Post-Game Talk: Well that just happened...

[Frk It]

I think our biggest worries are Rask, Price, and Lundquist. We can play with any team in the league and we are much better than most.

I wasn't saying we can't hang with any team. But we have seen in the past inferior teams ride a hot goalie past better teams. Price is having a ridiculous season thus far.

 

[Actual Thought*]

I wasn't saying we can't hang with any team. But we have seen in the past inferior teams ride a hot goalie past better teams. Price is having a ridiculous season thus far.

I was agreeing with you.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Do you think it is a positive statistic? I'm not saying we will get walked in the playoffs, but you can't just handwave away stats without context.

We have not been good against Tampa Bay. We have been inconsistent against Boston. We have been inconsistent to poor against Montreal. That's reflected in the fact we have only beaten those three teams one time in 7 games.

You also can't just hand wave all the statistical categories that we are strong in. You also have to consider that over the course of the season things ebb and flow. The Wings are much better now that they were at the beginning of the year. I am curious what attributes people here think are needed to win the cup.

 

[Frk It]

I was agreeing with you.

Sorry, not awake yet

I really like our odds of getting out of the 1st round this year. I hope E keeps up his level of play, and Smith gets back on track sometime before April.

 

[Frk It]

You also can't just hand wave all the statistical categories that we are strong in. You also have to consider that over the course of the season things ebb and flow. The Wings are much better now that they were at the beginning of the year. I am curious what attributes people here think are needed to win the cup.

Only thing I am concerned with is our tendency to get bottled up when we face teams that effectively forecheck. To me, it exposes the lack of quality puckmovers, because under pressure those outlets become much more difficult to make.

We've seen in losses against good clubs, happened against Pitt, but then again we were just bad in general then that game.

Other then that we are in a really good spot. Great depth up front, and good depth in net. Coaching staff has done great job maximizing what we have on blue line. Just every now and then still see them getting bottled up badly, and game tends to tighten come playoff time.

That's my only qualm though. I think even if it isn't addressed, we can still have some playoff success.

 

[SoupGuru]

The Pens coach talked about paying attention to getting his lines out there against defensive pairs and not really caring about which forwards he was playing against. Did anyone notice what strategy he was going with? Kronwall seemed like the one that got exploited the most.

 

[InjuredChoker]

The Pens coach talked about paying attention to getting his lines out there against defensive pairs and not really caring about which forwards he was playing against. Did anyone notice what strategy he was going with? Kronwall seemed like the one that got exploited the most.

crosby against kronwall-ericsson, mostly. it stayed pretty much that way until pens scored their 3rd goal. 3rd period, dekeyser and quincey were against crosby when they were against malkin earlier and kronwall-marchenko against malkin in the third, and sometimes smith and ericsson.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Only thing I am concerned with is our tendency to get bottled up when we face teams that effectively forecheck. To me, it exposes the lack of quality puckmovers, because under pressure those outlets become much more difficult to make.

We've seen in losses against good clubs, happened against Pitt, but then again we were just bad in general then that game.

Other then that we are in a really good spot. Great depth up front, and good depth in net. Coaching staff has done great job maximizing what we have on blue line. Just every now and then still see them getting bottled up badly, and game tends to tighten come playoff time.

That's my only qualm though. I think even if it isn't addressed, we can still have some playoff success.

I agree with most of this. However I think you have to take into account that while things do tighten up in the playoffs the Wings will tighten up with them. Babs will make sure of it like he always does.

I think the Pens were strong on the forecheck and the Wings kind of stood around and watched. I don't think the game was indicative of how the Wings are capable of playing. Games like that happen even during a playoff series. Teams simply can not maintain their highest level every game no matter who is on the roster.

They are reluctant to lose. 2nd fewest losses in the NHL.

The have...

Great GAA/SA

Great PP

Good/Great PK (great when Howard was in net)

Great TEAM defence

Good goal differential and it has been climbing as the season progresses

Good goal tending

4 effective lines

Depth

Great coaching staff

All great indicators that they will be hard to beat in a series. I expect Holland may do a little something to make them better at the TDL. I love our chances.

Remember they had Paul Coffey, Fetisov, Lidstrom, and Konstantinov and got crushed by great team defence.

