Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

2015 Off-Season talk

Recommended Posts

I wish they kept a time of possession stat like they do in football for time spent in the offensive zone with the puck.  That would be an informative thing to know.  I know there are games when it seems like the ice is tilted one way or the other.  It would be interesting to see how that actually measures out.

 

My understanding is that the primary reason Corsi and Fenwick stats were created was to serve as a proxy measurement for time of possession (which would be very hard to collect).  Of course, actual time would be much better, especially when looking at something ike a single game.  The longer the time span covered the better job the proxies are going to do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you need are 2 monkeys and 2 stopwatches.

Maybe "hard" is the wrong term.  But it would require additional staff dedicated to collecting it; I don't see the game statistician being able to easily collect possession time in addition to his other responsibilities.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd also love to see it.  A single game is too short a sample size to put too much stock in something like Corsi stats. But the NHL won't even pick up the CapGeeks site (Bettman says he doesn't think fans are interested enough to justify what, a couple of programmers?)  I can't see them adding the two monkeys to every single NHL game played in order to satisfy a few of us hard core fans. 

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake, I know I was being a bit of a smart aleck with my comment, but I would love to see that stat. 

 

I guess the monkeys will have to stay unemployed.

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Non statistically (well actually the stats below do bear it out) and mostly observationally, we have had times where it seems the ice is tilted strongly in our favor, but we generate few quality chances out of it. Historically our making back up goalies look good on a regular basis comes to mind. Possesion is important of course, but the really good teams take those last two steps of creating good chances and burying those chances too. Watching the teams left in the playoffs, especially Anaheim, Chicago and Tampa, they generate quality chances in bunches, and all have guys who finish.

 

I guess it is said that Corsi and others are proxies for chances per game, but not exactly. I note that the Canes list "scoring chances" in their intermission stats, (I think defined roughly as shots from inside the tops of the faceoff circles), but I don't know if anyone formally lists scoring chances per game as a season long thing. NHL.com doesn't list that.

 

But I did find a kind of interesting back door way at it, that they do list. Winning percentage when outshot. Ironically over half the league has a winning record when outshot.

 

But also, here is the list of current playoff teams and their ranking out of 30 in winning % outshot (regular season):

 

NYR #2, Anaheim #3, Tampa #5, Chicago #7.

 

I know, I know, goalie play, and tendancy to force low % shots on defense, clouds the waters, but it does point out that just generating shots on net is not enough. The eyeball test suggest that a good part of this is that those teams generate better chances even if there are fewer of them.

 

So possession leads to shots, which leads to goals. But not in equal measure. We finished last year #12 in shots per game, yet #27 in goals per game. And check this out, we were #3 in shots against per game, yet #18 in goals against per game.

 

Yes, we had sieves in net in October, but still, that's is not all on the goalies, who on balance played pretty well over most of the season.

 

So it would seem that the basic framework is there, limiting shots and getting more ourselves, but the execution in making those qualltiy chances and then finishing them was off the mark.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, nothing against the fancy stats and all, but I attend lots of games and it only takes two eyeballs to understand how we have been so miserable retaining the puck and creating scoring chances.  Prior to Peters arriving, and for the better part of 5 years previously -

 

1.) Take an entire shift to get possession of the puck as we chase it in the defensive zone along the boards and on opponents cycles

 

2)  Finally get it out of our own zone

 

3)  Dump into offensive zone, giving up possession we just gained

 

4)  Go for line change

 

5   Repeat 1-5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but last year as mentioned we were #12 in shots per game, yet #27 in goals per game. And we were #3 in shots against per game, yet #18 in goals against per game.

 

So I guess we were better under Peters at some of that, but could not accomplish the final piece of the quality chance "for" vs. the quality chance against. It is harder to get at that statisically best I can tell. But all the 1-2 losses we had for a while there might speak to it a little.

 

The eyeball test does point it out also. The number of times we pressed the play offensively, but almost exclusively to the outside. We got off lots of shots from the far wings and some from the points, but far less in the high qualtiy areas that many point out we seem to fear to go. So many games where we would outshoot the Tampas of the world only to have them beat us 4-2 on better quality chances and finish.

 

We do seem to give up less odd man breaks than we used to and the structure seems better for sure. There is also the fact that we played the front third of the seaon w/out Jordan, the first month with no goalies, and the back portion without Sekera, but that explains the defensive disparity more than the lack of offense (though Sekera was very good at making the play to get the puck out and up, so there is that).Still, it seems to point out a need for more skill to hang on the framework Peters has laid.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, nothing against the fancy stats and all, but I attend lots of games and it only takes two eyeballs to understand how we have been so miserable retaining the puck and creating scoring chances.  Prior to Peters arriving, and for the better part of 5 years previously -

 

1.) Take an entire shift to get possession of the puck as we chase it in the defensive zone along the boards and on opponents cycles

 

2)  Finally get it out of our own zone

 

3)  Dump into offensive zone, giving up possession we just gained

 

4)  Go for line change

 

5   Repeat 1-5

 

*Raises hand*

Seen it time and time again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A NHL-caliber defense would help.

 

But, sigh, I've been saying that for 6 years now.

 

And all I get are the recycles, washed up old guys, and AHL wanna-be's.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A NHL-caliber defense would help.

 

But, sigh, I've been saying that for 6 years now.

 

And all I get are the recycles, washed up old guys, and AHL wanna-be's.

 

Despite being #27 in the league in goals for, I do agree. It all starts in the back end with guys who can defend, get the puck and move it out and up. Also, our defense is thin on ice and on paper. The offense is at least in theory a bit better on paper, and we have very reasonable expectations for Rask and Lindholm. So while we need help on both sides, the defense must get help this year or we might as well blow it up.

