Speculation: Acq./Rost. Bldg./Cap/Lines etc. Part LXXV (Dog Days - Woof!) Galiev waived

[Sam Spade]

A 3-1-1 record isn't anything to write home about, but they have played well at even strength and if it weren't for poor special teams play the team could have an extra point or two in the standings. He needs to remember this combination works later in the season so he can try it again and have it as an option come playoff time.

Beyond well. 5 v 5 they've given up 4 goals (5 goals total for even strength situations). Fewest in the league.

Only negative so far has been special teams and this can be a good thing if it gets them working on it and making adjustments.

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

you are the stats man. can you show the percentage of kuznetsov's even strength points scored while with Ov and away from Ov? My memory is that kuzy thrived as a 2nd line center, free of the top defense pair and shutdown checking line of the opposition. That was the Caps advantage last season. They got team leading scorer scoring off their second line. That they lost that in the playoffs was what beat them. You seem to be saying that he did most of his damage with Ov.

Can you fill that in?

I think he meant to say that Ovi scores more at ES when next to Kuzy rather than NB.

 

[twabby]

you are the stats man. can you show the percentage of kuznetsov's even strength points scored while with Ov and away from Ov? My memory is that kuzy thrived as a 2nd line center, free of the top defense pair and shutdown checking line of the opposition. That was the Caps advantage last season. They got team leading scorer scoring off their second line. That they lost that in the playoffs was what beat them. You seem to be saying that he did most of his damage with Ov.

Can you fill that in?

I'll look for his specific points/60 with and without Ovechkin in a bit, I'm finding that data harder to find. However the team with Ovechkin and Kuznetsov both on the ice at the same time at 5v5 scored 3.40 goals/60 and gave up 2.14 goals/60 (61% of the goals), while with Kuznetsov on the ice and Ovechkin off the ice the team scored 2.97 goals/60 and gave up 2.35 goals/60 (56% of the goals). Kuznetsov IMO benefits from playing with Ovechkin, even if that means he goes up against tougher opposition.

Meanwhile, the lines last year and their goals for and expected goals for percentages:

Line|GF%|expected GF%
8-19-77|67.44%|50.29%
90-19-14|66.67%|52.97%
90-92-14|64.29%|48.52%
8-92-77 | 62.50% | 64.52%
8-92-14|61.54%|55.05%
65-92-14 | 43.48% | 50.77%

The 8-92-77 line was dynamite last season and while I'm glad they have given it another shot this season (with good results again), I can't for the life of me figure out why it was abandoned last season especially since the 90-19-14 line was also defensively strong and would have (IMO) done just as good a job defensively as the 8-19-77 line. I really hope Trotz doesn't stubbornly stick with 8-19 as a pair down the stretch because IMO the team is better off having Backstrom as the shutdown center on the second line instead of on the first line and because Kuznetsov has clearly shown great chemistry with Ovechkin and Oshie. Meanwhile, the 65-92-14 line last season underwhelmed down the stretch both from an actual scoring standpoint and a predictive (xGF%) standpoint.

 

[Langway]

My view is that for Trotz the 3rd and 4th lines are interchangeable depending on opponent. Often the Beagle line is the actual 3rd line.

It will be interesting to see how it develops

That would strike me as a gross misuse of Justin Williams if so and it hasn't been born out based on TOI thus far overall. I know they want to create an effective third scoring line and the Swedes are playing well from an underlying stat standpoint but Williams is still an effective player. He can play more minutes and probably could use better linemates (and, as I tend to harp on, better distribution team-wide will lead to everyone being more effective offensively).

They went out and got Lars Eller for a reason and it wasn't to be below Jay Beagle on the depth chart. Eller has averaged four minutes more ESTOI per game thus far and I don't expect that to change too much. The fourth line will get more time if they're up by multiple goals and are in garbage time but otherwise that's probably not going to be the case. Managing Sanford is one thing but either he or Connolly will need to step up and be worthy of more typical third-line usage. I really doubt the fourth-line supplants the third and if it does that's probably not a good thing.

 

[trick9]

This early in the season I look at TOI trends more than averages. Wilson and Beagle played 7mins and 5mins in the first game and are playing 11 plus estoi since while Sanford has both been scratched and logged fewer estoi than those two in his last game.

My view is that for Trotz the 3rd and 4th lines are interchangeable depending on opponent. Often the Beagle line is the actual 3rd line.

It will be interesting to see how it develops

Trotz gives his depth players rewards when they have good games, and takes away some of their ice when they have bad games. That's what happened with Wilson in the 1st game. The 4th line got more ice because they had few really good games after that and were big factors in the Caps getting wins.

