Anaheim best record in the league...+8 Goal Differential

[Paul4587]

18th in goals per game. 18th in goals against per game.

1st in points.

Something doesn't add up.

It's called winning tight games and losing blowouts.

 

[MoreOrr]

I know the thread was created quite a while ago, but still,... best record in the League is a misnomer. The best record in the League is Nashville, and they also have the 2nd best Goal Differential. I'm liking me some Predators (well, assuming that the Bruins aren't going to do much more than **** in the woods this Season).

 

[Sleepy]

Explain how a Game 7 loss to the Cup champ in Round 2 makes a team any more irrelevant than a Game 7 loss to the Cup champ in Round 3?

You're going to get an explanation, but it's not going to make much sense.

And before anyone thinks I'm agreeing with him because the Sharks also lost in 7, the Sharks were outplayed in 5 of the 7 games of that series and were no where near as good as CHI/LA/ANA last year.

 

[GAGLine]

It's called winning tight games and losing blowouts.

Oh, I understand how it happened. I'm just implying that it isn't sustainable. Anaheim will need to improve in both areas to stay atop the standings.

 

[snowave]

Oh, I understand how it happened. I'm just implying that it isn't sustainable. Anaheim will need to improve in both areas to stay atop the standings.

They've done it for half the season.... there's no reason to believe they won't continue. That being said, I don't think they are not a dominant team by any means. I also have serious doubts again about playoffs.

 

[PuqTalk]

So many of our fans are afraid to admit that we're not the number one contender, and I don't know why. We're not the best team in the league. We've got the best point percentage in the league. The two are not equal.

Are we a good team? Yes. Are we mainly carried by a handful of players? Yes. We need better depth. Especially on defense. Fowler, Beauchemin, Lindholm, and Vatanen are the makings of a solid core. We're still short a solid, two-way top-four defenseman to pair with Fowler though.

 

[nbducksfan19]

Join the club! So have we (the Habs)!

Won the division, then made it to ECF and now are battling for the top spot in the East.

Our teams are both elite at overachieving!

3 years isn't a long enough sample size - if they can do if for a decade I will no longer consider it a fluke

 

[ThirdManIn]

So many of our fans are afraid to admit that we're not the number one contender, and I don't know why. We're not the best team in the league. We've got the best point percentage in the league. The two are not equal.

Are we a good team? Yes. Are we mainly carried by a handful of players? Yes. We need better depth. Especially on defense. Fowler, Beauchemin, Lindholm, and Vatanen are the makings of a solid core. We're still short a solid, two-way top-four defenseman to pair with Fowler though.

Small correction: Anaheim has the second best point percentage in the league at .690. Nashville has the best at .718.

I agree with the rest, though.

 

[Paul4587]

So many of our fans are afraid to admit that we're not the number one contender, and I don't know why. We're not the best team in the league. We've got the best point percentage in the league. The two are not equal.

I don't see a single Ducks fan saying we're the number one contender.

 

[HanSolo]

I don't see a single Ducks fan saying we're the number one contender.

I'll bet you can find a few on Facebook or Twitter.

 

[SirQuacksALot]

I'll bet you can find a few on Facebook or Twitter.

Ah, the intellectual tent-poles of the internet.

 

[Paul4587]

I'll bet you can find a few on Facebook or Twitter.

Haha. I'll rephrase that. I don't see any hfboards Ducks fans claiming we're the number one contender.

 

[Sojourn]

Haha. I'll rephrase that. I don't see any hfboards Ducks fans claiming we're the number one contender.

It didn't need to be clarified, though(obviously DuckJet was joking). Puq's post suggested it was a common opinion, and that isn't true at all. Most of us seem to agree the team needs to improve, with some more secondary scoring or support in the top six, potentially another top 4 defenseman, and improved special teams. Who here is saying we're the top dog? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

 

[Taze em]

It's actually pretty easy to understand. The Ducks focus on defense more. They don't win games anymore with 5 goals. We win the low scoring games. We do lack the offensive depth to win these high scoring games. Luckily our defense is good enough to keep them low scoring. The high scoring games are generally due a product of occasional poor goaltending.


Have the Ducks overachieved so far? I'd say yes, but considering the injuries we've dealt with this year, it's unreal where we are in the standings, especially in the west.

A team can still dominate a game and win by 1 or 2 as well. It'd be nice to win by more, but it's not really that big of a deal. We dominated the Oiler games and only win those by a goal or two. Does that make them less impressive?

The Ducks focus on defense more? That's complete BS. Your defense is bad. 20th in GA. You have injuries but you say right now "your defense is good enough to keep games low scoring." No they aren't. In fact they are below average at doing that.

It's luck and it runs out.

 

[Paul4587]

The Ducks focus on defense more? That's complete BS. Your defense is bad. 20th in GA. You have injuries but you say right now "your defense is good enough to keep games low scoring." No they aren't. In fact they are below average at doing that.

