Heaton
Moderator
And when the Cup Champions were 30th, perhaps it tells us we need to hit less.
Wings were 25th in their cup winning year and 23rd in the following season as well. I don't think hit totals tells much of the story.
And when the Cup Champions were 30th, perhaps it tells us we need to hit less.
I don't mind a lack of hitting as long as forecheckers physically engage with a check or at least getting in a battle for a loose puck. That's why I don't mind that Brunner is gone. But I think guys like Nyquist and Tatar are effective on the forecheck because they're fast and tenacious and wear opposing D out from chasing them around and battling all the time.We don't hit. We don't punish guys in our end or in front of our net. We don't hit their defensemen enough.
Yeah, but they're in the wussy West! Obviously the Hawks could never succeed against the super-tough East. Except the Bruins, but... um.And when the Cup Champions were 30th, perhaps it tells us we need to hit less.
And when the Cup Champions were 30th, perhaps it tells us we need to hit less.
Thus we can conclude that possessing the puck is for soft teams.hits:
1: are a subjective stat that is measured differently at different arenas
2: the more you have the puck the less you tend to hit,for obvious reasons
Hah.
Right.
Interesting how both Chicago and Detroit stepped their rate of hitting in the playoffs though eh?
Here are their regular season and playoff hits per game rate
Team RSR POR
DET 18.0 27.14
CHI 17.5 28.7
Here's Boston's by comparison
BOS 25 38.4
What would be interesting would be to see our average hits per game in wins vs losses ...(no four on four or shootout games) to see if there is any difference.
We're 29th in hitting. So that tells you something
So what team would you like us modeled after?
I would model us after the 97 red wings if i could.
A blend of speed, smarts, skill and toughness
Hah.
Right.
Interesting how both Chicago and Detroit stepped their rate of hitting in the playoffs though eh?
Here are their regular season and playoff hits per game rate
Team RSR POR
DET 18.0 27.14
CHI 17.5 28.7
Here's Boston's by comparison
BOS 25 38.4
What would be interesting would be to see our average hits per game in wins vs losses ...(no four on four or shootout games) to see if there is any difference.
Hah.
Right.
Interesting how both Chicago and Detroit stepped their rate of hitting in the playoffs though eh?
Here are their regular season and playoff hits per game rate
Team RSR POR
DET 18.0 27.14
CHI 17.5 28.7
Here's Boston's by comparison
BOS 25 38.4
What would be interesting would be to see our average hits per game in wins vs losses ...(no four on four or shootout games) to see if there is any difference.
So basically you're saying that Boston hit more, and didn't win the Cup. What's the point?
Salary cap may have something to say about that. I think the Last couple cup winners have been different so there's no set way to win it
I'm not saying that at all.
Why do people a need to oversimplify and compartmentalize everything into some neat tidy package to agree or disagree with?
Well, you can use a Tootoo instead of an Eaves. You can sign a Morrow instead of an Alfredsson.
Let's not act like there's no way to add toughness or grit
Perhaps try explaining your position more clearly rather than lament the responses.
Many teams have won it all without big hit numbers or toughness. So while you can Don Cherry all day, don't willfully ignore success of teams that fit a "soft" criteria. Several examples have already been provided, including the current champs.
I'm not saying that at all.
Why do people a need to oversimplify and compartmentalize everything into some neat tidy package to agree or disagree with?
Wasn't meant to be insulting, but it's funny even a passing comparison to Cherry can get the hackles up. He's a fairly big proponent of your position here, that's all.
Then what are you saying?
Interesting how both Chicago and Detroit stepped their rate of hitting in the playoffs though eh?
Here are their regular season and playoff hits per game rate
Team RSR POR
DET 18.0 27.14
CHI 17.5 28.7
Here's Boston's by comparison
BOS 25 38.4
What would be interesting would be to see our average hits per game in wins vs losses ...(no four on four or shootout games) to see if there is any difference.
We've got a coach that likes big, physical hockey players -- so much so that he'll play a scrub like Abdelkader way out of position or overuse a broken down Danny Cleary.
If you spent the money to sign an Iginla, Morrow, Clarkson, Penner or whoever, then you wouldn't be forced to play these guys way out of position.
Hah.
Right.
Interesting how both Chicago and Detroit stepped their rate of hitting in the playoffs though eh?
Here are their regular season and playoff hits per game rate
Team RSR POR
DET 18.0 27.14
CHI 17.5 28.7
Here's Boston's by comparison
BOS 25 38.4
What would be interesting would be to see our average hits per game in wins vs losses ...(no four on four or shootout games) to see if there is any difference.
On a team-wide scale, both hits and block shots have no correlation to winning.
http://www.examiner.com/article/examining-real-time-statistics-and-dispelling-the-myths
I decided to run correlations over the past 6 years of regular season NHL hockey between a number of various team stats and the given team's point percentage and win percentage. I then ran year over year correlations to determine the predictive power of each yearly statistic. That is to say - I determined which of these stats are repeatable with a relatively high degree of certainty.
Statistic Reliability Pt% R Pt% R2 Win% R Win% R2
Road Hits 0.031 0.015 0.000 0.003 0.000
Home Hits 0.284 0.028 0.001 -0.003 0.000
You'll notice that team 5v5 Sh% is near the top of this list. It also has very low reliability. Then you'll see all of the penalty, hit, and RTSS stats. Virtually none of these matter to teams winning and losing. Teams win with an edge, or win without one. They also lose with an edge and lose without one. Being big and tough is NOT a cure all to a losing franchise... getting better at puck possession and spending more time in the other team's end is.
You'll also see that 3 of the 4 lowest ranked stats are Road, Home and Total hits. None of them matter particularly... but it's interesting to see how reliable Home hits are while Road hits are virtually non-repeatable. Obviously this indicates serious bias by score keepers around the NHL. Similarly Home Giveaways and Road Giveaways diverge enormously in terms of their reliability year over year.