Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

In Season 2017-18 Talk

Recommended Posts

I get to watch the 4-5 minute video highlights, and postgame  interviews. Last nights post game NEVER sounded so bleak listening to JWilly then Peters. My takeaway with Peters is he is no way no how in any agreement with the former GM and none of the 3 current Asst GMs he mentioned. Just not on the same page. Hard to see how he sticks around. New GM will want his own guy just like RF did. I know BPs made questionable moves with his lineup but there is a much bigger issue: he was given no goaltending by RF. Most important position in the game. Getting a 1C means nothing without a proven starting keeper. Can’t believe how many holes need filling in this lineup. Wow. Remember how Cujo was brought in a year or two ago to help with goaltending then quietly just disappeared? There’s an organizational goaltending story to be told there. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is something I have been wondering about since the sale. How bad were things in Hartford before they moved? Missing playoffs, low fan turnout? I keep thinking Houston Whalers. Did the league assure fans that the Whalers wouldn't move? I may be off base but this team really has done nothing of substance since 06, except really POing the fan base.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, top-shelf-1 said:

... What we don't know is what he was being asked to give up. ... 

 

I didn't care for Francis' not getting anything done either but in the end, this is one of the important facts that can't be ignored. The other would be which players Francis was and was not willing to part with. 

 

For some reason, some of us automatically assumed that the same deals held true across the board for every GM, that every GM was aware what the others were up to and that everyone had a shot at acquiring them.

 

In an Elliotte Friedman article, who interviewed Dundon, a few comments stood out: 

 

Quote

Dundon’s desire to do something impactful could be exploited. Dealing with other managers is like swimming with sharks. They sense your needs and squeeze you.

 

I think it would be naïve to think that there are no cut throat GMs out there totally aware of your position and needs.

 

Quote

He said the team was considering adding before a home-heavy stretch in February, but it didn’t go well. Therefore both he and Francis decided it wasn’t worth what it would take to acquire more at the end. The cost, in terms of Carolina’s best young players/prospects, was too great.

 

No mention of 2nd, 3rd or conditional draft picks. It's up to everyone's interpretation but I could think of a few names that I would not part with based on what was on the trade block. I know some were willing to accept even a bad or less than perfect deal for the sake of moving someone but in this case, if demands were really that exploitive, I'm totally ok with Francis staying put.

 

Quote

... the owner confirmed what we all suspected — that while both agreed the team needed improvements, they disagreed on the way to get there.

 

To me, that implies that TD was/is willing to take higher risks than RF but I also couldn't shake the image of a rich, overly excited new owner telling Francis "let's go for it, ...let's do it, ... let's do it!!", with little to no idea what he could be getting himself into or is doing to the team in the long run.
 
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The take I have on Dundon is 1) he wants the organizational structure he ultimately puts together to be an asset to the GM, and he expects the GM to be open to that input, rather than being the funnel for all hockey decisions (as Francis was), and 2) his vision is that he won't be, or need to be, directly involved in every decision if his organizational structure is working to his vision.

 

I'm not sure why number 1 would be a poor decision, as I understand things a good many teams have a similar structure.  But, the difference is many, or even most GM's don't report directly to the owner.  That's probably a starter for the "meddling owner" comments.  I'll admit when I read number 2 that's something that will just have to play out but it does make me go uh oh.

 

I don't know how to fix this, I really haven't started even thinking about it honestly.  I'm still numb. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whaler, my recollection is that Dundon indicated he agreed (or atleast didn't disagree) with the decisions Francis made.  The problem for Dundon is that he and Francis have entirely different styles. Based on the article with the quotes about the Eagles, Dundon wants an analytics based system where the analytics staff is giving a green (go for it), red (don't go for it), or a yellow (your call/roll the dice) zone for decisions. Ron Francis doesn't strike me as the type to be that much of a collaborative decision maker. To me this is more a less leadership by committee, effective at limiting crazy stupid ideas but runs the risk of being too timid and slow. Having the new GM report directly to him is Dundon's way of saying the new GM is only accountable to him alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know what analytics has done for us to date because thus far all we've gotten that the fans can see is the 3 minute goalie pull. I'm highly skeptical staring at the numbers can provide results in a game with so many unaccountable variables. Especially when the only analytical thing we can see as fans fails so utterly horribly.

 

I am petrified at the thought of a manager whose staring at the numbers rather then using his eyeballs.