 

[Frk It]

I agree with most of this. However I think you have to take into account that while things do tighten up in the playoffs the Wings will tighten up with them. Babs will make sure of it like he always does.

I think the Pens were strong on the forecheck and the Wings kind of stood around and watched. I don't think the game was indicative of how the Wings are capable of playing. Games like that happen even during a playoff series. Teams simply can not maintain their highest level every game no matter who is on the roster.

They are reluctant to lose. 2nd fewest losses in the NHL.

The have...

Great GAA/SA

Great PP

Good/Great PK (great when Howard was in net)

Great TEAM defence

Good goal differential and it has been climbing as the season progresses

Good goal tending

4 effective lines

Depth

Great coaching staff

All great indicators that they will be hard to beat in a series. I expect Holland may do a little something to make them better at the TDL. I love our chances.

Remember they had Paul Coffey, Fetisov, Lidstrom, and Konstantinov and got crushed by great team defence.

Can't believe I forgot to bring up special teams, good call there. PP and PK bails us out in close games all the time.

I know goaltending is a hot button issue here sometimes (no clue why), but I have faith in Howard to get the job done as long as the team plays well in front of him.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Can't believe I forgot to bring up special teams, good call there. PP and PK bails us out in close games all the time.

I know goaltending is a hot button issue here sometimes (no clue why), but I have faith in Howard to get the job done as long as the team plays well in front of him.

I like that Howard seems to have that "shake it off" personality. Never too high or too low. I agree that he is capable of getting it done with a good team in front of him.

 

[The Zermanator]

Can't believe I forgot to bring up special teams, good call there. PP and PK bails us out in close games all the time.

I know goaltending is a hot button issue here sometimes (no clue why), but I have faith in Howard to get the job done as long as the team plays well in front of him.

Yeah, the PP is our ace in the hole I think. If we run into a hot goalie, he may give us trouble at even strength but if the PP keeps it up we stand a decent chance.

I like that Howard seems to have that "shake it off" personality. Never too high or too low. I agree that he is capable of getting it done with a good team in front of him.

And I completely agree with both of you about Howard. Any decent team has a chance with a goalie who stops 92% of the shots he faces. Can't believe it's even a question around here.

 

[14ari13]

Hmm I dont think you realize what you actually say. It doesn't change the fact that Wings have losing record aginst ATL teams above playoff cutoff.

Wings are against 1-2 aginst Bruins. 0-2 against Habs. 0-2 against Lighting.

Yes, hopefully it's all in the past

What was our record vs them last season?

Yeah, the PP is our ace in the hole I think. If we run into a hot goalie, he may give us trouble at even strength but if the PP keeps it up we stand a decent chance.



And I completely agree with both of you about Howard. Any decent team has a chance with a goalie who stops 92% of the shots he faces. Can't believe it's even a question around here.

Solid is not good enough. Howard has to outplay the opponent's goalie in some games.
Do you think Howard is better than Price, Rask, Lundquist, Fluery, Bishop?


As for many posters here questioning our defence. You see that we Are experimenting with our defence and that is probably why Smith has struggled lately and our defence in general.
We have given up Lashoff, maybe Kindl too.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

What was our record vs them last season?


Solid is not good enough. Howard has to outplay the opponent's goalie in some games.
Do you think Howard is better than Price, Rask, Lundquist, Fluery, Bishop?


As for many posters here questioning our defence. You see that we Are experimenting with our defence and that is probably why Smith has struggled lately and our defence in general.
We have given up Lashoff, maybe Kindl too.

In the post-season he has been better than Fluery.

Yes I believe he is better than Bishop.

Gee, he isn't better than three of the top four goalies in the league real shocker there, now go look at what those guys make.

 

[sean3250]

What was our record vs them last season?


Solid is not good enough. Howard has to outplay the opponent's goalie in some games.
Do you think Howard is better than Price, Rask, Lundquist, Fluery, Bishop?


As for many posters here questioning our defence. You see that we Are experimenting with our defence and that is probably why Smith has struggled lately and our defence in general.
We have given up Lashoff, maybe Kindl too.

