HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

If you were named Sharks GM tomorrow...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2012, 01:21 PM
  #101
Speed
Registered User
 
Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Holden, MA
Posts: 1,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stalockrox View Post
I believe they have a goalie coach around at least 90% of the time, whether it's Thomas or Schwab...while WorSharks fans might not like what Thomas is doing there, he's done a pretty good job with the goalies - they both have.
I agree about Thomas - my only issue with him is how he handles being a GM.

Speed is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:22 PM
  #102
stalockrox
Registered User
 
stalockrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed View Post
I agree about Thomas - my only issue with him is how he handles being a GM.
Ya, that's what I meant by 'doing there' (GM duties)...not that you don't like what he'd doing with the Worcester goalies, should've been a bit more specific.

stalockrox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:36 PM
  #103
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
No, show me how that stat is computed and the values assigned.
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/...estions-3-what

Long story short, a player receives a "plus" whenever he's on the ice at even strength and his team directs a puck towards the opposing net (i.e., a shot, missed shot or shot that gets blocked) and a "minus" whenever an opponent does the same. It's as perfect a proxy as you can get for puck possession.

Like with any stat, context is imperative. Of course Desjardins wouldn't excel on the top line but I don't understand how that reflects poorly on the metric? He wouldn't do well because he isn't a very good hockey player; no amount of "heart" can change that.

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:40 PM
  #104
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I'm not sure how to look this up exactly, but my suspicion is if you could look on a game by game basis you would find a major discrepancy between games with the winchester-Desjardins-Murray lines and games where any one of those players is switched out. None of those guys by themselves is particularly effective, but remove any one of them from the line and it appears that the effectiveness of the line takes a serious dive. It's odd, because often a line has a 'lynchpin' player, but that doesn't seem to be the case with the 4th line.

My point is, Desjardins numbers may be somewhat skewed by the fact that his line has such tremendous chemistry. Looking at Desjardins numbers while he's got an unusual line-mate I bet would be significant.
I did this a little over a week ago so the numbers have likely changed a bit but probably not significantly:

Desjardins w/ Murray: 171 SF/139 SA (0.552)
Winchester w/ Murray: 164 SF/153 SA (0.517)

Desjardins w/o Murray: 32 SF/32 SA (0.500)
Winchester w/o Murray: 27 SF/32 SA (0.457)

Where SF is shots and missed shots for and SA is shots and missed shots against and the number in parentheses is the percentage of shots that player was on the ice for that the Sharks earned. Very small sample size without Murray (6 games) so it's hard to say for sure but it seems like he's driving the bus on that line to a certain extent.

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:44 PM
  #105
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
put handzus on waivers.
nmc.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:44 PM
  #106
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wynan View Post
I did this a little over a week ago so the numbers have likely changed a bit but probably not significantly:

Desjardins w/ Murray: 171 SF/139 SA (0.552)
Winchester w/ Murray: 164 SF/153 SA (0.517)

Desjardins w/o Murray: 32 SF/32 SA (0.500)
Winchester w/o Murray: 27 SF/32 SA (0.457)

Where SF is shots and missed shots and SA is shots and missed shots against and the number in parentheses is the percentage of shots that player was on the ice for that the Sharks earned. Very small sample size without Murray (6 games) so it's hard to say for sure but it seems like he's driving the bus on that line to a certain extent.
Can you do the same thing with the entire line together, and the anytime they are broken up in general?

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:49 PM
  #107
dwood16
Registered User
 
dwood16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: L.A.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
They could do the improvements by saving on the travel budget for scouts by itself. Its garbage to send scouts to see what another scout has already seen; that idea should have gone out the window with the massive availability of DVDs.

It is contacts on scouting, but then it is up to the scout to do digging and expand his contact list. There are firms that provide DVDs and stats for NA players at a price to orgs.

Det. has a huge scouting personnel presence in Europe compared to all other orgs. They also have a scouting budget that dwarfs all other orgs.

NTCs and NMCs can have performance clauses by the CBA (eg Kaberle).

LZ,
I will look over your sheets later.

Dwood16,
Simple thing about speed vs size and physicality. You can't hit em if you can't catch em. I recognize the need for size and physicality but not to the exclusion of speed.
I agree. With that said, I'd like to know what you think is more important/effective these days. A player with limited speed, size and athleticism who is very smart and sound positionally (like a pavelski or couture) or the athletic guy who is fast, big but maybe is an underachiever and hasn't put up huge numbers.

