Welcome back to those of you who found us today. It's been a hiatus brought on by a takeover from life over hockey. On my part, it was the powerplay of family, house and career that worked to dwindle my blogging time to nil. The Habs haven't missed a beat without me, and it's been fun watching them become a team that expects success.
About a month ago, Jay, a long-time reader on the site contacted me about the site's status. I told him that I had been keeping it ticking over and had plans to one day revive. He challenged me: this year. I hesitated and he offered to help. So here we are, Lions in Winter back for another winter. The plan is to have one tradiational game report a week with summary reports of the interim games to accompany. I have a feeling that when I get reading, I'll chip in on issues floating around the team (Galchenyuk's development, Tinordi's exile).
So now to Jay. Enjoy. Engage. GHG. - Topham
Date: 25/11/2015
Opponent: Rangers
Location: New York
Win: 5-1
Habs Goalie: Price (W), Condon
Opposition Goalie: Lundqvist (L), Raanta
Habs goalscorers: Andrighetto, Smith-Pelly (2), Galchenyuk, Pacioretty
Opposition goalscorers: Nash
Showing posts with label Lundqvist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lundqvist. Show all posts
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Friday, May 16, 2014
Revving Up Round 3: Strengths and Weakensses for Canadiens and Rangers
What a pleasure to have to write another one of these. Another series means the Canadiens strengths might be tested in different ways, as well as their weaknesses. To analyze the Rangers is a taller task than the Bruins, as they occupy less of my thoughts on a regular basis. Here goes anyway.
Canadiens strengths
1. Depth of scoring (Same as Bruins series)
This strength remains a core strength. In fact it did the Bruins in. To have Daniel Briere take a 4th line shift is a huge luxury, as is having a revitalized Lars Eller with experienced Gionta and fast Bourque on the 3rd unit.
The fortunate problem of the Canadiens coaching staff right now is the imminent return of Alex Galchenyuk: one of the team's strongest on-puck players. Usually it takes time for a player to go from first contact practice to insertion in the lineup, so don't expect #27 on Saturday. Beyond that, it's a coach's decision. The depth he adds is interesting as he could be inserted onto any of the forward lines to create a change of look and improve talent level throughout.
Canadiens strengths
1. Depth of scoring (Same as Bruins series)
This strength remains a core strength. In fact it did the Bruins in. To have Daniel Briere take a 4th line shift is a huge luxury, as is having a revitalized Lars Eller with experienced Gionta and fast Bourque on the 3rd unit.
The fortunate problem of the Canadiens coaching staff right now is the imminent return of Alex Galchenyuk: one of the team's strongest on-puck players. Usually it takes time for a player to go from first contact practice to insertion in the lineup, so don't expect #27 on Saturday. Beyond that, it's a coach's decision. The depth he adds is interesting as he could be inserted onto any of the forward lines to create a change of look and improve talent level throughout.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Game #45
Habs Dominate Conference Leaders
Details
Date: 15/01/2012
Opponent: Rangers
Location: Montreal
Win: 4-1
Habs Goalie: Budaj (W)
Opposition Goalie: Lundqvist (L)
Habs goalscorers: Pacioretty (2), Blunden, Desharnais
Opposition goalscorers: Mitchell
Play of the game
Dome hockey team
The 6 players we're playing in a no changes, do or die contest in the dome
Forwards
Max Pacioretty - Game Puck
A goal in each of the first two periods led the contributions of our top line for this outing. Our leading scorer earlier in the season, Max had a rough December but has hopefully broken his drought and regained some confidence for the months to come. We wanted big things from Pacioretty, and 15 goals in 42 games qualifies. He opened the scoring to put some wind in our sails early, and deflected an Erik Cole point shot for the eventual game-winner in the second. Big goals tonight.
Erik Cole
One thing we talked about early this season was the hope that we might finally have 3 lines that have the potential to score. I'd like to think some of that depth was echoed in a bench interview with Tortorella while we were up 3-1, where he said one of the problems was that "Their fourth line has scored twice." I don't know that this is our fourth line (especially considering we only dressed 11 forwards), but whatever line they are, they put 3 pucks in the net and Cole played a central role in all of these.
David Desharnais
Rounded out an extremely dangerous-looking line and used his speed and hockey sense to create problems for the Rangers all night long. Desharnais has amassed over 30 points in 45 games now, and is making a strong argument that he can take top-line offensive duties.
Defencemen
PK SubbanI've had the impression that Subban is being allowed to play a little more offensively the last couple games. He seemed more selective with his shots tonight, and had a lot more go on-target as a result. He showed good vision on his pass to Gomez to set up the Blunden goal. Didn't take part in total meltdown that allowed the first goal.
Josh Gorges
Not an easy night to round out the defenders, especially for defensive play. We weren't challenged too hard in our own end but Gorges was there to take care of it when we were. His physical play in the second and third periods helped to tie up a Rangers squad that knows how to move the puck and put it in the net.