Sanford hasn't been bad by any means, but not that impressive either, and that's propably what they expected from a rookie in his first pro games. But he loses some of that TOI when the 4th line has good games because Trotz isn't going to take that much ice away from either of the first 2 lines.

 

[Zoidberg Jesus]

you are the stats man. can you show the percentage of kuznetsov's even strength points scored while with Ov and away from Ov? My memory is that kuzy thrived as a 2nd line center, free of the top defense pair and shutdown checking line of the opposition. That was the Caps advantage last season. They got team leading scorer scoring off their second line. That they lost that in the playoffs was what beat them. You seem to be saying that he did most of his damage with Ov.

Can you fill that in?

Kuzy with Ovi: 1-12-13 in 306:40 for 2.54 P/60
Kuzy without Ovi: 10-26-36 in 853:05 for 2.53 P/60

So pretty much the same point production, just trading goals for assists away from Ovi. But twabby is right that the team was more successful as a whole when Kuzy played with Ovi than without him.

And just out of curiosity...

Ovi with Kuzy: 10-5-15 in 306:40 for 2.93 P/60
Ovi without Kuzy: 17-8-25 in 878:30 for 1.71 P/60

Huh. Was not expecting that big a difference.

 

[twabby]

Kuzy with Ovi: 1-12-13 in 306:40 for 2.54 P/60
Kuzy without Ovi: 10-26-36 in 853:05 for 2.53 P/60

So pretty much the same point production, just trading goals for assists away from Ovi. But twabby is right that the team was more successful as a whole when Kuzy played with Ovi than without him.

And just out of curiosity...

Ovi with Kuzy: 10-5-15 in 306:40 for 2.93 P/60
Ovi without Kuzy: 17-8-25 in 878:30 for 1.71 P/60

Huh. Was not expecting that big a difference.

There are certainly sample size issues to consider when evaluating the team as a whole when Ovechkin and Kuznetsov's were together vs. apart, but team certainly looked better as a whole when they were together and at the very least they should have been given another extended opportunity together in the final 20 games of last regular season to see if it worked going into the playoffs. Instead, they weren't reunited until Game 5 of the second round against the Penguins and at that point it was too late.

The fact that Trotz didn't put them back together despite Kuznetsov's individual scoring decline and the team in general declining after the snowstorm is really striking because it leads me to believe that he thought the team had a problem with effort rather than execution, which I think is a dangerous and faulty assumption for a team looking to advance and win a Stanley Cup.

 

[trick9]

Kuznetsov P/60 last season:

Vs. East: 0.79

Vs. West: 1.29 (leads NHL, Kane 2nd at 1.19)

 

[txpd]

So pretty much the same point production, just trading goals for assists away from Ovi. But twabby is right that the team was more successful as a whole when Kuzy played with Ovi than without him..

since Kuzy was not with Ov during the long post snow storm period, I am not surprised.

Edit: Kuzy scored 1 goal playing with Ov? 1? That's good?

 

[twabby]

since Kuzy was not with Ov during the long post snow storm period, I am not surprised.

Edit: Kuzy scored 1 goal playing with Ov? 1? That's good?

The snow-storm explains nothing. It's an excuse. There are likely many reasons the team stumbled down the stretch, part of which is Trotz's unwillingness to change things up and demand players or himself be accountable. Maybe going back to what worked in October/November of 2015 would have helped the Capitals at the end of last season, but it was never given a shot.

And as long as the team is doing well as a whole, I don't really care how many goals Kuznetsov himself scores while with Ovechkin. If he is racking up assists, it means the team is scoring.

 

[txpd]

The snow-storm explains nothing. It's an excuse. There are likely many reasons the team stumbled down the stretch, part of which is Trotz's unwillingness to change things up and demand players or himself be accountable. Maybe going back to what worked in October/November of 2015 would have helped the Capitals at the end of last season, but it was never given a shot.

And as long as the team is doing well as a whole, I don't really care how many goals Kuznetsov himself scores while with Ovechkin. If he is racking up assists, it means the team is scoring.

ok...well. the stretch run was when Kuzy went dark, the fact that his line scored less was not a surprise.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I'm wondering why our two top local stats champions aren't on the main boards dipping their toes into the advanced stats debate thread. Do it....I wanna watch.

 

[g00n]

There are certainly sample size issues to consider when evaluating the team as a whole when Ovechkin and Kuznetsov's were together vs. apart, but team certainly looked better as a whole when they were together and at the very least they should have been given another extended opportunity together in the final 20 games of last regular season to see if it worked going into the playoffs. Instead, they weren't reunited until Game 5 of the second round against the Penguins and at that point it was too late.

