Therrien Part VI - Who the hell is Jack Adams anyway ? Edition

[Milhouse40]

So we're on pace for about the same number of goals as we were during the Martin/Cunneyworth tank year - who here thinks that Therrien is tapping into our teams' full offensive potential?

Who here thinks that's unimportant?

And that stats that makes everything worst:
We are 3rd in the league for empty net goals with 12, tied with Anaheim.

 

[jaffy27]

So we're on pace for about the same number of goals as we were during the Martin/Cunneyworth tank year - who here thinks that Therrien is tapping into our teams' full offensive potential?

Who here thinks that's unimportant?

Goals are down overall this year, comparing 2012 to this year

Boston has 84 fewer goals with twelve games to go

Pittsburgh has 86 less goals with 12 games to go

Ottawa has 53 less goals with 13 games to go

Vancouver has 52 less goals with 13 games to go

HABS are 25 goals less with 11 games to go

I'm thinking we'll at least match the goal totals from 2012, but those other teams won't, seems were not the only team with issues. A well structured team with great goaltending with an equal amount of goals for, has brought us from last to first. I'm okay with that

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Goals are down overall this year, comparing 2012 to this year

Boston has 84 fewer goals with twelve games to go

Pittsburgh has 86 less goals with 12 games to go

Ottawa has 53 less goals with 13 games to go

Vancouver has 52 less goals with 13 games to go

HABS are 25 goals less with 11 games to go

I'm thinking we'll at least match the goal totals from 2012, but those other teams won't, seems were not the only team with issues. A well structured team with great goaltending with an equal amount of goals for, has brought us from last to first. I'm okay with that

22nd in goals now. We were 19th in goals in 2012.

Relatively speaking we're worse.

The problem with your analysis is that we usually score the last goal and we end up winning

Winning>>>>>>>trailing in first

We're only able to do this by virtue of Price standing on his head.

 

[Yep]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20142015&sort=standingsGoalDifferential&type=LEA


Here's a stats where we're not bottom third : goal differential.

7th overall and likely to finish in the top 10.


Merci Michel

 

[jaffy27]

22nd in goals now. We were 19th in goals in 2012.

Relatively speaking we're worse.

We're only able to do this by virtue of Price standing on his head.

We were 16th in goals against and now we're in 1st...we went up 16 spots...in goals for we only dropped 3 spots..we are definitely better. If we would be winning as a high scoring team, we'd be saying if Pacioretty and Galchenyuk don't stand on there heads and score 40 goals each, we'd be done. HABS play to their strenghts, our strengths are goaltending, Capitals is offence, Bruins is defense and physicality. You can argue till the cows come home, bottom line is we're in first

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

We were 16th in goals against

Price wasn't playing at Hasek levels like he is now. He was really good that season but not the monster he is now. He's the sole reason we're 1st.

and now we're in 1st...we went up 16 spots...

And if we had average goaltending we'd be bottom third there too. Do the math. Instead of stopping pucks at a rate of .936 we'd be stopping pucks at a rate around .910. That would probably put about 40 extra goals on the year...

in goals for we only dropped 3 spots..we are definitely better.

We dropped offensively and defensively. In 2012 we gave up an average amount of shots. We were bad in front of Price but that's no different now. And we've got a much better roster now than we did then.

Slice it up any way you want. We're worse offensively and defensively than we were in that tank year.

If we would be winning as a high scoring team, we'd be saying if Pacioretty and Galchenyuk don't stand on there heads and score 40 goals each, we'd be done. HABS play to their strenghts, our strengths are goaltending, Capitals is offence, Bruins is defense and physicality. You can argue till the cows come home, bottom line is we're in first

So not scoring and giving up tons of high quality shots is playing to our strengths? What?