I think the leagues has changed a lot and people are picking up on the fact (whether it be conscious or sub-conscious) that having guys who can cover a lot of ice, especially d-men is really huge. Guys like Ehrhoff for example.. he may not always make the right play with the puck but he gets to the puck so quick and that is preventing many more opportunities than he allows with poor puck management. Then again, I still think Douglass Murray is an effective player but I believe he is an outlier in this regard due to superb ability to read the play and much improved skating ability the last couple of years.

Also, shouldn't it be easy to watch hours of NHL level hockey and establish a very definitive idea of what exact attributes are most effective? and whether or not to draft accordingly. Maybe they should bring Billy Beane in. Or maybe they do already but make some exceptions.

dwood16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:50 PM
  #108
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
You don't have to take out anything provided you count it for every team, because it's a straight percentage of draft picks playing full time. It measures nothing else.
Not really as later picks take longer to show up. It gives an unfair advantage to teams who have more early picks.

Also Thomas is not a full time NHL goalie coach. The Sharks goalie results have not done as well since the Strelow era. Right now, Korn tops the league in results with nods to Allaire. Tretiak also has some of his stable and there are a couple guys in Finland whose names I do not know. Tretiak isn't coming to North America.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:51 PM
  #109
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Can you do the same thing with the entire line together, and the anytime they are broken up in general?
Unfortunately the "with or without you" script on timeonice.com that I've used to do stuff like that in the past hasn't been updated for this season. I don't recall that line being messed with too many times aside from those 6 games where McLaren (or Wingels) was in for Murray. I guess there was the 1.5 game stretch where Winchester was on the top line and of course Desjardins played there last game.

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:56 PM
  #110
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,638
vCash: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
nmc.
****

Then I'll include him in the Boyle trade and take back a little more salary. Hopefully he waives it...

magic school bus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 01:57 PM
  #111
stalockrox
Registered User
 
stalockrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Not really as later picks take longer to show up. It gives an unfair advantage to teams who have more early picks.

Also Thomas is not a full time NHL goalie coach. The Sharks goalie results have not done as well since the Strelow era. Right now, Korn tops the league in results with nods to Allaire. Tretiak also has some of his stable and there are a couple guys in Finland whose names I do not know. Tretiak isn't coming to North America.
Considering the Sharks goalies who have been working with Thomas (and now Schwab) haven't yet played in the NHL (Stalock's 1 period aside) you can't say that the goalie results are "not as good". That's not something anyone will know until one (or all) of Stalock, Sexsmith, Sateri graduate to the NHL.

The goalie coaches haven't had a whole lotta time with Niemi and Greiss has proven to be a legit NHL goalie. The goalie coaches, while not on Korn or Allaire's level, are doing a good job.

Also, Korn and Allaire aren't going anywhere, there's no prying either one of them out from where they are now.

stalockrox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:01 PM
  #112
dwood16
Registered User
 
dwood16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: L.A.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wynan View Post
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/...estions-3-what

Long story short, a player receives a "plus" whenever he's on the ice at even strength and his team directs a puck towards the opposing net (i.e., a shot, missed shot or shot that gets blocked) and a "minus" whenever an opponent does the same. It's as perfect a proxy as you can get for puck possession.

Like with any stat, context is imperative. Of course Desjardins wouldn't excel on the top line but I don't understand how that reflects poorly on the metric? He wouldn't do well because he isn't a very good hockey player; no amount of "heart" can change that.
This is a garbage stat.

Some players are insistent on getting only very good scoring chances and look for passing plays that result in goals and things to that nature. Some players are the opposite and throw garbage at the goal quite frequently ...skewing this stat.

Ability to actually finish would have to be factored in somehow.

dwood16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:07 PM
  #113
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwood16 View Post
This is a garbage stat.

Some players are insistent on getting only very good scoring chances and look for passing plays that result in goals and things to that nature. Some players are the opposite and throw garbage at the goal quite frequently ...skewing this stat.

