|
Post by folatre on Apr 8, 2020 21:53:25 GMT -5
Nice to hear from you, HFTO.
I concur with your analysis. There is a problem in the executive tier (President, GM, etc.) of the organization. If you want to understand what is wrong on the ice and in the standings season after season, logic says look there. In Spanish we say el pescado se pudre por la cabeza.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 8, 2020 22:47:59 GMT -5
Nice to hear from you, HFTO. I concur with your analysis. There is a problem in the executive tier (President, GM, etc.) of the organization. If you want to understand what is wrong on the ice and in the standings season after season, logic says look there. In Spanish we say el pescado se pudre por la cabeza. I'd guess a rough translation is something about fish rotting or smelling bad from the head down to .... tail? Another such saying in the corporate world is $hit flows downhill. Same sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 9, 2020 8:46:56 GMT -5
Yeah, exactly. For years, there was no strategic plan and no window for contending. Now, supposedly, the plan is drafting and developing (still with no definable window for contending). And low and behold, the ‘drafting and developing plan’ is the hands of people with a long and poor track record of drafting and developing.
The problem isn’t overly demanding fans. The problem isn’t snow. The problem isn’t taxes. The problem isn’t puck luck. The problem isn’t injuries. The problem isn’t guys partying. The problem isn’t too few guys who hate to lose. So, then, where is the problem? Up there, the guys at the top.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 9, 2020 8:54:08 GMT -5
I don't like this talk of bring ok with it because he can be a kid one more year and be with the boys .... In college, that means partying. I'll never trust this team's handling of prospects. So all CC has to look forward to is go back to a league he has clearly outgrown ... Oh goodie I don't believe Bergevin is doing this because he really thinks it's the right path. He's hearing criticism for their handling of Kotkaniemi ( and maybe Galchenyuk) and now he wants to look like the prudent manager.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 9, 2020 13:11:23 GMT -5
I don't like this talk of bring ok with it because he can be a kid one more year and be with the boys .... In college, that means partying. I'll never trust this team's handling of prospects. So all CC has to look forward to is go back to a league he has clearly outgrown ... Oh goodie I don't believe Bergevin is doing this because he really thinks it's the right path. He's hearing criticism for their handling of Kotkaniemi ( and maybe Galchenyuk) and now he wants to look like the prudent manager. Yes. I think he would have preferred to at least have Caufield go through training camp, but that might have posed problems with NCAA, so it would have been Habs or Laval. He does react to criticism though. That's another weak leadership characteristic. There's no disciplined plan he's following, so he reacts to the current situation. Much simpler to look wiser by having Caufield back in Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Apr 16, 2020 20:47:54 GMT -5
Other GMs have been fired for far less damage or lack of success that Bergevin has delivered. Heck, Geoff Molson hired and fired Pierre Gauthier after about 2 years and Goat actually did a decent job with what he had to work with. I don’t know where the seemingly limitless patience comes from. I feel like he’s too joined at the hip with Berg. Maybe there should be a team president in between like Shanahan or Neely. Either way there needs to be a refresh and a new point of view. Berg has done some decent moves recently with trades and draft picks but I don’t have confidence he can put it all together. I would have made a run at Julien Brisebois in Tampa or even Lou Lamoriello before he went to the Islanders. That and moving on from Julien, but I feel between Ducharme and Bouchard we have some decent options. There is only one executive in the entire NHL who is less competent than Bergevin. I wont mention his name out of respect for Senator Hartland Molson. It is unfair that the current version of the Hab’s has both. Julien Brisebois shoulda/coulda/woulda been our GM. At this point there is no easy fix no matter how smart the next Hab’s GM will be. Molson telling Bergevin to fix his mess is like telling a two year old in a high chair to clean up the cheerios he spilled.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 5, 2020 10:20:06 GMT -5
Rejean Tremblay opines that Damphousse should be the next President of Hockey Operations for the Canadien. I doubt this is a source-based rumour.
I am firmly in the camp who believes Montreal --in line with other big complicated markets such as Toronto, New York Rangers, Boston-- would benefit from having a popular hockey knowledgeable individual positioned between ownership and the GM. For me it would be helpful to have a President set the strategic plan of the organization and enhance the brand with both the fans and the business community. This person would also fulfill an important oversight role over the GM.
