Therrien - Into the Playoffs Edition!

[Kriss E]

Enligten me if you find a Joe Thornton, Ovi/Backstrom, Giroux, the Sedins or players of the sort at forward for the Habs.

Pacioretty is one of the best goal scorers in the NHL at ES over the past few years. I think only Stamkos and Kessel outscored him over the past 3 years.
Add in Subban and Markov.

Lack of talent is not the issue whatsoever.

 

[Mathletic]

Right, because of course having 2 elite point producing d-men manning the points isn't important hey?

how many of the teams he pointed out were led by elite dmen. Same point I mentionned to DA. As random as the PP may be. If there's anything to take from this is that elite forwards are probably the ones making the difference between an average and elite PP (or terrible).

 

[Mathletic]

Pacioretty is one of the best goal scorers in the NHL at ES over the past few years. I think only Stamkos and Kessel outscored him over the past 3 years.
Add in Subban and Markov.

Lack of talent is not the issue whatsoever.

Didn't notice most of these forwards are some of the best playmakers of their years? Doubt we'll ever say that of Max as good as he may be.

 

[DAChampion]

For those of you who don't understand the game,

There are two major differences between scoring on the PP and scoring on ES.

1) The other team can ice the puck when they're penalty killing.
2) The other team is playing full defense, so you can't counter-attack on the rush.

Both of those reasons will render a player like DD less effective.

 

[HabsDieHard*]

Pacioretty is one of the best goal scorers in the NHL at ES over the past few years. I think only Stamkos and Kessel outscored him over the past 3 years.
Add in Subban and Markov.

Lack of talent is not the issue whatsoever.

Also, these posts ignore something about the discussion.

No one is saying that the Habs SHOULD have a great power play, or have the players to do so.

What we are saying is that Therrien continues to employ the exact same strategy and personnel, for month after month after month after month of underwhelming and unimpressive results.

It's not that the power play is struggling badly.

It's that the power play has struggled badly for a long time, and the coaching staff seems wholly unwilling and uncapable to make any changes in an attempt to improve it.

 

[Mathletic]

I'm curious, do you consider the fact that Montreal do not play as often as say Chicago versus the same teams??

What does that have to do about anything? Chicacgo plays roughly the same teams over and over. Besides, I took Chicago as an example. I gave you the numbers for all the teams since the 2005-2006 season. Thought that would be enough.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

We were not a bad team in 2013, not even close to it.

Well we were one year removed from 3rd last with Martin/Cunneyworth.

 

[DAChampion]

how many of the teams he pointed out were led by elite dmen. Same point I mentionned to DA. As random as the PP may be. If there's anything to take from this is that elite forwards are probably the ones making the difference between an average and elite PP (or terrible).

The PP isn't 100% random, that's not how statistics work.

Each team's PP may be its own random variable, but it's a different random variable from one team to the next.

 

[Mathletic]

Also, these posts ignore something about the discussion.

No one is saying that the Habs SHOULD have a great power play, or have the players to do so.

What we are saying is that Therrien continues to employ the exact same strategy and personnel, for month after month after month after month of underwhelming and unimpressive results.

It's not that the power play is struggling badly.

It's that the power play has struggled badly for a long time, and the coaching staff seems wholly unwilling and uncapable to make any changes in an attempt to improve it.

What teams doesn't do that?

If your point isn't that the PP should be clearly better then I don't see the point of the whole discussion.

The PP isn't 100% random, that's not how statistics work.

Each team's PP may be its own random variable, but it's a different random variable from one team to the next.

Which is why I looked at it for each team from year to year or season to playoffs. I never said it was 100% random. I said it was pretty clear to me that teams don't have much control over their PP%. Doesn't mean Giroux isn't a better option on the PP than Prust. Only means that most teams employ strategies that compare to one another, also most teams have 3 or 4 good players who can run a decent PP and that very few teams can give themselves a significant edge through this.

 

[Unclewhalebone]

No, randomness doesn't mean you can just pull the names from a hat, make random scribbles on a board (though I might argue it would be interesting to try, the same way playing randomly at chess can get you to beat some good players or like Kasparov beat the IBM computer in the first game) and have the same results. It means that no coaching staff seems to posseess the ability to make their team a better PP than the rest of the league. Unlike what we can observe with players and players like Crosby sitting on top of the scoring leader race every year.

Nah, I don't mean complete randomness. I just mean that if randomness is a stronger determinant in the success of a PP than specific personnel and the strategies (which as you say are largely similar), can this apply to team success as a whole? In a league with "parity" is chance the strongest determinant in success?

