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

2016-17 If I Were GM...


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, maas_art said:

The idea of Tavares really has me dreaming.  

I am not sure NYI would move him for what we'd be willing to part with but man o man. This is a guy who has put up some really strong offensive numbers, is very solid defensively and has done so with basically NO support his entire career.  Anyone who has had decent numbers did so because they played with him.  

I think Engels is right in his article yesterday: if there's any possible way we can make a move for Tavares, id absolutely jump on it. 

I'd love to get hold of Tavares. But we could also go after RNH, Draisaitl, Duchene, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Couturier, Giroux, or so on. Bergevin keeps talking about how it's hard to acquire good players, but there are guys out there who we could take a shot at.

The Isles have a pretty good crop of young forwards coming up. They know Hamonic wants out. So what they're looking for is probably a solid defenceman. Ideally, my guess is that they'd want someone already in the NHL but still young, like a Seth Jones or Dougie Hamilton or Aaron Ekblad. We don't really have that piece. Would they take Weber? Would they take Sergachev? Or barring that, would they swap Tavares for Galchenyuk or Pacioretty? There are players we can put in play, but it really depends on what NY is willing to accept. No matter what we offer, one would have to wonder whether the Leafs make a play on him, and they have more top-end prospects than we do to offer up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I'd love to get hold of Tavares. But we could also go after RNH, Draisaitl, Duchene, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Couturier, Giroux, or so on. Bergevin keeps talking about how it's hard to acquire good players, but there are guys out there who we could take a shot at.

The Isles have a pretty good crop of young forwards coming up. They know Hamonic wants out. So what they're looking for is probably a solid defenceman. Ideally, my guess is that they'd want someone already in the NHL but still young, like a Seth Jones or Dougie Hamilton or Aaron Ekblad. We don't really have that piece. Would they take Weber? Would they take Sergachev? Or barring that, would they swap Tavares for Galchenyuk or Pacioretty? There are players we can put in play, but it really depends on what NY is willing to accept. No matter what we offer, one would have to wonder whether the Leafs make a play on him, and they have more top-end prospects than we do to offer up.

I read an interesting article on basically a "HabsEyesOnThePrize," Islander's site. It was well written & while the writer clearly wanted to resign Tavares, he suggested that if the isle couldnt get an extension this summer, they should trade him.   He listed Montreal, Toronto and the Blues as the 3 teams with the need, the assets and the cap space.  From us, he suggested Galchenyuk + Gallagher, which on the surface seems like a lot but its probably pretty close to what would be needed to get the deal done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I read an interesting article on basically a "HabsEyesOnThePrize," Islander's site. It was well written & while the writer clearly wanted to resign Tavares, he suggested that if the isle couldnt get an extension this summer, they should trade him.   He listed Montreal, Toronto and the Blues as the 3 teams with the need, the assets and the cap space.  From us, he suggested Galchenyuk + Gallagher, which on the surface seems like a lot but its probably pretty close to what would be needed to get the deal done. 

You're right Jed, but, when you consider that Peks, DD, Gally and Chuck would be off the books, then that leaves approx. 10 mil. (or more), to spend. My concern would be where do you get a 2nd line C, Danault? There's not much on the farm, or if there is, then CJ, IMO, wouldn't handle him improperly. So, that leaves MB to go and get a #2 C. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My case for Duchene is as follows...

Galchenyuk face off percentage on a team that won a division

2016/2017 - 42.7%, 2015/2016 - 47.9%, 2014/2015 - 47.1%

Duchene face off percentage on a team that was last in a division:

2016/2017 - 62.6%, 2015/2016 - 57.9%, 2015/2015 - 52.2%

 

Duchene is a five time 20 goal scorer in 8 seasons on a bad team. His cap hit is reasonable.

Galchenyuk is a two time 20 goal scorer in 5 seasons on a better team. His cap hit is undetermined.

Habs need scoring. Habs need to be way better on face-offs especially when it matters. We cant rely on Mitchell to win draws every time.

 

Why would any GM pay a center that has poor production on face offs? They wouldn't. The Habs need to package Galchenyuk as a winger for Mackinnon and swap Plekanec and Soderberg as a cap dumps. Both teams get what they need.