Anyway, I am definitely not convinced that Molson would remove himself from a role that he currently occupies. And even if he would, I am not sure that Damphousse would be among my top three choices.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Jun 5, 2020 11:14:17 GMT -5
Other GMs have been fired for far less damage or lack of success that Bergevin has delivered. Heck, Geoff Molson hired and fired Pierre Gauthier after about 2 years and Goat actually did a decent job with what he had to work with. I don’t know where the seemingly limitless patience comes from. I feel like he’s too joined at the hip with Berg. Maybe there should be a team president in between like Shanahan or Neely. Either way there needs to be a refresh and a new point of view. Berg has done some decent moves recently with trades and draft picks but I don’t have confidence he can put it all together. I would have made a run at Julien Brisebois in Tampa or even Lou Lamoriello before he went to the Islanders. That and moving on from Julien, but I feel between Ducharme and Bouchard we have some decent options. There is only one executive in the entire NHL who is less competent than Bergevin. I wont mention his name out of respect for Senator Hartland Molson. It is unfair that the current version of the Hab’s has both. Julien Brisebois shoulda/coulda/woulda been our GM. At this point there is no easy fix no matter how smart the next Hab’s GM will be. Molson telling Bergevin to fix his mess is like telling a two year old in a high chair to clean up the cheerios he spilled. You have never watched Buffalo?
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 7, 2020 18:07:03 GMT -5
There is only one executive in the entire NHL who is less competent than Bergevin. I wont mention his name out of respect for Senator Hartland Molson. It is unfair that the current version of the Hab’s has both. Julien Brisebois shoulda/coulda/woulda been our GM. At this point there is no easy fix no matter how smart the next Hab’s GM will be. Molson telling Bergevin to fix his mess is like telling a two year old in a high chair to clean up the cheerios he spilled. You have never watched Buffalo? I don’t disagree that there are other badly run franchises, but the Hab’s have a loyal fan base and lots of revenue. The Expos were well run but had to trade away the talent they developed because they lacked revenue. The Harold Ballard laughs are the only comparable i know.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 10, 2020 10:53:59 GMT -5
Molson said that he is not hiring a President of Hockey Operations and that he continues to have confidence in Bergevin. Captain Obvious also said that two eight game winless streaks pushed Montreal down in the standings.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 10, 2020 11:01:57 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening.
Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 10, 2020 11:40:16 GMT -5
What about this statement... the guy doesnt live in the real world...
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 10, 2020 11:43:37 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening. Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it. The sheep will always flock back... he has no worries... unlike franchises in the US and Ottawa.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 10, 2020 12:12:30 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening. Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it. Yes, Molson's statements are from today.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 10, 2020 12:42:05 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening. Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it. Yup, this was from his presser today. It gets better....
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Jun 10, 2020 13:54:10 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening. Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it. Yup, this was from his presser today. It gets better.... But really what would you expect him to say "We suck and shouldn't be in it?" Of course if they are in the playoffs you want them to do well but realistically they have little to no chance. He did also say that he was disappointed in the season. They had two eight game losing streaks that they couldn't come back from and that the injuries showed they were not deep enough to make up for it. He also said he wasn't happy about the season and Bergevin knows that so he has to put on an optimistic spin for the press and fans but is well aware what they really are.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 10, 2020 15:26:17 GMT -5
THF, yes that is important context. I just don’t want this ownership and management group to think that this primarily undeserved second chance is an endorsement that this season was a success...even if they beat the odds and get past the tough Pens. I really feel that they get too many free passes in a results based job, when their track record has not been up to any standards other than their own. While I never expect to hear Geoff throw Berg under the bus in the media, I would relish him issuing the challenge that this team needs to be much better and that his management team need to feel a bit more pressure to deliver.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 10, 2020 16:33:54 GMT -5
NWT, you will be waiting a long time before Molson ever issues such a challenge. He seems, if not satisfied, quite willing to let the status quo go on and on.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 10, 2020 18:04:17 GMT -5
Did he just say this? If so, I find it very disheartening. Same old, same old. They are in the playoffs ( If it ever happens) by a total fluke & this is good enough. Would standards that low be good enough for the family business? I doubt it. Tehcnically they are in a play-in not a play-off. If they beat Pittsburgh, they will then technically be in the playoffs, the final 16. If they beat Pittsburgh, Molson and Bergevin can make the true statement that they did not miss the playoffs 3 seasons in a row, even though we know differently, hey? I'd so much rather have a high pick this year. Molson, I'm sure, is smelling the dollars.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 10, 2020 18:08:47 GMT -5
