Pre-Game Talk: Leafs @ Habs: Wednesday 7:30pm

[lebdafor norris]

I tend to agree. Their play, particularly offensively, doesn't seem sustainable.

Their 5 vs 5 defence is rank 2nd in the league thou, while the rest of the Northern Division, with the exception of Calgary which is in the middle of the pack, are ranked in the bottom 10. For comparison, the CBJ were ranked 3rd in 5 vs 5, xGA/60 last season and we saw how well they handled the Leafs offence when they shut them out in 2 out of the 5 games during the playoffs qualifiers. If anything, this game is a nice measuring stick to see how the Leafs fair off against an actual tough defensive team which the Jets, Oilers, Nucks and Sens are certainly not.

Although, I do agree that the Habs offence is overachieving.

 

[zeke]

Even after their scoring drop off like I expect it to, Montreal's defence is still top notch. Their 5 vs 5, xGA/60 is 2nd in the league despite playing in a highly offensive Northern division, for comparison, the Jets and the Leafs are 26th and 23rd respectively in these category. I have a feeling Montreal is going to be the New York Islanders of these season; a team that we expect to fall off as the weeks go by but never do.

Defense:

MTL: #3 ga/60, #3 xga/60, #9 sa/60, #10 ca/60, #3 sv%
TOR: #5 ga/60, #19 xga/60, #7 sa/60, #6 ca/60, #6 sv%

 

[Cor]

Interesting

 

[lebdafor norris]

Defense:

MTL: #3 ga/60, #3 xga/60, #9 sa/60, #10 ca/60, #3 sv%
TOR: #5 ga/60, #19 xga/60, #7 sa/60, #6 ca/60, #6 sv%

per Natural Stat trick, 5 vs 5 xGA/60
Leafs 2.29 (23rd)
Habs 1.79 (2nd)
I prefer using 5 vs 5 because a team who played a lot of 3 vs 3 OT would have an inflated xGA due to the sheer amount of scoring chances that goes on. Anyway the stats you showed just proved how underrated Andersen's performance has been, the team is not allowing many shots yet the team's xGA is kinda high meaning the shots that do get through tends to be tough chances, while the team has limited the amount of low quality shots the Leafs tended to give up in the past, shots that helps inflate a goalie's sv.

Well at least Andy's performance in ES has been fantastic, his been victimized in the PK however and it doesn't help that 5 out of the top 6 teams in "times shorthanded" comes from the Northern Division, meaning these Canadian refs are whistle happy.

 

[zeke]

Using projected lines for tommorrow:

Even Strength:

Line 1: TOR 1.21gpg --- MTL 0.83gpg
Line 2: TOR 0.31gpg --- MTL 0.70gpg
Line 3: TOR 0.31gpg --- MTL 0.50gpg
Line 4: TOR 0.45gpg --- MTL 0.08gpg

Pair 1: TOR 0.15gpg --- MTL 0.42gpg
Pair 2: TOR 0.08gpg --- MTL 0.08gpg
Pair 3: TOR 0.00gpg --- MTL 0.00gpg


PP: TOR 1.15gpg --- MTL 0.77gpg
PK: TOR 0.00gpg --- MTL 0.58gpg

 

[Leafblooded]

Time to make a mess of the toilet seat boys

 

[Budz]

Vesey doesn’t add much.

I loathe him.

 

[zeke]

per Natural Stat trick, 5 vs 5 xGA/60
Leafs 2.29 (23rd)
Habs 1.79 (2nd)
I prefer using 5 vs 5 because a team who played a lot of 3 vs 3 OT would have an inflated xGA due to the sheer amount of scoring chances that goes on. Anyway the stats you showed just proved how underrated Andersen's performance has been, the team is not allowing many shots yet the team's xGA is kinda high meaning the shots that do get through tends to be tough chances, while the team has limited the amount of low quality shots the Leafs tended to give up in the past, shots that helps inflate a goalie's sv.

Well at least Andy's performance in ES has been fantastic, his been victimized in the PK however and it doesn't help that 5 out of the top 6 teams in "times shorthanded" comes from the Northern Division, meaning these Canadian refs are whistle happy.

Ah I see you're not using the score adjustment. You should.