And MMW Rads will not be a Hab next year. He's going to the highest bidder with the longest contract. He will probably end up on the leafs and have 40 goals playing along side Matthews. They need to spend smarter down the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

You're right Jed, but, when you consider that Peks, DD, Gally and Chuck would be off the books, then that leaves approx. 10 mil. (or more), to spend. My concern would be where do you get a 2nd line C, Danault? There's not much on the farm, or if there is, then CJ, IMO, wouldn't handle him improperly. So, that leaves MB to go and get a #2 C. 

Tough to say.  I contend that Danault might actually be ok as a 2nd line Centre behind an elite #1, which Tavares is.  So who knows.  There's also Hudon who i think Julien might actually give a shot to (I really believe he felt so rushed at the end of the year he didnt want to dabble with any unknowns).  

There are also so outside the box ideas out there.  A guy like Thornton could probably be a very effective #2 for a couple of years, assuming he isnt looking for #1 money and / or term. 

 

But first we have to land that big fish.   We can go with a less costly, less major move like RNH or Duchene (in both cases we MUST retain galchenyuk to do so though, or else we're going with yet another bergevin lateral move) or we go big with a move like Tavares. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, maas_art said:

I read an interesting article on basically a "HabsEyesOnThePrize," Islander's site. It was well written & while the writer clearly wanted to resign Tavares, he suggested that if the isle couldnt get an extension this summer, they should trade him.   He listed Montreal, Toronto and the Blues as the 3 teams with the need, the assets and the cap space.  From us, he suggested Galchenyuk + Gallagher, which on the surface seems like a lot but its probably pretty close to what would be needed to get the deal done. 

Although that's probably along the lines of what it would take to get Tavares, it starts to look a bit dicey when you talk about losing both Gallys at once (even for a guy like JT).  As it is we don't have enough players to choose from to fill our top two lines, and trading two of them for one in return (even if that one is the better player) could really expose our lack of high-end depth.  I'm just thinking about a playoff series where the other team is often able to get their top defensive guys out and shut down a top line - if we've got all of our eggs in the one basket, where do we go from there?  Or God forbid what if he gets hurt.

I'm still not saying I wouldn't do it, I'm just saying that's it's not a no-brainer even if the offer was there.  I'd much rather keep one of those two and see if they'd take a defenseman instead, even if we'd have to give up a good one (Sergachev?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Concreteveins1 said:

Galchenyuk face off percentage on a team that won a division

2016/2017 - 42.7%, 2015/2016 - 47.9%, 2014/2015 - 47.1%

Duchene face off percentage on a team that was last in a division:

2016/2017 - 62.6%, 2015/2016 - 57.9%, 2015/2015 - 52.2%

Face offs do not correlate to individual or team success.

4 minutes ago, Concreteveins1 said:

Duchene is a five time 20 goal scorer in 8 seasons on a bad team. His cap hit is reasonable.

Galchenyuk is a two time 20 goal scorer in 5 seasons on a better team. His cap hit is undetermined.

Raw all situations point totals are misleading for a variety of reasons. You think you're looking at individual skill here, and you're not, you're looking at luck and projecting it as skill. 5-on-5 primary point rates are more predictive of future success and more representative of individual skill. And Galchenyuk's 5-on-5 primary point rates have been either higher or insignificantly different than Duchene his entire career except for 2013-14.

In the most favourable characterization for Duchene, it's a wash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

Although that's probably along the lines of what it would take to get Tavares, it starts to look a bit dicey when you talk about losing both Gallys at once (even for a guy like JT).  As it is we don't have enough players to choose from to fill our top two lines, and trading two of them for one in return (even if that one is the better player) could really expose our lack of high-end depth.  I'm just thinking about a playoff series where the other team is often able to get their top defensive guys out and shut down a top line - if we've got all of our eggs in the one basket, where do we go from there?  Or God forbid what if he gets hurt.

I'm still not saying I wouldn't do it, I'm just saying that's it's not a no-brainer even if the offer was there.  I'd much rather keep one of those two and see if they'd take a defenseman instead, even if we'd have to give up a good one (Sergachev?)

