HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

ES Pts per ES TOI

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2011, 09:58 PM
  #1
Happy Pappy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 18
vCash: 500
ES Pts per ES TOI

I was a little bored and I thought I'd calculate this stat. I figure it's a nice stat to see who played the best based on the opportunities they received. Sure some players played with better line mates but they generally played against tougher guys so it probably evens out.

Benoit Pouliot 0.034
Jeff Halpern 0.034
Tomas Plekanec 0.033
Mathieu Darche 0.033
David Desharnais 0.032
Max Pacioretty 0.032
Andrei Kostitsyn 0.031
Brian Gionta 0.027
Michael Cammalleri 0.027
Lars Eller 0.021
Maxim Lapierre 0.019
James Wisniewski 0.018
Travis Moen 0.018
Scott Gomez 0.017
P.K. Subban 0.016

For those that think this statistic is completely useless, here are the top guys for the Canucks and Bruins:
Daniel Sedin 0.051
Henrik Sedin 0.046
Alexandre Burrows 0.045
Mason Raymond 0.034
Ryan Kesler 0.033
Mikael Samuelsson 0.029
Raffi Torres 0.027
Manny Malhotra 0.024

David Krejci 0.045
Milan Lucic 0.043
Patrice Bergeron 0.041
Nathan Horton 0.041
Brad Marchand 0.035
Blake Wheeler 0.034
Mark Recchi 0.029
Daniel Paille 0.028
Michael Ryder 0.028

So how do you explain that the top players are at the top for this statistic on other teams but not for the habs and why isn't Pouliot getting any opportunity to prove himself (especially on the PP)?

Happy Pappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 09:59 PM
  #2
Nidema
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
great post Happy Pappy.

It's always been puzzling to me why Pouliot never got a chance. But the discrepancy in EV pts/min for our top players and other team's is glaring. Perhaps guys like Pleky are mandated by Martin to play with more defensive awareness, sacrificing his point production at ES. Who knows.

Nidema is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:05 PM
  #3
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
It's nice to see you using rate stats Happy Pappy, but one caveat. When looking at goals/assists/points (or the corresponding rate stats) you have to take into account two things.

1) The quality of opposition the player is playing against - It's easier to score against 4th-line players than it is first-line players.

2) You need to look at where a player begins their shift on faceoffs. Players who get a tonne of offensive-zone faceoffs from their coahces, like Erhoff or the Sedins will have greater offensive opportunties because they are closer to the opposition goal.


As a bit of an aside, behindthenet.ca has rate stats for scoring though they are expressed per 60-minutes of ES ice-time rather than per minute of ES ice-time. IT's a little less unwieldy. It also has a stat (OZone%) that gives you an idea of where a player starts on the ice which is calculated by: #Ozone Faceoffs/(#Ozone Faceoffs + #dzone faceoffs). Finally there are a couple of quality of competition metrics there, one based on +/- (QUALCOMP) and one based on shots directed at goal (Corsi QoC). Both give you an idea of the type of opposition faced

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:26 PM
  #4
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Well, to be fair, Cammy and Gionta had their worst pts/gp of their career since they started scoring more than 30pts. Gomez had his worst career year.
Plekanec, there's no question it was fatigue imo. It's only normal that a player of his size and skills (he's good, but he's not 1pt/gp good) will get tired from carrying his linemates on top of being the most used forward on the PK.

It truly is a testament of how well structured we played this year. When your top players all pretty much have career lows on top of having key injuries, you shouldn't really make the POs, let alone almost make it to the 2nd round. That's why I'm really baffled when people criticize Martin.

I defended Pouliot throughout the season, and those stats were why. They were even higher earlier in the season.

Vancouver and Boston were the #1 and #5 most scoring team this year. They also were the best two teams in terms of ES goal differential. So, comparing us to them isn't really fair as we were nowhere near their numbers.

I don't expect our guys to have such low scores next season though. We will improve our production.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:32 PM
  #5
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,282
vCash: 50
From the pouliot thread, I had written this:

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=3...4&postcount=35

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:51 PM
  #6
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
1) The quality of opposition the player is playing against - It's easier to score against 4th-line players than it is first-line players.
I somewhat disagree. There's a reason why top players play versus other top players. It is tougher, but they can handle it.
You could also argue that on home ice, with the last change and exploiting the no shift after icing rule, top players often end up playing versus weaker opponents.

