Post-Game Talk: This is how Couts does it.

[The Rage Kage]

Patrick can definitely be as good as Monahan is in 4 years when he is 23 like Monahan.

I would love to see him rip off a hot streak in our final 20 games. 15 points. Something like that would be great heading into the summer.

As for PP2..all they have to so is run the same system as PP1 with their most talented players. No idea why thats hard.

Those talented guys havent paid their dues yet.

 

[Tripod]

It's telling that Flip went from the most wanted PP spot on the team, to the 2nd pairing, then on no PP lately.

Too important at ES I guess.

 

[Beef Invictus]

You think they are full-out forechecking now more than they were?

I disagree. They did change their forecheck from a 1-1-3 to a 1-2-2, but the new 1-2-2 is more of the classic trap.

In the 1-1-3 they usually had a chaser attack deep, and then the second forward would jump the puck carrier. But teams were breaking it, leaving two men behind the play.

With the 1-2-2, they still often send a chaser deep depending on the read. But the puck side wing doesn’t jump deep as much, he stays in front of the carrier, & the non puck side wing can then take away the center. So I’d say the forecheck is less aggressive, but it has been more structurally sound in the middle of the ice.

I don't think they are, I know they are. The difference is where they maintain possession after entry rather than dump and maybe send a single forechecker with minimal pressure applied. When the team goes into the Hakshell they stop pushing offensive possession. They've done that less lately. The results have been good, predictably.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I don't think they are, I know they are. The difference is where they maintain possession after entry rather than dump and maybe send a single forechecker with minimal pressure applied. When the team goes into the Hakshell they stop pushing offensive possession. They've done that less lately. The results have been good, predictably.

I respectfully disagree.
In their 1-1-3, a second forechecker would immediately attack the puck carrier after he picked a side. The 2nd pressure was deep.
In their 1-2-2 trap the 2nd forecheckers are at the offensive blue line on the wings & don’t attack as far in. They’re focused more on staying in front of the carrier & trapping him higher up the ice. It’s safer.
I’ll keep watching, though.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Beef, here’s an article that refers to what I’m talking about.

It says they went from a “two man forecheck” (1-1-3, though they don’t name it in the article) to a “one man forecheck with more support behind him” (1-2-2, they do name it)

That’s exactly the way I’ve seen it.

How small, tactical changes revived the Flyers from losing streak

Edit: And here’s another article where Ghost is quoted as saying the new 1-2-2 is more “passive” & Voracek says it isn’t as dangerous now if they make a mistake. Interestingly, the article refers to the prior two man forecheck as a “1-3-1” but I think 1-1-3 is more accurate. It is a weak side lock, which the article mentions.

Subtle changes helped turn around Flyers' season and make hockey fun again

 

[deadhead]

The "shell" was more of a reflection of their inability to win board battles in their D-zone at the end of games and get the puck moving the other direction. When they play with high intensity they win their share of those battles, but the lack of size and speed means when they get a lead, there's a tendency to let up and that gets them in trouble.

One reason the 4th line was so effective early on is that it would outskate and outhit opposing teams and keep the puck in the O-zone, the 2nd and 3rd lines weren't effective at that.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Almost all the defensemen FlyGuy listed along with Sanheim in CF leaders do it in MUCH more demanding two-way roles.

Think about this, if quality of competition was the most important factor of Corsi, the top of the leaderboards would be filled with 3rd pair, sheltered defenseman. But it's not. For the most part, the stars are at the top, and the scrubs are at the bottom.

Quality of teammates by CF%:
Hagg - 51.49 (highest on the team)
Sanheim - 47.76 (lowest for D)

Hagg plays with the best possession players on the team and still posts the numbers that he does.

It also dawned on me that the reason Hagg’s high danger chances against are slightly higher than Sanheim’s are probably because Hägg has played mostly with Ghost, who makes some brutal turnovers for all of the other good he does, & MacDonald. I bet if you could isolate those caused by individual players, Hägg accounts for fewer than Sanheim, who plays mostly with Gudas, who doesn’t give up many egregious turnovers.

I don't see #53 out there. You are really starting to sound like a certain poster that types novels on these boards.

There's a correlation between guys that give up a lot of shots and guys that give up a lot of scoring chances. Hagg is on the ice for a lot of shots against. He actually does a decent job limiting chances considering, but that's the nature of the beast. If the other team has the puck a lot, they are eventually going to get scoring chances and score. It really doesn't have much to do with turnovers. This might blow your mind but no defenseman, with as many minutes played as Sanheim, has a better scoring chance rate against than him, in the league. With all of those turnovers you see and his terrible defense, he's still one of the best shot suppressors in the league and as a result the other team doesn't get many scoring chances when he is on the ice.

 

[Striiker]

Oh we're back to the Ghost "mistake" exaggerations?

Neato

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Think about this, if quality of competition was the most important factor of Corsi, the top of the leaderboards would be filled with 3rd pair, sheltered defenseman. But it's not. For the most part, the stars are at the top, and the scrubs are at the bottom.

Quality of teammates by CF%:
Hagg - 51.49 (highest on the team)
Sanheim - 47.76 (lowest for D)

Hagg plays with the best possession players on the team and still posts the numbers that he does.






I don't see #53 out there. You are really starting to sound like a certain poster that types novels on these boards.