With the exception of Montreal, all the big money clubs based in highly demanding hockey markets opt to have a separate POHO, for good reasons in my view. The Leafs have Shanahan. The Rangers have John Davidson. The Bruins have Neely. Why, what’s the point, what does a President of Hockey Operations do? The President is instrumental in the strategic planning function
The President provides accountability through effective oversight of the General Manager The President interfaces regularly with ownership and keeps ownership abreast of the major short, medium, and long-term issues impacting the on-ice product
The President takes a lot of media related duties away from the GM to better insulate that individual and allow them to focus on running the hockey club
The President represents the club at various and potentially numerous fan events
The President represents the club in the business community in general and provides access to corporate sponsors
I am not suggesting that Molson is incapable across this entire range of functions; in fact, he probably is effective in some of them. However, it shows naivete or a certain lack of self-awareness that he continues to think he is the best man for the job.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 10, 2020 18:28:41 GMT -5
THF, yes that is important context. I just don’t want this ownership and management group to think that this primarily undeserved second chance is an endorsement that this season was a success...even if they beat the odds and get past the tough Pens. I really feel that they get too many free passes in a results based job, when their track record has not been up to any standards other than their own. While I never expect to hear Geoff throw Berg under the bus in the media, I would relish him issuing the challenge that this team needs to be much better and that his management team need to feel a bit more pressure to deliver. Molson firing Bergevin for failure is the same as Molson saying I failed by not recognizing and addressing the GM problem earlier. Original hiring of Bergevin was not a terrible mistake but not fixing the problem after five years of mistakes is a big mistake of omission. Tampa Bay benefited when we missed out on a smart educated bilingual manager right under our noses. If Molson's brewery produces an inferior product for eight years and loses market share would Geoff tell the GM he made the mistakes and is now responsible to fix them? The loss of a loyal customer base is the only message Molson will understand and react to.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 10, 2020 18:39:09 GMT -5
With the exception of Montreal, all the big money clubs based in highly demanding hockey markets opt to have a separate POHO, for good reasons in my view. The Leafs have Shanahan. The Rangers have John Davidson. The Bruins have Neely. Why, what’s the point, what does a President of Hockey Operations do? The President is instrumental in the strategic planning function The President provides accountability through effective oversight of the General Manager The President interfaces regularly with ownership and keeps ownership abreast of the major short, medium, and long-term issues impacting the on-ice product The President takes a lot of media related duties away from the GM to better insulate that individual and allow them to focus on running the hockey club The President represents the club at various and potentially numerous fan events The President represents the club in the business community in general and provides access to corporate sponsors I am not suggesting that Molson is incapable across this entire range of functions; in fact, he probably is effective in some of them. However, it shows naivete or a certain lack of self-awareness that he continues to think he is the best man for the job. The reason Molson isn't hiring a POHO goes to the root of the reason it is highly unlikely (99.9% probability) that we will ever have a SC champion in Montreal as long as Molson owns the team. He won't spend the money. I have brought up numerous examples of actions taken by the team which (coincidentally!) have had the effect of saving money. Far more moves have saved $$ than those which cost $$. Why do we not have skating coaches or other specialists? Why do we never hear of any advanced stats discussions? Why do so many incoming players cost less than outgoing players? Why do we not have a regular ECHL affiliate? Why are some players told to take it or leave it? Why are we spending well below the CAP, consistently? Geoff Molson is just a slyer Eugene Melnyk. We need to pull an Ottawa fan action on him.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 10, 2020 18:50:49 GMT -5
Yeah, seventeen, in part it sure seems to be about money. Molson perhaps thinks paying someone $3 million per year to do what he does now pro bono is an unnecessary expense. Likewise, installing a new President would logically imply the hockey man coming in with his own plan would probably kick Bergevin and Julien to the curb, which would trigger large payments to those two until June 2022, while incurring fresh compensation layouts to the new GM and Coach. Molson is a thrifty owner and this impulse is probably reinforced by what he sees as the spectre of a zero profit 2020-21 season with no or limited fans in the building.
And I think there is another part to his reluctance that it is harder to pin down than following the money trail. It is well known that Molson speaks to Bergevin almost every day about Habs hockey and what is going on. I believe he enjoys “talking shop” with Bergevin, Timmins and the front office guys. Removing himself from hockey operations does not mean that he would have to stop being a fan. But it would probably hurt Molson bad because it would signify the end of what very well may be his current perception that him and Bergevin are co-running the show.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 10, 2020 19:15:26 GMT -5
I think you've hit the nail on the head folatre. Molson likes being on the inside too much.
