News and Notes XXII: Now With More Finnish!

[SaskCanesFan]

I'm familiar with the team outcome with Ward in net vs Darling...98 point pace in 42 starts for Ward

Ward is undervalued...folks don't appreciate how good he is.

It's debatable that the Canes would be a bubble team with an average replacement for Darling...my opinion is that a fairly optimistic view of the team.

Staal-Ryan-Rask-Kruger down the middle was pure garbage and not the makings of a playoff team with average goaltending.

Ward was a decent amount below average, and he had the team on a 98 point pace. That's on the bubble and in. So how would an average goalie, who by definition would have been better than Ward, have ended up with a worse outcome and the team not in exactly? That doesn't add up

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I'm familiar with the team outcome with Ward in net vs Darling...98 point pace in 42 starts for Ward

Ward is undervalued...folks don't appreciate how good he is.

It's debatable that the Canes would be a bubble team with an average replacement for Darling...my opinion is that a fairly optimistic view of the team.

Staal-Ryan-Rask-Kruger down the middle was pure garbage and not the makings of a playoff team with average goaltending.

I agree with this, maybe not quite as strongly as I did before, but I still think they probably wouldn't have been a playoff team with avg. goaltending, but we'll never know because that doesn't exist in a vacuum. I've posted this before, but every playoff team in the NHL except for 2 were in the top 1/2 of the league in Goal scoring. CLB was 17th by only 1 goal. ANA was 19th, but had the leagues #1 goaltending (by SV%). Canes were 23rd. Also, in a stretch where the team had to win some games to stay in a playoff spot, they barely scored. Scoring (or lack there-of) was as big of an issue as goaltending. Maybe they are related to some extent, as the team played differently in front of Darling for whatever reason, but in order to be a playoff team, this team needed more firepower on offense.

The counter argument though, is it's not a huge stretch to believe that going from the leagues' worst to the league average for goaltending could have resulted in 7 more wins (thus 97 points). Every playoff team in the east was a + for GF/GA. The worst were NJ at +4 and +8 and the Canes were -28. The league Median goaltending sv% was .909. Canes was .893. If the Canes had just the middle of the pack goaltending of .909, they would have given up 38 less goals and been +10. That doesn't guarantee they would have been in the playoffs, but they would have been in the picture. Maybe Peters doesn't lose the team if that's the case. Maybe Francis makes some deadline deals if that's the case. A bunch of what-ifs, but it's a reasonable discussion.

In the end, I still think this was not a playoff team because they weren't talented enough up front, but I think they would have been close.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

The good news, is I think this team has an opportunity to be a much better scoring team this year if things go the right way so getting at least average goaltending is a must.

 

[Svechhammer]

Maybe not for next year, at least until the calendar flips to 2019, but I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating the boost that Necas and Svechnikov could provide this anemic offense. By that alone I think average tending should be good enough next year to at least sneak into the last wild card spot.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

No doubt that Necas and Svechnikov should provide an offensive boost, but if Skinner and Faulk are moved, that also takes away from the offense so we have to see the moves in totality. The net gain may still be positive, but it's not just adding those two and everything else stays the same. Brind'Amour is a wildcard though that we have no idea about. He says he wants to open up the offense more and thinks he can get more scoring out of these guys, but until he does, it's just words.

The other thing we have to consider (knock on wood) is that the Canes have been relatively lucky when it comes to injuries these past few seasons. The good news, is they have a lot more depth now, so can probably withstand an injury better than in prior seasons, it just depends who gets injured.

 

[Svechhammer]

It depends on the return for those 2. If they are hockey moves and we get players for the lineup, then I don't think the impact will be that bad when you consider the incoming talent. If we move them for picks or not ready prospects, then things could regress a bit. That being said, I can't help but look at Skinner's stat line from last year where he was a -27 despite scoring 49 points and wonder if he's just to much of a defensive liability anymore. It's not like I came away from last season thinking his defensive game was good, but I didn't realize it was that bad.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

It depends on the return for those 2. If they are hockey moves and we get players for the lineup, then I don't think the impact will be that bad when you consider the incoming talent. If we move them for picks or not ready prospects, then things could regress a bit. That being said, I can't help but look at Skinner's stat line from last year where he was a -27 despite scoring 49 points and wonder if he's just to much of a defensive liability anymore. It's not like I came away from last season thinking his defensive game was good, but I didn't realize it was that bad.

