View Single Post
05-30-2013, 08:48 AM
How about 76 for 25?
dmanfish90's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newmarket, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,675
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to dmanfish90
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
And yet the Blackhawks were dead last in the league in the stats column... Sharks were 22nd... Even the Penguins and the Bruins barely get into the top 1/3... hmm...

Then I would present a combined "stat", as opposed to just one or the other.

Sure does. Begs the question though: did you provide defensive zone faceoff percentage rankings, or "total"?

I think everyone's at least a bit puzzled arguing an arbitrary set of factors manipulated to provide an arbitrary ranking system, and its correlation to the results of the games and the "eye test".

At what point does this ranking show me the difference between Montreal starting off the season with a healthy defense and healthy goalie but ending with injuries to both, and L.A. starting off the year without one of its top 4 defensemen and a recovering goalie but ending the year healthy? Seems to me like those were roads going in opposite directions that were bound to meet somewhere along the line; whatever the statistical particulars may be. The defensive play of the Kings' forwards compared to the Habs' is definitely an edge, though.
Defense is comprised of more than hits, but hits do play a small part (1/10).

FYI, I believe Giveaways aren't actually a "defensive" stat as to get a giveaway you need possession of the puck (hence you are technically on offense) and then have it lost by a player on the other team "taking it away" from you. I still do believe they are both equally as important statistics, but for defensive sakes, Takeaways is the one to use because it is an actual defensive stat, hence why it was used by the author of that article i posted above.

Show me a link to defensive zone faceoff % and more than gladly use them. For now, totals will have to do. Might skew things, but I highly doubt it. More likely they even each other out and you get a general picture about how likely a team is to win a faceoff at any faceoff dot on the ice. I think that's the key thing here.

How are Goals Against per Game, Shots Against per Game, Hits, Blocked Shots, Takeaway, and Faceoff % arbitrary? Okay maybe the last one but the first 5 statistical categories are all defensive categories. Do you disagree with this statement?

Now you're using injuries as excuses. I provide statistics in coming off with a somewhat logical conclusion on how well defensively a certain team or teams has/have played and your response is "oh well LA just won a cup and all cup teams are usually rusty the year after to start and Quick had back surgery that he's still recovering from" which is all true and fine and dandy. But the way I see it, excuses. In fact, how do you end up 5th place in the standings and use that as an excuse for how well you played in any respect, offensively/defensively/whatever. Now with their playoff performance, can you still use those above excuses?

The "ranking" system isn't a joke as mentioned below in this post.

Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Do you know how many games Price played in his often coveted AHL playoff heroics?, apparently not. As far as those achievements, one conn smythe trumps them all, in the running 2 years in a row destroys it.

At the Jr's if it wasn't for Toews scoring on every shot, no one remembers this performance, Price was letting in every shot himself.
He played 22 AHL playoff games that year, won 15 of them.

I remember that game very well as i watched it live. I remember Toews scoring like 3 times in a row after the first 3 players shot. Price was letting in every shot on their repeat scorer Mueller I believe. Eventually he stopped enough for them to win and move onto the Gold Medal Game.

Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Thank god you wrote ESPECIALLY as far as AHL prowess 'cause everything else you mentioned, there's another goalie who also added this to his resume....and that's the great Justin Pogge.

Anyway, what you mentioned is the reason of the expectations. Not sure why people are blaming other posters for having high expectations. 'Cause then you add how he was brought up (don't respond LafleurGuy, that part is not for you...), the money he makes, who we traded to make room for him, and here are you high expectations. Then now, you can even add a goalie that was picked in the same draft much later on who has already 1 Cup and working on another one. And an enemy goalie in Rask, who has already reached a 3rd round, that Price didn't do yet. I know, teams and all. But somehow, both of those goalies are making their team better. As good as they are, they have weaknesses. Boston was about to lose in the 1st round. LA looked like a team that would probably not make the playoffs....
Pogge has never won the Calder Cup, let alone in the same year he won the World Juniors, was the World Juniors Goalie of the Tournament (ahead of Tuukka Rask), Tournament MVP, Jack A. Butterfield Trophy as the AHL Playoffs MVP.