Goaltender
Peter Budaj
Impressive showing, particularly for a guy who's been on the bench all season. Seriously, this is only Budaj's 6th outing, and only his second in the last 6 weeks or so. Budaj made some good stops early, including a very assertive play well-out of his net early in the second. His kick-save on a shot during the Rangers' power play was one of the prettiest of the game and came at an important moment.
Comments
An encouraging game to watch, for sure. Though the line of Cole/Desharnais/Pacioretty stole the show tonight, much of our forward line stood out tonight. Gomez had a really impressive game, and played the neutral ice and transition game as well as I've seen him do this season or last. He won some battles down low and created some great scoring chances, one of which Blunden put home. Blunden was involved in more real chances than I've ever seen before, and I have to wonder if that wasn't because Gomez was keeping him well-fed. Then I saw Gomez "on the back-check" with about 45 seconds left to go in the third: a bad change, and #11 skating out from the offensive zone at walking pace with his hands on his knees as the Rangers put together one of their better chances of the period.
Bourque was also noticeable in his debut beside Plekanec and actually reminds me of Cole if anyone: he has good speed and size, he likes to hit, and he seems to have good offensive senses. People say that maybe this is a new generation of Canadiens that won't be as skilled or as fast as the last couple of seasons, but I defy them to explain to me how the addition of Cole has slowed down our rush or harmed our offense. I think Bourque is of a similar vein, and could have similar success in a power forward role beside Plekanec and Gionta while bringing some size to the trio. Too bad Gionta's out for the rest of the season.
We started strong in the first and scored a beautiful goal only a couple minutes into it. Maybe 6 or 7 minutes later, we started to run into problems winning battles in our end, getting on loose pucks, and clearing it once we did get a stick on it. The Rangers were able to play a possession game in our end of the rink for a fair stretch of the first period, and that's never good. However, we came out strong after the first intermission and never looked back. We seemed to find some real confidence in the dressing room that translated into 3 goals and some pretty serious domination over the Eastern Conference leaders. We won more battles and did the little things right, and they weren't able to contain our rushes or outplay us in the neutral zone. When that happens, we're a tough team to beat and a lot of fun to watch.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Draft Odds
Will Carey Price Escape Last Goalie Picked Scenario?
When the NHL announced that it was to create the All-Star teams for the Annual Classic by a live draft, the first thought in most peoples' minds was:
"Who will have the shame of being the last standing"
To soften the blow to the 6th goalie and the last defenceman taken, the league put in some rules to ensure these were picked by an earlier deadline. (They also softened the blow to the least deserving forward, er defenceman, when they made him an assistant captain with exemption from the draft)
But guess what. someone will still have to be picked last. What's more, with the use of cunning and guile we can all figure out who the last defender and goalie picked were anyway.
As Canadiens fans, we don't have the luxury of being from a city in the US where the NHL is really trying to promote itself right now, so we only have on representative at the game.
Carey price nearly won the write in ballots, but the always humble Penguins fans stuffed the boxes for their goalie before Christmas when his stats were so Un-Star. Carey made it anyway, either on merit or because every team has to have one representative -- you tell me.
In any case, what this all means is that just about the only reason to watch any of the festivities this weekend for the hardcore Habs fan is to see where Carey price will be selected. It should give a new barometer on Price -- what opposing players think of him.
Mock draft results
Ahead of the actual draft, one of the most popular things to do for people with 3 minutes to spare is to do a mock draft and publish it in their newspaper or on their web page. In these drafts, the columnists either pick who they'd select (credible?) or pretend to be Staal and Lidtsrom and pick that way (less credible?).
In order to get an idea of the odds for Carey, I had a browse through about 9 mock drafts to see where he stood (NHL I, NHL III, TSN, Cgy Herald, Can Press, SI, SN, Broadstreet Hockey).
At this point, I'd have to say that Carey Price is the odds on favourite to be selected with the very last pick of a goaltender. The chips seem to fall mostly this way:
1) Cam Ward
Those pretending to be Staal all took him first. Given that Staal is the one picking, it seems plausible that he might go for Ward.
7 first, 1 second, 1 fourth (never after Price)
2) Tim Thomas
The best goaltender in the league this year (and over the past few years) gets relegated by Ward, but no further.
2 first, 4 second, 3 third (once after Price -- TSN)
3) Jonas Hiller
The best save percentage over the last few years, a solid and consistent bet is recognized as such.
1 second, 3 third, 2 fourth, 3 fifth (twice after Price)
4) Marc-Andre Fleury
Having to earn a selection without an internet vote may prove harder for MAF. The pundits knock him down the few notches his career stats deserve.
3 third, 3 fourth, 2 fifth, 1 sixth (twice after Price)
5) Henrik Lundqvist
Lidstrom is Swedish, and Lundqvist is pretty reliable to a standard.
2 second, 1 fourth, 4 fifth, 2 sixth (thrice after Price)
6) Carey Price
One big fan in Darren Dreger, but also openly mocked by some fantasy drafters. He was the clear last choice form the limited selection here.
