Off-season roster thread #3 -- Post-draft and upcoming Free Agency

[WhereAreTheCookies]

Faceoffs are an art, you need body strength, juju, and

Something I've noticed about some of the better faceoff guys, Bergeron in particular. He has a very wide stance so he's low to the ice, and he places one of his hands far closer to the stick blade than most centers do. He gets a lot more leverage that way, and he also has a habit of not leaving the faceoff circle right away, he will kind of plant himself there which also prevents the other center from getting immediate forward momentum towards Bergerons defensive zone.

 

[Fezzy126]

There's also this wonderful dynamic:

Player A wins faceoffs at a 60% rate over the season.
Player B wins faceoffs at a 40% rate over the season.

So when A and B faceoff against each other, A will win 6 out of 10 and B will win 4 out of 10. Right?

NOPE. Over a long enough span, sure those numbers will hold. But during one night and they take like 15 faceoffs against each other? I'd bet A wins 10-12.....given that 60% is among the league's best while 40% is among the league's worst.

I tend to think that faceoffs matter more than most people. ESPECIALLY in the offensive/defensive end. One lost faceoff can end in a goal in those ends super quick.

Completely agree with this.

There's also taking into account good vs bad possession teams. In general a good possession team can probably tolerate a lost faceoff more than a poor possession team, because they'll do a better job at disrupting possession and taking back the puck. Whereas a poor possession team could lose a faceoff and not see the puck for the next 2-3 minutes.

Another thing to think about - Is a team better scoring off of zone possession or in transition? Faceoffs are potentially less important to transition teams as well.

All of this is purely theoretical, but the point is that there's a whole world of analysis that's ignored in most faceoff studies. I think where most people land is that faceoffs can be crucially important at the micro level for certain game situations, so it's probably a good idea to have at least one guy that's above average at the dot.

 

[Digable5]

I think FO's are very important to becoming a winning team. It is an easily measurable factor in your possession metrics. More possession SHOULD equal improved point differential.

Now, the center getting clean wins is only one part of winning faceoffs. The wingers are also a part of winning faceoffs that are NOT clean wins. Sometimes you can even let the other center win it, and you attack them off the drop and still win the possession, which is scored as a faceoff win.

Winning more faceoffs is always going to be better than winning less. Having at least one good FO guy Is pretty essential in the playoffs I would think. Having one on the team should help the other centers improve as well in practice.

So.....do we need to waste a spot on a FO specialist right now? No.......but if we are still legit in the fight for a playoff spot come the trade deadline, and none of our current centers have suddenly become a 50+ FO guy, then we will need to be looking at trading for one.

Fire up the Bob Corkum fax machine. He was a great faceoff guy.

 

[Chainshot]

There's also this wonderful dynamic:

Player A wins faceoffs at a 60% rate over the season.
Player B wins faceoffs at a 40% rate over the season.

So when A and B faceoff against each other, A will win 6 out of 10 and B will win 4 out of 10. Right?

NOPE. Over a long enough span, sure those numbers will hold. But during one night and they take like 15 faceoffs against each other? I'd bet A wins 10-12.....given that 60% is among the league's best while 40% is among the league's worst.

I tend to think that faceoffs matter more than most people. ESPECIALLY in the offensive/defensive end. One lost faceoff can end in a goal in those ends super quick.

Yet quantifying that has yet to bear out that it actually results in goals against more regularly.

 

[Zman5778]

Yet quantifying that has yet to bear out that it actually results in goals against more regularly.

Faceoffs are one part of hockey that I am absolutely convinced that the analytics community has wrong. I'm not sure I'm eloquent enough to explain my thoughts on it.

I think what it comes down to is that on a large enough time scale (say over the course of a season)......sure, faceoffs effect could/should even out.

But I think it underplays situations like:
1a.) A faceoff in the defensive zone that immediately turns into a GA/GWGA.
1b.) A faceoff loss in the defensive zone that is never cleared and turns into a GA/GWGA.
2.) An opening faceoff in OT where the losing team basically never sees the puck

There's gotta be a way to separate neutral zone faceoff effects from D-zone faceoff effects.

 

[Chainshot]

Faceoffs are one part of hockey that I am absolutely convinced that the analytics community has wrong. I'm not sure I'm eloquent enough to explain my thoughts on it.

I think what it comes down to is that on a large enough time scale (say over the course of a season)......sure, faceoffs effect could/should even out.

