Jump to content
News Ticker
  • News Around the NHL

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum

Bardonshky

Member
  • Content Count

    18
  • Posts on chatbox

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Positive

Profile Information

  • Favorite Team
    Wild

Recent Profile Visitors

30 profile views
  1. A point shot wouldn’t be from prime scoring real estate, but if a team was having trouble getting the puck to the net, I’m pretty sure coaches would be asking for point shots.
  2. “In order to score on a rebound, you have to have that first shot, get the puck to the (blue) paint,” Leafs coach Mike Babcock said Friday after the team held an optional skate. “In playoffs, all you have to do is watch the games, night in, night out, even if you’re not a hockey fan. If you don’t get to the net, you’re not going to score. (Goalies), they’re too dialed in, they’re too big, they’re too good, so you have to get to the net. “I thought we passed up a ton of opportunities to shoot (Thursday). … At playoff time there is no better play. Get it to the net, get people to the net and shoot the pill.” -Babs
  3. Are you certain PP goals factor in to plus minus? Shorties I believe do. But not sure PK goals count against. But maybe my info is old. Sure match-ups influence the number, but I’m not sure that’s a strike against. If you know the assignment it could still be a gauge of a given players performance. A guy might get 4 goals in a game and be +2. That’d tell you something. Especially if lines or units were shufflling and another guy was +3 without getting a goal. As for some guys getting less ice, sure, but it’s still a measure of their performance night in night out. Also, other guys might be worse the same night because they got caught out. I think those are things that can help you look to see where a players game went wrong or right. In aggregate the number tells you less, but assuming you know the players role it’s not entirely useless.
  4. By “settles the player” I meant that skilled guys, when slumping, are encouraged to accumulate shots. Ideally from the highest percentage area -in front- but worse angles if that’s what’s available.
  5. Great post! Beyond it being a team game, it’s a very fast team game with dynamic substitutions. I don’t think stats can do for it what they do for, say, baseball. I can see the value of CF -not that you’re saying you don’t- but again, it doesn’t tell me much in aggregate. I like knowing about shots, to me they’re a decent indicator of offensive zone time. But again, sometimes a team piles up shots in the first or third period. It tells me more to know when. Shots are great to know for an individual player, but as you say, shots are not all equal. Side rant on shots -it kills me when I see a player consistently getting the best single quality opportunity in a game and not converting -it lends credence to the argument that quantity of shots matters. It does to some extent because quantity settles the player.
  6. You captured the part of TFG’s (thoughtful and thorough) post that piqued my interest as well. The weakness of the stat is it’s relative to so many factors. But I think that makes it a handy flag too. TOI is an example. A crummy +/- makes me want too look at TOI. If I see a guy with a crummy +/- and high TOI, I want to know how are they getting that time. In long chunks? Then when did the goals against happen? Late in the game? Babcock getting on shift length going into Toronto opened my eyes to the difference even a few seconds make. It makes me want to see if a player or line or pair is going long early and getting chances as a result, but becoming a liability late. It informs my viewing experience? That last sentence is definitely the lamest thing I’ve said all day.
  7. Apologies if this is misplaced. There are a million sub-forums in this joint, and while I’ve tried to cruise them before starting a topic, educating oneself on forum etiquette ain’t like it used to be. I’m sure this has been hashed out before, but it won’t go away (I suspect for good reason) it’s worth the occasional revisit. Some say the statistic is worthless. Some say it’s simply too narrow. Some legendary coaches clearly found value. Some current coaches say it’s obsolete. Some marquee players have bonuses structured at least partially based on it. I’ve got a kernel of an opinion, but I’m certainly not a stats guy -more of a watch-the-game guy.  Opinions? 
  8. Oh, I’m just speculating. Who knows what Hastings was thinking.
  9. I watched the early games casually but I’d guess he struggled with the speed of it.
  10. People are going to be on about that goal that got called back. Fact is, the US squad didn’t pressure like they had in prior games and their passing and possession game fell way off. I’m not on the team so I don’t have to say “not to take away from the Finns.” The US played the tightest hockey of the tourney then played the first period part time.
  11. I don’t think he saw a lot of minutes, man.
  12. Don’t believe I implied that’s not a part of the ideal d man’s skill set, but ideal d men are rare. For one, dumps are prevalent these days. That’s a puck race. Playing a line rush physically is risky and you don’t see it much because coaches don’t want D giving up position. So you’re talking about once a team establishes the cycle. I actually think Spurgeon wins the puck more than a lot of those big guys I listed and the bigger guys in this roster. Look up Datsyuk hold off Chara in the corner. Or Crosby holding off nearly anyone. It’s about getting your hips between the player and the puck. That’s about base, not height and weight. Edit: translation, it’s about skating. Do they have to be strong, yes. But slim hockey players can be deceptively strong. It’s the way they train. A breeze blew Granlund off the puck his first year, training earned him a strong base and he comes off the wall with pucks way more since. Edit: I would concede small size exposes D to injury on puck races but I think this is an area Spurgeon is pretty good. But it’s a risk for sure. Then again: Foster. Spurgeon is smart. He’s got middling-to-great special awareness. Lidstrom was smaller than a lot of the forwards he faced, but he could defend the big guys and Kane. Karlsson is dwarves by today’s power forwards. I don’t think he’s worried. Guys like Crosby WANT him skating backward on D. I don’t think he’s afraid of a puck race with Wheeler, etc.
  13. This is becoming an antiquated view of defensemen. I’m not saying a d corps can/should be small, but the game is becoming more and more about speed. A lot of people want to focus on fast skaters when they talk about speed, but speed starts with transitions. Teams need what Spurgy has more than size. They’ll let you have your Kuba, Foster, Skoula..,
  14. Oh, my content will need to be approved by a moderator. Well THATS something new on a Wild message board. Datsyuk should be the player every parent encourages his kid to emulate. He was juggling the puck around, popping it in crazy little ways, in warm ups before that became a thing. He does everything extraordinarily well, and at top speed. Review the clip where he baits Weber in for the reverse check -that’s uncanny presence and command of time and space. If you hit Datsyuk, he’d embarrass you. He could fend off Chara in the corner. His edgework and deception were before their time. His defense was larcenous. Yeah... Granlund. He can stickhandle. Some would say Kane, by I might argue Giroux beats him at his game. For me Crosby is the best though. He’s the one who best integrates it with edgework in the style of Datsyuk. For me, Karlsson’s dekes are the most satisfying to watch though: keeps it simple.
  15. Nice. Gotta have a WJC thread. Well done. That said, someone pee'd in your deep (as usual) pool of talent. You thinking putting a pillowlegs named DiPietro between the pipes was tempting the hockey god of bad luck?
×
×
  • Create New...