Yeah i agree completely - and remember, this was an Islanders fan (albeit a knowledgeable one) making the proposal.  I think that giving up 2 of our top 6 players would be very risky.  That said, Tavares is the type of player who does make those around him better so you dont necessarily need the two best wingers on his line  - a guy like Hudon for example may work great on his left.  

Ultimately, just like stamkos last year, im sure this will be a whole lotta nothing but boy would i love to have Tavares on my team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, habs_93 said:

Face offs do not correlate to individual or team success.

Raw all situations point totals are misleading for a variety of reasons. You think you're looking at individual skill here, and you're not, you're looking at luck and projecting it as skill. 5-on-5 primary point rates are more predictive of future success and more representative of individual skill. And Galchenyuk's 5-on-5 primary point rates have been either higher or insignificantly different than Duchene his entire career except for 2013-14.

In the most favourable characterization for Duchene, it's a wash.

This.

I couldn't care if Duchene's winning more draws. The question is whether that leads to more shots/scoring chances/goals for or not. In this case, it doesn't. Despite the fact that Duchene starts with the puck more then, his team is getting shot at more than the Habs are with Galchenyuk on the ice.

Galchenyuk's point totals are lower because he gets less opportunity to score (less ice time). Galchenyuk was #2 on our team in points per game and #1 on our team in points per ice time. Better than Pacioretty, better than Radulov, better than Weber, and better than Duchene. It means that if we had Duchene and you gave Duchene the same linemates and ice time Galchenyuk was getting, he'd produce LESS than Galchenyuk. Based on the season two years ago, I think there was an analysis that showed that if Galchenyuk had been given the same ice time as the top scorers in the league, he would have finished in the top 10 in NHL scoring and that the major reason he was further down the points list was simply under-utilization. You want more scoring? Play Galchenyuk like a top-line player instead of looking to deal him for a lesser player to give more ice time to. You acquire Duchene and give him 22 minutes a night, yeah he'll probably put up more goals than Galchenyuk getting 15 minutes a game. That doesn't mean Duchene is a more productive forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

This.

I couldn't care if Duchene's winning more draws. The question is whether that leads to more shots/scoring chances/goals for or not. In this case, it doesn't. Despite the fact that Duchene starts with the puck more then, his team is getting shot at more than the Habs are with Galchenyuk on the ice.

Galchenyuk's point totals are lower because he gets less opportunity to score (less ice time). Galchenyuk was #2 on our team in points per game and #1 on our team in points per ice time. Better than Pacioretty, better than Radulov, better than Weber, and better than Duchene. It means that if we had Duchene and you gave Duchene the same linemates and ice time Galchenyuk was getting, he'd produce LESS than Galchenyuk. Based on the season two years ago, I think there was an analysis that showed that if Galchenyuk had been given the same ice time as the top scorers in the league, he would have finished in the top 10 in NHL scoring and that the major reason he was further down the points list was simply under-utilization. You want more scoring? Play Galchenyuk like a top-line player instead of looking to deal him for a lesser player to give more ice time to. You acquire Duchene and give him 22 minutes a night, yeah he'll probably put up more goals than Galchenyuk getting 15 minutes a game. That doesn't mean Duchene is a more productive forward.

The big reason though that Duchene gets more ice time is that he is a defensively responsible center. A 200' player that you can play in all situations and because he is a good face off center he doesn't have to be protected and can take the big draws in both zones. CJ definitely has always been a coach (like most) that wants a #1 center that you can put in all situations. I'm not saying he's as offensively gifted, but in todays NHL that is what most all coaches are looking for a "two" way center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

The big reason though that Duchene gets more ice time is that he is a defensively responsible center.

If Duchene is "defensively responsible", why have his adjusted 5-on-5 Corsi Against per 60 rates been worse than Galchenyuk 3 out of the 5 seasons they've both played? I'm curious to know how a player can be considered "defensively responsible" if his team faces more shot attempts against when he's on the ice.

28 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

and because he is a good face off center he doesn't have to be protected and can take the big draws in both zones.

Face off do not correlate to any measure of individual or team success. Winning a face off provides no more offensive or defensive advantage than can be expected to happen via random chance. Trading a better player for a worse player who is better at a meaningless activity is something a bad organization would do, and I hope the Canadiens aren't bad.

