, I was curious to see what might have been written on this topic in the past. As it turns out, there is quite a bit.
The general consensus seems to be that a second assist is worth less than a goal and less than a first assist, but to what extent is (and will remain) unclear. James Mirtle chimed in on this a few years ago. And the new stats community has been in on the discussion. But it seems the area where this has seen the most light is among those who attempt to make the NHL statistics speak to player contribution through mathematical manipulation ¬ specifically Allan Ryder of Goals Created.
Allan writes an extensive thesis on how he thinks players contribute to the results (wins) on the ice. If you’re keen you can find some of his full work here. If you want to stick to assists today, then he wrote on those for the Globe and Mail a few years back too.
After reading all the fretting over the inadequacy of the NHL scoring methods, it came a quite a surprise that statistical experts have come to one of three conclusions on this:
- Analysts are limited by the information in the scoring reports, and only the NHL has the ability to increase the data
- Second assists are worth less, so we’ll remove them altogether for a G+A1 look
- Second assists are worth less, but we’re not sure how much, so we’ll assign a number based on individual intuition to create a correction factor
Obviously, point one is outdated and has been completely misproven by the work of Olivier in the Habs camp and many others like him around the league. Point two is an improvement, but discounting second assists altogether might be as wrong as counting them equally in the first place. The third approach is the step in the right direction, but it stops short of illuminating anything, as it is unclear how much data and research plays a part in the divining of those numbers.
In his lengthy 2004 report on player contribution, Allan Ryder wrote:
“I know of no research on the relative value of goals versus assists. So you will just have to live with my best guess.”I don’t pretend to have taken the definitive step in settling this age old debate, but I think what we have done is at least an interesting starting point. By looking at all the goals individually and recording situation, players and contribution score we at least raise a flag to say that perhaps 0.5 a goal and 0.25 per assist is out of whack.
Goal distribution
Historical statistics for the NHL show that typically 5% of goals are unassisted, 20% of goals have one assist and the other 75% have the full two. This means there are 1.7 assists per goal scored.
This season, the Montreal Canadiens scored a total of 256 goals.
193 of the goals had 2 assists credited (75%)
45 of the goals had 1 assist credited (18%)
18 goals were unassisted (7%)
These numbers mean there were 1.68 assists per goal this year in Montreal.
That looks just about right, considering what we should expect. I agree the sample would be better with goals from all teams included, but at least the Habs aren’t some unassisted goalscoring anomaly to waste a season worth of data collection.
Value of goals
It seems that those who suggested a goalscorer should get about 50% of credit on all NHL goals might be vindicated. A season's worth of Habs goals puts goalscoring credit at about 54%, pretty close to half.
Interesting to note, however, is that not all goals are created equally. Shorthanded goals show a trend to being more goalscorer driven (not surprising), and PP goals have the goalscorer sharing much more credit with his teammates.
All in all, the goalscoring picture is about where we might have thought with a number out of the air. So far so good.
Value of assists
This is where things get interesting. With about 46% of credit left to dole out, an equitable soul might place the first and second assists at about 23% each. The most daring of stats guessers put the ratio at 3:2
(or 0.28 and 0.18, or thereabouts).
Total numbers showing 0.33 and 0.13 put these estimates way off.
Data for ES and PP all show the same - that a first assist is a major contribution to a goal, a second assist is a minor one.
What does this mean?
If this data is indicative of the way things happen elsewhere, then as suspected, the NHL scoring leaders do not do a very good job of representing player contribution.
While we already know that goals are better than assists, we can tease that information just by looking at the scoring breakdown. But if there is a massive difference between first and second assist then scoring summaries that don't split into two sets of helpers must be severely questioned.
This we mostly knew already. Hence the rise of the player contribution systems from both Allan Ryder and Tom Awad. There are implications for these systems too. Awad for example feeds all assists into his GVT at the same value, and may have a value for goals (0.43) that underestimates the triggerman.
The last, and probably most important thing, this data tells me is that generalizing values to situation (whether it be ES, PP or SH, or 1assists, 2 assists goals) creates error. If we as fans want to get to the bottom of player contribution, then we have have work to do.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Unspoken: Philly Blew It
Every year this happens. A team wins the Cup and we go into some kind of praise-amplification cycle, the usual result of which is a conclusion that all future Cups will be won as this latest one was.
It's all fine and good as long as it remains theory, that is until you go out and overpay Rob Scuderi.
