Series Talk: Round 1 - St. Louis Blues [now w/ Poll]

[henchman21]

This kinda proves my point that "advanced stats" are kind of trash.

The reason people rag on O'Reilly is because MacK and the first line torched him on the score sheet. 4 game series, MacK 9 points, Landy 8, and Rantanen 7. Compared to RORs 3 points and -7. It was a butt kicking, I don't really care what the advanced have to say. Score sheet told the story.

3 of MacK's points (and goals) were against the empty net. That skews this quite a bit. 5v5 Mack had 4 points. I'm pretty sure if you could guarantee any coach that MacK is only going to be involved in one goal per game 5v5, they'd take it and hope they limit PP opportunities and win the game elsewhere. With MacK (and other superstar players), you're never going to 'win' against them individually, but you want to contain them. ROR was not the issue in this series for the Blues... the depth behind him was the issue. If your only capable top 6 center is too busy trying to contain MacK, you have the obvious problems the Blues had.

 

[Foppa2118]

Which is why if baffles the hell out of me why people are ragging on ROR's performance in this series. The advanced stats are kind of absurd on the against/not against ROR for MacK. ROR did as good of job as could be done on MacK, they Blues just had no depth to help him.

Proof positive why it's so silly to read anything into advanced stats with a sample size as small as 4 games. It was clear from watching the games ROR got totally out competed by the top line. So much so that his coach stopped matching the Selke winner against it in game 3.

He lost a lot of battles, especially physical battles where he got pushed around more than usual. I don't know if he was totally healthy or not, but he just didn't compete as hard as he usually does outside a few spurts.

That's why they ended up with this.

MacKinnon - 6 goals 9 points +6
Landeskog - 2 goals 8 points +6
Rantanen - 1 goal 7 points - +5
O'Reilly - 0 goals 3 points -7
Avs - 4 wins
Blues - 0 wins

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Ror was fine. Good even. Thus boards obsession with shitting on former players is very weird.

 

[Balthazar]

Getting out-hit in this series was a given, the entire Blues strategy was to finish every check and hit us into submission. All the running around trying to put a body on everyone with the puck ended up meaning they didn't spend much time with possession, so they just hit more.

It will be interesting to see if Vegas tries the same thing with us. Everybody kind of expects that they will, but they could easily look at what we just did to STL and conclude that playing us that way is a losing strategy.

Bertuzzo getting out of their lineup was a relief on that front. Outside of maybe Schenn no one scared me as far as potentially trying to injure our players.

The Vegas' 4th line on the other hand are on a whole different level. They'll try to hit/injure our dmen again (like they did successfully with Byram earlier).

 

[Foppa2118]

Plus/minus can be a misleading stat, but when you're comparing players that were matched up against each other the majority of four games in a row, and the discrepancy is this big, there's simply no case for saying ROR played well.

MacKinnon: +6
Landeskog: +5
Rantanen: +5

O'Reilly: -7

 

[The Mars Volchenkov]

Empty netters certainly make that look wider than it really was.

 

[Foppa2118]

Empty netters certainly make that look wider than it really was.

No it doesn't. The top line he was matched up against still doubled ROR's production, he still had 0 goals with only 2 primary assists, and he still went pointless in two of the four games.

MacKinnon worked for those empty netters too.

Without Empty Net Goals

MacKinnon - 3 goals 6 points
Landeskog - 2 goals 6 points
Rantanen - 1 goal 6 points
O'Reilly - 0 goals 3 points

 

[Avsboy]

Ror was fine. Good even. Thus boards obsession with shitting on former players is very weird.

We love Stastny though

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

We love Stastny though

True. How could anyone possibly dislike Paul Walnuts though?

 

[McMetal]

Bertuzzo getting out of their lineup was a relief on that front. Outside of maybe Schenn no one scared me as far as potentially trying to injure our players.

The Vegas' 4th line on the other hand are on a whole different level. They'll try to hit/injure our dmen again (like they did successfully with Byram earlier).

That is the conventional wisdom, yes, but if they do that, it will likely leave them exposed in the same way that it exposed the Blues. Going out of your way to finish every check is very similar to what STL tried to do, and that flat out did nothing to stop the Avs. Vegas may well look at this series and conclude that chasing hits everywhere on the ice is a bad idea.

And frankly, any player can injure anybody with a dirty hit, that's not something unique to the Knights 4th line. Tyson Barrie took out Simon Despres jumping into a hit once, to give you an example, no one would describe him as a big tough injury machine. The narrative that they're somehow elite at hurting people is getting out of hand IMO. None of them are Tom Wilson, and they have regularly been too busy getting caved in on possession to hurt anyone this season. If DeBoer wants to put them on the ice against Makar, I feel pretty good about them getting made to look like the pylons they are.

 

[Foppa2118]

As Bednar would say, we didn't hit that much because we had the puck most of the series.

Also why the Blues weren't getting any calls, despite Berube's whining.

 

[The Kingslayer]

We love Stastny though

Also I think we all love varly still

 

[The Kingslayer]

As Bednar would say, we didn't hit that much because we had the puck most of the series.

Also why the Blues weren't getting any calls, despite Berube's whining.

Which is true. Had the puck all series and had the lead.

 

[Bill Peckerskull]

The Vegas' 4th line on the other hand are on a whole different level. They'll try to hit/injure our dmen again (like they did successfully with Byram earlier).

It's not just their 4th line that does it. Tuch, Pacioretty, Stephenson, Stone, and most of their D all do it too. It's going to be an incredibly difficult matchup for the Avs. That's why I hate that it's round 2. Even if they find a way to win it (and I honestly don't think they will) it could have consequences for the next couple rounds.

