Amped for this Season

[BroadwayJay*]

Is there a Corsi to predict whether the players on this team have the mental toughness not to let a 3 game losing streak blossom into an 8 game losing streak around Veteran's Day?

Maybe that's not "mental toughness" and is, instead, "goaltending".

 

[BroadwayJay*]

The Isles are NOT going to finish 4th. I don't need to look at any facts to know that. The defense wasn't addressed, and our 2nd best forward was replaced with an inferior scorer, and a decent 3rd liner.

I know. You don't need facts to draw conclusions.

 

[AndThereGoesGrabner*]

Defense was not the Isles biggest issue, It has always been goaltending. Having a very good goalie like Halak will make our defense look better. Good goaltending will give our defense more confidence & that alone should win us games that we are suppose to win, unlike last seasons 3rd period meltdowns. Also, Vanek sucks! He is no big loss!!

 

[13th Floor]

Defense was not the Isles biggest issue, It has always been goaltending. Having a very good goalie like Halak will make our defense look better. Good goaltending will give our defense more confidence & that alone should win us games that we are suppose to win, unlike last seasons 3rd period meltdowns. Also, Vanek sucks! He is no big loss!!

It's a two way street. I find it odd that you think the goalie influences the defense but the defense doesn't influence the goalie. Hockey is a fluid game. They have both been terrible... for a long time.

 

[2ndGenIslander]

Nice post. I think we all share the excitement that this upcoming season holds. definitely the most optimism surrounding this team we've felt in over a decade, and it feels good.

 

[2ndGenIslander]

Defense was not the Isles biggest issue, It has always been goaltending. Having a very good goalie like Halak will make our defense look better. Good goaltending will give our defense more confidence & that alone should win us games that we are suppose to win, unlike last seasons 3rd period meltdowns. Also, Vanek sucks! He is no big loss!!

I'm actually happy things worked out the way they did. If we signed vanek, we have yes a very talented forward, but a lazy unmotivated slug. Grabov and kulemin may not be as skilled, but bring a lot to the table and are hustlers. I think they'll fit in with the team more than vanek did

 

[MJF]

Maybe that's not "mental toughness" and is, instead, "goaltending".

Many of those losses the Isles scored 2 goals or less. Maybe it wasn't just goaltending.

The mental toughness part comes in when your goaltender gives up a bad or inopportune goal, and rather than fight back to get that goal back, the team lays down for the night. Or when the team is trying to protect a 2 goal lead midway through the game and they stop skating and stop shooting and you just know they are going to give up the next goal.

 

[Bones45]

Defense and goaltending go hand in hand. Its rare to have one far out perform the other.

In the Isles case, the G and D were sub par, so we ended up with our standard crappy performance. Now we solved the G problem, but we are still weak and inexperienced on D. Another year under their belts, the kids should be better, but obviously its still a liability.

Any team which solidifies 2 of 3 major holes in the off-season is in far better shape, but I'm just not sure that 4th place is where we land. Broadway Jay loves his stats and figures us to be there, but I'm thinking 6/7/8th if we stay fairly healthy.

And as far as the blown 3rd period leads, I put that squarely on the coaching and skaters, not the goaltending. If the entire team is out of position and panicking due to history and inexperience and the coach does nothing to help, then the goaltender, on the 2/3rd rebound is hardly at fault.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Many of those losses the Isles scored 2 goals or less. Maybe it wasn't just goaltending.

The mental toughness part comes in when your goaltender gives up a bad or inopportune goal, and rather than fight back to get that goal back, the team lays down for the night. Or when the team is trying to protect a 2 goal lead midway through the game and they stop skating and stop shooting and you just know they are going to give up the next goal.

I don't really think that is all that true.

Bad goaltending was really the problem. When you outshoot an opponent 40-30 and lose 4-3, it is frustrating, but it has nothing to do with mental toughness.

Honestly, I think you're selling these guys short by talking about "mental toughness". These guys are NHL athletes, the best at what they do. They've been elite at every level they've played in their entire lives. They have won, they have lost. They aren't scared babies cowering into their blankets.