As we enjoy the interminable season finally coming to an end, I offer this thought. Perhaps Chicago might not have won the Cup had their opposition offered a credible goaltending option.
Last night was only one example, but again Leighton was shaky. Two of the goals allowed, including the OT Stanley Cup Winner, were minor league stuff.
When in recent memory can you remember a Stanley Cup finalist putting forward a serious bid with a goalie that was pulled twice, allowed 3.96 goals a game and saved less than 88% of shots. He played well in one win, but that hardly balances two of his losses in which he allowed about 25% of shots to go in.
To sum up, Michael leighton was sub-par and by letting in some of the goals he did, effectively cut the Flyers chances off at the knees.
Still, I choose not to entitle the piece with Michael Leighton's name, as this was all to be expected. Miraculaous shut out run aside, Leighton is a player with this kind of checkered history. A borderline NHLer with up and down numbers. It shouldn't have surprised anyone that his miracle streak was just that, a miracle streak.
Really Philadelphia management is to blame.
It starts as these things usually do with drafting. Since they drafted Roman Cechmanek in 2000 (their last credible goalie graduate), the Flyers have selected 15 goalies in all. All told from those 15, they have received 2 NHL games of sub 0.800 goaltending. Not pretty. The lessons they learned in the late 1990s when their last thrust into contention was on were clearly unlearned, as they constantly have goaltending further down the list than nearly everything else. Though they've sprung for two third round goalie choices in the past two seasons, prior to that their reliance on free agency meant they had little time for goalies before round 5.
Speaking of free agency, they often get distracted there too. I'm not necessarily saying that goalies can be plucked out of thin air in July, but it might be easier if the kitty isn't always already spent to find someone adequate.
Ray Emery was a great example of Philly's approach to goaltending on the cheap. Always willing to spring big money for the next bully in line, they frequently find themselves looking for the bargain basement option come September. Esche, Biron, Boucher, Emery, leighton, not exactly a crew that sends shivers down the spine of shooters.
And then there are trades. Never mind that Philly might have turned down a great bargain in December with the potential Halak deal. That bears no meaning next to the fact that they had built a team to win in the present with several excellent young and middle age stars ready to shine, yet failed to trade a single piece of their depth when Ray Emery first showed himself to be missing a step and then underwent fairly major surgery before the trade deadline.
It's fair to say that Philly's management didn't react because they never thought this possible, even with a goaltender. Fine. But making the playoffs and winning the Cup were clearly in the plans when they signed all their forwards to long-term millions and then traded the future couple of first rounders for Pronger. Philly were a team built for now, or thereabouts. So why leave playoff qualification, and ultimately playoff success in the court of a gamble like Boucher? Or Leighton?
In my mind, it's quite a big mistake. And now, quite a big opportunity missed..
Who should be more aggrieved?
I'm as happy as anyone to see Mike Richards close to tears. He must feel pretty aggrieved by management's ponderous approach to shoring the back end. Peter Laviolette too. He coached a storm to get his team as far as it did, yet being cuffed by the Leighton/Boucher options must have been hard. Finally, Chris Pronger, who still dominant might wonder how many more Cup runs he can coax out of himself.
Yet, as unhappy as those should be, could it be that Canadiens fans and perhaps Bruins fans even more so should be cursing their luck.
Coming into the Bruins game in relief, Michael Leighton was a 0.902 career goalie with no NHL playoff experience. In the 2.5 games he played vs. Boston to rescue the Flyers from 3-1, he laid down a shutout to end the series with a 0.943 save % and 1.54 GAA. Against Montreal, it was 3 more shutouts en route to a 0.950 save % and a 1.41 GAA.
Had he played as he did in the final, Boston would have likely scored 5 more goals in 2.5 games and Montreal was owed 10 more. Had he played at his career NHL rate, Boston would have expected 3 more goals and Montreal a further 7.
That's not to say both teams didn't have a part in Leighton's supremacy, or that Philly's D didn't also. Merely to say that we all knew one day Leighton wouldn't be making some of the saves he seemed to be able to make against both Bruins and Habs, and we knew we'd feel a little bit unlucky to have faced him at the one time in his career he looked a genuine starter.
It's all fine and good as long as it remains theory, that is until you go out and overpay Rob Scuderi.
As we enjoy the interminable season finally coming to an end, I offer this thought. Perhaps Chicago might not have won the Cup had their opposition offered a credible goaltending option.