1 second, 2 fourth, 6 sixth
On form
On form alone, Carey would probably fare a bit better.
This season, he is tied for fifth among the All-Star goalies in save percentage, with 0.920, good for 13th in the NHL (tied with Ward). Carey's been good, but the league standard has gone up. He's been better at keeping the goals down, as he's 9th leaguwide in that regard (2.36) and better than both Hiller (2.50) and Ward (2.70). So let's say if this game wasn't in Carolina, then Carey would be well ahead of Cam. Then again, if it wasn't in Carolina, how would Shanahan explain Ward over Pavelec or Rinne?
If we take a regular season only view and remove playoff accolades and blushes, then Carey is also slightly better than both Ward and Fleury for a career.
Sorry folks, but unless this game is suddenly moved to a different venue, it looks like GAA numbers won't be enough to save Carey's uneasy stand until the 10th round of this draft.
If there's something we've learned about Carey in his short career, however, it's that thinking he has something to prove is a better mode than thinking he's proved something already. As far as the Habs go, it may be good for Price to add a little chip to his shoulder for the next time he faces Staal, or Richards, or St. Louis.
"Who will have the shame of being the last standing"
To soften the blow to the 6th goalie and the last defenceman taken, the league put in some rules to ensure these were picked by an earlier deadline. (They also softened the blow to the least deserving forward, er defenceman, when they made him an assistant captain with exemption from the draft)
But guess what. someone will still have to be picked last. What's more, with the use of cunning and guile we can all figure out who the last defender and goalie picked were anyway.
As Canadiens fans, we don't have the luxury of being from a city in the US where the NHL is really trying to promote itself right now, so we only have on representative at the game.
Carey price nearly won the write in ballots, but the always humble Penguins fans stuffed the boxes for their goalie before Christmas when his stats were so Un-Star. Carey made it anyway, either on merit or because every team has to have one representative -- you tell me.
In any case, what this all means is that just about the only reason to watch any of the festivities this weekend for the hardcore Habs fan is to see where Carey price will be selected. It should give a new barometer on Price -- what opposing players think of him.
Mock draft results
Ahead of the actual draft, one of the most popular things to do for people with 3 minutes to spare is to do a mock draft and publish it in their newspaper or on their web page. In these drafts, the columnists either pick who they'd select (credible?) or pretend to be Staal and Lidtsrom and pick that way (less credible?).
In order to get an idea of the odds for Carey, I had a browse through about 9 mock drafts to see where he stood (NHL I, NHL III, TSN, Cgy Herald, Can Press, SI, SN, Broadstreet Hockey).
At this point, I'd have to say that Carey Price is the odds on favourite to be selected with the very last pick of a goaltender. The chips seem to fall mostly this way:
1) Cam Ward
Those pretending to be Staal all took him first. Given that Staal is the one picking, it seems plausible that he might go for Ward.
7 first, 1 second, 1 fourth (never after Price)
2) Tim Thomas
The best goaltender in the league this year (and over the past few years) gets relegated by Ward, but no further.
2 first, 4 second, 3 third (once after Price -- TSN)
3) Jonas Hiller
The best save percentage over the last few years, a solid and consistent bet is recognized as such.
1 second, 3 third, 2 fourth, 3 fifth (twice after Price)
4) Marc-Andre Fleury
Having to earn a selection without an internet vote may prove harder for MAF. The pundits knock him down the few notches his career stats deserve.
3 third, 3 fourth, 2 fifth, 1 sixth (twice after Price)
5) Henrik Lundqvist
Lidstrom is Swedish, and Lundqvist is pretty reliable to a standard.
2 second, 1 fourth, 4 fifth, 2 sixth (thrice after Price)
6) Carey Price
One big fan in Darren Dreger, but also openly mocked by some fantasy drafters. He was the clear last choice form the limited selection here.
1 second, 2 fourth, 6 sixth
On form
On form alone, Carey would probably fare a bit better.
This season, he is tied for fifth among the All-Star goalies in save percentage, with 0.920, good for 13th in the NHL (tied with Ward). Carey's been good, but the league standard has gone up. He's been better at keeping the goals down, as he's 9th leaguwide in that regard (2.36) and better than both Hiller (2.50) and Ward (2.70). So let's say if this game wasn't in Carolina, then Carey would be well ahead of Cam. Then again, if it wasn't in Carolina, how would Shanahan explain Ward over Pavelec or Rinne?
If we take a regular season only view and remove playoff accolades and blushes, then Carey is also slightly better than both Ward and Fleury for a career.
Sorry folks, but unless this game is suddenly moved to a different venue, it looks like GAA numbers won't be enough to save Carey's uneasy stand until the 10th round of this draft.
If there's something we've learned about Carey in his short career, however, it's that thinking he has something to prove is a better mode than thinking he's proved something already. As far as the Habs go, it may be good for Price to add a little chip to his shoulder for the next time he faces Staal, or Richards, or St. Louis.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Carey Price: Thoroughbred In The Gates?
