HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > By The Numbers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

By The Numbers Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Ingame coaching ability

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-18-2017, 04:10 AM
  #1
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Ingame coaching ability

How would you rank the existing NHL coaches with their ingame coaching abilities? So in terms of being able to shuffle the lines and getting the right players against the other teams players out. Who is flexible and being able to use the hot players to get the most out of them in the game, who is too scared and stuck to use star power late games even when they're evidently snake bitten.

I'm using a scale of 0-10 with incrementials of 0.5. Let's say that the average coach is around 5 and you would expect majority to fall around that.

Clearly what I'm trying to do here is a shortcut to a lot of work by watching the games. Reading the GDT's is what I'm doing, but I could still use other peoples insights. Even a mark of + to - or ++ to -- to average is sufficient.

I see this as a value to be used in team strenghts for betting for your sheet and it's easier to react to coaching changes by having one etc.

One would also think that in modern age there are not big differences here in how the technology can help here but perhaps it's more of an approach as a meta and then personal abilities taking over or falling. In reality it's also probably much more complex.

Anaheim, R.Carlyle:
Arizona, D.Tippett:
Boston, B.Cassidy:
Buffalo, D.Bylsma:
Calgary, G.Gulutzan:
Carolina, B.Peters:
Chicago, J.Quenneville:
Colorado, J.Bednar:
Columbus, J.Tortorella:
Dallas, L.Ruff:
Detroit, J.Blashill:
Edmonton, T.McLellan:
Florida, T.Rowe:
Los Angeles, D.Sutter:
Minnesota, B.Boudreau:
Montreal, C.Julien:
Nashville, P.Laviolette:
New Jersey, J.Hynes:
NY Islanders, D.Weight:
NY Rangers, A.Vigneault:
Ottawa, G.Boucher:
Philadelphia, D.Hakstol:
Pittsburgh, M.Sullivan:
San Jose, P.DeBoer:
St. Louis, M.Yeo:
Tampa Bay, J.Cooper:
Toronto, M.Babcock:
Vancouver, W.Desjardins:
Washington, B.Trotz:
Winnipeg, P.Maurice:


Last edited by Depch: 03-18-2017 at 09:51 AM.
Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 04:45 AM
  #2
Maukkis
ScheifElite
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,198
vCash: 500
Can we ditch the 0-10 scale and just use negative numbers? I know a certain Paul from Winnipeg who should be somewhere around -8.

The guy never reacts to anything, unless he decides to bench a rookie. More often than not there is someone else having an even worse game out there. The team can literally be outshot to no end and at most he switches two guys, usually Ehlers and X, around. He never does anything major mid-game, even when it is needed the most.

He is just shocking.

Maukkis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 04:58 AM
  #3
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maukkis View Post
Can we ditch the 0-10 scale and just use negative numbers? I know a certain Paul from Winnipeg who should be somewhere around -8.

The guy never reacts to anything, unless he decides to bench a rookie. More often than not there is someone else having an even worse game out there. The team can literally be outshot to no end and at most he switches two guys, usually Ehlers and X, around. He never does anything major mid-game, even when it is needed the most.

He is just shocking.
Hehe, I knew I could expect these kinds of reactions, VERY familiar from the GDT's.

They're much respected however in combining it all here.

And actually if someone has the interest and will to go through with their own ranking I don't mind using your own scale. Also it's a big job to be acknowledgeable of ALL the coaches, so if you just have input of few and their relation, or even one (the team you follow) that could be sufficient as well.


Last edited by Depch: 03-18-2017 at 07:52 AM.
Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 05:16 AM
  #4
Hansen 36
BASED JIM BENNING
 
Hansen 36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,012
vCash: 420
Willie Desjardins has never made competent reactionary in game changes, and I think the only actual decision that he has made ingame in recent memory was benching Goldobin after scoring his first goal with us

I guess deciding to play Megna 15-20 minutes counts too

Hansen 36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 05:26 AM
  #5
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Doug Weight from the NYI has a good record so far behind his team. Has he had that much of an impact or was the previous coach just that bad that was keeping the team on hold?

On the site http://www.hockey-reference.com/coaches/NHL_stats.html it shows that he's on 16-9-3 at the moment so that's NYI since the change - 17-17-8 -> 16-9-3

Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 09:29 AM
  #6
ottawa
Avatar of the Year*
 
ottawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Orleans
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,567
vCash: 50
Julien isn't bad from what I've seen this time, definitely above average, not sure how much though.

__________________
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v191/SpiderManNL/24cups.gif
ottawa is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 09:47 AM
  #7
Doctor No
Registered User
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,685
vCash: 50
Ah, the joy of being an Avalanche fan, and reading this as "Imagine coaching ability..."

__________________
The Goaltender Home Page (http://hockeygoalies.org) - Preserving Goaltender History since 1994
2016-17 NHL Goaltending Performances by Team: http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/logs/NHL2016.html
Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 09:59 AM
  #8
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
I'll have this as a one up and modified that is summarizing up responses regarding single coaches. Thank you so far for your responses.

I'll rank it with -- to ++ at start regarding the commentary. This is also due to change as information is gathered.