Also, weaker opposition will face weaker players, so it pretty much evens out.
I wouldn't put much weight on this notion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
2) You need to look at where a player begins their shift on faceoffs. Players who get a tonne of offensive-zone faceoffs from their coahces, like Erhoff or the Sedins will have greater offensive opportunties because they are closer to the opposition goal.
I think this contradicts a bit your first point. Ya, you want to put your best players for that offensive zone faceoffs (unless it's not their turn), but they'll get to face the other side's top opposition. Also, your best center isn't always good in the faceoffs. Plekanec isn't particularly good, he had a 50% success rate, and Gomez 48. In the POs they worsened considering the Bruins have good faceoffs man. Plekanec had 43% (an embarrassing 20% in the last game), Gomez 40.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:53 PM
  #7
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,752
vCash: 500
Good job on the leg work. You're going to be pissed to know that this guy already does all that stuff for you (for the Habs, at least).

edit: wait a sec... I don't think he does points... my bad.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 11:24 PM
  #8
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I somewhat disagree. There's a reason why top players play versus other top players. It is tougher, but they can handle it.
You could also argue that on home ice, with the last change and exploiting the no shift after icing rule, top players often end up playing versus weaker opponents.

Also, weaker opposition will face weaker players, so it pretty much evens out.
I wouldn't put much weight on this notion.
For your top-line players you're absolutely right, quality of opposition isn't all that important as coaches tend to go best-on-best in the hopes of out-scoring the opposition's best with their best. It is tougher to score but the coaches are doing this hoping that their top-line can out-score their opposition best, not merely rack up the points.

The power-on-power matchup is one of the reasons we saw Moen or Halpern in the top-6 so much last season. Moen's most frequent linemates last season were Gionta and Gomez while Halpern's where Cammalleri and Plekanec Without Pacioretty the Habs really only had 5 top-6 forwards and Martin compensated by putting Moen on the Gomez line or Halpern on the Plekanec line and giving that line more defensive responsibility.

Things get a little murky when you get down to the 2nd and especially the 3rd-line. If a team is able to put together a quality 3rd-line like Philly has had those players can absolutely torch the opposition players. That's what happened to Philly Leino this year: 70% of his shifts were with Briere and Hartnell and since they were employed as Philadelphia's 3rd-line since the other two lines handled the top-6 minutes.

Incidentally, this is why I'm advocating the Habs going out and getting two quality wingers from the free-agent pool even if they're not necessarily bona-fide guys. By giving Eller better wingers than he played with last season,

Quote:
I think this contradicts a bit your first point. Ya, you want to put your best players for that offensive zone faceoffs (unless it's not their turn), but they'll get to face the other side's top opposition. Also, your best center isn't always good in the faceoffs. Plekanec isn't particularly good, he had a 50% success rate, and Gomez 48. In the POs they worsened considering the Bruins have good faceoffs man. Plekanec had 43% (an embarrassing 20% in the last game), Gomez 40.
I'm not talking about faceoff win percentage. I'm talking about, when a player begins their shift on a faceoff, where they start on the ice. In the statistic I mentioned neutral-zone faceoffs are excluded for simplicity but the Sedins had an ozone% of 70% while Plekanec's was 50.2%. Similarly Erhoff's Ozone% was 61.5% and Subban's was 48.5%.

In general power-on-power matchups tend to override starting your best scorers in the offensive zone; Crosby and Datsyuk for example had Ozone% of less than 50% which means they stated in the defensive zone more often than the offensive zone. Their ability to put up the point totals they do starting so far away from goals is what makes them the best two players in the game (in addition to playing against the opposition's best. But you already knew that).

Vancouver's a very unique situation where they put together a fantastic defensive 3rd-line of Torres-Malholtra-Jansen/Samuelssonwith a terrific faceoffman which they employed as defensive zone specialists allowing the Sedins (and even Kesler to a degree) to feast on offensive zone faceoffs and rack up the points. Vancouver's 3rd-line was much like an old-fashioned checking line which has largely gone out of fashion.

I think the Philly model is more what Gauthier will be going after for this season. None of the Habs centres are lights-out on faceoffs so the Vancouver-like specialization is probably too much to ask from the group. Having a high-quality 3rd line though would give the Habs a big secondary scoring threat against comparatively weaker 3rd-lines.

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 12:22 AM
  #9
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
For your top-line players you're absolutely right, quality of opposition isn't all that important as coaches tend to go best-on-best in the hopes of out-scoring the opposition's best with their best. It is tougher to score but the coaches are doing this hoping that their top-line can out-score their opposition best, not merely rack up the points.

The power-on-power matchup is one of the reasons we saw Moen or Halpern in the top-6 so much last season. Moen's most frequent linemates last season were Gionta and Gomez while Halpern's where Cammalleri and Plekanec Without Pacioretty the Habs really only had 5 top-6 forwards and Martin compensated by putting Moen on the Gomez line or Halpern on the Plekanec line and giving that line more defensive responsibility.