It could be worse I guess. It could be the Rangers with James Dolan running the show. Hardly a day goes by that Dolan isn't roasted in the NY press dor yet another faux pas.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 11, 2020 10:57:34 GMT -5
Yeah, Dolan is a total goof. But he seems to stay on the Knicks side of things, much to their detriment. Regarding the Rangers, Davidson is the President and Gorton is the GM, so for me they have really good people in place.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 12, 2020 16:13:44 GMT -5
Good read from The Athletic from Arthur Staple. Steve Valiquette was a marginal NHL goalie who has developed a data bank of shots on goal. He can tell you which are the most dangerous and in which circumstances. If you want some insight into why good coaches get fired, why some players never develop, why good drafting can be sunk by poor development, you'll get some possible answers here. Steve Valiquette on the NHL’s latest trends and why GMs should take noteSteve Valiquette played 15 pro seasons as a goalie, mostly in the Islanders and Rangers organizations. He’s known now as a studio analyst for MSG Network on Rangers games, but his main project is Clear Sight Hockey, the data company he formed in 2015. He and his partners provide exclusive data on scoring chances for a handful of NHL teams, as he outlined in a Q&A with The Athletic in November 2018. Valiquette was a guest on the No Sleep Til Belmont podcast this week and offered up more insight into his work and what it’s shown about the way goals are scored in today’s NHL, as well as where he thinks data will take the league in the coming years. We compiled a few of his answers here in Q&A form. (Editor’s note: This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.) On how he learned the mental side of the game as a goalie: Everything changed for me in the ’04-05 season. We had that lockout. I was very fortunate to have Benoit Allaire stay with me and Jason LaBarbera. We were partners in Hartford and we had a goalie coach there full-time for the first time at the AHL level. Now, as you know, all 31 teams employ two, three, sometimes four goalie coaches so there’s coverage. But back in those days, there was maybe one guy who came in periodically for the NHL goalies. It was basically a perfect storm for me in a few ways. I hired a sports psychologist. My friend Steve Montador — the late, great Steve Montador — I remember in the summer time, he said, “Vally, if you want to play in the NHL you have to hire this sports psychologist I work with. She’s changed my life.” Her name is Giselle Bourgeois. She was in Lenox, Mass., about an hour and 15 minutes away from where I was in Hartford. So I was able to get there twice a week. I wasn’t just working on the ice with the best goalie coach in the world, I was able to work with a sports psychologist. The way that changed everything I looked at was understanding where I had shortcomings. I was a career .909 save percentage in the AHL, I was 27 years old and I was pegged to back up Jason LaBarbera at the time and I had to realize I had different issues with what the data community would call score effects. Goalies react very differently depending on the score of the game. These are things we only know anecdotally. We don’t know them in fact until we categorize scoring chances over and over again and then come up with historical averages, and then you’re able to look at, “Wow, this goalie really doesn’t stop the puck when his team’s up by a goal. Any scoring chance seems to go in on this guy.” And there are goalies in the NHL who are plagued with that mental barrier; they’re not able to give themselves permission to believe in themselves in game conditions. They play really well and make saves when their team is down by two, but not when it really matters. And the psychology of a team, it hinges on the mental strength of your goaltender. This is what I’m really fascinated with right now. I can remember getting rattled playing against the Albany River Rats in the AHL before I started working with my sports psychologist, feeling the pressure playing in a game we had to win. They’re in last place, we’re in first place and I get scored on twice in the first period against a team that, full disclosure, I think I’m too good for them. I’m too good to be playing against them. And that’s not a good thing. Any time you let your guard down because you think you’re better than somebody, you end up taking that bite in the butt. That’s everything in life, isn’t it? So I had to come up with strategies, with the help of my sports psychologist, to play the puck. Next puck. Not the opponent, I compete against the puck. The puck tells me where to go, when to go, how fast to go, I have to keep squareness on it at all times. That keeps me in the moment. During that year, leading the league in save percentage with my partner, it gave me the belief that I could play in the NHL in a supporting role. I was already too old, because it took me so long to gather the courage to get a sports psychologist. On how he got into the world of hockey data:Before I even started categorizing things, I was really in tune to the fact that not all shots are created equal. In the summer of 2014, hockey had an analytics revolution and that was right in line with the time I was retiring from playing. After 15 years pro and five years junior, I’d played on 20 different teams. I thought to myself, if each coaching staff I ever played for looked at scoring chances differently, then how