Last night was only one example, but again Leighton was shaky. Two of the goals allowed, including the OT Stanley Cup Winner, were minor league stuff.
When in recent memory can you remember a Stanley Cup finalist putting forward a serious bid with a goalie that was pulled twice, allowed 3.96 goals a game and saved less than 88% of shots. He played well in one win, but that hardly balances two of his losses in which he allowed about 25% of shots to go in.
To sum up, Michael leighton was sub-par and by letting in some of the goals he did, effectively cut the Flyers chances off at the knees.
Still, I choose not to entitle the piece with Michael Leighton's name, as this was all to be expected. Miraculaous shut out run aside, Leighton is a player with this kind of checkered history. A borderline NHLer with up and down numbers. It shouldn't have surprised anyone that his miracle streak was just that, a miracle streak.
Really Philadelphia management is to blame.
It starts as these things usually do with drafting. Since they drafted Roman Cechmanek in 2000 (their last credible goalie graduate), the Flyers have selected 15 goalies in all. All told from those 15, they have received 2 NHL games of sub 0.800 goaltending. Not pretty. The lessons they learned in the late 1990s when their last thrust into contention was on were clearly unlearned, as they constantly have goaltending further down the list than nearly everything else. Though they've sprung for two third round goalie choices in the past two seasons, prior to that their reliance on free agency meant they had little time for goalies before round 5.
Speaking of free agency, they often get distracted there too. I'm not necessarily saying that goalies can be plucked out of thin air in July, but it might be easier if the kitty isn't always already spent to find someone adequate.
Ray Emery was a great example of Philly's approach to goaltending on the cheap. Always willing to spring big money for the next bully in line, they frequently find themselves looking for the bargain basement option come September. Esche, Biron, Boucher, Emery, leighton, not exactly a crew that sends shivers down the spine of shooters.
And then there are trades. Never mind that Philly might have turned down a great bargain in December with the potential Halak deal. That bears no meaning next to the fact that they had built a team to win in the present with several excellent young and middle age stars ready to shine, yet failed to trade a single piece of their depth when Ray Emery first showed himself to be missing a step and then underwent fairly major surgery before the trade deadline.
It's fair to say that Philly's management didn't react because they never thought this possible, even with a goaltender. Fine. But making the playoffs and winning the Cup were clearly in the plans when they signed all their forwards to long-term millions and then traded the future couple of first rounders for Pronger. Philly were a team built for now, or thereabouts. So why leave playoff qualification, and ultimately playoff success in the court of a gamble like Boucher? Or Leighton?
In my mind, it's quite a big mistake. And now, quite a big opportunity missed..
Who should be more aggrieved?
I'm as happy as anyone to see Mike Richards close to tears. He must feel pretty aggrieved by management's ponderous approach to shoring the back end. Peter Laviolette too. He coached a storm to get his team as far as it did, yet being cuffed by the Leighton/Boucher options must have been hard. Finally, Chris Pronger, who still dominant might wonder how many more Cup runs he can coax out of himself.
Yet, as unhappy as those should be, could it be that Canadiens fans and perhaps Bruins fans even more so should be cursing their luck.
Coming into the Bruins game in relief, Michael Leighton was a 0.902 career goalie with no NHL playoff experience. In the 2.5 games he played vs. Boston to rescue the Flyers from 3-1, he laid down a shutout to end the series with a 0.943 save % and 1.54 GAA. Against Montreal, it was 3 more shutouts en route to a 0.950 save % and a 1.41 GAA.
Had he played as he did in the final, Boston would have likely scored 5 more goals in 2.5 games and Montreal was owed 10 more. Had he played at his career NHL rate, Boston would have expected 3 more goals and Montreal a further 7.
That's not to say both teams didn't have a part in Leighton's supremacy, or that Philly's D didn't also. Merely to say that we all knew one day Leighton wouldn't be making some of the saves he seemed to be able to make against both Bruins and Habs, and we knew we'd feel a little bit unlucky to have faced him at the one time in his career he looked a genuine starter.
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Adieu Guy Boucher
This past week, the Montreal Canadiens lost their young dauphin, the rising star that is Guy Boucher. A French Canadian student of the game who has succeeded at every level so far due to his diligence and the creative new development of tactics.
He’s the coach that any team would want. Eventually.