Ability to actually finish would have to be factored in somehow.
Except that it's been shown that every player's "PDO" (the shooting percentage of his team added to the save percentage of his team when he's on the ice at even strength) regresses to very close to 1000 over the course of a season. A player's shooting percentage in one half of the season is a terrible predictor of their shooting percentage in the second half. Save for a very tiny sliver of players, no one has exhibited the ability to consistently maintain a shooting percentage significantly above league mean. At the team level, there's zero year-to-year correlation in shooting percentage.

Here's a chart of every player to play in the NHL last season. The x-axis is number of minutes played and the y-axis is PDO (for example, if a player and his teammates shot 8% when he was on the ice at even strength and his goalies had a SV% of 0.924 when he was on the ice he'd have a PDO of 1004).

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:09 PM
  #114
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloweForbidzYou View Post
trade.. marleau... put clowe on line 3...
trade murray for forward.. trade niemi somewhere
trade couture for nabby

at what point in this sequence am i canned?
From the get go!

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:32 PM
  #115
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloweForbidzYou View Post
trade havlat, marleau
make sure to aquire non soft players with speed.
put handguns on waivers
put clowe on line 3.
trade murray for forward
call up petrecki
trade all our draft picks for next 2 years for weber.
trade vlasic for something
trade niemi somewhere
trade couture for nabby
release boyle, getting to old.
fire tmac.

at what point in this sequence am i canned?
The first thing you suggest would likely get you fired by itself.

In total your plan is to replace two of the top six and three of the top four. Actually its three of the top six considering your planing on demoting Clowe. Thats ignoring the draft picks you plan on giving up for Weber. This is probably more nuts then what Tampa did a few seasons ago.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:36 PM
  #116
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wynan View Post
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/...estions-3-what

Long story short, a player receives a "plus" whenever he's on the ice at even strength and his team directs a puck towards the opposing net (i.e., a shot, missed shot or shot that gets blocked) and a "minus" whenever an opponent does the same. It's as perfect a proxy as you can get for puck possession.

Like with any stat, context is imperative. Of course Desjardins wouldn't excel on the top line but I don't understand how that reflects poorly on the metric? He wouldn't do well because he isn't a very good hockey player; no amount of "heart" can change that.
So if I'm on the ice and pin my opponent into his zone for 40 seconds, he skates out to the red line and fires one on my net, I get a "minus"?

That makes it an incredible dumb stat because there's no context involved at all.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:38 PM
  #117
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I don't think the Sharks really need that much. One good puck player up front changes the whole team and it doesn't have to be some great player. It could be another Kyle Wellwood.
Or a healthy and comfortable Havlat

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:38 PM
  #118
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Not really as later picks take longer to show up. It gives an unfair advantage to teams who have more early picks.
And yet those teams aren't at the top. The top three are Montreal, Boston, and Buffalo.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:39 PM
  #119
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwood16 View Post
I agree. With that said, I'd like to know what you think is more important/effective these days. A player with limited speed, size and athleticism who is very smart and sound positionally (like a pavelski or couture) or the athletic guy who is fast, big but maybe is an underachiever and hasn't put up huge numbers.

I think the leagues has changed a lot and people are picking up on the fact (whether it be conscious or sub-conscious) that having guys who can cover a lot of ice, especially d-men is really huge. Guys like Ehrhoff for example.. he may not always make the right play with the puck but he gets to the puck so quick and that is preventing many more opportunities than he allows with poor puck management. Then again, I still think Douglass Murray is an effective player but I believe he is an outlier in this regard due to superb ability to read the play and much improved skating ability the last couple of years.

Also, shouldn't it be easy to watch hours of NHL level hockey and establish a very definitive idea of what exact attributes are most effective? and whether or not to draft accordingly. Maybe they should bring Billy Beane in. Or maybe they do already but make some exceptions.
Blue line speed is the new key. Boston is an exception where they do it with size and a goalie who integrates with the lack of speed. It isn't one-sided. As you say, they get the puck before the hit arrives more often. AV even teaches his dmen to let the opponent get there first but to time their arrival to that of the opposing forward (get the hit) when it is a 50/50 race. A part of this is the rule change on two-line pass and the expansion of the offensive zones.