Things get a little murky when you get down to the 2nd and especially the 3rd-line. If a team is able to put together a quality 3rd-line like Philly has had those players can absolutely torch the opposition players. That's what happened to Philly Leino this year: 70% of his shifts were with Briere and Hartnell and since they were employed as Philadelphia's 3rd-line since the other two lines handled the top-6 minutes.

Incidentally, this is why I'm advocating the Habs going out and getting two quality wingers from the free-agent pool even if they're not necessarily bona-fide guys. By giving Eller better wingers than he played with last season,
The reason Halpern and Moen played on the first two lines wasn't because Martin wanted to give them more defensive responsibilities, it's because we didn't have top 6 players. Cammy got hurt at some point, AK went into cold mode after he was brought down to play with Gomez/Moen while Martin took a cold Gionta and made him play with Plek, that was Martin's first big mistake this year imo.

Our lack of offensive touch made Martin try a bunch of different combinations.

Sure, I can agree that if you have a solid 3rd line, worthy of being a 2nd on most teams and maybe even 1st on others, they'll likely benefit more from playing versus weaker opponents. But that's not the case with us. And in the OP's example, their top players had the better scoring ratios, so we're not talking about good players benefiting from playing versus weaker opponents.

I don't think Gauthier will go after two quality wingers this summer. I think one is more likely to be it. MaxPac will be on the top 6, I expect that new signing to likely be there as well, and then I'm picturing DD and AK being centered by Eller.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
I'm not talking about faceoff win percentage. I'm talking about, when a player begins their shift on a faceoff, where they start on the ice. In the statistic I mentioned neutral-zone faceoffs are excluded for simplicity but the Sedins had an ozone% of 70% while Plekanec's was 50.2%. Similarly Erhoff's Ozone% was 61.5% and Subban's was 48.5%.

In general power-on-power matchups tend to override starting your best scorers in the offensive zone; Crosby and Datsyuk for example had Ozone% of less than 50% which means they stated in the defensive zone more often than the offensive zone. Their ability to put up the point totals they do starting so far away from goals is what makes them the best two players in the game (in addition to playing against the opposition's best. But you already knew that).

Vancouver's a very unique situation where they put together a fantastic defensive 3rd-line of Torres-Malholtra-Jansen/Samuelssonwith a terrific faceoffman which they employed as defensive zone specialists allowing the Sedins (and even Kesler to a degree) to feast on offensive zone faceoffs and rack up the points. Vancouver's 3rd-line was much like an old-fashioned checking line which has largely gone out of fashion.

I think the Philly model is more what Gauthier will be going after for this season. None of the Habs centres are lights-out on faceoffs so the Vancouver-like specialization is probably too much to ask from the group. Having a high-quality 3rd line though would give the Habs a big secondary scoring threat against comparatively weaker 3rd-lines.
Yes, but you don't take into consideration that the Canucks were a clearly more offensive team than us. So, it's only normal that Sedin gets more OZFOs, as opposed to Plekanec. The later one is also counted on for defensive duties because he's great at them.

But again, I don't think the OP was comparing us to other teams. He just wanted to show that for the Habs, the best players, outside Plekanec, aren't the ones with the better ratios.

I agree that, with the current shape up of our line up, it appears we're more likely aiming towards 3 offensive line (with Martin making all of them still defensively smart due to his system), which I'm perfectly content with.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 01:09 AM
  #10
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
The reason Halpern and Moen played on the first two lines wasn't because Martin wanted to give them more defensive responsibilities, it's because we didn't have top 6 players. Cammy got hurt at some point, AK went into cold mode after he was brought down to play with Gomez/Moen while Martin took a cold Gionta and made him play with Plek, that was Martin's first big mistake this year imo.

Our lack of offensive touch made Martin try a bunch of different combinations.

Sure, I can agree that if you have a solid 3rd line, worthy of being a 2nd on most teams and maybe even 1st on others, they'll likely benefit more from playing versus weaker opponents. But that's not the case with us. And in the OP's example, their top players had the better scoring ratios, so we're not talking about good players benefiting from playing versus weaker opponents.
If Martin was simply trying to replace injured offense the would have employed stronger offensive players like Pouliot, Desharnias and Darche as replacements to the top lines. Instead Martin put strong defensive forwards to play those minutes. The reason is because strong defensive players were necessary to employ the extreme power versus power line usage strategy that Martin employs.

The point is that Pouliot and Desharnais had strong scoring rates largely because they faced weak opposition this season. They're not good enough to do that against good NHL players (yet). The concept is exactly the same for Philadelphia's 3rd line, just not as extreme.

Cammaleri-Plekanec-Kostitsyn and Cammaleri-Plekanec-Halpern in particular faced extraordinarily tough opposition last year in service of Martin's line matching scheme because it is both the strongest offensive and defensive unit the Habs can use. Since Gionta and Gomez play together, there isn't a winger who can match Kostitsyn's two-way game on the team so Halpern was used there when Kostitsyn wasn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Yes, but you don't take into consideration that the Canucks were a clearly more offensive team than us. So, it's only normal that Sedin gets more OZFOs, as opposed to Plekanec. The later one is also counted on for defensive duties because he's great at them.