I personally have no problems going up against MAF, or Bishop in the playoffs. While MAF may be having a great year, he wouldn't instill much confidence in me if I was a Pens fan. He's a career .911 in the regular season, and an even worse .905 in the playoffs. He is a known playoff choker. He's had a total of ONE good playoff run and that was all the ways back in 07-08. I'm not worried about him come playoff time. I'm sure the real MAF will show his face when the playoffs roll around.

And as for Bishop he's a career .917 just like Howard, and he's played 180 less games than Howard has. Bishop hasn't even played in a single playoff game in his entire NHL career. And as you may already know, most goalies stats tend to go down in the playoffs. Who's to say, that he would be the difference maker in a series against Tampa. Also, he's not even playing well this year at all. He's winning games (well look at the team in front of him), but Tampa isn't winning because of him. He doesn't scare me in the playoffs either.

I agree that Price (although Jimmy has better playoff numbers than Price), Rask, and Lundqvist are better goalies than Howard. I don't know if Jimmy is the guy you can win a cup with, but goalies worse than him have won a cup.

 

[14ari13]

In the post-season he has been better than Fluery.

Yes I believe he is better than Bishop.

Gee, he isn't better than three of the top four goalies in the league real shocker there, now go look at what those guys make.

I personally have no problems going up against MAF, or Bishop in the playoffs. While MAF may be having a great year, he wouldn't instill much confidence in me if I was a Pens fan. He's a career .911 in the regular season, and an even worse .905 in the playoffs. He is a known playoff choker. He's had a total of ONE good playoff run and that was all the ways back in 07-08. I'm not worried about him come playoff time. I'm sure the real MAF will show his face when the playoffs roll around.

And as for Bishop he's a career .917 just like Howard, and he's played 180 less games than Howard has. Bishop hasn't even played in a single playoff game in his entire NHL career. And as you may already know, most goalies stats tend to go down in the playoffs.Who's to say, that he would be the difference maker in a series against Tampa. Also, he's not even playing well this year at all. He's winning games (well look at the team in front of him), but Tampa isn't winning because of him. He doesn't scare me in the playoffs either.

I agree that Price (although Jimmy has better playoff numbers than Price), Rask, and Lundqvist are better goalies than Howard. I don't know if Jimmy is the guy you can win a cup with, but goalies worse than him have won a cup.

What do you mean down? Worse?


It all does not matter. He has to outplay the other goalies in some games and has to steal some.

 

[sean3250]

What do you mean down? Worse?


It all does not matter. He has to outplay the other goalies in some games and has to steal some.

Yes. I meant to say worse.

Anyway, your right. Goalies have to steal a game here and there in the playoffs. Its the nature of the beast. We just have to hope that Howard is up to the task.

 

[benusmc]

I thought Howard was one of our top players before he went down with injury, other than OT of course.....

 

[Dynheart]

I don't understand people's beef here. It's almost like you're finding reasons to nitpick, just so you can nitpick. Not team is perfect. Just go look at those so called "contenders" boards. They don't think they are contenders. Just the "other" fan bases.

First off. We have the "losing to playoff contenders". Tampa being one of the more recent. So what. They lose that game, and they are all of the sudden...no longer contenders. But lets use the same logic, and arguments. What if they lost against Buffalo that day? Same old argument, different day. Only difference is that the Wings aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams, so they aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams. With this sound logic, the Wings should never drop a game if they're a "legit contender".

But let's dig further. It's no longer about not being able to beat playoff/non playoff teams. It's all about the Atlantic. 1-3-3. OK. Not impressive. Most of those games were played when the season started (no expectations at the time). The team only consisted of the PK, and Jimmy Howard, who couldn't stop a puck in the shootout..which they were faced with a lot in the beginning of the season.

The more recent games, Boston and Tampa. They are what they are. The Boston game is when the Wings decided to take a month off (December). Tampa? Wings were bound to lose. They were on a Winning streak. It could have very well been the Oilers that beat them.

The Pens? I hope that the people posting here know that that wasn't just the Pens outplaying the Wings. That was the Wings beating themselves on the ice. If they competed, the result could have been different. Maybe the same. But that's not the same Wings team we have been seeing for most of the season so far. So I just chalk that up as a "whatever" type of game.

The Wings will be fine come playoff time. Finding nitpicks just to call the Wings a non-contender is basically just like every top teams board. We need a top D-man and we'll be fine. Otherwise, they'll have to make due. And they been doing a good job of it so far.