Yeah, if certainly does depend on the return, but it's unlikely that we are getting a 30G scorer back for Skinner. No doubt on his defense being a detractor, but the discussion was how those player (Svech and Necas) would help our anemic offense so I was focusing on that part.

Skinner is good for about 30G per year (albeit, it bounces around year to year) and Faulk is good for about 15 goals per year assuming this was just a down year. So that's 45 goals / year that would be going "out", ignoring the defensive side of things, depending on who comes back in the trade.

 

[Svechhammer]

Yeah, if certainly does depend on the return, but it's unlikely that we are getting a 30G scorer back for Skinner. No doubt on his defense being a detractor, but the discussion was how those player (Svech and Necas) would help our anemic offense so I was focusing on that part.

Skinner is good for about 30G per year (albeit, it bounces around year to year) and Faulk is good for about 15 goals per year assuming this was just a down year. So that's 45 goals / year that would be going "out", ignoring the defensive side of things, depending on who comes back in the trade.

I get what you're saying, and I don't disagree. But to effectively net out the impact of losing Faulk and Skinner, by those metrics, you would need Necas and Svechnikov to each score about 20 goals this year, and I'm not sure that's as big a stretch as we think. I honestly think they each might. But at that same time, if we're basing this on just how bad the offense was last year, we're needing to replace 24 goals by Skinner and 8 goals by Faulk just to break even. Personally, I think Svech alone has the potential to cover that next season. At that point, any additional help by Necas and any chipping in by someone we get on a return is the net improvement on the team as a whole. And this is ignoring how I've seen some scouts say that Svech's forechecking is a sneaky strength.

 

[What the Faulk]

Here are all the 18 and 19 year old rookies to score 25+ in their first season since 1967. There are 29 of them, so about once every two years. Since 2000, there have been six: Kovalchuk, Crosby, Staal, Skinner, Laine, and Matthews.

I think the expectations for some of these rookies are approaching disappointment.

 

[The Stranger]

Ward was a decent amount below average, and he had the team on a 98 point pace. That's on the bubble and in. So how would an average goalie, who by definition would have been better than Ward, have ended up with a worse outcome and the team not in exactly? That doesn't add up

The counter argument though, is it's not a huge stretch to believe that going from the leagues' worst to the league average for goaltending could have resulted in 7 more wins (thus 97 points). Every playoff team in the east was a + for GF/GA. The worst were NJ at +4 and +8 and the Canes were -28. The league Median goaltending sv% was .909. Canes was .893. If the Canes had just the middle of the pack goaltending of .909, they would have given up 38 less goals and been +10. That doesn't guarantee they would have been in the playoffs, but they would have been in the picture. Maybe Peters doesn't lose the team if that's the case. Maybe Francis makes some deadline deals if that's the case. A bunch of what-ifs, but it's a reasonable discussion.

Average goaltending =/= League average sv%. A team's sv% is a function of more things than just goalie performance.

I do agree that there would be positive ripple from improved G play last season...hockey butterfly effect...so it's conceivable they would've made the playoffs.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Yeah, I know SV% =/= goaltending play as the team game plays into it, and as you say, there's the butterfly effect. Even if I'm off by 5-10 goals, it doesn't change the overall message though, and you and I are in agreement. It may have made them a bubble team, but it's not a slam dunk that they'd have been in the playoffs with average goaltending.

EDIT: does anyone know where to get "run support" numbers for goalies?

1) How many goals / GP did we score with Cam in net vs. Darling in net?
2) What was the quality of schedule in Cam starts vs. Darling starts? (team and home vs. away)?

 

[Chrispy]

EDIT: does anyone know where to get "run support" numbers for goalies?

1) How many goals / GP did we score with Cam in net vs. Darling in net?
2) What was the quality of schedule in Cam starts vs. Darling starts? (team and home vs. away)?

I didn't try to split the start/relief games for them, just assigned the game to the starting goalie:

Team averaged 3.07 GPG when Ward started (26 Home, 16 away)
Team averaged 2.475 GPG when Darling started (15 Home, 25 away)

No idea where to find schedule strength metrics for each of them.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I didn't try to split the start/relief games for them, just assigned the game to the starting goalie:

Team averaged 3.07 GPG when Ward started (26 Home, 16 away)
Team averaged 2.475 GPG when Darling started (15 Home, 25 away)

No idea where to find schedule strength metrics for each of them.