Also, I don't think you understand the debate here. Nobody is saying we're not in first. The debate is HOW we got to be in first. Manny Malholtra for example is on our roster... is he responsible for our success? No right? Well, neither is Therrien.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20142015&sort=standingsGoalDifferential&type=LEA


Here's a stats where we're not bottom third : goal differential.

7th overall and likely to finish in the top 10.


Merci Carey

Fixed.

Our goal differential would be negative if not for Price. Our D is bad and our offense is bad. Looking at the goal differential is like looking at the standings... it doesn't tell you how you got there.

 

[jaffy27]

Price wasn't playing at Hasek levels like he is now. He was really good that season but not the monster he is now. He's the sole reason we're 1st.

big reason we're in first I agree, sole reason is selling Pacioretty's and Subban's stellar years short

if we had average goaltending we'd be bottom third there too. Do the math. Instead of stopping pucks at a rate of .936 we'd be stopping pucks at a rate around .910. That would probably put about 40 extra goals on the year...

If Washington had average scoring they'd be bottom third, if Nashville had average goaltending they'd be bottom third, if L.A wasn't going on their current run, they'd be out of playoffs, if Ottawa had the goaltending they've been getting lately all year they'd be in the playoffs, if Dubnyk didn't come and save the Wilds year, they'd be out of playoffs....lots of if's here, I can play the if game and go through the entire NHL and make a case for all the teams

dropped offensively and defensively. In 2012 we gave up an average amount of shots. We were bad in front of Price but that's no different now. And we've got a much better roster now than we did then.

Price has the benefit of having a more experienced Subban, an actual Markov who wasn't there, no Campoli, no Kaberle, no Spacek (notice last 3 guys no longer in NHL), no Diaz, no Weber, no St-Denis...I think you get the picture that his D now is a little better at boxing out players and clearing the front of the net, hence better numbers, but Price's maturation is the prime reason he's so stellar, helps when you have actual D playing in front of you though

it up any way you want. We're worse offensively and defensively than we were in that tank year.

Offensively pretty much the same and defensively much better for reasons already explained, don't know how you figure going from 16th to 1st in goals allowed makes us worst, you must've went to a different type of school then I did

not scoring and giving up tons of high quality shots is playing to our strengths? What?

Our strength is our goalie, and all teams give up quality scoring chances, they just don't capitalize on there chances and we do, the beauty of having the best goalie in the world

, I don't think you understand the debate here. Nobody is saying we're not in first. The debate is HOW we got to be in first. Manny Malholtra for example is on our roster... is he responsible for our success? No right? Well, neither is Therrien.

Everyone is responsible for bringing this team into first, Price and Subban would get the biggest piece of pie if we split it that way, but in Anaheim, it's Getzlaf and Perry, and in LA it's Doughty and Kopitar and in Pittsburgh it's Malkin and Crosby, do you get it, your best players make you win

goal differential would be negative if not for Price. Our D is bad and our offense is bad. Looking at the goal differential is like looking at the standings... it doesn't tell you how you got there.

and Chicago's goal differential would go down if Kane and Toews weren't there, and St-Louis if Tarasenko and Oshie weren't there and Nashville if Rinne wasn't there (do you remember when Rinne got hurt and Nashville started to slide in the standings??) it's no coincidence.

Im ready to bet that if the Habs win the cup, you'll be pissed. Our offence is bad, our D is bad, our coach is bad, our Gm is bad, our team system is bad.......yet we sit in first. Im starting to think that your a Bruin fan....

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

big reason we're in first I agree, sole reason is selling Pacioretty's and Subban's stellar years short

With all due respect to those guys, with average goaltending we'd be out of the playoffs. It's never entirely one guy, but we rely on Price to a ridiculous extent. So "solely" maybe not in the literal sense but it is "solely" to a ridiculous degree.

