Powerplay math and associated optimism
- Thread starter gocbj
- Start date
Johansen2Foligno
CBJ Realest
- Jan 2, 2015
- 9,253
- 4,174
I don't mean to rain on the parade, but do we have any strong reason to believe that there will be an upward correction? There is also the chance that it will get worse or even stay the same. They are having a lot of trouble getting set when they do get in the zone
This is something that is hard to forecast.
They finished in the bottom third last year at 17.2%
This is something that is hard to forecast.
They finished in the bottom third last year at 17.2%
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Regression to the mean. Every positive or encouraging stat that’s above league average we’re told is... wait for it... unsustainable. Where do you think bus’ meme comes from?
Look, I don’t know about the power play. It sucks. It’s not a good thing and it’s embarrassing to watch. But let’s not act like it couldn’t improve just by virtue of the ‘It can’t get worse’ factor.
Last edited:
Agree with all of that...
Even as poor as the PP is, we're in the playoffs
And if the exceptional teams wander back towards reality, that's even better.
...to end at 17.2, we will score 26 PP goals in the 2nd half
and 17.2 was 28th out of 31 in 2017-2018
Optimism! Moneypuck
Even as poor as the PP is, we're in the playoffs
And if the exceptional teams wander back towards reality, that's even better.
...to end at 17.2, we will score 26 PP goals in the 2nd half
and 17.2 was 28th out of 31 in 2017-2018
Optimism! Moneypuck
Last edited:
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,591
- 6,498
The CBJ are less than 50% as efficient on the PP as the league's top 6 power plays are.
There isn't a personnel deficiency that can explain this. The coaching staff has looked at their schemes and made as many adjustments as they can. The players, I'll assume, have been asked for their input until they've been blue in the face.
What does a regular (well run) business do when a part of their business is giving them fits? They get outside help. If the CBJ haven't had the Cleveland Monsters staff look at the PP and make recommendations, then shame on Jarmo and Torts. If they have and things haven't worked then there are other potential options. Due to affiliations, the CBJ would have to go outside of the North American professional ranks. They could have a successful Division 1 coaching staff take a look at the PP and make recommendations. Major Junior Hockey in Canada is also an option. So are European league coaching staffs.
Most of us have come across issues/problems in our lives where we've looked at them for so long and from so many angles that we end up stymied. The CBJ coaching staff reached that point a long time ago. If they (CBJ mgmt as a whole) think that they're going to fix the PP, then they're not only crappy managers, but arrogant bordering upon delusional.
There isn't a personnel deficiency that can explain this. The coaching staff has looked at their schemes and made as many adjustments as they can. The players, I'll assume, have been asked for their input until they've been blue in the face.
What does a regular (well run) business do when a part of their business is giving them fits? They get outside help. If the CBJ haven't had the Cleveland Monsters staff look at the PP and make recommendations, then shame on Jarmo and Torts. If they have and things haven't worked then there are other potential options. Due to affiliations, the CBJ would have to go outside of the North American professional ranks. They could have a successful Division 1 coaching staff take a look at the PP and make recommendations. Major Junior Hockey in Canada is also an option. So are European league coaching staffs.
Most of us have come across issues/problems in our lives where we've looked at them for so long and from so many angles that we end up stymied. The CBJ coaching staff reached that point a long time ago. If they (CBJ mgmt as a whole) think that they're going to fix the PP, then they're not only crappy managers, but arrogant bordering upon delusional.
Last edited:
The Jones Zone
Registered User
At this point desperate failure calls for desperate action
why not put Nash on the PP for a game or 2
the PP can not get worse, and maybe, just maybe Nash cashes in and gets his offensive game going
"What do you have lose"
why not put Nash on the PP for a game or 2
the PP can not get worse, and maybe, just maybe Nash cashes in and gets his offensive game going
"What do you have lose"
Our only play for the longest time has been to slowly work the top of the umbrella. The players don't have the confidence to move the puck quickly enough to create any kind of disorder, and they're not even trying any down low plays. And for some reason they don't like the one-timer threat.
I want to see them just go with
PP1:
------------- Dubois
Panarin - Atkinson - Werenski
------------- Jones
It's just our top unit from 5v5. We need guys to have a comfort level with each other to move the puck more quickly. I'd go with this unit and leave it that way for at least a month. They have the requisite skills, they just need some plays and some confidence. The Panarin <-> Werenski one-timer* options immediately gives them some plays, and some threats that the opposition needs to think about other than the Jones blast, which is all we've been using. I can see Werenski -> Dubois -> Atkinson being a pretty good short-pass play as well.
PP2:
------------- Wennberg
Bjorkstrand - Anderson - Duclair
------------- Nuti / Murray
This is a leftovers unit, I'll admit it, but the best PP's in the league are always built around the top unit. The second unit here at least has the guys on the wall in one-timer* positions. And it takes Foligno out of the mix - he hasn't been helpful on the PP in two years now.
