March NHL News Thread
- Thread starter cshea
- Start date
I don't know nearly as much about hockey as you guys, but I really don't feel like this is the best way to go about fixing this problem. Maybe make it so that the first time getting tossed after an icing is a minor penalty or something? I get more annoyed with refs who sit there for 7-10 seconds and don't drop the puck than players going in and purposefully committing a foul.... but like you said, the refs never call the minor penalty. I feel like moving a player back 18 inches (which is what I heard was the plan) will actually give the refs more sway over the outcome of the game in a less visible way than calling a minor penalty.cshea said:
I am probably not explaining how I feel all that well, to be honest, and I may be wrong in my thinking, but I just think the faceoff is the one thing that the ref's have almost total control over, and sometimes it seems like they bask in it. Giving them more power in this regard is not going to help the game.
I think the solution is to enforce the existing rules/policies. Even if a team intentionally delays action by deliberately getting tossed, it's only a few seconds if the linesman follows the existing policy and keeps the action moving. If a team is stretching it, drop the puck. I don't like the idea of moving back 18 inches or adding new rules.
Hilarious. Ovechkin, and his 68 points, is -31 for the season. The Caps have only been outscored by 6 goals on the season
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/17/alex-ovechkins-plus-minus-rating-is-getting-a-bit-ridiculous/
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/17/alex-ovechkins-plus-minus-rating-is-getting-a-bit-ridiculous/
That is pretty crazy, but I truly detest plus/minus. It's a dreadful way to measure individual contribution to team success.
On one hand I agree that +/- is a poor stat but at the same time when you look at guys who are plus players year in, year out they are generally the guys you'd expect.
Re: Ovechkin, I think its a variety of things at work. He does a lot of damage on the PP, and that doesn't register on his +/-. He also has a reputation for being bad defensively so teams with scoring lines who are at least decent defensively are comfortable matching their top line vs Ovechkin and figuring they can match his production head to head.
Re: Ovechkin, I think its a variety of things at work. He does a lot of damage on the PP, and that doesn't register on his +/-. He also has a reputation for being bad defensively so teams with scoring lines who are at least decent defensively are comfortable matching their top line vs Ovechkin and figuring they can match his production head to head.
steveluck7 said:
This is a terrible article for so many reasons.
Yes, Ovechkin has 26 even strength goals which is a huge number. But there's a reason the author didn't mention his even strength points. That's because he's still on single digit assists at even strength. His linemates have scored next to nothing for him. Backstrom has just 8 even strength goals and his two most frequent left wing mates have produced nothing 5-on-5. Marcus Johansson has 2 goals and Martin Erat had 0 in that situation which is a large reason why he's no longer on the Caps. When you consider the paltry assist numbers in addition to the gaudy goal totals, Ovechkin has 35 even strength points this year. That's the same number as Chris Higgins. That's two more than Michael Frolik. There's 52 other players in the league with as many or more even strength points. It's silly to think of Ovechkin as scoring at some great pace when it's a level surface. He's not. He's been a solid but unremarkable point producer at even strength this year, with excellent goal totals and atrocious assist numbers.
Again, how many even strength points? There's over 50 guys on pace or better with him this season...
Also, Washington as a team isn't that good. The author alludes to Washington being a solid team multiple times, but they are not. Look at their ROW. It's a mediocre team who I am hoping will hot with stellar goalie play (as you all know Holtby can and I know Halak can) and a streak good fortune. But realistically, the Caps are closer to the worst team in the league than the best. In the very plausible scenario that Washington goes 0-for their next 5 (ANA, SJ, LAK, LAK, BOS), they'll enter total tank mode and I hope they can slip down to a top-6/7 pick before the lottery. If they can manage a few wins in this tough stretch, more power to them and it'll give them a needed boost towards having a chance at the playoffs, but they need a lot of help the rest of the way. They have not shown me that they are very good. This is probably the worst Caps team since 2007.