 

[Yemack]

I don't understand people's beef here. It's almost like you're finding reasons to nitpick, just so you can nitpick. Not team is perfect. Just go look at those so called "contenders" boards. They don't think they are contenders. Just the "other" fan bases.

First off. We have the "losing to playoff contenders". Tampa being one of the more recent. So what. They lose that game, and they are all of the sudden...no longer contenders. But lets use the same logic, and arguments. What if they lost against Buffalo that day? Same old argument, different day. Only difference is that the Wings aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams, so they aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams. With this sound logic, the Wings should never drop a game if they're a "legit contender".

But let's dig further. It's no longer about not being able to beat playoff/non playoff teams. It's all about the Atlantic. 1-3-3. OK. Not impressive. Most of those games were played when the season started (no expectations at the time). The team only consisted of the PK, and Jimmy Howard, who couldn't stop a puck in the shootout..which they were faced with a lot in the beginning of the season.

The more recent games, Boston and Tampa. They are what they are. The Boston game is when the Wings decided to take a month off (December). Tampa? Wings were bound to lose. They were on a Winning streak. It could have very well been the Oilers that beat them.

The Pens? I hope that the people posting here know that that wasn't just the Pens outplaying the Wings. That was the Wings beating themselves on the ice. If they competed, the result could have been different. Maybe the same. But that's not the same Wings team we have been seeing for most of the season so far. So I just chalk that up as a "whatever" type of game.

The Wings will be fine come playoff time. Finding nitpicks just to call the Wings a non-contender is basically just like every top teams board. We need a top D-man and we'll be fine. Otherwise, they'll have to make due. And they been doing a good job of it so far.

let me reitertate that I'm not saying I'm projecting current record to show Wings will fail.

However Wings are 353% more likely to have an 'off night' against division rivals? chance?

doing chi square test shows 99.9% it is not due to a chance, using 22-9 (wings record outside division) as baseline. Using overall record as the baseline, stat test shows 99% that it is not due to random chance.

Therefore there seems to be a clear relationship between [playing a team within our division] and [winning %].

The purpose of this test was not to show how wings will do in playoff, because regular season record, although a very good barometer, doesn't always predict that winner.

This purpose of this test was to show how it is not due to some random unfortunate event that Wings lost all those games against atlantic playoff teams.

Like I said, I belive wings will do well but at the same time current record merits a concern because there is a definite factor influencing wings winning % within our division.

 

[Actual Thought*]

let me reitertate that I'm not saying I'm projecting current record to show Wings will fail.

However Wings are 353% more likely to have an 'off night' against division rivals? chance?

doing chi square test shows 99.9% it is not due to a chance, using 22-9 (wings record outside division) as baseline. Using overall record as the baseline, stat test shows 99% that it is not due to random chance.

Therefore there seems to be a clear relationship between [playing a team within our division] and [winning %].

The purpose of this test was not to show how wings will do in playoff, because regular season record, although a very good barometer, doesn't always predict that winner.

This purpose of this test was to show how it is not due to some random unfortunate event that Wings lost all those games against atlantic playoff teams.

Like I said, I belive wings will do well but at the same time current record merits a concern because there is a definite factor influencing wings winning % within our division.

I have absolutely no idea what you are driving at. Is there some point? I know you posted a bunch of random numbers but I have no idea what you are trying to say? I know you are not predicting they will fail because you said that before you said all the other stuff that seems to be an attempt to find a fatal flaw? I dunno.

 

[TheOtherOne]

let me reitertate that I'm not saying I'm projecting current record to show Wings will fail.

However Wings are 353% more likely to have an 'off night' against division rivals? chance?

doing chi square test shows 99.9% it is not due to a chance, using 22-9 (wings record outside division) as baseline. Using overall record as the baseline, stat test shows 99% that it is not due to random chance.

Therefore there seems to be a clear relationship between [playing a team within our division] and [winning %].

The purpose of this test was not to show how wings will do in playoff, because regular season record, although a very good barometer, doesn't always predict that winner.

This purpose of this test was to show how it is not due to some random unfortunate event that Wings lost all those games against atlantic playoff teams.