29 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

but in todays NHL that is what most all coaches are looking for a "two" way center.

I'm still not interested in appeal to authority fallacies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, habs_93 said:

 

Face off do not correlate to any measure of individual or team success. Winning a face off provides no more offensive or defensive advantage than can be expected to happen via random chance. Trading a better player for a worse player who is better at a meaningless activity is something a bad organization would do, and I hope the Canadiens aren't bad.

 

While faceoff ability is probably not as important as other skills, I think your underestimating the ability.      Take the game 2 of Oilers vs Ducks ... Ducks owned in the faceoff circle and out shot Oilers by a 2 to 1 margin.    This can be directly tied to them winning the bulk of the fo's in the Oilers end and thus keeping the offense rolling.    Face offs are part of the puck possession metric ... if you're losing a lot of face offs, then there should and would be a direct impact on your possession numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HabsAlways said:

While faceoff ability is probably not as important as other skills, I think your underestimating the ability.      Take the game 2 of Oilers vs Ducks ... Ducks owned in the faceoff circle and out shot Oilers by a 2 to 1 margin.    This can be directly tied to them winning the bulk of the fo's in the Oilers end and thus keeping the offense rolling.    Face offs are part of the puck possession metric ... if you're losing a lot of face offs, then there should and would be a direct impact on your possession numbers. 

But does it matter? If Galchenyuk is winning 47% of his draws but the team gets 53% of the shot attempts while he's on the ice, isn't that still better than having a guy like Ott, who wins 55% of his draws but where the team only gets 40% of the shot attempts while he's on the ice? Maybe face-off wins help give you a jump-start at possession, but you actually have to do something with the puck when you get it. If Plekanec wins a draw in our own zone and our D man just takes the puck and clears it up the boards onto the sticks of the other team, then it's not that different than losing the draw in the first place. Players who help you should in theory be the guys who get the puck and then can perform controlled zone exits and entries and make plays that lead to attempts on the opposition's goal. Galchenyuk does those things. His value is higher than that of someone who wins 5% more draws but can't do much with the puck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HabsAlways said:

While faceoff ability is probably not as important as other skills, I think your underestimating the ability.      Take the game 2 of Oilers vs Ducks ... Ducks owned in the faceoff circle and out shot Oilers by a 2 to 1 margin.    This can be directly tied to them winning the bulk of the fo's in the Oilers end and thus keeping the offense rolling.    Face offs are part of the puck possession metric ... if you're losing a lot of face offs, then there should and would be a direct impact on your possession numbers. 

You're taking small sample size observations and projecting them onto entire seasons and careers, and that's a bit unwise. I want to be very clear about what I'm saying here. "Winning a face off provides no more offensive or defensive advantage than can be expected to happen via random chance" is counter-intuitive, but hear me out.

 I mean that it is not worth trading players/trading for players based on face off percentage, because over large samples face offs are meaningless. A front office which tries to tune its roster for small sample sizes is going to put itself at the whim of luck.

Here's why I don't care about face off percentage. I took Corsica.hockey's data for all centres in 82-game seasons between 2007-08 and 2016-17 and filtered to reduce noise (removed players with under 25 games played in a season, and players who had taken a number of face offs under 1 standard deviation from the mean). I then ran a Pearson correlation test between 5-on-5 face off percentage and on-ice adjusted 5-on-5 Corsi For %. The result was an r-squared value of 0.00344. Without getting into a long discussion of r-squared and Pearson correlation, the cliff note version of what this means is that 5-on-5 face off percentage in the last decade or so in the NHL explains around one third of one percent of a centre's 5-on-5 possession performance over a season.

I've explained why special teams isn't worth looking at in this way, but one very reasonable objection to this analysis would be that it's binning offensive zone, neutral zone, and defensive zone face offs together, as well as Corsi data from face off starts or otherwise. Controlling for these factors would be interesting, but it would also require more time than I can spend at the moment.