 

[MJF]

I don't really think that is all that true.

Bad goaltending was really the problem. When you outshoot an opponent 40-30 and lose 4-3, it is frustrating, but it has nothing to do with mental toughness.

Honestly, I think you're selling these guys short by talking about "mental toughness". These guys are NHL athletes, the best at what they do. They've been elite at every level they've played in their entire lives. They have won, they have lost. They aren't scared babies cowering into their blankets.

I don't think I'm selling these guys short at all. I think there's a part of the mental game that is missing. There has been a prolonged losing streak each year under Cappy and under Scott Gordon as well.

The goaltending was bad the last 2 years and the stats bear that out. No denying that. And there's no denying that there is some real talent on this roster. But nothing in a team sport ever happens in a vaccuum. It's usually more than one aspect of the team that fails. Coaching, power play, goaltending have been the recent complaints on this board. And you also hear about the annual need for a veteran presence on the roster...someone who knows how to win.

So while I acknowledge that these players have competed at elite levels, the fact that there is an annual season-killing losing streak shows me that these players and the last 2 head coaches do not know how to navigate through rough waters.

Losing feeds on itself. Don't believe me? Look at the records.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

I don't think I'm selling these guys short at all. I think there's a part of the mental game that is missing. There has been a prolonged losing streak each year under Cappy and under Scott Gordon as well.

The goaltending was bad the last 2 years and the stats bear that out. No denying that. And there's no denying that there is some real talent on this roster. But nothing in a team sport ever happens in a vaccuum. It's usually more than one aspect of the team that fails. Coaching, power play, goaltending have been the recent complaints on this board. And you also hear about the annual need for a veteran presence on the roster...someone who knows how to win.

So while I acknowledge that these players have competed at elite levels, the fact that there is an annual season-killing losing streak shows me that these players and the last 2 head coaches do not know how to navigate through rough waters.

Losing feeds on itself. Don't believe me? Look at the records.

Did the Colorado Avalanche magically get mental toughness last year?

Did the Leafs have mental toughness, then lose it when they collapsed? Did the Sharks have mental toughness until game 4 of the first round, then lose the mental toughness? How about when the Kings were struggling down the stretch, did they lack mental toughness and then somehow regained it?

There is just no evidence of this mystical "mental toughness", and certainly no repeatable observations.

 

[MJF]

Did the Colorado Avalanche magically get mental toughness last year?

Did the Leafs have mental toughness, then lose it when they collapsed? Did the Sharks have mental toughness until game 4 of the first round, then lose the mental toughness? How about when the Kings were struggling down the stretch, did they lack mental toughness and then somehow regained it?

There is just no evidence of this mystical "mental toughness", and certainly no repeatable observations.

Then it must have been a lack of talent.

Statistics are a wondeful indicator of future performance, but if you think there is no such thing as "he mental game" you are mistaken.

I guess you believe that players and teams that employ sports psychologists are really pushing snake oil salesmen.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Then it must have been a lack of talent.

Statistics are a wondeful indicator of future performance, but if you think there is no such thing as "he mental game" you are mistaken.

I guess you believe that players and teams that employ sports psychologists are really pushing snake oil salesmen.

Not at all. I just don't think there is such a thing as a blanket team malaise that infects over 20 elite athletes at one time over a period covering the final few minutes of a game.

Individual people can have struggles that are addressed with a sports psychologist, that is not in dispute. However, I don't think it is fair to suggest that John Tavares, an absolutely elite player by any metric, lacks mental toughness because his team blew some late leads.

Mental toughness is something all elite athletes have or they never would have been able to make it to the NHL, a place you cannot coast into.

As far as a "lack of talent", I think that is 100% the reason that teams blow leads, go on losing streaks, etc... That talent may be sitting on the bench, or even behind the bench.

In our case, it was between the pipes and mental toughness was not the problem - lack of ability was.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Then it must have been a lack of talent.

You didn't say anything about the Avalanche, Sharks, Kings, Leafs; in regards to their collective mental toughnesses.

