HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Notices

Kings and Sharks - Scoring Chances in the Playoffs ...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-28-2011, 04:54 PM
  #1
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Kings and Sharks - Scoring Chances in the Playoffs ...

... Here is a VERY interesting and telling analysis of the scoring chances in the series. Now, everyone has their own ideas of what constitutes a scoring chance, but what's important to me is that there's a consistent definition that's being adhered to when tallying these up.

This is from Copper and Blue, and whether or not you're an Oiler fan, you should immediately bookmark this site if you haven't already. They're doing some cutting-edge stuff over here and they link to other guys doing more cutting-edge stuff.

Some things I found interesting:

- For those who say Doughty had a bad series aside from game 2, the scoring chances for and against say otherwise. Doughty was the only King who managed to balance his books (27 for, 26 against) at even strength. Well, Moller and Ponikarovsky did too, but within MUCH smaller sample sizes.

- Richardson (23 for, 24 against) and Simmonds (20 for, 21 against) were the best regular forwards the Kings had in both categories.

- Johnson (14 for, 35 against) pretty much capsulizes what we have all become aware of with him. He's not defensively sound. Will he ever be? Or is a move to forward something that will be in his future?

- Parse (2 for, 10 against) probably shouldn't have been brought back into the lineup.

- Joe Thornton (31 for, 17 against), the "playoff choker", was probably the Sharks' best player in the series.

- Quick deserves his share of credit for keeping things close, despite seeing almost 50% more scoring chances than his counterparts, Niemi and Niittymaki. Or does Niemi deserve his share of blame for allowing the Kings to come so close despite the discrepancy in chances? It's likely a little bit of both.

At any rate, check this out.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 05:16 PM
  #2
Brodie562
Registered User
 
Brodie562's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: LBC
Country: United States
Posts: 830
vCash: 500
Thanks for sharing that! definitely gonna bookmark this.

Brodie562 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 05:33 PM
  #3
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
JJ/Scuds got completely dominated. Didn't realize it was so bad.

Also, Doughty is beast. Really good site and bookmarked as you suggested. Thanks for the heads up, JT.

Would love to keep track of this throughout the whole season.

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 07:29 PM
  #4
driller1
Dry Island Reject
 
driller1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,361
vCash: 500
Interesting.... I didn't realize Scuds/JJ were out chanced that badly. The goals I remember the most did not involve them...

Game 1: OT Simmonds fumbles puck, Martinez slips, Game Over
Game 3: OT Puck turned over in neutral zone, DD & Mitchell on ice, Penner / Zeus with lazy back check, Seto buries it, Game Over
Game 4: 3rd Period. Martinez/Greene/ Richardson decide to leave Thorton alone in front of the net after Kings fight back to make it 3-2. Thorton buries it and Game Over
Game 6: OT. DD and Mitchell get a bad bounce. Game Over

The worst mistake I saw JJ/Scuds make was period 2 Game 3. They lost their man on the weak side and their man buried a one timer. I think that was the 3rd goal.

I guess they were on the ice for the first goal of the series with Heater, but I think the forwards blew that coverage. Perhaps I'll analyze all the goals in the series. Be interesting to see the difference between the scoring chances and the actual scoring- reason I make a distinction is because I trust Quick to gobble up the B+/A- chances, and if thats all JJ/Scuds are giving up, then that might be more acceptable than giving up a low number of A+ chances...

driller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 08:16 PM
  #5
Moses Doughty
LA's offense offends
 
Moses Doughty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Drewbacca
Country: United States
Posts: 8,068
vCash: 500
Game 6 was Scuderi/Mitchell not DD/Mitchell driller

But still surprising

Moses Doughty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 09:40 PM
  #6
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,787
vCash: 500
Good stuff. I'd not that JJ had a much of a series but these types of number really do help to put it into perspective.

As for Joe Thornton guys a pt a game player in the regular season but over the decade of his career when he gets to the playoffs he still produces but not at the same level. Heck, this year he had 70pts in 80 games but it took him 97 games to do it in the playoffs. Isn't that what we always talk about? That big players play big in big games? Joe's plays less then expected. But even then less then normal is still a good amount of pts. If the Sharks go on a run and he gets a cup people will start to forget. Admittedly this has been his reputation for over a decade and he's going to start to run out of time to change his career. Hockey doesn't last forever.