the heck can we look at what scoring chances would be like for every team and every game played during the season? Then, and only then, would you get historical averages for each shot type. To say that a breakaway goes in 31 percent of the time — you would not be able to say that unless you’ve categorized all 2,300 breakaways that season. So that was my “coming to Jesus” moment with the sport, I just couldn’t believe we’d gotten this far in hockey and there was no measure for what a scoring chance is across the league. The only way I thought that could get done was if I came up with an expected goals model. An expected goals model is built using historical averages for every chance in the NHL during a season. You need a database to hold that — we’ve got 350,000 NHL chances in our database, categorized by shot type — and then you have to manually track all of these shots to then get true context for every event. And then you can deliver these things the morning after games for teams and you can have the structure for a business. That’s what I thought was going to be possible. I didn’t realize this thought would be such a gut-wrenching experience, because it’s that hard to do. And I’m not even worried about anyone copying it because it’s that hard to do. On where goals are being scored on the ice in 2019-20:
Goals this season and last, there is one shot sequence that goes in more than any other sequence and it’s what we would call a low slot-line pass. If there’s a line that divides the ice in two and it goes from the middle of the net and stops at the top of the circles — imagine just splitting the ice in two equal parts — any pass that begins above the hash mark and is received below the hash mark from one side of the ice to the other, that shot accounted for more goals than any other shot type. 736 goals on 2,023 shots.
It’s a telling sign to me: “OK, what did this shot show me as a goalie?” It’s the hardest thing to stop. I’m on one side of the ice, I’m fixed in my stance, the shooter’s approaching me, he’s a threat. And now the pass goes across the ice. Physically, it’s the first time I have to open my legs. I’ve got to be able to move my head, get full rotation, then get down to my far post. It’s a very difficult technical save — physical, cognitive — it’s very difficult. Of course, I felt that as a goalie, but at the same time I would have said at the end of my playing career that breakaways went in the most often. I would have thought those would have been the scoring chances that went in the most.
The next two top scoring sequences in the NHL are actually two different types of broken plays — what we’d categorize as a mid-percentage broken play and then a high-percentage broken play. You can imagine how difficult these things are to put into context when you’re training people to watch the game the way you do.
The simple way of saying it is that a mid-percentage broken play would be a shot that comes, delivered to the net from the point, in the air. The player in front is waving at it, trying to deflect it and it inadvertently hits someone’s elbow or shin pad and ends up in the net. That’s a mid-percentage broken play because the intent was a mid-percentage shot, an in-the-air deflection, no screen.
A high-percentage broken play is a slot-line pass that’s intended for the receiving player. It doesn’t go through and it goes off their skate or their stick. Those went in 434 times last year. It’s neat because when you look at how the puck ends up in the net at the end of the season, the slot line is directly impacted in two of the top three sequences. If you can move the puck from one side of the ice to the other and force the other team to defend, you’re going to get more broken play goals.
On what the data says about successful teams:
If you’re new to the data, you can always look at who won last year. Who was the most recent Stanley Cup winner? It’s the St. Louis Blues and, with a robust database, you can look at how they create grade-A chances. How often do they create grade-A chances? Are they even important?
What I thought was interesting with St. Louis this season was, they are one of the top-six teams in high-percentage chances for and against in OZP (offensive zone play). Only Carolina and Vegas are also in both of those top six. Those are three pretty good teams … Carolina is top five in just about everything except for goaltending. They’re a good team. If anything unravels Carolina, it’s goaltending.
St. Louis is No. 2, tied with Boston, for slot-line plays created in OZP. St. Louis is No. 7 in slot-line plays that have led to goals, tied with Washington. They’re good at finishing their scoring chances. They’ve got a better-than-average shooting percentage, but it’s not outstanding.
Then I would look to expected goals — it’s a rate stat, per 60 minutes. At five-on-five, with the game tied, St. Louis ranks No. 4 at creating high-percentage chances. At five-on-five up by a goal, St. Louis ranks 30th at high-percentage chances and fifth at high-percentage chances against.
Now, when I looked at that, I’m saying to myself, “Pretty neat. They don’t really go for it up a goal, they pack it in and they play defensively. They’re good at closing teams out. They don’t give up a lot. They don’t create a lot.” Then I was looking at Jordan Binnington. What I’ve always looked at with data is how a goaltender can elevate a weaker team or unravel a very good team. It’s a different sport. It’s an individual playing hockey. I never considered myself a hockey player; I was a goalie.
