I wasn't able to watch all of the Habs/Bruins game last night, but did see most of it. I think I turned it on at the beginning of the second period, and watched through the end of the first overtime (I knew I wasn't going to be able to stay away through the period break).
So I missed Subban's goal to open the scoring, but did see Bourque's goal to extend the lead (he's still dead to me, though). After that, it felt like the Canadiens kept playing well most of the way through the period, although the Fenwick chart shows that the rest of the game was pretty solidly dominated by the Bruins.
And it certainly felt like the Bruins were dominating for the last five minutes or so of the second, and solidly through the third and initial OT.
And, of course, that OT indicates that the Bruins did come back in the third. In fact, they scored three, but Montreal did match one of those so that they never fell behind.
Although the Habs did get a couple chances in that OT, they spent most of the period playing defense.
But they got a break thirty seconds or so from the end, as they got a power play. That didn't win it for them, but gave them some momentum going into the second extra time. And in the second extra period, they got another break, as they got a second power play four minutes in. And that did win it for them, as it took only seven seconds for PK to notch his second of the night and give them the lead in the series.
In the end, shots were 51-33, and Fenwick 68-44, so things don't look so good for the Canadiens, going forward. But they've got a lead now, and have seized home ice advantage, so it's not terrible either. I'm still calling it in favor of Boston, but it's much narrower, now (and it certainly wouldn't break my heart to be wrong).
Showing posts with label analysis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label analysis. Show all posts
20140502
20140402
It's over
I was going to write about the last Caps games against Boston and Nashville, but after that tire fire of a game tonight against Dallas, I give up.
They actually started out pretty well, getting a number of good chances through the first eight minutes or so of the game. Then the Caps got a power play. On the power play, they quickly gave up TWO (!) breakaways, and lost the power play when Carlson hooked Garbutt to keep him from getting the shot off. All that only took about thirty seconds.
Things didn't seriously go south, though, until Dallas scored on a nice tip-in by Tyler Seguin, and the rout began. It took a while for Dallas to score a second goal, but that was all on Halak. The Caps just lost any ability to pressure Dallas, and generally looked lost.
I was going to say they looked lost in the defensive zone, but they looked lost in the neutral zone, too. And they didn't keep the puck in the offensive zone long enough to come to any sort of judgement there. More importantly, Dallas did a very nice job transitioning from D to O whenever the Caps gave up the puck, and got several breakaways.
There was the two-man clean breakaway on which Whitney scored. There was another breakaway almost right away. It was stopped, but did lead to a goal when, after a shot from the point, Erskine and Brouillette both took the same man, leaving Jeffrey alone at the side of the net, where he beat Halak (a nice overhead shot of the CF). Those two goals were on the same shift. By the fourth line. I almost turned it off right then, and wish I had.
In any event, Oates had had enough, and pulled Halak. I hope it was to send a message to the rest of the team, because it certainly wasn't Halak's fault they were down three. Hasek in his prime would have been hard-pressed to do better with that (so-called) defense in front of him.
Anyway, how much did it inspire the team? They gave up two more odd-man rushes in the next minute (yeah, Holtby looked good, too).
But it took until the last five or six minutes of the second for the Caps to even start catching up possessionally. To their credit, though, they did continue to catch up (helped by several penalties), and even managed to finish the game tied in Fenwick. Close, 5v5 Fenwick, however, was not tied. It was not even close.
And, midway through the third, Jeffrey scored again on a nice tic-tac-toe passing play. Again, fourth line. And Jeffrey, it should be noted, had just scored his first two goals of the season.
Anyway, that was enough for me. I turned it off, and missed the Caps taking their first five goal deficit of the season. Good times.
So, in the biggest games of the season, the Caps came out flat against the Bruins and got stomped. Then they played so-so against a Nashville team with no particular motivation, and were lucky to get into overtime. Then they played a hungry (and fast, it should be noted) Dallas team and just got curb-stomped. Too bad it's too late to try for lottery position.
I don't know where this team goes from here. Oates has to go. He did a very nice job getting OV back on track (and a decent job helping a few other players), but his system sucks raw eggs. It looked like the Caps were starting to get it at the end of last season, but that now appears to have been an illusion. They are not improving, and might even be getting worse.
His line combos are baffling, and he shows no sign of recognizing that some of the combos he's apparently liked are just horrible. That was Laich and Brouwer early in the season, and Beagle and OV recently. JP from Japer's Rink tweeted a couple of charts yesterday that showed that Beagle is the absolute worst player to pair with OV, both in shots generated and in shots allowed. And not by a small amount, in either case.
Oates seems to have no recognition of which defensemen are getting the job done, and which aren't. Hint: Erskine isn't, and has been an almost unmitigated disaster this season. And, McPhee, nice $2M extension there. Schmidt and Oleksy were both doing pretty well, but have been buried in Hershey for much of the season. Carrick has talent, but isn't ready for the NHL, but was allowed to stay for thirty games.
The penalty kill has basically been a disaster all season. They show almost no ability to stop the other team from getting set up in the offensive zone, and, as a result, allow roughly two shot attempts per minute. The only reason it looks somewhat respectable is because the goalies have saved 90% of the shots, which is not a sustainable formula.
And Oates' management of the goalie situations have been execrable. Holtby is far too good a goalie to be allowed to sit as much as he has since Halak arrived. And how about that three-goalie carousel in the middle of the season, with Holtby, Neuvy, and Gru? That was genius, right?