Are These Thoroughbred Trends?
As promised, my second post on Carey Price will deal with the question as to whether he is a thoroughbred or not. This piece is not a debate about Halak or Price (that may come later), just the thoroughbred issue.
Carey Price 2008-2009
This season is touted as a season to forget for Carey Price, but I don't think that on the whole is being very fair. I only have to look at my own writings for reminders, like this from the mid-term analysis:
But it wasn't 20 minutes of play after that post before Carey began an atrocious stretch of the season that lasted an unacceptable 14 starts and 6 weeks in all. The beginning of the downfall may have been to injury or, if you buy my pet theory, may have been the How-to-score-on-Price seminar, aka the Youngstars game, in January.
His statistics over that 14-start stretch include a 3.91 GAA, an Aebischeresque 0.862 save percentage and a paltry 5 points from a possible 28 for his team. Conversely, the other 38 games look quite acceptable indeed with a 2.46 GAA, a 0.919 save %, with a contender-like 21 wins and 9 OTLs.
Consider also that in the 14-games of putridity he had a save % under 0.900 on 8 occasions, whereas in his first 25 games that only happened on 6 occasions.
As though letting in nearly 4 goals a game weren't bad enough, it was the style in which he did it in the confidence-sapping stretch of the season that killed the team's morale almost completely by early March. It was goals within the first ten shots ten times and within the first five shots on five occasions. It was goals on consecutive opposition shots (3 times). And it was the untimely way he faltered, such as after the team got a lead or clawed back to tie it up.
All of these things happen to Marin Brodeur once in a while (see playoffs 2009) and to the next tier down a little more. And they happen to average goalies for long stretches.
But isn't that the point? Is he or is he not above average? (A thoroughbred does not conjure thoughts of running in the pack) Perhaps more pertinent, do great goalies start as average/below-average goalies (do thoroughbreds)? To get to the bottom of it, I had a look at some nice stats.
Quality shot stats
Anyone who has been watching Carey Price over the last year (starting specifically at the Philadelphia series) must surely have noticed that good shooters with a good amount of time seem to be able to beat him more than we'd like them to. Anyone who gets sight of the top of the net seems to score. Of course, the defence is heavily to blame for letting so many good shooters get so many good shots away, but there comes a point when you have to wonder -- is Umberger a good shot. If he is, who isn't?
From a subjective point of view, once you get this idea in your mind you start seeing what you want to see. That can be a problem if a goalie lets in high shots game after game. Witness Kostadis' point in the comments to the introductory portion of this series. He notes that Carey Price makes plenty of outstanding saves in some games where we end up un-doming him. Usually because we see the eventual gamewinner as a misplay. So a more objective approach is required from someone so tainted as me, stats...
Quality of shot analysis
For this part of the analysis, I sought some evidence of shot quality from statistics to probe the question properly. The first ones I found were the Behind The Net analysis based on shot quality at 5-on-5.
Here Carey proves himself to be better than average (first pleasant surprise). Based on the average ability to save shots form the positions they came from, we should have expected Carey to let in 93 goals (92.7 actuall) on 1027 shots at even strength. In play, he only let in 88 even strength goals - saving 5 goals more than he should have - good news.
I took it a step further to do some save percentage on these numbers. Basically, I calculated how many goals each goalie saved over and above the expected and divided by the number of goals expected. What this gives us is a statistic that I have called clutch saves; it gives some guide as to what's been happening with "clutch" goaltending this season.
Carey's 4.7 goals saved over 92.7 expected goals means he saves 5.1% of shots that he would have no business saving (if he were average). Very good, I thought.
Furthermore, this percentage puts Price about 32nd among goalies who play enough to warrant consideration. If you look at NHL starters, he's 18th. And if you chuck in Varlamov for good measure, Price is 19th.
The top 5 in the league are all still alive in the playoffs:
Tim Thomas (29.2%)
Simeon Varlamov (26.6%)
Roberto Luongo (26.6%)
Nikolai Khabibulin (26.4%)
Jonas Hiller (22.6%)
Others worth noting:
Henrik Lundqvist (20.8%)
Tomas Vokoun (20.7%)
Martin Brodeur (20.5%)
Pekka Rinne (15.5%)
Steve Mason (13.7%)
Jaroslav Halak (13.4%)
Cristobal Huet (13.2%)
Yann Danis (12.3%)
Cam Ward (12.2%)
Marc-Andre Fluery (3.2%)
Chris Osgood (-6.7%)
Mikka Kiprusoff (-10%)
What does this mean?
Well, it means he's average - or at least he was for the enire season.
The problem here is that averages include all goalies who play in the NHL, not just the 30 starters. So when Pogge (worst in the league, btw) steps in an lets up 9 more goals than expected in 7 games, Carey is compared to that. What's more, for me, where he currently sits is not thoroughbred territory - too many thoroughbreds are ahead of him (some almost as young).