At five-on-five, with the game tied, Binnington ranked No. 3 in expected goals differential — how many difficult shots he faced, how many goals he allowed, he ranked third. You can have a great technical goalie with a great physical frame, but if he doesn’t have the mindset to be able to play in those different game conditions … you can still help these people, you don’t have to trade them.
Another interesting thing with Binnington. At six-on-five, with the other goalie pulled, he was No. 4 in expected goals differential. Five-on-five, up one goal, St. Louis is good at clamping down, not giving up many quality scoring opportunities. And why is that important? Because Binnington is one of the league’s best at stopping the shots he should stop in those conditions.
He’s at the top of the NHL in not allowing low-percentage chances against. He only allowed one low-percentage goal on 129 shots this season. That’s neat because now they’ve got a good team in St. Louis that’s leaning on their goaltender they once didn’t have. Now they have a guy in there who’s able to close it down.
David Rittich was last in that category — 10 goals on 126 low-percentage shots. Binnington shuts the door when the team is up by a goal, doesn’t get rattled and doesn’t give up the bad goal where Rittich does. And that’s why I think it’s so important to look at score effects, because if you don’t know who’s performing when the game is tied, up by a goal or down by a goal, do you really know what you have and what you can count on in the postseason? On the battle to convince GMs and coaches of what the data says:
Every team now employs an analytics team and a coaching staff and those two departments have to then relay up to the GM that everybody’s doing their job, and there can be conflict there. Now, there’s another layer of conflict.
The reason why I was first hired by an NHL team three years ago was because I was coming in as the third party that was going to mediate the scoring chances the day after a game was played. Because the analytics group wouldn’t be in line with what the coaches believed they saw. Depending on the game, one day you’d have the goalie coach doing the chances, one day the defense coach doing it. And a chance that goes towards the other team’s net is not qualified the same as one you receive, so there’s a lot of internal struggle there.
One of our shot types has been getting lower and lower every year — clear-sighted shots, ones where the goalie has more than half a second of clear sight on the puck before it comes off the stick from the slot. When you look at most of the public data, that shot from the slot area — home plate, the house, however you refer to it — that would be qualified as a high-danger shot for most companies out there.
That doesn’t qualify as a high-danger shot for us because we’ve looked at roughly 5,000 chances a year on clear-sighted shots that come from the slot. So a player skates into the slot area, unobstructed, has a bit of time and space, shoots and tries to beat a goalie clean. Now, the unfortunate role I have is that I have to go and explain to a team that this year, that shot only went in 7.1 percent of the time. It’s a shot that goes in less than nine percent of the time. What it leads to is, “OK, Steve, send me the list of shots, wise guy.” So, I’ll send you everything we have. Here’s the video.
I’ll share a couple of the conversations I’ve had. Auston Matthews, he had 41 clear-sighted shots from the slot area in the NHL. Led the league. How many goals would you guess he’d have from there?
I was like, “11?” He’s the best shooter in the game, isn’t he? He had four. Four goals on 41 shots, and this is the guy I rave about on MSG about his release. But I watched those 41 shots just to be sure, and I see the goals he does score. He actually scores when he’s shooting through a defender’s triangle, he’s got a really good drag and pull, a release that comes off quickly and surprises goalies when he uses the defender as a screen. So that’s a tactic he uses very well.
But does he beat goalies clean when they have that all-important half second of clear sight? No. There were only three or four guys who stood out this year in that shot type. Jack Eichel had 29 shots from there and scored seven goals — that’s 24 percent and he led the league. He’s one of those elite snipers who can look at a goalie and beat him clean.
John Tavares had a good year this year — had 21 chances in that category, not a ton, but four goals. So that’s 19 percent. (Evgeni) Malkin, four goals on 19 shots. (Leon) Draisaitl, three goals on 19. So that’s 21 and 15 percent.
But overall, I’m looking at this list and it’s a tough one to explain to people in hockey if you don’t have the video to back it up. On understanding game conditions, or score effects, and how important they are:
I think this is important because if you don’t look at how your players are performing in certain game conditions, I don’t think you really have a good grasp of the psychology of your team.