If Washington had average scoring they'd be bottom third, if Nashville had average goaltending they'd be bottom third, if L.A wasn't going on their current run, they'd be out of playoffs, if Ottawa had the goaltending they've been getting lately all year they'd be in the playoffs, if Dubnyk didn't come and save the Wilds year, they'd be out of playoffs....lots of if's here, I can play the if game and go through the entire NHL and make a case for all the teams

Right. And IF that was the case, we would look at their coaching in a different light. Here we aren't doing well offensively or defensively and we've got a better roster than we've had in years. The REALITY is that those other teams are playing well and we aren't. Moreover, we are hugely dependent on netminding moreso than any other team in the league.

As for Minnesota, they were playing WELL before Dubnyk got there but they had horrible goaltending. And Dubnyk did nothing behind bad teams. One helped the other. All the Minnesota example does is strengthen my argument that goaltending is a huge factor in how well teams do. And you can't attribute goaltending success to the coach, its beyond his control apart from choosing to play a backup.

Price has the benefit of having a more experienced Subban, an actual Markov who wasn't there, no Campoli, no Kaberle, no Spacek (notice last 3 guys no longer in NHL), no Diaz, no Weber, no St-Denis...I think you get the picture that his D now is a little better at boxing out players and clearing the front of the net, hence better numbers, but Price's maturation is the prime reason he's so stellar, helps when you have actual D playing in front of you though

I'd say we've got a great blueline. Subban's arguably the best in the league and he and Markov are arguably the league's best pairing.

So why are we bleeding shots? Why are the scoring chances against of such high quality?

Offensively pretty much the same and defensively much better for reasons already explained, don't know how you figure going from 16th to 1st in goals allowed makes us worst, you must've went to a different type of school then I did

You're right, I did. I went to a school that understands the difference between defensive play and goaltending. Minnesota for example played well defensively this year but got nothing out of it because their netminding sucked. Dubnyk was behind a bad defense and wasn't good enough to compensate. Put them together though and all of a sudden the Wild are winning games again.

Not sure how you can't understand the difference here.

Our strength is our goalie, and all teams give up quality scoring chances, they just don't capitalize on there chances and we do, the beauty of having the best goalie in the world

They don't give up the number of scoring chances that we do nor do they give up the same quality of scoring chances.

Everyone is responsible for bringing this team into first, Price and Subban would get the biggest piece of pie if we split it that way, but in Anaheim, it's Getzlaf and Perry, and in LA it's Doughty and Kopitar and in Pittsburgh it's Malkin and Crosby, do you get it, your best players make you win

Not all players should be credited equally. And a coach shouldn't get credit just by virtue of being there any more than Manny Malholtra should.

and Chicago's goal differential would go down if Kane and Toews weren't there, and St-Louis if Tarasenko and Oshie weren't there and Nashville if Rinne wasn't there (do you remember when Rinne got hurt and Nashville started to slide in the standings??) it's no coincidence.

Nashville has played much better hockey than we have. Chicago continues to win despite Kane being hurt, the Rangers have been on fire without Lundqvist.

I'm not saying teams don't rely on key players... of course they do. But not to the extent that we rely on Price.

Im ready to bet that if the Habs win the cup, you'll be pissed. Our offence is bad, our D is bad, our coach is bad, our Gm is bad, our team system is bad.......yet we sit in first. Im starting to think that your a Bruin fan....

If you can't debate on the facts, don't try to debate me. Trying to make this personal or switching the topic doesn't impress anyone. It only shows that you are running out of valid arguments. I'm not even going to get into the whole tired debate over what a "real fan is" because it would only serve your purpose to sidetrack this debate. It's the second time that you've taken a personal shot at me... let it be the last. Debate on the facts and the topic, not the poster.

The fact is that this team is NOT playing well and hasn't played well for a long time. You say this team has played well? Look at the post below. Our scoring chances don't come from dangerous areas but the chances against do. Not only are we giving up MORE scoring chances but they are of higher quality. This was posted on the main boards and should be mandatory reading for anyone debating this topic:

Urrrrgh, I hate being goaded into posting, but it seems I've been given no choice. I can't stand idly by while people who clearly do not watch enough Habs (my favourite hockey team) games give praise to a defensive system that is not deserving of such high praise, or any praise at all for that matter

The eye test should be enough to tell the tale, but apparently based on some of the views expressed in this thread, that's unfortunately not that case, so, let's get into some explainations.

