Stats for the Marleau and Thornton bashers

[Sharksrule04]

I disagree. The Sharks have a definite problem in games 5-7 of playoff series. They've been unable to get by many series and those have been the games where they have failed. Thus, stats involving those games are highly relevant for this team.

LOLOLOLOL, you can't be serious? I swear I am not trying to be rude with this statement, but they obviously aren't having trouble in games 8,9 and 10 because they don't exist. They are best of 7 series so when they lose a series, there is a strong chance it will end in the 5-7 games range (unless they get swept which has happened 1 time since the 2000's. They have also lost games in the 1-4 range (or there wouldn't be a game 5,6,7) so they are failing there as well when they lose. Focusing on 1 or 2 losses in a 7 game series is not wise. Why do people try to down play the importance of games 1-4? Every game is worth the same in the playoffs no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise.

 

[Sharksrule04]

Over the course of a career (that includes at least 50 games spanning at least 5 seasons), playoff point production has an average of about a 5% drop-off from regular season to postseason.

Obviously you get some individual variations here and there, but by and large the league-wide standard drop-off is only about 5%.

If what you said actually bore out--that top players take a hit to their scoring rate--then ALL top players should be taking (on average) the same hit to their scoring rate. Thornton's drop-off should mirror the drop-offs of Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Zetterberg, Getzlaf, etc. It doesn't.

I looked up the stats a while back and Thornton had the single biggest rate drop-off of any top 100 player in the last 20+ years. That was a few seasons back, so that doesn't take into account the recent series against the Blues and Kings (or the drop in his regular season production which closes the gap a bit), but he's still near the worst if not the absolute worst in terms of production drop-off.

Yes, if you live in a black and white world where there isn't room for anything other than Yes or No. We do not live in that world and statistics are averages. Averages are across large sample sizes and are NOT law when applying to individual cases or even 5-10 year periods.

 

[richo]

They are best of 7 series so when they lose a series, there is a strong chance it will end in the 5-7 games range

Which it almost always does and the Sharks lose. This is when it gets tough. Games 1 through 4 generally don't have elimination hanging over your head. Bottom line. When the chips are down they lose. Thornton and Marleau don't come through when it gets tough and elimination is looming. As others showed the stats show this.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Which it almost always does and the Sharks lose. This is when it gets tough. Games 1 through 4 generally don't have elimination hanging over your head. Bottom line. When the chips are down they lose. Thornton and Marleau don't come through when it gets tough and elimination is looming. As others showed the stats show this.

It's just a cheap way to scapegoat top guys and feed into the mindset that they have to be the ones that get the job done and the rest of the team just has to hold it together or some nonsense. It's not how championship teams are built and that's not their mindset. This is no different than when people scapegoated Nabokov for letting in a goal in the playoffs and use some lame excuse about momentum or breaking their spirit or some other silly wording. But you can look at the teams who have gone the distance and point to plenty of times along the way where the same thing happened yet they overcame.

This isn't like basketball or football where the top guys control a majority of the gameplay. The top forwards are on there for maybe a 3rd of the game. There's a lot more of a team dynamic than most are willing to admit when they argue this blame the top guys thing.

 

[DarrylshutzSydor]

It's just a cheap way to scapegoat top guys and feed into the mindset that they have to be the ones that get the job done and the rest of the team just has to hold it together or some nonsense. It's not how championship teams are built and that's not their mindset. This is no different than when people scapegoated Nabokov for letting in a goal in the playoffs and use some lame excuse about momentum or breaking their spirit or some other silly wording. But you can look at the teams who have gone the distance and point to plenty of times along the way where the same thing happened yet they overcame.

This isn't like basketball or football where the top guys control a majority of the gameplay. The top forwards are on there for maybe a 3rd of the game. There's a lot more of a team dynamic than most are willing to admit when they argue this blame the top guys thing.

Your top guys have to be the difference if you are going to win. Bottom line.

 

[Barrie22]

Your top guys have to be the difference if you are going to win. Bottom line.

Was toews and kane the difference makers vs the lightning last year when the hawks won in the stanley cup finals with a combined 6 points in 6 games?

Or how about the year before when the hawks beat the wild in round 2 with a combined 7 points in 6 games?