 

[MarkT]

Called it

 

[chet1926]

3 of MacK's points (and goals) were against the empty net. That skews this quite a bit. 5v5 Mack had 4 points. I'm pretty sure if you could guarantee any coach that MacK is only going to be involved in one goal per game 5v5, they'd take it and hope they limit PP opportunities and win the game elsewhere. With MacK (and other superstar players), you're never going to 'win' against them individually, but you want to contain them. ROR was not the issue in this series for the Blues... the depth behind him was the issue. If your only capable top 6 center is too busy trying to contain MacK, you have the obvious problems the Blues had.

I mean you're really trying to manipulate the stats. At the end of the day MacK had 9 points in 4 games, and all the top line guys were over 7pts. That's over 2 pts per game. That's not at all even containing MacK or the top line. Look at what Winnipeg is doing with McDavid, that's containing a superstar.

While I agree ROR wasn't St Louis's biggest problem, he really didn't do much to help them out either. Not much scoring and didn't contain our top guys. Wasn't a good series for him.

 

[Hasbro]

Proof positive why it's so silly to read anything into advanced stats with a sample size as small as 4 games.

Sample Size Queen.

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

That is the conventional wisdom, yes, but if they do that, it will likely leave them exposed in the same way that it exposed the Blues. Going out of your way to finish every check is very similar to what STL tried to do, and that flat out did nothing to stop the Avs. Vegas may well look at this series and conclude that chasing hits everywhere on the ice is a bad idea.

And frankly, any player can injure anybody with a dirty hit, that's not something unique to the Knights 4th line. Tyson Barrie took out Simon Despres jumping into a hit once, to give you an example, no one would describe him as a big tough injury machine. The narrative that they're somehow elite at hurting people is getting out of hand IMO. None of them are Tom Wilson, and they have regularly been too busy getting caved in on possession to hurt anyone this season. If DeBoer wants to put them on the ice against Makar, I feel pretty good about them getting made to look like the pylons they are.

Vegas D play much better to support in the neutral zone which allows their forwards to hit so much without giving up so many rushes against.

Vegas plays smart physical. Like the game that Gru stole. Vegas established a dominant physical forecheck and the Avs didn't have a good answer. They really bullied Rants and MacK as well.

 

[Meatball]

Hello Avs fans. I come in peace to both apologize for the things I said about your team on our board, and to wish you the best of luck going forward.

You're blessed to have a transcendent talent in MacKinnon, a superstar on the backend in Makar, and a whole lot of depth (the scary thing is that you weren't fully healthy either!). Everytime you guys had the puck, I was worried that it would end up in our net, and as it turns out, my fears weren't unfounded.

You have an excellent team.

Good luck to you the rest of the way!

 

[avsfan9]

Empty netters certainly make that look wider than it really was.

Nah not really game 1 could have been 6or 7 to 1. Avs dominated the blues and they rightfully should have tbh.

 

[Foppa2118]

Sample Size Queen.

Sample Size Queen > Stat Whacker

 

[Richard88]

Has there been any more lopsided series based on the final scores?

Colorado won the series 4-0 with each game being decided by 3+ goal including one game by 4 goals, for a goal differential of +13 in 4 games.

Sweeps are pretty rare these days and much less so a series where one team wins every single game by what ends up looking like a blowout on the scoreboard.

 

[henchman21]

I mean you're really trying to manipulate the stats. At the end of the day MacK had 9 points in 4 games, and all the top line guys were over 7pts. That's over 2 pts per game. That's not at all even containing MacK or the top line. Look at what Winnipeg is doing with McDavid, that's containing a superstar.

While I agree ROR wasn't St Louis's biggest problem, he really didn't do much to help them out either. Not much scoring and didn't contain our top guys. Wasn't a good series for him.

I'm not manipulating stats at all. Finding context is important and empty net points are not the same as 5v5 points.

 

[chet1926]

I'm not manipulating stats at all. Finding context is important and empty net points are not the same as 5v5 points.

Kind of, never seen someone so adamant that a player wasn't dominant because the advanced stats said so, when the score sheet says they averaged over 2pts per game in the series. Which is crazy good. Sure I'd love more 5v5 points out of MacK, but I can almost guarantee if he posts say 10pts+ in our next series we'll win. Doesn't matter when he gets those points.

Empty net points IMO are important because they usually ice a game. Only the trusted players get to go out at that time of the game. Sure no goalie means open nets but you've got make a play to get a chance at the empty net. Not to mention we gave up 0 with the extra attacker. Overall important stuff.

You're more than allowed to think whatever you want with the fancy stats. I'll stick with the basics and say the first line was dominant compared to ROR his -7 and only 3 assists.

 

[henchman21]

Kind of, never seen someone so adamant that a player wasn't dominant because the advanced stats said so, when the score sheet says they averaged over 2pts per game in the series. Which is crazy good. Sure I'd love more 5v5 points out of MacK, but I can almost guarantee if he posts say 10pts+ in our next series we'll win. Doesn't matter when he gets those points.

Empty net points IMO are important because they usually ice a game. Only the trusted players get to go out at that time of the game. Sure no goalie means open nets but you've got make a play to get a chance at the empty net. Not to mention we gave up 0 with the extra attacker. Overall important stuff.

You're more than allowed to think whatever you want with the fancy stats. I'll stick with the basics and say the first line was dominant compared to ROR his -7 and only 3 assists.

I never said MacK wasn't dominant, you're putting words in my mouth there. I said ROR did as good of job as you could ask and that the Blues depth was the issue. ROR played great in a tough situation. Any stats are just stats and need context... I'm not an big advanced stats pusher, but there are interesting and can illustrate some things. Here it is night and day between ROR and everybody else against MacK.