 

I am likely taking it entirely too literally but he seems all in on the stats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legend, I would hope the analytics would be used to evaluate decisions such as the acquisition of players and contract size length. We are currently carrying 3 contracts that were clearly overpays that may have been prevented by an analytical approach. We may have not even started the HWSNBN experiment and definitely not gone with such a big contract if it wasn't for JR's eyeball test. Analytics might have also led to shorter term/lower value deals to Darling and Rask which many thought were good moves at the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, legend-1 said:

I am petrified at the thought of a manager whose staring at the numbers rather then using his eyeballs.

 

Analytics is like painting by numbers. You get a painting but it isn't a Monet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about the goalie pull is that pulling forces an outcome, forcing a goal to occur either way. The only downside to pulling at the correct, early time, is that the likely outcome happens earlier, and then the correct move is to pull again, which can lead to an emotionally worse outcome, ie losing 6-3 instead of 5-3. It looks worse and feels worse, but the game was going to be lost either way. The other thing is that when the goalies is pulled too late and we have a flurry of chances, but time runs out, it feels like "hey they made a good run at it" and it doesn't have the same emotional impact either. But I think, they waited too long, another minute of that offensive flurry and maybe we win. Also, the chance of scoring 5/5 in 3 minutes is very very low. The comparisons are false, which creates a perfect environment for bias. But to make it worse, when the coach makes the right, but not traditional call and it fails, rather than thinking, "well we were going to lose that game anyway", we blame the coach. This is why coaches wait. They don't want to be blamed for the inevitable loss so they just follow the standard plan. The idea of science is mainly to try to remove bias, and ideally good analytics too. 

 

It's kind of like going for it on 4th down. There are many situations where it is clearly the right call, but the coach doesn't get as much heat if he just punts.

 

This is not to discount that hockey is fluid and has many variables and some stats are better than others. 

 

To me the main thing is to focus on generating high quality chances and limiting them. Our players and systems need to do that. Just looking at shots does not work, as we have proven for years now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal view of the coaching approach to goalie pull, OT player selection and Shootout choices is they have all been hap-hazard and not taken serious enough.

 

A PRIMARY focus should be all the points on-the-line that accumulate all season.  Nothing can be left to error.

 

Year-after-year this team bleeds points in what has become a very important process to meet year-end goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the group the creates detailed stats collects lots of specific data that is not otherwise collected. Things like high quality scoring chances created by player X or Team Y rather than just SOG or shots attempted. I think there is a big difference between "advanced stats" that try to use shots and shot suppression (low quality high volume data) as surrogates and having someone watching every game, rewinding, watching again, and measuring things that really matter.  I think they could be much more useful than corsi, etc.

 

I think we all intuitively know that the dangerous players create opportunities. If it were all about system then low talent teams would win the cup. The elite level guy also creates ice for good but not great players. 

 

It's also a factor in drafting. I recall a scout going on and on about Clayton Keller, and how he was always creating chances for his team. Sure enough he's a 19 y.o. on pace for 65 points on a bad team. It could go beyond just who to pick, but who is worth moving parts to move up and pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manwolf said:

My personal view of the coaching approach to goalie pull, OT player selection and Shootout choices is they have all been hap-hazard and not taken serious enough.

 

A PRIMARY focus should be all the points on-the-line that accumulate all season.  Nothing can be left to error.

 

Year-after-year this team bleeds points in what has become a very important process to meet year-end goals.

Although I completely agree with your last 2 paragraphs here, Manwolf, the sentiment that the "choices have all been haphazard and not taken serious enough" is a little over the top and I'd like to submit something a bit different from that for you to ponder.

 

There's no question that each of us has our favorites and that's the way it should be. We normally see our favorite(s) within the framework of 5 players and the goalie, and any result of their actions are +/- due to that grouping. Now, change that to 6 players, no goalie or 3 on 3, and there are different dynamics? And I mainly want to focus on that play of 3 on 3, where much criticism has been heaped on Peters for his "bone headed" choices, I admit sometimes by me, and I'd like to submit that just because someone like Skinner is one of our better snipers in 5 on 5, his defensive liability is a realistic venerability when you shift to overtime. Not only that, but to me there are so many dynamic factors pre and during a game, that I don't think any one of us could possibly realistically decide who should be playing in that overtime period? What I'm referring to are factors like who may be nursing an injury, who is having a good game, who might have some viral illness or who might have incurred an in game limitation? Now granted, scheming for those overtime periods and practicing them can optimize the personnel, but again that is a "static" plan, which could not possibly anticipate those that might have to be made "on the fly" if you will by how a game unfolds.

 

Thus, I submit that how haphazard or serious enough these things are taken depends on one's view of Peters, which during this low period of the season, is pretty negative.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KJUNKANE said:

Thus, I submit that how haphazard or serious enough these things are taken depends on one's view of Peters, which during this low period of the season, is pretty negative. 