Yes we have high expectations, hence why everyone says he should be better. But people make it seem like this means nothing. It doesn't mean more than winning a cup and a conn smythe, but before last season, Price's accomplishments trumped Quick's. Now, the opposite.

Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Hits have no bearing on the quality of defence, 10 % is 10% too high. One of the best dan ever, rarely hit, see Nik Lidstrom

Takeaways, completely meaningless, no standard set between rinks to even count them, and the team with the puck the most is the team that has the least amount of chances to actually create takeaways

Faceoffs, basically a coin toss, once again, 10% is 10% too high. None of those things had any impact on the bad defensive prowess. Zero, talk about grasping. If those lack of hits/faceoffs/takeways weren't leading to more shots/more scoring chances they are completely irrelevant, it's clear as day that they weren't. lol
If that is the case then why is PO hockey very hard hitting and the games are extremely close? I might be making a stretch but I feel like they complement each other...

Takeaways are not meaningless. What do u mean by "no standard set between rinks to even count them"? They are counted, and are on the website. Thank you for illustrating my point. As I believe takeaways are a minorly important defensive stat, you make the argument that the team with the puck more often (like we did for most games this season) will have less opportunities to take the puck off the other team because the other team doesn't have the puck as much as them. So when people mention "we had the 5th fewest shots on goal this year, we controlled the play, etc" it has very little to do with how we played defensively and almost everything to do with how we played offensively.

I might "grasp" but this logic of "we had the fewest shots on goal in the league" deal and that's why we're such a great defensive team might work for most teams like, say LOS ANGELES who were consistently for the past 5 years a team that allowed the 6th fewest shots allowed/game or lower in the NHL. But for a team like Montreal who I think has cracked the top 10 in SA/G over the past 5 seasons maybe once, it doesn't.

Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
"Probably going to give up shots", except we didn't. Giveaways/takeaways are about the most meaningless stat going. The top dman in the league leads in giveaways every year, it's because they have the puck the most often.

Shots blocked haha, you realize this shows how well our d actually was right? We gave up the 4th fewest shots and didn't have to prevent shots from getting on net either, which means we were controlling the play. If you can't grasp these basic concepts you're in way too deep.

Edit: So lets review your data

We were middle of the pack in shots blocked.
We sucked at hitting
We gave up the forth fewest shots in the league.
We were middle of the pack in faceoffs.
We were bad at takeaways,

While guess what, while all those things were happening, no shots were resulted of it, unless you believe if we hit more, won more faceoffs and blocked a few more shots, then we'd be 1st overall in Defense. Your understanding of statistics is mind-boggling.

If they were leading to more shots, we would of, umm, giving up more shots, but we gave up the 4th fewest, add to the fact we were only 14th in the league in blocked shots, means that fewer pucks were going towards our net, which also means, we had the puck more than our opponents, which also means, the habs were a very good team this year. In no way was LA's D significantly better than ours, not by any metric.
Top Dman in the league does not have the most giveaways because as you said "they have the puck the most often". Talk about grasping. Out of the Norris finalists, only 1 was in the Top 10 in Giveaways this year (Subban) only 2 in the top 30 (Subban, Letang was 27th), but nice try...if you're going to rationalize that Subban is in the top 10, well let's just say that he probably has to grow his skills still (being the youngest of all 3 and especially defensively) and he likes to handle the puck much more than Letang and Suter, don't you think?

What it means is that teams spent probably much less time in our zone than years past and that we gave up less shots on net and less shots directed at the net. Now is this a correlation that the team was better defensively? Possibly, but it could also show that the team was also MUCH MUCH BETTER at maintaining possession and keeping the puck in the O-Zone (something I saw game after game). What I didn't see during our regular season and playoff games is our defense consistently playing well defensively.

My understanding of statistics might be mind-boggling to you. Explain to me how this year with our defensive prowess manage to only be about .05 GA/G better this year than 2010-11 where Price was absolutely "incredible". Also, our G/G was almost .5 G/G better this season than it was 2 years ago. Another interesting statistic.

Explain that to me Mr. Statistics Genius.

Originally Posted by icu View Post
Your logic again, is completely false.

Quick is a better goalie than Price, and went in the 2nd round. That fact alone destroys your logic.