But again, I don't think the OP was comparing us to other teams. He just wanted to show that for the Habs, the best players, outside Plekanec, aren't the ones with the better ratios.

I agree that, with the current shape up of our line up, it appears we're more likely aiming towards 3 offensive line (with Martin making all of them still defensively smart due to his system), which I'm perfectly content with.
You'd think that but you're completely wrong.

Vancouver Team Zone Start: 51.4%
Boston Team Zone Start: 48.2%

Montreal Team Zone Start: 50.9%


Montreal was a way better possession club then they get credit for. As a result they drove the puck more towards the enemy's net. In positional terms, Vancouver wasn't much more offensive than Montreal

Henrik Sedin Zone Start: 71.2%
Kesler Zone Start: 50.0%
Malhotra Zone Start: 25.0%

Vancouver was somewhat better at getting faceoffs in the offensive zone than Montreal, but the Sedins' offensive zone starts were paid for by having Malhotra take the defensive ones.

Plekanec Zone Start: 50.2%
Gomez Zone Start: 54.0%
Halpern Zone Start: 43.3%
Eller Zone Start: 51.6%
Desharnais Zone Start: 46.3%

Plekanec got sent out against the opponents best where ever they were so had a neutral start. Gomez was used for offense. Halpern used for defense.

In all cases these numbers aren't nearly as extreme as Vancouver. That is because Montreal uses an power versus power line matchup system while Vancouver uses a zone start based line usage system. The differences in Montreal's usage is largely that Plekanec's line gets extremely difficult matchups (probably in the top 5 toughest as a line in the NHL) while Gomez line gets upper middling (facing 2nd and 3rd lines), Eller gets lesser middling (weaker 2nd and 3rd lines) and Desharnais gets super soft minutes (4th lines).

Desharnais' numbers reflect how he was only used against opposition 4th lines. Most coaches tend to send their 4th out in the offensive zone so they won't get victimized by better players. Desharnais was sent out to beat 4th lines so he started opposite of them.

The goal for next year while likely be to keep the jobs constant while providing better wingers for Eller. This will allow them to be a lesser version of Briere's line in Philadelphia, exploiting weak matchups while the top-6 plays the good players.

Incidently, Montreal's zone start is another piece of supporting evidence about MathMan and I's argument that the Habs' 5 on 5 play

Montreal Yearly Zone Start %
2008: 46.9%
2009: 47.6%
2010: 47.4%
2011: 50.9%

Notice the difference? It largely tracks the percentage of shots taken versus all shots in the game (taken/(taken+received)).

Shot %:
2008: 47.9%
2009: 48.6%
2010: 47.1%
2011: 50.6%

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 01:52 AM
  #11
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
If Martin was simply trying to replace injured offense the would have employed stronger offensive players like Pouliot, Desharnias and Darche as replacements to the top lines. Instead Martin put strong defensive forwards to play those minutes. The reason is because strong defensive players were necessary to employ the extreme power versus power line usage strategy that Martin employs.

The point is that Pouliot and Desharnais had strong scoring rates largely because they faced weak opposition this season. They're not good enough to do that against good NHL players (yet). The concept is exactly the same for Philadelphia's 3rd line, just not as extreme.

Cammaleri-Plekanec-Kostitsyn and Cammaleri-Plekanec-Halpern in particular faced extraordinarily tough opposition last year in service of Martin's line matching scheme because it is both the strongest offensive and defensive unit the Habs can use. Since Gionta and Gomez play together, there isn't a winger who can match Kostitsyn's two-way game on the team so Halpern was used there when Kostitsyn wasn't.
Darche was actually used along side Gomez and Gionta, quite often. Moen and Pyatt also spent some time there. That lasted until MaxPac was called up. What happened then? Martin didn't feel like matching up defense for the power vs power idea?

The only reason scrappers were used there was because of injuries, or lack of production from other top 6 players. Considering the lines didn't produce and weren't playing any particularly well defensively either, Martin opted for more reliable forwards.

If MaxPac remained healthy, and AK went back to his hot self with Plek, then Moen, Darche, Halpern or Pyatt would have never been used there.

Like I said, in the end it evens out. You can argue that Pouliot and DD have decent ratios because they play weaker opponents. I can argue that there's a reason for that and that's because they are weaker players themselves. It evens out in the end. It's not like they have some type of big advantage over Plekanec or Cammy considering these guys are significantly better.
Maybe if we're talking about guys like Briere playing vs 3rd liners, but that's not the case for us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
You'd think that but you're completely wrong.