Or how about when the hawks beat the wings in round 2 in 2012-13 with a combined 8 points in 7 games?

Or how about kopitar in the cup finals vs the rangers with his 2 points in 5 games?

Or lets go closer to home shall we with kopitar in 2012-13 in the kings 7 game series win against the sharks and kopitars 3 points in 7 games.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Yes, if you live in a black and white world where there isn't room for anything other than Yes or No. We do not live in that world and statistics are averages. Averages are across large sample sizes and are NOT law when applying to individual cases or even 5-10 year periods.

You asked a question, and he answered. Now you are trying to say that it is irrelevant?

Thornton's dropoff is very large compared to other star players in the league.

It's just a cheap way to scapegoat top guys and feed into the mindset that they have to be the ones that get the job done and the rest of the team just has to hold it together or some nonsense.

That's not the mindest. The mindset is merely that your top players have to lead the way. Something like 60-80% of your scoring comes from your top-six and top defensemen. And then you have players like Marleau and Thornton being outplayed by Matt Nieto and James Sheppard.

It's not how championship teams are built and that's not their mindset.

Beg your pardon, but that is their mindset. When is the last time a team won the cup with a scoring-by-committee approach?

This is no different than when people scapegoated Nabokov for letting in a goal in the playoffs and use some lame excuse about momentum or breaking their spirit or some other silly wording.

I don't find it silly. Momentum, confidence, spirit..these exist. A goalie letting in a bad goal at a bad time can be a disaster.

But you can look at the teams who have gone the distance and point to plenty of times along the way where the same thing happened yet they overcame.

That is also true. But I think many of see the top players leading the way; helping their team overcome. Thornton and Marleau have been prominent leaders on a team with a decades-long history of mental collapses.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Your top guys have to be the difference if you are going to win. Bottom line.

Except that they're not going to be all the time and they aren't all the time on championship teams like the Hawks and Kings. Bottom line is that the team has to find ways to overcome top players getting shut down and goalies giving up goals. Hawks and Kings do that. Sharks don't.

And lol at Sheppard and Nieto outplaying Marleau and Thornton. Lucking your way into a few points here and there in a 7 game series isn't outplaying. It's outproducing. There's a difference. Sheppard was quite easily one of the worst forwards in that series regardless of his production.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Was toews and kane the difference makers vs the lightning last year when the hawks won in the stanley cup finals with a combined 6 points in 6 games?

Another way of putting it is that of the 6 goals scored by Chicago in the final 3 games, Kane or Toews had a hand in 5 of them. In a game that Chicago won, the duo had a hand in 75% of the team's scoring. Nearly half of the goals scored by Chicago throughout the series had the involvement of either player. Both players finished with a positive +/-.

On the flip side, the bottom half of the team (9 players) had a hand in 4 of Chicago's 13 goals that series.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Another way of putting it is that of the 6 goals scored by Chicago in the final 3 games, Kane or Toews had a hand in 5 of them. In a game that Chicago won, the duo had a hand in 75% of the team's scoring. Nearly half of the goals scored by Chicago throughout the series had the involvement of either player. Both players finished with a positive +/-.

On the flip side, the bottom half of the team (9 players) had a hand in 4 of Chicago's 13 goals that series.

Or since you need to account for all the games played in the series since that's the only fair way to do it, Kane and Toews had a hand in 6 of the 13 goals. The rest of the team did the rest.

 

[Barrie22]

Or since you need to account for all the games played in the series since that's the only fair way to do it, Kane and Toews had a hand in 6 of the 13 goals. The rest of the team did the rest.

No of course not only games 5, 6, 7 mean anything in the playoffs. It is not even worth it for the teams to play the 1st 4 games. Only games that matter in the playoffs are games 5, 6, 7.

 

[hohosaregood]

Now, I don't have much of an opinion on the raw goal totals in games 5-7 since who cares. I think we can all agree that CPPG and EMS are flawed stats. I'm looking at you Foofs.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Now, I don't have much of an opinion on the raw goal totals in games 5-7 since who cares. I think we can all agree that CPPG and EMS are flawed stats. I'm looking at you Foofs.

There isn't enough hate in this post for my liking. Please try again.

