Jake Gardiner played more minutes than any other Leafs player and then Jake Gardiner was a healthy scratch. The next game, Jake Gardiner played more minutes than any other Leafs player.
If you're not a Leafs fan then this may seem crazy but if you *are* a Leafs fan then you know it's just another day in Toronto.
You see, this is the franchise that continues to trot out Mark Fraser on defense rather than JM Liles, some nights Morgan Rielly and yes, some nights, Jake Gardiner. It's also the franchise that continues to smash its metaphorical head against the metaphorical wall -- 'our feelings' being the head in this metaphor and 'Tyler Bozak on the first line' being the wall.
We start Bernier more than Reimer, we pay big money for Clarkson and Bozak while buying out Grabovski and watching MacArthur walk, and did I mention we keep skating Bozak on the first line?
The decisions that this organization has made since Randy Carlyle took over as coach are mind-numbing. I'm sure that there are those of you who'll say, "who could have predicted x or y," and to you people I say, "everyone, basically."
Rumours have been flying for the past few weeks that the Leafs are looking to bolster their defense. Also, they plan on trading Gardiner for a top-6 forward. What? Normally, I'd say that it's just the Toronto media trying to sell copy but this came from Darren Dreger and if there's a bigger shill in sports over the last 18-months, I'm not aware of him or her. The Leafs are trying to do those things, bet on it, and Dreger is going to do everything in his power to oversell Toronto's assets and undersell whoever it is that Nonis may have his beady little eyes on.
Having said these things, it hasn't all been bad. The record is pretty good because the goalies have been great and one of those goalies (albeit the lesser of the two) was a Nonis acquisition. Also Bolland was a hell of a lot better than I'd expected him to be, if I'm being honest. But seriously, I have a hard time coming up with a more directionless team in the league. OK, maybe the Flyers.
So go on Twitter ( @bcphockeyblog ) and call me negative, ask me if I hate the Leafs, or tell me to watch a game instead of sticking my head in spreadsheet but do those things knowing that I don't like being negative about my team, and I'm this frustrated because I do love the Leafs, and that the chances are I probably watch more hockey more closely than you do (assuming you said those things in the first place, that is.)
The truth is, I'm fed up. We deserve better decision-making than what we've seen from Nonis and Carlyle so far. There's a limit to what any manager can achieve with the set of assets they're given but we've consistently mis-used the range of goods we have at our disposal, and that's something for which I can't abide. Enough is enough -- fire them both.
Showing posts with label Curt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Curt. Show all posts
Monday, December 2, 2013
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Time On Ice: Guessing At Carlyle's Favourites
If you ask your average advanced stat guy what's the single best metric for judging a player's talent relative to the rest of his teammates, most will say time on ice. You see, contrary to popular belief, most of us don't think NHL coaches are stupid or can't judge talent or any of the things that we're often accused of. Sure, we point out perceived mistakes when we see them but that doesn't mean we think coaches are inept -- just fallible.
Randy Carlyle falls prey to these critiques more often than most. Part of it is because the Leafs do so poorly in a lot of the advanced stat metrics that proponents of the discipline have shown correlate very closely to success and the other part comes with the territory. Leafs fans, you see, are a critical and jaded bunch.
For a lot of last season, I found myself infuriated with Carlyle's player selection. In my view, Franson, Grabovski, and Kadri weren't getting nearly enough icetime while Bozak was getting far too much. Add to this the Jake Gardiner demotion and I had ample fodder for my critiques.
Given that three of these underused assets were young, I wondered if Carlyle had an anti-youth bias. Having given Carlyle the lockout shortened season to figure things out with this roster, I thought I'd have a look at who he's using to start this year and, crucially, in what situations to see if his own assessment of players is closer or further to my own this season.
Randy Carlyle falls prey to these critiques more often than most. Part of it is because the Leafs do so poorly in a lot of the advanced stat metrics that proponents of the discipline have shown correlate very closely to success and the other part comes with the territory. Leafs fans, you see, are a critical and jaded bunch.
For a lot of last season, I found myself infuriated with Carlyle's player selection. In my view, Franson, Grabovski, and Kadri weren't getting nearly enough icetime while Bozak was getting far too much. Add to this the Jake Gardiner demotion and I had ample fodder for my critiques.
