GDT: Sens @ NYI: Last minute edition - March 16, 2024 TSN5

[jbeck5]

Well, one leads to the other, take away the 30 some goals against our top two goalies allowed with that league worst sv% vs their .910, and how many of those one goal games we've had turn into wins or OTL if you remove a goal every other game? how many of the games where we just gave up after a deflating soft goal turn into competitive games with a save instead of a blunder?

you've also got a 5 game difference, so there's that as well.

For sure. Save percentages have a direct impact.

I also think we just don't know how to win or get points in games. Our game management is weak.

I remember there was a point where we were like +2 on the season and yet behind teams that were -12.

It's not that we gave up more goals or didn't score enough goals...it was the timing of when we got scored on or didn't score.

We don't know how to get a point out of a game for example...or how to hold a lead.

You can say it's just goaltending, but I've seen this team pepper a team with 20 shots in a period, only to barely sustain any pressure offensively when we need to either hold off a lead, or keep the tie going into overtime to get a point, or to make a comeback.


This team is just so wildly inconsistent, and it's not just the goaltending.


The offense goes for long stretches of uselessness that I feel other teams don't go through as often.

 

[Relapsing]

Yeah, looking at it I misread hockey db, and took saves as shots against when I multiplied by by the sh% vs NYI,

Should be about 42 when you include Sogaard's games too

As for getting above average sv% when we had Anderson, it was pretty much every second year, with the not above average years typically being right about average, at least until he started aging out. I don't think it's fantasy to aspire towards that, or something closer to that, nobody is asking for Lundqvist here.


So they've played like a bubble team since Roy took over? That's a 94 pts, and the difference between Roy and Lambert is NYI pace under Lambert would have had the team go 9-7-5, one fewer pts over the same span. But of course this misses the point that was being made, how does a team that plays like the NYI get that record, and the answer to that question has little to do with Roy vs Lambert, and a lot to do with Sorokin.

Don't sleep on the performance of other teams above them in the standings. Detroit losing a bunch lately only helps the isles.


But... Good luck having your point heard. The person you're replying to doesn't care.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

And yet they're noticeably better than us.

Isn't it depressing?




They've always won when the pressure was off and it's done nothing to improve the team or give them confidence or teach them how to win.

They just go back to losing the next year again.

Islanders are noticeable better than us?

We beat Detroit three times lol. They’re not noticeably better than us. On paper or on the ice

 

[Wondercarrot]

Lack of confidence in goaltending is the mind killer.
Infects every part of the game, you cant pretend to be confident in goaltending.

 

[Micklebot]

Islanders are noticeable better than us?

We beat Detroit three times lol. They’re not noticeably better than us. On paper or on the ice

They are both noticeably higher in the standings, and have noticeably more consistent goaltending.

Underlying numbers for the three teams are pretty similar,

Team​	CF%​	GF%​	xGF%​	SCF%​	HDCF%​	SH%​	SV%​	PDO​
Ottawa Senators​	50.06​	48.45​	49.55​	48.06​	49.66​	8.94​	90.27​	0.992​
New York Islanders​	46.73​	50.97​	49.55​	47.26​	49.88​	8.41​	92.47​	1.009​
Detroit Red Wings​	45.74​	48.67​	45.48​	44.52​	44.09​	10.33​	90.68​	1.01​

 

[Big Muddy]

Senators have to be able to win some games on those Western road trips. I know the focus is often on Eastern Conference opponents, but the Senators do very poorly on those western road trips even against the lower ranked teams. They just seem unprepared and lackluster in those games and it seems like a broader phenomenon than just a single source problem.

 

[jbeck5]

Islanders are noticeable better than us?

We beat Detroit three times lol. They’re not noticeably better than us. On paper or on the ice

Look at their record.

Islanders and Redwings are both 7 games over 500. We're 5 games under .500.

That means they're 12 games apart. That's pretty significant.

Just because we might look better the few games against them doesn't mean we look better against the rest of the league compared to them.

Considering we beat them and they're 12 games up on us, could you imagine the difference in records against the rest of the league between us and them. Wouldn't be pretty for us. There's a significant gap here.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Look at their record.

Islanders and Redwings are both 7 games over 500. We're 5 games under .500.

That means they're 12 games apart. That's pretty significant.

Just because we might look better the few games against them doesn't mean we look better against the rest of the league compared to them.

Considering we beat them and they're 12 games up on us, could you imagine the difference in records against the rest of the league between us and them. Wouldn't be pretty for us. There's a significant gap here.

Give them korpisalo forsberg and Sogaard you know where they would be.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

They are both noticeably higher in the standings, and have noticeably more consistent goaltending.

Underlying numbers for the three teams are pretty similar,

Team​	CF%​	GF%​	xGF%​	SCF%​	HDCF%​	SH%​	SV%​	PDO​
Ottawa Senators​	50.06​	48.45​	49.55​	48.06​	49.66​	8.94​	90.27​	0.992​
New York Islanders​	46.73​	50.97​	49.55​	47.26​	49.88​	8.41​	92.47​	1.009​
Detroit Red Wings​	45.74​	48.67​	45.48​	44.52​	44.09​	10.33​	90.68​	1.01​

Impossible!!