It's laughable that the author excuses Kessel's number due to Toronto as a bad team but criticizes Ovechkin for Washington being a solid team. The Leafs recorded 85 points that season. Washington is on pace for 88 points, and it's largely fueled by good luck in the shootout. The Caps are 25th in the NHL in regulation/OT wins. Only Buffalo, Florida, NYI, Edmonton, and Calgary are worse. That's the dregs of the league. To further illustrate, Toronto was -11 in goals at even strength that season while Washington is already -15.
Marty St. Louis put up 83 points with a -23 one year. Mario Lemieux scored 91 points in 67 games and was a -25. Ray Whitney managed a -26 with 76 points. Heck, Wayne Gretzky scored 130 points and finished -25 (as noted). It happens.
You know who else put up eerily similar numbers to that? Alex Ovechkin, who scored 50 goals and was a +45 (2nd the NHL) in 2009-10. Notorious two-way stud Jeff Schultz was a league-leading +50 that season.
The author very directly references Ovechkin having a lack of effort as though that's responsible for the numbers. If you base that off his -31 rating this year, does that mean you praise him for for his +45 rating a few years ago? Is he really trying less this year or have his skills eroded to the point of a 76 +/- goal swing?
Ovechkin is a bit of a victim due to the minutes he plays. He spends such a significant portion of his time on the powerplay. He averages 5:07 PPTOI/game, which is far and away the most in the NHL. Overall, that's about a quarter of his ice time during which, despite league leading production, he can only be a negative by definition. Even though he leads the league in PPG and is second to only linemate Nick Backstrom in PPP, he's a -7 on the powerplay. The Caps have given up 8 SHG this season, and Ovechkin has been on the ice for 7 of them since he's pretty much always out there.
Further, since the Caps aren't actually that good and rarely win in regulation, Ovechkin has suffered a bit due to empty netters. The Caps have allowed 5 this year, and as you'd guess, Ovechkin has been on the ice for all 5. He has been on the ice for just 2 Caps ENGs, giving him a -10 deficit from the PP and empty netters alone.
Ovechkin's defensive game and effort aren't different this year, especially compared to last season when he was in the same system and a positive +/- player. The bigger difference between the +45 Ovechkin of 2010, the +2 Ovechkin of last year, and -31 Ovechkin of this season is simply how good the Caps and his surroundings are. A combination of even strength poor luck, sometimes poor play (not due to lack of effort), a big swing in empty net goals going from a positive to a negative as a team, and allowing a lot of shorties are the major culprits.
You want a really ridiculous stat? Alex Ovechkin has been on the ice at 5-on-5 for 35 goals. He has 35 even strength points. For comparison, Patrice Bergeron has 36 even strength points, but he's been on the ice for 51 5-on-5 goals. Ovechkin's linemates literally cannot seem to score this year unless he factors.
It's also worth noting, since a lot of people seem to forget, that Ovechkin has been on the ice for more Caps goals scored than against this year. He's a +45 on at 5-on-4 this season, which is just staggering. David Krejci, the top Bruin at 5-on-4, is +20. Put another way, Ovechkin has been on the ice for 50 5-on-4 goals this year. That's more goals than every other team in the NHL except for the Pens (55) have total on the powerplay. Despite Ovechkin and his linemates' struggles at even strength, there's no question Ovechkin has been extremely valuable and hugely positive contributor this year.
FAH that is a masterful takedown of the article. Well done my man. I just learned something today.
The fault here with the author is that he accepts the results of plus/minus at face value rather than consider any one of its many shortcomings: fully credits/debits players just for not being on the bench regardless of the degree they contributed to scoring or preventing a goal, capriciously ignores any contributions while on the PP or failures while SH, and so and so on, etc., and moreso. Emile Francis created it like a kid making up rules to a ficticious game, not through analytical evaluation of empirical evidence, and it just stuck. Conventional wisdom has since taken hold so it goes largely unquestioned. Plus, this is just hockey, not national defense, so people will protest only so much.