Given that three of these underused assets were young, I wondered if Carlyle had an anti-youth bias. Having given Carlyle the lockout shortened season to figure things out with this roster, I thought I'd have a look at who he's using to start this year and, crucially, in what situations to see if his own assessment of players is closer or further to my own this season.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Through Three: Early Observations on the Leafs Season
The Toronto Maple Leafs are 3-0-0 and are the only team in the NHL who can make that claim. Awesome.
To win three games in a row, some things have to be going well and there have certainly been some positives in the early going for Toronto but it hasn't been all sunshine and smiles. With three games in the books, I thought I'd share some of my observations from the early days of the 2013-14 season.
The Good and the Bad of Tyler Bozak
I'll preface this by saying that I've been on Bozak's case for an awfully long time now but he really hasn't done anything in the first three games to alter my opinion of him. He throws the puck to Kessel in all situations and doesn't have the skill or offensive instincts to capitalize when Kessel gives it back. There have been at least a half-dozen opportunities in the early stages of the season where Bozak has either feebly put a one-time shot in the direction of the net or missed the puck entirely. What it all boils down to is that Bozak is a disaster at 5-on-5 and the fact that he's still skating with Kessel is either a damning reflection of the job Burke/Nonis have done at filling the centre position or an indictment of Randy Carlyle's deployment of the centres we do have.
Having said all of that, Bozak has looked awfully good on the penalty-kill. He's been playing the points very aggressively and twice in the first three games it's paid off -- once with a shorthanded goal and once with what nearly turned into a shorthanded breakaway. Couple this with his proficiency in the shootout and Bozak has it in him to be a useful player in select situations.
Van Riemsdyk's Steady Play
Is it just me or has Van Riemsdyk quickly become one of the most consistent Leafs forwards? He seems to create at least one scoring chance for himself every game at even strength and he always looks dangerous on the powerplay. I've been very impressed with Van Riemsdyk's play thus far and I've got a feeling he's going to put up some pretty gaudy special teams numbers.
To win three games in a row, some things have to be going well and there have certainly been some positives in the early going for Toronto but it hasn't been all sunshine and smiles. With three games in the books, I thought I'd share some of my observations from the early days of the 2013-14 season.
The Good and the Bad of Tyler Bozak
I'll preface this by saying that I've been on Bozak's case for an awfully long time now but he really hasn't done anything in the first three games to alter my opinion of him. He throws the puck to Kessel in all situations and doesn't have the skill or offensive instincts to capitalize when Kessel gives it back. There have been at least a half-dozen opportunities in the early stages of the season where Bozak has either feebly put a one-time shot in the direction of the net or missed the puck entirely. What it all boils down to is that Bozak is a disaster at 5-on-5 and the fact that he's still skating with Kessel is either a damning reflection of the job Burke/Nonis have done at filling the centre position or an indictment of Randy Carlyle's deployment of the centres we do have.
Having said all of that, Bozak has looked awfully good on the penalty-kill. He's been playing the points very aggressively and twice in the first three games it's paid off -- once with a shorthanded goal and once with what nearly turned into a shorthanded breakaway. Couple this with his proficiency in the shootout and Bozak has it in him to be a useful player in select situations.
Van Riemsdyk's Steady Play
Is it just me or has Van Riemsdyk quickly become one of the most consistent Leafs forwards? He seems to create at least one scoring chance for himself every game at even strength and he always looks dangerous on the powerplay. I've been very impressed with Van Riemsdyk's play thus far and I've got a feeling he's going to put up some pretty gaudy special teams numbers.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Toronto Maple Leafs Roster Shakedowns
My morning started with the news that Joe Colborne had been traded to the Calgary Flames for a fourth round draft pick that could become a third round draft pick if the NHL decided mid-season that all 30 teams would make the playoffs starting this year.
Next came the news that John-Michael Liles was on waivers and then finally word that Morgan Rielly would be starting the season in the NHL.
