rename this thread to "Sharks fans QQing about stuff, and stuff."
Lol... seriously. We are 2 points behind with 2 games in hand for leading the conference. Our 5 on 5 and PP is great. It's only 17 games into the season and we have shown steady improvement.
I'll take it.
__________________
What?! Look, he thinks he's people!
Why are we fawning over the Pens and listing all the teams that would "easily destroy" us? So depressing. What's the point of watching if you know for certain that there is no chance we'll win? I think the Sharks are capable of beating any team in the league, including the godly Pens. Now, of course, there are a lot of factors that will influence the outcome, but I'm still pretty confident that it could happen.
I'm just a lurker, and this is my humble opinion, but sometimes I don't know who the true Sharks fans are on this board. I'm not saying fandom requires all-out blind homerism, but I think it should include a bit of faith and support for your team. Especially where the Sharks are now, and have been for years, they are contenders and could beat any of the other contenders. Will it happen? Maybe. That's why I watch.
Why are we fawning over the Pens and listing all the teams that would "easily destroy" us? So depressing. What's the point of watching if you know for certain that there is no chance we'll win? I think the Sharks are capable of beating any team in the league, including the godly Pens. Now, of course, there are a lot of factors that will influence the outcome, but I'm still pretty confident that it could happen.
I'm just a lurker, and this is my humble opinion, but sometimes I don't know who the true Sharks fans are on this board. I'm not saying fandom requires all-out blind homerism, but I think it should include a bit of faith and support for your team. Especially where the Sharks are now, and have been for years, they are contenders and could beat any of the other contenders. Will it happen? Maybe. That's why I watch.
He was one of only two Penguins defensemen to begin the majority of his shifts in the defensive zone so the fact that Pittsburgh outshot the opposition while he was on the ice would have to speak to the fact that he or Martin is at least proficient at moving the puck. I haven't seen a ton of Michalek with the Pens but back when he was in Phoenix his first passes were stellar. Even if you're going to maintain that he's poor at moving the puck, he's generating a positive on-ice shot differential despite starting in his own zone more often than not and playing against relatively tough competition; I don't see why his alleged lack of puck movement should be held against him when he's clearly providing a lot of value to the team. You want your defensemen to move the puck so you can gain the blueline and generate chances in the offensive zone. The Pens are attaining that end result when Michalek is on the ice; who really cares how it gets done?
The Penguins generated nearly 60% of the shots when the score was tied or within a goal at even strength in that series. That's territorial domination to a degree that few teams have accomplished in recent postseason history. I watched the series too and Bylsma completely broke down the 1-3-1 with his unique zone entry strategy and the Pens ended up with a large number of odd-man situations in that series if you're going to claim that those shots were from the outside. Let's not forget that they lost that series by one goal in the seventh game. Sometimes the pucks just don't go in over a seven-game sample size. I have a hard time calling Tampa the better team in that series; certainly not at even-strength.
It matters how it gets done because the playoffs are about exploiting weaknesses on a team. When one of your weaknesses is puck movement from just certain blue liners, it is something that can be taken advantage of by the other team. Every top four d-man provides some value to their team but it doesn't mean they are w/o weaknesses.
You want to say who cares how it gets done yet brush off the fact that their territorial and shot advantage didn't yield them crap in terms of goals. When a team consistently holds you to 3 goals in your wins and 2 or less in your losses, they are dictating play in their own zone a lot more than you're giving them credit for.
Either way, my point still stands. I'm not buying the Penguins until they can stay healthy, first and foremost, and secondly their blue line is highly overrated. It's mobile but it's not that good at moving the puck especially past Kris Letang.
It matters how it gets done because the playoffs are about exploiting weaknesses on a team. When one of your weaknesses is puck movement from just certain blue liners, it is something that can be taken advantage of by the other team. Every top four d-man provides some value to their team but it doesn't mean they are w/o weaknesses.
You want to say who cares how it gets done yet brush off the fact that their territorial and shot advantage didn't yield them crap in terms of goals. When a team consistently holds you to 3 goals in your wins and 2 or less in your losses, they are dictating play in their own zone a lot more than you're giving them credit for.
Either way, my point still stands. I'm not buying the Penguins until they can stay healthy, first and foremost, and secondly their blue line is highly overrated. It's mobile but it's not that good at moving the puck especially past Kris Letang.
If teams haven't been able to take advantage of Michalek's supposed deficiencies to hem the Penguins in the zone while he's on the ice (despite the fact that it shouldn't have even been all that hard to do since no Pens defenseman started more shifts in his own zone last year than Z!), why would they suddenly develop the ability to do so in the postseason?
It does not at all mean they're dictating play in their own zone, it means they got incredibly lucky not to get scored on to a greater degree in that series. Roloson was fortunate enough to have a flukey hot streak. No coach in the league aims to get outshot when the score is tied and certainly not to the degree that the Pens were able to accomplish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer
I like to read about stats as much as the next intelligent hockey fan but I have seen stats say good things about the Sharks only to have it not amount to anything but a heartbreaking loss too often to accept stats as the only justification for anything. Overreliance on statistics is no more valid as any other approach. Stats only say so much, and there is no statistic for luck, a key component for every Cup run.
