Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

In Season 2017-18 Talk

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, raleighcaniac said:

Not drawing conclusions. Pointing out an early trend. 5 games into the season he's average/middle of the pack. Small sample size? Yes. Same for all keepers at this point but who are doing much better. If he was at the top of the list everyone would be crowing. Anyone denying he needs to crank it up? Tonight would be a good time to stand on his head and win one against a team better than us. Hope he does because it will be good for his confidence and the teams. And ticket sales? The numbers don't lie about the lack of local interest with declining sales year over year. Last in the league two years running. Maybe a hatrick in the works?

While there is truth to these thoughts, rc, I'm not sure why we have to immediately think negatively about this goalie? I mean after all, the team and this player are really just in a "feeling out" mode, are they not, and as others have reflected, the numbers you base this feeling upon are really too few to characterize the trend. Darling is obviously a huge goalie, and, as with any of these goalies, will have weaknesses, no? The team, and he have to learn what they are, thus to help him out to cover them. Besides, I think I have heard that several goals were him "left out to dry", in which case may be on the defense still not back in the groove. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darling may very well end up being all that he was heralded. I hope so because the teams in trouble if he isn't based on RF's $ commitment to him. My point has been when you look closely, he is at the moment posting very average numbers after 5 starts - no better than the Ward/Lack tandem last year. Based on his low shot total of 127 I think the D is performing well compared to other goalie shots against. As far as the feeling out mode goes this team doesn't have the luxury of time (read: points) to do so. I hope Darling carries the team tonight. I'm sure he's feeling the pressure to come up big now, as he should. Lets look again at his numbers after 10 games and reconvene.

Edited by raleighcaniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, raleighcaniac said:

no better than the Ward/Lack tandem last year.

Except that tandem was at or near the bottom of the league, so average is still a noticeable improvement. Certainly room for improvement, but calling him comparable to Ward/Lack from last year is undervaluing what he's done so far.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment Scott’s  save % is under 90 v Wards or Lacks last year and his GA avg is better at 2.57. Top stat is Ward bottom is Lacks.  

 

F4ADDCE9-63C5-4619-AB54-8955B54DEEA8.jpeg

8B68A9A0-3036-4F4D-9CE5-D7188E93E4AE.jpeg

Edited by raleighcaniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, raleighcaniac said:

His save % is less than Wards or Lacks and his GA avg is but a whisker better. Top stat is Ward bottom is Lacks.  

 

F4ADDCE9-63C5-4619-AB54-8955B54DEEA8.jpeg

8B68A9A0-3036-4F4D-9CE5-D7188E93E4AE.jpeg

 

I'm concerned.  I will give it 20 before making the final call with the bd58 stamp of approval or stamp of disapproval.   Stay tuned....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Building on (and transitioning from) what is being discussed in the Tampa Game day thread....I can't say I disagree with many of the thoughts, opinions, and frustrations being voiced. We all want the boys to be "in" games, and last night's result was incredibly deflating and left a sour taste in our collective mouths for sure. Would anyone feel any different though, say if Peters had waited to pull Darling with only 1:30m left and possession, and they only scored one empty net goal finishing things off at 3-1? It's still a loss and we are still 3-3-1. Honestly this first months schedule is brutal, and without knowing what the future would hold, looking at the opponents, just guessing, I would have said we would have been 3-4 at this point, which is what we basically are. Tampa is a top notch, built to win it all, Stanley cup contender. We are supposedly a semi-rebuilding team on the rise and cusp of a scrapping for a Wild Card berth. With that being said, the lack of goal scoring is not just an anomaly. It's been our bane for several years now, and has clearly not been addressed to the point to which it needs to be. I think much of this falls on expectation of gradual performance increases of several of our "home grown" players or lack thereof, on a year by year basis. Lapses in our touted defense don't help either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, sleekfeeder said:

