Post-Game Talk (GBU): "Suckurah", Enroth, and the Weather

[jBuds]

Dallas does it right. I remember a time when every team did stuff like that.

Like when a team would get a penalty they'd play that DUN DUN-DUN-DUN DUN DUN-DUN-DUN-DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUN song

Or when a team would score against Carolina they'd play Say it ain't so by weezer

When Ottawa would score, they'd have a guy saying SCORES SCORES SCORES over and over

Or when a call goal review took too long they'd play the jeopardy song

Ohhhhh, THAT DunDun song. The one with the noise and the instruments.

 

[YesThatsRight*]

Ohhhhh, THAT DunDun song. The one with the noise and the instruments.

dude that was the joke of the century right there

 

[Konix]

I believe you're thinking of The Imperial March.

Also,

John Scott in the corner

 

[YesThatsRight*]

John Scott a beast put him in the lineup

 

[toejam56]

Good:

-- Verone. Veronay. De money. Demoney. Call him what you want. He created chances, or they just seemed to follow him around. Impressive debut.
-- Stafford, just quietly doing the little things that make him our best two-way forward (then again, look at the competition).
-- Leino. Why TF not? Couple good shots, a nice set up, a nice check, a near miss -- Houston, we got a pulse. At least for a night.
-- Hodgson, Ennis. Both created opportunities on the offensive side of the ledger.
-- Weber playing with a little verve. But as always with this guy, we need to see follow through.
-- Myers.

Bad:

-- Girgenson seemed off.
-- Sulzer/Ehrhoff struggled, or Ehrhoff struggled lugging his fellow countryman around. What's the German word for "dead weight?"
-- Enroth with a couple brain farts. The Sekera goal was sad. His play mirrors his confidence which mirrors a roller coaster.

Ugly:

-- The ticky-tac penalty calling, the calls that never were but that should have been, etc. What's new?
-- Sekera's GWG, 2 assists, and +4, a leader in minutes, etc. I hope Compher was worth it.

My German is rusty but...I believe the German word for "dead weight" is Sulzer.....pronounced Sull-zer.

 

[Kyndig]

Bad:

-- Sulzer/Ehrhoff struggled, or Ehrhoff struggled lugging his fellow countryman around. What's the German word for "dead weight?"
.

I figured it was a mini wakeup call to Ehrhoff "Hey even when you're in a slump you're still not as bad as Sulzer here."

G:
Varone, better get him off the team soon or he will hurt the tank
MES- Staffords back I'm telling joo
Weber
McBain
Foligno/Flynn
Myers

B:
Girgensons/Ott/Hodgson. It seems like they were always hemmed in their own end the entire game, can anyone confirm or deny this with stats?

U:
Sekera changing or just now finally correcting people after a bajillion years in the NHL on how to pronounce his name.
Girgensons doing the same move on every single breakaway/shootout...and someone PLEASE teach that kid how to shoot accurately! Its so bad!
Refs
Enroth
Weather, its been freezing cold and it would've been nice to have an ice rink up this year...too bad couldn't afford the plastic.

 

[Vito_81]

I honestly believe Nolan is playing leino just because he really wants to show murray just how useless he is so that there is no doubt on what to do in the summer

 

[Ethan Edwards]

Nolan's continued use of Ville Leino. What, are you channelling Andy Kaufman as NHL coach? Do you think Ville Leino is some kind of punch-line to a joke nobody quite understands? We get it, he sucks, don't pretend that isn't the case by giving him PP time.

That's pretty clever, and I agree overall that Leino is inexplicably used by Nolan like his continued poor play is masked by a Klingon cloaking device, but the argument is undercut when Leino is lambasted after what was a pretty decent game. I'm not defending Leino's season. He's been atrocious, won't shoot, has no nose for the net (even aside from zero goals), seems miserable, has no business on either PP unit, and I want him gone. But last night he played his "best" game in quite awhile. He was aggressive, took the shot when it was there, and had several nice defensive plays, one backcheck in particular where he stopped a pass to a wide-open forward in front of the net. I'm not saying he was Patrick Sharp last night, or even close, and he had some gaffes (along with many others), but he was much better than his usual putrid self. Not a lofty standard, it was only one game, and I still want him gone (believe me, I'm with the majority here), but it's more effective making the Lame-O argument after an ACTUAL bad game from him, and there have been plenty of those.

 

[VanIslander]

John Scott a beast put him in the lineup

 

[Kyndig]

Leino and Sulzer are the secret weapons we have for the tank. Replace those two players and we have more points than Calgary.

 

[stokes84]

I figured it was a mini wakeup call to Ehrhoff "Hey even when you're in a slump you're still not as bad as Sulzer here."

G:
Varone, better get him off the team soon or he will hurt the tank
MES- Staffords back I'm telling joo
Weber
McBain
Foligno/Flynn
Myers

B:
Girgensons/Ott/Hodgson. It seems like they were always hemmed in their own end the entire game, can anyone confirm or deny this with stats?

U:
Sekera changing or just now finally correcting people after a bajillion years in the NHL on how to pronounce his name.
Girgensons doing the same move on every single breakaway/shootout...and someone PLEASE teach that kid how to shoot accurately! Its so bad!
Refs
Enroth
Weather, its been freezing cold and it would've been nice to have an ice rink up this year...too bad couldn't afford the plastic.

As far as your bad goes, yes, it is proven with stats. Hodgson is the worst corsi forward on the team and Ott isn't far off. Girgensons is among the best, but it was his first game with them.

E: I'm sure you can find individual game stats in the advanced stats thread that is stickied.

 

[brian_griffin]

dude that was the joke of the century right there

Indeed it was - jbuds sarcasm meter has an autocalibration routine.
And welcome to these boards.

My German is rusty but...I believe the German word for "dead weight" is Sulzer.....pronounced Sull-zer.

I laughed (at work - it not's that humorous here).

I honestly believe Nolan is playing leino just because he really wants to show murray just how useless he is so that there is no doubt on what to do in the summer

Giving Leino the rope and the chair and letting Ville kick it out from under himself.

Leino and Sulzer are the secret weapons we have for the tank. Replace those two players and we have more points than Calgary.

Nolan = genius.
Only way it backfires is if Ville gets injured.

I didn't see full game. But in brief:

>Nice jump by Hodgson to get in clear for the 1st goal.
>Sulzer weak stick in neutral zone on Skinner's goal, stays flat-footed and has trouble recovering, but a damn nice backhand by Skinner. I've watched Skinner play a few times in person. He floats way too much away from the puck and doesn't play enough defense for my tastes, but he is fun to watch.
>Smart, basic play by Varone on Flynn's goal. Enter O-zone on opposite wing of the puck, go straight to the low slot with the puck in deep, and good things happen.
>In contrast with Semin's 1st goal where Ott was 2-strides behind Semin going to the high slot... Pretty sure Ott needed a line change, but he's gotta stay closer to Semin, regardless.
>Khubodin must have fell asleep in lockerroom in 2nd intermission. Beaten by Stafford's shot off the post and then handcuffed by Ennis' throw-it-to-the-net-goal.
>Really weird hearing "Seck'-urr-ah" instead of "Seh-Kayr'-ah".

 

[Sabresruletheschool]

Leino and Sulzer are the secret weapons we have for the tank. Replace those two players and we have more points than Calgary.

To be Leino is Crosby's evil twin. While Crosby can make any bad line great, Leino can turn any good line to a crap. He's lay's up or magically losses the puck on almost every play that might have him confront a opposing player. It's sad actually.

 

[Sabresruletheschool]

To be Leino is Crosby's evil twin. While Crosby can make any bad line great, Leino can turn any good line to a crap. He's lay's up or magically losses the puck on almost every play that might have him confront a opposing player. It's sad actually.

OK the spelling and grammar was way off on this one

 

[Zip15]

I figured it was a mini wakeup call to Ehrhoff "Hey even when you're in a slump you're still not as bad as Sulzer here."

G:
Varone, better get him off the team soon or he will hurt the tank
MES- Staffords back I'm telling joo
Weber
McBain
Foligno/Flynn
Myers

B:
Girgensons/Ott/Hodgson. It seems like they were always hemmed in their own end the entire game, can anyone confirm or deny this with stats?