It's luck and it runs out.

We're 20th in GA but for a large portion of the season we were missing half our blueline. At one point we were icing Fowler, Lindholm, Vatanen, Manson, Clark & Blacker as our top 6. The Hawks got to face that lineup one game and absolutely schooled us.

Now that everybody is healthy I like our blueline. It's not as good as the likes of the Hawks/Preds/Blues but it's pretty decent IMO. Lindholm taking a big step forward and Beauchemin bouncing back have been huge for us.

 

[eklunds source]

It's actually pretty easy to understand. The Ducks focus on defense more. They don't win games anymore with 5 goals. We win the low scoring games. We do lack the offensive depth to win these high scoring games. Luckily our defense is good enough to keep them low scoring. The high scoring games are generally due a product of occasional poor goaltending.

I don't think you can "reliably" win the low-scoring games. Just for what it's worth.. This is an old article, but it's every bit as relevant today (possibly moreso with more parity):

One-Goal Games

Are teams that win a lot of one-goal games lucky, or do they have a special ability to win when the chips are down – that characteristic known as “clutch” or “killer instinct?”

Logically, if teams that win a lot of one-goal games boast those intangibles, we would expect it to show up in their playoff performance – if they can win in critical regular season situations, one reasons that they would be better in the most critical playoff situations than their opposition. Is that true?

...

If I were looking for a way to predict playoff upsets, I would have difficulty finding a better way.

I’m very comfortable believing that teams win a lot of one-goal games primarily because they’re lucky, not because they’re born winners that win the tight games because they just want it a little more than their opponents. If the latter were true, these teams wouldn’t constantly lose playoff series to lower seeds.

An insanely good record in close games is pretty much a time bomb (for teams whose record in 2+ goal games isn't similar); last year the Avalanche were 28-4-8 in 1-goal games.

A team can still dominate a game and win by 1 or 2 as well. It'd be nice to win by more, but it's not really that big of a deal. We dominated the Oiler games and only win those by a goal or two. Does that make them less impressive?

A team can also be significantly outplayed and still win by 3+ goals. Over the long run, those things tend to even out, but not always (see: Colorado last year).

This year, Anaheim is 20-0-6 in 1-goal games, and 6-10 in games decided by 2+ goals. That screams "unsustainable" to me, but at the same time, one would expect their record to improve as their team health improves. My only point is that if you're consistently winning close games (while losing big), it probably means you're significantly overachieving.

 

[douglast5]

Lets expand past this year.

From 2009-2010 season. (6 seasons)

Anaheim is 73-30 in one goal games in regulation. (OT/SO not counted as technically that is a tied game, they aren't leading/trailing at the end.)

That is a .708 win %, next highest team is .580%

Now in those 6 seasons, probably around 90% of the players are different now from the beginning, new coaches, for whatever reason Anaheim has a knack for winning these close games.

6 seasons of luck and overacheiving, with completely different rosters. Anaheim is a team of try hards.

 

[Sojourn]

The Ducks focus on defense more? That's complete BS. Your defense is bad. 20th in GA. You have injuries but you say right now "your defense is good enough to keep games low scoring." No they aren't. In fact they are below average at doing that.

It's luck and it runs out.

You may want to do a little research. Anaheim's defense has been hit hard by injuries, and they've already played 13 different defensemen this season, including 4 different AHL defensemen.

I respect that you may not actually observe much of the team, but you could at least put in a little more effort than assuming the team's defense is inept because you glanced at the GA's in the standings. It's pretty obvious that's all you did there, and it's a little ridiculous that you're jumping down an Anaheim fan's throat for his statement, when he has obviously seen much more of the team than you.

 

[JaegerDice]

Their possession numbers are still pretty mediocre (as they were last year).

Their D and goaltending is kind of suspect.

Call it hubris, but President's Trophy or not, I wouldn't be too worried about the Blackhawks meeting them in the playoffs this year.

 

[Machinehead]

What I took from a real good look at the Ducks last night is that they need more scoring depth. This day and age, in a low-scoring, system-driven league, good teams take away your best players.

 

[eklunds source]

Lets expand past this year.

From 2009-2010 season. (6 seasons)

Anaheim is 73-30 in one goal games in regulation. (OT/SO not counted as technically that is a tied game, they aren't leading/trailing at the end.)

That is a .708 win %, next highest team is .580%

Now in those 6 seasons, probably around 90% of the players are different now from the beginning, new coaches, for whatever reason Anaheim has a knack for winning these close games.

6 seasons of luck and overacheiving, with completely different rosters. Anaheim is a team of try hards.

