Is Pete Here Tomorrow?

[DatBoyJPP]

I highly doubt you would find another coach to be more successful in that span either.

He actually coached the teams really well, it was just a lack of offense for the past two years.

Lack of offense? No one blows 2 goal leads as well as us

 

[Jersey Fresh]

This is a team bereft of ideas and it starts with the bozo behind the bench.

Some blame towards the players though, too. The fact that a 20 year old rookie defenseman has been our best player is disgusting.

 

[Bleedred]

LOL at no practice today.

Team should be practicing today. They had most of last night off. Why give then off today? And it would also be nice if there was a little more urgency to fix the PK.

 

[Bleedred]

Agreed. What coach was going to turn last year's roster into a surefire playoff team? Deboer would've done that himself if not for a terrible goalie and some shootout losses.

And whose fault was that, that the terrible goalie started as many games as he did?

 

[Colin226]

And whose fault was that, that the terrible goalie started as many games as he did?

Please, he wasn't going to consistently bench the 20-year face of the franchise player in his final year. Yes, it would have helped us win, but Marty and a big group of fans complained enough as it was.. It happened the way it had to happen. You know Lou had a hand in it anyway

 

[Bleedred]

Please, he wasn't going to consistently bench the 20-year face of the franchise player in his final year. Yes, it would have helped us win, but Marty and a big group of fans complained enough as it was.. It happened the way it had to happen. You know Lou had a hand in it anyway

I'm not gonna deny that Lou probably had a hand in it.

I just don't think it's fair to use "Played an inferior goalie" as an excuse for DeBoer, when he has a hand in these ridiculous personnel decisions.

Ridiculous personnel decisions that go far past just the goaltending. Not to mention, it was also DeBoer who thought it was a good idea to play Hedberg over and over again in 2013. Chris Terreri might have been a better option than Hedberg was during that stretch.

 

[Zippy316]

Lack of offense? No one blows 2 goal leads as well as us

Lack of offense has a lot to do with that.

We could never pull away from games; we weren't strong enough offensively. We constantly kept games close and it sometimes would bite us in the ass.

I'm not against a coaching change, I'm just not ready to put the full focus of the blame on DeBoer. I fully welcome the idea of a new face, with fresh ideas, to mix things up. However, I don't believe it's a necessity, at least not right now.

 

[Bleedred]

Lack of offense has a lot to do with that.

We could never pull away from games; we weren't strong enough offensively. We constantly kept games close and it sometimes would bite us in the ass.

I'm not against a coaching change, I'm just not ready to put the full focus of the blame on DeBoer. I fully welcome the idea of a new face, with fresh ideas, to mix things up. However, I don't believe it's a necessity, at least not right now.

When you score 3 goals, it's usually enough to win the game. Not always, but a lot of the time.

So many 3-1 leads have melted away. You could blame terrible goaltending, but it's happened with every goaltender that's played for us the last 4 seasons.

 

[DatBoyJPP]

Lack of offense has a lot to do with that.

We could never pull away from games; we weren't strong enough offensively. We constantly kept games close and it sometimes would bite us in the ass.

I'm not against a coaching change, I'm just not ready to put the full focus of the blame on DeBoer. I fully welcome the idea of a new face, with fresh ideas, to mix things up. However, I don't believe it's a necessity, at least not right now.

We sit back with the lead. 100% DeBoer's fault

 

[Benedict Parisechuk]

The best team we've had since the lockout who were 2 wins away from winning the cup still blew multi goal leads on the regular. They were even doing it multiple times in the playoffs. That should have been the ultimate red flag right there. Now that the personnel is worse, it happens even more frequently. His Florida teams did it as well. It's a pattern.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

"In 469 career games, Deboer coached teams have blown two goal leads 56 times."

That's insane.

 

[indfin]

"In 469 career games, Deboer coached teams have blown two goal leads 56 times."

That's insane.

On the surface, it seems like I lot (and it may well be). But you need some context before we declare it insane:

1. Is this 56 LOSSES where they had a 2-goal lead? or 56 "2-goal leads lost" (i.e, if they blow the lead but win the game, is that counted in your figure? how about if they blow multiple-two goal leads in the same game?)

2. How many games (or times, depending on what we are measuring) did they HAVE a 2-goal lead?

3. Over the same seasons, how many blown 2-goal leads are there by each team (certainly, there are far more league-wide than from 1990-2004)

Again, not defending Deboer (or the Devils here), but would like some more info on this.

 

[Colin226]

The best team we've had since the lockout who were 2 wins away from winning the cup still blew multi goal leads on the regular. They were even doing it multiple times in the playoffs. That should have been the ultimate red flag right there. Now that the personnel is worse, it happens even more frequently. His Florida teams did it as well. It's a pattern.

I will say that I recall someone on here doing a great comparison showing how we've basically blown leads at about the league average over the last few years, with blown leads increasing around the NHL.. I'm not saying that all of our blown leads were just bad luck, but I think you have to look at league trends as a whole (increased scoring will lead to more blow leads league-wide) when evaluating the Devils issue of blowing leads. Expect it to only increase more for everyone.

 

[Richer's Ghost]

"In 469 career games, Deboer coached teams have blown two goal leads 56 times."

That's insane.

That's roughly 12% of the time. Which is far better than the league average of 16%.

 

[Zippy316]

We sit back with the lead. 100% DeBoer's fault

Everything I've seen is that DeBoer pushes the Devils to keep the tempo up when with the lead. Unless he's saying to the media differently than what he's coaching, sitting back is not in his idea of how to play with the lead.

We've been fine with the lead the times where we didn't stray from our possession game and didn't stop attacking.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

That's roughly 12% of the time. Which is far better than the league average of 16%.