There are stats for luck. They're called shooting percentage and save percentage, especially over a sample size as small as one regular season and certainly in the course of a playoff series. It's been proven that there's zero year-to-year correlation in shooting percentage at the team level; it's not something teams can significantly influence in the short term. High-quality scoring chances have proven to correlate almost perfectly with shot and missed shot totals. What teams can control, and what remains consistent, is even-strength shot attempt differential. Obviously flukey shooting and save percentage can determine a lot of playoff series since you're dealing with such a small sample of games and it's the reason for things like the Sharks' 2009 series against Anaheim and the Habs' and Flyers' runs in 2010 but it's also a much better metric to judge teams by than goal differential or standings points which are both influenced heavily by luck. The top puck possession team has made the Stanley Cup Finals three of the past four seasons (and the fourth place team made it last year) so the underlying numbers do have better predictive value in that regard than goal-based stats.
Why are we fawning over the Pens and listing all the teams that would "easily destroy" us? So depressing. What's the point of watching if you know for certain that there is no chance we'll win? I think the Sharks are capable of beating any team in the league, including the godly Pens. Now, of course, there are a lot of factors that will influence the outcome, but I'm still pretty confident that it could happen.
I'm just a lurker, and this is my humble opinion, but sometimes I don't know who the true Sharks fans are on this board. I'm not saying fandom requires all-out blind homerism, but I think it should include a bit of faith and support for your team. Especially where the Sharks are now, and have been for years, they are contenders and could beat any of the other contenders. Will it happen? Maybe. That's why I watch.
This is a great post and a major issue I have been seeing as a fan in the past few years. This is an unfortunate byproduct of the Sharks' success, where we no longer care much about regular season results and focus almost solely on the playoffs. We seem to ignore the PROcess when in fact the process is as important now as it was during the years when we were underdogs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wynan
There are stats for luck. They're called shooting percentage and save percentage, especially over a sample size as small as one regular season and certainly in the course of a playoff series.
Beg to differ strongly with this, and anyone who has watched much of the Sharks over the last few seasons ought to feel the same. Shooting and save percentage can reflect the system and individual players' skills as much as luck. Not all shots have an equal chance of getting in, and shots directly at the goalie's chest will never go in. Goalies regularly put up huge save% against us, but is it due to tremendous skill or our offensive system?
It's silly to believe that the system remains exactly the same year in and out, and that players' skills don't change, improve or decline. But in order to read into the stats at the level you seem to be doing, you have to assume just that.
If teams haven't been able to take advantage of Michalek's supposed deficiencies to hem the Penguins in the zone while he's on the ice (despite the fact that it shouldn't have even been all that hard to do since no Pens defenseman started more shifts in his own zone last year than Z!), why would they suddenly develop the ability to do so in the postseason?
It does not at all mean they're dictating play in their own zone, it means they got incredibly lucky not to get scored on to a greater degree in that series. Roloson was fortunate enough to have a flukey hot streak. No coach in the league aims to get outshot when the score is tied and certainly not to the degree that the Pens were able to accomplish.
Well, to your first point, it's the playoffs...not the regular season. It's much easier to hide deficiencies during the regular season than in the playoffs. Why would they be able to do it in the post-season? Teams are better than the average competition he will face during the season. Teams will gameplan a lot more for a playoff series than they would for one of 82 on the schedule.
Your use of these numbers has been a complete non-sequitur in the first place. Just because he shows high starts in his own zone and gets to the offensive zone a lot doesn't mean he is a good puck-moving defenseman.
You also give near no credit to Tampa's defense by saying they lucked out. There are plenty of teams with the talent and system that can control the other team's offense rather well even while being badly out-shot and out-possessed. Tampa last year was one of those teams. Pittsburgh may have gotten a lot of shots but they were not all that threatening. I've seen that show before too with the Sharks against the Ducks a few years ago. They would out-shoot the Ducks by a healthy margin but could never get second and third opportunities.
Just because coaches don't aim to get out-shot or out-possessed doesn't mean they don't plan ahead for that instance and teach their players what they need to do in the defensive zone to keep the other team from getting great scoring chances in high numbers.
Tampa Bay beating Pittsburgh last year was not dumb luck or a fluke. The sooner you step back from the numbers you're using and watch the play, the quicker you will understand that. It's not dumb luck to hold a team to 2 goals a game in seven games like the Lightning did.
I'd like Boston to lose just because they are on a 10 game win streak. Plus while Detroit is a conference rival I got a healthy respect for their coach and most of their players.
I'd like Boston to lose just because they are on a 10 game win streak. Plus while Detroit is a conference rival I got a healthy respect for their coach and most of their players.
Yea-no. Wings are in Western Conf, Bruins are not. Go Bruins.