McPhee needs to go as well. He's had one good coaching hire over his career, the talent pipeline is nearly bare. His desperation trade for Erat, late last season, was a complete disaster (not helped by the fact that Oates seemed to have no idea how to use Erat's considerable talents). His agreeing to dump Perreault for a bag of pucks at the beginning of the season was mystifying. Yes, we've gotten to see Wilson more, and he definitely shows talent, but Perreault would have helped the team a ton more, this season. Especially when Grabo was injured, but even before that the difference would have been large.
Perreault: 691 minutes, 52.3% fenwick for, forty points, and I would bet many more penalties drawn than the fifteen for which he's been called
Wilson: 572 minutes, 46.1% fenwick for, ten points, and we really don't want to talk about the PIMs
And I've ignored, of course, that center is a much more valuable position than wing.
Moving on... I don't know about the players. Erskine should be waived, for sure. Even if they only reclaim half of his cap hit and have to play him in Hershey, that's better than playing him in Washington.
Grabo needs to be re-signed, stat! Penner should be re-signed almost as fast. I don't think either should be given more than three year deals, though.
I'm slightly ambivalent, because I don't think Laich's been healthy all season (so I'm not sure how much of his poor play is age, and how much injury), but I'm leaning toward saying he should be let go (maybe via compliance buy-out).
Halak should be allowed to walk. He's pretty good, but unless his contract demands are far less than I expect, he won't be worth it. In fact, I wouldn't want him to stick around for more than one year under any circumstances (well, unless he'd take about a third of what I expect he'll get, I suppose), and I can't see him agreeing to a one year deal. Call up Gru next year, and save the money. The drop in performance will be negligible, at best.
Beyond that, I'm low on ideas. Volpatti certainly isn't helping the team, but as a league-minimum player on the fourth line, he's not hurting it either.
Beagle hasn't helped the team much this season, although much of the onus on that goes on Oates, for playing him way over his head. Beagle's a decent checker, penalty killer, and face-off guy. Use him like that, and he won't be hurting the team at his salary. As top line center, he's the punchline of a really terrible joke.
Brouwer? There've certainly been times, this season, when I would've been glad to see him jettisoned (especially when he was constantly paired with Laich), but he's not a bad player. Can't decide if he's really worth that salary, but maybe he is. Certainly wouldn't mind seeing him replaced with someone who drives play, though that would almost certainly require trading Troy.
MarJo has improved a lot this season, I think. He hasn't taken advantage of his speed quite as much, but he's much stronger on the puck, to the point that he's moderately useful in a grinding, cycling game.
Schmidt can certainly be called up; he'll help the team.
All of which really leaves me wondering where the room is to improve the team. There really is a lot of talent there, and they've terribly underperformed that talent level. Maybe big changes at the top, combined with one or two small tweaks in the lineup, will result in significantly improved results. We can hope, anyway.
FWIW, next game is Friday in New Jersey. I can't decide if I'll bother to watch.
They actually started out pretty well, getting a number of good chances through the first eight minutes or so of the game. Then the Caps got a power play. On the power play, they quickly gave up TWO (!) breakaways, and lost the power play when Carlson hooked Garbutt to keep him from getting the shot off. All that only took about thirty seconds.
Things didn't seriously go south, though, until Dallas scored on a nice tip-in by Tyler Seguin, and the rout began. It took a while for Dallas to score a second goal, but that was all on Halak. The Caps just lost any ability to pressure Dallas, and generally looked lost.
I was going to say they looked lost in the defensive zone, but they looked lost in the neutral zone, too. And they didn't keep the puck in the offensive zone long enough to come to any sort of judgement there. More importantly, Dallas did a very nice job transitioning from D to O whenever the Caps gave up the puck, and got several breakaways.
There was the two-man clean breakaway on which Whitney scored. There was another breakaway almost right away. It was stopped, but did lead to a goal when, after a shot from the point, Erskine and Brouillette both took the same man, leaving Jeffrey alone at the side of the net, where he beat Halak (a nice overhead shot of the CF). Those two goals were on the same shift. By the fourth line. I almost turned it off right then, and wish I had.
In any event, Oates had had enough, and pulled Halak. I hope it was to send a message to the rest of the team, because it certainly wasn't Halak's fault they were down three. Hasek in his prime would have been hard-pressed to do better with that (so-called) defense in front of him.
Anyway, how much did it inspire the team? They gave up two more odd-man rushes in the next minute (yeah, Holtby looked good, too).
But it took until the last five or six minutes of the second for the Caps to even start catching up possessionally. To their credit, though, they did continue to catch up (helped by several penalties), and even managed to finish the game tied in Fenwick. Close, 5v5 Fenwick, however, was not tied. It was not even close.
And, midway through the third, Jeffrey scored again on a nice tic-tac-toe passing play. Again, fourth line. And Jeffrey, it should be noted, had just scored his first two goals of the season.
Anyway, that was enough for me. I turned it off, and missed the Caps taking their first five goal deficit of the season. Good times.
So, in the biggest games of the season, the Caps came out flat against the Bruins and got stomped. Then they played so-so against a Nashville team with no particular motivation, and were lucky to get into overtime. Then they played a hungry (and fast, it should be noted) Dallas team and just got curb-stomped. Too bad it's too late to try for lottery position.
I don't know where this team goes from here. Oates has to go. He did a very nice job getting OV back on track (and a decent job helping a few other players), but his system sucks raw eggs. It looked like the Caps were starting to get it at the end of last season, but that now appears to have been an illusion. They are not improving, and might even be getting worse.