* - Not necessarily a one-timer slapshot, but a one touch play where they don't need to dust off the puck and pivot with it before facing the net.
The Jones Zone
Registered User
Panarin--Anderson--Nash
DuClair----Jones
I mean Sam Gagner was a terrible player, but effective on the PP
what the hell do you have to lose
DuClair----Jones
I mean Sam Gagner was a terrible player, but effective on the PP
what the hell do you have to lose
Last edited:
Sam Gagner possesses a hell of a lot more skill with the puck compared to Riley Nash
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,591
- 6,498
So do most beer leaguers.
I honestly don't know if Riley Nash would be a top player in the ECHL. He's so bad.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,591
- 6,498
Since the lockout and shortened 12-13 season 6 seasons including this one), the worst PPs have been:
1) 13-14 Panthers 10.0%
2) 16-17 Avalance 12.6%
Montreal is currently at 12.6% and the CBJ are cruising along at 12.8%.
The CBJ have zero chance of doing anything in the playoffs (if they make them) with this type of crap performance.
How Tortorella and staff can't get more out of Panarin, Atkinson, Z and Jones is mind boggling.
This PP is bottom 1% performance level. Unreal.
1) 13-14 Panthers 10.0%
2) 16-17 Avalance 12.6%
Montreal is currently at 12.6% and the CBJ are cruising along at 12.8%.
The CBJ have zero chance of doing anything in the playoffs (if they make them) with this type of crap performance.
How Tortorella and staff can't get more out of Panarin, Atkinson, Z and Jones is mind boggling.
This PP is bottom 1% performance level. Unreal.
Last edited:
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
He's consistent enough in terms of "solid but not spectacular" play that he'd be a bottom line roleplayer/#13F on most teams. It's just that we paid him a little more than that.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,591
- 6,498
Just stop it. He's horrible. You have to look for him or he's invisible. I'd take a random free agent at $650,000 over this hideous stiff any day of the week. Twice on Sundays.
"Solid play". Solid something but not play.
He's overpaid by $2 million per year. That's hardly a little bit.
Last edited:
Riley Nash gets a lot of defensive shifts, and somehow he manages to have a full goal against less per 60 minutes than Dubinsky. Dubi ought to be taking notes.
Who started this whole thing about judging players by their "visibility"? I'd rather know whether we do better or worse with them out there. By that standard nothing much happens when Riley Nash is on the ice. We don't score and the other team doesn't score. I'll take that whether you can see it or not. His scoring is absurdly low, but the team has a less than 5% shooting percentage when he's out there, which is bound to increase. Overpaid but enough with the hyperbole. We've seen horrible players before and usually the puck ends up in our net a lot when they're out there. That is not Riley Nash.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,591
- 6,498
I'm not an advanced stats basher, but if Riley Nash looks good by any measure, it should probably be ignored in his case.
Riley Nash is a -5. Per minute of play he's about tied with Dubinsky for worst forward on the team. He brings nothing to the game. Nothing. It speaks to the lack of talent in Cleveland and/or Jarmo's unwillingness to admit that he threw $8 million in the toilet that he's still on the roster.
He could be waived and no one would take him. He could be offered with 1/3rd salary retention for nothing in return and that wouldn't create any interest.
He's a joke. As is your feeble defense of him.
So a player you admit to not noticing is so bad that when the stats say he isn't that bad the stats should be ignored? Your post is just "He's bad, he's horrible", stated over and over again in slightly different ways with no actual information. Excuse me for not being persuaded that you have any insight here.
I didn't mention any advanced stats, just goals against, which are lower with Riley Nash on the ice than with all but a few of our forwards.
Viqsi I’m usually on your side, but CR is right. Riley Nash is as bad, if not worse, as Gregory Campbell was while he was here.
My memory of Campbell is of a player who didn't have the requisite skills to get the puck from one end of the ice to the other. Stone hands, not that tough. Just bad. Nash can't score but he stickhandles and passes well enough to move things forward, which is a nice thing to have from a 4th liner.
We brought Campbell here to be a tougher version of what Nash actually is, a defensively responsible guy with a good forecheck game. Campbell wasn't even that. You could say Nash is a bigger disappointment compared to what we might have hoped for from him given his resume and contract. But as a player he's better.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Gregory Campbell was a liability defensively and offensively. Riley Nash is merely a liability offensively.
MoeBartoli
Checkers-to-Jackets
- Jan 12, 2011
- 14,066
- 10,260
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
Game 3 Florida Panthers @ Tampa Bay Lightning - Florida Panthers leads series 2-0Wagers: 1Staked: $100.00Event closes- Updated: