Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
AWACSooner

Offseason Talk 2019

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, LakeLivin said:

Yeah, outside of Cff I don't think you'd find many people that think the AHL is a better league talent wise than the KHL.

 

If the AHL offered the K a match between both leagues' champs, K officials would laugh it off, but the upshot would be same: They'd refuse. The AHL, NCAA and quite possibly the Memorial Cup champs would embarrass the K's best team, because you can count the number of NHL-grade Russian keepers currently in this league on one hand three fingers. 

 

Share this post


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

Looks like we just got an honorable mention for best NHL defense. https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1830759

It's solid to be named in the top 9, and more than good enough. But, I'd point out two things. 1. I think they are factoring in the "bad" part of the year, where the goaltending hadn't gelled yet. It would be interesting to see the numbers for the last 4 months. 2. We picked up Gardiner, generally considered and upgrade over DeHaan, while Nashville and some others lost key guys. I'd bet that our current group moves up into the top 5. But then, I'm an optimist this time of year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read on Canes Corner where Rod was going to be at Backyard Bistro tomorrow night for those who can attend. Wish I could but long drive for us. Have to save up stamina for the season.

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at some basic analysis, one can really see how the committee really does keep working to improve this team based on analytics.  WARNING: longer, mildly analytic post to follow:

 

Ironically, both things that have plagued this team in recent years, surprisingly continued last year, at least taken as a whole year. The numbers are much better in the second half which does skew things a little, but not fully. That is, this team has been a bit of an analytics outlier. For at least a few seasons we've generated tons of shots, and limited shots against, yet remained bad at scoring goals and limiting goals*. We improved this in the back half of the year, but for the whole year, maybe better, but still not great. *Better goaltending and a strong back half, combined with allowing fewer shots overall, masked this, and we ended up being #7 in goals allowed, so we did ok in the end. But the issue of high quality chances is still something the committee looked at, and made some moves to fix.

 

1. The quality of chances allowed remains high, even though total shots remains low. Apparently we remained one of the worst at allowing quality chances. We limited shots (#4 best in shots against), but gave up "expected goals" or high danger chances at a high level. This means the goaltending, especially late was even better than it actually looked on paper. I've mentioned this in another post, but according to the article in the Athletic, DeHaan was the worst at allowing high danger shots, and Faulk was next.

 

Fix: Eventually switching DeHaan for Gardiner, may remove a few hits, but apparently Gardiner is actually pretty good overall at limiting high danger chances. Despite some public call outs for gaffes, his actual overall numbers are good. If we move Faulk out, then we've switched out our two worst D zone players based on this metric.

 

2. Shooting percentage. So the story goes, we generate a ton of shots, but don't make many. Anyone watching this team more than one year knows that's true. Again, the back half of the year improved this already, but for the year, we were #26 in shooting percentage. Even last year's glory contained a lot of past problems. Nino lead the team in shooting percentage at 13.6%, but he came over for the resurgence part of the year. TT's 12.6% was tops for full season players. The average shooting percentage for NHL forwards is 10.8%. The Canes only had three players (100 shots min) significantly over average: Nino, Aho, and TT (13.6, 12.3, and 12.6%). Ferland and Svech were right on the average at 10.9% and 10.6%. Martinook just a shade off average, and Williams, Foegele, Staal all in the 9% range, McGinn 8%, and Walmark 7.6%. 

 

One more perspective. For players with at least 100 shots last year, there were 100 players with shooting percentages higher than TT and Aho, our top full year guys. 

 

I would really like to see these numbers after Jan 1, but I don't know where to find them. I'm sure we were better as we definitely scored more goals.

 

The analytic people have said the Canes have just been unlucky, but we know better. The combination of players and system worked to create low danger shots for, and high danger shots against, whilst lowering both totals. Peters went off to Calgary with his system and they were #3 in the league in shooting percentage. So, maybe more the players than the system, or at least how our players were used in the system.

 

Fix: Anyways, the point is that we went out and traded for and signed two forwards. Dzingel and Haula. Dzingle's shooting percentage has been 16% or better for two straight seasons (157 games and 295 shots). This automatically makes him by far our best. Haula's shooting percentage was 16.6% his last full season, and averaged 12.7% the two previous years (only Nino was better than 12.7% last year). 