++ (8.5 - 10)
+ (6-8)
+/- (4.5 - 5.5)
- (2-4)
-- (0-1.5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Depch View Post
Anaheim, R.Carlyle:
Arizona, D.Tippett:
Boston, B.Cassidy:
Buffalo, D.Bylsma:
Calgary, G.Gulutzan:
Carolina, B.Peters:
Chicago, J.Quenneville: ++ (8.5 - 10)
Colorado, J.Bednar: -- (0-1.5)
Columbus, J.Tortorella:
Dallas, L.Ruff:
Detroit, J.Blashill:
Edmonton, T.McLellan:
Florida, T.Rowe:
Los Angeles, D.Sutter:
Minnesota, B.Boudreau:
Montreal, C.Julien: + (6-8)
Nashville, P.Laviolette:
New Jersey, J.Hynes:
NY Islanders, D.Weight:
NY Rangers, A.Vigneault:
Ottawa, G.Boucher:
Philadelphia, D.Hakstol:
Pittsburgh, M.Sullivan: ++(8.5-10)
San Jose, P.DeBoer:
St. Louis, M.Yeo:
Tampa Bay, J.Cooper:
Toronto, M.Babcock: +/- (4.5 - 5.5) / + (6-8)
Vancouver, W.Desjardins: -- (0-1.5)
Washington, B.Trotz:
Winnipeg, P.Maurice: -- (0-1.5)


Last edited by Depch: 03-23-2017 at 08:11 PM.
Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2017, 07:10 PM
  #9
morehockeystats
Unusual hockey stats
 
morehockeystats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Would you consider blowing leads / coming back from behind as a good quantification of this parameter?

morehockeystats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 02:32 AM
  #10
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by morehockeystats View Post
Would you consider blowing leads / coming back from behind as a good quantification of this parameter?
This is a tough question to answer. I need to elaborate my thoughts here.

I do think things _should_ be run from top to bottom starting from attitude and leadership. It is the coaches job trying to lit the fire and keep things on focus. Captains should (imo) be players that respond to the coach well and carry on the message to the team by their effort and attitude on ice and in the locker room, they should be well respected players as well. It is ultimately the players that respond or not, the regular players have limitations in mental and spiritual aspects as well and probably more often so than with the top of the organisation in general with some exceptions always.

Also if coach reports of some possible tightly knit problems in locker room to the GM, but the GM does not respond is it the coaches fault how things end up or GM to not make a move that costs the coach trying to do things his style. Big questions. Locker room presence and character guys are very important to keep that fire lit up and rise to flames when it's required.

Perhaps if some coaches blow out games statistically way more than the others it could be used as an emphasizer, but not as the main definition. How to handle players and locker room is a big part of coaching.


Last edited by Depch: 03-19-2017 at 06:43 AM.
Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 11:18 AM
  #11
morehockeystats
Unusual hockey stats
 
morehockeystats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Depch View Post
This is a tough question to answer. I need to elaborate my thoughts here.

I do think things _should_ be run from top to bottom starting from attitude and leadership. It is the coaches job trying to lit the fire and keep things on focus. Captains should (imo) be players that respond to the coach well and carry on the message to the team by their effort and attitude on ice and in the locker room, they should be well respected players as well. It is ultimately the players that respond or not, the regular players have limitations in mental and spiritual aspects as well and probably more often so than with the top of the organisation in general with some exceptions always.

Also if coach reports of some possible tightly knit problems in locker room to the GM, but the GM does not respond is it the coaches fault how things end up or GM to not make a move that costs the coach trying to do things his style. Big questions. Locker room presence and character guys are very important to keep that fire lit up and rise to flames when it's required.

Perhaps if some coaches blow out games statistically way more than the others it could be used as an emphasizer, but not as the main definition. How to handle players and locker room is a big part of coaching.
But this sub-forum is called "By The Numbers"...

morehockeystats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 01:48 PM
  #12
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by morehockeystats View Post
But this sub-forum is called "By The Numbers"...
Yes and my initial post was about ranking the coaches with incrementials of 0.5 between 0-10. That is what I have been planning to do to my betting sheet. If that alone does not suffice the standards for the sub-forum alone but 'by the numbers' mean splitting actual numbers from the games to a formula then I must stand corrected here.

How to measure any of this by actual numbers from the game would be really hard. Especially when you count out the roster in hand from it to have the coaches on even ground. I guess it could only be done counting manually how they react within games and try to keep the team awake. Like I explained I think blowouts could work to a degree, it's at least reflecting a bit to the coaches ability to do the things one has to. But it's not all on the coach, he might still try but there just is no response.

If this is not up to the standards of the sub-forum you can remove this, I will just try to work it out myself then, no hard feelings here, keep the standards high.

ps. I don't mind if the opinions are a bit subjective, you could still draw something out of them.

Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 02:24 PM
  #13
Daeni10
Kunitz was there
 
Daeni10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Cologne
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,309
vCash: 500
I think Mike Sullivan is really good at adjusting in game, even though he sometimes has stupid decisions pregame (for example Kunitz staying on line 1 even though he changed the line during the game(s) before and they looked better)
I also think that Dan Bylsma is really really terrible at adjusting in game because he got outcoached a lot of times in the Playoffs.

