Team Better 5 on 5 Under Hakstol than Gordon

[Howie58]

I am not a big advanced stat expert; I posted the article because it was thought-provoking.  As for Gordon--not sure where I stand.  That said, we are likely to go seven years without a playoff series win.  That deserves its own thread--will wait for end of season before starting it.  But it begs the kind of questions Fletcher needs to ask going forward.  Is the core of this team solid?  Are the prospects as good as we've thought?  Is the team's offense on par with "best--of-breed" in the "New NHL?"  

 

On the stats side--we had an excellent FO% and nothing to show for it in wins and losses.  And we frequently out-shot our opponents and lost.  But, this team is winning, and showing effort that was lacking in the Hakstol era.  

[OccamsRazor]

40 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I call that reality denial. 

 

Can't say it any other way. 

 

Sorry. 

 

I'm ok being wrong. My wife tells me often.

[ruxpin]

16 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

I'm ok being wrong. My wife tells me often.

Right there with you on the wife thing.

 

Here's the other thing unfair about the "reality denial" thing:   Either it's not fair, or I'm kind of in the same direction with it myself.  Because if everything was rosy, it would be really weird for me to completely agree with you and others who say they don't want Gordon to stay as head coach next year with the "interim" removed (the only way he's staying).  Obviously, my desire to bring someone else in either says something is still missing or whatever we have simply isn't enough.

 

Maybe it's "grass is always greener," but I don't think so.  I mean, our record over the last month and a half going on two months is hard to argue with.   But the truth of the matter is that it's not really a lot different from our turn around in the second half last year.  Is it?  The difference I guess, is that we didn't start from quite as far back.   And that's with Hakstol on both ends of it.

 

Is our roster filled with an inordinate number of second half players?  I don't know.  Is it a lack of organizational urgency?  I mean, on the player level.  Because that would kind of go back even to Mike Richards' "it's only one game" ten games in a row.

 

I don't know if, for me, it's about Gordon or if it's just the desire to bring someone in that has not been here in any way for the last whatever number of years of stink.  An outside influence that's willing and able to do things from a completely different point of view.  We have the GM -- the perceived faults and all -- that fits that.  So, let's do it with the coach and his staff.

 

It's possible my real objection to the negative comparison of Gordon vs. Hakstol is how bad I perceived Hakstol to be.  I do see a lot of structural differences on the special teams, in particular, from Hakstol.  One thing on power play -- particularly the first unit -- that I still see as the same, and I guess that's Knob, is the approach to entry.  I do not like (then or now) one player carrying the puck almost to the redline and then TURNING to pass it back to the last trailing player and then attacking the center of the blueline to then attempt the pass usually to the wing on his right.  I don't understand how that isn't tremendously easy to defend against, jump, and send it the other way either on a dump or on a rush.   I think it's weak, but more importantly, I think it's horribly predictable.   They don't seem to do that as much on the second unit, but they do it some there too.   I do see some other teams doing this.  The Panthers do it a lot.  I've seen it elsewhere.   But the teams that do this seem to vary where their point of entry is on the blueline.  And they also seem to vary where they pass it to once they get to the blueline.  It seems to me--and I've complained about this all year--that the non-puck-carriers are nearly full stop when the carrier hits the blueline.  This takes any speed or fluidity out of the attack.  It also increases the danger of the bumbled pass at the blueline while everyone is standing still.

 

If I'm right and the second unit doesn't do that as much, I think it probably explains why (at least anecdotally, I haven't measured it) the second unit seems to be more successful.

 

Anyway, I think Gordon has been a lot better than Hakstol.  Whether it's by choice or because Fletcher has moved out some of the dead weight vets, Gordon is using different personnel.  

 

I would like to see him jumble lines less.  I don't think this has to be the go-to fix all the time.  It's been that way for years.  And while I will argue that 5v5 has improved, I'm not sure going from 48% to 52% is cause for a parade.  Or even good enough.   

 

We beat this part to death in the other thread:   I'm willing to do Coach Q if that's the plan and ultimately what they describe.  I have reservations, though, that I really can't articulate.  Sadly, "spidey-sense" is not sufficient.

[OccamsRazor]

3 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I mean, our record over the last month and a half going on two months is hard to argue with. 