 

I happen to think that Svech will bump his up, and IMO so will Foegele. Wallmark was pretty much low man, so one thinks coming off of his rookie campaign he can up his, and Staal was actually more than 2% off his career average last year. I would actually predict that Aho will up his % as well. 

 

Interesting note in the Necas - Gauthier competition: Gauthier is the sniper. His AHL shooting % last year was 16.1% on 167 shots. Necas not shabby at 13.1% 115 shots. Necas is a pass first, second, and third guy. He is likely to up other guy's shooting %. (Of course vs AHL goaltending, but these guys can also elevate their games as they progress, so who knows, but there is upside for both, but on shooting, especially Gauthier, who also potted an insane number of goals in Juniors). 

 

 

I think this is interesting and encouraging. We have long had a team that generates more shots and limits more shots than anyone. Last year we were #1 in shot differential. If we can continue to lower the quality of shots allowed, and add sniping skill on the shots for, we can be pretty dominant.  On top of reasonable expectations for improvements (Svech, Foegele, Staal, Wallmark), we have added two guys who's last two seasons would have put them very much at the top of last year's group in sniping, and are switching out D men that should improve the quality of shots against, and by extension save %. 

 

These should be very positive predictors for the upcoming year IMO. 

 

We have likely also improved the PP with Haula, Dzingle, and especially Gardiner, and possibly Necas or even Goat. 

 

If this team improves shooting %, quality of shots against, and the PP? Look out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people are forgetting that Andrei  Svechnikov  only 2 years ago was in  the  USHL  hockey program  and not with team usa  getting the best training ,  and then a year from that make a giant leap to the OHL   which is the tougher of the CHL  leagues  to score in  because teams are more prepared for defensive  measures .  To then get drafted   play a full year  in the  NHL   the best damn league in the world   and come in his first year and put up really decent points .    Svechnikov is special for a reason and i think a ton of people are going to see that first hand  if they didnt know it already .   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Canesfanforever said:

I think a lot of people are forgetting that Andrei  Svechnikov  only 2 years ago was in  the  USHL  hockey program  and not with team usa  getting the best training ,  and then a year from that make a giant leap to the OHL   which is the tougher of the CHL  leagues  to score in  because teams are more prepared for defensive  measures .  To then get drafted   play a full year  in the  NHL   the best damn league in the world   and come in his first year and put up really decent points .    Svechnikov is special for a reason and i think a ton of people are going to see that first hand  if they didnt know it already .   

 

 

Okay Cff, I'll be the 1st to bite. What is exactly your point here as you've lost me in your train of thought? Is this a response to remkin's post or just an off the cuff comment, as I doubt there's anyone reading on this site that doesn't know how special that Svech will be? Thus I don't know why you've wandered off into a discussion of the various leagues to show what is already obvious? Please enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, remkin said:

Recently read two pieces saying we have arguably the best D in the NHL, and absolutely top 5, so thescore.com might want to bump us up!

Or "the two pieces" you read might want to reveal their rationale for their ratings. Who are they?

Share this post


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

Okay Cff, I'll be the 1st to bite. What is exactly your point here as you've lost me in your train of thought? Is this a response to remkin's post or just an off the cuff comment, as I doubt there's anyone reading on this site that doesn't know how special that Svech will be? Thus I don't know why you've wandered off into a discussion of the various leagues to show what is already obvious? Please enlighten me.

My Whole take  is  obvious .   Players  that fit into  Brind'Amours  scheme   are going to be guy's who show stride in pulling off that Scheme  .  If they are not all playing the system laid  out before them  then   perhaps   a year of development is in order for them  would be needed .   And i was comparing   Svech in this case .   Lots of people are questioning if  Necas is ready or not  vs others  and All i have to do is point to a guy  who shown  to work hard   vs some  who have not reached  that mile stone   yet .   Granted players are different in their own ways  but the fact still remains  clear .   If you have people who are willing to step up  when it is certainly time to do so    then they should .  " The committee "  understands that , I just don't  understand why others on here dont  with  that process  of being accepted to the team or being sent down .  