On size versus speed, we can get down to motivation. At the junior and equivalent levels in US and Euro hockey, size is a much bigger advantage. The talent is much more spread out and the big guys get a huge advantage. I am sure the tendency is for coaches not to push their big guys as hard because of that dramatic advantage. There are also coaches who still do push (eg Hay). A player is in large part a product of his environment and they are already disabling the big guys in many cases because of the differences in treatment. We keep running into big guys who reach the NHL or AHL level and just don't have "it". Not so much with the smaller guys. The small guys establish a work ethic earlier just to compete with their size disadvantage. And some of those smaller guys hit later growth spurts. My issue with New England forwards goes right to the core of the motivation issue. The guys who stay in the New England level of junior hockey are not competing with the quantity of top talent that is present in the USHL and Canadian junior (NE programs are too scattered, same goes for California kids). If it is a New England kid that I were looking at, I would want him transferring to USHL or Canadian junior to see how he competes against top talent.

The attributes you want for an ideal NHL team are diverse. Too much one way or the other will get in the way. The problem for the Sharks is that the ideal mix has shifted since some of the execs formed their ideals and their mix is off balance with the rest of the league. From what I can tell they fall in love with individual players without regard to fit a little too often as well.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:40 PM
  #120
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
So if I'm on the ice and pin my opponent into his zone for 40 seconds, he skates out to the red line and fires one on my net, I get a "minus"?

That makes it an incredible dumb stat because there's no context involved at all.
You can warp your view of hockey looking at advanced stats. Most of it is over complicated versions of basic stats.

In my opinion the only stat you need to look at is PDO while understanding its limitations.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:43 PM
  #121
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
So if I'm on the ice and pin my opponent into his zone for 40 seconds, he skates out to the red line and fires one on my net, I get a "minus"?

That makes it an incredible dumb stat because there's no context involved at all.
That's assuming you direct zero shots at the net in your 40 seconds of zone time. The reality is Corsi has been shown to correlate extremely strongly with zone time and scoring chances.

Your far-fetched and ridiculous example aside (I'd love to see evidence of any player who consistently generates zone time only to generate zero shot attempts, allow an 80 footer on goal and then skate back to the bench), it works as a stat; at least much better than anything else that's available. At the team level, it's the best predictor of future success and indicator of actual talent. Of course it needs context; every stat does. That's why it's important to take into account quality of competition, how many shifts a player is starting in their own end relative to the opponent's and the quality of the teammates they're skating with.

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:46 PM
  #122
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
And yet those teams aren't at the top. The top three are Montreal, Boston, and Buffalo.
And two of those three have traditionally good (going back to 91) drafting/development (Montreal/Buffalo) in terms of quantity. Some of those at the very bottom are there because their drafting/development is awful (eg Edmonton). The two that I named have also not been saddled with dramatically late picks. BTW, kudos to Boston for turning it around from the early 90s, I noticed.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:50 PM
  #123
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wynan View Post
Your far-fetched and ridiculous example aside
It happened four times Sunday, and it was the WorSharks penned into their zone by St John's. So, not so "far-fetched and ridiculous"...

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:56 PM
  #124
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stalockrox View Post
Considering the Sharks goalies who have been working with Thomas (and now Schwab) haven't yet played in the NHL (Stalock's 1 period aside) you can't say that the goalie results are "not as good". That's not something anyone will know until one (or all) of Stalock, Sexsmith, Sateri graduate to the NHL.

The goalie coaches haven't had a whole lotta time with Niemi and Greiss has proven to be a legit NHL goalie. The goalie coaches, while not on Korn or Allaire's level, are doing a good job.

Also, Korn and Allaire aren't going anywhere, there's no prying either one of them out from where they are now.
I won't argue that Schwab couldn't be a diamond in the rough in terms of coaching. Not enough history as you say. There is a lot of evidence that Thomas is not good. Even Nabby used other coaches (including Tretiak) during Strelow's decline. Greiss has used other coaches at times. That is not all of the evidence.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 03:00 PM
  #125
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
It happened four times Sunday, and it was the WorSharks penned into their zone by St John's. So, not so "far-fetched and ridiculous"...
It's not something that happens with regularity at the NHL level and certainly not something that wouldn't cancel out over time. The percentage of shots that are taken from the neutral zone is pretty insignificant over a full season. Again, even if it isn't something you believe intuitively (which it really should be; the vast majority of the time, you aren't shooting the puck with any sort of consistency unless you're in the offensive zone) the numbers bear out the strong correlation between shot differential and possession differential.

Les Wynan* 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 01:22 AM.

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.