Vancouver Team Zone Start: 51.4%
Boston Team Zone Start: 48.2%

Montreal Team Zone Start: 50.9%


Montreal was a way better possession club then they get credit for. As a result they drove the puck more towards the enemy's net. In positional terms, Vancouver wasn't much more offensive than Montreal

Henrik Sedin Zone Start: 71.2%
Kesler Zone Start: 50.0%
Malhotra Zone Start: 25.0%

Vancouver was somewhat better at getting faceoffs in the offensive zone than Montreal, but the Sedins' offensive zone starts were paid for by having Malhotra take the defensive ones.

Plekanec Zone Start: 50.2%
Gomez Zone Start: 54.0%
Halpern Zone Start: 43.3%
Eller Zone Start: 51.6%
Desharnais Zone Start: 46.3%

Plekanec got sent out against the opponents best where ever they were so had a neutral start. Gomez was used for offense. Halpern used for defense.

In all cases these numbers aren't nearly as extreme as Vancouver. That is because Montreal uses an power versus power line matchup system while Vancouver uses a zone start based line usage system. The differences in Montreal's usage is largely that Plekanec's line gets extremely difficult matchups (probably in the top 5 toughest as a line in the NHL) while Gomez line gets upper middling (facing 2nd and 3rd lines), Eller gets lesser middling (weaker 2nd and 3rd lines) and Desharnais gets super soft minutes (4th lines).

Desharnais' numbers reflect how he was only used against opposition 4th lines. Most coaches tend to send their 4th out in the offensive zone so they won't get victimized by better players. Desharnais was sent out to beat 4th lines so he started opposite of them.

The goal for next year while likely be to keep the jobs constant while providing better wingers for Eller. This will allow them to be a lesser version of Briere's line in Philadelphia, exploiting weak matchups while the top-6 plays the good players.

Incidently, Montreal's zone start is another piece of supporting evidence about MathMan and I's argument that the Habs' 5 on 5 play

Montreal Yearly Zone Start %
2008: 46.9%
2009: 47.6%
2010: 47.4%
2011: 50.9%

Notice the difference? It largely tracks the percentage of shots taken versus all shots in the game (taken/(taken+received)).

Shot %:
2008: 47.9%
2009: 48.6%
2010: 47.1%
2011: 50.6%
I stand corrected. However, I seriously think you guys are reading way too much into these stats. This might be a time where you're really trying to find Stats to explain something that doesn't really need explaining.
Cammy, Gionta and Gomez all had season lows in terms of production. If you compare their rate to the ones they had last year (Cammy and Gomez didn't have particularly great seasons two years ago either) then you notice a drop.
Plekanec also has a drop from his previous year. Only AK improved his rate.

So really, opposition and faceoffs might have a slight role (maybe FOs more than opposition in some cases), but for our players, I just think it's them simply not having a good season. I don't think anybody can argue that our top 6 had a good year, it hasn't. I believe that holds a much bigger importance as to why their numbers are lower.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 02:13 AM
  #12
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
Having a high-quality 3rd line though would give the Habs a big secondary scoring threat against comparatively weaker 3rd-lines.
You can get sort of the same result by having a high-quality DEFENSIVE third line that plays against the first or second line of the other team and shuts them down. This gives your first or second line a better matchup in most cases.

When Moore-Lapierre-Pyatt were buzzing about on the ice and shutting down the Washington and Pittsburgh offensive juggernauts in the 2010 playoffs, either Cammalleri or Gionta got an easier matchup. And they profited by scoring.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 02:25 AM
  #13
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Darche was actually used along side Gomez and Gionta, quite often. Moen and Pyatt also spent some time there. That lasted until MaxPac was called up. What happened then? Martin didn't feel like matching up defense for the power vs power idea?
MaxPac is good enough to handle top-6 minutes defensively and is better than Halpern/Darche/Moen in the offensive zone. He was very, very good in his time with the Habs last season. It's hard to compare because Kostitsyn had tougher minutes (opposition and zone-starts) but I think he's very close to where Kostitsyn is at the least, if not already on par.


Quote:
I stand corrected. However, I seriously think you guys are reading way too much into these stats. This might be a time where you're really trying to find Stats to explain something that doesn't really need explaining.
Cammy, Gionta and Gomez all had season lows in terms of production. If you compare their rate to the ones they had last year (Cammy and Gomez didn't have particularly great seasons two years ago either) then you notice a drop.
Plekanec also has a drop from his previous year. Only AK improved his rate.