Evaluating individual performance in hockey is almost exclusively art, not science, and no amount of window-dressing with any fancy metric will change that. It's not remotely a zero-sum game. Like that Joshua computer had to learn by almost blowing up the world: the only solution is not to play. Say 'no' to plus/minus. (An irony here is that one statistic that seems to have more empirical value than others is goals scored, simply because goals are the currency of the game - net more than the opposition and you win. In this isolated realm, Ovechkin is in elite company if not on top in the recent past. Alas, there are clearly other factors at work that add to or take away from a player's value, and when you qualitatively consider these mysterious things, Ovechkin is a lesser player than just looking at his goal production indicates. The problem is that these things are just impossible to quantify, i.e., it's art. In short (yeah right, Fred), plus/minus should be used at no time for any purpose.)
Evaluating individual performance in hockey is almost exclusively art, not science, and no amount of window-dressing with any fancy metric will change that. It's not remotely a zero-sum game. Like that Joshua computer had to learn by almost blowing up the world: the only solution is not to play. Say 'no' to plus/minus. (An irony here is that one statistic that seems to have more empirical value than others is goals scored, simply because goals are the currency of the game - net more than the opposition and you win. In this isolated realm, Ovechkin is in elite company if not on top in the recent past. Alas, there are clearly other factors at work that add to or take away from a player's value, and when you qualitatively consider these mysterious things, Ovechkin is a lesser player than just looking at his goal production indicates. The problem is that these things are just impossible to quantify, i.e., it's art. In short (yeah right, Fred), plus/minus should be used at no time for any purpose.)
Would people be more OK with +/- if it included all scores? Or, if it was separated by pp/es/pk (including maybe differentiating betwen 5v4 and 5v3). Or if it was normalized to ice time?
It seems like +/- could be the basis of a valuable stat, but the fact that it removes 2 sources of scoring, and is treated the same for chara playing 25 minutes, and Thornton playing 10 makes it a lot less valuable.
I know in basketball they've started tracking single player and 5 player groups for +/- and normalizing for time. Perhaps they could do something similar with hockey.
I'm making up the numbers here, but if Chara could be said to have a -.11/.92/1.83 APM(Average Plus Minus) for PK/ES/PP, that would be a much better measure of a player than the current +/- number.
It seems like +/- could be the basis of a valuable stat, but the fact that it removes 2 sources of scoring, and is treated the same for chara playing 25 minutes, and Thornton playing 10 makes it a lot less valuable.
I know in basketball they've started tracking single player and 5 player groups for +/- and normalizing for time. Perhaps they could do something similar with hockey.
I'm making up the numbers here, but if Chara could be said to have a -.11/.92/1.83 APM(Average Plus Minus) for PK/ES/PP, that would be a much better measure of a player than the current +/- number.
CORSI is probably the best measurement out there in terms of puck possession. It doesn't rely on goals and paints a better picture of a players production.
Could you explain CORSI so that a beginning hockey fan could understand it? I am much more comfortable with baseball and football statistics but am trying to become more involved with hockey. Thank you in advance! If this question belongs in another thread please feel free to move. Sorry for my ignorance among you guys.cshea said:
The basic form of Corsi is that it is essentially a plus/minus of a teams total shots for against their total shots against while a player is on the ice at even strength. Every sort of shot is counted, not just goals or shots on net. Corsi includes goals, shots on goal, missed shots, blocked shots, posts- everything. The idea being that if you're shooting more than the other team, then you're controlling the puck.richgedman'sghost said:
That is a very basic explanation of Corsi, but it's really only the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot to explore, and If you're interested in learning more, the 2 sites I visit are:
http://www.behindthenet.ca/index.php
http://www.extraskater.com/
I like Extra Skater a bit more. They update their numbers quicker than Behind the Net and they have more content. Extra Skater also has a Glossary that helps explain some of the statistics.
Edit: TSOYRRA's link's bellow offer a much better explanation than I could ever give. Check those out.
richgedman'sghost said:
Here's a nice primer: http://www.secondcityhockey.com/2013/12/4/5167404/nhl-stats-made-simple-part-1-corsi-fenwick
And one on score effects: http://www.secondcityhockey.com/2013/12/12/5204176/understanding-stats-part-2/in/4965327
Contrary to popular belief, Peter Karmanos is in fact alive.
Jim Rutherford will step aside as Carolina's GM after the season and it's believe Ron Francis will replace him.