I do love the more complex numbers. I wonder how many teams use these types of things....

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 09:53 PM
  #7
driller1
Dry Island Reject
 
driller1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moses Doughty View Post
Game 6 was Scuderi/Mitchell not DD/Mitchell driller

But still surprising
You're right- DD & JJ just finished a PP... My memory is already failing Trying to drown my sorrows in alcohol

driller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 04:46 AM
  #8
kingsholygrail
Interference = Cup
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 42,640
vCash: 500
Totals don't really mean much. It would have to be broken down by the individual games.

kingsholygrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 05:40 AM
  #9
Nex06
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsholygrail View Post
Totals don't really mean much. It would have to be broken down by the individual games.
You mean individual Sharks-Kings playoff games? In that case you haven't really checked those links, it's all there.

Nex06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:39 AM
  #10
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
- Johnson (14 for, 35 against) pretty much capsulizes what we have all become aware of with him. He's not defensively sound. Will he ever be? Or is a move to forward something that will be in his future?

Tick Tock!

Capn Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 09:00 AM
  #11
kingsholygrail
Interference = Cup
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 42,640
vCash: 500
So what is your solution to the Jack Johnson problem?

kingsholygrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 09:16 AM
  #12
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsholygrail View Post
So what is your solution to the Jack Johnson problem?

Paul Stastny!

Capn Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 01:22 AM
  #13
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... Here is a VERY interesting and telling analysis of the scoring chances in the series. Now, everyone has their own ideas of what constitutes a scoring chance, but what's important to me is that there's a consistent definition that's being adhered to when tallying these up.

This is from Copper and Blue, and whether or not you're an Oiler fan, you should immediately bookmark this site if you haven't already. They're doing some cutting-edge stuff over here and they link to other guys doing more cutting-edge stuff.

Some things I found interesting:

- For those who say Doughty had a bad series aside from game 2, the scoring chances for and against say otherwise. Doughty was the only King who managed to balance his books (27 for, 26 against) at even strength. Well, Moller and Ponikarovsky did too, but within MUCH smaller sample sizes.

- Richardson (23 for, 24 against) and Simmonds (20 for, 21 against) were the best regular forwards the Kings had in both categories.

- Johnson (14 for, 35 against) pretty much capsulizes what we have all become aware of with him. He's not defensively sound. Will he ever be? Or is a move to forward something that will be in his future?

- Parse (2 for, 10 against) probably shouldn't have been brought back into the lineup.

- Joe Thornton (31 for, 17 against), the "playoff choker", was probably the Sharks' best player in the series.

- Quick deserves his share of credit for keeping things close, despite seeing almost 50% more scoring chances than his counterparts, Niemi and Niittymaki. Or does Niemi deserve his share of blame for allowing the Kings to come so close despite the discrepancy in chances? It's likely a little bit of both.

At any rate, check this out.
This is a fascinating site, but I had a few questions.

First, I'm not quite sure how to read these charts. I poked around a bit on the site for a methodology post that explained them but I didn't see it. Could you point me toward something like that?

Second, do we know how the Kings' playoff performance compared to the regular season? Did the regular season games feature this same disparity in scoring chances, particularly with Jack Johnson?

Third, is there a site that tracks this sort of data for each player? If their argument here is that Johnson got killed in this series, I'll buy that. But I'd like to see his numbers for a whole season because the historian in me needs to see change over time to understand what's happening.

Fourth, what other sites like this do you have? I'm interested in these kinds of statistical breakdowns, but I'm not even sure what to be looking for. Is there a standard methodology shared by analysts league-wide, or is this pretty much the invention of these guys?

agentfouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 02:57 AM
  #14
Alternate Jersey
Registered User
 
Alternate Jersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,520
vCash: 500
thanks for the read, JT. always respect your ability to find stats like these...very interesting.

Alternate Jersey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 07:48 AM
  #15
alpa
Yoda+Gandalf=Sutter
 
alpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sweden and Slovenia
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,723
vCash: 500
WOW! Trade JJ for a LW , his numbers through the regular season were not laying

alpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 12:23 PM
  #16
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentfouser View Post
This is a fascinating site, but I had a few questions.