So really, opposition and faceoffs might have a slight role (maybe FOs more than opposition in some cases), but for our players, I just think it's them simply not having a good season. I don't think anybody can argue that our top 6 had a good year, it hasn't. I believe that holds a much bigger importance as to why their numbers are lower.
I was speaking more in general about using goals/assists/points rather than this case specifically but yeah, pretty much every top-6 forward had a down (and unlucky as far as I can tell) year. Players converting shots to goals at their career rate should see the Habs get another 20 or so goals next year without major lineup changes (see the link here, starting below the first table skips most of the methodology and would save some time).


Last edited by Roke: 06-17-2011 at 02:39 AM.
Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 02:35 AM
  #14
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Darche was actually used along side Gomez and Gionta, quite often. Moen and Pyatt also spent some time there. That lasted until MaxPac was called up. What happened then? Martin didn't feel like matching up defense for the power vs power idea?
Pacioretty was a good enough two-way player that he could outplay relatively tough minutes so he became a fixture of the top-6. That made matching up easier not harder.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
The only reason scrappers were used there was because of injuries, or lack of production from other top 6 players. Considering the lines didn't produce and weren't playing any particularly well defensively either, Martin opted for more reliable forwards.

If MaxPac remained healthy, and AK went back to his hot self with Plek, then Moen, Darche, Halpern or Pyatt would have never been used there.
Of course, none of us disagree about that. But it was the importance of defensive matchups that got Moen and Halpern promoted over the more offensively capable Pouliot and Desharnais. That's all we are saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Like I said, in the end it evens out. You can argue that Pouliot and DD have decent ratios because they play weaker opponents. I can argue that there's a reason for that and that's because they are weaker players themselves. It evens out in the end. It's not like they have some type of big advantage over Plekanec or Cammy considering these guys are significantly better.
Maybe if we're talking about guys like Briere playing vs 3rd liners, but that's not the case for us.
We're not in that big of a disagreement here. The point is that DD and Pouliot's production was better than it would have been playing more serious minutes because they were facing weak opposition. This is just good strategy by the coaching staff to use them in this manner where they will be a net positive to the team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I stand corrected. However, I seriously think you guys are reading way too much into these stats. This might be a time where you're really trying to find Stats to explain something that doesn't really need explaining.
Cammy, Gionta and Gomez all had season lows in terms of production. If you compare their rate to the ones they had last year (Cammy and Gomez didn't have particularly great seasons two years ago either) then you notice a drop.
Plekanec also has a drop from his previous year. Only AK improved his rate.

So really, opposition and faceoffs might have a slight role (maybe FOs more than opposition in some cases), but for our players, I just think it's them simply not having a good season. I don't think anybody can argue that our top 6 had a good year, it hasn't. I believe that holds a much bigger importance as to why their numbers are lower.
The underlying stats provide a context and understanding of what the team strategy is and what situations players found themselves in. The top six had a subpar offensive season in terms of goals and points. Looking at the advance stats provides a description of why that was the case.

In the case of the Hab's top 6 it was because all of them suffered from a poor shooting percentage on 5 on 5 play. Shots, zone starts, quality of competition etc. all show that as a unit the Habs top 2 lines all did a very good job of carrying the play but were undone by horribly low conversion of shoting chances into goals.

Gomez was the biggest victim with a hilariously bad 4.73% team shooting percentage at even strength. This is almost half of the 8.51% he had last year and this difference entirely accounts for his missing scoring. Changes in shooting percentage are largely transient, so we can expect Gomez's production to return.

The Hab's top forwards all suffered in various degrees from this "Gomez-itis" as MathMan calls it.

Player: This Season - Last Season
Gomez: 4.73% - 8.51%
Plekanec: 8.45% - 9.09%
Cammaleri: 7.32% - 9.80%
Gionta: 6.77%- 9.14%
Kostitsyn: 7.71 - 8.57%
Pouliot: 7.71% - 8.71%

League average is about 8.2% I believe. Top-six forwards generally have a somewhat higher team on-ice shooting percentage than others so 8.5-9% shooting should be a typical year for these players. Gomez tends to be a low shooting percentage player so something like 7.5-8% would be more typical for him.

This is where the offensive production at even strength the Habs should have gotten disappeared to and the source of the bad offensive seasons that you've noted. This is a sign that these players still were good at controlling the play and are all likely to rebound next season.

But this is just a more detail oriented and robust method to arrive at the same conclusion you did. The Habs under-performed and will likely rebound to historical production in terms of points per game next year, with the greater the under-performance meaning the greater the rebound (Gomez most underperforming, Plekanec least).

Heck, Kostitsyn had an average year by his standards and these stats indicate that if he maintains his current play he'll be above average next season when his luck should turn to the good.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 02:38 AM
  #15
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
You can get sort of the same result by having a high-quality DEFENSIVE third line that plays against the first or second line of the other team and shuts them down. This gives your first or second line a better matchup in most cases.
You are absolutely right that teams can employ an ultra-defensive 3rd-line; I mentioned that Vancouver did it last year. While Martin may employ that in the future none of the Habs' centres under contract/RFA are good enough in the faceoff circle to really thrive in such a role.