His save percentage, though, at even strength is still a plump 0.914, so no decisive knock-down here. Based on this analysis, his toroughbred status hangs on.
Penalty-kill save %
Behind the Net also has a whole raft of other stats if you're that way inclined. For the second look, I decided to show you goalie performance while his team is a man down. The reason I choose this is because the shot quality analysis isn't done for anything but ES, also it seems logical that shots are better set up on the PP than at ES.
These stats offer a bit of a quick and rude awakening for all those people who support Carey's thorough breeding. If you look across the season for the whole league, Carey Price is in fact the worst starter across all teams in terms of save percentage on the PK. On an average of 38.6 shots per 60 minutes of PP time, Carey Price allowed an average of 7.61 goals. That means his save % was a rather embarrassing 0.803 at 4-on-5.
Now, PP shots are harder to save you say. Of course they are. But the average NHL goalie has a save % of 0.852, and that includes every weak link there is (like Mathieu Garon who saves just over 75% of PP shots in 20 games). Some good goalies have low save percentages here (Brodeur, for example at 0.816), but many don't. Thoroughbreds shouln't, I say.
The top 5 starters in the league here are:
Nicklas Backstrom (0.923)
Henrik Lundqvist (0.918)
Martin Biron (0.894)
Simeon Varlamov (0.893)
Tim Thomas (0.888)
Others to note are:
Craig Anderson (0.910)
Jaroslav Halak (0.890)
Mikka Kiprusoff (0.888)
Pekka Rinne (0.887)
Steve Mason (0.870)
Marc-Andre Fleury (0.867)
Cristobal Huet (0.866)
Jonas Hiller (0.862)
Cam Ward (0.862)
Jose Theodore (0.845)
Yann Danis (0.833)
Roberto Luongo (0.833)
What does this mean?
Well not much on its own. If Carey had been Halak-efficient it would have meant a mere 2 goals less. It's not a case on its own, but as things add up, it certainly seems to follow the pattern. It's another hit against the thoroughbred hypothesis.
Giving a chance to win
In response to Kostadis' case that LIW is wrong about Halak > Price (which is not the point of this piece, rather whether Price = thoroughbred), I thought I could take a similar approach.
He claims, that Carey Price gave the Canadiens a chance to win in 33 games of 49 (so 67.3%), whereas Halak only gave them 52.9% chance. I'll start by pointing out neither goalies stats are based on starts, which I thought they should be. Price goes up and so does Halak, with this tweak. Halak, for his part, gave opportunity for wins in 19/33, or 57.6%.
I thought I would look at things a bit closer. For can we really say that a goalie who loses in OT always gives his team a chance to win. In reality, you say, we can. And I concede on that. But for us at Lions in Winter, we generally look at how many goals a goalie allows to decide whether that would allow a win on most nights (i.e., those where his team doesn't win 6-5). While each goalie loses a couple of games this way, this subjective method actually works in the goalie's favour, since games that are lost 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1 can be counted as games he gave his team a chance to win.
By this criteria, nothing really changes. But if you get generous and say that 3 GAs is a reasonable amount for a goalie in a league where average GAA is parked in between 2 and 3 year-upon-year, then it gets interesting.
Carey Price, by the 3-goal criteria, actually gave his team a chance to win 73% of the time. And, lo and behold, Jaroslav Halak gave his team a chance to win an incredible 73% of the time. Funny that it would be equal.
By this criteria, Carey has to win. But only against Halak. It doesn't really prove that anyone is or isn't a thoroughbred. After all, no one has ever accused 9th round QMJHL alum Halak of being thoroughly bred. For that we need to look at goalies on other teams - ones that actually win.
Quickly for illustration I looked at Tim Thomas, Roberto Luongo, Cam Ward and Pekka Rinne.
Tim Thomas by the first criteria (W and OTLs) gave his team a chance to win 79.6% of the time. If you guve him the 3 goal benefit of the doubt that's 83.3% of the time.
Roberto Luongo gave 74.1% and 74.1%.
Cam Ward gave 64.7% and 76.5%.
Rinne gave 67.3% and 81.6%.
This is not a random sample, but I think it's a fair group to sample if you want to look at thoroughbreds. While Carey Price and Halak look OK in isolation, in the light of day they don't stack up to Thomas or Rinne. They come close to Luongo, but to be fair to Roberto, he did have 9 shutouts which mean automatic points (not just chance at), both our guys mustered only 1 of those. I think this category shows Carey in a much better light than the other two. What's more, given his age, I think you could argue that giving his team a 73% chance to win is pretty darn goosd. Is it thoroughbred stuff? Let me just say, I'd rather have Rinne based on this season... (is he a thoroughbred?)
One streak to skew all stats
There's a very very solid case to be made that it was all due to one bad streak. But was it just a bad streak? Did 14 games destroy everything? It's a valid argument, I concede.