A 0.708win% sounds impressive (and it is), but how much of that is because Anaheim is full of "try hards" and how much of that is luck? What would you expect Anaheim's record in 1-goal games to be (as a range), if you knew how good they were in 2+ goal games? (Answers to both these questions are statistically calculable, by the way)

If you ask every NHL GM to flip a coin 100 times, and Dean Lombardi gets heads 71 times while no other GM gets more than 58... Is Lombardi a try-hard when it comes to coin flipping?

I'm not saying winning a 1-goal game is a coin flip... but humans are really, really good at pattern recognition. So good that we very frequently have false positives - we see patterns in random data, and assign meaning to them where there is none.

Apophenia, our bane and boon

We, as a general rule, suck at statistical analysis. That isn’t to say that we don’t have the mental apparatus to perform the task, or that some people don’t have a better grasp on it than others, but when it comes to judging the significance of an event statistically (without doing the math outright), we will almost always err on the side of greater importance than not.

There’s a very simple reason for that too. It’s far less costly to designate an event or occurrence significant and be wrong, that to deem it insignificant and be wrong.

As an example, the wind rustles the grass near you. Was that a predator? Considering that it might be a predator could save your life and there's very little cost to investigate or at least be cautious. Assuming it was the wind could get you killed.

I'll trust your data and agree yes, Anaheim has been the best team in the league in 1-goal games over that period. That doesn't necessarily mean anything though. As you said, there was lots of roster and coaching turnover. Our brains find it "safe" to assume there is a pattern there and they must be doing something right.

 

[HanSolo]

What I took from a real good look at the Ducks last night is that they need more scoring depth. This day and age, in a low-scoring, system-driven league, good teams take away your best players.

We have the depth. Sort of. They're just not contributing.

 

[Gliff]

What I took from a real good look at the Ducks last night is that they need more scoring depth. This day and age, in a low-scoring, system-driven league, good teams take away your best players.

Cogliano, Silfverberg, Rakell, Thompson, DSP...

Our depth is fine if they could stop hitting the ****ing posts.

 

[Sojourn]

What I took from a real good look at the Ducks last night is that they need more scoring depth. This day and age, in a low-scoring, system-driven league, good teams take away your best players.

Last night probably wasn't the best example of Anaheim. I'd say this is especially true of our defense, which just seemed unusually sloppy last night. Some of that credit should obviously go to New York, because they were sharp, and I thought they executed their game plan well. There is no doubt they were the better team last night.

You're right, though. Depth scoring has been an issue. Perry, unfortunately, doesn't even look close to 100%, and I really wonder if he should be playing. Lately, it really feels like if Getzlaf isn't the one creating the play, nothing is finding its way into the net. Some of that is probably a bit of bad luck, but adding another forward who can score(a passer might be ideal) would go a long way. There is also something to be said for supplementing your even strength production with PP goals, and Anaheim just hasn't been doing that lately. Believe me, we were all surprised when they scored on the PP last night. The opposite is true on the penalty kill, and opposing teams have been taking advantage of their PP chances.

All of these things add up, and I don't think you'll find many of us who don't think this needs to change. For the most part, Anaheim has been finding ways to win despite these issues. That's the good news. The bad news is that they are issues, and I don't think we can expect the wins to continue at this rate without finding ways to make improvements.

 

[Machinehead]

We have the depth. Sort of. They're just not contributing.

Cogliano, Silfverberg, Rakell, Thompson, DSP...

Our depth is fine if they could stop hitting the ****ing posts.

Well yeah, that's the thing, they have to like...actually score.

Last night probably wasn't the best example of Anaheim. I'd say this is especially true of our defense, which just seemed unusually sloppy last night. Some of that credit should obviously go to New York, because they were sharp, and I thought they executed their game plan well. There is no doubt they were the better team last night.

You're right, though. Depth scoring has been an issue. Perry, unfortunately, doesn't even look close to 100%, and I really wonder if he should be playing. Lately, it really feels like if Getzlaf isn't the one creating the play, nothing is finding its way into the net. Some of that is probably a bit of bad luck, but adding another forward who can score(a passer might be ideal) would go a long way. There is also something to be said for supplementing your even strength production with PP goals, and Anaheim just hasn't been doing that lately. Believe me, we were all surprised when they scored on the PP last night. The opposite is true on the penalty kill, and opposing teams have been taking advantage of their PP chances.

All of these things add up, and I don't think you'll find many of us who don't think this needs to change. For the most part, Anaheim has been finding ways to win despite these issues. That's the good news. The bad news is that they are issues, and I don't think we can expect the wins to continue at this rate without finding ways to make improvements.

The Ducks D is a lot better than what they did last night that's true. And they're still a very good team. I don't expect them to win the Presidents trophy being 18th in goals and GA as of right now, but I do still think they're a top team in the conference. Plus you never know, didn't the Ducks have a year recently where they were top 10 in GF and GA and missed the playoffs? Could be someone else. But they certainly IMO need another scorer.