Non-advanced team statistics with Babcock and Keefe (updated in OP 12/26/19)

[MapleLeafs9]

updated 12/26/19:

Record
Babcock: 9-10-4 (20th league, 10th east, 5th atlantic)
Keefe: 11-4-0 (4th league, 2nd east, 1st atlantic)

Goal differential
Babcock: 72-79, -7 (22nd)
Keefe: 60-41, +19 (1st)

Powerplay
Babcock: 17.6% (18th)
Keefe: 34.4% (1st)

Penalty kill
Babcock: 73.1% (27th)
Keefe: 82.8% (12th)

Giveaways
Babcock: 275 (27th)
Keefe: 151 (16th)

Takeaways
Babcock: 162 (16th)
Keefe: 131 (11th)

Faceoff %
Babcock: 53.8% (1st)
Keefe: 49.8% (20th)

Way better than every category except takeaways (which is kind of an arbitrary stat, same with giveaways) and faceoffs, not sure how we took such a massive dip there. So we have been a way better team, but I'm still not sure if its good enough to make the playoffs. Still really inconsistent and the effort level just isn't there sometimes throughout stretches of games. Really need Buffalo and Montreal to start losing games, because Tampa is right on everyone's tails and I still fully expect them to finish 2nd in the Atlantic. They're too good not to.

Feel free to post any advanced statistics that show if we've been better or worse or about the same. I just went for a more simpler approach here.

Click to read more...

 

[RoadWarrior]

Record
Babcock: 9-10-4
Keefe: 7-4-0

Goal differential
Babcock: 72-79, -7 (22nd)
Keefe: 37-28, +9 (4th)

Powerplay
Babcock: 17.6% (18th)
Keefe: 33.3% (1st)

Penalty kill
Babcock: 73.1% (27th)
Keefe: 88.0% (5th)

Giveaways
Babcock: 275 (27th)
Keefe: 106 (9th)

Takeaways
Babcock: 162 (16th)
Keefe: 80 (20th)

Faceoff %
Babcock: 53.8% (1st)
Keefe: 48.5% (24th)

Way better than every category except takeaways (which is kind of an arbitrary stat, same with giveaways) and faceoffs, not sure how we took such a massive dip there. So we have been a way better team, but I'm still not sure if its good enough to make the playoffs. Still really inconsistent and the effort level just isn't there sometimes throughout stretches of games. Really need Buffalo and Montreal to start losing games, because Tampa is right on everyone's tails and I still fully expect them to finish 2nd in the Atlantic. They're too good not to.

Feel free to post any advanced statistics that show if we've been better or worse or about the same. I just went for a more simpler approach here.

Faceoffs are related to line matching which Babcock was obsessed with so that's not a surprise.

 

[MapleLeafs9]

Faceoffs are related to line matching which Babcock was obsessed with so that's not a surprise.

That and we've also been on the road a lot (9 of 11 games) so tough to get matchups you want for faceoffs I guess

 

[Pookie]

	Team GP	Andersen Starts	% GP Started	Shots/Game	Save %
Babcock	23	17	74%	31.5	0.912
Keefe	11	10	91%	30.8	0.935

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[MapleLeafs9]

	Team GP	Andersen Starts	% GP Started	Shots/Game	Save %
Babcock	23	17	74%	31.5	0.912
Keefe	11	10	91%	30.8	0.935

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So are you saying we're winning because we're getting better goaltending? Or getting better goaltending because we've been better since the Keefe hire?

 

[Mickey Marner]

The only place faceoffs matter are special teams and they certainly haven't negatively affected those.

 

[MyBudJT]

Player	P\GP before Keefe	P\GP with Keefe
Mitch Marner	1	1.4
John Tavares	0.88	1
Auston Matthews	1.17	0.64
Andreas Johnsson	0.52	0.57
Kasperi Kapanen	0.52	0.55
Zach Hyman	0.5*	0.55
William Nylander	0.74	0.55
Ilya Mikheyev	0.52	0.55
Jason Spezza	0.54	0.5
Morgan Rielly	0.74	0.45
Jake Muzzin	0.5	0.18
	*= 4 game sample

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Pookie]

So are you saying we're winning because we're getting better goaltending? Or getting better goaltending because we've been better since the Keefe hire?

Not really drawing any conclusion from it other than:

1. Keefe is playing him at a very high rate.

2. Andersen is playing really well.

Since goal metrics (ie did it go in or not) have more of a correlation to outcome... I’d wager that Freddy’s performance is driving the Corsi numbers and not vice versa.

While we can’t draw a conclusion what we do know is that if Freddy continues to play at this rate he will have an increased risk for fatigue and injury.

To manage that, Keefe would have to tap on Hutchinson more.

They have to weigh the risk. Ride Freddy and hope he stays healthy or use Hutchinson and hope he can actually win a game.

Not a great spot for Keefe to be in. I’d be going with freddy as much as I could though.

A serviceable back up would address both concerns.