His line combos are baffling, and he shows no sign of recognizing that some of the combos he's apparently liked are just horrible. That was Laich and Brouwer early in the season, and Beagle and OV recently. JP from Japer's Rink tweeted a couple of charts yesterday that showed that Beagle is the absolute worst player to pair with OV, both in shots generated and in shots allowed. And not by a small amount, in either case.
Oates seems to have no recognition of which defensemen are getting the job done, and which aren't. Hint: Erskine isn't, and has been an almost unmitigated disaster this season. And, McPhee, nice $2M extension there. Schmidt and Oleksy were both doing pretty well, but have been buried in Hershey for much of the season. Carrick has talent, but isn't ready for the NHL, but was allowed to stay for thirty games.
The penalty kill has basically been a disaster all season. They show almost no ability to stop the other team from getting set up in the offensive zone, and, as a result, allow roughly two shot attempts per minute. The only reason it looks somewhat respectable is because the goalies have saved 90% of the shots, which is not a sustainable formula.
And Oates' management of the goalie situations have been execrable. Holtby is far too good a goalie to be allowed to sit as much as he has since Halak arrived. And how about that three-goalie carousel in the middle of the season, with Holtby, Neuvy, and Gru? That was genius, right?
McPhee needs to go as well. He's had one good coaching hire over his career, the talent pipeline is nearly bare. His desperation trade for Erat, late last season, was a complete disaster (not helped by the fact that Oates seemed to have no idea how to use Erat's considerable talents). His agreeing to dump Perreault for a bag of pucks at the beginning of the season was mystifying. Yes, we've gotten to see Wilson more, and he definitely shows talent, but Perreault would have helped the team a ton more, this season. Especially when Grabo was injured, but even before that the difference would have been large.
Perreault: 691 minutes, 52.3% fenwick for, forty points, and I would bet many more penalties drawn than the fifteen for which he's been called
Wilson: 572 minutes, 46.1% fenwick for, ten points, and we really don't want to talk about the PIMs
And I've ignored, of course, that center is a much more valuable position than wing.
Moving on... I don't know about the players. Erskine should be waived, for sure. Even if they only reclaim half of his cap hit and have to play him in Hershey, that's better than playing him in Washington.
Grabo needs to be re-signed, stat! Penner should be re-signed almost as fast. I don't think either should be given more than three year deals, though.
I'm slightly ambivalent, because I don't think Laich's been healthy all season (so I'm not sure how much of his poor play is age, and how much injury), but I'm leaning toward saying he should be let go (maybe via compliance buy-out).
Halak should be allowed to walk. He's pretty good, but unless his contract demands are far less than I expect, he won't be worth it. In fact, I wouldn't want him to stick around for more than one year under any circumstances (well, unless he'd take about a third of what I expect he'll get, I suppose), and I can't see him agreeing to a one year deal. Call up Gru next year, and save the money. The drop in performance will be negligible, at best.
Beyond that, I'm low on ideas. Volpatti certainly isn't helping the team, but as a league-minimum player on the fourth line, he's not hurting it either.
Beagle hasn't helped the team much this season, although much of the onus on that goes on Oates, for playing him way over his head. Beagle's a decent checker, penalty killer, and face-off guy. Use him like that, and he won't be hurting the team at his salary. As top line center, he's the punchline of a really terrible joke.
Brouwer? There've certainly been times, this season, when I would've been glad to see him jettisoned (especially when he was constantly paired with Laich), but he's not a bad player. Can't decide if he's really worth that salary, but maybe he is. Certainly wouldn't mind seeing him replaced with someone who drives play, though that would almost certainly require trading Troy.
MarJo has improved a lot this season, I think. He hasn't taken advantage of his speed quite as much, but he's much stronger on the puck, to the point that he's moderately useful in a grinding, cycling game.
Schmidt can certainly be called up; he'll help the team.
All of which really leaves me wondering where the room is to improve the team. There really is a lot of talent there, and they've terribly underperformed that talent level. Maybe big changes at the top, combined with one or two small tweaks in the lineup, will result in significantly improved results. We can hope, anyway.
FWIW, next game is Friday in New Jersey. I can't decide if I'll bother to watch.
20140129
The power of Green Over Game
I watched last night's Caps game in Buffalo after putting the kids to bed.
There was definitely some drama going in, as Laich had missed yesterday's skate, and it was unknown whether that was going to keep him out. He did end up playing, happily, and even looked good at times (he's seemed very hit-and-miss this season, with an awful lot of missing).
Holtby was in net, which was good, with the rest of the defense the same. Offensively, Wellman was still up for Grabovski. Happily for the Caps, Miller got the night off for the Sabres.
The game got off to a fairly slow start, with little going on for the first couple minutes. But Ellis tripped Erat in trying to recover from being badly burned, giving the Caps an early power play. The Caps lost the subsequent draw, but brought the puck back down and got Enroth to freeze the shot. OV tried to go back to the bench (apparently to change his gloves), but wasn't allowed by the refs. He came back, corralled the puck Brouwer had bumped back to him, and fired it between a defender's legs and into the top-left corner of the net.
A minute later, the Caps were back in the offensive end, when Green flung a shot towards the net. It made it through the traffic, and Green was credited with his sixth of the season, but replay review showed that the puck hit OV's pants on its way in. (And I'd never noticed before, but that deflection meant OV got credited with a shot and Green didn't, even though OV wasn't even trying to touch the puck. Interesting.)
A big flurry by the Sabres a couple minutes later, culminating in a rush up-ice. Holtby made the first two stops, but OV (in good position) failed to hinder Ehrhoff at all, and Ehrhoff put it over Holtby's leg for the score.