 

It is. I need to see how this finishes out to truly make a call on it.

 

One thing is for sure when Hart got the crease it change the team from a confidence stand point a lot.

 

And sometimes that has a lot to do with it.

 

They aren't reinventing the wheel. If you don't feel confident in what you're doing it is going to show on the ice and in the results.

 

And once the mash unit start in the net from the opening night i think it messed with the team mentally and their confidence suffered and they were a different team then add on a coach who only holds the young players accountable for mistakes and well we see what happened.

 

So when the regular season ends i think i will have a better idea of what they need to do. Till then i'm back and forth. 

[flyerrod]

4 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

It is. I need to see how this finishes out to truly make a call on it.

 

One thing is for sure when Hart got the crease it change the team from a confidence stand point a lot.

 

And sometimes that has a lot to do with it.

 

They aren't reinventing the wheel. If you don't feel confident in what you're doing it is going to show on the ice and in the results.

 

And once the mash unit start in the net from the opening night i think it messed with the team mentally and their confidence suffered and they were a different team then add on a coach who only holds the young players accountable for mistakes and well we see what happened.

 

So when the regular season ends i think i will have a better idea of what they need to do. Till then i'm back and forth.  

Ok Sybill.....Get back on your fence and quit jumping back and forth.....

[OccamsRazor]

59 minutes ago, flyerrod said:

Ok Sybill.....Get back on your fence and quit jumping back and forth.....

 

@ruxpin is trying to steal the fence from me.

 

It's MINE!

[mojo1917]

Couple of things I've noticed. 

Carter Hart made timely saves. The saves that can help a team get off it's heals.

Until he and Stolarz showed up/ got healthy, none of the 4 other stiffs did this with any regularity.

Elliott, has with the exception of the Caps game, done this recently too, we'll consider this his "good" run, and to be fair he has been "good".

The early season Flyers were historically unlucky on the powerplay, I mentioned in another thread, the young guys were beating the goalie but hitting the post, then in a few cases, they got benched or sent back down to LHV or moved onto a line with veteran stiffs coach Hakstol had a comfort level with.

 

 

The PK has been better because Gordon prefers to attack the pressure the puck. Hakstol did not do this he preferred to be passive and get sticks in passing lanes.  The PK is better today.

Gordon has trusted the young guys and stayed with them so they could just play hockey and not be worried about ice time/ rental arrangements.

 

Nolan Patrick is a smart hockey player and he carries the puck into the O-zone on the second unit power play better than anyone not named Giroux or Provorov. He is big, he's got a wicked handle and he skates pretty well, guys go backwards when he's barreling down on them, he gets the boys following him and plays open up, it isn't predictable because he's got a lot of options when he carries the puck in and he has shown no preferences yet.

 

Travis Sanhiem is a smart hockey player too, he's a great skater and makes little plays on the rush to drive defenders out of the way to open a shooting lane  or into a screen for a drag and shoot. He was not allowed to play under Hakstol.

 

Should I keep going? Oscar Lindblom is a smart hockey player and while his skating is just okay, he always seems to be around the puck and able to make plays along the wall to keep possession he breaks up the other team's break out because he knows where the puck is going. He wasn't allowed to play under Hakstol.

These young guys needed to play hockey to improve the old guy wouldn't let them. The interim guy has.

Eye test , this team is better now- by a lot than the sorry bunch that skated in December. 

 

 

[elmatus]

I'm a bigger fan of advanced stats than many if not most people, but no amount of stats can make up for the simple fact they were losing terribly before xmas and have won a remarkable number of games since Gordon took over. Any of a million factors are likely converging to make this so, and we can talk about them, but this for me is where the advanced stats arguments kind of run dry. In the vast majority of cases, AStats correlate very well with the product on the ice. This may just be an exception, but I'm fine with it.

 

Only crap part is the lowered draft pick, but tanking for a top pick is just bad math in today's NHL anyway. It makes no sense. Give me watchable hockey for whatever games are left even if the season has essentially been doomed since the calendar flipped over. I'm also enjoying watching the kiddos get their ice time finally. Whether that's a product of good timing or just different management decisions, I'm fine with it either way.

 

I'll admit I still have a soft spot for Hexy and what he did in his time here. I probably always will. But I'm fine with loosening the increasingly apparent stranglehold he had on team management over the years.