First, I'm not quite sure how to read these charts. I poked around a bit on the site for a methodology post that explained them but I didn't see it. Could you point me toward something like that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentfouser View Post
Is there a standard methodology shared by analysts league-wide, or is this pretty much the invention of these guys?
... It's right up near the top of the page that I linked.

Quote:
For those who'd like a definition: a scoring chance is defined as a clear play directed toward the opposing net from a dangerous scoring area - loosely defined as the top of the circle in and inside the faceoff dots, though sometimes slightly more generous than that depending on the amount of immediately-preceding puck movement or screens in front of the net. Blocked shots are generally not included but missed shots are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentfouser View Post
Second, do we know how the Kings' playoff performance compared to the regular season? Did the regular season games feature this same disparity in scoring chances, particularly with Jack Johnson?
... Unfortunately, no one really does this on a regular basis for the Kings' games during the season. It's also too bad the NHL doesn't have someone in each arena keeping track of official league numbers of scoring chances.

If you want to estimate scoring chances, you can take the number of shots on goal and missed shots by both teams, and keep track of that by player. The problem with including ALL shots is that some shots aren't dangerous enough to be considered true scoring chances. But, in most cases, you'll have a very good estimate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by agentfouser View Post
Third, is there a site that tracks this sort of data for each player? If their argument here is that Johnson got killed in this series, I'll buy that. But I'd like to see his numbers for a whole season because the historian in me needs to see change over time to understand what's happening.

Fourth, what other sites like this do you have? I'm interested in these kinds of statistical breakdowns, but I'm not even sure what to be looking for.
... Start with Behind the Net's player breakdown. You'll see a wealth of sortable numbers there. I also like Hockey Numbers as well. The Hockey Analytics site provides a terrific "season in review" PDF file that is full of great little bits of info. Beyond that, check the "links" page on each of those sites, and go from there.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 01:37 PM
  #17
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
If you want to estimate scoring chances, you can take the number of shots on goal and missed shots by both teams, and keep track of that by player. The problem with including ALL shots is that some shots aren't dangerous enough to be considered true scoring chances. But, in most cases, you'll have a very good estimate.
Or just choose an area to be your scoring chance area. Anything down the middle of the ice or something like that. I generally go with some house like shape. Anything in the triangle made by the net and the two faceoff dots and anything in the square made by the two faceoff dots and the blue line.

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 02:12 PM
  #18
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,407
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
JJ routinely loses his man, dude gets mesmerized by the puck. You talk about players who could have used a year in Manchester and this is the guy. With Martinez developing and some of the supposed young studs coming in the pipeline it wouldn't surprise me to see him dealt. However, I think the system doesn't fit his style of play. The guy needs to be able to move on offense, use his skating and stick handling but the Kings have him standing stationary on the blue line. I wouldn't trade him, he can be worked with, he has a lot of skill and trading away young dmen with upside has never worked out well for the Kings. If you put him in a different system with more movement I think he'll take off.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 04:20 PM
  #19
Brad Doty
Moderator
Compliance Hero
 
Brad Doty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: I.E.
Country: United States
Posts: 10,228
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
JJ routinely loses his man, dude gets mesmerized by the puck. You talk about players who could have used a year in Manchester and this is the guy. With Martinez developing and some of the supposed young studs coming in the pipeline it wouldn't surprise me to see him dealt. However, I think the system doesn't fit his style of play. The guy needs to be able to move on offense, use his skating and stick handling but the Kings have him standing stationary on the blue line. I wouldn't trade him, he can be worked with, he has a lot of skill and trading away young dmen with upside has never worked out well for the Kings. If you put him in a different system with more movement I think he'll take off.
This. I get the feeling that if JJ is traded, he becomes someone else's #1 offensive D-man in the Lubo mold. He's got a ton of offensive ability, and I think he still has a lot of untapped potential in both the offensive and (certainly) defensive areas.

I will say I appreciate the data, and it would explain the minuses, but I wonder what is causing these deficiencies, since it's not like he's being partnered with defensive slouches...

I guess what I'm saying is we all ask "when will he get it?", but what is it that we want him to get?

Brad Doty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 08:47 PM
  #20
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN14 View Post
This. I get the feeling that if JJ is traded, he becomes someone else's #1 offensive D-man in the Lubo mold.
... But Visnovsky WAS the #1 defenseman for the Kings for at least a couple seasons before he got dealt; hell, I'd go so far as to say that he was the Kings' MVP in 05-06 and was co-MVP with Cammalleri in 06-07.