 

[HabsDieHard*]

how many of the teams he pointed out were led by elite dmen. Same point I mentionned to DA. As random as the PP may be. If there's anything to take from this is that elite forwards are probably the ones making the difference between an average and elite PP (or terrible).

********.

All that is doing is looking at a complex situation and anointing it black and white status.

It's not that elite forwards or elite d-men are one or the other more of a "difference" on the power play.

There are any number of reasons why a power play will struggle or will have a lot of success.

But the frustrating part about Therrien is that when his teams' power play is struggling, he just continues to do the same half brained nonsense.

Why are the 3 forwards almost always still the same as at 5 on 5?

Why are Desharnais and Plekanec the top 2 centers on the power play?

Why is Pacioretty often sent to the ice as not just the only viable scoring threat on his line but also the only forward with size?

These are fair and legitimate questions, that people have been askign for a while, and the Therrien apologists just prattle on with the same nonsense absolving Therrien of any and all blame and simply saying the players aren't good enough.

Oh the habs have 2 elite point producing d-men? One of whom has been a part of many top 10 power plays in his career?

Well obviously forwards are more important than d-men! That's why the Habs PP sucks!

Therrien apologist nonsense.

 

[Analyzer*]

The Habs were constantly outshot in the regular season and are now out shooting the Sens by a comfortable margin.

What happened?

A lot of the habs shots have no traffic in front, no second chances and are from weak angles

 

[Phenom]

Do what exactly ? Use Eller on the PP ? That's the only thing you guys are coming up with. It's don't use DD, use Eller. That's not a great plan.

And making no change at all is an even worst plan. So which plan do you choose?

If you're willing to stick by that motto of making no change in this proven failing PP because you assume Eller won't do no better than DD, then may god help us all with our current horrible PP. If your idea of remaining passive because you have all the facts, stats, theories and speculations that improving the PP is a waste of time, then we sure as hell are doomed for long term failure.

 

[Kriss E]

Didn't notice most of these forwards are some of the best playmakers of their years? Doubt we'll ever say that of Max as good as he may be.

Who was our great playmaker when we were top 10 for 6 out of 7years?

What does that have to do about anything? Chicacgo plays roughly the same teams over and over. Besides, I took Chicago as an example. I gave you the numbers for all the teams since the 2005-2006 season. Thought that would be enough.

Don't you think who is killing the penalty can affect your PP results?

Well we were one year removed from 3rd last with Martin/Cunneyworth.

And?...Are you suggesting that the team who finished 3rd was remotely similar to the one of 12-13??

 

[HabsDieHard*]

What teams doesn't do that?

If your point isn't that the PP should be clearly better then I don't see the point of the whole discussion.



Which is why I looked at it for each team from year to year or season to playoffs. I never said it was 100% random. I said it was pretty clear to me that teams don't have much control over their PP%. Doesn't mean Giroux isn't a better option on the PP than Prust. Only means that most teams employ strategies that compare to one another, also most teams have 3 or 4 good players who can run a decent PP and that very few teams can give themselves a significant edge through this.

You can't be serious with the bolded?

Do you only watch Habs games?

I don't think there's a single other team that just simply sends out the same forward trios at 5 on 5 as on the power play, whether it leads to success or not.

I have no idea what your remark about Giroux/Prust means, and I think I'm glad of that.

Probably has something to do with all of that "research" you did and then threw out right after.

 

[DAChampion]

For those of you who believe that everything in hockey is pure randomness, the Habs now have a 75% chance of winning the series against Ottawa.

They have a 50% chance of winning 6, and if they lose that one, they have a 50% chance of winning game 7

 

[HabsDieHard*]

And making no change at all is an even worst plan. So which plan do you choose?

If you're willing to stick by that motto of making no change in this proven failing PP because you assume Eller won't do no better than DD, then may god help us all with our current horrible PP. If your idea of remaining passive because you have all the facts, stats, theories and speculations that improving the PP is a waste of time, then we sure as hell are doomed for long term failure.

Also the reason so many want to see Eller is that he's a big body who can theoretically be a net front presence.

No one is saying he'll transform the power play into an elite one.

We would just like to see some different combinations and trios used, in light of the complete ineptitude of the personnel currently being used.

It's just more Therrien apologist nonsense though.

The power play sucks, and has looked predictable and stale for 18 months.

So you don't blame Therrien, you blame the players' at his disposal.

"oh what's he going to do? Use Eller instead of Desharnais? Either way he's working with what he's got"

Then the same people will absolve Bergevin of any blame in the situation as well, go figure.

 

[Unclewhalebone]

For those of you who believe that everything in hockey is pure randomness, the Habs now have a 75% chance of winning the series against Ottawa.