That finished out the scoring in the first, though the Caps had a strong edge in Fenwick the rest of the way.
An early penalty against Dima led to a lot of zone time for the Sabres, resulting in a Hodgson goal two minutes into the second.
That motivated the Caps to take over the game for several minutes, leading to Green breaking into the zone with the puck, getting Enroth to commit to him, then skating the puck around the net and scoring on the reverse layup (in off of Enroth, I think). I should also note that that was a dominant shift by the fourth line, leading to that. Their next shift was also excellent, with great forechecking. Indeed, Wilson looked better than he had in quite a while; he was definitely trying to show his ability to generate chances, not to hit hard or chuck knuckles.
Carlson had a really bad pinch, though, just after that, leading quickly to Verrone getting his first goal. Alzner made a good initial stop of the rush, and pushed it all the way to the boards. But all five Caps went to that side, leaving Verrone all alone, next to the goal, on the other side. So when Foligno's pass came across, he had an empty net and time. Not a frequent combination. (And, for those keeping score at home, that was one minute, two seconds after Green's goal.)
A few minutes later, though, Brouwer drew a hooking penalty to give the Caps another power play. OV got the puck in his normal position, but with no shot, so he threw it all the way across (through three defenders) to Erat, who quickly fed Brouwer in his normal position for the score. Nicely done, all the way around.
That finished out the scoring in the second (in fact, it almost finished out the shooting, too; there was only one more unblocked shot attempt over the last three minutes) with the Caps again having a one goal lead.
Buffalo, who'd been dominated for most of the game up to this point, put together a heck of a seven minute (or so) stretch, ending with Hodgson stealing the puck from Chimmer (drawing a penalty in the process), faking out the defender (not a good play by Alzner here, either), and putting a backhander over Holtby's shoulder for his second of the game. Very nice play by Hodgson, very poor one by Chimmer; in particular, Chimmer pled his case over the penalty call while Hodgson skated in on the net.
Play, the rest of the way, was pretty even, until they got to overtime. There, the Caps took over, with Green cementing his "Game Over" nickname one minute in. But that whole minute was some very nice 4-on-4 play by the Caps.
This game really felt like a dominant one (and 5v5 close FF% corroborates that (64.2%)), but there were some terrible mistakes a few times in there. Plus, another case of the Caps giving one back right after scoring.
Erskine and Carrick were serious anchors on the Caps possession numbers. The other four defenders were 58-65% CF, while Erskine and Carrick were 29%. Ouch. Why are Oleksy and Schmidt in Hershey, again? And why the hell were Erskine and Carrick getting most of their starts in the defensive end (83%)?!?
Wellman has looked pretty decent in his two games. Not like a driver of play, of course (which Grabo can be), but not like an anchor either. That's better than I was expecting. Let's hope it continues.
The power play, of course, looked very good, with two goals on three attempts. And in those 4+ minutes, they had six attempts, four of which were on-net.
The PK, on the other hand, did not look so good. The defenders did block half of the shot attempts, which is good, I guess. But there were six in under three minutes, and that's too many. I wonder how much of that is driven by Erskine and Carrick's performance (roughly 1/4 of the total time).
Holtby, I thought, had a pretty good game, despite that terrible save percentage. He just wasn't getting much help from the defense. Two of the goals are directly attributable to the skaters, and a case could be made for a third, as well.
Anyway, overall a very good game by the Caps. They dominated for most of the game (basically, outside of the first seven minutes of the third), but they really need to concentrate more. They can't keep having breakdowns leading to quick scores like kept happening last night.
Next up are the Blue Jackets, who have finally cooled of, and are currently tied with the Caps in the standings. Go Caps!
There was definitely some drama going in, as Laich had missed yesterday's skate, and it was unknown whether that was going to keep him out. He did end up playing, happily, and even looked good at times (he's seemed very hit-and-miss this season, with an awful lot of missing).
Holtby was in net, which was good, with the rest of the defense the same. Offensively, Wellman was still up for Grabovski. Happily for the Caps, Miller got the night off for the Sabres.
The game got off to a fairly slow start, with little going on for the first couple minutes. But Ellis tripped Erat in trying to recover from being badly burned, giving the Caps an early power play. The Caps lost the subsequent draw, but brought the puck back down and got Enroth to freeze the shot. OV tried to go back to the bench (apparently to change his gloves), but wasn't allowed by the refs. He came back, corralled the puck Brouwer had bumped back to him, and fired it between a defender's legs and into the top-left corner of the net.
A minute later, the Caps were back in the offensive end, when Green flung a shot towards the net. It made it through the traffic, and Green was credited with his sixth of the season, but replay review showed that the puck hit OV's pants on its way in. (And I'd never noticed before, but that deflection meant OV got credited with a shot and Green didn't, even though OV wasn't even trying to touch the puck. Interesting.)
A big flurry by the Sabres a couple minutes later, culminating in a rush up-ice. Holtby made the first two stops, but OV (in good position) failed to hinder Ehrhoff at all, and Ehrhoff put it over Holtby's leg for the score.
That finished out the scoring in the first, though the Caps had a strong edge in Fenwick the rest of the way.
An early penalty against Dima led to a lot of zone time for the Sabres, resulting in a Hodgson goal two minutes into the second.
