AJgoal Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 So a few days back, I mentioned that if Voracek would just shoot to his historical percentage, he'd have had 6 goals (he's sitting at a whopping 1.5% vs. a historical of 9.8%). So it got me wondering how the team as a whole is faring. The disparity is striking. Only Giroux (12.2 vs 11.4), Streit (9.1 vs 7.3), Both Schenns (B: 12.2 vs 11.2; L: 16.7 vs. 4.0), and Bellemare (5.6 vs 5.3) are shooting above their career shooting percentage. Laughton is above his by 3+ percent, but his career prior to this season is also a small sample size. As you can see, the positive difference in the forward shooting percentage is fairly small. Luke Schenn's is significant, but related to a small sample size. The flip side is just how large the disparity is with those shooting below their career percentage. Voracek 8+ percentage points (would be good for 7 goals for the season). Simmonds is at almost 7 points south of his. Read 3 points. Umberger 11(0 goals, but he has a smaller number of games). Vandevelde almost 5. Couturier 4+. All told, if every player on the team reverted to their mean shooting percentage, both those above and below, this team projects to have 17 more goals on the season. A full 50% more than what they've put up. I can't tell you why everyone is down this year, or how to fix it, but that's a pretty staggering number. You're looking at almost a goal per game that the Flyers are losing. As @aziz has mentioned a few times, if they could just get that one goal, that would be huge. It's not enough to move them into the positive in goals for vs. goals against, but a 2.55 GPGF vs a 2.9 GPGA looks a lot better than 1.7 vs 2.9 for getting some wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 They suck.... sorry but they are pathetic right now and Vorachek is flat out terrible right now. Glad Hextall was so eager to give him that ridiculous payday when he had one very good year.Hextall should not be off their hook w this team yet everyone wants to give him a free pass. There was no reason to sign him or Couts to those contracts without earning them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icehole Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I think their % is down because of the quality of shots they are taking. They can't get anything going.I agree with murray...Hextal has made some strange decisions. Only time will tell if he gets as bad as Homer, but I dont see any difference yet. Hextal made some good moves but we also forget that Homer made some good moves at one point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 See ice.... we agree on a lot! Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 TRADE EVERYONE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icehole Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Murray, why dont you join me on the Couts hate train...we can do some damage. You can get me the stats I need and I can just keep focusing on my eye test. Wait...nevermind...I dont need any help with that. Couts makes it too easy as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Couturier's deal isn't so outrageous and could over the length of the deal be worth it.A little extra offense would be nice, but if he remains a ~15 goal ~40 point player it's not egregious given his other contributions.Still, the trend of locking up players in long term deals who haven't done much on the winning side of the equation is a bit disturbing. Contracts are always a gamble, but there are ways to mitigate risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 TRADE EVERYONE! Their value will never be lower!? O_o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Murray, why dont you join me on the Couts hate train...we can do some damage. i have a hard time understanding "hate" for couturier. his biggest offense is having no offense. which is a pretty fun thing to point out. but, really, it isn't like his play actually causes problems, he's just underwhelming. how can you hate "he isn't really all that great"? the guy has inspired you to change your avatar, you are recruiting for your anti-couturier effort...because the guy makes a bit more than he should and doesn't score a lot of goals. ??? there are more than a few worse players on this team, you know. and through it all, you still call him, "couts", like you are buddies and he hooks you up with drinks sometimes when you hang out. but you "hate" him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Murray, why dont you join me on the Couts hate train...we can do some damage. You can get me the stats I need and I can just keep focusing on my eye test. Wait...nevermind...I dont need any help with that. Couts makes it too easy as it is. cant go there yet.... gimme until the end of the season on the Couts train. I do not think he is the answer to the 2C position but still think he could be a damn good 3C in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 I do not think he is the answer to the 2C position but still think he could be a damn good 3C in this league. He