Yeah, we all know the objective of the Habs' system. It's a passive system, they allow for easy zone entry and collapse down low at the first sight of trouble. Let them have the boards, let them move the puck out high, those aren't particularly dangerous areas, what are they gonna do with those? Nothing! Of course that's how it would work in a perfect world, in theory, but there is nothing perfect about the way the Habs execute this system. IF the system were working as it should, you could expect the possession numbers to show that the Habs are regularly outpossessed, and they are, we can see this on the ice, we can see this in the metrics (48.6% CF, that's Columbus, Edmonton, New Jersey territory. As well as a whopping 57.8 CA per 60, that's 5th worst in the league). However, you might be thinking to yourself: "just because they're outpossessed doesn't mean they're allowing the dangerous shots". Well, think again.

This right here shows the distribution of the locations from which shots are directed at the Habs net, and for the sake of comparison, we'll compare it to the league average. Red, red is bad, and there is a whole lot of red in that Habs zone. So, essentially this defensive scheme of theirs allows the team to be outpossessed on a regular basis, and it apparently gives away the dangerous areas of the ice too. So clearly it's not working as well as a lot of people seem to think it is. You could look at the lineup and see this is what would happen. There's not much beyond that Subban-Markov pairing (when they're on the ice, the team doesn't have these issues, who'd have guessed). You've got a young Nathan Beaulieu, he's great, but he's not ready to anchor that 2nd pairing just yet. Jeff Petry is a good addition, I think he'll do wonders to improve the team, but they hven't had him all year long. Clearly good defense is not why they've been winning hockey games all year long

Which makes me wonder, why have they been winning? Must be the high-powered offense, that puts up 2.54 goals per game. *a stagehand whispers something in my ear* Wait? What? You mean that doesn't qualify as a high-powered offense? You're saying that's among the 10 worst in the league? Oh, dang. Well, it's not the offense either then, hmmmm.

There's one reason the Habs are where they are in the standings, and we all know what it is; it's Carey Price, and please don't even suggest otherwise

 

[Habsawce]

He's finally changing the lines around, with 11 games left. But still, better late than never. However, if he reverts back to DD-Patches before the playoffs I will probably actually go insane.

 

[Tourist]

Nobody would disagree that we don't allow goals. But the reason we don't allow goals is due to goaltending, not strong defensive play.

That's the real problem here, we don't defend well either.

I was merely explaining in my post why I think we don't score a lot of goals. I didn't touch the topic of why we don't allow a lot of goals. Yes I do think Price is the main reason our goal against average is so stellar.

 

[Big Lurk]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20142015&sort=standingsGoalDifferential&type=LEA


Here's a stats where we're not bottom third : goal differential.

7th overall and likely to finish in the top 10.


Merci Michel

I didnt know Carey Price had a middle name

 

[Tourist]

The problem with your analysis is that we give up the first goal more often than not and do spend quite a bit of time trailing.

We have the best GAA and the 4th best record in the NHL. I would be surprised if stats showed that we spent a lot of time trailing compared to other teams.

We do have a tendency to allow the first goal early, but then again we have a tendency to press a little more after and get the equalizer. Then Price simply doesn't allow anymore goals.

The point is we don't play with the urgency to score, since by default we're a conservative team AND we practically never concede more than 2 goals a game.

Teams play differently depending on the score, whether or not they are instructed to do so by the coach.

 

[HabsDieHard*]

Man oh man, facts are just not the friend of one side of this argument.