Quote:
When Moore-Lapierre-Pyatt were buzzing about on the ice and shutting down the Washington and Pittsburgh offensive juggernauts in the 2010 playoffs, either Cammalleri or Gionta got an easier matchup. And they profited by scoring.
Moore-Lapierre-Pyatt took away defensive minutes that probably went to Gomez' line but Plekanec was employed in the toughest situations in the 2010 playoffs in terms of the percentage of defensive zone faceoffs.

As you can see here, looking at the DEF FO W (defensive faceoff won) and DEF FO L (likewise, but lost). Those number are for whether the team won/lost a faceoff when the player was on the ice, not whether the individual won/lost. We all know that the main effect on faceoff win% is the centre but the purpose of these stats are for telling where a player began a shift, not who is good at winning faceoffs.

Plekanec was on the ice for 92 Defensive Zone Faceoffs and 45 OZF
Gomez was on the ice for 69 Defensive one Faceoffs and 88 OZF
Moore was on the ice for 55 Defensive Zone Faceoffs and 44 OZF

Like I said, an ultra-defensive 3rd-line can work (Vancouver proved it over the season) but it doesn't seem to be the way Martin employed his three best centres in those playoffs. I can see the Habs going to that type of 3rd-line in a year or two when Eller is ready for top-6 minutes and Gomez is traded, but right now the personnel aren't there for the Habs to employ it.


Last edited by Roke: 06-17-2011 at 02:49 AM.
Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 03:22 AM
  #16
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
You are absolutely right that teams can employ an ultra-defensive 3rd-line; I mentioned that Vancouver did it last year. While Martin may employ that in the future none of the Habs' centres under contract/RFA are good enough in the faceoff circle to really thrive in such a role.



Moore-Lapierre-Pyatt took away defensive minutes that probably went to Gomez' line but Plekanec was employed in the toughest situations in the 2010 playoffs in terms of the percentage of defensive zone faceoffs.

As you can see here, looking at the DEF FO W (defensive faceoff won) and DEF FO L (likewise, but lost). Those number are for whether the team won/lost a faceoff when the player was on the ice, not whether the individual won/lost. We all know that the main effect on faceoff win% is the centre but the purpose of these stats are for telling where a player began a shift, not who is good at winning faceoffs.

Plekanec was on the ice for 92 Defensive Zone Faceoffs and 45 OZF
Gomez was on the ice for 69 Defensive one Faceoffs and 88 OZF
Moore was on the ice for 55 Defensive Zone Faceoffs and 44 OZF

Like I said, an ultra-defensive 3rd-line can work (Vancouver proved it over the season) but it doesn't seem to be the way Martin employed his three best centres in those playoffs. I can see the Habs going to that type of 3rd-line in a year or two when Eller is ready for top-6 minutes and Gomez is traded, but right now the personnel aren't there for the Habs to employ it.
The Habs current team make up doesn't favour an ultra defensive third line, although its a viable strategy if you have the personal. The Habs general strategy is to exploit having such an excellent two-way center as Plekanec to neutralize the other teams best players. Essentially the first line is the shut down line. This would have worked beautifully if Gomez's line wasn't a shot conversion abyss as the Plekanec line would play the other teams best to about equal while the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines beat their opposition. Unfortunately, the 2nd line was a big negative this season in goal differential and the other lines only produced enough to bring the total to about equal.

Next year I imagine they will pursue a similar strategy, this time with a stronger 3rd line centered by Eller and the expectation that Pacioretty-Gomez-Gionta will outplay other teams second lines to the extent they severely outshot them this season.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 08:45 AM
  #17
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
These stats prove that Pouliot is better than he is made out to be by Martin, etc; it makes the staff and brass look incompetent actually.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 11:19 AM
  #18
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
These stats prove that Pouliot is better than he is made out to be by Martin, etc; it makes the staff and brass look incompetent actually.
Actually, if you follow the same train of thought, then it shows Martin placed Pouliot in favorable match ups. Making him face weaker opponents, which helped him.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 11:25 AM
  #19
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
But this is just a more detail oriented and robust method to arrive at the same conclusion you did.
Precisely. But it was insightful nonetheless.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 11:37 AM
  #20
Analyzer
#WeAreBoston
 
Analyzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Actually, if you follow the same train of thought, then it shows Martin placed Pouliot in favorable match ups. Making him face weaker opponents, which helped him.
Yes, 5 minutes a game is that.

Analyzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 11:39 AM
  #21
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
These stats prove that Pouliot is better than he is made out to be by Martin, etc; it makes the staff and brass look incompetent actually.
Using that logic, someone could argue that players like Halpern and Darche should be receiving ES minutes at the expense of Cammalleri and Gionta.