The mean 5-on-5 face off percentage for centres after filtering is 50.11%. The mean 5-on-5 face off percentage for the top 100 adjusted 5-on-5 Corsi For centres is 51.4%, which is one quarter of a standard deviation above the mean; not a particularly significant difference. For every 2016-17 Patrice Bergeron (61.71% adjusted 5-on-5 Corsi For, 62.48% 5-on-5 face off percentage), there's a 2007-08 Johan Franzen (60.85% adj5on5CF%, 47.69% 5on5FO%) or a 2011-12 Henrik Sedin (58.4% adj5on5CF%, 48.43% 5on5FO%).

Face offs are noise.

I'm sure you can remember any number of times in the last decade or so where a lost face off immediately resulted in a goal against. I know I can: Plekanec in the playoffs against Boston a few years back. And I'm sure we all can remember a lot of games where we lost by a goal and had a 40-45% team face off percentage and it "felt" like if we had the puck a few more times, we would've at least got a point out of it. But humans are bad at keeping track of high frequency cause and effect, and our minds tell us we're great at it. This is one of the many instances in hockey where the conventional wisdom and accepted practices accreted through the game's decades has no basis in reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

But does it matter? If Galchenyuk is winning 47% of his draws but the team gets 53% of the shot attempts while he's on the ice, isn't that still better than having a guy like Ott, who wins 55% of his draws but where the team only gets 40% of the shot attempts while he's on the ice? Maybe face-off wins help give you a jump-start at possession, but you actually have to do something with the puck when you get it. If Plekanec wins a draw in our own zone and our D man just takes the puck and clears it up the boards onto the sticks of the other team, then it's not that different than losing the draw in the first place. Players who help you should in theory be the guys who get the puck and then can perform controlled zone exits and entries and make plays that lead to attempts on the opposition's goal. Galchenyuk does those things. His value is higher than that of someone who wins 5% more draws but can't do much with the puck.

If we win the draw in our zone and we immediately clear the zone if we have possession at that time or not the other team does not and is not a threat. Where as if we win the draw immediately in the offensive zone than we have control have a scoring opportunity. Losing draws in your zone can sometimes keep you stuck in your zone and your teams gets tired a lot of time creating a icing. Which then the other team gets fresh players on ice and you still have the player who may than lose the face off again putting your team on the ropes defensively. Any offensive zone or defensive zone face off can be huge and there are times late in games pk's & pp's where it is huge. Every broadcast of every game talks about how critical and important face offs are especially in the play offs. I'm not saying Chucky can't be a strong face off player, but that said until he is that alone if he's playing center will reduce his ice time. It is why you see it so often in crucial parts of games where coaches will put two centers on at the same time to make sure they have better odds of winning the draw if one is kicked out of the circle. They also may have a more offensive player but have another center take the draw to have better % at starting with possession. Also remember Chucky hasn't been taking a lot of defensive face off draws so his 53% is probably flayed but that quite a bit. Also his on ice time currently has him on currently with others winning the draws while he has been wing and in the offensive zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

Every broadcast of every game talks about how critical and important face offs are especially in the play offs.

Broadcasters are a particularly un-authoritative example of argument from authority fallacy.

25 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

to have better % at starting with possession.

Read the post above.

25 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

Also remember Chucky hasn't been taking a lot of defensive face off draws

For future reference, you don't have to ballpark this kind of thing anymore. Corsica.hockey has these and more data readily available. Go to Corsica.hockey, click on the skate icon (for skaters), and you're in the individual skater data page. To see the actual percentage of 5-on-5 face offs taken in the defensive zone for all of our players, click on the "Any" box under Team, then hit backspace and type in MTL and hit enter. After that, click on "On-Ice" under Report and click on Context. Scroll to the right, and you'll find DZF%, Defensive Zone Face Off Percentage. Click it twice, and it'll sort our players descending in that measure. You'll find that Galchenyuk took 39.46% of his 5-on-5 face offs in our defensive zone this season. More than Gallagher, Plekanec, Flynn, Mitchell, Shaw, and Byron. On that same page, you can see that Galchenyuk got fewer 5-on-5 offensive zone starts than anyone except King, Ott, and De La Rose. So the narrative that he's been sheltered somehow and gotten easy match-ups is obviously false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, habs_93 said:

Broadcasters are a particularly un-authoritative example of argument from authority fallacy.

Read the post above.