 

Hakstol is another story. May he be forgotten.

[vis]

Little late to this party, but I'm not sure "better" is the right word, but they were certainly a different team under Hakstol. 

 

Hakstol loved "structure."  Hakstol's teams may have been better defensively, thus resulting in better CF and shot suppression, but his teams were generally subpar offensively.  Based on what I see, Gordon's team is more aggressive and willing to take on more risk, particularly on offense.  Players seem more creative with the puck.  They seem to play with more energy and by "feel" rather than by structure.  Getting good goaltending enables them to better able to withstand breakdowns that come with taking more risk.

 

I don't know.  Maybe I'm imagining things or seeing what I want to see on the ice.  I feel like Hakstol was more concerned about suppressing his opponent's offense, whereas Gordon seems more concerned with his own team generating offense. 

 

I would like to see a heat map showing all 5v5 shots generated under Hakstol and all 5v5 shots generated under Gordon.  I feel like they don't generate as much from the points as they did under Hakstol and we are seeing more scoring off the rush and from in front.  Also, even though the GAA may be in the bottom third of the league, I wonder what the 5v5 sv% has been.  I also wonder how many better scoring chances Gordon's team gives up 5v5 than Hakstol's.

 

Aside from all of that, the team just seems to play with way more confidence under Gordon, particularly the young guys.  Patrick, Konency, Lindblom, Sanheim and Provorov have all been much better players after Hakstol got fired.  Maybe Murphy's firing had more of an impact on Sanheim and Provorov.  Whatever.  Point is, everything I was hoping would happen the rest of the season after Hakstol got fired has happened with those players.  Without their improvement, this run would not have occurred.  And I don't think that's entirely attributable to goaltending.  Gordon must be doing something right or something better than Hakstol was doing. Not sure that's going to be reflected in the fancy stats.

[OccamsRazor]

On 3/10/2019 at 4:28 PM, ruxpin said:

I do not like (then or now) one player carrying the puck almost to the redline and then TURNING to pass it back to the last trailing player and then attacking the center of the blueline to then attempt the pass usually to the wing on his right. 

 

This is still happening and it pisses me off to not end. And like just last game they continue with the perimeter passing on the power play so scared to pass it down low near the goal mouth....against a rag tag bunch like the Sens it's embarrassing.

 

So if thy are scared to do it against the Sens what should we expect this next game vs the Caps who love to pressure the puck.

 

They have to start getting more shots on net and trying to get to the rebounds....there won't be any rebounds to pounce on if they don't shoot.

 

Just over the 5 games....they have 1 power play goal....1 for 12 attempts is down right terrible...or 3 goals over the last 11 games...3 for 25 how ever you want to dice it it sucks bad...as i said sure they have had some good games where they have played well vs teams not so good on the PK and it has to be expected but overall i just don't see much difference in play even when they move the personnel around and swap guys out.

 

It's a mentality thing and they just don't have the right mind set and more than likely won't this year.

 

I think a reboot could help...that means a new staff a new way of wanting to do things. Everyone shown the door on this.

[King Knut]

On 3/9/2019 at 8:06 PM, Howie58 said:

Greetings:

 

I saw this post last night.  There is lots of food for thought:

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/scott-gordon-done-enough-keep-173647021.html

 

Our goal and special teams have saved the day.  I am not sure what this says about Gordon.  Our wins and losses are radically different.  Is this a comment on Hart, or that special teams play is "where it's at."  One thing seems certain--whether it's Q or Gordon, our squad outside of goal probably needs lots of retooling.

 

 

 

I protest the nature of this piece.  It feels a little naive. 

 

Our goal and special teams saved the day is the obvious answer, but when that remains the same even when the goalie happens to be the same one they were playing under Hakstol, then something different is at play.  First Stolarz and then Elliott did not get suddenly much much better all on their own.  The Premise of the piece seems to be that Hart has made all the difference, but the team's done just as well when they play the goalies they had before Hart came up and Hakstol was still the coach.  And in fact, the team did just as poorly WITH Hart in net before Gordon made the shift to the 1-3-1 forecheck and the repositioning inside the D-Zone.  And as we've seen from his last three starts, Hart is far from infallible.