5v5

#8 gf/60
#7 xgf/60
#10 cf/60

#5 ga/60
#19 xga/60
#6 ca/60
#6 sv%

PP

#1 gf/60
#1 xgf/60
#1 cf/60

PK

#23 ga/60
#11 xga/60
#4 ca/60
#29 sv%

Also, xga is not only the outlier for the leafs amongst all the stats but is likely not the best one to use for defense:

Corsi Is Better At Predicting Future Goals Than Expected Goals Is – Draglikepull's hockey research

It is true that scoring chances have been better at predicting team level goal ratio over the past decade or so than Corsi has. But it is important to note that this improvement is based entirely on being better at predicting goal scoring. Corsi is still better, by quite a large margin, at predicting goal prevention.

You will have a better idea which teams are good at scoring goals by looking at quality-adjusted metrics, but you’ll get a better idea about which teams are good at preventing goals by looking at pure shot attempts.

 

[Carltons Cup]

 

[stickty111]

Interesting

Not sure what that indicates, but timing is odd considering Marlies start in about a week. Mirtle did have Lilly as a taxi squad member when the cap stuff was done.

 

[Coachcorner]

Like this game here is the hottest one. :fire: :for: :sure: :leaf: : :maple leaf:

We have the BEST TEAM AND THE MOST TALENTED ONE, WITH THE MONEY! Not they! WE DO! That's what's up sire! This is going to be a tough one though, we have so many injuries. Tavares line should be REAL READY FOR THIS ONE. They have some good players too. That suzuki line is real good two way hockey. We are missing some of our new thugs, so Bogosian's role will be bigger in this one. Even fights might happen sires and sirettes. Be ready to rumble on that mother. Lets see if our number one, best guy in net, the number one GOALTENDER FOR LIFE, FreeDY ANDERSEN can bag that thang up ONCE AGAIN! ! WE LOVE LIFE AND HIM SO HARD! He IS THE REASON!

 

[hamzarocks]

Defense:

MTL: #3 ga/60, #3 xga/60, #9 sa/60, #10 ca/60, #3 sv%
TOR: #5 ga/60, #19 xga/60, #7 sa/60, #6 ca/60, #6 sv%

Is this basically surmising that leafs have gotten worse goaltending, while giving up less chances but higher quality shots as compared to the habs who give up more chances but have a better goaltending partially perhaps due to the limiting the number of high quality chances(rushes, breakaways, slot chances etc)?

If so it aligns with my own eye test . The leafs from what I've seen this year have been solid in their own zone and dont give up to many chances, having the ability to stop opposition forwards along the cycle and not letting shots get on net. When opposing teams do get a mismatch or we have a breakdown behind the net/along the boards it seems we get caught out of position and it results in a high quality chance which Andersen unfortunately this year more often than not has not been able to save.

I like the way we have been defensively for the most part this year. Still have room to improve but can definately see us being league wide 8-15 defensively right now

 

[lebdafor norris]

gf/60
#7 xgf/60
#10 cf/60

#5 ga/60
#19 xga/60
#6 ca/60
#6 sv%

Ah I see you're not using the score adjustment. You should.

5v5

#8 gf/60
#7 xgf/60
#10 cf/60

#5 ga/60
#19 xga/60
#6 ca/60
#6 sv%

PP

#1 gf/60
#1 xgf/60
#1 cf/60

PK

#23 ga/60
#11 xga/60
#4 ca/60
#29 sv%

Also, xga is not only the outlier for the leafs amongst all the stats but is likely not the best one to use for defense:

Corsi Is Better At Predicting Future Goals Than Expected Goals Is – Draglikepull's hockey research

Is this for real? If the R2 value of Corsi, scoring chances and xGA is less than .3 then all 3 stats are thrash, hot garbage when it comes to predicting results and should not be taken seriously unlike baseball advance statistics. Here is the value R2 should be to remain relevant

if R-squared value < 0.3 this value is generally considered a None or Very weak effect size,
- if R-squared value 0.3 < r < 0.5 this value is generally considered a weak or low effect size,
- if R-squared value 0.5 < r < 0.7 this value is generally considered a Moderate effect size,
- if R-squared value r > 0.7 this value is generally considered strong effect size,

.21 being better than .17 means little in the grand picture because all that means is that both predictive model is thrash, I only took a couple courses in statistics years ago but this I'm sure of and I'm kind of disappointed if that article turns out to be right because all that will mean is that the eye test crowd was right all along in thrashing Corsi and xGA, Promiseland was right all along, lol.