 

[zeke]

All stats adjusted for Score Effects:


EVEN STRENGTH

Goal Differential

Babs: -0.05 g60+/- (#19), 49.5 gf% (#19)
Keefe: +0.87 g60+/- (#6), 58.6 gf% (#5)

Expected Goal Differential

Babs: -0.25 xg60+/- (#26), 47.5 xgf% (#26)
Keefe: +0.55 xg60+/- (#3), 55.3 xgf% (#4)

Shot Differential

Babs: +0.51 sh60+/- (#15), 50.4 shf% (#15)
Keefe: +6.23 sh60+/- (#6), 54.7 shf% (#6)

Shot Attempt Differential

Babs: +5.70 c60+/- (#6), 52.4 cf% (#6)
Keefe: +11.49 c60+/- (#2), 54.8 cf% (#3)

Percentages

Babs: 8.37 sh% (#18), 91.33 sv% (#19)
Keefe: 8.14 sh% (#15), 93.06 sv% (#10)


POWER PLAY

Goals For

Babs: 5.97 gf/60 (#21)
Keefe: 11.36 gf/60 (#3)

Expected Goals For

Babs: 7.21 xgf/60 (#7)
Keefe: 10.22 xgf/60 (#1)

Shooting Percentage

Babs: 12.05 sh% (#19)
Keefe: 17.37 sh% (#4)


PENALTY KILL

Goals Against

Babs: 9.11 ga/60 (#24)
Keefe: 3.84 ga/60 (#6)

Expected Goals Against

Babs: 7.67 xga/60 (#27)
Keefe: 3.90 xga/60 (#1)

Save Percentage

Babs: 85.60 sv% (#21)
Keefe: 87.97 sv% (#16)




It really is an astonishing difference across the board, both in top line numbers and underlying metrics.

 

[Duffman955]

Teams often do well short term after a coaching change.

Hopefully that isn't the case here. the team looks visibly better and reinvigorated

 

[Buds17]

Definitely hope to see a team respond well to a coaching change. Dropping in takeaways isn't that devastating since the team has progressed so well in reducing the amount of giveaways. Winning or losing a faceoff can help set the wheels in motion for what is to come on the rest of that shift. However, unless a goal is scored or conceded almost directly off of the draw, other things are also happening there.

 

[authentic]

The only place faceoffs matter are special teams and they certainly haven't negatively affected those.

A key faceoff win can be crucial at times but I think their overall importance can be very overrated.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Keefe’s also has a healthier team. I’m happy with how the team looks but Marner’s injury coincided with our biggest drop in play.

I think we’re better with Keefe, but injuries exacerbated the problems with Babcock.

 

[Teeder Keon]

Keefe’s also has a healthier team. I’m happy with how the team looks but Marner’s injury coincided with our biggest drop in play.

I think we’re better with Keefe, but injuries exacerbated the problems with Babcock.

Certainly injuries never help the situation

 

[Teeder Keon]

A key faceoff win can be crucial at times but I think their overall importance can be very overrated.

Sorry
I disagree completely
Any possession at any time anywhere on the ice is crucial at the end of the game results
Face offs start the process of moving in the right direction which could lead to a goal for or defending , which could lead to a goal against .

 

[Teeder Keon]

Teams often do well short term after a coaching change.

Hopefully that isn't the case here. the team looks visibly better and reinvigorated

Without a doubt
But great players playing great and goaltending being great makes a HOF coach all day long

 

[zeke]

Keefe’s also has a healthier team. I’m happy with how the team looks but Marner’s injury coincided with our biggest drop in play.

I think we’re better with Keefe, but injuries exacerbated the problems with Babcock.

Marner played in 18 of 23 games under babcock, only 5 of 11 under Keefe.

 

[Eb]

Player	P\GP before Keefe	P\GP with Keefe
Mitch Marner	1	1.4
John Tavares	0.88	1
Auston Matthews	1.17	0.64
Andreas Johnsson	0.52	0.57
Kasperi Kapanen	0.52	0.55
Zach Hyman	0.5*	0.55
William Nylander	0.74	0.55
Ilya Mikheyev	0.52	0.55
Jason Spezza	0.54	0.5
Morgan Rielly	0.74	0.45
Jake Muzzin	0.5	0.18
	*= 4 game sample

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Where is Barrie?

 

[MyBudJT]

Where is Barrie?

why aren’t you asking about Dermott, Ceci, Holl, Gauthier, Timashov, etc etc...? It’s not a complete list....

 

[Eb]

why aren’t you asking about Dermott, Ceci, Holl, Gauthier, Timashov, etc etc...? It’s not a complete list....

Lol, because you had included all the other top players on the team.
Also, because Barrie most likely had the biggest jump in production. Seems odd to leave him off.

 

[MyBudJT]

Lol, because you had included all the other top players on the team.
Also, because Barrie most likely had the biggest jump in production. Seems odd to leave him off.

Barrie is not a top player on this team... look up the stats and post them if it matters that much to you...

 

[Eb]

Barrie is not a top player on this team... look up the stats and post them if it matters that much to you...

Injury Report: - Barrie x-rays come back negative says coach Keefe

Here's a good post for you. Although, I'm sure you saw it already.

 

[DarkKnight]

To be fair on takeaways, Marner was out for larger percentage under Keefe than Babcock and he was best on team.

 

[MyBudJT]

Injury Report: - Barrie x-rays come back negative says coach Keefe

Here's a good post for you. Although, I'm sure you saw it already.

What does this have to do with my list...?

I haven’t had the time to look through it, and evaluate what it means in context. It’s amazing how good a lot of those numbers look on players that get extremely sheltered (i.e mostly Ozone starts with top QoT against low QoC...)... similar to how Dermott’s numbers looked elite last season in an extremely sheltered role...

Also, the sample size is a bit small, yet.

 

[Eb]

What does this have to do with my list...
I haven’t had the time to look through it, and evaluate what it means in context. It’s amazing how good a lot of those numbers look on players that get extremely sheltered (i.e mostly Ozone starts with top QoT against low QoC...)... similar to how Dermott’s numbers looked elite last season in an extremely sheltered role...

Also, the sample size is a bit small, yet.

It's clear that you left Barrie off the list because it showed Keefe/Barrie in a positive light. This doesn't fit your agenda. I asked my question knowing this was the reason.

The post I quoted was just great to read. Love seeing posters like yourself proved wrong!