Round 1, Game 2 -- Toronto @ Boston

[IdiotKicker]

Not a great night but still had a chance. Gotta pick one up in Toronto now.

 

[Haunted]

Weak effort tonight

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Win on Wednesday

 

[Jordu]

Ullmark deserved better.

 

[LogansDad]

Ullmark deserved better.

Yep. He was outstanding. Could have been a 6-2 game. Bruins stunk.

 

[nolasoxfan]

Sleep walked through 2 periods.

 

[Curt S Loew]

Got their asses kicked. Goaltending only reason it was close. As usual.

 

[Ferm Sheller]

Toronto absolutely needed this and still were lucky to have pulled it out.

 

[wiffleballhero]

Damn. That sucked.

Toronto isn't really playing that great and yet here we are.

 

[lexrageorge]

Weak showing, let Toronto get their way on offense. We'll see if they can recover in Game 3.

 

[Dewey's 'stache]

Well fuck, 8 wins in a row. But this one wasn’t their best or even better effort and the end result showed. Ullmark was solid, goaltending wasn’t the issue.

 

[The Napkin]

not great

Losing Peeke killed them. Both on the pp and extra TOI for the other 5.
Marchand shoulda got the live chicken

 

[Myt1]

Marchy tough game. Great effort but just snake bit.

 

[OfTheCarmen]

I lost count of how many times they tried to clear it up the right side of the goal (as from standing behind the goal) up the boards to absolutely no one.

It was like I was watching my son's not-great bantam team play.

 

[joe dokes]

not great

Losing Peeke killed them.

Yeah. He's been underrated-ly solid for weeks.

 

[TSC]

Have to imagine Wotherspoon or Forbort is next in line. I don’t trust Lohrei enough defensively yet to put him against this team.

 

[Zososoxfan]

not great

Losing Peeke killed them. Both on the pp and extra TOI for the other 5.
Marchand shoulda got the live chicken

Can I, uhhh, get a little help understanding this? I'm guessing the guys at the top did the hockey good, and the guys at the bottom did the hockey not so good. But for instance, what's the distinction between offense and on ice offense? To be more specific to the graph, why is Geekie's teal value small while Mac's is just about even with his green (dark teal?) value?

 

[Bigdogx]

Damn it, Lindholm.

The guy just seems to have lost his game, he was a consistent liability out on the ice last night imo.

 

[Ferm Sheller]

The guy just seems to have lost his game, he was a consistent liability out on the ice last night imo.

Yes, agreed, but in his defense (no pun intended), he did prevent a wrap around goal.

 

[Jordu]

Can I, uhhh, get a little help understanding this? I'm guessing the guys at the top did the hockey good, and the guys at the bottom did the hockey not so good. But for instance, what's the distinction between offense and on ice offense? To be more specific to the graph, why is Geekie's teal value small while Mac's is just about even with his green (dark teal?) value?

I was curious myself, so I Googled around a bit. The overall concept is GameScore, adapted for the NHL by Dom Luszczyszyn of The Athletic. The model uses stats (from NaturalStatTrick's API) and feeds the stats into a formula. Which stats? These stats: goals, primary assists, secondary assists, shots on goal, blocked shots, penalty differential, face-offs, 5-on-5 Corsi differential, 5-on-5 goal differential.

I found this 2016 blog post from Luszczyszyn, if you want to see the formula: "Measuring Single Game Productivity: An Introduction To Game Score."

Individual stats are those stats for each player, and "on ice" stats are for when that player is on the ice with teammates.

It's a crude but useful tool.

 

[Ferm Sheller]

Just a reminder that someone who hasn't given up on the season should start a new game thread.

 

[tims4wins]

Just a reminder that someone who hasn't given up on the season should start a new game thread.

Reporting for duty.

 

[Ferm Sheller]

Reporting for duty.

Good man.