This stat set is moderately interesting as a discussion point but not instructive at at all.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 11:41 AM
  #22
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Actually, if you follow the same train of thought, then it shows Martin placed Pouliot in favorable match ups. Making him face weaker opponents, which helped him.
Wrong.

1) Pouliot only played ~10 minutes per game of ES, even though opposing 2nd, 3rd, and 4th lines are on the ice for 30 ES minutes per game.
2) Pouliot was not just above average in the ESP/TOI compartment, he was NUMBER ONE on the entire team with great statistical significance.
3) In particular, Pouliot did better than any of his linemates, who presumably faced similar matchups that he faced.
4) The effect of the coach controlling match-ups is negated by the fact half the games are played on the road.

ETA: Speaking as someone who has lectured on statistics, the fact Pouliot was number one in the ESP/TOI category does not prove he was in any way the best player in the category. What it shows is that with very high statistical significance, he was among the better players. "Luck" plays a role that could shift the 2nd best player to 5th place, et cetera, kind of like how a guy who is career 50.6% in faceoffs might have a season with 50.2% even if nothing changed -- statistical noise. In summary, these stats are very impressive, and we can conclude that Pouliot looks great.


Last edited by DAChampion: 06-17-2011 at 11:47 AM.
DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 12:33 PM
  #23
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Wrong.

1) Pouliot only played ~10 minutes per game of ES, even though opposing 2nd, 3rd, and 4th lines are on the ice for 30 ES minutes per game.
2) Pouliot was not just above average in the ESP/TOI compartment, he was NUMBER ONE on the entire team with great statistical significance.
3) In particular, Pouliot did better than any of his linemates, who presumably faced similar matchups that he faced.
4) The effect of the coach controlling match-ups is negated by the fact half the games are played on the road.

ETA: we can conclude that Pouliot looks great.
1) Explain how you got to that conclusion, and tell me what are you saying exactly. This really doesn't make any sense to me, so perhaps I missed something.

2) Yes he was. He was also on the bottom two lines. Darche had a great year too, doesn't mean we should start using him more.

3) Plekanec did not have the same match up as Pouliot. That's ridiculous.

4) This is only negated on faceoffs, and coaches have adapted themselves. Players tend to switch at the first opportunity to get the proper match ups on the ice. It isn't as negated as you think.

Good or decent, not great, and production is not the only important aspect of a forward.
I was pleased with his utilisation. Maintaining him in a smaller role, with less responsibilities was the smart thing to do.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 12:50 PM
  #24
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
ETA: Speaking as someone who has lectured on statistics, the fact Pouliot was number one in the ESP/TOI category does not prove he was in any way the best player in the category. What it shows is that with very high statistical significance, he was among the better players. "Luck" plays a role that could shift the 2nd best player to 5th place, et cetera, kind of like how a guy who is career 50.6% in faceoffs might have a season with 50.2% even if nothing changed -- statistical noise. In summary, these stats are very impressive, and we can conclude that Pouliot looks great.
Since you claim to have an expertise in statistics, you should also be fairly adept when it comes to evaluating their value objectively. Even if you ignore the quality of competition as a variable that impacts this set of statistics, there's no reason to draw a strong conclusion from them with regards to how worthy Pouliot is of receiving ice-time.

The analysis that you are offering of these statistics is based on the assumption that Pts/ES TOI stands alone as proof that Pouliot should have played more. The fact that you jumpt to the conclusion that this stat makes "the Habs staff and brass look incompetent" shows a distinct lack of perspective in your opinion.

I can't believe that I have to explain this on a hockey forum, but offensive production alone does not determine a player's worthiness of ice time in the NHL. Instead of drawing the assumption that Martin has it in for Pouliot, maybe we should objectively look at some reasons why Pouliot might not have received more ice time in all situations.

Pouliot leading all Habs forwards in minor penalties was certainly a factor in his reduced ice-time (much as it was for Eller throughout the year). Considering that Gio and Cammy combined for the same number of minors (26) in 1300+ more minutes played is indicative of how much of a hinderance Pouliot's discipline was this season. His lack of defensive reliability was another reason why he played a little less than other forwards. It's way too simplistic to ignore Pouliot's obvious flaws and assume it's the coach's vendetta which is responsible for his relatively low amount of ice-time.

These statistics support nothing more than the common sense assumption that Pouliot is a player capable of scoring points, but needs drastic improvement in other areas of his game to put it all together and deserve more ice-time.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2011, 01:47 PM
  #25
number 11
Registered User
 
number 11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,890
vCash: 500
i'd like to see a stat that measures how many times pouliot falls down per minute of icetime.

number 11 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 03:59 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.