This one's view is formed and one to which I'm entitled.  haphazard it is.

 

I've seen obvious combinations of slow or defensively challenged players out there together (cough .. Ryan, Skinner..cough) and if I'm not mistaken Faulk as the sole defender out there with them.  My thought is "we're done" and sure enough we are shortly afterward.

 

ok, maybe it is partly planned, like when they start defensively. Two defenders and Jordan, or Lindholm.  Not a way to start 3v3 IMO (on your heels).  Playing not to lose is a losing plan.

 

I don't believe he takes the selection of shootout seriously either.  More a roll of the dice.  He's not using STATS if you see Skinner out there.

 

The other team has injuries, too, btw.

Edited by Manwolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, legend-1 said:

I'd love to know what analytics has done for us to date because thus far all we've gotten that the fans can see is the 3 minute goalie pull. I'm highly skeptical staring at the numbers can provide results in a game with so many unaccountable variables. Especially when the only analytical thing we can see as fans fails so utterly horribly.

 

I am petrified at the thought of a manager whose staring at the numbers rather then using his eyeballs.

 

I am likely taking it entirely too literally but he seems all in on the stats. 

 

I don't have the citation, but Dundon clarified that the Canes won't be making decisions based solely on analytics.  I'm paraphrasing, but my take was that the Canes would use them in conjunction with "regular hockey concepts" (my term, not his), to confirm, debunk, explore, etc..

 

To add to rem's thoughts on the early goalie pull; although analysis has shown it to be the most effective strategy to tie a game, unfortunately the "most effective" is still mostly not effective.  And when it isn't effective it usually stands out with the opposition scoring an empty netter.  And since it runs counter to traditional hockey sensibility, it leaves the coach open to a bunch of criticism.  The 2 times BP pulled the goalie with 3 minutes left, it didn't work and the opposition scored an empty netter, both times fairly quickly.  But there was a third time he pulled our goalie early, with something like 2:30 left.  Canes put on some great pressure and eventually tied it up 1:10 later, a clear success.  That instance is an example of why you do it, even if it isn't going to work most of the time, but no one seems to remember it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 6:06 PM, winger52 said:

Here is something I have been wondering about since the sale. How bad were things in Hartford before they moved? Missing playoffs, low fan turnout? I keep thinking Houston Whalers. Did the league assure fans that the Whalers wouldn't move? I may be off base but this team really has done nothing of substance since 06, except really POing the fan base.

 

Thanks

Even though the Panthers have made more appearances in the playoffs than us over the last 9 years, they really haven't made much of anything and they haven't moved... yet.

If not for the Canes winning the Stanley Cup in 2006, I think this would have already happened.

As far as BP and his decisions, I wonder if some of his decisions for OT, goalie, etc..... was more of a middle finger to GMRF than bad coaching.

 

Edited by hopper915

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Manwolf said:

This one's view is formed and one to which I'm entitled.  haphazard it is.

 

I've seen obvious combinations of slow or defensively challenged players out there together (cough .. Ryan, Skinner..cough) and if I'm not mistaken Faulk as the sole defender out there with them.  My thought is "we're done" and sure enough we are shortly afterward.

 

ok, maybe it is partly planned, like when they start defensively. Two defenders and Jordan, or Lindholm.  Not a way to start 3v3 IMO (on your heels).  Playing not to lose is a losing plan.

 

I don't believe he takes the selection of shootout seriously either.  More a roll of the dice.  He's not using STATS if you see Skinner out there.

 

The other team has injuries, too, btw.

And that's as it should be Manwolf, however as good or bad as we see Bill Peters, I believe him to be cerebral,and base that on Ron Francis early impression of his presentation when he was being considered for the HC position. Now Francis was relieved of his position for cause, but obviously not because of his hockey ignorance, and further RF has a damn sight more hockey sense than either of us I believe? Thus, I must conclude that more than likely BP isn't "haphazard" in his approach, unless he lost that ability in the 3+ years he's been our coach.

 

That the other team has injuries is superflous really to my discussion, as all I was really attempting to do is offer what I believe is an explanation to the choice(s) on who is chosen for either overtime 3on3 or shootout, which obviously runs contrary to your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LakeLivin said:

The 2 times BP pulled the goalie with 3 minutes left, it didn't work and the opposition scored an empty netter, both times fairly quickly.  But there was a third time he pulled our goalie early, with something like 2:30 left.  Canes put on some great pressure and eventually tied it up 1:10 later, a clear success.  That instance is an example of why you do it, even if it isn't going to work most of the time, but no one seems to remember it.  