Do you have a position on that, or are you conceding that it is more likely a talent issue? I'm unclear.

 

[ScaredStreit]

I know. You don't need facts to draw conclusions.

What facts are you looking at that make the conclude that we have the ability to finish in 4th in the conference?

The fact that we just finished 14th place? The fact that they were 17th in goals? The fact that we were 28th in goals against? The fact that our new starting goaltender while an upgrade (no arguments out of me there) has never played 60 games in a single season? The fact that we lost a legit 1st liner? The fact that we're relying on young players as integral defenseman (Reinhart/CDH)? The fact that Visnovsky is injury prone and aging? The fact that we were 17th on the PP. The fact that we were 29th in PK%?

I mean don't get me wrong I think we'll be better than last year....but there's really no reason whatsoever to think that this team can improve by THAT much. Make an 8th seed? I highly doubt it-but I don't think it's too too much of a stretch saying we could be on the bubble. But 4-7th seed as the range? I just don't see it.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

What facts are you looking at that make the conclude that we have the ability to finish in 4th in the conference?

Personnel changes and the respective changes in Corsi% (very conservatively, at Charlie's insistence); Projected shots for/against based on those changes; Likely changes in save percentage from our goaltenders; Reduction in shots against based on the personnel changes above; likely line time.

Based on that data, we plotted out the likely GOALS FOR/GOALS AGAINST for the team as constructed, based on the lines I considered best; if healthy.

We also did some lines that other folks wanted to see, but for this conversation we chose the "best possible" line combinations to generate shots on goal and reduce shots against.

Based on the GF/GA for the projected 2014 we plotted out where the team fit among the standings from last season; based on the projected season.

We ended up most similar to TBL, who had a +25 goal differential. There were third. I put us behind them to be conservative, which made us project to be fourth.

Now, there is still more work to do and Charlie and I intend to do it to make a more accurate prediction.

For example, we intend to do the same thing for PIT, TBL, BOS, NYR, CBJ, CAR, and NJD to see where those teams end up and see where we fit in the division. After that, we'll be able to paint a more accurate picture.

If there is time, we'll do the Atlantic too.

All of our methodology is discussed in detail in the previous thread where we did all this work. You are welcome to examine it.

 

[steveat]

Lets try to calculate predicted standings using a number of different methods.

I like this. Then we can compare (give us something to talk about the summer break) at the end of the season. It won't take long till we can create a method with at least a bit of accuracy...then we patent it and license it for MILLIONS!

OR, we can just do it for fun.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Lets try to calculate predicted standings using a number of different methods.

I like this. Then we can compare (give us something to talk about the summer break) at the end of the season. It won't take long till we can create a method with at least a bit of accuracy...then we patent it and license it for MILLIONS!

OR, we can just do it for fun.

Charlie and I are on it. I'm just going abroad for a couple of weeks so that will slow things down a bit.

 

[Bones45]

I'm going to chime in with my thoughts here.

Let me preface this by saying, I'm not into stats. I used to be a big baseball fan (Mattingly, Winfield era) and even then I wasn't into them. But I can appreciate it in baseball.

"Mattingly is batting .457 vs lefthanders who are over 6' on cloudy Wednesdays nights with a full moon".

I kid, but basically, even in baseball I would roll my eyes when the announcers would bust out stuff like that. It's like people have far too much time on their hands and stats guys are born. This works in baseball, b/c its such a 1 one 1 sport with SLOOOOW action. If you can even call it action. Its a very deliberate game.

But this is where the a similar view in hockey generates another eye roll from me. I haven't looked into Corsi and have really only rolled through a lot of posts about the different #'s for players and teams. Frankly, it might be accurate, and a great talking point, i just don't know how well it translates to accurate predictions due to the nature of the game. Too much action ( did I just say that?), so many variables. Hockey is by far more of a team game which relies on all players doing their job. Not a pitcher vs hitter scenario.