is NOT a second line center. He is a Very Good third liner. NTTAWWT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 He is NOT a second line center. He is a Very Good third liner. NTTAWWT I concur Sir Radoran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phlyer1 Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Their value will never be lower!? O_o Can you put a team on Waivlers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icehole Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 i have a hard time understanding "hate" for couturier. his biggest offense is having no offense. which is a pretty fun thing to point out. but, really, it isn't like his play actually causes problems, he's just underwhelming. how can you hate "he isn't really all that great"? the guy has inspired you to change your avatar, you are recruiting for your anti-couturier effort...because the guy makes a bit more than he should and doesn't score a lot of goals. ??? there are more than a few worse players on this team, you know.and through it all, you still call him, "couts", like you are buddies and he hooks you up with drinks sometimes when you hang out. but you "hate" him.Hey Aziz,I shouldnt hate on him...it's not all his fault. It's the people that think he's impervious to criticism that I dont understand.Not in this thread, but when I see a 50 paragraph article on why couts isnt scoring, I shake my head. I picture their eyes being bloodshot flipping through all of the stat sheets going "couts isnt scoring but...wah...huh...his corsi says he should be scoring...he should be scoring...why isnt he scoring!!!" then the head explodes.Put the stat sheets down and watch the game. Watch him constantly fall behind players. Watch him timidly go after a puck in the corner. Watch him stand face to face with a guy and not look him in the eyes because he is a submissive.Im not saying he doesnt belong in the NHL but he shouldnt be a second line guy who you expect scoring from. I dont need corsi to tell me that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So a few days back, I mentioned that if Voracek would just shoot to his historical percentage, he'd have had 6 goals (he's sitting at a whopping 1.5% vs. a historical of 9.8%). So it got me wondering how the team as a whole is faring. The disparity is striking. Only Giroux (12.2 vs 11.4), Streit (9.1 vs 7.3), Both Schenns (B: 12.2 vs 11.2; L: 16.7 vs. 4.0), and Bellemare (5.6 vs 5.3) are shooting above their career shooting percentage. Laughton is above his by 3+ percent, but his career prior to this season is also a small sample size. As you can see, the positive difference in the forward shooting percentage is fairly small. Luke Schenn's is significant, but related to a small sample size. The flip side is just how large the disparity is with those shooting below their career percentage. Voracek 8+ percentage points (would be good for 7 goals for the season). Simmonds is at almost 7 points south of his. Read 3 points. Umberger 11(0 goals, but he has a smaller number of games). Vandevelde almost 5. Couturier 4+. All told, if every player on the team reverted to their mean shooting percentage, both those above and below, this team projects to have 17 more goals on the season. A full 50% more than what they've put up. I can't tell you why everyone is down this year, or how to fix it, but that's a pretty staggering number. You're looking at almost a goal per game that the Flyers are losing. As @aziz has mentioned a few times, if they could just get that one goal, that would be huge. It's not enough to move them into the positive in goals for vs. goals against, but a 2.55 GPGF vs a 2.9 GPGA looks a lot better than 1.7 vs 2.9 for getting some wins. I think in many respects they're just shooting more and trying to get more pucks on net - originally as a strategy and now more as a desperation. Perhaps in the past they simply didn't take as many shots? (I haven't looked up the shots-per-game numbers). OK, fine, so I went and looked a few up. Giroux is actually shooting marginally less (2.45 this year to 2.54 historically). Voracek is over 3 shots/game this season (3.35) and his historical average is 2.28. Simmonds is up at 2.55 as opposed to career 2.05. Read is down marginally to 1.65 from 1.89. EDIT: That said, the team is averaging 30 shots a game this season, 29 last, 30 the year before and 29 during the shortened season. Not much change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howie58 Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Howdy: I am beginning to wonder if this is a continuation of last year's downward spiral. We finished 22 of 30 in offense. Our PP was good, 5 on 5 wasn't. Just saying....maybe this group isn't that good. The other thought....you stop line 1, you stop the team (offshoot) of point 1. Either way, I am thinking we shouldn't be that surprised. If things get worse by February, then we see wholesale trade. Hakstol is too early in the game to be canned. Howie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Howdy: I am beginning to