Building on (and transitioning from) what is being discussed in the Tampa Game day thread....I can't say I disagree with many of the thoughts, opinions, and frustrations being voiced. We all want the boys to be "in" games, and last night's result was incredibly deflating and left a sour taste in our collective mouths for sure. Would anyone feel any different though, say if Peters had waited to pull Darling with only 1:30m left and possession, and they only scored one empty net goal finishing things off at 3-1? It's still a loss and we are still 3-3-1. Honestly this first months schedule is brutal, and without knowing what the future would hold, looking at the opponents, just guessing, I would have said we would have been 3-4 at this point, which is what we basically are. Tampa is a top notch, built to win it all, Stanley cup contender. We are supposedly a semi-rebuilding team on the rise and cusp of a scrapping for a Wild Card berth. With that being said, the lack of goal scoring is not just an anomaly. It's been our bane for several years now, and has clearly not been addressed to the point to which it needs to be. I think much of this falls on expectation of gradual performance increases of several of our "home grown" players or lack thereof, on a year by year basis. Lapses in our touted defense don't help either.

Well said, Sleek. The only small bone I'll pick is that I see the pulling of the keeper as poorly conceived and very poorly executed. If you're going to do it that early, it has to be a surprise, and there's nothing surprising about having your keeper on the bench for a face-off, one, and a face-off is a 50-50 puck. The team were very close to scoring at 5 v 5, and that gaping net was all the incentive TB needed to put the game away. If you give it another minute at 5 v 5, maybe you tie it up. If not, you've still got two minutes to try with the net empty--but even then, you DON'T take Darling off if you DON'T have possession in their end, while play is on, or the surprise element is gone. 

 

I have been and will continue to be one of BP's biggest supporters; he is crazy smart and has the team playing the way it needs to play to win. If any two of Aho, Lindholm, Rask, and TT can get going at the same time, the goal scoring wouldn't be an issue. But last night he made a really, really stupid, entirely unnecessary, poorly executed decision with Darling--and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he didn't get a dressing down from RF because of it.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an observation but does anyone else think we have gone back to the Maurice style of playing? And what I mean by that is dumping, chasing, and just playing off the boards. I know we can't charge in every possession but we are predictable with the boards or trying to split the defense...IMHO! 

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so though I'm sure opinions will vary.

 

Under Mo it seems to have been a primary means of gaining the O-zone, with slower forwards who were not always willing or able to forecheck hard to regain possession. 

 

Under BP and more trendy nowadays, it seems the D often tries to stand up speedy offensive players at the blue line trying to cause a turnover, so it doesn't leave you many other options but to get the puck deep and use your speed to regain possession in relentless forechecks. It seems to have worked just fine on a lot of occasions when puck placement is good and your forwards are on the same page.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Building on (and transitioning from) what is being discussed in the Tampa Game day thread....I can't say I disagree with many of the thoughts, opinions, and frustrations being voiced. We all want the boys to be "in" games, and last night's result was incredibly deflating and left a sour taste in our collective mouths for sure. Would anyone feel any different though, say if Peters had waited to pull Darling with only 1:30m left and possession, and they only scored one empty net goal finishing things off at 3-1? It's still a loss and we are still 3-3-1. Honestly this first months schedule is brutal, and without knowing what the future would hold, looking at the opponents, just guessing, I would have said we would have been 3-4 at this point, which is what we basically are. Tampa is a top notch, built to win it all, Stanley cup contender. We are supposedly a semi-rebuilding team on the rise and cusp of a scrapping for a Wild Card berth. With that being said, the lack of goal scoring is not just an anomaly. It's been our bane for several years now, and has clearly not been addressed to the point to which it needs to be. I think much of this falls on expectation of gradual performance increases of several of our "home grown" players or lack thereof, on a year by year basis. Lapses in our touted defense don't help either.

I'll take a different approach on this apparently than top shelf, and admittedly have not perused the game thread you mentioned( will do so after posting this), and several will likely crucify me for these thoughts? I was in attendance and suffered thru highs and lows in and after, but on the way home, mulled over the experience listening to the After Math as I did(BTW, please if anyone on here has any influence on programming of that show, please bring Maniscalco back).