 

[OB34KNH]

What's Robertson's timeline for returning?

 

[7even]

Looked at the schedule for Feb 13 - 20

Montreal
Feb 13 vs Toronto
Feb 20 @Toronto

Toronto
Feb 13 @montreal
Feb 15 vs Ottawa
Feb 17 vs Ottawa
Feb 18 vs Ottawa
Feb 20 vs Montreal

How did that ever get through their schedule making software? Might as well forfeit that Feb 20 game now.

The Canucks are playing their smallest violin rn

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Interesting

Probably want him to get some practice in before going back to the Marlies.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

LOL, so now we are concerned with Montreal being tough? Wow, quite the turn around from the smurfs.

Who’s concerned. I’m still stuck in a loop of Orr and McLaren beating the entire team. Then the guy wouldn’t play for us or accept a trade. Georges was his name i think.

 

[Mitch nylander]

Please win. No team I hate more than the habs

 

[Damisoph]

Love that 4th line. Send Barabanov back to Russia please.

 

[Damisoph]

per Natural Stat trick, 5 vs 5 xGA/60
Leafs 2.29 (23rd)
Habs 1.79 (2nd)
I prefer using 5 vs 5 because a team who played a lot of 3 vs 3 OT would have an inflated xGA due to the sheer amount of scoring chances that goes on. Anyway the stats you showed just proved how underrated Andersen's performance has been, the team is not allowing many shots yet the team's xGA is kinda high meaning the shots that do get through tends to be tough chances, while the team has limited the amount of low quality shots the Leafs tended to give up in the past, shots that helps inflate a goalie's sv.

Well at least Andy's performance in ES has been fantastic, his been victimized in the PK however and it doesn't help that 5 out of the top 6 teams in "times shorthanded" comes from the Northern Division, meaning these Canadian refs are whistle happy.

the margins seem razor thin if half a goal is the difference between 2nd and 23rd. Coming from someone that knows next to nothing about expected goals.

 

[lebdafor norris]

the margins seem razor thin if half a goal is the difference between 2nd and 23rd. Coming from someone that knows next to nothing about expected goals.

Remember this is 5 vs 5 only, the difference between an excellent defensive team like the Boston Bruins which currently sits at 1.99 GA/60, not expected but that is their actual GA/60 this season, and a mediocre defensive team like the New York Rangers is about half a goal.

 

[SoftDumpNtheCorner88]

Really want to see how we look next to Montreal who's been suprising a lot of people.

Worried we might be too use to the play of a sluggish Vancouver team and get caught off guard by Montreal.

I want to see a win but feel we might lose.

 

[darrylsittler27]

Keefe better find a 3rd line tomm. No Simmonds, groan.

 

[Damisoph]

Keefe better find a 3rd line tomm. No Simmonds, groan.

Wayne train was doing all his best work on the PP anyway. Soupie is due to break out, might as well be tonight

 

[Gary Nylund]

Is this for real? If the R2 value of Corsi, scoring chances and xGA is less than .3 then all 3 stats are thrash, hot garbage when it comes to predicting results and should not be taken seriously unlike baseball advance statistics. Here is the value R2 should be to remain relevant

if R-squared value < 0.3 this value is generally considered a None or Very weak effect size,
- if R-squared value 0.3 < r < 0.5 this value is generally considered a weak or low effect size,
- if R-squared value 0.5 < r < 0.7 this value is generally considered a Moderate effect size,
- if R-squared value r > 0.7 this value is generally considered strong effect size,

.21 being better than .17 means little in the grand picture because all that means is that both predictive model is thrash, I only took a couple courses in statistics years ago but this I'm sure of and I'm kind of disappointed if that article turns out to be right because all that will mean is that the eye test crowd was right all along in thrashing Corsi and xGA, Promiseland was right all along, lol.

This doesn't surprise me the least bit. Stats are interesting to look at and I wouldn't say they're complete garbage (though I suppose I could be wrong) but I've always thought some people rely on them waaaaaaaaaaaay too much. Hockey is such a fluid game, so hard to measure what's happening on the ice and so many different variables to consider for context. I doubt hockey stats will ever be anywhere near as meaningful as baseball stats, maybe one day they'll be somewhat close but IMHO that day is still far off in the distance.