 

I know, SD, I was a bit relentless on bemoaning the loss of Sekera, but despite Faulk's breakout, Sekera still was probably our overall best dman, or at least close to it. Not that Faulk-Sekera was the best top pairing in the NHL, but that it would have been easier to add a guy ot that pair, than adding to just Faulk. Haisney brings what he brings and as a bottom 3 type guy he is solid, but we are missing two guys in the top 3 on defense now.

 

I get it, he wasn't going to re-sign at any kind of distanly reasonble price, and we got a pretty nice return considering, but it does leave the job of at least attempting to replace him as job 1. I will say while it is very unlikely, how cool would it be to just get Sekera back? Play the rental game like a champ. Start w/ Sekera, give him up for LA's #1 and McKeown, then just sign him back.

 

There are some signs of encouraging play from some prospects, but for next year? While counting on E and J and Skinner to bounce back and get expected gains from Rask and Lindholm isn't terribly encouraging, where does one even look for that from the current crop of defenseman outside of Faulk and Hainsey? Murphy? Maybe. Pesce? Maybe at the start of the learning curve..

 

Unless we are to really just ride this year out GMRF simply must do something to help the blueline this year. Does that push him to reach for Werenski or Provorov if Hanifin isn't there, or is? I don't know. Won't help that much this year anyway. In an ideal world he finds a guy in UFA, but that will be tough. If ever there was a time to overpay for the right guy on defense it would be now, if he could help for mulitple years, as Fluery, and other prospects grow up.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A NHL-caliber defense would help.

 

But, sigh, I've been saying that for 6 years now.

 

And all I get are the recycles, washed up old guys, and AHL wanna-be's.

Sums up how I have felt for years. Just once I would like to see us concentrate on defense and build/have an above average defense (we usually field a below average defense).

Also, would like to see us become a physical team.

I've been saying we are soft, and that we consistently ignore/undervalue defense for years. I think that was JR's philosophy/fault. Just have warm bodies on defense and concentrate on skilled forwards and hope for great goalie play. Try winning now by giving away draft picks, minimizing the importance of having depth players to fill roles.

Hopefully those days are over and we can start changing the identity and culture of this struggling franchise.

Btw Coastal, nice summary of what is plain to see on a nightly basis.

Also, our high shot totals were a joke. There were so many unscreened perimeter shots and low percentage plays. Again, anyone with eyeballs could see that we didn't generate quality scoring chances with any consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, eyeballs work real well if your using them.

 

Might as well shoot the puck, low percentage shot be damned, because waiting for somebody with enough ballsiness to park in front of the net for a screen is just way too much to ask for.

 

The low-quality shots are a great index to no ballsiness in front of the net.

 

We need players with ballsiness. 

 

Ballsiness is officially a word now.

 

RF to Prospect at the Draft Combine -- "Son, do you have ballsiness.....cause we are looking for ballsiness"

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like there are a few ways to get quality shots.

 

Netfront presence is a constant theme of all coaches in the NHL. Skill and playmaking is another, speed and breakouts is another, and cycling mastery with an eventual play to the net is yet another. Doesn't seem that we've been great at any of those in a while. We don't generate a ton of odd man rushes, we are easily pushed to the periphery in the zone, where we then mostly fail at creating a grade A chance. Of course coaches are always on about shooting the puck and dirty goals, but as mentioned that generally works only with a net front presence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Netfront presence is a constant theme of all coaches because it takes a player with ballsiness to get there.  Who qualifies on our team?

 

Nobody.

 

Skinner tried to live there for a while and got his block knocked off to the point he's a girly man on skates now.

 

Jordan Staal tries to be a force there but he has hands of stone and rarely finishes the chances he has when he is there anyway.

 

How many tip in goals or goals on rebounds do we generate with "all" those shots?

 

Not many.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also of note, our team shooting percentage (number of shots that result in goals) is 29th in the league at 7.25%.  The league average is 9%, and not surprising, of the teams that averaged 9% or better, 13 of 16 made the playoffs.

 

So, the shots for stat is really useless as an indicator of anything, other than a team shoots a lot.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do the Canes rank in "Goalies hit with the puck in the jersey logo"?

 

I'm guessing #1.

 

 

 

Seriously, most of those shots come from the perimeter with nobody in the area of the goal. NHL goalies stop most of what they see.  You have to get in the crease and muck it up.  Of course, we don't have a mucker (a mucker is a player with ballsiness).

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a comparison, here is Tampa Bay, the team with the highest shooting percentage, and the Canes, the team with one of the lowest shooting percentages.  Not hard to see the difference.

 

0Hhcye.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. Shrink: "What do you see in these shot charts?"

 

Wxray: "Doc, for Tampa I see a large creature with huge mandibles, ready to bite someone's head off.  For the Canes, I see two people playing badminton."

 

Dr. Shrink: "I was afraid of that.  That condition leads to severe depression."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great info coastal.   I'm going to have to check that out.

 

 

I marked a star on the Canes one where Semin was standing, picking his nose while all the shots were taken.

 

10qjsrn.jpg

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What really sucks is that the net-front presence thing was a theme of the coaches as the season went on and nothing really changed.

That's worrisome.

It was obvious to anyone who knows anything about hockey, and we still didn't have the ballsiness to get it done.

Things have to change, but generally speaking, people/players don't change. Maybe some of the young guys who are still growing/getting stronger, but still...

When the only guy willing to go to the net is not only the smallest player on your team, but the entire NHL, something is seriously f.....messed up. Gerbe tries like hell but physics take over and he's rendered ineffective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...