Edited by Canesfanforever

Share this post


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

Or "the two pieces" you read might want to reveal their rationale for their ratings. Who are they?

One was the Canes review in the Athletic and well laid out. Can’t remember the other one, might have been yahoo. It’s all opinion anyways.

Share this post


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

One was the Canes review in the Athletic and well laid out. Can’t remember the other one, might have been yahoo. It’s all opinion anyways.

Yes it is all opinion. But if some one quotes we have the best D in the league I'd love to see more detail for their opinion and rationale for their opinion. I was thrilled that we made 

an honorable mention in the article I quoted but to say we are the best in the league is stretching it a bit. Whether you use an eye test or statistically based info, the Canes D is not within the top 5.

 

 

Share this post


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

Yes it is all opinion. . Whether you use an eye test or statistically based info, the Canes D is not within the top 5.

 

 

The article in the Athletic uses pretty good stats. Arguably Slavin, Pesce, Hamiltion and Gardiner could all be top pair. The article suggests that Hamilton is a top 10 NHL  defenseman, and grossly under rated. Basically all four of our top four guys are underrated in someway or another. Faulk may not be a favorite, but he’s a pretty decent bottom pair. I don’t know about the best, but top five it’s not a stretch.

Share this post


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

committee "  understands that , I just  understand why others on here dont

Count me as one. Sorry. Your syntax needs a little polishing, as several sentences appear to leave words out?

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


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

Count me as one. Sorry. Your syntax needs a little polishing, as several sentences appear to leave words out?

I dont see what there is not to understand .    Brind'Amours system is  instructed to the players to  do what he wants .   If they show signs of having trouble   performing that system  then they need to go to  development  .  It's that bare bones  simple to understand .  And i  was merely pointing out that players  who are not ready for the nhl tolls   wont be playing in the nhl this year .    

Share this post


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

English is my only language ,  no need for you to be a horses *edit*  ! 

Well sorry dude, but the grammar and syntax of your posts just doesn’t make any sense in American or the Queen’s English

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was away from my computer when discussing the strength of D thing so didn't have the references. The main reference is the Athletic review of the Canes for this year by Dom Luszczyszyn who really has more consonants in his name than should be legal, but puts a lot of analytics into his piece.

 

https://theathletic.com/1225734/2019/09/22/2019-20-nhl-season-preview-carolina-hurricanes/

 

It really is worth reading, and IMO the Athletic is worth paying for. I'd cut and paste a lot from it, but since it's for pay I have to go easy. Further, his analysis of our D is 12 full paragraphs long and full of analytics and breaks down each and every D man expected to play. 

 

Here's the sentence that I was referring too.

 

"That’s an absolutely loaded blue line that deservedly grades out as the league’s best...."

 

I will include this analytic table: Simply, the bluer and darker, the more elite the player. The red is bad. Of note, both "bad" guys, are only there by 1/10 of a point. Reimer coming off a career worst in front of a porous D, and Fleury, who is still under 90 NHL games.

 

Screen-Shot-2019-09-19-at-3.46.33-PM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW that same guy has a player-based model to predict the top teams for this year. We are projected as the #6 team, and 100.4 points and 83% playoff chance. He takes every player's last three seasons and projects for:

 

Goals: 0.75

Primary Assists: 0.7

Secondary Assists: 0.55

Shots: 0.075

Blocks: 0.05

Penalty Differential: 0.15

Faceoff Differential: 0.01

5-on-5 Corsi Differential: 0.05

5-on-5 Goal Differential: 0.15 

 

He then adjusts for most recent results, expected goals and a usage factor. It's all very wonky and available on the site. 

 

I have to think this model must by definition underestimate up and coming players like Svech and Foegele, and obviously Necas/Gauthier since they don't have usefull NHL stats. 

 

Anyways, what I find interesting is that earlier, I heard a lot of guys who use their "expertise" pick us to regress while a few liked us to be good. Lately though, I'm seeing more and more love for us. And almost all that use actual statistical models like us pretty high. One of the commenters claimed to have a different statistical model that put us #4. 

 

Of course anything can happen, and I know we've long suffered the role of hoping teams take us lightly, but my optimism this year is not out there on an island! There are others.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...