 

Yeah, I couldn't believe that happened, and they actually tied it.  I'm not sure the strategy is worth looking like a jackarse when it doesn't work.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

I don't have the citation, but Dundon clarified that the Canes won't be making decisions based solely on analytics.  I'm paraphrasing, but my take was that the Canes would use them in conjunction with "regular hockey concepts" (my term, not his), to confirm, debunk, explore, etc..

 

 

The analytical discussion has me a little fidgety. Analytics has it's place but overuse can lead to paralysis. I hear the above Lake but I also heard that TD wants to be the best in the NHL at using analytics. This tells me that he will be using them heavily in the decision processes. Analytics in Hockey is 100 times more difficult to process than let's say baseball which is pretty cut and dry. The NHL isn't Billy Beane looking at ERA's B A's, OBP, Slugging Percentage, etc The NHL.is open to interpretation of the analytics and you could get five different opinions from 5 guys in a room reviewing the same stats. Then you also have the scenario where player X has great stats in coach Y's system but doesn't gell with coach Z's system.  I'm all for the use of analytics to a degree but just hope that TD isn't trying to find a pot of gold in their use and get's totally mesmerized with their use.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, coastal_caniac said:

 

Yeah, I couldn't believe that happened, and they actually tied it.  I'm not sure the strategy is worth looking like a jackarse when it doesn't work.  

 

Given his current status, wanna bet if Bill Peters is wondering the same thing? :P

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, slapshot02 said:

The analytical discussion has me a little fidgety. Analytics has it's place but overuse can lead to paralysis. I hear the above Lake but I also heard that TD wants to be the best in the NHL at using analytics. This tells me that he will be using them heavily in the decision processes. Analytics in Hockey is 100 times more difficult to process than let's say baseball which is pretty cut and dry. The NHL isn't Billy Beane looking at ERA's B A's, OBP, Slugging Percentage, etc The NHL.is open to interpretation of the analytics and you could get five different opinions from 5 guys in a room reviewing the same stats. Then you also have the scenario where player X has great stats in coach Y's system but doesn't gell with coach Z's system.  I'm all for the use of analytics to a degree but just hope that TD isn't trying to find a pot of gold in their use and get's totally mesmerized with their use.

 

I hear ya, and don't disagree with your concerns.  Two things lessen them for me. 

  1. Based on everything I've seen so far, TD is one of the last people I worry about succumbing to analysis paralysis. (think "lower bowl" or "Ron Francis", lol)
  2. He repeatedly talks about putting together a team approach to facilitate decisions, something that doesn't fit in with my idea of an autocrat

 

Here's an excerpt from his latest interview that I think touches on how he wants to use analytics.  I highlighted some of the pieces that jump out at me.

 

TD: I think that we have to find a way to blend the hockey traditional ability to evaluate talent and construct a roster with sort of an institutionalized process that makes sure we have all the information [analytics] and structure and accountability for everyone in the organization. If you can combine really talented people with great resources [state of the art analytics], accountability and an ability to have multiple opinions and also check your opinions or create new ideas based on information that’s available, and that hopefully gives you the best outcome.

 

I could be wrong, but the more I hear about Dundon's philosophy and direction, the better I feel about the Canes future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hopper915 said:

 

As far as BP and his decisions, I wonder if some of his decisions for OT, goalie, etc..... was more of a middle finger to GMRF than bad coaching.

 

 

 Then he definitely needs to be fired. Personal feelings to the detriment of the team. Pack you stuff and grab you passport. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DevildogKodi said:

Whaler, my recollection is that Dundon indicated he agreed (or atleast didn't disagree) with the decisions Francis made.  The problem for Dundon is that he and Francis have entirely different styles. Based on the article with the quotes about the Eagles, Dundon wants an analytics based system where the analytics staff is giving a green (go for it), red (don't go for it), or a yellow (your call/roll the dice) zone for decisions. Ron Francis doesn't strike me as the type to be that much of a collaborative decision maker. To me this is more a less leadership by committee, effective at limiting crazy stupid ideas but runs the risk of being too timid and slow. Having the new GM report directly to him is Dundon's way of saying the new GM is only accountable to him alone.

 

Thanks, I saw that. I had a "wait,...what?" moment and had to read it twice trying to figure out where TD was going with that. I don't know, between some Twitter comments and Maclean and Kypreos sharing some opinions on nhl.com a few days ago, I'm not really left with a hand wringing, confidence inspiring impression about him and the club's future. Guess I have to wait and see. I hope I'm totally wrong with my initial impression and his odd business model sets the standard for the rest of the league but man, I sure hope his "meddling" doesn't turn into another Charles Wang-type cluster gaggle. He was all about business and hands on too and knew little about the sport.    

 

 

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...