U:
Sekera changing or just now finally correcting people after a bajillion years in the NHL on how to pronounce his name.
Girgensons doing the same move on every single breakaway/shootout...and someone PLEASE teach that kid how to shoot accurately! Its so bad!
Refs
Enroth
Weather, its been freezing cold and it would've been nice to have an ice rink up this year...too bad couldn't afford the plastic.

Here's the link for some advanced stats for last night's game:

http://www.extraskater.com/game/2014-01-23-hurricanes-sabres

To answer your question, yes, they were hemmed a lot last night. 5-on-5 on-ice Corsi totals (for-against):

Girgensons: 11-22 (33.3%)
Hodgson: 13-24 (35.1%)
Ott: 14-26 (35%)

MES was much better.

Moulson: 17-7 (70.8%)
Ennis: 17-9 (65.4%)
Stafford: 15-11 (57.7%)

 

[Paradigm]

This is amazing

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

First game I've been to this year though varone looked good and his sister was sitting behind us which was cool. Myers was all over the ice again and I liked Ennis

 

[mikemcburn]

Here's the link for some advanced stats for last night's game:

http://www.extraskater.com/game/2014-01-23-hurricanes-sabres

To answer your question, yes, they were hemmed a lot last night. 5-on-5 on-ice Corsi totals (for-against):

Girgensons: 11-22 (33.3%)
Hodgson: 13-24 (35.1%)
Ott: 14-26 (35%)

MES was much better.

Moulson: 17-7 (70.8%)
Ennis: 17-9 (65.4%)
Stafford: 15-11 (57.7%)

Coris stats are highly overrated, especially when viewed out of context with other stats and the more subject bits (game situations, linemates, which d pairings are matched up, etc.).

Guys can have a great corsi by taking low percentage shots that do not generate any genuine scoring chances, and only giving up 1 shot against - but if that 1 shot against finds the back of their net, that's really all that counts. Other guys can have a pathetic corsi despite keeping shots against to the outside and giving up no genuine scoring chances, then taking advantage of a turn over and scoring on the first shot taken in the o-zone.

Last night as an example, the newly minted Ott/Hod/Girgs trio had a to be expected poor corsi while learning to gel, but they were scored against due game situations entirely unrelated to their corsi - one goal against coming after they'd had sustained o-zone pressure which ended abruptly with a Sulzer turn-over, and another goal against resulted from the M/E/S line deciding to start a sluggish change as the puck was going back into the Sabre d-zone (leaving O/H/G racing to get back, but too late and presto).

Comparably, the M/E/S line, which has had time to practice and gel together, had a positive corsi yet generated the same amount of goals as the O/H/G line (1 each) and their line change timing resulted in a goal against attributed to the O/H/G line.

If last night isn't a good enough example of how corsi stats are meaningless without context, then take the last game for another -

Versus Florida Jan 21st, the corsi stats were reversed with M/E/S at 29.2%, 37.0% and 36.4% respectively, while Ott hit 70.8% and Hodgson ended at 63.0% even with revolving wingers Leino (66.7%) and Omark (57.1%). And yet, it was Stafford and his 36.4% corsi who paced the team with 2 goals and 1 assist, while Ott/Hod produced nothing with their revolving wingers and yet had positive corsi stats. Go figure.

The only guy with a negative corsi and 0 points for both games was Girgs (34.8% v Florida and 33.3% v Carolina), but I wouldn't write him off just yet. Sure, the O/H/G line was hemmed in last night, but they also generated the real world chances and points to suggest they could make a productive trio if given the chance to gel.

 

[stokes84]

Coris stats are highly overrated, especially when viewed out of context with other stats and the more subject bits (game situations, linemates, which d pairings are matched up, etc.).

Guys can have a great corsi by taking low percentage shots that do not generate any genuine scoring chances, and only giving up 1 shot against - but if that 1 shot against finds the back of their net, that's really all that counts. Other guys can have a pathetic corsi despite keeping shots against to the outside and giving up no genuine scoring chances, then taking advantage of a turn over and scoring on the first shot taken in the o-zone.