My feelings on the roster that's about to start the 2013-14 season is a bit of a mixed bag. On the one hand, I'm pleasantly surprised that the Leafs decided to keep Rielly for the time being. For one thing, I think he'll do more learning at the NHL-level than he will in the WHL with a pretty woeful Moose Jaw team and for another, I think he's a much better defenseman today than a guy like Mark Fraser. As long as Phaneuf, Gunnarsson, and Ranger are eating PK minutes, I don't see any reason to carry Fraser ahead of Rielly.
Next came the news that John-Michael Liles was on waivers and then finally word that Morgan Rielly would be starting the season in the NHL.
My feelings on the roster that's about to start the 2013-14 season is a bit of a mixed bag. On the one hand, I'm pleasantly surprised that the Leafs decided to keep Rielly for the time being. For one thing, I think he'll do more learning at the NHL-level than he will in the WHL with a pretty woeful Moose Jaw team and for another, I think he's a much better defenseman today than a guy like Mark Fraser. As long as Phaneuf, Gunnarsson, and Ranger are eating PK minutes, I don't see any reason to carry Fraser ahead of Rielly.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Toronto Maple Leafs Season Pre-Preview
Having missed the playoffs for 8 consecutive seasons, you might think that a playoff berth would mean fewer offseason changes but you'd be wrong. With some key pieces shipped out of town, some big tickets handed out to other highly sought after players, this year's Leafs have the same frame with a different finish.
With all the roster changes, the development of some key prospects, and a coach with a little more familiarity with the returning players, we thought that we'd make our best guesses at what this team will look like headed into the 2013-'14 season.
Out: Clarke MacArthur, Mikhail Grabovski, Ben Scrivens, Matt Frattin, Mike Kostka, Mike Komisarek, Leo Komarov
At first glance, it doesn't look like the Leafs lost much in the way of production. Grabovski (16), MacArthur (20), and Frattin (13) all finished outside the top-7 in scoring on last year's team. What these numbers don't show is that all three of these players had a higher O-zone finish than O-zone start, suggesting they were all pushing play in the right direction. Of the returning Leafs, only Nazem Kadri and Jay McClement can make that claim which leads to the inevitable question, "who is going to do the heavy lifting?"
In: Dave Bolland, David Clarkson, TJ Brennan, Jonathan Bernier
The Leafs hope that the answer to that question will, in part, be Dave Bolland. Bolland's advanced stats don't suggest that he's going to be a possession monster by any stretch but the Leafs think that he's the ideal third line centre.
Clarkson is the powerforward that the Leafs haven't had since time immemorial. He shoots a ton, he fights, he scores his share, and he pushes the play to the offensive zone. What you also get, however, is a career shooting percentage under 10. What should Leafs fans expect? A physically dominating puck-hog who will score but whose linemates probably wont.
With all the roster changes, the development of some key prospects, and a coach with a little more familiarity with the returning players, we thought that we'd make our best guesses at what this team will look like headed into the 2013-'14 season.
Out: Clarke MacArthur, Mikhail Grabovski, Ben Scrivens, Matt Frattin, Mike Kostka, Mike Komisarek, Leo Komarov
At first glance, it doesn't look like the Leafs lost much in the way of production. Grabovski (16), MacArthur (20), and Frattin (13) all finished outside the top-7 in scoring on last year's team. What these numbers don't show is that all three of these players had a higher O-zone finish than O-zone start, suggesting they were all pushing play in the right direction. Of the returning Leafs, only Nazem Kadri and Jay McClement can make that claim which leads to the inevitable question, "who is going to do the heavy lifting?"
In: Dave Bolland, David Clarkson, TJ Brennan, Jonathan Bernier
The Leafs hope that the answer to that question will, in part, be Dave Bolland. Bolland's advanced stats don't suggest that he's going to be a possession monster by any stretch but the Leafs think that he's the ideal third line centre.
Clarkson is the powerforward that the Leafs haven't had since time immemorial. He shoots a ton, he fights, he scores his share, and he pushes the play to the offensive zone. What you also get, however, is a career shooting percentage under 10. What should Leafs fans expect? A physically dominating puck-hog who will score but whose linemates probably wont.
Monday, August 12, 2013
Good Forwards, Good Defense, and an Average Team: Quick Fixes for the Maple Leafs
Cheering for a mediocre team is a funny thing, particularly when that team spends all the way to the ceiling of the salary cap. Almost everyone agrees that there's a problem but nobody can agree on what that problem is -- or at least they don't agree for long.
A few years ago, on paper, the Leafs looked like they'd have a strong defense with Phaneuf, Beauchemin, Gunnarsson, Komisarek, Schenn, and Kaberle. It should have been a formidable group and yet it wasn't. Our forward group looked like it was Phil Kessel and a bunch of also-rans and yet they scored.
Last year, again on paper, the offense looked really deep (with a pretty similar cast of characters, surprisingly) and the defense looked like it would be a disaster. With Gunnarsson ailing, Liles and Komisarek playing poorly and Gardiner playing hardly at all, the defensive group feels like they should be pretty terrible and yet Steve Burtch at PPP shows us this where our best defensemen compare to Lidstrom (Phaneuf), Pitkanen (Gardiner), Marc Staal (Gunnarsson), and Tom Gilbert (Franson) and we're forced to wonder what exactly the problem is.
For the last couple of years I've been arguing that a lot of the problem with this team has been the defensive play of the forward group and the evidence seems to be piling up. For every Kulemin and Grabovski there's been a Bozak or a Lupul to counteract their defensive edge and until about 18 months ago, Kessel was really struggling with his defensive game.
A few years ago, on paper, the Leafs looked like they'd have a strong defense with Phaneuf, Beauchemin, Gunnarsson, Komisarek, Schenn, and Kaberle. It should have been a formidable group and yet it wasn't. Our forward group looked like it was Phil Kessel and a bunch of also-rans and yet they scored.
Last year, again on paper, the offense looked really deep (with a pretty similar cast of characters, surprisingly) and the defense looked like it would be a disaster. With Gunnarsson ailing, Liles and Komisarek playing poorly and Gardiner playing hardly at all, the defensive group feels like they should be pretty terrible and yet Steve Burtch at PPP shows us this where our best defensemen compare to Lidstrom (Phaneuf), Pitkanen (Gardiner), Marc Staal (Gunnarsson), and Tom Gilbert (Franson) and we're forced to wonder what exactly the problem is.
For the last couple of years I've been arguing that a lot of the problem with this team has been the defensive play of the forward group and the evidence seems to be piling up. For every Kulemin and Grabovski there's been a Bozak or a Lupul to counteract their defensive edge and until about 18 months ago, Kessel was really struggling with his defensive game.
Monday, July 8, 2013
My Take On The Leafs' Offseason So Far
When you're a fan of a sports team, it seems like every offseason is more important than the last but this offseason really was a different animal than your usual summer for the Maple Leafs.
The new CBA brought with it a pair of amnesty buyouts and there were no shortage of candidates on the Leafs' roster. Add to this a number of key RFAs, gaping holes on the blueline, and the team's best two players one year removed from Unrestricted Free Agency, and it's safe to say that this is an offseason like few others.
With most of the dust of the offseason settled, here are my impressions of the Leafs' summer thus far.
Leafs Trade Matt Frattin, Ben Scrivens, and a 2nd Round Pick for Jonathan Bernier
If you're wondering why the Leafs moved assets to acquire a goalie then you're probably not alone. James Reimer was the team's MVP last year and the primary reason why the team was able to break its playoff drought. That said, while a goalie upgrade wasn't a high priority, I do think that the Leafs got the better end of the trade.
My concern with the deal is what it may mean as it pertains to management's belief in James Reimer. If I were a betting man, I'd put money on Reimer being the better goalie but it doesn't bother me at all to have two viable options. What would bother me is if Reimer weren't the leading candidate for the starting role heading into the 2013-'14 season.
The new CBA brought with it a pair of amnesty buyouts and there were no shortage of candidates on the Leafs' roster. Add to this a number of key RFAs, gaping holes on the blueline, and the team's best two players one year removed from Unrestricted Free Agency, and it's safe to say that this is an offseason like few others.
With most of the dust of the offseason settled, here are my impressions of the Leafs' summer thus far.
