Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

BeanCountingHab

Members
  • Posts

    4,117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BeanCountingHab

  1. He's leading the team in playoff goals. Not sure how much you could want from a guy like him.

    Yeah, I'll admit he looks lazy. But looking lazy and being lazy are 2 different things.

    Well, if all he's going to do is lead team in goals, we may as well give someone else a chance. B)

    I get it, he cruises around, he's a streaky player, but he always dangerous out there, and at the end of the day he's got 5 goals for us through 11 playoff games.

  2. Thomas Vanek, for all the talk about how bad a post-season he's having (and he's been less noticeable than you would like), now has 5 goals and 3 assists in 10 games. Over the course of a regular season, he'd be on track to pot over 40 goals. So even when you don't notice him and he's playing poorly, he's still been productive.

    That's what's funny about these style players. We'll still be waiting for Vanek to "start producing" and the realize he's leading the team in playoff scoring. ^_^

  3. It's how that type of player is. Guys like Vanek "float" and look for dead spots on the ice to strike. When they're scoring it looks great, when they're not it looks lazy. I don't want Vanek flying all over the ice like Ryan White.

    This criticism has been directed at virtually every goal scorer to play the game. Kessel, Vanek, Cammalleri, Pacioretty, Ovechkin, Gaborik, Hall, Kane (Patrick and Evander), the list goes on.

    He's not Pacioretty though, he doesn't drive the play to the same extent. Anyway, he is what he is so I'm not piling on the critisism; but it's probably worth taking into consideration before deciding whether to offer him an 8 year deal for $60M or something.

  4. I commented there, but just wanted to add here that you did a great job, and also recommend anyone with an interest in the relationship between PDO, possession, and results check this out.

    I'm wondering if there will ever come a time where we can come up with a certain "base" or "normalized" PDO for each team besides assuming they will always regress to 100.

    I'm thinking maybe something that looks at each player's 3 year rolling average of shooting %, shot volume/60, and 5 on 5 average TOI. And for goalies, a 3 year rolling save % and average games played per season. You'd then come up with an expected shooting perecentage and save percentage for your team, and voila: base or expected PDO.

    One issue I forsee with this would be not enough historical data for rookies or sophmores (maybe the solution would be using a league average number).

  5. To me, he looked lackluster for Games 2-4 in the first round too, and then he had 10 days off. If he was sick or dealing with a minor injury, you'd think that would have had time to resolve. I'd be inclined to believe Vanek and Therrien when they say he was fine, and it wouldn't make sense for Therrien to call out Vanek at his press conference in terms of effort if he knew he was hurt. I think it's just a case of a player needing to give more.

    I thought games 3 and 4 he looked meh as well, but this game was decidedly different. Impossible to say, but I'll be watching him closely again. I think maybe groin, he seems to be afraid to take full strides. Anyone who's not a scratch is always "fine" during the playoffs until they're eliminated and you find out half the team was injured.

  6. He has to be sick or injured or something. There were way too many shifts where he he pulled himself off not even 20 seconds into it after a few strides. I doubt we'll know anything until after the playoffs (or possibly if he gets scratched) but something's not right IMHO.

  7. I can't think of anything that's going to give you that cumulative amount at specific points in time. Game by game obviously gives you shooting percentage + save percentage but then it becomes absolutely insane to add up all those games for each team. I take it you've tried extraskater, have you looked at behind the net?

    Re-reading your original post now, I noticed you said you can't find a game by game breakdown for PDO. Extra skater does have this for each team, they just don't do the cumulative calculation for you. If you're willing to you excel (as suggested in the post above) you can probably get there.

    This would give you the data you need to make it happen: http://www.extraskater.com/team/montreal-canadiens/2013/gamelog

  8. Alright, so I am working on data collection for a new stats project of mine, and I need some help. I need to get data from about the 40, 50, and 60 game mark for each team this season, and the fenwick data is easy enough to get. I haven't been able to find a game-by-game breakdown for PDO (cumulative, not rolling 10 game) for each team. I can view everything currently, but I can't go "back in time" and get a real good snapshot of, say, the Phoenix Coyotes after they had played 50 games. Has anybody seen a website where I can get such a thing?