Not making the playoffs for so long has some putting “playoff team” on a pedestal, like to make or battle for the playoffs you need to be some perfectly constructed team with all the pieces in place.

 

[Micklebot]

Give them korpisalo forsberg and Sogaard you know where they would be.

To be fair, goalies are part of the team, but yeah...

It's funny, when you look at all situation xGF%, we're actually top 10 in the league. That's in part because we draw a lot of penalties and don't take a lot, but still.

Where we are last in the league though is Low danger sv%, and by a pretty healthy margin. Just getting league average goaltending on Low danger chances would mean 14 fewer goals against.

 

[UglyPuckling]

Senators have to be able to win some games on those Western road trips. I know the focus is often on Eastern Conference opponents, but the Senators do very poorly on those western road trips even against the lower ranked teams. They just seem unprepared and lackluster in those games and it seems like a broader phenomenon than just a single source problem.

We’ve lost several games where we only scored one goal (or got shut out in a few cases) and there were several of those loses that were low scoring affairs. I don’t know how many more games we would have won with better goaltending, but it doesn’t look like the only problem to me. And, yes we haven’t done well against western conference teams, even when against teams with a poor record. That’s another issue that will need to improve if the Senators want to become a legit contender.

 

[JD1]

We’ve lost several games where we only scored one goal (or got shut out in a few cases) and there were several of those loses that were low scoring affairs. I don’t know how many more games we would have won with better goaltending, but it doesn’t look like the only problem to me. And, yes we haven’t done well against western conference teams, even when against teams with a poor record. That’s another issue that will need to improve if the Senators want to become a legit contender.

One way to think about it is we have a -17 goal differential and we have -30 goals saved compared to average. Put the two together and we've got a +13 goal differential. Then look at the point totals of teams in that differential neighborhood.

Goaltending covers up a lot of problems. Think about those 30 goals against. That's 30 less conversations in the GDTs about either soft goals or play breakdowns. The game is so fast that you barely notice a broken down play when there's a save and the puck goes off the other way.

What impact do the 30 goals against have on stats? We give 3.47/60. Reduce the goals against by 30, that number changes to exactly 3.00. And if we gave up 3 against per game, we'd be middle of the pact defensively.

Another way to look at it is we give up roughly .5 goals against above average. We've got 12 one goal losses. How would one less goal against in 30 games change the W/L? Quite substantially I presume.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

To be fair, goalies are part of the team, but yeah...

It's funny, when you look at all situation xGF%, we're actually top 10 in the league. That's in part because we draw a lot of penalties and don't take a lot, but still.

Where we are last in the league though is Low danger sv%, and by a pretty healthy margin. Just getting league average goaltending on Low danger chances would mean 14 fewer goals against.

Yeah. There’s a long way to go to become a contender. But to be a middle of the pack contending for playoffs team? There’s a very obvious issue that’s keeping us from that very achievable goal

 

[mysens]

Well, let’s see what team shows up today. Brining the kids for this one….either way if they win or they lose, it’s still a heartbreaker for me

 

[Micklebot]

We’ve lost several games where we only scored one goal (or got shut out in a few cases) and there were several of those loses that were low scoring affairs. I don’t know how many more games we would have won with better goaltending, but it doesn’t look like the only problem to me. And, yes we haven’t done well against western conference teams, even when against teams with a poor record. That’s another issue that will need to improve if the Senators want to become a legit contender.

Of the 9 games we scored one or fewer goals (for reference, contenders like NYR and Col have 8, Dal 10, Bos 11, Car 12, Fla 14 so I don't see that as a area of concern), only 3 were loses by one goal (we were only shut out once btw). We have another 9 one goal loses, bringing the total of one goal games to 12. Then there are the 9 games where we got scored on with the goalie pulled, some of which would have been one goal losses if not for the en GA.

After that, there's the impact playing in front of unreliable goaltending can have game to game to account for, it kills momentum and deflates a team.

 

[Micklebot]

Yeah. There’s a long way to go to become a contender. But to be a middle of the pack contending for playoffs team? There’s a very obvious issue that’s keeping us from that very achievable goal

We should already be that, but the goaltending fell out from beneath us. Can't believe I'm saying it but if only Talbot accepted Dorion's offer (assuming it wasn't an insane deal like he gave Korpisalo....). Apparently Talbot wanted two yrs from us and more money than we were prepared to offer, so instead we gave 5x4 to a worse goalie

 

[Micklebot]

One way to think about it is we have a -17 goal differential and we have -30 goals saved compared to average. Put the two together and we've got a +13 goal differential. Then look at the point totals of teams in that differential neighborhood.

Goaltending covers up a lot of problems. Think about those 30 goals against. That's 30 less conversations in the GDTs about either soft goals or play breakdowns. The game is so fast that you barely notice a broken down play when there's a save and the puck goes off the other way.

What impact do the 30 goals against have on stats? We give 3.47/60. Reduce the goals against by 30, that number changes to exactly 3.00. And if we gave up 3 against per game, we'd be middle of the pact defensively.