But I think it underplays situations like:
1a.) A faceoff in the defensive zone that immediately turns into a GA/GWGA.
1b.) A faceoff loss in the defensive zone that is never cleared and turns into a GA/GWGA.
2.) An opening faceoff in OT where the losing team basically never sees the puck

There's gotta be a way to separate neutral zone faceoff effects from D-zone faceoff effects.

As I said, teams have studied this and come to different conclusions. I'm sure they were savvy enough to pay attention to zone location when they were doing it. This isn't something about the blog stats folks, this was stuff tangentially reported on that individual teams have done trying to find out if it mattered to the degree you describe. They didn't arrive at similar conclusions based on the individual teams. We can lay out a case for it one way or another but at this point it's a "nice to have" rather than a necessity.

And my point comes back to having someone who is good at that specific task and sucks, measurably, at so much else does not balance out. Someone brought up Bergeron - that man is good at so many things other than just faceoffs. In the same way, O'Reilly is excellent at things that have nothing to do with faceoffs. And both are good at faceoffs in addition to being excellent positional players who compete for pucks all over the ice.

 

[TheMistyStranger]

Jesus Christ the real games need to start soon. You people are going loopy.

 

[Irie]

Faceoffs are one part of hockey that I am absolutely convinced that the analytics community has wrong. I'm not sure I'm eloquent enough to explain my thoughts on it.

I think what it comes down to is that on a large enough time scale (say over the course of a season)......sure, faceoffs effect could/should even out.

But I think it underplays situations like:
1a.) A faceoff in the defensive zone that immediately turns into a GA/GWGA.
1b.) A faceoff loss in the defensive zone that is never cleared and turns into a GA/GWGA.
2.) An opening faceoff in OT where the losing team basically never sees the puck

There's gotta be a way to separate neutral zone faceoff effects from D-zone faceoff effects.

I think there is often more impact than just the immediate GA issue that is obvious.

Losing them consistently on the penalty kill often leads to ridiculously long pk shifts with a lot of skating and icings, and tends to gas players to the point where they are exhausted and out of energy late in games. That can have more impact on a games outcome than just giving up an early goal right off a draw.

It would be nice to have a scale on the importance of individual draws but the factors that would have to be evaluated likely make it near logistically impossible.

 

[jc17]

Faceoffs are one part of hockey that I am absolutely convinced that the analytics community has wrong. I'm not sure I'm eloquent enough to explain my thoughts on it.

I think what it comes down to is that on a large enough time scale (say over the course of a season)......sure, faceoffs effect could/should even out.

But I think it underplays situations like:
1a.) A faceoff in the defensive zone that immediately turns into a GA/GWGA.
1b.) A faceoff loss in the defensive zone that is never cleared and turns into a GA/GWGA.
2.) An opening faceoff in OT where the losing team basically never sees the puck

There's gotta be a way to separate neutral zone faceoff effects from D-zone faceoff effects.

I think the problem is still that there are tons of decisions that can result in possession changes during the play that outnumber faceoffs by a lot.

Its not that faceoffs don't matter, but they don't drive possession more than the other things throughout the game

 

[Olax]

Hi. Outsider coming in peace, asking for fantasy league reasons:

How are you guys expecting the goaltending situation / split be as we are about to start the season? Is Anderson still looking to be a clear #1 or is it looking more like an open challenge between him and Comrie? (Even UPL?)

Thank you and good luck on the new season!

 

[Fjordy]

Hi. Outsider coming in peace, asking for fantasy league reasons:

How are you guys expecting the goaltending situation / split be as we are about to start the season? Is Anderson still looking to be a clear #1 or is it looking more like an open challenge between him and Comrie? (Even UPL?)

Thank you and good luck on the new season!

It will be hard for Anderson to become the first number because of the load that he can no longer withstand, he himself knows this. I expect Comrie to play about 40 games, Anderson to play 20 and UPL 20.

 

[Club]

Hi. Outsider coming in peace, asking for fantasy league reasons:

How are you guys expecting the goaltending situation / split be as we are about to start the season? Is Anderson still looking to be a clear #1 or is it looking more like an open challenge between him and Comrie? (Even UPL?)

Thank you and good luck on the new season!

I expect Comrie as Fjordy has said. But... who knows. UPL could get hot.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

Milano is a interesting name

Are the Bills planning to use some of the Sabres spare cap space to circumvent the upcoming crunch?

 

[Jimmybarndoor2]

Are the Bills planning to use some of the Sabres spare cap space to circumvent the upcoming crunch?