 

[hohosaregood]

There isn't enough hate in this post for my liking. Please try again.

Look here buddy. You can try to deny it all you want but CPPG don't friggin matter in this argument. It's a raw measurement of caloric intake and the higher it is, and it correlates strongly with more wins. UNLESS, you wanna talk about it with TBSPS and EMS and the Ice Cream/Gelato ratio then maybe you can make an argument that it normalizes CPPGPW but you'd be laughed out of every advanced stat blogs from here to Switzerland for making such a dumb claim. Everybody knows it doesn't work just like you


**** goals scored.
[Mod]

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Look here buddy. You can try to deny it all you want but CPPG don't friggin matter in this argument. It's a raw measurement of caloric intake and the higher it is, and it correlates strongly with more wins. UNLESS, you wanna talk about it with TBSPS and EMS and the Ice Cream/Gelato ratio then maybe you can make an argument that it normalizes CPPGPW but you'd be laughed out of every advanced stat blogs from here to Switzerland for making such a dumb claim. Everybody knows it doesn't work just like you


**** goals scored.
*drop mic*

That's better.

 

[Barrie22]

Another way of putting it is that of the 6 goals scored by Chicago in the final 3 games, Kane or Toews had a hand in 5 of them. In a game that Chicago won, the duo had a hand in 75% of the team's scoring. Nearly half of the goals scored by Chicago throughout the series had the involvement of either player. Both players finished with a positive +/-.

On the flip side, the bottom half of the team (9 players) had a hand in 4 of Chicago's 13 goals that series.

Sure lets do that with thornton and marleau then.

Sharks vs kings 2013-14. Sharks scored 19 goals that series. Thornton and markeau were apart of 10 of those 19 goals. Which is 52% of the teams goals were with thornton and marleau being apart of. Which is still better then the hawks due with 6 points of 13 goals. Remind me which team went on to win there respective series?

How about the kings series in 2012-13? The team scored 10 goals that series, thornton and marleau were apart of 7 of 10 goals that series. I guess it was thornton and marleaus fault they were only apart of 70% of the goals right?

How about the st louis series in 2011-12. The team scored 8 goals that series. Thornton and marleau were apart of 5 of 8 goals (all 5 of them being thornton). For a total of 62% of the goals were scored with thornton.

How about the 2010-11 series vs vanvouver. Sharks scored 11 goals that series. Thornton and marleau were involved in 13 points of 11 goals.

How about 2009-10 vs the hawks. Sharks scored 7 goals. Thornton and marleau were involved with all 7 goals (6 of the goals scored were specifically from marleau). Marleau assisted on the only other goal he did not score.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

October can't come soone enough.

 

[Mafoofoo]

Look here buddy. You can try to deny it all you want but CPPG don't friggin matter in this argument. It's a raw measurement of caloric intake and the higher it is, and it correlates strongly with more wins. UNLESS, you wanna talk about it with TBSPS and EMS and the Ice Cream/Gelato ratio then maybe you can make an argument that it normalizes CPPGPW but you'd be laughed out of every advanced stat blogs from here to Switzerland for making such a dumb claim. Everybody knows it doesn't work just like you


**** goals scored.
[Mod]

CPPG is literally the most important stat there is in the game of hockey. Just because you don't understand the basics behind the stats and it makes your boys Thornton and Marleau look like the silly pugs they are when put up against the true elite players in the league like Byfuglien, Toews, and Kessel doesn't make the stat irrelevant.

Almost every culinary expert in the world agrees with me about its relevancy when evaluating the performance of nhl players.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Sure lets do that with thornton and marleau then.

Sharks vs kings 2013-14. Sharks scored 19 goals that series. Thornton and marleau were apart of 9 of those 19 goals. Which is 47% of the teams goals were with thornton and marleau being apart of. Which is still better then the hawks due with 6 points of 13 goals. Remind me which team went on to win there respective series?

How about the kings series in 2012-13? The team scored 10 goals that series, thornton and marleau were apart of 5 of 10 goals that series. I guess it was thornton and marleau's fault they were only apart of 50% of the goals right?