For me it's about trends, though. If this were the very first slump from Carey Price, then I'm sure it would be water off a ducks back. It's not though, and a responsible scientist like myself has to ask whether the good is the aberration, or the bad. Those of us counting will note that Carey Price has had a few breakdowns since his arrival with the team. To be generous (and a bit facetious) I'll call these non-thoroughbred episodes, or NTEs. The more research-minded among us will note that he also had a pretty long NTE the season following his selection in the first round, not to mention his blow-up in the WHL playoffs that year. So to enumerate the NTEs:
1) 2005-06 Tri-City Americans
2) January 2008 Montreal and Hamilton
3) April 2008 Round 2 Montreal vs. Philadelphia
4) January and February 2009 Montreal (the aforementioned 14 games)
5) April 2009 Round 1 Montreal vs. Boston
That of course allows us to paint every stretch in between as one where the opposite position is held (i.e., a thoroughbred stretch):
1) 2006-07 All teams (Tri-City, Canada, Hamilton)
2) October to December 2007 Montreal
3) February to April 2008 Montreal (including Round 1 vs. Boston)
4) October to December 2008 Montreal
5) March 2009
On balance there are as many good games as bad in there, and most games are probably just adequate or average (less than 3 goals, saving 90% of shots). What we have is a pint glass with half a pint of beer and half a pint of air. If you go for the glass half full approach, you see the Gold medal for Canada the Calder Cup, the end of the 2007-08 season and Round 1 and the very sturdy beginning for this last season. It all adds up for you. The glass half empty perspective notices the floundering in the playoffs, the 14-game stretch to forget and the easy goals, and starts to question whether sub-NHL success will ever be translated.
I've come to the end of this and realise that despite a lot of stats, not much has changed. I haven't proved that Carey Price is not a thoroughbred, nor can we look and say that he is one. I think I would conclude that there is plenty of reason to question whether his progression will be as smoothe as some assure us it will be. I think there's enough evidence to suggest that anyone who says he's not a thoroughbred is at least as sane as someone who purports he is. I think that's all I wanted to do - prove our point of view on this isn't as crazy as some make it out to be.
What I can say with some assurance is that this season he was not a great goalie. On average he was an average goalie. Is that good for 21? I don't know.
I think we'll have to wait and see what happens by next season on this one. Maybe even wait until the next playoff test. Given that Gainey is basing our team around this guy come hell or high water, I'd recommend to anyone that hasn't already dedicated 50 blog pages to this to take the glass half full approach -- it'll be better for your sanity.
Carey Price 2008-2009
This season is touted as a season to forget for Carey Price, but I don't think that on the whole is being very fair. I only have to look at my own writings for reminders, like this from the mid-term analysis:
Carey Price: A+
Top ten in multiple categories in NHL rankings, his contribution to the Habs has been undeniable so far. His value to the fan, as we've seen during Halak's reign, is that he positions himself so well and so far ahead of the play that many saves look too easy. Only a year into his career, to be A+ on a 56-point team midway through the season is an impressive feat. Tough tests to come though, no doubt.
But it wasn't 20 minutes of play after that post before Carey began an atrocious stretch of the season that lasted an unacceptable 14 starts and 6 weeks in all. The beginning of the downfall may have been to injury or, if you buy my pet theory, may have been the How-to-score-on-Price seminar, aka the Youngstars game, in January.
His statistics over that 14-start stretch include a 3.91 GAA, an Aebischeresque 0.862 save percentage and a paltry 5 points from a possible 28 for his team. Conversely, the other 38 games look quite acceptable indeed with a 2.46 GAA, a 0.919 save %, with a contender-like 21 wins and 9 OTLs.
Consider also that in the 14-games of putridity he had a save % under 0.900 on 8 occasions, whereas in his first 25 games that only happened on 6 occasions.
As though letting in nearly 4 goals a game weren't bad enough, it was the style in which he did it in the confidence-sapping stretch of the season that killed the team's morale almost completely by early March. It was goals within the first ten shots ten times and within the first five shots on five occasions. It was goals on consecutive opposition shots (3 times). And it was the untimely way he faltered, such as after the team got a lead or clawed back to tie it up.
All of these things happen to Marin Brodeur once in a while (see playoffs 2009) and to the next tier down a little more. And they happen to average goalies for long stretches.
But isn't that the point? Is he or is he not above average? (A thoroughbred does not conjure thoughts of running in the pack) Perhaps more pertinent, do great goalies start as average/below-average goalies (do thoroughbreds)? To get to the bottom of it, I had a look at some nice stats.
Quality shot stats
Anyone who has been watching Carey Price over the last year (starting specifically at the Philadelphia series) must surely have noticed that good shooters with a good amount of time seem to be able to beat him more than we'd like them to. Anyone who gets sight of the top of the net seems to score. Of course, the defence is heavily to blame for letting so many good shooters get so many good shots away, but there comes a point when you have to wonder -- is Umberger a good shot. If he is, who isn't?