Leafs Trade Matt Frattin, Ben Scrivens, and a 2nd Round Pick for Jonathan Bernier
If you're wondering why the Leafs moved assets to acquire a goalie then you're probably not alone. James Reimer was the team's MVP last year and the primary reason why the team was able to break its playoff drought. That said, while a goalie upgrade wasn't a high priority, I do think that the Leafs got the better end of the trade.
My concern with the deal is what it may mean as it pertains to management's belief in James Reimer. If I were a betting man, I'd put money on Reimer being the better goalie but it doesn't bother me at all to have two viable options. What would bother me is if Reimer weren't the leading candidate for the starting role heading into the 2013-'14 season.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Drafting By Position
The following is a re-post from a while back but with the draft coming up, I think it's worth re-visiting:
About a week ago, I was talking with a friend about 2013 eligible draft prospect Darnell Nurse. He's huge and athletic and while I'm not a pro-scout, I'd guess that he's a guy with an awfully high ceiling. I suggested that some team that barely missed the playoffs was going to be awfully lucky to draft him and that I wouldn't even be surprised if he snuck into the top-10 on draft day. It was at that point that my friend suggested that taking a defenseman in the top-10 was a risky proposition.
About a week ago, I was talking with a friend about 2013 eligible draft prospect Darnell Nurse. He's huge and athletic and while I'm not a pro-scout, I'd guess that he's a guy with an awfully high ceiling. I suggested that some team that barely missed the playoffs was going to be awfully lucky to draft him and that I wouldn't even be surprised if he snuck into the top-10 on draft day. It was at that point that my friend suggested that taking a defenseman in the top-10 was a risky proposition.
We shot some names back and forth of forwards and defense who had worked out, where star players came from, Cam Barker, &c. &c. Are your odds better of getting a good player in the first round if you take a forward? At what point, if any, are defensemen generally safer picks? We couldn't really come to any reasonable conclusions without doing the work.
So with that, I set about putting together a spreadsheet with 10 years of draft data (1999 to 2008) where each pick in the first three rounds was categorized as an All-Star, an Impact Player, a Replaceable Player, or a Bust. For now, I've held fast to defining an All-Star strictly (must have actually been an All-Star) but I do think this analysis would benefit from a little more flexibility in this regard (ex. Hamonic and Subban are not All-Stars but Justin Williams and Alexander Frolov are.) An Impact Player is a top-6 forward or a top-4 defenseman, a Replaceable Player would be a guy who has predominantly been an NHLer but generally in a support role, and a Bust would be a guy who didn't have a significant NHL career.
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Maple Leafs Playoff Review
What a series.
As disappointing as last night's collapse was, the mere fact of Toronto having pushed Boston to overtime in a game 7 is cause for celebration for fans of the Maple Leafs. No team has given this edition of the Leafs as much trouble as the Bruins and yet there we were, with them until the end, pushing Boston to the brink of elimination, and though it's the Leafs who find themselves on the outside looking in, there's something creditable in the way that they acquitted themselves during this year's playoffs -- something we'll hope to carry forward into next season.
While seven games isn't a sample size worthy of hard and fast conclusions, it does give us a glimpse through the window of what some of our players are or aren't capable of. There were some surprises during the playoffs and some disappointments; some things to be excited for and some causes for concern. Below are my observations on what we saw from our boys during the second-season.
Phil Kessel, Demon Hunter - It's indisputable that Phil Kessel had struggled mightily to produce results against the Bruins during his time with the Leafs and while many people wrongly attributed these struggles to vacuous psychological shortcomings, the truth is that lining up against a Norris-calibre defenseman is hard on everyone. During this series, Kessel was able to exorcize his demons and put to bed any fears that Leafs fans may have had that Kessel wilts under pressure. He was almost certainly our best forward in the playoffs and will be worth every penny he earns on the extension that we'd all better hope he signs this offseason.
As disappointing as last night's collapse was, the mere fact of Toronto having pushed Boston to overtime in a game 7 is cause for celebration for fans of the Maple Leafs. No team has given this edition of the Leafs as much trouble as the Bruins and yet there we were, with them until the end, pushing Boston to the brink of elimination, and though it's the Leafs who find themselves on the outside looking in, there's something creditable in the way that they acquitted themselves during this year's playoffs -- something we'll hope to carry forward into next season.