That would be an interesting situation
Sabres sign a Odell Beckham for 1 million and bills sign him for league min. Player on both teams. Might pass scrutiny

 

[debaser66]

I believe in UPL!
he's gonna have a good season if he's up

 

[Dingo44]

It will be hard for Anderson to become the first number because of the load that he can no longer withstand, he himself knows this. I expect Comrie to play about 40 games, Anderson to play 20 and UPL 20.

I'd throw Levi in there for 5 games.

 

[sabresfan129103]

I believe in UPL!
he's gonna have a good season if he's up

I believe in his hockey ability. I have less faith in his ability to stay healthy though. This season is critical for him, so hopefully the injury bug doesn't bite him again.

 

[Matt Ress]

Hi. Outsider coming in peace, asking for fantasy league reasons:

How are you guys expecting the goaltending situation / split be as we are about to start the season? Is Anderson still looking to be a clear #1 or is it looking more like an open challenge between him and Comrie? (Even UPL?)

Thank you and good luck on the new season!

I kind of expect Anderson to be the season long backup. If Comrie gets hurt or is having a tough go, I expect UPL up to take most of the starts. Andy's old, he probably doesn't want to be the guy and they'll probably want extended looks at Comrie and UPL anyway.

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

I never post here - I've been lurking forever. But I'll offer to buy that flag from you if anyone goes. Message me.

 

[Matt Ress]

I never post here - I've been lurking forever. But I'll offer to buy that flag from you if anyone goes. Message me.

Solid 1st post

 

[EichHart]

Got Dahlin and Tuch in my draft last night!

 

[MOGlLNY]

Got Dahlin and Tuch in my draft last night!

I reached for Dahls 61st overall but I am very confident in him blowing up this year for 65-70 points.

 

[joshjull]

There's also this wonderful dynamic:

Player A wins faceoffs at a 60% rate over the season.
Player B wins faceoffs at a 40% rate over the season.

So when A and B faceoff against each other, A will win 6 out of 10 and B will win 4 out of 10. Right?

NOPE. Over a long enough span, sure those numbers will hold. But during one night and they take like 15 faceoffs against each other? I'd bet A wins 10-12.....given that 60% is among the league's best while 40% is among the league's worst.

I tend to think that faceoffs matter more than most people. ESPECIALLY in the offensive/defensive end. One lost faceoff can end in a goal in those ends super quick.

Thats not a great argument/example.

1) You just pulled numbers out of thin air to argue Player A will win 10-12 of the 15 faceoffs. It means he curb stomped Player B. Its not that it couldn’t happen. But he’d have to get curb stomped himself one night to balance his numbers out for the season. Which means faceoff% numbers don’t matter on a given night. Because whoever curb stomped Player A couldn’t be better and outperformed their own numbers.

2) Player B’s team will adjust. At the very least by cycling in wingers for the draws instead of the center. Or if its a key Dzone/Ozone draw possibly putting out a different center.

 

[joshjull]

Completely agree with this.

There's also taking into account good vs bad possession teams. In general a good possession team can probably tolerate a lost faceoff more than a poor possession team, because they'll do a better job at disrupting possession and taking back the puck. Whereas a poor possession team could lose a faceoff and not see the puck for the next 2-3 minutes.

Another thing to think about - Is a team better scoring off of zone possession or in transition? Faceoffs are potentially less important to transition teams as well.

All of this is purely theoretical, but the point is that there's a whole world of analysis that's ignored in most faceoff studies. I think where most people land is that faceoffs can be crucially important at the micro level for certain game situations, so it's probably a good idea to have at least one guy that's above average at the dot.

When have you ever seen that happen 5v5?

Thats 2 to 3 line changes after the faceoff loss. Maybe, and I stress maybe, it could happen after an icing during the long change in the 2nd period. But thats a stretch.

 

[Ace]

Here is the reason faceoff talk is worth less than the time spent doing it…

most face offs actually are meaningless. An overwhelming amount of them lead to nothing but an eventual turnover in possession or a save anyway. Almost all of them, in fact.

I couldn’t care less what percentage of most face offs anyone wins. Because they flat out full stop do not matter.

but a few do. So you care about losing those. Cool. But if I have ten meaningful face offs a week and bad is a guy who almost wins 5 of them and good is someone who doesnt win six….no I’m not spending a roster spot of wasting my time on it. Because most of the game is not faceoffs and getting worse at 99 percent of the game to incrementally improve at one…that usually doesn’t matter anyway…. Is stupid.