From a subjective point of view, once you get this idea in your mind you start seeing what you want to see. That can be a problem if a goalie lets in high shots game after game. Witness Kostadis' point in the comments to the introductory portion of this series. He notes that Carey Price makes plenty of outstanding saves in some games where we end up un-doming him. Usually because we see the eventual gamewinner as a misplay. So a more objective approach is required from someone so tainted as me, stats...
Quality of shot analysis
For this part of the analysis, I sought some evidence of shot quality from statistics to probe the question properly. The first ones I found were the Behind The Net analysis based on shot quality at 5-on-5.
Here Carey proves himself to be better than average (first pleasant surprise). Based on the average ability to save shots form the positions they came from, we should have expected Carey to let in 93 goals (92.7 actuall) on 1027 shots at even strength. In play, he only let in 88 even strength goals - saving 5 goals more than he should have - good news.
I took it a step further to do some save percentage on these numbers. Basically, I calculated how many goals each goalie saved over and above the expected and divided by the number of goals expected. What this gives us is a statistic that I have called clutch saves; it gives some guide as to what's been happening with "clutch" goaltending this season.
Carey's 4.7 goals saved over 92.7 expected goals means he saves 5.1% of shots that he would have no business saving (if he were average). Very good, I thought.
Furthermore, this percentage puts Price about 32nd among goalies who play enough to warrant consideration. If you look at NHL starters, he's 18th. And if you chuck in Varlamov for good measure, Price is 19th.
The top 5 in the league are all still alive in the playoffs:
Tim Thomas (29.2%)
Simeon Varlamov (26.6%)
Roberto Luongo (26.6%)
Nikolai Khabibulin (26.4%)
Jonas Hiller (22.6%)
Others worth noting:
Henrik Lundqvist (20.8%)
Tomas Vokoun (20.7%)
Martin Brodeur (20.5%)
Pekka Rinne (15.5%)
Steve Mason (13.7%)
Jaroslav Halak (13.4%)
Cristobal Huet (13.2%)
Yann Danis (12.3%)
Cam Ward (12.2%)
Marc-Andre Fluery (3.2%)
Chris Osgood (-6.7%)
Mikka Kiprusoff (-10%)
What does this mean?
Well, it means he's average - or at least he was for the enire season.
The problem here is that averages include all goalies who play in the NHL, not just the 30 starters. So when Pogge (worst in the league, btw) steps in an lets up 9 more goals than expected in 7 games, Carey is compared to that. What's more, for me, where he currently sits is not thoroughbred territory - too many thoroughbreds are ahead of him (some almost as young).
His save percentage, though, at even strength is still a plump 0.914, so no decisive knock-down here. Based on this analysis, his toroughbred status hangs on.
Penalty-kill save %
Behind the Net also has a whole raft of other stats if you're that way inclined. For the second look, I decided to show you goalie performance while his team is a man down. The reason I choose this is because the shot quality analysis isn't done for anything but ES, also it seems logical that shots are better set up on the PP than at ES.
These stats offer a bit of a quick and rude awakening for all those people who support Carey's thorough breeding. If you look across the season for the whole league, Carey Price is in fact the worst starter across all teams in terms of save percentage on the PK. On an average of 38.6 shots per 60 minutes of PP time, Carey Price allowed an average of 7.61 goals. That means his save % was a rather embarrassing 0.803 at 4-on-5.
Now, PP shots are harder to save you say. Of course they are. But the average NHL goalie has a save % of 0.852, and that includes every weak link there is (like Mathieu Garon who saves just over 75% of PP shots in 20 games). Some good goalies have low save percentages here (Brodeur, for example at 0.816), but many don't. Thoroughbreds shouln't, I say.
The top 5 starters in the league here are:
Nicklas Backstrom (0.923)
Henrik Lundqvist (0.918)
Martin Biron (0.894)
Simeon Varlamov (0.893)
Tim Thomas (0.888)
Others to note are:
Craig Anderson (0.910)
Jaroslav Halak (0.890)
Mikka Kiprusoff (0.888)
Pekka Rinne (0.887)
Steve Mason (0.870)
Marc-Andre Fleury (0.867)
Cristobal Huet (0.866)
Jonas Hiller (0.862)
Cam Ward (0.862)
Jose Theodore (0.845)
Yann Danis (0.833)
Roberto Luongo (0.833)
What does this mean?
Well not much on its own. If Carey had been Halak-efficient it would have meant a mere 2 goals less. It's not a case on its own, but as things add up, it certainly seems to follow the pattern. It's another hit against the thoroughbred hypothesis.
Giving a chance to win
In response to Kostadis' case that LIW is wrong about Halak > Price (which is not the point of this piece, rather whether Price = thoroughbred), I thought I could take a similar approach.
He claims, that Carey Price gave the Canadiens a chance to win in 33 games of 49 (so 67.3%), whereas Halak only gave them 52.9% chance. I'll start by pointing out neither goalies stats are based on starts, which I thought they should be. Price goes up and so does Halak, with this tweak. Halak, for his part, gave opportunity for wins in 19/33, or 57.6%.