Two years ago the Rangers gave up a bunch of leads at the end of a bunch of games, and now you’re categorizing your team as mentally soft. Two years ago, you’re giving up a number of games late. But when you leave the game level and look at your team, then drill down and look at your players, it’s amazing how many times it’s the same guy. Some people just can’t perform under certain game conditions. There’s an anxiety, there’s a past experience, there’s something there.
They don’t expect to win. It’s almost like they’re going to relive something they’ve failed at in the past and they’re going to do it again. It’s amazing when I see teams losing, what their percentage of losing is when the goalie gives up a low-percentage goal. It’s like the entire bench sinks.
I watch the Rangers so closely so I can speak to them. They had a really good season in net with all three guys that played. But I noticed in my notes that game-over-game, they lost games when their goalie allowed a low-percentage goal. Is their margin for error that small that their goalies can’t give up one low-percentage goal? That sinks the entire game?
They lost 70 percent of the games when the goalie allowed one low-percentage goal against. It made me think a little harder, I wanted to look at what happens if the Rangers score one low-percentage goal and they give up two — they lost 82 percent of those games. The Devils lost 90 percent of the time, 18 games.
If I’m the Devils, how much do you look at what the goalies were doing early in the season? You weren’t giving up that many chances, you weren’t that bad offensively, but you weren’t getting goaltending.
We went through a stretch with eight coaches fired in a seven-week stretch. Take a look at the goaltending they got and where they were. Within our database, every coach got fired because they didn’t get goaltending. I could go team by team. There’s some teams firing good coaches.
On expected goal differential and what it says about goalies:
One of the lists I like to look at is expected goals. And then look at the differential — the guys in the minus all miss the playoffs. There isn’t a good team that had poor goaltending this year. But there are some good teams that had great goaltending and now the perception is they have a great team, their coach is great. But it’s not always the case.
I was looking at the expected goals for goalies this year. I used a filter of 950 chances against, which weeds out the backups. You get 22 goalies who qualify. Just quick snapshots:
Connor Hellebuyck, best goalie in the game, should be your Vezina Trophy winner. Jacob Markstrom deserves a big payday. (Tuukka) Rask and (Corey) Crawford, still elite goalies in their 30s. Robin Lehner, he should start over (Marc-Andre) Fleury. Juuse Saros should start over (Pekka) Rinne. (Mackenzie) Blackwood in New Jersey is a legit goalie at 23 years old. (Sergei) Bobrovsky and (John) Gibson, their games fell off a cliff this season.
It’s neat to see how a guy performs based on what he’s facing because we’ve never had the opportunity to see things that way. You could always say the reason Marty Brodeur was so great was because he only had to face 18 shots a night, but you still have to qualify that he had two two-on-ones and a breakaway.
And we can use those same filters for our shooters and our defensemen.
On combining data with psychology to get the most out of players:
Wouldn’t you say that every team should employ a sports psychologist and have the right person to look at this data? Exactly that. I lived this.
What if you have a guy you’re developing? Let’s say it’s Ilya Sorokin. He comes over and he’s playing for the Islanders next year. And he’s not playing well against the lower teams, but he plays big against the big teams. You’ve got a young guy who’s impressionable, he’s finding his way in the league, he’s going to find his way the same way (Igor) Shesterkin has, but he needs a little more help.
Now you have somebody on him. This is the data. Let’s look at the game conditions, watch the video — he has a letdown here. It’s the hardest part about scouting. It’s the reason there’s so many mistakes in the draft. It’s because when we get to the point of developing these players, we don’t know how to psychologically work with them. Then we deem them a bust because we couldn’t get through to them. But you didn’t even know what the root of the problem was.
This is the next frontier of data, to help us get into the mental game. If we’re talking about a developing player or even a superstar who doesn’t score when you need a goal. Maybe that would help a Buffalo, a Jeff Skinner, and seeing when he scores. Not to say Jeff Skinner isn’t going to be able to score five-on-five when the game’s tied, but maybe we can help him. We can help his mindset and have the confidence to perform in those big-time situations. Or your team doesn’t make the playoffs. So on the player level, if you can’t help anybody, how’s your team going to do?
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 12, 2020 17:37:39 GMT -5
Molson has stood up for Bergevon many times. Results speaks. Of course, team is not doing well. So, for gone conclusion Bergevin is hanging by a shoestring. Molson probably wants to bring somebody in but doubt it will be now with everything in a flux. He may want to see how this playoff thing goes and if there will be hockey next year before adding a big contract to his front office. He may be spending 4 to 5 million a year, for a new GM who cannot make any moves next year. IF it is early '21, and things look good as far as playing hockey, situation be changed. But that is big if
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 13, 2020 18:42:45 GMT -5
Thanks, seventeen, that was a good read.