Another way to look at it is we give up roughly .5 goals against above average. We've got 12 one goal losses. How would one less goal against in 30 games change the W/L? Quite substantially I presume.

The rule of thumb used to be 6 goals equals a win, so 30 ga is 5 wins lost or an extra ten points.

 

[DrEasy]

We should already be that, but the goaltending fell out from beneath us. Can't believe I'm saying it but if only Talbot accepted Dorion's offer (assuming it wasn't an insane deal like he gave Korpisalo....). Apparently Talbot wanted two yrs from us and more money than we were prepared to offer, so instead we gave 5x4 to a worse goalie

When at the beginning of the season both Korpi and Forsberg played badly, we reached the conclusion that it must be the coaching and the defensive system (or lack thereof) that was the culprit, and that any goalie we sign would have performed badly, since all our goalies under DJ (including Talbot) seemed to perform badly. Most weren't convinced yet that goaltending was a problem in and of itself.

It took the elimination of the coaching variable to be fully convinced that goaltending was a problem in and of itself. It's only in retrospect that we can wonder whether Talbot would have performed better this year, and maybe he still wouldn't have initially, given the same coaching and system (or lack thereof). A chicken-and-egg problem that we may now have finally escaped!

I realize this post is overly convoluted, but I still think it makes sense! There was probably a better way to write it though...

 

[Cosmix]

Yes, players and the coaches always want to win. It's in their DNA.

And their monetary interest!

 

[Cosmix]

Sounds like this was a bad one to miss. Afternoon games are a bummer.

I almost hate afternoon games as much as 10:00 pm games!

 

[Cosmix]

For sure. Save percentages have a direct impact.

I also think we just don't know how to win or get points in games. Our game management is weak.

I remember there was a point where we were like +2 on the season and yet behind teams that were -12.

It's not that we gave up more goals or didn't score enough goals...it was the timing of when we got scored on or didn't score.

We don't know how to get a point out of a game for example...or how to hold a lead.

You can say it's just goaltending, but I've seen this team pepper a team with 20 shots in a period, only to barely sustain any pressure offensively when we need to either hold off a lead, or keep the tie going into overtime to get a point, or to make a comeback.


This team is just so wildly inconsistent, and it's not just the goaltending.


The offense goes for long stretches of uselessness that I feel other teams don't go through as often.

I think coaching was also an important factor in the poor team play for years. It is not just goaltending; the team was giving up too many shots against. I think the team would have won more games if Guy Boucher was the coach.

 

[Micklebot]

When at the beginning of the season both Korpi and Forsberg played badly, we reached the conclusion that it must be the coaching and the defensive system (or lack thereof) that was the culprit, and that any goalie we sign would have performed badly, since all our goalies under DJ (including Talbot) seemed to perform badly. Most weren't convinced yet that goaltending was a problem in and of itself.

It took the elimination of the coaching variable to be fully convinced that goaltending was a problem in and of itself. It's only in retrospect that we can wonder whether Talbot would have performed better this year, and maybe he still wouldn't have initially, given the same coaching and system (or lack thereof). A chicken-and-egg problem that we may now have finally escaped!

I realize this post is overly convoluted, but I still think it makes sense! There was probably a better way to write it though...

I think Talbot was better last year than he was given credit for and he had some injury issues to fight through, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect a .917sv% or whatever he currently has, he had a lightning hot start and LA helps out their goalies more than we do, but a 900 or dare I say league average .904 would have been perfectly plausible.

 

[ottawagm]

Recycling GDT today?

 

[JD1]

When at the beginning of the season both Korpi and Forsberg played badly, we reached the conclusion that it must be the coaching and the defensive system (or lack thereof) that was the culprit, and that any goalie we sign would have performed badly, since all our goalies under DJ (including Talbot) seemed to perform badly. Most weren't convinced yet that goaltending was a problem in and of itself.

It took the elimination of the coaching variable to be fully convinced that goaltending was a problem in and of itself. It's only in retrospect that we can wonder whether Talbot would have performed better this year, and maybe he still wouldn't have initially, given the same coaching and system (or lack thereof). A chicken-and-egg problem that we may now have finally escaped!

I realize this post is overly convoluted, but I still think it makes sense! There was probably a better way to write it though...

I think Talbot just had a bad year last year. It started with a longer term injury in camp and eventually included two other stints on the IR list. Just not got unravelled and in a groove.

He's had 9 seasons above .908 and 2 below .900, including last year. I think he's better than what we saw last year

 

[jbeck5]

Give them korpisalo forsberg and Sogaard you know where they would be.

Goaltending is part of the team.

When we got swept by buffalo in 1999, they didn't have a deeper team...or more star power, but they did have much better goaltending.

Gotta include goaltending in your analysis.

I think coaching was also an important factor in the poor team play for years. It is not just goaltending; the team was giving up too many shots against. I think the team would have won more games if Guy Boucher was the coach.

Didn't we always get outshot and were a minus team under Boucher?

What he was great at was game management. We would get the most points we could out of being a minus team getting outshot often.