Like I said, I belive wings will do well but at the same time current record merits a concern because there is a definite factor influencing wings winning % within our division.

I don't think chi square test to show statistical significance makes much sense in this case, because it relies on an underlying assumption that "playing against a division rival" is a key factor. This lumps all division rivals into an arbitrary category. Playing against Tampa, playing against Montreal, playing against Boston, these are not the same thing at all. You would have to run the same test on each team individually to draw meaning from it and my guess is in that case you have a much lower chi square value due to smaller sample size in that case.

I mean essentially you're saying that our record of all games against Tampa, Montreal, and Boston prove that we have a high chance of losing a game against Buffalo.

 

[Yemack]

I don't think chi square test to show statistical significance makes much sense in this case, because it relies on an underlying assumption that "playing against a division rival" is a key factor. This lumps all division rivals into an arbitrary category. Playing against Tampa, playing against Montreal, playing against Boston, these are not the same thing at all. You would have to run the same test on each team individually to draw meaning from it and my guess is in that case you have a much lower chi square value due to smaller sample size in that case.

I mean essentially you're saying that our record of all games against Tampa, Montreal, and Boston prove that we have a high chance of losing a game against Buffalo.

actually i only tested for significance against atlantic playoff teams. playing buffalo doesn't factor into any of the equation.

I think chi square test makes sense because I was trying to find whether there is a relationship between 2 factors [playing against division playoff teams] and [wings winning %]. I wan'st trying to find causual or correlation factor. Chi square usually works well when you have categorical variables like this case and is a good test for preliminary testing. (if I remember my stat correctly)

To make it easier to understand, I just want to highlight 2 numbers.

353% <-wings are likely to lose 353% more times against Habs, Bruins and Lightining compared to teams outside our division.

99.9% <- chance that the loss against those teams are NOT due to just unlucky random chance.

 

[Yemack]

I have absolutely no idea what you are driving at. Is there some point? I know you posted a bunch of random numbers but I have no idea what you are trying to say? I know you are not predicting they will fail because you said that before you said all the other stuff that seems to be an attempt to find a fatal flaw? I dunno.

First, If you have problem with my calculation or assumptions or types of statistics I used, I welcome criticism.

Second, just because I dont think they are ok on some aspect means I think they are fatally flawed.

 

[Pavels Dog]

First off. We have the "losing to playoff contenders". Tampa being one of the more recent. So what. They lose that game, and they are all of the sudden...no longer contenders. But lets use the same logic, and arguments. What if they lost against Buffalo that day? Same old argument, different day. Only difference is that the Wings aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams, so they aren't contenders because they cannot beat non-playoff teams. With this sound logic, the Wings should never drop a game if they're a "legit contender".

Exactly this.

Bad win% against the West? We're not legit, only good because we're in the East.
Bad win% against bottomfeeders? We're not legit, should be able to beat bad teams even without a 100% effort.
Bad win% against division ? Not legit, obviously.

Every season is basically some variation on this. Can't beat everyone, and rarely do you have exactly the same win% against all teams. Our current record against the top Eastern rivals is mainly a statistical oddity imo, not a reflection of us not being able to compete with them. Even if we had a perfect record against them I would not put our chances to win a playoff series against Tampa/Montreal at much higher than 50%. That's how evenly matched the East is.

 

[TheOtherOne]

actually i only tested for significance against atlantic playoff teams. playing buffalo doesn't factor into any of the equation.

I think chi square test makes sense because I was trying to find whether there is a relationship between 2 factors [playing against division playoff teams] and [wings winning %]. I wan'st trying to find causual or correlation factor. Chi square usually works well when you have categorical variables like this case and is a good test for preliminary testing. (if I remember my stat correctly)

To make it easier to understand, I just want to highlight 2 numbers.

353% <-wings are likely to lose 353% more times against Habs, Bruins and Lightining compared to teams outside our division.

99.9% <- chance that the loss against those teams are NOT due to just unlucky random chance.

Okay, that's a little better, but you're still calculating the chance to lose against Montreal based on past history against Boston, for example. If you dismiss that as an impossible, meaningless correlation, then your chi2 goes down.

I guess all I'm saying is don't read too much into the numbers, but if you've already acknowledged that then no biggie, we can move on.