• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Leafs at Islanders -- Tuesday, 7 pm

I saw them playing couple of this year and they are much better from year before.
Not sure how they will manage without Grabo but we shall see
 
zeke said:
they're not a team to be scared of, obviously. if we're scared of the Isles we're in deep trouble.

they're a decent team finally, at least.
Click to expand...

And the Leafs...how would you rate them? Do you see the Leafs as favourites in tonight's game?
 
Last edited:
SENSible said:
And the Leafs...how would you rate them? Do you see the Leafs as favourites in tonight's game?
Click to expand...

The problem with the Leafs is...which Leafs?

The fast, creative team that has been creating tons of chances and maintaining solid possession. Or the reactionary, shitty Leafs that can't clear their zone.

We've seen some of the one, and some of the other this season. The former would probably be a favourite in this game, the latter definitely isn't.
 
I am not-so-secretly hoping we'll slide towards a 2-8 or 3-7 record so we can get a new coach before it's too late to salvage the season. :)
 
The Jekyll and Hyde Leafs are interesting because they are clearly trying to utilize more possession, etc...but it has only translated into small pockets of great possession play...makes me wonder if its just growing pains at using new systems, strategies, etc...
 
Metalleaf said:
The Jekyll and Hyde Leafs are interesting because they are clearly trying to utilize more possession, etc...but it has only translated into small pockets of great possession play...makes me wonder if its just growing pains at using new systems, strategies, etc...
Click to expand...

There are going to be growing pains. Especially with such a young team. The vet 3rd line, and guys like Polak, PHaneuf and Lupul have had little trouble adapting. But anyone expecting massive turnaround in performance in less than 5 games likely had unreasonable expectations.
 
I mean they've showed the competency at times to play that way, something we never saw last season...hopefully by season's end they'll be a much more competent possession team.
 
for the record, they've been pretty much a dead even 50% possession team in 5v5 Close situations so far.
 
zeke said:
for the record, they've been pretty much a dead even 50% possession team in 5v5 Close situations so far.
Click to expand...
As compared to what was it last year? ~ 41%?

50% still isn't great, but it is an improvement at least.

I don't know why you pick 5v5 though. Why not include all ES TOI? The fact we're pathetic 4v4 should be taken into consideration too.
 
don't they think they have an ES total breakdown on any sites.

mostly because 5v5 is a totally different situation than 4v4. but also because 4v4 makes up such a tiny part of total icetime in the end that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference.
 
Last edited:
It's possible they could be developing into very strong play as the new system takes hold. I'm just not confident in Carlyle getting this to work with his ways with ice time deployment, motivation of his players, in-game non-adjustments and whippingboy practices with good young skilled players.

We shall see, but I'm leaning on them playing poorly under him and so until he's replaced.
 
on the flip side, if you look at the leafs using Score-adjusted 5v5, they're only at 46%. not as good, but still better than last year's 42%.

Using score-adjusted gives you a bigger sample to work with, by adjusting for instead of just ignoring non-close situations.

And that score-adjusted number includes the fact that the leafs have completely capitulated in the PIT and first DET game after going down a few goals. The last halves of those two games we got absolutely crushed. We just completely gave up in both.
 
zeke said:
on the flip side, if you look at the leafs using Score-adjusted 5v5, they're only at 46%. not as good, but still better than last year's 42%.

Using score-adjusted gives you a bigger sample to work with, by adjusting for instead of just ignoring non-close situations.

And that score-adjusted number includes the fact that the leafs have completely capitulated in the PIT and first DET game after going down a few goals. The last halves of those two games we got absolutely crushed. We just completely gave up in both.
Click to expand...

Have you ever come across the justification for using close instead of CF% or something else all inclusive? I've heard the argument, but 1) it seems a bit silly to me & 2)I've never seen good data backing it up.
 
MindzEye said:
Have you ever come across the justification for using close instead of CF% or something else all inclusive? I've heard the argument, but 1) it seems a bit silly to me & 2)I've never seen good data backing it up.
Click to expand...

yeah there's been plenty of stuff written on why close is the best, which is usually under the umbrella of "score effects".

And it follows along with logic, too - teams adjust their strategy depending on the score. Teams will sit on leads, or even just plain let up with big ones, while teams a few goals down might just start riskng everything and going all out attack, or might just capitulate and give up. The Close numbers have for the most part been better predictors than the overall numbers.

the downside is the that you're cutting off a good chunk of your sample size when you do it and that those non-close situations probably do tell you something about the teams too.

So theyve started using score adjusted numbers that let you use all the data points without ignoring score effects. Of course, I'm not sure that they're doing quite the RIGHT adjustments yet, but the early returns seem to be sensible. They seem to make better predictions so far.....from what I know about them, which isn't a whole lot. its hard to find much info on the score adjusted numbers as of yet.
 
Funnily enough, for once the advanced stats actually support randy's decision on the defensemen.

5v5 CF%

Phaneuf 52.6
Franson 49.6
Gardiner 49.1
Polak 47.0
Rielly 46.6
Robidas 44.2
Percy 42.5

thought percy looks worse due to tough zone starts.....but then again, even when you adjust for that, he doesn't look great:

ZoneStart-Adjusts 5v5 CF%:

Phaneuf 54.3
Polak 50.3
Robidas 45.5
Percy 45.2
Rielly 44.9
Gardiner 44.7

(Franson doesn't have enough minutes to come up on this list yet).


and there's the fact that the one game Stuart sat out was by far our best possesion game of the year.


For once, one of Randy's decisions is actually supported by the advanced stats.
 
lundqvist only melted down after we pumped 4 sweet and well earned goals past him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top