 

The reason the corsi has dropped, but the goals against have dropped is because part of Gordon's system is ceding more shots in favor of being in position to make them lower percentage shots that are A) easier to save and B) easier to control rebounds on.

 

This is one of the reasons Corsi by itself is a flawed stat.  I actually think it's a much better measure of a player (especially a D man) than a team.  

 

I don't mean this as a cheerleading campaign for Gordon as head coach.  I honestly just don't know who's right.  I just mean to point it out for clarity's sake and that whoever the coach is, they can't go back to playing like they did for Hakstol.  

 

Under Hakstol, they did to themselves what they are doing to most other teams now, take a ton of low% shots that don't go in and allow a ton of high % shots that all do go in.

 

It's easy to look at the difference in save % and say, well clearly it's the goalie.  But that (and corsi as a stat) neglects the difficulty of the shots being taken (at either end).

 

One more thing before everyone thinks I'm just loving on Gordon, he's exhibiting almost as poor an ability to handle his goalies at Hakstol and Berube before him.  Playing the rookie Hart in his first game back against the Captials instead of against the league worst Senators just made no sense.  Playing him all those games in a row including back to back nights against the redwings (which as I've enumerated elsewhere, I blame more on Fletcher than Gordon) but the next games against Montreal and Tampa (that they lost) were all on Gordon.  As we then saw, Hart got hurt.

 

It's common to blame Hextall for Neuvirth and Elliott getting hurt because the latter is "old" and the former is made out of glass, and there's some truth to this (though as I've also enumerated elsewhere, there are tough reasons why these were the guys that I personally don't blame Hextall for) but at the end of the day Hakstol did a TON of work to damage Elliott's chances of remaining healthy by the way he played him.  I'd say the same for Neuvirth when he was ABLE to play Neuvirth, but let's face it.  That guy's got physical issues that no coach could avoid.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

On 3/10/2019 at 1:28 PM, ruxpin said:

And at 87.5% it sounds like shots are better or you wouldn't be getting the trash/deflections. 

 

So now.

 

Are they better?

 

They went 0 for 4 again last night.

 

1 pp goal now in 6 games.

 

So seriously I'm asking because I just don't know anymore...

 

...when is the bleeding going to stop?

 

I still stand firmly on the I don't see any change.

 

Someone Gordon just rearranged the deck chairs on the titanic...SMFH.

[Howie58]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

ne more thing before everyone thinks I'm just loving on Gordon, he's exhibiting almost as poor an ability to handle his goalies at Hakstol and Berube before him.  Playing the rookie Hart in his first game back against the Captials instead of against the league worst Senators just made no sense.

I have to agree with you on the goal side.  Perhaps there is "make the playoffs" pressure from down on high that plays a role in his decisionmaking.  There are no easy answers.  I will start a post-season assessment after our last loss.  We can take up the bigger picture  question of whether we really make any progress this year?

[King Knut]

1 hour ago, Howie58 said:

I have to agree with you on the goal side.  Perhaps there is "make the playoffs" pressure from down on high that plays a role in his decision making.  There are no easy answers.  

 

If there is such pressure, its ironic they're making the choices they are because I think it's actually hurting those playoff chances significantly.  

 

1 hour ago, Howie58 said:

I will start a post-season assessment after our last loss.  We can take up the bigger picture  question of whether we really make any progress this year?

 

Oh I think there's undoubtedly been progress.  

IMHO, in previous seasons, they never looked as bad or as confused and timid as they did at times the first half of this season under Hak.  Even Hak's other seasons, they didn't look that bad that consistently.  Other seasons they looked like they were on the verge of "putting it together" but on the other side of the bench, Hak kept making the same mistakes over and over again.

 

This season, they all just looked clueless, especially on defense.  Just perplexingly lost in the woods.  

 

They don't look that way anymore, which isn't to say they don't get beat.  They do. There's always room for improvement and next steps.  The team that is there now is finally playing like they should have in October when the season started.  They're losing big games and winning a bunch of others. 

 

The problem is, it's March and there won't be time to make strides on all the lessons they're learning in these big games they're losing.  

 

I'm much happier with their overall play.  With the hope of an active free agency and some more kids taking steps to the pros, I'm finally excited again.

 

While Hakstol was still here, it felt like Umberger, VLC and Luke Schenn were still playing out there.