Again, I'll reiterate the point, the only thing that matters is what you do at the NHL level. Everything else means nothing.

Sidney Crosby is Sidney Crosby, because he won a Gold, Stanley Cup, Art Ross, and Hart. Sidney Crosby is not Sidney Crosby because of what he did in Junior, but because of what he did at the NHL level.

Also, according to your skewed logic, I suppose someone with a PhD who amounts to nothing later on in life is much more successful than a university dropout such as Steve Jobs.

Hype, literally means nothing. I want people who get the job done, when it counts. I don't care about their hype. And successful GMs or bosses will hire people who get the job done. GMs or bosses that fall for the hype end up failing their teams or companies, and ultimately lose their job.
LOL and GMs have crystal balls that can see the future. This is one of the funniest things i've ever read.

Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
340 NHL games later, it means nothing.
Means nothing? So then Lundqvist's stats the past 5 years mean nothing too, never been past the 2nd round is a failure, etc.

Jesus ****ing Price people, enough with the hyperbolic statements. Of course it doesn't mean more than winning a SC/winning a Conn Smythe, but it doesn't mean nothing either.

Originally Posted by Doc McKenna View Post
You mean the same average team that made it to the ECF? Oh right we had a hot goalie that we traded away so price wouldn't have competition because our ELITE TOP 5 goalie has a super fragile ego. So its always cuzz the team sucked right, except when the back up brought us to the semi finals? That is what a good goalie does in the post season. Gives their team a chance. Price regardless of year or injuries hasn't done it. The year he made it past first round we got swept in 4 straight. MAYBE his workload is too heavy(something many point as his strong suit) if so say something and be fresh for the playoff.s
Halak didn't just give our team a chance, HE STOLE GAMES FOR US. Quick might steal a game or two in the POs, but in only 2 rounds, Halak probably "stole" half of them (7 games). Quick gives his team a chance to win by coming up with timely saves. Our team has been average for years and one year our goalie stood on his head and took us to the ECF. Everyone knows this and says this, including other fans.

FYI in 2010-11 Price gave our team many chances in many games to win (hence the 3 OT games in that 7 game series against the eventual SC Champions) and how do some players reward him, by shooting at TT's pads on a 2 on 1 (Gionta). This year we had no hope whatsoever. Price played well Game 2 and Game 4 and the team in front of him lets him down in Game 3 and 4.

GP has nothing to do with it. Who's in front of him does. Sooner most of you realize this, the better.

Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
And the problem with talking about Price pre-NHL accomplishments, especially his AHL Cup, is that you would have thought that it would have permitted him to be better, sooner. You don't do all that, real young, to then, go back in a regular mode, till you reach 27th, your prime time. That's usually reserved to non-phenom guys who has a more quiet and steady progression. But now, there's talk about his style....his attitude.....his competitiveness.....his weaknesses and so on....Somehow, even for him, what he did in the past has to count for so much, he has to bring it to another level. From his own words.
He should have been better, but I think he wanted to live the celeb life in Montreal and not focus about winning a SC. That's my opinion, although after trading Halak and proving himself to be a very good goaltender he showed the world what he could do, and then last year with the team's ****storm still had average stats and this year playing well the first 2 months of the season before bed crapping by almost everyone. He needs to elevate his game above regular mode and go into Quick mode.

Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
This thread was greatness. Only small group of us were complaining about the contract and his inconsistent play. He followed that up by having a weak regular season and terrible post season.

"but but but the cap is going to go up...this is a great deal!"

Cap hit comparables:

Cam Ward: 6.3 million
Ryan Miller: 6.25 million
Pekka Rinne: 7 million
Henrik Lundqvist: 6.875 million

The only thing that he doesn't have that these goalies have is SC (Ward, playing lights out in 06 after coming in for Gerber and Koivu goes down with that eye injury from Williams stick), Vezina Trophy (Miller, Lundqvist) and Vezina Trophy Finalist (Rinne). Price will get all of the above eventually and hopefully it will be while he's still the #1 for Le CH. But despite this, is he a bit overpaid due to his last season's performance? No doubt. Is he overpaid since taking over the #1 from Jaro Halak? Maybe a little but it's an argument to say the least.

dmanfish90 is offline