I'm on my phone so I can't see the graph that well, but I'm assuming that's 16% of games with a two goal lead, not 16% of all games.

12% of total games is crazy.

 

[Richer's Ghost]

I'm on my phone so I can't see the graph that well, but I'm assuming that's 16% of games with a two goal lead, not 16% of all games.

12% of total games is crazy.

Not when there are more blown leads than games played.

There's 1230 games in an NHL season. (30*82/2 teams per game)

This data is for a 7 year span. That's 8610 total games played.

2 goal leads happened 9831 times according to their data - greater than once per game.

They were blown 1536 times. That's 17.8% of total games if you want to force it into a ratio.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

Not when there are more blown leads than games played.

There's 1230 games in an NHL season. (30*82/2 teams per game)

This data is for a 7 year span. That's 8610 total games played.

2 goal leads happened 9831 times according to their data - greater than once per game.

They were blown 1536 times. That's 17.8% of total games if you want to force it into a ratio.

Stand corrected then. I wouldn't have thought initially there are that many 2 goal leads in the flow of the game, but I guess that makes sense.

I'd be interested in league wide statistics versus Deboer for just 3rd period two goal leads.

 

[Richer's Ghost]

Stand corrected then. I wouldn't have thought initially there are that many 2 goal leads in the flow of the game, but I guess that makes sense.

I'd be interested in league wide statistics versus Deboer for just 3rd period two goal leads.

I was shocked it was that high myself, but again we only notice how often it happens in the games we care about I guess so it seems even more dramatic.

I don't know how you can find that data set you're looking for but NHL.com has stats on just winning% for entering the 3rd period with a lead. Devils won 76% of the time last year and only lost in regulation once, but lost in OT 6 times. We won't talk about the shootout.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...rt=winsAfterLead2P&viewName=recordWhenLeading

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...rt=otLossAfterLead2P&viewName=overtimeRecords

 

[Zippy316]

I was shocked it was that high myself, but again we only notice how often it happens in the games we care about I guess so it seems even more dramatic.

I don't know how you can find that data set you're looking for but NHL.com has stats on just winning% for entering the 3rd period with a lead. Devils won 76% of the time last year and only lost in regulation once, but lost in OT 6 times. We won't talk about the shootout.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...rt=winsAfterLead2P&viewName=recordWhenLeading

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...rt=otLossAfterLead2P&viewName=overtimeRecords

Wow, looking at that first link, Buffalo's stats are horrendously bad....

 

[indfin]

Not when there are more blown leads than games played.

There's 1230 games in an NHL season. (30*82/2 teams per game)

This data is for a 7 year span. That's 8610 total games played.

2 goal leads happened 9831 times according to their data - greater than once per game.

They were blown 1536 times. That's 17.8% of total games if you want to force it into a ratio.

Wait:

So (over that 7-year period) 1,536 out of 9,831 two-goal leads eventually evaporated ... or about 18% of the time

But the first poster said that the Deboer's teams had blown 56 2-goal leads in 469 (TOTAL) games, not 469 "opportunities" to blow the lead. The other missing data is how many times his teams GOT a 2-goal lead.

So, for example, if Deboer's teams had about 310 2-goal leads in those 469 games, and 56 of those 2-goal leads went away, then his teams blew those leads at around the league average. But if they only had 200 of those leads, then they blow them at a much higher-than-average clip.

Since his teams have been below-average over that time ... did they get way by blowing more (%) two goal leads or getting fewer of them (than other teams) and them squandering them at similar rates?

I am not sure how much any of that matters, since the bottom line is what counts ... although MAYBE it's possible (through coaching style) to do a better/worse job of protecting the lead? or maybe that same style will tend to get you fewer two-goal leads in the first place?

 

[MadDevil]

How much of the blown leads are a coaching/system issue and how much is simply a personnel issue? Is the coach telling them to back off, or are they just not executing?

 

[Jersey Fresh]

Wait:

So (over that 7-year period) 1,536 out of 9,831 two-goal leads eventually evaporated ... or about 18% of the time

But the first poster said that the Deboer's teams had blown 56 2-goal leads in 469 (TOTAL) games, not 469 "opportunities" to blow the lead. The other missing data is how many times his teams GOT a 2-goal lead.

So, for example, if Deboer's teams had about 310 2-goal leads in those 469 games, and 56 of those 2-goal leads went away, then his teams blew those leads at around the league average. But if they only had 200 of those leads, then they blow them at a much higher-than-average clip.

Since his teams have been below-average over that time ... did they get way by blowing more (%) two goal leads or getting fewer of them (than other teams) and them squandering them at similar rates?

I am not sure how much any of that matters, since the bottom line is what counts ... although MAYBE it's possible (through coaching style) to do a better/worse job of protecting the lead? or maybe that same style will tend to get you fewer two-goal leads in the first place?

I think you bring up a valid point and just based on the teams we've iced in that span of the time, I would lean in your direction towards higher than average.

One thing to consider though, is that a blown 2 goal lead doesn't necessarily mean a loss, just a blown lead. So you could potentially have multiple blown two goal leads in a game (as RG's graph indicates). Could just be paranoia, but makes the number a whole lot more believable because we have played a hell of a lot of one goal games.

Who the hell knows. What I do know from a simple eye test is Deboer's system with a lead in the 3rd is not the same as the rest of the game.

 

[JK3]

Am I missing something? Do any of those numbers mention or is there a way to figure out how many blown 2 goal leads that led to losses.

Sure there are a ton of lead changes throughout the league. You can blow leads all game long but still win the game or you can limp into OT, or the shootout and lose.

EDIT: Jersey Fresh just made my point.

 

[Devils090]

How much of the blown leads are a coaching/system issue and how much is simply a personnel issue? Is the coach telling them to back off, or are they just not executing?

could be a mental thing too