Jay -- I'm not challenging you on this, as I know enough that you are totally into this, and probably can and will tear apart this comment. I just think that stats are stats and #'s are cool to talk about, but we all know this team, and mgmt, and how we played in past years. To say that the Isles will finish 4th based upon Corsi is just hard to swallow. That's all.

I just really hope that you are right. (and that it would actually lead to a playoff round victory)

 

[BroadwayJay*]

I'm going to chime in with my thoughts here.

Let me preface this by saying, I'm not into stats. I used to be a big baseball fan (Mattingly, Winfield era) and even then I wasn't into them. But I can appreciate it in baseball.

"Mattingly is batting .457 vs lefthanders who are over 6' on cloudy Wednesdays nights with a full moon".

I kid, but basically, even in baseball I would roll my eyes when the announcers would bust out stuff like that. It's like people have far too much time on their hands and stats guys are born. This works in baseball, b/c its such a 1 one 1 sport with SLOOOOW action. If you can even call it action. Its a very deliberate game.

But this is where the a similar view in hockey generates another eye roll from me. I haven't looked into Corsi and have really only rolled through a lot of posts about the different #'s for players and teams. Frankly, it might be accurate, and a great talking point, i just don't know how well it translates to accurate predictions due to the nature of the game. Too much action ( did I just say that?), so many variables. Hockey is by far more of a team game which relies on all players doing their job. Not a pitcher vs hitter scenario.

Jay -- I'm not challenging you on this, as I know enough that you are totally into this, and probably can and will tear apart this comment. I just think that stats are stats and #'s are cool to talk about, but we all know this team, and mgmt, and how we played in past years. To say that the Isles will finish 4th based upon Corsi is just hard to swallow. That's all.

I just really hope that you are right. (and that it would actually lead to a playoff round victory)

You can't say that it is inapplicable, then say you aren't challenging me.

However, I'll let it go because I like you.

So we're crystal-clear, I also roll my eyes at "batting .457 against left-handers on a Sunday when it is cloudy". It is stupid and useless.

However, big picture and large sample size statistics are HIGHLY valuable. There is a big difference. Everything on Earth is quantifiable, sometimes it is just harder to do than other times.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Personnel changes and the respective changes in Corsi% (very conservatively, at Charlie's insistence); Projected shots for/against based on those changes; Likely changes in save percentage from our goaltenders; Reduction in shots against based on the personnel changes above; likely line time.

Based on that data, we plotted out the likely GOALS FOR/GOALS AGAINST for the team as constructed, based on the lines I considered best; if healthy.

We also did some lines that other folks wanted to see, but for this conversation we chose the "best possible" line combinations to generate shots on goal and reduce shots against.

Based on the GF/GA for the projected 2014 we plotted out where the team fit among the standings from last season; based on the projected season.

We ended up most similar to TBL, who had a +25 goal differential. There were third. I put us behind them to be conservative, which made us project to be fourth.

Now, there is still more work to do and Charlie and I intend to do it to make a more accurate prediction.

For example, we intend to do the same thing for PIT, TBL, BOS, NYR, CBJ, CAR, and NJD to see where those teams end up and see where we fit in the division. After that, we'll be able to paint a more accurate picture.

If there is time, we'll do the Atlantic too.

All of our methodology is discussed in detail in the previous thread where we did all this work. You are welcome to examine it.

So your prediction of the Isles finishing 4th is "conservative"?

 

[BroadwayJay*]

So your prediction of the Isles finishing 4th is "conservative"?

The basis upon which we began the modeling was conservative.

You have to read all the words, one just isn't enough.

 

[ScaredStreit]

I'm going to chime in with my thoughts here.

Let me preface this by saying, I'm not into stats. I used to be a big baseball fan (Mattingly, Winfield era) and even then I wasn't into them. But I can appreciate it in baseball.

"Mattingly is batting .457 vs lefthanders who are over 6' on cloudy Wednesdays nights with a full moon".

I kid, but basically, even in baseball I would roll my eyes when the announcers would bust out stuff like that. It's like people have far too much time on their hands and stats guys are born. This works in baseball, b/c its such a 1 one 1 sport with SLOOOOW action. If you can even call it action. Its a very deliberate game.