That motivated the Caps to take over the game for several minutes, leading to Green breaking into the zone with the puck, getting Enroth to commit to him, then skating the puck around the net and scoring on the reverse layup (in off of Enroth, I think). I should also note that that was a dominant shift by the fourth line, leading to that. Their next shift was also excellent, with great forechecking. Indeed, Wilson looked better than he had in quite a while; he was definitely trying to show his ability to generate chances, not to hit hard or chuck knuckles.
Carlson had a really bad pinch, though, just after that, leading quickly to Verrone getting his first goal. Alzner made a good initial stop of the rush, and pushed it all the way to the boards. But all five Caps went to that side, leaving Verrone all alone, next to the goal, on the other side. So when Foligno's pass came across, he had an empty net and time. Not a frequent combination. (And, for those keeping score at home, that was one minute, two seconds after Green's goal.)
A few minutes later, though, Brouwer drew a hooking penalty to give the Caps another power play. OV got the puck in his normal position, but with no shot, so he threw it all the way across (through three defenders) to Erat, who quickly fed Brouwer in his normal position for the score. Nicely done, all the way around.
That finished out the scoring in the second (in fact, it almost finished out the shooting, too; there was only one more unblocked shot attempt over the last three minutes) with the Caps again having a one goal lead.
Buffalo, who'd been dominated for most of the game up to this point, put together a heck of a seven minute (or so) stretch, ending with Hodgson stealing the puck from Chimmer (drawing a penalty in the process), faking out the defender (not a good play by Alzner here, either), and putting a backhander over Holtby's shoulder for his second of the game. Very nice play by Hodgson, very poor one by Chimmer; in particular, Chimmer pled his case over the penalty call while Hodgson skated in on the net.
Play, the rest of the way, was pretty even, until they got to overtime. There, the Caps took over, with Green cementing his "Game Over" nickname one minute in. But that whole minute was some very nice 4-on-4 play by the Caps.
This game really felt like a dominant one (and 5v5 close FF% corroborates that (64.2%)), but there were some terrible mistakes a few times in there. Plus, another case of the Caps giving one back right after scoring.
Erskine and Carrick were serious anchors on the Caps possession numbers. The other four defenders were 58-65% CF, while Erskine and Carrick were 29%. Ouch. Why are Oleksy and Schmidt in Hershey, again? And why the hell were Erskine and Carrick getting most of their starts in the defensive end (83%)?!?
Wellman has looked pretty decent in his two games. Not like a driver of play, of course (which Grabo can be), but not like an anchor either. That's better than I was expecting. Let's hope it continues.
The power play, of course, looked very good, with two goals on three attempts. And in those 4+ minutes, they had six attempts, four of which were on-net.
The PK, on the other hand, did not look so good. The defenders did block half of the shot attempts, which is good, I guess. But there were six in under three minutes, and that's too many. I wonder how much of that is driven by Erskine and Carrick's performance (roughly 1/4 of the total time).
Holtby, I thought, had a pretty good game, despite that terrible save percentage. He just wasn't getting much help from the defense. Two of the goals are directly attributable to the skaters, and a case could be made for a third, as well.
Anyway, overall a very good game by the Caps. They dominated for most of the game (basically, outside of the first seven minutes of the third), but they really need to concentrate more. They can't keep having breakdowns leading to quick scores like kept happening last night.
Next up are the Blue Jackets, who have finally cooled of, and are currently tied with the Caps in the standings. Go Caps!
20140119
Caps feeling blue, jacketed
I wasn't able to watch the Caps game against the Blue Jackets the other night; I didn't realize, in advance, that it was on Comcast's secondary channel, and didn't realize until after I'd put the kids to bed (and done a couple other things, I think). So I turned it on just in time to see the last 45 seconds or so, with the Caps trying frantically to reduce the embarassment of the 5-1 score.
I went looking through the stats, to see if there was any saving grace to the score, and there really wasn't. Gru had a terrible night, and Holtby was merely good in relief. But possession was heavily in favor of Columbus, no matter how you want to measure it.
Actually, one thing about it was really weird; overall Fenwick was just about even until Columbus scored its third goal. That's usually when the team losing starts picking up some steam (since the team leading is focused more on holding its lead than extending), but it appears that the Caps gave up at that point. Fenwick was 21-19 (in favor of Columbus) at that point. It was 26-16 the rest of the way (and that's giving the Caps credit for their last five, which all happened after Columbus seems to've stopped trying to score).
So there's really nothing good in the game.
The power play didn't score in almost eight minutes, though they did get eight shots on net (and attempted five more). That's not terrible, but not great, either.
The PK allowed eight shots (and three more attempts) in just over six minutes, with two goals (and a third goal was scored three seconds after OV got out of the box, before he could get back into the play).
Bob, obviously, had a great game, stopping twenty-six of twenty-seven, but they really needed to send more pucks his way.
Erat finally escaped purgatory for the game, and got an assist on Carlson's goal (as near as I can tell, he was on a line with Backstrom and Brouwer, although I don't know the rest of the lineup shifts (except that Volpatti sat out).
One thing I can't figure out is that Erskine and Carrick again got a lot more D-Zone faceoffs than Green and Orlov. I get that Green and Orlov are the best in the offensive zone, but they're also the best at moving the puck up the ice. They're also much more defensively responsible in their own end. But the faceoff numbers for the defensemen make it look like there was a lot of shuffling from the combos we've been seeing, lately (Erskine had 7 D-zone draws, for instance, while Carrick had only three).
I'm not sure where all that leaves us, except hoping that things work a lot better this evening against the Rangers (and thinking it's very unlikely to be Gru getting the nod tonight; not sure where to bet between the other two). Go Caps!