For future reference, you don't have to ballpark this kind of thing anymore. Corsica.hockey has these and more data readily available. Go to Corsica.hockey, click on the skate icon (for skaters), and you're in the individual skater data page. To see the actual percentage of 5-on-5 face offs taken in the defensive zone for all of our players, click on the "Any" box under Team, then hit backspace and type in MTL and hit enter. After that, click on "On-Ice" under Report and click on Context. Scroll to the right, and you'll find DZF%, Defensive Zone Face Off Percentage. Click it twice, and it'll sort our players descending in that measure. You'll find that Galchenyuk took 39.46% of his 5-on-5 face offs in our defensive zone this season. More than Gallagher, Plekanec, Flynn, Mitchell, Shaw, and Byron. On that same page, you can see that Galchenyuk got fewer 5-on-5 offensive zone starts than anyone except King, Ott, and De La Rose. So the narrative that he's been sheltered somehow and gotten easy match-ups is obviously false.

and remembering Corsica isn't the holy grail of all hockey. He still was a - on a plus hockey team. So 5 on 5 more goals were scored against the team when he was on the ice than for the team. I know you will say plus minus means nothing but Corsica doesn't mean everything either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CaptWelly said:

and remembering Corsica isn't the holy grail of all hockey.

If you want to impugn the quality of Manny's data, you might want to bring some facts to the table instead of one sentence.

1 minute ago, CaptWelly said:

He still was a - on a plus hockey team.

We've been through this. I've written page upon page about +/- for you to read. There exist hundreds of internet sources on the subject available via a Google search. +/- is worthless, and it will continue to be worthless no matter how much you continue to use it.

2 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

So 5 on 5 more goals were scored against the team when he was on the ice than for the team.

Raw goal totals are a measure of luck and not skill, and there are much better measures of luck available that aren't as beholden to random noise as goals are.

3 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

I know you will say plus minus means nothing but Corsica doesn't mean everything either.

You've been repeatedly reminded that absolutely no one on this forum has ever said that current generation possession analytics "mean everything". You can stop saying it now, otherwise it'll be hard to keep assuming good faith on your part about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, habs_93 said:

 

 I mean that it is not worth trading players/trading for players based on face off percentage, because over large samples face offs are meaningless. A front office which tries to tune its roster for small sample sizes is going to put itself at the whim of luck.

 

I agree with your entire analysis ... however, I still stick by that faceoffs are part of possession.        Take Vermette this season, 62.6% FO% wins ... that's 10% higher than the mean.      If I have two equal players in every other aspect and Vermette is @ 62.6% FO wins and the other guy is at 50 ... I know who I'm sticking on the ice in my own end to take a draw. or who I might stick out there with a minute to go and a big faceoff in the ozone.

Hockey is a numbers game, maybe not so much as baseball, but it's still there ... you play the odds, you play the stats.     Over the course of a season Vermette's 62.6% is going to result in more possession than an equally talented player with 50%.

But ... I also agree that FO% would one of the last things I looked at when weighing two players in a trade.

 

EDIT : I guess I'm not articulating that over the course of a season FO% in isolation should result in more/less possession ... if all other factors are equal (line matchup, talent levels) etc ... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

I agree with your entire analysis ... however, I still stick by that faceoffs are part of possession.        Take Vermette this season, 62.6% FO% wins ... that's 10% higher than the mean.      If I have two equal players in every other aspect and Vermette is @ 62.6% FO wins and the other guy is at 50 ... I know who I'm sticking on the ice in my own end to take a draw. or who I might stick out there with a minute to go and a big faceoff in the ozone.

The timing available in the NHL's RTSS data is pretty coarse, so doing post-face off analysis requires a lot of inference and still has low granularity. That said, people have demonstrated that face off wins in the offensive zone create a temporary (5-15 seconds, varying by a number of factors) period where there's an expectation of more events from the attacking team. The thing is, available research indicates that the benefit is mostly from the offensive zone start, not winning the face off. Is it nice to win an offensive zone face off clean and immediately start a cycle that generates a shot attempt? Absolutely. But losing the face off and recovering it on the quarter board is just as good if it also generates positive possession.

I know for a fact that there are some NHL organizations using proprietary video tracking systems to create microstat products for this. I don't talk about microstats much because most of the stuff out there right now is under NDAs or it's black boxes, and I don't like talking about things I can't test myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2017 at 11:17 PM, BigTed3 said:

This.