Johnson's never come close to that, or has given any indication that he will come close to that with this team. Consider this: Visnovsky's worst +/- was -18. That -18 would qualify as the second-best +/- of Johnson's career!

Can you think of an example where a defenseman is with one team for four seasons, averages 25 points with a -19 rating per season, and then all of a sudden becomes a star player with another team? I can't, honestly. I've known defense-first guys who have gradually become better (Randy Ladouceur comes to mind), but Jack's not like that. He's a hybrid offense/defense player; expected to do well at both ends of the ice.

I almost hate to say this, but I've often wondered what would happen if Johnson were hurt for about 40 games. I almost think the team would post a far better record in those 40 games than they would for the rest of the season. And, if that's the case, what then???

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 10:50 PM
  #21
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,740
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
I've always said Manchester would've been the best place for Johnson to start his career.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 01:18 AM
  #22
driller1
Dry Island Reject
 
driller1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post

I almost hate to say this, but I've often wondered what would happen if Johnson were hurt for about 40 games. I almost think the team would post a far better record in those 40 games than they would for the rest of the season. And, if that's the case, what then???

Well, we posted a better record without Doughty than with him and we haven't traded him yet, I imagine the same would be the case with JJ.

Like I said a few posts ago, JJ wasn't on the ice for the key goals in the series. He was definitely at fault for losing his guy for one goal in the 3rd game, but otherwise, I don't remember too many goals against him, regardless of how poorly the Blueline report says him and Scuds played.

driller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 01:26 AM
  #23
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Thanks JT for the info AND the info on the sites. They are completely fascinating. Lots of interesting content and no matter where you stand on the importance of statistics having the chance to view the game down to its minutia is always interesting and informative. Wow.

etherialone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 01:59 AM
  #24
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... But Visnovsky WAS the #1 defenseman for the Kings for at least a couple seasons before he got dealt; hell, I'd go so far as to say that he was the Kings' MVP in 05-06 and was co-MVP with Cammalleri in 06-07.

Johnson's never come close to that, or has given any indication that he will come close to that with this team. Consider this: Visnovsky's worst +/- was -18. That -18 would qualify as the second-best +/- of Johnson's career!
He's had a couple of good stretches. So it's not completely hopeless.

Overall though, I do agree with the sentiment of your post. This is why I'm open to the idea of moving him for the right return. He may still pan out of course, but if he can return something similar to EJ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
I've always said Manchester would've been the best place for Johnson to start his career.
Absolutely.

johnjm22 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 02:43 AM
  #25
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by driller1 View Post
Well, we posted a better record without Doughty than with him and we haven't traded him yet, I imagine the same would be the case with JJ.
... The Kings were 3-2-1 without Doughty and 33-32-11 with him. The Kings had won three in a row when Doughty got hurt, and promptly won four in a row upon his return. So, were they really that much better without Drew, or was it simply a case of the team getting pretty good offense and excellent goaltending in the early part of the season?

The Kings were 10-3-2 for the first 15 games, and 26-31-10 thereafter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by driller1 View Post
Like I said a few posts ago, JJ wasn't on the ice for the key goals in the series. He was definitely at fault for losing his guy for one goal in the 3rd game, but otherwise, I don't remember too many goals against him, regardless of how poorly the Blueline report says him and Scuds played.
... Just because Johnson happened to get bailed out on many of the scoring chances he was on the ice for does not mean he played well defensively. And, the numbers for the series aren't a new thing with Jack, at all. His career defensive numbers are, frankly, atrocious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
He's had a couple of good stretches. So it's not completely hopeless.
... Indeed. At the beginning of this season, it seemed like he was going to pull out of it. But - yeah he didn't close things out so well.

First 37 games - 4 goals, 26 points, -1, 24.6 minutes per game
Last 51 games - 2 goals, 21 points, -22, 22.1 minutes per game

Maybe he's playing too often? Would holding his minutes down to about 20 per game early in the season keep him fresh later on? Was he hiding an injury? I really like him and want him to succeed, but I'm not sure what the Kings should do with him at this point.

JT Dutch* 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 10:56 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.