Habs fan reaction has been predictably sour on this departure. Boucher was seen as a star signing last season, even before he went to work for the organization. Following a season of success in the AHL and of player development the likes of which we have seldom seen in three decades in Montreal, his star only seemed brighter.
My personal take on this is that the Habs did the right thing here.
First, they did the right thing for the man. Boucher now leaves the Canadiens family with nothing but cherished memories. This will always be the team that gave him his break, and now too the team that didn’t begrudge him his next one.
Second, they honour their commitment to Jacques Martin, who like his calm demeanor or not, must be given loads of credit for his revamp of the team that can suddenly compete with the big boys.
Finally, they didn’t panic. Panic would have been hiring Boucher on as head coach for fear that he may be great. Such hirings are unwise, as they take us further from the well laid plan that was so painful to instigate one short year ago. A veteran coach was needed, and probably still is, while veterans are forged from the young generation of leaders coming through.
Still reasons to denounce this move do exist. In the vein of a Leclair trade that still haunts many a fan’s dreams, there’s the what if? What if Boucher wins the Cup elsewhere? What if he wins the Jack Adams?
It’s easy to get caught up in all these what ifs, but often forgot is the other side of the coin: What if Guy Boucher takes time to adjust to the league like the vast majority of coaches who come through?
Among the reasons to take confident comfort in this move, the story of one William Scott Bowman is foremost.
Scotty Bowman entered the Canadiens organization as a star more than 50 years before Guy Boucher ever did. At his hiring in the early 1950s, Bowman was a former junior Canadien who had impressed his mentors. Early in his post-player days, Scotty was made assistant of the Junior Canadiens under the mercurial Sam Pollock. Memorial Cup finals and championships followed as he made his name within the Forum’s halls.
After stints coaching in Ottawa and Peterborough, Scotty was moved internally to the position of chief scout of amateur talent (a latter-day Trevor Timmins). In any case, the Canadiens weren’t going to let his feet get cold. When he was ready, he took full duties as coach of the Montreal Junior Canadiens ¬ the main feeder to the star-laden team in the NHL.
Then, in 1967-68, the NHL expanded its operations to include 6 more cities. Opportunities that had been sewn up by playing and coaching talent alike until then were suddenly doubled. For the Canadiens, this presented a choice. Would Scotty Bowman be shoehorned into the pro ranks alongside Toe Blake, would they put their organizational foot down and try to bar his way, or would they let the star they had nurtured fly the coop.
They chose the latter and Scotty was allowed to depart in order to become an assistant to Lynn Patrick in St. Louis. As Scotty recalls it, he decided to take a chance then too:
"Montreal was a very strong team at the time. Toe Blake was coaching. I got a chance to go to the NHL when they expanded. It's hard to turn down a chance to get into the NHL. I was coaching the Junior Canadiens who had moved back to Montreal. I got the opportunity to go to St. Louis from Lynn Patrick. He was going to be the general manager, and I coached his son Craig in junior hockey in Montreal. When he got the job with the Blues, he hired me as his assistant. I decided I really should take a chance. I was fortunate the league expanded and I got an opportunity to get to one of the expansion franchises."His time in St. Louis was a success, after becoming head coach after mere weeks into the season, Scotty’s teams went on to reach the finals in each of his first three seasons in the NHL. No doubt Scotty learned much.
Apprenticeship completed, his old head coach and friend Sam Pollock convinced Scotty to rejoin his hometown club in 1971. The rest is history.
Guy Boucher may never match Scotty Bowman’s achievements, but his path to the NHL coaching ranks is at least somewhat similar. In both cases, the coaches had keen eyes for talent, a commitment to winning and the determination to outstretch their rival coaches. Both were also known stars of the Canadiens organizations they were part of.
In following Bowman’s path out of the Canadiens family to stretch his legs, we hope that the similarities continue ¬ there’s really nothing else to be done. In the new world of the NHL, where teams from one season rarely resemble the one three years down the line, there’s no real reason to fret over Boucher. We simply hope he can learn and thrive while keeping the candle he has for the Canadiens organization flickering until the opportunity for his return may come.
Suivant, next.
On a related note, one would think that the hiring of Guy Boucher last year will have taught the Canadiens management team a valuable lesson about installing quality personnel under the main team. I hope that in addition to holding early camps, firing scouts, signing Americans and negotiating with Plekanec that Gauthier is dedicating a substantial slab of time to scouting the next Bulldogs coach.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)