Valiquette is a smart guy and he is almost assuredly right that some widely used metrics in hockey analytics are not particularly useful because they miss the nuance of what constitutes a dangerous shot for an NHL goalie.
As his work shows, counting all shots from the slot as quality scoring chances makes no sense when you appreciate that even elite shooters like Matthews rarely score when the goalie is set and sees the puck. In other words, simply plotting where a shot was taken from only tells part of the story and often not the most important part of the story. It really seems to be what happens in the 1-2 seconds before a shot is taken (a nice pass across the slot, a nice deke on a breakaway) or in the 1-2 seconds after the shot (tips, rebounds, deflection off leg/skate) are at the heart of understanding what kind of chances are actually problematic for NHL goalies.
I have a sense that the sources that frequently say Montreal is top five in chances for are skewing the numbers in a way that flatters the Habs by counting the very thing Valiquette is describing – low risk shots from within the “home plate” area.
I do not have a link, but I know I read an interesting piece by Andrew Berkshire since play was put on hold this spring and he made some interesting observations about and interpretations into why Montreal sputters notwithstanding strong Corsi numbers. In essence, he made a few solid points: • Habs take a lot of perimeter shots compared to most teams • Even for shots not from the blueline or from wild angles, shot location itself is not capturing enough info (this is what Valiquette is saying) to explain Habs poor shooting percentages • Montreal is actually bottom five in offensive zone possession time three consecutive seasons, which means the Habs do not get enough second and third chances, nor do they dominate pucks low and cycle it • Also, the Habs give up too many odd man chances against, which is the product of Montreal committing a high number of neutral zone turnovers
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 13, 2020 21:07:40 GMT -5
To build on this a bit. The Habs are a very good turnover and transition team. That often leads to higher shot totals. Too often from the perimeter or clear shots into the chest. We have all seen it. But you need sustained offensive possession to exploit second chances and to further breakdown defensive coverage these days. Those deadly cross ice pass situations that Valiquette talks about are really hard for the Habs to create if they do not do it on the first rush. You need snipers to convert on the pass and you need big bodies to maintain possession. Still some gaps in team architecture. Why do some of our most promising shifts come from the fourth line? Great cycling ability, but not the talent to convert enough from it.
This was a great article. The “old school” would scoff at it and just talk about getting more home plate shots. The game has evolved. Full power to those teams that have mixed up their management and coaching staff accordingly. And then there is the concept of building your team around the mix of players you need to play the style you want to play. Also implies more than just yet another of Molson’s “reset”.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 13, 2020 21:09:41 GMT -5
You're analyzing it really well, folatre. Sure, we have a lot of possession, but either our shooters suck, or the shots we're taking are not particularly dangerous, even if they're from good positions. A huge factor is that a decent NHL goalie (eg, an average one) will stop most shots if he can see them and if he's set. I would guess, most of the Habs shots are of that variety.
Another major fact I took out of that article, is something I've experienced in soccer games. I've played on some really good rec teams, but our goaltending has not always been up to the standard of the rest of the team. In those cases, our team has not done well. We didn't need great goaltending, we just needed someone who didn't let in bad goals. Stop the ones you're supposed to stop. If a good shot beats you, ok, that's life. If a bad shot beats you, it destroys the team. Binnington is a guy who seems to do that...not get beaten by bad shots. In the stats Valiquette was talking about, David Rittich was the opposite, and there you have a pretty good team (Calgary) that has problems winning. It just fits so well. He also makes the point that some very good coaches have been fired because they've had goaltending that lets in bad goals at bad times. That's on the GM, right, not the coach? Yet the revolving door is at the coach level rather than the GM level where it belongs. "Show me a good goalie and I'll show you a good coach" is less of a catch phrase than it is an actual law of nature. Carolina is provided as an example of a very good team that's been torpedoed by goaltending (thank goodness). Think of how many years the Flyers failed because the GM just wouldn't go out and get a decent goalie.
Which begs the question.....what kind of goalie is Price? Is he the Binnington, Roy or Dryden who just wouldn't let in that killer goal or is he more like Rittich? I'm not sure. I've seen both versions.
I found it a really insightful and educational article. Glad you enjoyed it.
|
|