Jim Rutherford will step aside as Carolina's GM after the season and it's believe Ron Francis will replace him.
I thought he may be just because he's let Rutherford run the Hurricanes into the ground for the better part of a decade.
well to be fair they have had a ridiculous amount of injuries to key guys, but that is hockeyTheShynessClinic said:
Adam Gretz @AGretz 1h
Via http://mangameslost.com database PIT is 7th team since '09-10 to have more than 400 man games lost to injury. Only 1 to make playoffs
Via http://mangameslost.com database PIT is 7th team since '09-10 to have more than 400 man games lost to injury. Only 1 to make playoffs
At this point there is a very good likelihood that 6 of the 7 Canadian teams are going to miss the playoffs. In a league with 30 teams and 16 playoff spots, that's a tough thing to accomplish.
Gonna be a lot of hand wringing north of the 49th parallel.
Gonna be a lot of hand wringing north of the 49th parallel.
Any good place I can see a summary of the injuries? It seems like Detroit's injuries have been to far more important players. Its not like losing Paul Martin is a huge disadvantage.
AMcGhie said:
Can't comment on the Pens, but the Detroit News outlined the various injuries to the Wings this year just today.
Wasn't everyone absolutely shitting on the Orpik/Martin pairing in the Olympics? I know he's good, but I feel like Detroit misses Zetterberg or Datsuyk more than Pitt missed Martin.ForceAtHome said:
AMcGhie said:
Orpik was bad, but Martin was fine IMHO. But Martin and Orpik didn't play together for the entire Olympics. Orpik played with Carlson for a good chunk of the tournament. I'm not saying Martin is more important than Zetterberg or Datsyuk, but Martin is a good hockey player who Pittsburgh definitely misses. Martin and Letang are their two biggest minutes eaters. I don't see how that's not hugely significant. Martin has also been vastly improved from a couple of years ago when it looked like his game had eroded a bit.
@TSNBobMcKenzie: Chris Kreider expected to be out of NYR lineup for extended period: at least a month, maybe much longer. Hand injury, possibly broken bone.
I personally shit on Martin because I know someone who grew up friends with him, and occasionally won't shut up about it. Did I tell you guys how awesome the ECF's were last year, especially after she bragged to me for DAYS about having tickets to games 3 and 4?
edit: selplnig
edit: selplnig
https://twitter.com/penguins/status/448165872998551552"]#AskNeal[/url] - the winners so far:PedroSpecialK said:
This entire link has all of the winners.
http://www.crossingbroad.com/2014/03/the-penguins-askneal-twitter-hashtag-went-horribly-wrong.html#more-21631
That is so heartwarming.
Hah, dafoomie got a question in there.
EDIT: I suck at this twitter posting thing.
Hah, dafoomie got a question in there.
EDIT: I suck at this twitter posting thing.
My favorites were:
James - if you owned a bar, how cheap would your shots be?
and
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could cross check someone in the face?
James - if you owned a bar, how cheap would your shots be?
and
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could cross check someone in the face?
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
So did the notorious Mike from Attleboro. Perhaps even more shocking, it was a little funny:
Mike From Attleboro @MikeFromATown
How does one go about playing as dirty as you do while fighting less than the Swiss? #AskNeal
Deadspin, of all places, has a great and personal read on Luongo and his significance to Vancouver. I found it fascinating and an interesting view into the mind of a Canucks fan and Vancouver resident. I'd love to hear others' reactions if they get a chance to read it (it's fairly long).
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Interesting read. Also, a great link in that article to an Atlantic piece about Finnish goaltending. http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/02/the-puck-stops-here/357579/
Sometimes the jokes write themselves...
Wasn't a stick, wasn't a puck. It was a granola bar. Still, all smiles for Burr. pic.twitter.com/FHZpr3shXj
— Vancouver Canucks (@VanCanucks) March 27, 2014
Wasn't a stick, wasn't a puck. It was a granola bar. Still, all smiles for Burr. pic.twitter.com/FHZpr3shXj
— Vancouver Canucks (@VanCanucks) March 27, 2014