But this is where the a similar view in hockey generates another eye roll from me. I haven't looked into Corsi and have really only rolled through a lot of posts about the different #'s for players and teams. Frankly, it might be accurate, and a great talking point, i just don't know how well it translates to accurate predictions due to the nature of the game. Too much action ( did I just say that?), so many variables. Hockey is by far more of a team game which relies on all players doing their job. Not a pitcher vs hitter scenario.

Jay -- I'm not challenging you on this, as I know enough that you are totally into this, and probably can and will tear apart this comment. I just think that stats are stats and #'s are cool to talk about, but we all know this team, and mgmt, and how we played in past years. To say that the Isles will finish 4th based upon Corsi is just hard to swallow. That's all.

I just really hope that you are right. (and that it would actually lead to a playoff round victory)

The biggest flaw in Corsi is simple:

Corsi is mostly about shots on goal. But it doesn't make any distinction (as far as I know) between shots. A shot from center ice is the same as a breakaway. A shot from the corner is the same as a 3-on-1 one timer from the slot.

That it's MUCH easier to stop a shot from the point with no screen than to stop a shot from the point with a screen in front.

Same shot. Same location. Two VERY different scenarios.

If Jay's prediction truly is that the Isles finish 4th "conservatively" due to Corsi....I think of 2 things:

A) It's going to speak volumes at the end of the year when the Isles fall short of it. And then maybe people will start to understand that Corsi's not what it's cut out to be.

B) Did Jay actually watch the Islanders this past year, or just read the stats? I doubt you'd find many other optimistic posters-even the biggest ones-who'd agree that finishing in 4th place is "conservative" for the Islanders this year.

 

[ScaredStreit]

The basis upon which we began the modeling was conservative.

You have to read all the words, one just isn't enough.

Sorry I'm not trying to be rude (and I really do like you as a poster even if it seems otherwise, I think you have a lot to offer HF)....but you tend to publish novels on HF, and I just don't have to time to read them all lol.

And whether it's you or your model or predicts 3rd (which if you came up with you're basically making the model that predicts 3rd therefore you're predicting 3rd), I'm sorry but it's ridiculous. It wont be happening. I'm not Nostradamus. But I'd put money down in Vegas that the Isles finish below 3rd place this year.

 

[MJF]

You didn't say anything about the Avalanche, Sharks, Kings, Leafs; in regards to their collective mental toughnesses.

Do you have a position on that, or are you conceding that it is more likely a talent issue? I'm unclear.

Easy does it. I work for a living. I have to fit these posts in when I can.

I never said that mental aspect trumps talent. The most talented teams usually, but don't always, win. That is one reason why you can have one team upset another.

Maybe a team like the Avalanche got a lift and had a leadership void filled by their new head coach. Maybe the Kings, in their struggles down the stretch found the "mental toughness" in them to get back into the games, force overtimes, score late game goals rather than concede to adversity. And maybe the Leafs collapsed because they have an ill-conceived roster and played to about the level they should have all season. After all, who makes David Clarkson one of their highest-priced FA signings.

My problem with your prior statement is that you dismiss the mental game, attitude, and confidence as mysticism. It's as though "if you can't quantify it, its not a factor". Hardly the case.

It will not always be a blanket malaise that affects all 20 players on the bench at once. All you have to have is one of your team's better players think "here we go again" when that late go-ahead goal is given up, and while that player is getting the bulk of the ice time down the stretch because the bench is shortened, you might not be getting a focused player who is making smart decisions with the puck or skating as hard. Have that "here we go again" thought occur often enough on the bench and watch a losing streak start to avalanche (no pun intended).

Do not pay short-shrift to the mental aspect of sports. It plays a role in the fortunes of a team. When you hear players in post-game press conferences talk about how "the boys are playing with such confidence right now" do roll your eyes and dismiss it as jock talk?

These games are played by men, who have confidence levels that rise and fall. Not with Strat-O-Matic cards and dice.