I went looking through the stats, to see if there was any saving grace to the score, and there really wasn't. Gru had a terrible night, and Holtby was merely good in relief. But possession was heavily in favor of Columbus, no matter how you want to measure it.
Actually, one thing about it was really weird; overall Fenwick was just about even until Columbus scored its third goal. That's usually when the team losing starts picking up some steam (since the team leading is focused more on holding its lead than extending), but it appears that the Caps gave up at that point. Fenwick was 21-19 (in favor of Columbus) at that point. It was 26-16 the rest of the way (and that's giving the Caps credit for their last five, which all happened after Columbus seems to've stopped trying to score).
So there's really nothing good in the game.
The power play didn't score in almost eight minutes, though they did get eight shots on net (and attempted five more). That's not terrible, but not great, either.
The PK allowed eight shots (and three more attempts) in just over six minutes, with two goals (and a third goal was scored three seconds after OV got out of the box, before he could get back into the play).
Bob, obviously, had a great game, stopping twenty-six of twenty-seven, but they really needed to send more pucks his way.
Erat finally escaped purgatory for the game, and got an assist on Carlson's goal (as near as I can tell, he was on a line with Backstrom and Brouwer, although I don't know the rest of the lineup shifts (except that Volpatti sat out).
One thing I can't figure out is that Erskine and Carrick again got a lot more D-Zone faceoffs than Green and Orlov. I get that Green and Orlov are the best in the offensive zone, but they're also the best at moving the puck up the ice. They're also much more defensively responsible in their own end. But the faceoff numbers for the defensemen make it look like there was a lot of shuffling from the combos we've been seeing, lately (Erskine had 7 D-zone draws, for instance, while Carrick had only three).
I'm not sure where all that leaves us, except hoping that things work a lot better this evening against the Rangers (and thinking it's very unlikely to be Gru getting the nod tonight; not sure where to bet between the other two). Go Caps!
20131209
No-money-ball?
I've been a casual fan of the A's for quite a few years. No, I don't follow them especially closely, but I'm happy to hear about them doing well.
So this article about their recent run of semi-success caught my attention.
But I've got to say that it's pretty misguided, on a fundamental level.
...
It’s taken a decade to realize that [Moneyball team-building] sinks like a stone in a flooded dugout in the postseason.
And, frankly, that's a silly thing to say. To start with, judging success or failure in baseball on six games is ludicrous. Luck dominates over that time span. Try picking six games out of a player's season, and see how representative they are of the whole season. It would, of course, be possible, ex post facto, to pick ones that would, but randomly picking, that would be very unlikely.
Plus, there's the fact that they did get to Game Five of all those series; they were no blown out in any of them. They belonged in each of those games. If you're going to say "Moneyball can't compete", you need to show that they didn't even belong in those games.
Muddying the issue even further were that it took very flukish plays to not win two of those games. Giambi not sliding, and the catcher not being called for runner's interference for blocking the plate without having the ball.
That's what Beane meant, when he said that "His shit doesn't work in the postseason"; not that it wouldn't work, but that all the good work in the world can still have you losing to an inferior team in a short series (and even seven games is really a short series).
For an even more extreme example, look at the 2001 Mariners. Unbelievably good team, playing to its potential that year, and they still lost the division series. It happens; the A's have been very unlucky. They'll get over the hump.
Also, if you want to look at another example, look at the Rays. Their payroll hasn't been terribly higher than the A's, and they've gotten past the division series. So it's absurd to say that the A's can't advance.
It sucks, I know (believe me, as a Caps fan, boy, do I know), but it happens.
So this article about their recent run of semi-success caught my attention.
But I've got to say that it's pretty misguided, on a fundamental level.
Over the past fourteen years of the financially-stingy Moneyball era, Oakland has played in six ALDS Game 5's and lost all six.
...
It’s taken a decade to realize that [Moneyball team-building] sinks like a stone in a flooded dugout in the postseason.
And, frankly, that's a silly thing to say. To start with, judging success or failure in baseball on six games is ludicrous. Luck dominates over that time span. Try picking six games out of a player's season, and see how representative they are of the whole season. It would, of course, be possible, ex post facto, to pick ones that would, but randomly picking, that would be very unlikely.
Plus, there's the fact that they did get to Game Five of all those series; they were no blown out in any of them. They belonged in each of those games. If you're going to say "Moneyball can't compete", you need to show that they didn't even belong in those games.
Muddying the issue even further were that it took very flukish plays to not win two of those games. Giambi not sliding, and the catcher not being called for runner's interference for blocking the plate without having the ball.
That's what Beane meant, when he said that "His shit doesn't work in the postseason"; not that it wouldn't work, but that all the good work in the world can still have you losing to an inferior team in a short series (and even seven games is really a short series).
For an even more extreme example, look at the 2001 Mariners. Unbelievably good team, playing to its potential that year, and they still lost the division series. It happens; the A's have been very unlucky. They'll get over the hump.
Also, if you want to look at another example, look at the Rays. Their payroll hasn't been terribly higher than the A's, and they've gotten past the division series. So it's absurd to say that the A's can't advance.
It sucks, I know (believe me, as a Caps fan, boy, do I know), but it happens.
20131206
Adventures in stock forecasting
I've been meaning to write about this article for a while. It's talking about things financial analysts say that don't make any sense.
A few of them are great:
4. "Earnings met expectations, but analysts were looking for a beat."
If you're expecting earnings to beat expectations, you don't know what the word "expectations" means.