    I have all the possession data a guy could ever want, but PDO, especially if it's broken down into shooting and save percentage, seems to be surprisingly hard to come by. I would be SUPER grateful if anyone had any resources to share.

    I can't think of anything that's going to give you that cumulative amount at specific points in time. Game by game obviously gives you shooting percentage + save percentage but then it becomes absolutely insane to add up all those games for each team. I take it you've tried extraskater, have you looked at behind the net?

  9. I think a player like Vanek can already see what the organization offers. Montreal is a great city, possibly the best hockey town on the planet, and the Habs are a playoff team with some world-class talent. He may already know whether he would entertain a generous offer from the Habs. That said, I'm sure he still would like to see what the market will bring from free agency.

    The question remains about coaching. Does Vanek see the same things many fans on this forum claim to see regarding Therrien, and are those things so negative that they become deal-breakers in themselves? Or does Vanek realize that if he signs, it would no doubt be for a longer term than that of any faltering coach?

    I think the reasons stemming from the "glory days" of the franchise are no longer relevant. The dozens of Stanley Cup banners and all those retired numbers don't translate to success today. But the team seems like it's becoming a real threat, even with its current shortcomings. In 2010, we rode a hot goaltender and had the leading goal-scorer in the playoffs and really made some noise by upsetting the top two seeds. Imagine if the team got on a run like that this season, only with Price in net and the likes of Vanek, Pacioretty and Subban leading the charge? Even though the dynasty days are long over, the next time the Habs win a Cup, the city, and the rest of the hockey world, will literally go bananas. (Hopefully, they fireproof all the police cars.)

    I doubt Vanek has any reason to dislike Therrien, so I don't see that as a deterent to him signing here.

  10. You know what stat I'd love to see tracked would be what I'll call Zone Time. Basically, time in the offensive zone and time in the defensive zone. Neutral zone time would be ignored. You would then break it down into a percentage between the two teams. This would all be at even-strength to make it useful.

    I'd keep it simple for tracking purposes and to remove any bias, and simply use the actual location of the puck in a given and how long it's there. To get what I mean, picture a couple guys with a stop watch each responsible for one team's offensive zone. When the puck enters the zone, he starts the clock, when he leaves the zone he stops it. Alternatively it's probably even easier/more accurate with a recording of the game on a computer afterwards.

    You'd then have something like:

    MTL: 62.5% zone time

    TOR: 37.5% zone time

    Which could mean the puck was in Toronto's end (at even strength) for 25 minutes and Montreal's end for 15 minutes (remainder in the neutral zone and/or special teams).

    It's not perfect but the idea would be to get another measure for possession to use in conjection with something like Fenwick. My gut says you'd see a pretty high correlation with the top teams and positive Zone Time. I think it'd be a pretty accessible stat for the non-fancy stat crowd as well.

  11. It's interesting to hear him speak like that, especially since he's actually in the position to make those decisions. And especially since he's still playing Fraser (even though the shift chart in the article seems to indicate that he knows that Fraser's not a great defenceman).

    I mean it's easy for us to sit at home and to scream at Therrien about how Douglas Murray is getting killed and how Raphael Diaz was underused, but for us there're no other factors involved. What happens if Therrien sits Murray, puts Diaz in and then we lose five straight. Maybe in one of those losses Diaz gets burned for a goal in a way that looks 'soft'. For us we can just look at the stats and say "Well despite the final scores our possession numbers have actually been quite a bit better. Our shooting % is down and Carey's had a rough couple of games, but overall the underlying change has been positive and it should all even out in the end."

    And that's probably all true!