 

[Yep]

Our scoring chances don't come from dangerous areas but the chances against do. Not only are we giving up MORE scoring chances but they are of higher quality. This was posted on the main boards and should be mandatory reading for anyone debating this topic:

Again... we shouldn't make unequivocal conclusions based on these graphs for two main reasons.

1- Shot locations don't tell the complete story when its comes to scoring chances.

Example : 10 clear shots from the slot isn't the same as 10 shots from the slots where 2 comes from deviation, 4 from rebounds and 2 from transition shots (let's say a one-timer and a 2 on 1).

It is incontestably important to keep the shots on the perimeter, but efficient defensive systems also prevent higher quality scoring chances.

More on this :
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/i...ality-project/
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/intro...oject-part-ii/


2- Score effect

Habs are in the lead more often than not. Team trailing tends to increase pressure and shoot from everywhere instead of patiently frabricating plays. The Habs are 28th when it comes to shot attempts for minus shot attempts against when in the lead (SAT Ahead).

When in the lead which they are more often than not, the HABS sit back on it. The can do it because Carey Price first and foremost AND because they learned to play a conservative risk-minimizing defensive system.

This has to have an effect on the chart posted above. Everyone can see that.


Again : I'm not defending Therrien, I dislike his guts and DD for that matter, BUT I'm advocating for a more nuanced and balanced perspective on this team.

 

[Big Lurk]

French
« J’ai peut-être été trop patient en début de saison. Nous avons connu beaucoup de succès avec Paul (MacLean) derrière le banc au cours des dernières saisons. Mais cette année notre style de jeu n’était plus le même. Quand j’ai jonglé avec la possibilité d’effectuer un changement, j’ai demandé à Dave quels étaient ses plans. Je voulais voir un club plus actif sur la glace, un club plus efficace en échec-avant pour récupérer des rondelles, plus agressif dans notre territoire. Nous étions trop passifs en début d’année. La pression sur les joueurs faisait défaut à mes yeux. J’ai peut-être pris trop de temps pour réagir », a reconnu Murray.

English
«I may have been too patient early in the season . We have had great success with Paul ( MacLean ) behind the bench in recent seasons. But this year our style of play was not the same. When I juggled the possibility to make a change, I asked (future coach) Dave Cameron what were his plans. I wanted to see a more active club on the ice, a more effective club forechecking to retrieve pucks, more aggressive in our territory. We were too passive earlier this year . The pressure on the players was lacking to me. I may have taken too long to react», admitted Murray.


Ottawa's GM on firing Paul Maclean.

oooooowwwww

 

[Tourist]

The fact is that this team is NOT playing well and hasn't played well for a long time. You say this team has played well? Look at the post below. Our scoring chances don't come from dangerous areas but the chances against do. Not only are we giving up MORE scoring chances but they are of higher quality. This was posted on the main boards and should be mandatory reading for anyone debating this topic:

Scoring chances are not solely based on shot location. Sure it's a factor but not the only one. This graph treats a Pacioretty breakaway shot the same as a rushed Prust shot from the same location. Even a Pacioretty shot with time and space is not the same as a rushed Pacioretty shot from the same location. Any goalie will tell you that it makes a huge difference. This is the NHL. If a player in the slot has time and space to pick a corner, he'll score at a pretty high rate regardless of god mode Carey. That graph is severely incomplete if its goal is to accurately inform us on quality of scoring chances.

 

[HabsDieHard*]

Canadiens give up lots of shots, and lots of high percentage shots.

The goal post moving to defend Therrien is fascinating on this issue.

When faced with the fact that the supposedly defensive minded team gives up a lot of shots, they are a lot of low percentage shots.

When faced with the fact that they are in fact not a lot of low percentage shots, and in fact they are one of the worst in the league in giving up high percentage shots, we see people create a distinction between "levels" oif high percentage shots.

And then we get to the point where it's all defended becuase it's simply part of the Habs strategy...any time you get a lead you just sit back and let the opposing team fire at will, because hey the team has Carey Price so they can do that.