And most of them are pretty good. But I do take a bit of an issue with this one:
2. "Earnings were positive before one-time charges."
This is Wall Street's equivalent of, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
And that's because it's rarely true that those one-time charges are enough to sink a company. And unless they are, all you really care about is whether the company can continue to make money. If continuous revenues and expenses lead to a profit, you don't really care if one lawsuit knocked that into a quarterly loss. Unless that lawsuit is immensely bigger than revenues, or unless you can reasonably expect it to be repeated by a bunch more follow-on suits.
For instance, investors didn't really care about the SECs recent $13B fine against JP Morgan-Chase. It's roughly seven months profits, but has zero long-term effect on health of the company. Now, if that had been a $130B suit, they would care (and the flip response there would be dead-on), but at that level? Big deal.
A few of them are great:
4. "Earnings met expectations, but analysts were looking for a beat."
If you're expecting earnings to beat expectations, you don't know what the word "expectations" means.
And most of them are pretty good. But I do take a bit of an issue with this one:
2. "Earnings were positive before one-time charges."
This is Wall Street's equivalent of, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
And that's because it's rarely true that those one-time charges are enough to sink a company. And unless they are, all you really care about is whether the company can continue to make money. If continuous revenues and expenses lead to a profit, you don't really care if one lawsuit knocked that into a quarterly loss. Unless that lawsuit is immensely bigger than revenues, or unless you can reasonably expect it to be repeated by a bunch more follow-on suits.
For instance, investors didn't really care about the SECs recent $13B fine against JP Morgan-Chase. It's roughly seven months profits, but has zero long-term effect on health of the company. Now, if that had been a $130B suit, they would care (and the flip response there would be dead-on), but at that level? Big deal.
Caps catch-up
Another reason I haven't been too enthusiastic about posting is that the Caps pretty much are what I'd been suspecting. I have actually managed to watch all of the games (well, for DVR-related reasons, I missed the first period of the Islanders game, and also turned off the Carolina game when it got to 4-0. But I saw pretty much everything else), and they've convinced me that something is fundamentally wrong with this team.
I'm not sure what it is. I felt really good about Oates as a coach, last year. But this year, he continues to baffle me. Most notably with the way Erat is being jerked around; it blew my mind when Marty was scratched, a few games back. It certainly wasn't a surprise when, a few days later, Erat asked for a trade; I can't blame him.
But that's hardly the only puzzlement. Fehr plays pretty well (to be fair, sometimes he's excellent) when he's in, but has been scratched an awful lot. Volpatti is still getting a sweater just about every game (which is said not to denigrate him or his play, but by no stretch of the imagination is he better than Erat or Fehr).
Laich and Brouwer were finally separated, but it took an awfully long time. I think part of it was that they do do an excellent job together on the penalty kill, and Oates wanted to use players from the same line together on the PK, but that seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
And separating Laich and Brouwer resulted in splitting the phenomenally successful Chimmer-Grabo-Ward line. I'll give a little bit of a pass on that, since it was replaced by the previously-successful Chimmer-Laich-Ward line, but I don't think that was the only possibility.
And the end result of all the machinations is that the team has a top-quality first line and a top-quality third line (25-84-42) but still can only win by getting phenomenally good goaltending. That's great when it works, but it's hardly a recipe for predictable success. Yes, if you've got Hasek-level goaltending (relative to average), you can do it, but goaltenders are kinda hard to predict.
Despite the talent on the team (the only glaring hole is 4D, and I think Schmidt's been at least adequate in that role), their possession numbers are pretty bad, and they're playing catch-up all too often.
In fact, they were making a big deal in the broadcast (in the Carolina game, I think) about the Caps leading the lead in late-last-period tying goals (and let's face it, that game-tying shortie by Nick was pretty incredible). While it's great that they've been able to do that, what isn't great is that they've needed to, so often.
How many times have they gone down to start? How many of those times have they seemed to be on autopilot for most, if not all, of the first period? How many times have they allowed a matching goal within two and a half minutes of scoring? Too many, a bunch, and way too many, respectively, I think.
I'm beginning to think there's something fundamentally wrong that has little or nothing to do with talent. Maybe it's a lack of pushing by team leaders. Maybe it's a coaching problem (the problems on the breakout certainly seem to point to this) with a bad system, or with a system that demands that all the players have Oates' personal ability to see the ice. Maybe it's assistant coaches? I loved Calle as a player, but he's in charge of the PK, and the PK doesn't do a good enough job keeping the other team out at the blue line (no, I'm not claiming to know what's off, there, but I'm pretty sure something is).
What I do know is that the team has gotten a lot of luck (especially in the shootout, but also in goaltending on the PK), and, while they are in second place, they're closer to last than to first. They also have the fourth-worst ROW in the conference, so they're not going to get any tie-breakers. The one bright spot is that they do have the second best goal differential in the division.
As far as individual games over the last couple of weeks, I thought they played well against the Islanders and against the Leafs. And they were doing pretty well against the Canes, until things fell apart impressively quickly. Other than that, I've been pretty underwhelmed. Update: I forgot to mention that they looked pretty good in the first Montreal game, but Budaj had a hella good game.
I guess we'll see if the current trend (towards better possession numbers) holds for a while. If it does, then maybe I'll revise my opinion.
I'm not sure what it is. I felt really good about Oates as a coach, last year. But this year, he continues to baffle me. Most notably with the way Erat is being jerked around; it blew my mind when Marty was scratched, a few games back. It certainly wasn't a surprise when, a few days later, Erat asked for a trade; I can't blame him.