I thought I would look at things a bit closer. For can we really say that a goalie who loses in OT always gives his team a chance to win. In reality, you say, we can. And I concede on that. But for us at Lions in Winter, we generally look at how many goals a goalie allows to decide whether that would allow a win on most nights (i.e., those where his team doesn't win 6-5). While each goalie loses a couple of games this way, this subjective method actually works in the goalie's favour, since games that are lost 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1 can be counted as games he gave his team a chance to win.
By this criteria, nothing really changes. But if you get generous and say that 3 GAs is a reasonable amount for a goalie in a league where average GAA is parked in between 2 and 3 year-upon-year, then it gets interesting.
Carey Price, by the 3-goal criteria, actually gave his team a chance to win 73% of the time. And, lo and behold, Jaroslav Halak gave his team a chance to win an incredible 73% of the time. Funny that it would be equal.
By this criteria, Carey has to win. But only against Halak. It doesn't really prove that anyone is or isn't a thoroughbred. After all, no one has ever accused 9th round QMJHL alum Halak of being thoroughly bred. For that we need to look at goalies on other teams - ones that actually win.
Quickly for illustration I looked at Tim Thomas, Roberto Luongo, Cam Ward and Pekka Rinne.
Tim Thomas by the first criteria (W and OTLs) gave his team a chance to win 79.6% of the time. If you guve him the 3 goal benefit of the doubt that's 83.3% of the time.
Roberto Luongo gave 74.1% and 74.1%.
Cam Ward gave 64.7% and 76.5%.
Rinne gave 67.3% and 81.6%.
This is not a random sample, but I think it's a fair group to sample if you want to look at thoroughbreds. While Carey Price and Halak look OK in isolation, in the light of day they don't stack up to Thomas or Rinne. They come close to Luongo, but to be fair to Roberto, he did have 9 shutouts which mean automatic points (not just chance at), both our guys mustered only 1 of those. I think this category shows Carey in a much better light than the other two. What's more, given his age, I think you could argue that giving his team a 73% chance to win is pretty darn goosd. Is it thoroughbred stuff? Let me just say, I'd rather have Rinne based on this season... (is he a thoroughbred?)
One streak to skew all stats
There's a very very solid case to be made that it was all due to one bad streak. But was it just a bad streak? Did 14 games destroy everything? It's a valid argument, I concede.
For me it's about trends, though. If this were the very first slump from Carey Price, then I'm sure it would be water off a ducks back. It's not though, and a responsible scientist like myself has to ask whether the good is the aberration, or the bad. Those of us counting will note that Carey Price has had a few breakdowns since his arrival with the team. To be generous (and a bit facetious) I'll call these non-thoroughbred episodes, or NTEs. The more research-minded among us will note that he also had a pretty long NTE the season following his selection in the first round, not to mention his blow-up in the WHL playoffs that year. So to enumerate the NTEs:
1) 2005-06 Tri-City Americans
2) January 2008 Montreal and Hamilton
3) April 2008 Round 2 Montreal vs. Philadelphia
4) January and February 2009 Montreal (the aforementioned 14 games)
5) April 2009 Round 1 Montreal vs. Boston
That of course allows us to paint every stretch in between as one where the opposite position is held (i.e., a thoroughbred stretch):
1) 2006-07 All teams (Tri-City, Canada, Hamilton)
2) October to December 2007 Montreal
3) February to April 2008 Montreal (including Round 1 vs. Boston)
4) October to December 2008 Montreal
5) March 2009
On balance there are as many good games as bad in there, and most games are probably just adequate or average (less than 3 goals, saving 90% of shots). What we have is a pint glass with half a pint of beer and half a pint of air. If you go for the glass half full approach, you see the Gold medal for Canada the Calder Cup, the end of the 2007-08 season and Round 1 and the very sturdy beginning for this last season. It all adds up for you. The glass half empty perspective notices the floundering in the playoffs, the 14-game stretch to forget and the easy goals, and starts to question whether sub-NHL success will ever be translated.
I've come to the end of this and realise that despite a lot of stats, not much has changed. I haven't proved that Carey Price is not a thoroughbred, nor can we look and say that he is one. I think I would conclude that there is plenty of reason to question whether his progression will be as smoothe as some assure us it will be. I think there's enough evidence to suggest that anyone who says he's not a thoroughbred is at least as sane as someone who purports he is. I think that's all I wanted to do - prove our point of view on this isn't as crazy as some make it out to be.
What I can say with some assurance is that this season he was not a great goalie. On average he was an average goalie. Is that good for 21? I don't know.
I think we'll have to wait and see what happens by next season on this one. Maybe even wait until the next playoff test. Given that Gainey is basing our team around this guy come hell or high water, I'd recommend to anyone that hasn't already dedicated 50 blog pages to this to take the glass half full approach -- it'll be better for your sanity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)