This team gets outplayed the vast majority of games they play, if you replace Price with Howard on the season, the Habs have a negative goals for/against differential.

Now this isn't talking about replacing Price with a sub replacement goalie, this is talking about replacing him with a goalie currently on a playoff team.

The saddest part is how a certain sect of fans have no qualms whatsoever in downplaying the greatness of Prices' play this year, because they are in such a fervour to defend Therriens' work.

 

[HabsDieHard*]

Scoring chances are not solely based on shot location. Sure it's a factor but not the only one. This graph treats a Pacioretty breakaway shot the same as a rushed Prust shot from the same location. Even a Pacioretty shot with time and space is not the same as a rushed Pacioretty shot from the same location. Any goalie will tell you that it makes a huge difference. This is the NHL. If a player in the slot has time and space to pick a corner, he'll score at a pretty high rate regardless of god mode Carey. That graph is severely incomplete if its goal is to accurately inform us on quality of scoring chances.

You're completely grasping at straws with this remark.

A shot from the slot, whether it's a Pacioretty breakaway or a Malhotra shot, is a shot from the slot, and therefore a shot from a higher scoring area than from countless other areas on the ice.

In the coming years I expect we'll see these statistics expanded on substantially.

But in the meantime, your argument revolves around dismissing any statistic which goes against your view point and declaring all of them to be misleading/irrelevant.

The team gives up lots of shots, they are terrible offensively, and they have an awful power play.

And yet many are content to just blame the players for all of that, and act like the team is playing some sort of stifling defensive system.

Which is total malarkie, and there is literally an endless number of statistics to establish it as malarkie.

But hey, the standings (anyone remember where the team finished in 2012/2013???) obviously indicate the team is playing well, and not getting the best goaltending performance in 20 or so years.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Scoring chances are not solely based on shot location. Sure it's a factor but not the only one. This graph treats a Pacioretty breakaway shot the same as a rushed Prust shot from the same location. Even a Pacioretty shot with time and space is not the same as a rushed Pacioretty shot from the same location. Any goalie will tell you that it makes a huge difference. This is the NHL. If a player in the slot has time and space to pick a corner, he'll score at a pretty high rate regardless of god mode Carey. That graph is severely incomplete if its goal is to accurately inform us on quality of scoring chances.

Thing is pretty much EVERY piece of data we have is negative in terms of the Habs except goaltending...

Does this heat map conclusively PROVE that the scoring chances are better? No. But combine it with everything else. Combine it with the crazy saves we watch Price make on a nightly basis....

No one stat or chart or metric is ever going to tell you absolutely everything you need to know. But when you look at the data as a whole and you see it telling a consistent story across the board?

 

[HabsDieHard*]

Thing is pretty much EVERY piece of data we have is negative in terms of the Habs except goaltending...

Does this heat map conclusively PROVE that the scoring chances are better? No. But combine it with everything else. Combine it with the crazy saves we watch Price make on a nightly basis....

No one stat or chart or metric is ever going to tell you absolutely everything you need to know. But when you look at the data as a whole and you see it telling a consistent story across the board?

As long as you dispute the validity of the statistics you don't have to acknowledge them in your argument.

The most vocal group of fans when it comes to discrediting the importance of these "advanced analytics" also quite often seem to be the ones who are demanding that the analytics become more in depth.

It's a great way to discredit an argument if you think about it. Deny the validity of them and you've basically won.

 

[jaffy27]

With all due respect to those guys, with average goaltending we'd be out of the playoffs. It's never entirely one guy, but we rely on Price to a ridiculous extent. So "solely" maybe not in the literal sense but it is "solely" to a ridiculous degree.

Right. And IF that was the case, we would look at their coaching in a different light. Here we aren't doing well offensively or defensively and we've got a better roster than we've had in years. The REALITY is that those other teams are playing well and we aren't. Moreover, we are hugely dependent on netminding moreso than any other team in the league.