Thanks for this. Interesting. I figured the scoring would look like that, but was surprised to see the home/away split was so skewed.

EDIT: What's even more interesting. According to NaturalStatTrick, is the Canes scored 117 goals on the road and 108 goals at home this past season.

 

[Stickpucker]

If we keep Skinner and are in the playoffs at the tdl I could see him signing a reasonable deal. If we aren't his value would be the same it is today from a futures perspective.

Only reason to trade him now is a hockey trade. I don't see a great fit....I wonder if we tried to work something around Galchenyuk or Domi.

 

[What the Faulk]

If we keep Skinner and are in the playoffs at the tdl I could see him signing a reasonable deal. If we aren't his value would be the same it is today from a futures perspective.

Only reason to trade him now is a hockey trade. I don't see a great fit....I wonder if we tried to work something around Galchenyuk or Domi.

It depends on what both sides see as reasonable, but I'd definitely be talking numbers right now.

 

[Chrispy]

It depends on what both sides see as reasonable, but I'd definitely be talking numbers right now.

I'm pretty confident they've talked numbers already which is why these trade rumors are prevalent. Most of us agree the team isn't ready to shell out market value for Skinner.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Kane got $49M for 7 years with $12M in signing bonuses and $17M in the first two seasons. I have to imagine that is the minimum Skinner would sign for.

 

[What the Faulk]

I'm pretty confident they've talked numbers already which is why these trade rumors are prevalent. Most of us agree the team isn't ready to shell out market value for Skinner.

I mean, maybe. If they're looking to change the locker room they might be looking to trade him before even doing that. It wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I mean, maybe. If they're looking to change the locker room they might be looking to trade him before even doing that. It wouldn't surprise me.

Yeah, wouldn't surprise me either. They know roughly his market value without even having the conversation so they could have already decided they aren't willing to pay it, or as you said, want to change the room up.

 

[FreshSeabass]

Following the live Q&A with Craig Custance and saw this.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

I would be surprised. Aho is coming off of his ELC next year. If the team offer sheets Nylander at $8.1 mil x 5 (1st, 2nd, 3rd compensation), not only is that likely matched, but it raises the floor of Aho's ask this Summer. How can Carolina justify selling Aho on a $7 mil x 6 type contract if the team was willing to pay $1.1 mil more and buy out one less UFA year for a player that put up fewer points?

The aforementioned scenario has helped suppress the offer sheet. 2nd/3rd contracts are typically a good value for NHL clubs. One offer sheet can lead to another offer sheet and so on, driving up the cost of those contracts throughout the system in the background. Instead of paying young players like RFAs, they would then be paid like UFAs, making it difficult to assemble the depth needed to win. Eventually, the league would adjust, with veteran players looking for those huge UFA contracts ending up as the losers.

 

[geehaad]

Team averaged 3.07 GPG when Ward started (26 Home, 16 away)
Team averaged 2.475 GPG when Darling started (15 Home, 25 away)

the Canes scored 117 goals on the road and 108 goals at home this past season.

Wow. Those two sets of numbers seem contrary to each other.

Not questioning their accuracy, but it makes sense that the total number of goals at home would be higher given Ward's better run support in 26 of the 41 home games, and Darling's lack thereof in 25 of 41 away games.

 

[CandyCanes]

There was about 10-15 game period where Darling had let in a goal within the first 1-10 shots every single game. There’s a reason why the team scored less with him in net. The team was basically instantly playing in a game down a goal from the start of the game.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

There was about 10-15 game period where Darling had let in a goal within the first 1-10 shots every single game. There’s a reason why the team scored less with him in net. The team was basically instantly playing in a game down a goal from the start of the game.

Doesn’t the theory of “score effects” suggest that being down early would actually increase Carolina’s expected GPG?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

For whatever reason, there seemed to be a lot of games where the team just played worse in front of Darling. Maybe it was getting deflated after an early goal. Maybe it was because he was worse at handling the puck. Maybe they couldn't get their transition game going as well because they knew he struggled with rebounds / covering the puck, etc.. Maybe a combination of all of the above, but I thought it was noticeable a number of times.