But that's hardly the only puzzlement. Fehr plays pretty well (to be fair, sometimes he's excellent) when he's in, but has been scratched an awful lot. Volpatti is still getting a sweater just about every game (which is said not to denigrate him or his play, but by no stretch of the imagination is he better than Erat or Fehr).
Laich and Brouwer were finally separated, but it took an awfully long time. I think part of it was that they do do an excellent job together on the penalty kill, and Oates wanted to use players from the same line together on the PK, but that seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
And separating Laich and Brouwer resulted in splitting the phenomenally successful Chimmer-Grabo-Ward line. I'll give a little bit of a pass on that, since it was replaced by the previously-successful Chimmer-Laich-Ward line, but I don't think that was the only possibility.
And the end result of all the machinations is that the team has a top-quality first line and a top-quality third line (25-84-42) but still can only win by getting phenomenally good goaltending. That's great when it works, but it's hardly a recipe for predictable success. Yes, if you've got Hasek-level goaltending (relative to average), you can do it, but goaltenders are kinda hard to predict.
Despite the talent on the team (the only glaring hole is 4D, and I think Schmidt's been at least adequate in that role), their possession numbers are pretty bad, and they're playing catch-up all too often.
In fact, they were making a big deal in the broadcast (in the Carolina game, I think) about the Caps leading the lead in late-last-period tying goals (and let's face it, that game-tying shortie by Nick was pretty incredible). While it's great that they've been able to do that, what isn't great is that they've needed to, so often.
How many times have they gone down to start? How many of those times have they seemed to be on autopilot for most, if not all, of the first period? How many times have they allowed a matching goal within two and a half minutes of scoring? Too many, a bunch, and way too many, respectively, I think.
I'm beginning to think there's something fundamentally wrong that has little or nothing to do with talent. Maybe it's a lack of pushing by team leaders. Maybe it's a coaching problem (the problems on the breakout certainly seem to point to this) with a bad system, or with a system that demands that all the players have Oates' personal ability to see the ice. Maybe it's assistant coaches? I loved Calle as a player, but he's in charge of the PK, and the PK doesn't do a good enough job keeping the other team out at the blue line (no, I'm not claiming to know what's off, there, but I'm pretty sure something is).
What I do know is that the team has gotten a lot of luck (especially in the shootout, but also in goaltending on the PK), and, while they are in second place, they're closer to last than to first. They also have the fourth-worst ROW in the conference, so they're not going to get any tie-breakers. The one bright spot is that they do have the second best goal differential in the division.
As far as individual games over the last couple of weeks, I thought they played well against the Islanders and against the Leafs. And they were doing pretty well against the Canes, until things fell apart impressively quickly. Other than that, I've been pretty underwhelmed. Update: I forgot to mention that they looked pretty good in the first Montreal game, but Budaj had a hella good game.
I guess we'll see if the current trend (towards better possession numbers) holds for a while. If it does, then maybe I'll revise my opinion.
20130502
Heat Map of OV's shooting
I just ran across this article on Ovechkin scoring, this year. The heat map itself is pretty cool; I wish I had the data to create the graphic.
But, the conclusions drawn in the writeup are, to my mind, reversing cause and effect. OV's heat map doesn't show a preponderance of stick-side, low goals because OV is most effective shooting there. It's entirely due to his position on the power play.
That is, he wasn't put in the left circle because that's where his shot goes most, he was put there because he's right handed, and has the best shot on the team. And the result of the system is that he frequently gets one-timers there where the goalie is still trying to get across the crease. To put it another way, the system frequently results in him shooting into a half-empty net, so of course that's the hot spot on the heat map.
I'd like to appeal to his heat map for non-PP situations or to the one for prior seasons, but I don't have the data for those.
And if you'd like to draw conclusions for Hank being (one of) the best goalies for stopping OV, specifically, just look at their matchup history. There's enough games that you should be able to draw some fairly solid conclusions. Having trouble with career playoff stats, but OV has 16-15-31 in 31 career regular-season games. Hand-compiled playoffs: 9-8-17 in 19 games.
That puts OV's career vs Rangers at 25-23-48 in 50 games. Not bad numbers, but noticeably less than career numbers (particularly for the playoffs). So maybe there's at least a hint of truth to it. I guess we'll see when they play the actual games (assuming that ever happens).
But, the conclusions drawn in the writeup are, to my mind, reversing cause and effect. OV's heat map doesn't show a preponderance of stick-side, low goals because OV is most effective shooting there. It's entirely due to his position on the power play.
That is, he wasn't put in the left circle because that's where his shot goes most, he was put there because he's right handed, and has the best shot on the team. And the result of the system is that he frequently gets one-timers there where the goalie is still trying to get across the crease. To put it another way, the system frequently results in him shooting into a half-empty net, so of course that's the hot spot on the heat map.
I'd like to appeal to his heat map for non-PP situations or to the one for prior seasons, but I don't have the data for those.
And if you'd like to draw conclusions for Hank being (one of) the best goalies for stopping OV, specifically, just look at their matchup history. There's enough games that you should be able to draw some fairly solid conclusions. Having trouble with career playoff stats, but OV has 16-15-31 in 31 career regular-season games. Hand-compiled playoffs: 9-8-17 in 19 games.
That puts OV's career vs Rangers at 25-23-48 in 50 games. Not bad numbers, but noticeably less than career numbers (particularly for the playoffs). So maybe there's at least a hint of truth to it. I guess we'll see when they play the actual games (assuming that ever happens).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)