The fact that Trotz didn't put them back together despite Kuznetsov's individual scoring decline and the team in general declining after the snowstorm is really striking because it leads me to believe that he thought the team had a problem with effort rather than execution, which I think is a dangerous and faulty assumption for a team looking to advance and win a Stanley Cup.

Seems like this is having it both ways. You can't argue for stats proving effectiveness despite the "eye test" and then talk about how the team looked despite the stats when they don't say what you expect. If a team is being run by the stats, and the stats say "no significant difference" then your argument about giving them another chance because they looked better is inconsistent with any fancy stat argument. If we put so much value on individual possession stats and seek to set our lines based on the best matches per the numbers, then how the rest of the team performs (and looks) should be irrelevant, right? Each player and line is a statistical island.

The question dealt with individual production not team GF. It seems like a redirection and cherrypicking to pivot from that question to a different stat which already tells us what we know (that the Caps were a better team early last year).

All that said, I don't disagree with the notion that Trotz was stubborn or stale with his lines last year and I've said so before. I still think it tracks directly back to gmbm grabbing players for specific roles/lines and making it publicly known, which puts Trotz in a position where he either has to go with those lines or explain to his boss (and the press) why it's not being done. I think this is where Oates and McPhee butted heads, iirc. It's likely that gmbm was aware of that and isn't going to allow the same kind of dynamic.

 

[Rob Brown]

Is it safe to assume that Grubauer will start one of the back-to-back games against Vancouver/Calgary?

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

Is it safe to assume that Grubauer will start one of the back-to-back games against Vancouver/Calgary?

He's due for a game, so yes, I think he will get his first start in one of these two games.

 

[twabby]

Seems like this is having it both ways. You can't argue for stats proving effectiveness despite the "eye test" and then talk about how the team looked despite the stats when they don't say what you expect. If a team is being run by the stats, and the stats say "no significant difference" then your argument about giving them another chance because they looked better is inconsistent with any fancy stat argument. If we put so much value on individual possession stats and seek to set our lines based on the best matches per the numbers, then how the rest of the team performs (and looks) should be irrelevant, right? Each player and line is a statistical island.

The question dealt with individual production not team GF. It seems like a redirection and cherrypicking to pivot from that question to a different stat which already tells us what we know (that the Caps were a better team early last year).

The discussion started when I made the statement that while I like that Trotz is experimenting with new lines early in the season, he needs to remember what works (because he completely forgot about what worked last season). So I wouldn't really call that pivoting, since Zoidberg Jesus seemed to answer txpd's question about production with and without Ovechkin.

Kuznetsov might have had similar point production with and without Ovechkin, but the team as a whole was best IMO with the 8-92-77/90-19-14 top 6 that they used for most of October (March and April were also good, but this is where I combine the eye test as well to make my determination):

Month|GF%|CF%|xGF%
October 2015|60.9%|54.2%|54.02%
November 2015|51.54%|50.86%|49.47%
December 2015|65.71%|49.16%|49.81%
January 2016|61.01%|52.6%|48.53%
February 2016|53.34%|49.24%|51.23%
March 2016|49.09%|49.76%|54.86%
April 2016|46.99%|58.31%|57.8%

Also the statement about everyone and every line being on an island is putting words in my mouth since I've never said anything of the sort.

 

[Frank8]

He's due for a game, so yes, I think he will get his first start in one of these two games.

I know he wasn't that busy but he's had his first start.

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

I know he wasn't that busy but he's had his first start.

****, that's true, he had a shutout against the Avs. That was probably the easiest game of his life. I'm really forgetful.

In any case, I don't expect Holtby to play all 3 games of the west coast trip.

 

[txpd]

there are so many things wrong with using October as a gauge for comparisons over a full season and playoffs. Particularly with a relative unestablished player like Kuznetsov.

 

[twabby]

there are so many things wrong with using October as a gauge for comparisons over a full season and playoffs. Particularly with a relative unestablished player like Kuznetsov.

The problem is that they never gave what worked in October another shot later in the season, despite wrapping up the Presidents Trophy effectively by February and despite some underwhelming play for much of the season. That doesn't mean what worked in October would have necessarily worked in February, March, April, or the postseason but why not at least give it another shot especially given how poorly the team played post-snow storm?

Coming back to this season, Trotz should file away these first five games and have a positive impression of their even strength play IMO. I'd be disappointed if the same thing happened this season as last season.