    But now look at that same sequence of events from the point of view of the coach. You can imagine him going to talk to his GM: "You've taken out the proven defensive defenseman that I got for you in the off-season to replace him with a guy who doesn't even hit, and look! You're getting scored on all over the ice!" Just try mumbling something about PDO when your job is on the line. There's a real inertia in the league when it comes to this stuff. Even if you want to be progressive, like Eakins seems to be leaning towards, it's up to you to be able to prove that your way is better than the status quo. That's not an easy thing to do.

    There are shades of the way Therrien manages Murray and the way Eakins manages Fraser. When you look at the easy zone starts Murray gets, Therrien seems to know he isn't very good. But the old school mentality he has makes him believe he needs that size and toughness in the line up regardless. That's why I was and am really rooting for Tinordi, but because I think the only the way Murray is permanently out of the rotation is if someone else can bring those things that Therrien perceives to be really important.

    As far as your philosophy on the coach's point of view, I really don't think that's the case here (ie: needing to play Murray to appease the GM who brought him in). If anything, the 'tough' guys brought in seems to have been done for Therrien given how much he values them, while a skill guy like Briere was massively under-utilized for most of the year despite being one of the most productive forwards on the team for the ice time he was given.

  12. Yep, every time we see him smile I get a little more excited at the idea that he might actually sign here long term. To be honest, I think it will have a lot to do with how we play in the playoffs. We all know how exciting a playoff run in Montreal can be - I think if we can get a few rounds in it might be enough to convince him to stick around.

    Also, I just wanted to say that I've been really pleasantly surprised with Vanek's passing abilities. He's had a couple of assists lately that have just been top notch, including the pass to DD last night.

    Yup, he's not going to win any defensive awards any time soon but his offensive game is very multi-dementional. Really strong on the puck (how many times do you see Kronwall get knocked down like that?), great vision and passing, can score with a shot, a deflection, or by using his hands to grind one out in front of the net.

  13. Well and that line will get torn apart in the playoffs with proper line matching. Pacioretty is the only guy with a semblance of a defensive game and he's not winning a Selke any time soon.

    Pacioretty-DD-Vanek feels like it should work well but they're getting horribly outshot and outchanced, because Pacioretty is really the only guy who can sustain possession on that line. They're such good forwards that they still capitalize at a high rate but I don't think that line is the answer.

    Ya, the two way ability of that line is definitely a concern. If we're really determined to keep them together we need to go really heavy "Vignault with Sedins" style o-zone starts, like 75-80%+ ozone starts for that line.

  14. Unrelated to the contract discussions... Who did Vanek play on a line with in 2006-2007? 43 goals, 41 assists, and +47.

    Yeah, if Bergevin approaches Vanek's agent and offers that the agent politely says, "We'll get back to you in early July."

    Probably Briere. Maybe Pominville or Afinogenov? They had a great offense that year, took a huge hit after Briere and Drury left.

  15. Bah, the stupid site timed out and ruined my original reply. Here is a cole's notes version:

    First off, all great points, and you could very well be right; there's a good chance it does take 8 years to get him here. Maybe even with 8 years on the table he decides to move on. You're also right, the old prime/peak used to be 28-33 or so but it's definitely earlier now. I guess to explain myself better, I don't think players are peaking or hitting their prime later (I agree it's happening earlier), but I think the decline is becoming a more gradual slope for certain types of players: offensively skilled guys who don't play/rely on an overly punishing style and don't have much injury history).

    I really don't have a ton to back that up. I was just reading an article about a week old that showed a pretty sharp decline in players' offensive output through their 30s, but there was a follow up that looked specifically at the more offensively talented group (I think the paramater was 0.7PPG players), and production from 30-34 was something like 85% or 90% on average of there production from 25-29.

    It's a scary proposition signing any player to 7-8 years at 30, but depending on the dollar about I think he's a decent candidate to take the risk. Very consistent scorer, nice upside and very skilled, no significant injury history.

    P.S. I hope I didn't come off as pompous with the age breakdown, I just think given the type of decline were talking about one or two extra years can be pretty important.

×
×
  • Create New...