As for Minnesota, they were playing WELL before Dubnyk got there but they had horrible goaltending. And Dubnyk did nothing behind bad teams. One helped the other. All the Minnesota example does is strengthen my argument that goaltending is a huge factor in how well teams do. And you can't attribute goaltending success to the coach, its beyond his control apart from choosing to play a backup.

I'd say we've got a great blueline. Subban's arguably the best in the league and he and Markov are arguably the league's best pairing.

So why are we bleeding shots? Why are the scoring chances against of such high quality?

You're right, I did. I went to a school that understands the difference between defensive play and goaltending. Minnesota for example played well defensively this year but got nothing out of it because their netminding sucked. Dubnyk was behind a bad defense and wasn't good enough to compensate. Put them together though and all of a sudden the Wild are winning games again.

Not sure how you can't understand the difference here.

They don't give up the number of scoring chances that we do nor do they give up the same quality of scoring chances.

Not all players should be credited equally. And a coach shouldn't get credit just by virtue of being there any more than Manny Malholtra should.

Nashville has played much better hockey than we have. Chicago continues to win despite Kane being hurt, the Rangers have been on fire without Lundqvist.

I'm not saying teams don't rely on key players... of course they do. But not to the extent that we rely on Price.

If you can't debate on the facts, don't try to debate me. Trying to make this personal or switching the topic doesn't impress anyone. It only shows that you are running out of valid arguments. I'm not even going to get into the whole tired debate over what a "real fan is" because it would only serve your purpose to sidetrack this debate. It's the second time that you've taken a personal shot at me... let it be the last. Debate on the facts and the topic, not the poster.

The fact is that this team is NOT playing well and hasn't played well for a long time. You say this team has played well? Look at the post below. Our scoring chances don't come from dangerous areas but the chances against do. Not only are we giving up MORE scoring chances but they are of higher quality. This was posted on the main boards and should be mandatory reading for anyone debating this topic:

numbers below 1.0 are bad...looks like the habs take high percentage shots and other teams don't
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=80713&stc=1&d=1426784987

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

numbers below 1.0 are bad...looks like the habs take high percentage shots and other teams don't
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=80713&stc=1&d=1426784987

And why do you think other team's shooting percentages are low against us? Price has a save percentage 26 points better than the league average.

Come on man...

 

[Yep]

And why do you think other team's shooting percentages are low against us?

Come on man...

Da system based on Carey Price AND risk minimizing.

 

[Tourist]

You're completely grasping at straws with this remark.

A shot from the slot, whether it's a Pacioretty breakaway or a Malhotra shot, is a shot from the slot, and therefore a shot from a higher scoring area than from countless other areas on the ice.

In the coming years I expect we'll see these statistics expanded on substantially.

But in the meantime, your argument revolves around dismissing any statistic which goes against your view point and declaring all of them to be misleading/irrelevant.

The team gives up lots of shots, they are terrible offensively, and they have an awful power play.

And yet many are content to just blame the players for all of that, and act like the team is playing some sort of stifling defensive system.

Which is total malarkie, and there is literally an endless number of statistics to establish it as malarkie.

But hey, the standings (anyone remember where the team finished in 2012/2013???) obviously indicate the team is playing well, and not getting the best goaltending performance in 20 or so years.

You argue about points I didn't even make. Why do you do that?

I simply said this graph, which is supposed to accurately depict quality scoring chances, is severely lacking. If people want to come up with new stats and more advanced graphs, that's cool, I have a science background and love that stuff. But be rigorous about it.

 

[jaffy27]

And why do you think other team's shooting percentages are low against us?

Come on man...

why do you think we shoot so well against other teams?
Btw, other teams only average 2 shots more per game
as for your question, its good goaltending, clearing rebounds and making sure Price can see the puck..under Therrien's system of course