wonder if this is a continuation of last year's downward spiral. We finished 22 of 30 in offense. Our PP was good, 5 on 5 wasn't. Just saying....maybe this group isn't that good. The other thought....you stop line 1, you stop the team (offshoot) of point 1. Either way, I am thinking we shouldn't be that surprised. If things get worse by February, then we see wholesale trade. Hakstol is too early in the game to be canned. Howie wise words Howie... could not agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 It's the people that think he's impervious to criticism that I dont understand. i agree there. i've said from his rookie year that he is too slow to be effective offensively. specifically because he doesn't have the foot speed to get himself back into defensive position if he presses too deep into the offensive zone...and that causes all kinds of problems. he ends up being tentative in the offensive zone, because getting trapped is a thing he has to guard against at all moments. as soon as he crosses the hashmarks, he has passed the point of no return should the play turn the other way, so he waves at pucks and avoids heavy involvement along the boards. all to compensate for the fact that his skates apparently weigh 30 lbs each. still, he contributes at a high level when not asked to penetrate into the offensive zone, and that is a matter of proper deployment of the asset. each time he gets caught, imo he has been mis-coached. he is and should be a defensive specialist, and as such does and would excel. he is not and won't be an offensive threat, but that is ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 I shouldnt hate on him...it's not all his fault. It's the people that think he's impervious to criticism that I dont understand. Couturier's shot is lousy. Matt Carle bad...he does have good stick handling skills though and has gotten better using his body to shield the puck from checkers at the NHL level. HIs skating is better but still is not what i would call "good" too...so there's room for his game to improve for sure. If he winds up being a little better than Michael Handzus, that's certainly not a waste. He was an #8 overall pick so that he is a serviceable NHL player is a win, he's not the Fat Balloon or JvR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Couturier's shot is lousy. Matt Carle bad...he does have good stick handling skills though and has gotten better using his body to shield the puck from checkers at the NHL level. HIs skating is better but still is not what i would call "good" too...so there's room for his game to improve for sure. If he winds up being a little better than Michael Handzus, that's certainly not a waste. He was an #8 overall pick so that he is a serviceable NHL player is a win, he's not the Fat Balloon or JvR. or Sam Gagner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icehole Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 cant go there yet.... gimme until the end of the season on the Couts train. I do not think he is the answer to the 2C position but still think he could be a damn good 3C in this league.Taking draft position (I know people think he plays well for a #8 but I dont) and contract out of the equation, I think he can be a good third liner.I was thinking about this earlier. Is he good offensively? No. Is he good in transition defense? Not really. He shines once things have slowed down in the zone and he can get into position. He positions himself well and has good anticipation. That's because he has a good head on his shoulders. That's never my problem with him. It all comes down to physical ability to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 I think in many respects they're just shooting more and trying to get more pucks on net - originally as a strategy and now more as a desperation. Perhaps in the past they simply didn't take as many shots? (I haven't looked up the shots-per-game numbers). OK, fine, so I went and looked a few up. Giroux is actually shooting marginally less (2.45 this year to 2.54 historically). Voracek is over 3 shots/game this season (3.35) and his historical average is 2.28. Simmonds is up at 2.55 as opposed to career 2.05. Read is down marginally to 1.65 from 1.89. EDIT: That said, the team is averaging 30 shots a game this season, 29 last, 30 the year before and 29 during the shortened season. Not much change That's possible, but the rebound chances and whatnot should be there, then. And they are, but the Flyers just cannot put them in to save their lives. And typically, regardless of the number of shots, players rarely wander off their career percentages. They may have one high or low season, but they generally revert to the mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 They may have one high or low season, but they generally revert to the mean. please tell me this is the "low" for Jake!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 I would hope so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 See ice.... we agree on a lot! Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.