 

[g00n]

The discussion started when I made the statement that while I like that Trotz is experimenting with new lines early in the season, he needs to remember what works (because he completely forgot about what worked last season). So I wouldn't really call that pivoting, since Zoidberg Jesus seemed to answer txpd's question about production with and without Ovechkin.

Kuznetsov might have had similar point production with and without Ovechkin, but the team as a whole was best IMO with the 8-92-77/90-19-14 top 6 that they used for most of October (March and April were also good, but this is where I combine the eye test as well to make my determination):

Month|GF%|CF%|xGF%
October 2015|60.9%|54.2%|54.02%
November 2015|51.54%|50.86%|49.47%
December 2015|65.71%|49.16%|49.81%
January 2016|61.01%|52.6%|48.53%
February 2016|53.34%|49.24%|51.23%
March 2016|49.09%|49.76%|54.86%
April 2016|46.99%|58.31%|57.8%

Also the statement about everyone and every line being on an island is putting words in my mouth since I've never said anything of the sort.

You didn't say anything new or significant here. Zoidberg Jesus answered the question about Kuz AFTER you pivoted to stats about the team. Like you did again above with more team stats. Again, we already know they were better early last year.

You don't need to to say "island". That's my observation of how this dynamic has been working. If we're relying so heavily on stats that we're microanalyzing fractions of a percent in shooting frequency when a player is on or off the ice, including as they relate to linemate combos, then we are ISOLATING that player and his statistics from everything else that is happening. When you say you want to build teams based on those stats and not appearances, but then talk about how a team looks good despite the stats, that seems contradictory.

Just an observation. Maybe you meant something other than what you said.

 

[txpd]

The problem is that they never gave what worked in October another shot later in the season, despite wrapping up the Presidents Trophy effectively by February and despite some underwhelming play for much of the season. That doesn't mean what worked in October would have necessarily worked in February, March, April, or the postseason but why not at least give it another shot especially given how poorly the team played post-snow storm?

Coming back to this season, Trotz should file away these first five games and have a positive impression of their even strength play IMO. I'd be disappointed if the same thing happened this season as last season.

These October games are pretty meaningless in the context of the playoff teams they will face. Teams have new players and systems in place that they are learning to apply. They are trying players that wont be there when the games really count. The players are fresh and bare little resemblance to the players that will be playing beat up and worn down by the time the games really count.

These are easy games.

As for last season. Trotz had a game plan to use Backstrom Oshie and Ov as his matchup line. Putting Kuznetsov on the first line would have changed that entire basic plan. That one change could effect all four lines.

That plan actually works if Kuznetsov is 0.50 points per game in the playoffs. I see no reason to blame Trotz because Kuznetsov disappeared.

Edit: Regardless of the team's plan on how they wanted to use Ov. Kuznetsov was in a slump that became a terrible slump. You are suggesting that not only should Trotz have changed his match up plans but should have taken a slumping player and throw him into the teeth of every team's top defense? Not sure that works? Ov is rolling toward 50. Teams are zero'd in on him. He is successful anyway. You want to mess with that? Ov went into the playoffs hot. You would have risked taking him off the rails for Kuznetsov? All those things add up to not moving 92 to 8.

 

[HecticGlow]

It's worth remembering that Trotz did put Ovi back with Kuzy for some games in the spring - and the result was that Burakovsky stopped producing when away from Kuzy. That's why MoJo was on the third line wing instead of Burk at the end of the season and Flyers series, too - Bura didn't score much last season when away from Kuzy. They even played 8-92-90 for a few games while Oshie was out injured (with 65-19-14 on the other line).

That's what's reassuring about this year so far - Bura scored twice with Backstrom and Mojo, and has had as many good chances as the top line have (even if they haven't been converted into goals). Give it a few games and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see 90-92-77 and 8-19-65 - probably a bit more defensively balanced than 8-92-65.

 

[txpd]

That's what's reassuring about this year so far - Bura scored twice with Backstrom and Mojo,.

right now I am only marginally reassured by those two goals by Burakovsky. Since that first game, he is 0g 0a -2 in 4 games since. He has had some chances but the energy created by that opening night has worn off by now. He needs one on this road trip or changes are coming

 

[Dream Big]

right now I am only marginally reassured by those two goals by Burakovsky. Since that first game, he is 0g 0a -2 in 4 games since. He has had some chances but the energy created by that opening night has worn off by now. He needs one on this road trip or changes are coming

Time to send Burakovsky to Hershey? Maybe some other eager beaver deserves a shot?