There's a correlation between guys that give up a lot of shots and guys that give up a lot of scoring chances. Hagg is on the ice for a lot of shots against. He actually does a decent job limiting chances considering, but that's the nature of the beast. If the other team has the puck a lot, they are eventually going to get scoring chances and score. It really doesn't have much to do with turnovers. This might blow your mind but no defenseman, with as many minutes played as Sanheim, has a better scoring chance rate against than him, in the league. With all of those turnovers you see and his terrible defense, he's still one of the best shot suppressors in the league and as a result the other team doesn't get many scoring chances when he is on the ice.

I just meant the big name D on that list are big names because they play tons of minutes, against top lines, in all situations. Sanheim is sheltered. He doesn’t belong in that group in the grand scheme of things. Not yet.

And I’m sure you’ve seen my posts on the two articles many of you refer to in order to argue zone starts have a minimal impact on Corsi. That’s a misinterpretation. The article actually shows & says that on a small scale, (such as one season) zone starts have a “quite large” effect on Corsi. It’s only after 5 years of “aggregate data” that the impact evened out for 80% of players. Right now, Sanheim has only played 34 games (small sample) & has been heavily deployed in the Ozone, versus Haag who has heavily been deployed in the dzone. The zone starts are very likely to have a “quite large “ impact on their Corsis.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

The "shell" was more of a reflection of their inability to win board battles in their D-zone at the end of games and get the puck moving the other direction. When they play with high intensity they win their share of those battles, but the lack of size and speed means when they get a lead, there's a tendency to let up and that gets them in trouble.

One reason the 4th line was so effective early on is that it would outskate and outhit opposing teams and keep the puck in the O-zone, the 2nd and 3rd lines weren't effective at that.

Right. The “shell” is just a combination of too many icings and an inability to win & maintain possession.

 

[BernieParent]

I am genuinely pleased with the bigger push the Flyers have made late in the past couple of close games, resulting in the around-the-empty-net hijinx. The stat padding is nice, but I really didn't care if they painted the posts and crossbar black; they were two zones away from their own net and in full control of the puck.

 

[FLYguy3911]

I just meant the big name D on that list are big names because they play tons of minutes, against top lines, in all situations. Sanheim is sheltered. He doesn’t belong in that group in the grand scheme of things. Not yet.

He doesn't belong in that group in a vacuum because he doesn't play special teams like those guys. But the one situation he does play (5v5) he performs at an elite, or near elite, level. That is the point.

And I’m sure you’ve seen my posts on the two articles many of you refer to in order to argue zone starts have a minimal impact on Corsi. That’s a misinterpretation. The article actually shows & says that on a small scale, (such as one season) zone starts have a “quite large” effect on Corsi. It’s only after 5 years of “aggregate data” that the impact evened out for 80% of players. Right now, Sanheim has only played 34 games (small sample) & has been heavily deployed in the Ozone, versus Haag who has heavily been deployed in the dzone. The zone starts are very likely to have a “quite large “ impact on their Corsis.

Do you realize Hagg has like 400 shifts that didn't start with a faceoff that are included in the data?

Claude Giroux, Sean Couturier, and Jake Voracek also have DZ starts on par with Hagg. Why are their stats not in the toilet as well? Nolan Patrick has zone starts on par with Sanheim, why does he have some of the worst possession numbers in the league?

You're making this a much bigger deal than it is. Hagg on average gets 1-2 more DZ faceoffs a game than Sanheim. An offensive team gets, on average, 2-3 unblocked shot attempts for every 10 offensive zone faceoffs. That is not the difference between being bottom 10 and top 10 but believe whatever you want.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

He doesn't belong in that group in a vacuum because he doesn't play special teams like those guys. But the one situation he does play (5v5) he performs at an elite, or near elite, level. That is the point.


Do you realize Hagg has like 400 shifts that didn't start with a faceoff that are included in the data?

Claude Giroux, Sean Couturier, and Jake Voracek also have DZ starts on par with Hagg. Why are their stats not in the toilet as well? Nolan Patrick has zone starts on par with Sanheim, why does he have some of the worst possession numbers in the league?

You're making this a much bigger deal than it is. Hagg on average gets 1-2 more DZ faceoffs a game than Sanheim. An offensive team gets, on average, 2-3 unblocked shot attempts for every 10 offensive zone faceoffs. That is not the difference between being bottom 10 and top 10 but believe whatever you want.

It’s a small sample size for both players. Their zone starts do make a difference.
I’m not saying Sanheim is horrible.
I’m not saying Hägg is great.
Just saying Sanheim’s performance is being overrated & Hagg is getting more hate than deserved. In such a small sample, their deployment is likely to skew Sanheim as better than he is, & Hägg worse than he is. The articles make that abundantly clear.
Neither of us are going to change our stance on the topic, so I’ll call a truce before more posters get annoyed.

 

[Magua]

I wouldn’t really call 1/2 a season a “small sample.”

 

[FLYguy3911]

If only some of these websites had a filter that could adjust for score effects and zone starts. We would really be cooking with gas.

 

[Striiker]

Just saying Sanheim’s performance is being overrated & Hagg is getting more hate than deserved.

That's not true.

But it's strange that you try to counter that by overrating Haggs performance and giving Sanheim more hate than deserved.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I wouldn’t really call 1/2 a season a “small sample.”

The article that analyzes the effects of zone starts does.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

That's not true.

But it's strange that you try to counter that by overrating Haggs performance and giving Sanheim more hate than deserved.

I think it is. We disagree.