They have a 50% chance of winning 6, and if they lose that one, they have a 50% chance of winning game 7

I'll take them odds. LOL

 

[Andy]

Enligten me if you find a Joe Thornton, Ovi/Backstrom, Giroux, the Sedins or players of the sort at forward for the Habs.

Montreal Canadiens, top 10 powerplay in 6 of the 7 seasons from 2005-2011. No Thornton, Ovi, Giroux or the Sedins.

Also, i thought it was all randomness.

 

[Habsfan2731]

Well Therrien didn't adjust a damn thing, he threw his players under the bus when asked about the PP, he doesn't realize that every team in the league takes away PK's shot, his set up has Pacioretty below the god damn goal line, run a triangle up top with 76-79-67, RH-LH-LH, Eller in front of the net & Galchenyuk along the half wall, who can curl out & make the pass across or shoot from the slot, it's so damn simple. Therrien's favouritism holds this O back, Bergevin has to step up this off season and either trade Desharnais or fire Therrien, the only thing Mt can be somewhat thanked for is helping Pacioretty become better defensively, yet he still drags the guy down with Desharnais/Weise, Galchenyuk has NO confidence yet he doesn't switch his line, he won't even give him a boost of confidence, MT & his system have sucked all the creativity out of this team, it's beyond frustrating to watch.

 

[Unclewhalebone]

For those of you who believe that everything in hockey is pure randomness, the Habs now have a 75% chance of winning the series against Ottawa.

They have a 50% chance of winning 6, and if they lose that one, they have a 50% chance of winning game 7

I would guess though that the actual win % of teams leading 3-2 is close to that. Probably a bit higher because in theory the "better" team is more likely to be up 3-2. I'd guess 78% win rate.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

huh what I delete these small procedures 100 times a day. I'll save a big project obviously but that's what I would call "exploratory data analysis". You go through some data, see what comes out but that's about it. There's nothing that solid in there, or at least that couldn't be easily improved upon.

There would be nothing better than you going through this yourself if you think that's sketchy as ****.

Apparently I'm going to have to, since you keep referring to work you refuse to show. The fact that you think that's acceptable is simply

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Montreal Canadiens, top 10 powerplay in 6 of the 7 seasons from 2005-2011. No Thornton, Ovi, Giroux or the Sedins.

Also, i thought it was all randomness.

Naw, now good players have an impact, except in Chicago, which proves that replacing DD wouldn't do anything. It's all there in the documents he didn't bother saving.

 

[Mathletic]

Nah, I don't mean complete randomness. I just mean that if randomness is a stronger determinant in the success of a PP than specific personnel and the strategies (which as you say are largely similar), can this apply to team success as a whole? In a league with "parity" is chance the strongest determinant in success?

Well it depends to what extent you want a precise answer. It's not random in the sense that there's clearly teams with better players than others. It's easy to show that players like Crosby and Toews will make your team better and that you will likely win more games than the average team. However, there's certainly a lot of random variables at play even with those players. One being the number of games played (or injuries). You can also take it to another level and ask how randomly players are distributed throughout the league. You can ask how randomly SV% is distributed. When we see someone like Dubnyk barely making any saves in the AHL one year and being nominated for the Vézina the year after, you have to wonder how much noise there is in the SV% stat or goaltending in general. That SV% can have a significant impact on a team's record.

I could go on for the night asking questions, maybe there's something more precise you'd want me to talk about. The more I write in this post the more I come back and think of more questions I come up with and since I have to study for a few exams it might be a good thing to move on . But if what you're asking is from the starting point of the season, we know the status of each team, players and so on. How much randomness can we expect to see? I'd say it would be a good thing to look at Vegas' odds. Being a sports bettor I can tell you that they're really not bad at making predictions. So, it might be interesting to look at futures and how much they change from the original predictions. However, from a team perspective, say your question is how likely a .550 to be a true .600 or .525, I'd go back to the binomial distribution and give you a confidence interval.

Who was our great playmaker when we were top 10 for 6 out of 7years?

Kovalev was among the league leaders in PP assists in those years and Markov in the prime of his career.

Don't you think who is killing the penalty can affect your PP results?

Sure?

Apparently I'm going to have to, since you keep referring to work you refuse to show. The fact that you think that's acceptable is simply

Think I'm writing a doctoral thesis on HF or what?

 

[Mathletic]

I would guess though that the actual win % of teams leading 3-2 is close to that. Probably a bit higher because in theory the "better" team is more likely to be up 3-2. I'd guess 78% win rate.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1865419&page=3