Last night as an example, the newly minted Ott/Hod/Girgs trio had a to be expected poor corsi while learning to gel, but they were scored against due game situations entirely unrelated to their corsi - one goal against coming after they'd had sustained o-zone pressure which ended abruptly with a Sulzer turn-over, and another goal against resulted from the M/E/S line deciding to start a sluggish change as the puck was going back into the Sabre d-zone (leaving O/H/G racing to get back, but too late and presto).

Comparably, the M/E/S line, which has had time to practice and gel together, had a positive corsi yet generated the same amount of goals as the O/H/G line (1 each) and their line change timing resulted in a goal against attributed to the O/H/G line.

If last night isn't a good enough example of how corsi stats are meaningless without context, then take the last game for another -

Versus Florida Jan 21st, the corsi stats were reversed with M/E/S at 29.2%, 37.0% and 36.4% respectively, while Ott hit 70.8% and Hodgson ended at 63.0% even with revolving wingers Leino (66.7%) and Omark (57.1%). And yet, it was Stafford and his 36.4% corsi who paced the team with 2 goals and 1 assist, while Ott/Hod produced nothing with their revolving wingers and yet had positive corsi stats. Go figure.

The only guy with a negative corsi and 0 points for both games was Girgs (34.8% v Florida and 33.3% v Carolina), but I wouldn't write him off just yet. Sure, the O/H/G line was hemmed in last night, but they also generated the real world chances and points to suggest they could make a productive trio if given the chance to gel.

Hodgson has the worst corsi of any forward on the team and Ott is close to him, and the real world goal they scored was a screw up by Carolina's defenseman that would have made Sulzer blush. Those two are bad possession players. Nobody is worried about Girgs, he has had great numbers (relatively) all year.

 

[Zip15]

Coris stats are highly overrated, especially when viewed out of context with other stats and the more subject bits (game situations, linemates, which d pairings are matched up, etc.).

Guys can have a great corsi by taking low percentage shots that do not generate any genuine scoring chances, and only giving up 1 shot against - but if that 1 shot against finds the back of their net, that's really all that counts. Other guys can have a pathetic corsi despite keeping shots against to the outside and giving up no genuine scoring chances, then taking advantage of a turn over and scoring on the first shot taken in the o-zone.

Last night as an example, the newly minted Ott/Hod/Girgs trio had a to be expected poor corsi while learning to gel, but they were scored against due game situations entirely unrelated to their corsi - one goal against coming after they'd had sustained o-zone pressure which ended abruptly with a Sulzer turn-over, and another goal against resulted from the M/E/S line deciding to start a sluggish change as the puck was going back into the Sabre d-zone (leaving O/H/G racing to get back, but too late and presto).

Comparably, the M/E/S line, which has had time to practice and gel together, had a positive corsi yet generated the same amount of goals as the O/H/G line (1 each) and their line change timing resulted in a goal against attributed to the O/H/G line.

If last night isn't a good enough example of how corsi stats are meaningless without context, then take the last game for another -

Versus Florida Jan 21st, the corsi stats were reversed with M/E/S at 29.2%, 37.0% and 36.4% respectively, while Ott hit 70.8% and Hodgson ended at 63.0% even with revolving wingers Leino (66.7%) and Omark (57.1%). And yet, it was Stafford and his 36.4% corsi who paced the team with 2 goals and 1 assist, while Ott/Hod produced nothing with their revolving wingers and yet had positive corsi stats. Go figure.

The only guy with a negative corsi and 0 points for both games was Girgs (34.8% v Florida and 33.3% v Carolina), but I wouldn't write him off just yet. Sure, the O/H/G line was hemmed in last night, but they also generated the real world chances and points to suggest they could make a productive trio if given the chance to gel.

I understand the value of Corsi/Fenwick numbers, thanks, and realize that context is important. It's ironic that you spend more than half your post talking about plays (Sulzer gaffe, line change) that led to only one Corsi event in each instance. It seems your post is better suited to railing against the value of +/- rather than Corsi/Fenwick.

I responded to a poster who asked if the stats were consistent with his feeling that OHG were getting hemmed last night. They were consistent with his feeling, and, at least last night, MES had more sustained pressure in the offensive zone with similar zone starts as OHG. That's all I was stating. I was neither placing blame for the goals against when OHG were on the ice, nor was I attempting to get into reasons why OHG may have had a tough night.