Daeni10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 02:56 PM
  #14
morehockeystats
Unusual hockey stats
 
morehockeystats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Depch View Post
Yes and my initial post was about ranking the coaches with incrementials of 0.5 between 0-10. That is what I have been planning to do to my betting sheet. If that alone does not suffice the standards for the sub-forum alone but 'by the numbers' mean splitting actual numbers from the games to a formula then I must stand corrected here.

How to measure any of this by actual numbers from the game would be really hard. Especially when you count out the roster in hand from it to have the coaches on even ground. I guess it could only be done counting manually how they react within games and try to keep the team awake. Like I explained I think blowouts could work to a degree, it's at least reflecting a bit to the coaches ability to do the things one has to. But it's not all on the coach, he might still try but there just is no response.

If this is not up to the standards of the sub-forum you can remove this, I will just try to work it out myself then, no hard feelings here, keep the standards high.

ps. I don't mind if the opinions are a bit subjective, you could still draw something out of them.
It's not about removal, it's about me and others trying to come up with a quantifiable description of what you're trying to measure rather than being completely subjective.

morehockeystats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 03:17 PM
  #15
Depch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by morehockeystats View Post
It's not about removal, it's about me and others trying to come up with a quantifiable description of what you're trying to measure rather than being completely subjective.
Allright. I respected the suggestion, it was a good one. Thus the thorough response I provided regarding the matter. I think this is a bit more complex than that so while I would be interested in seeing that statistic as well I don't think that alone can dictate the measures completely.

What I would like to see in measures might be the following
-Giving ice time to "hot" players. When you see middle 6 players getting more ice if they've got the points to show.
-If things are not working, shuffle things out. For example I regarded Yeo in Minnesota being often stuck on your snake bitten star players. He was probably shaky and acting out of fear on his position and tried to force things out. Perhaps he's taken lessons to STL.
-I respect a coaches ability to take risks, like how early they can take the goalie out etc. It is a message that the coach is trying to be proactive.
-What you also said would work as one part of being able to light fire in players and keep the ship on course. It's not all on the coach, but he is responsible.

At least these things come to my mind. I don't know if you can count things like changing your playbook against different opponents and so on. So some of the input must be subjective as well.

Depch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 03:42 PM
  #16
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,621
vCash: 500
Ingame Coaching

Ingame coaching is a function of between game coaching and preparation by the complete coaching staff plus the support staff that helps with the film work and stat work.

Basically you want to see a positive progression from the opening faceoff thru the various stages of play. How the coaching staff reacts to the first and other goals, how between period adjustments are made - should include both corrective adjustments to his team and anticipated adjustments / reactions by the opposing team.

Trust this helps.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2017, 03:58 PM
  #17
morehockeystats
Unusual hockey stats
 
morehockeystats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Depch View Post
Allright. I respected the suggestion, it was a good one. Thus the thorough response I provided regarding the matter. I think this is a bit more complex than that so while I would be interested in seeing that statistic as well I don't think that alone can dictate the measures completely.

What I would like to see in measures might be the following
-Giving ice time to "hot" players. When you see middle 6 players getting more ice if they've got the points to show.
-If things are not working, shuffle things out. For example I regarded Yeo in Minnesota being often stuck on your snake bitten star players. He was probably shaky and acting out of fear on his position and tried to force things out. Perhaps he's taken lessons to STL.
-I respect a coaches ability to take risks, like how early they can take the goalie out etc. It is a message that the coach is trying to be proactive.
-What you also said would work as one part of being able to light fire in players and keep the ship on course. It's not all on the coach, but he is responsible.

At least these things come to my mind. I don't know if you can count things like changing your playbook against different opponents and so on. So some of the input must be subjective as well.
Well, here are two tables that I maintain that may help you in that quantification:
1. Blowing leads and coming from behind:
http://morehockeystats.com/teams/strikebacks
2. Scoring goals / Allowing goals after a lead change:
http://morehockeystats.com/teams/relaxation

morehockeystats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 10:35 AM
  #18
leafs94
Registered User
 
leafs94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,708
vCash: 500
Babcock is very very bad at making in game adjustments.

That said his pre-game, game plans, coaching etc. makes up for it.

But he just can't drop his player biases, no matter how poorly/how in effective players are.

some examples: Nylander was our best player in the ice last game, he played 28 seconds in overtime. Playing Komarov and Hyman on a line together in 3 on 3 ot.

leafs94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 04:04 PM
  #19
theaub
34-38-61-10-13-15
 
theaub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,669
vCash: 50
Q is the best line matching coach in the league.

His coaching against Boudreau a couple years ago was nothing short of a clinic (which bodes well for this year IMO).

There's probably also something to be said for the Hawks absolutely ridiculous record late in playoff series (32-8 from Game 5 onwards) that likely has something to do with being able to exploit matchups etc

theaub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-22-2017, 08:23 PM
  #20
SnoopDogg
Gin and Juice
 
SnoopDogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,391
vCash: 500
Buffalo, D.Bylsma: 1

SnoopDogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.