I couldn't care if Duchene's winning more draws. The question is whether that leads to more shots/scoring chances/goals for or not. In this case, it doesn't. Despite the fact that Duchene starts with the puck more then, his team is getting shot at more than the Habs are with Galchenyuk on the ice.

Galchenyuk's point totals are lower because he gets less opportunity to score (less ice time). Galchenyuk was #2 on our team in points per game and #1 on our team in points per ice time. Better than Pacioretty, better than Radulov, better than Weber, and better than Duchene.

Also Galchenyk  on the ice more times when the other team scores then when his team scores and continually ends up on the minus side. Its not just bad luck or being on a bad team. His defensive game is brutal and you have to insulate him.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, habs_93 said:

Broadcasters are a particularly un-authoritative example of argument from authority fallacy.

Read the post above.

For future reference, you don't have to ballpark this kind of thing anymore. Corsica.hockey has these and more data readily available. Go to Corsica.hockey, click on the skate icon (for skaters), and you're in the individual skater data page. To see the actual percentage of 5-on-5 face offs taken in the defensive zone for all of our players, click on the "Any" box under Team, then hit backspace and type in MTL and hit enter. After that, click on "On-Ice" under Report and click on Context. Scroll to the right, and you'll find DZF%, Defensive Zone Face Off Percentage. Click it twice, and it'll sort our players descending in that measure. You'll find that Galchenyuk took 39.46% of his 5-on-5 face offs in our defensive zone this season. More than Gallagher, Plekanec, Flynn, Mitchell, Shaw, and Byron. On that same page, you can see that Galchenyuk got fewer 5-on-5 offensive zone starts than anyone except King, Ott, and De La Rose. So the narrative that he's been sheltered somehow and gotten easy match-ups is obviously false.

Actually you supported the other members claim that Galchenyk is being insulated. And when your presenting information and numbers you should try to provide proper information.

As an example (DZF%) is NOT defensive zones faceoffs it is defensive zone finishes , and the higher number in simple terms is bad bad bad :) so bad in fact Deshernais was better than Glachenyk .

Now if you want to rebuke the other member and talk about defensive zone start percentage (DFS%well you can't because there was no other player on Montreal that had fewer defensive zone starts than Galchenyk :) 22.27%

And to add to that offensive zone start percentage (OFS%) there was only one player on Montreal who had more offensive zone starts then Galcheynk and that was Ryan Johnston. Galchenyk started in the offensive Zone a whopping 43.97% of the time.

So yes he is being insulated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To take this a step further because some people rely soooo much on corsica numbers

Head to Head. 

DZS% defensive zone start % Deuchene 39.19% to Galchenyks 22.27%

DZF% defensive zone finish% Deuchene 36.68% to Galchenyks 39.46%

Now even though Deuchene starts in the defensive zone far far far more often then Galchenyk he stills ends up the the defensive zone less then Galchenyk

OZS% offensive zone start % Deuchene 29.54% to Galchenyks  whopping 43.97% 

OZF% offensive zone finish % Deuchene 35.91% to Galchenyks  whopping 32.51% 

Now even though Galchenyk gets over 14% more offensive zone starts he stills ends up in the offensive zone less then Deuchene.

Also when you compare perceived players they get to play with - well

TOI.QoT  - total ice time quality of team all calculated by corsica again I suppose :) Galchenyk get to play with the better quality of teamates although small 30.39 % to 29.97 % for Deuchene

So even through all the insulation and better team mates. Galcheynk still ends up in wrong end of the ice time afte time after time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mea culpa, there. A different site I've used in the past had the same abbreviation for what I was discussing.

1 minute ago, Ravadak said:

To take this a step further because some people rely soooo much on corsica numbers

Again, if you think there's something wrong with his stuff, explain why.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, habs_93 said:

Mea culpa, there. A different site I've used in the past had the same abbreviation for what I was discussing.

Again, if you think there's something wrong with his stuff, explain why.

 

I don't have to you just explained it to yourself, Its great to have acess to all this raw data but in the wrong hands, well we just seen what happens you validated someone else because of your own mistake :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...