 

[mikemcburn]

I understand the value of Corsi/Fenwick numbers, thanks, and realize that context is important. It's ironic that you spend more than half your post talking about plays (Sulzer gaffe, line change) that led to only one Corsi event in each instance. It seems your post is better suited to railing against the value of +/- rather than Corsi/Fenwick.

I responded to a poster who asked if the stats were consistent with his feeling that OHG were getting hemmed last night. They were consistent with his feeling, and, at least last night, MES had more sustained pressure in the offensive zone with similar zone starts as OHG. That's all I was stating. I was neither placing blame for the goals against when OHG were on the ice, nor was I attempting to get into reasons why OHG may have had a tough night.

Heya, I was only inserting a comment, not coming at you for having done the same.

There isn't any irony in how much attention I gave to describing the context, btw. That was the point - as examples only, the last two games demonstrate that corsi isn't the be all/end all stat some crack it up to be precisely because it takes only one play/event to make zone control stats irrelevant.

Last night MES had a significantly better corsi than OHG, yet didn't produce significantly more offense (the same actually) and were directly responsible for the goal against OHG. Comparably, the game before MES had a significantly poorer corsi than OH? yet produced significantly more offense (2 goals versus none).

For my part, anyway, I'd take MES having poor corsi numbers every game if it meant the line was scoring 2+ goals. Same goes for OH?.

 

[Paxon]

Heya, I was only inserting a comment, not coming at you for having done the same.

There isn't any irony in how much attention I gave to describing the context, btw. That was the point - as examples only, the last two games demonstrate that corsi isn't the be all/end all stat some crack it up to be precisely because it takes only one play/event to make zone control stats irrelevant.

Last night MES had a significantly better corsi than OHG, yet didn't produce significantly more offense (the same actually) and were directly responsible for the goal against OHG. Comparably, the game before MES had a significantly poorer corsi than OH? yet produced significantly more offense (2 goals versus none).

For my part, anyway, I'd take MES having poor corsi numbers every game if it meant the line was scoring 2+ goals. Same goes for OH?.

The point of possession numbers is that taken from a large sample size, they are generally accurate predictors. I don't really understand your reasoning re: "it takes only one play/event to make zone control stats irrelevant". If the way you're looking at Corsi or similar stats is invalidated by one positive or negative event, then you aren't looking at them correctly (I'm using the proverbial 'you' there). Generally speaking, if you have great Corsi numbers you increase the chances that lucky bounces/quality vs poor execution/etc impact you positively rather than negatively, due to the puck being in the offensive zone more often than the defensive zone.

Your points seem similar to those who subscribe to the notion that all that matters is the scoreboard (results/outcome). Corsi and other possession stats are useful for analyzing from the perspective of what a play or performance's probable outcome is, which is a more sensible form of analysis (whether or not it's based in statistics). Corsi, like all hockey statistics, is riddled with flaws, of course -- I agree with many of your earlier criticisms. It is one of the best and most meaningful statistics in the sport, though.

 

[jBuds]

dude that was the joke of the century right there

iLaft.

I'm done with Leino.

 

[brian_griffin]

Heya, I was only inserting a comment, not coming at you for having done the same.

There isn't any irony in how much attention I gave to describing the context, btw. That was the point - as examples only, the last two games demonstrate that corsi isn't the be all/end all stat some crack it up to be precisely because it takes only one play/event to make zone control stats irrelevant.

Last night MES had a significantly better corsi than OHG, yet didn't produce significantly more offense (the same actually) and were directly responsible for the goal against OHG. Comparably, the game before MES had a significantly poorer corsi than OH? yet produced significantly more offense (2 goals versus none).

For my part, anyway, I'd take MES having poor corsi numbers every game if it meant the line was scoring 2+ goals. Same goes for OH?.

Your comments on context notwithstanding, over a large sample size, a line having a poor Corsi is likely giving up more goals against than scored for.

The bolded scenario above over a large sample size ("every game") yet still outscoring it's opposition line likely means the line is either way too damn lucky with it's goals-scored-for, and should regress to the mean, or that they themselves are being outscored.

(Paxon says this too.)