 

My thoughts I'll sum up in that quite frankly, I thought The Canes were every bit as good as Tampa Bay, and if even 1 of the 3 posts our guys hit goes in, that's a different game, likely not needing the extreme of pulling our goalie so early? Yes, their 1 line is dominating but Stamkos/Kucherov, for the most part, were controlled most of the night except for that "cheap shot" goal at the very end( as an aside, I hope our guys recall that low life display when we meet them next,I sure would). So, in summary, I remain rem-like in optimism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, KJUNKANE said:

I'll take a different approach on this apparently than top shelf, and admittedly have not perused the game thread you mentioned( will do so after posting this), and several will likely crucify me for these thoughts? I was in attendance and suffered thru highs and lows in and after, but on the way home, mulled over the experience listening to the After Math as I did(BTW, please if anyone on here has any influence on programming of that show, please bring Maniscalco back).

 

My thoughts I'll sum up in that quite frankly, I thought The Canes were every bit as good as Tampa Bay, and if even 1 of the 3 posts our guys hit goes in, that's a different game, likely not needing the extreme of pulling our goalie so early? Yes, their 1 line is dominating but Stamkos/Kucherov, for the most part, were controlled most of the night except for that "cheap shot" goal at the very end( as an aside, I hope our guys recall that low life display when we meet them next,I sure would). So, in summary, I remain rem-like in optimism.

 

No crucifying, just a bit of a disagreement, Kjunkane.

 

But, but, we've heard that before.  And that's the problem with this team.  There are a lot of "almosts".  Somehow this team has to find a way to get that little extra to win these games.  They are having a hard time getting there.  The difference between 6th place and 10th place in conference is very slight.  They need to find that slight difference and use it.  Maybe a few less wiffs from Lindy.  Maybe a jolt of smelling salts to Rask.  I dunno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wxray1 said:

 

No crucifying, just a bit of a disagreement, Kjunkane.

 

But, but, we've heard that before.  And that's the problem with this team.  There are a lot of "almosts".  Somehow this team has to find a way to get that little extra to win these games.  They are having a hard time getting there.  The difference between 6th place and 10th place in conference is very slight.  They need to find that slight difference and use it.  Maybe a few less wiffs from Lindy.  Maybe a jolt of smelling salts to Rask.  I dunno.

"Disagreement" accepted, and maybe its just me and the start of a new season, but things just feel different to me wxray, like we're on the verge of breakout? In my opinion, surely the biggest disappointment is Rask etal being counted on for scoring, but where has Justin Faulk's "booming" shot gone from the point on PP, where we desperately need it? Together with his faux pas on defense, he's the biggest disappointment to me in this young season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, KJUNKANE said:

... but on the way home, mulled over the experience listening to the After Math as I did(BTW, please if anyone on here has any influence on programming of that show, please bring Maniscalco back).

 

 

One of the most excruciating Aftermath's in history, and yes the dude said that the zebra with the orange band is a linesman.

 

If that is the level of guy doing this show Canes Cold Ones wih Hag and the Big Guy actually has a chance of being successful.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KJUNKANE said:

"Disagreement" accepted, and maybe its just me and the start of a new season, but things just feel different to me wxray, like we're on the verge of breakout? In my opinion, surely the biggest disappointment is Rask etal being counted on for scoring, but where has Justin Faulk's "booming" shot gone from the point on PP, where we desperately need it? Together with his faux pas on defense, he's the biggest disappointment to me in this young season.

 

OK, I can buy that.  It will be different if the breakout starts now, and not December or January.  Yeah its early, but those few weeks of malaise have been what has bitten the team in the butt the last 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be awfully difficult and expensive to trade for a goal scorer. Could you imagine what RF would want in exchange for trading Skins? Thats what he's faced with as he looks for a goal scorer, if he is. Hannifins stock has probably gone down since the season started, same as Faulk so what are they worth in a trade?

 

I think we will end up moving forward with who we have and that some combo of BP stroking/berating will lead to more goals from Rask, Lindholm, Aho, TT and even Kruger and Nordstrom (all Euro's coincidentally, or not). I do wish we had more Canadians/Americans on the roster.

Edited by raleighcaniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't have a problem with pulling Mongo so early.  Every analysis I've seen on the subject shows that it pays off more often than not.  Here's a couple of excerpts:  

  • "For the pulled goalie strategy to be effective, a necessary condition is that the team pulling the goaltender has to score at a higher rate when playing 6-on-5 than 5-on-5 with both goaltenders. Combining road and home statistics, teams playing 6-on-5 score a goal every 8.5 minutes, which is way below the sample means of 28.6 and 26.2 minutes when playing 5-on-5 with both goaltenders for the road and home teams, respectively."
  • "What we can say is that during the 2015–16 NHL regular season and the first few nights of playoff action, teams that pulled their puckstopper for the final time with between 90 seconds and five minutes remaining in a one-goal game tied the contest approximately 16 percent of the time; those that waited until there was less than a minute and a half left squared the affair approximately 10 percent of the time."