How about the st louis series in 2011-12. The team scored 8 goals that series. Thornton and marleau were apart of 5 of 8 goals (all 5 of them being thornton). For a total of 62% of the goals were scored with thornton. And 0% scored by Marleau

How about the 2010-11 series vs vanvouver. Sharks scored 11 goals that series. Thornton and marleau were involved in 7 of the 11 goals. 5 of which were on the powerplay

How about 2009-10 vs the hawks. Sharks scored 7 goals. Thornton and marleau were involved with all 7 goals (6 of the goals scored were specifically from marleau). Marleau assisted on the only other goal he did not score No he didn't. And Thornton had what, one point the entire series? And again, all the production came on the PP

Not to mention that throughout those various series, JT and Marleau mostly finished negative.

 

[Barrie22]

Not to mention that throughout those various series, JT and Marleau mostly finished negative.

I always thought power play goals counted the same as all other goals towards a teams goal totals in a game. But apparently i have been wrong with that thinking for the past 30+ years.

 

[Alwalys]

I always thought power play goals counted the same as all other goals towards a teams goal totals in a game. But apparently i have been wrong with that thinking for the past 30+ years.

Was that a classic goalpost move or what?

 

[Dicdonya]

I don't understand why anyone argues about Thornton/marleau failing to deliver a cup. This team has never, ever, had a complete team. We have always been missing a top defender, and elite goaltending is questionable. Weve also never had a complete 4 lines ever, and outside of one year with pavs on the third line, we barely have even had 3 complete lines.

What I'm saying is, how can you blame the top players, when they've never been given proper support. You're basically saying you think Thornton/marleau should be so great, they literally drag a bad team to a cup, something no one has done in years. I think they could overcome a few issues, but going into the playoffs with 2.5 lines, mediocre at best defense, and a goalie that can't overcome mediocre defense, means you can't have an intellectually honest argument that it's only/mainly your top players faults, on any team.

It's basically the same as blaming Crosby/malkin for not winning more cups, yet just like sj, they've not had complete teams for years as well. I guess they should get rid of them.

If we had a complete team like la or chi for couple years, and then we still failed to win a cup, and Thornton/Marleau failed to play up to expectations I could understand blaming them. That's not the case though.

 

[Sharksrule04]

Not to mention that throughout those various series, JT and Marleau mostly finished negative.

There really is no point in furthering this argument as every stat that could be dug up has been dug up.

Thornton/Marleau Basher will say that some opponents stud player puts up ____ pts per game in the playoffs.
Thornton/Marleau Supporters will present stats that show Thornton/Marleau performed very similarly.
Thornton/Marleau Basher will say, but those were in games 1-4.
Thornton/Marleau supporter will present stats that show otherwise.
Thornton/Marleau Basher will say, but they were all points on the Power Play.
Thornton/Marleau supporter will argue power play pts are just as important as even strength points.
Thornton/Marleau basher will say, but they were a -1 for the series therefore they clearly were outplayed by other teams best players.
Thornton/Marleau supporter will get angry
and then it will repeat and repeat....

 

[Sharksrule04]

I don't understand why anyone argues about Thornton/marleau failing to deliver a cup. This team has never, ever, had a complete team. We have always been missing a top defender, and elite goaltending is questionable. Weve also never had a complete 4 lines ever, and outside of one year with pavs on the third line, we barely have even had 3 complete lines.

What I'm saying is, how can you blame the top players, when they've never been given proper support. You're basically saying you think Thornton/marleau should be so great, they literally drag a bad team to a cup, something no one has done in years. I think they could overcome a few issues, but going into the playoffs with 2.5 lines, mediocre at best defense, and a goalie that can't overcome mediocre defense, means you can't have an intellectually honest argument that it's only/mainly your top players faults, on any team.

It's basically the same as blaming Crosby/malkin for not winning more cups, yet just like sj, they've not had complete teams for years as well. I guess they should get rid of them.

If we had a complete team like la or chi for couple years, and then we still failed to win a cup, and Thornton/Marleau failed to play up to expectations I could understand blaming them. That's not the case though.

Great post my friend, great post!

 

[boylerroom]

I don't think anyone truly thinks #19 and #12 are hacks. They ARE elite talent. But elite talent doesn't win you cups always does it?

I think this train ride has run so far off the track though it's shocking how many want to ride into oblivion.

YMMV