Problem is, even though pulling the goalie early works more often than waiting, it still doesn't work very often. I've seen estimated increases in success rate of tying the game ranging from 3% to 6%.  But even though the success rate is increased, it still doesn't work more than 80% of the time. Not sure how often the other team scores an empty netter during those times it doesn't work, but I suspect it's often enough to leave a coach open to lots of criticism, even if the overall strategy is sound. 

 

The estimates I've seen on pulling the goalie early are that the strategy would earn a team an average of an extra 1-2 points a season.  I guess the question becomes: is an extra point or two over the course of a season worth watching some games go from a 2-1 loss to a 5-1 loss?

 

Oh, and on the timing: I see top's point about the risk of leaving the net empty for a faceoff.  On the other hand, it presented an opportunity for BP to get the exact 6 skaters he wanted out there on the ice which is hard to do if it's dependent on your having possession in your own zone first.  And even if the Bolts win the faceoff, it's in their zone and they probably usually win it back, which still leaves us the opportunity to backcheck with an extra man.  So from my perspective, there were factors that at least somewhat mitigated the risk.

some articles I found:

http://people.stat.sfu.ca/~tim/papers/goalie.pdf

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nhl-coaches-are-pulling-goalies-earlier-than-ever/

https://www.hockeywilderness.com/2016/10/4/13160374/nhl-pulled-goalie-patrick-roy-minnesota-wild-hockey-extra-skater-overtime

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/whens-ideal-time-pull-goalie/

 

 

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


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

Would be awfully difficult and expensive to trade for a goal scorer. Could you imagine what RF would want in exchange for trading Skins? Thats what he's faced with as he looks for a goal scorer, if he is. Hannifins stock has probably gone down since the season started, same as Faulk so what are they worth in a trade?

 

I think we will end up moving forward with who we have and that some combo of BP stroking/berating will lead to more goals from Rask, Lindholm, Aho, TT and even Kruger and Nordstrom (all Euro's coincidentally, or not). I do wish we had more Canadians/Americans on the roster.

 

You are right it would be expensive but....

we have exceptional organizational depth. One big trade wouldn’t put us back below 10th in top prospect pools.

If we move Hanifin, we have LV as the next call for a replacement.

Although we have a potential scorers in Roy, Gauthier, and Saarela in the system we don’t have anyone who looks like a top line center.  Aho, maybe.  

As long as we don’t move our 1st this year with a bunch of youngsters, Im good.  2019, fine.  

At least we aren’t Montreal or NYR with little depth and have many needs.  If one of them makes big trade, they will have very little coming out of the system that isnt a bottom 6 guy.  We can move Rask to soften the blow.

Share this post


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

Hannifins stock has probably gone down since the season started, same as Faulk so what are they worth in a trade?

almost posted this myself. Have to wonder at this point if even Crazy Joe would still be interested in either of them.

Share this post


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

I didn't have a problem with pulling Mongo so early.  Every analysis I've seen on the subject shows that it pays off more often than not. 

 

The only reason to do it that early is when you're down by two, analytics be damned. It is also an extremely case-specific decision, one too nuanced to count on analytics, which do not take those nuances into account, for direction. This is why some of us are saying BP should have trusted his gut instead.

 

His team was surging--that is the key point. We'd owned them in their end for the prior five minutes, and the dam was about to break. But the minute the Bolts saw our open net, they knew they'd won the game. This is the NHL, where guys can hit that thing from anywhere on the ice--not the intermission, with guys in sneakers trying to win $100. Another minute of 5 v 5 would have still given the Canes two minutes of 6v5, if they failed to tie 5v5.

Share this post


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

which is hard to do if it's dependent on your having possession in your own zone first.

How is that hard to do? You send out five and have the sixth guy ready when Darls hits the bench. Teams have been doing it for a hundred years. Literally.

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...