While seven games isn't a sample size worthy of hard and fast conclusions, it does give us a glimpse through the window of what some of our players are or aren't capable of. There were some surprises during the playoffs and some disappointments; some things to be excited for and some causes for concern. Below are my observations on what we saw from our boys during the second-season.
Phil Kessel, Demon Hunter - It's indisputable that Phil Kessel had struggled mightily to produce results against the Bruins during his time with the Leafs and while many people wrongly attributed these struggles to vacuous psychological shortcomings, the truth is that lining up against a Norris-calibre defenseman is hard on everyone. During this series, Kessel was able to exorcize his demons and put to bed any fears that Leafs fans may have had that Kessel wilts under pressure. He was almost certainly our best forward in the playoffs and will be worth every penny he earns on the extension that we'd all better hope he signs this offseason.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
10 Playoff Thoughts for the Toronto Maple Leafs
Blue Chip Prospects started churning out articles in May of 2010. When we first started out, the blog was more general hockey-related stuff and we spent a fair bit of our time just making fun of other teams and their fans. Over the years, we've become increasingly focused on the Leafs and, in my opinion, found our niche in one of the best blogging communities the internet has to offer.
Before I get going, I'd like to say a quick thank you to the guys over at Pension Plan Puppets, Maple Leafs Hot Stove, Vintage Leaf Memories, and Hope in the Big Smoke for all of their support. In addition to the work going on by the group at The Leafs Nation, the guys who contribute on these sites are all bright, insightful individuals who have pushed me to understand hockey in a more complete way and they've all shown BCP a tremendous amount of support over the years, for which I'm tremendously grateful. The community of Leafs bloggers is a group that I'm very proud to be a part of.
When I started blogging 4 years ago, this was the post that I wanted to write: A collection of thoughts on the state of the team as they head into the playoffs. It was pretty clear at the time that I wouldn't be writing this post about the 2010 Leafs, but I sure didn't think I'd have to wait until 2013. As I put pen to pad (or finger to keyboard) the Leafs have three games remaining before facing what looks like either Boston or Montreal and I think I can safely speak for all of you when I say, "PLAYOFFS!!1"
Here are a few things that are on my mind as we inch closer to hockey's second season.
1) Doesn't Mikhail Grabovski strike you as precisely the kind of player who was made for playoff hockey? Grabbo is, for my money, one of the better two way centres in all of hockey and he's the kind of guy who would put his face through the boards if he thought it would help his team. On a Leaf Matters podcast a little while ago, Anthony Petrielli said that he thought Grabovski was the toughest player on the Leafs and I have a hard time arguing the point. I worry that he may continue to get under-utilized in the playoffs but if he gets the icetime that I feel he deserves, I think he'll emerge as a more mainstream hero among Leaf fans.
2) James Reimer has been stealing games for the Leafs all year and I wouldn't be surprised if the Leafs' playoff run lasts longer than most expect because of it. You don't need to delve too deeply into the aforementioned blogs to find a post that laments how badly the Leafs have been outshot this year which means the reasons they're in the playoffs are 1) a lucky shooting percentage, and 2) James Reimer being one of the better goalies in the NHL this season. I've written more extensively on Reimer here so I wont go on a long diatribe but suffice to say that in addition to being an A+ person, James Reimer has developed into a goalie deserving of our trust.
Before I get going, I'd like to say a quick thank you to the guys over at Pension Plan Puppets, Maple Leafs Hot Stove, Vintage Leaf Memories, and Hope in the Big Smoke for all of their support. In addition to the work going on by the group at The Leafs Nation, the guys who contribute on these sites are all bright, insightful individuals who have pushed me to understand hockey in a more complete way and they've all shown BCP a tremendous amount of support over the years, for which I'm tremendously grateful. The community of Leafs bloggers is a group that I'm very proud to be a part of.
When I started blogging 4 years ago, this was the post that I wanted to write: A collection of thoughts on the state of the team as they head into the playoffs. It was pretty clear at the time that I wouldn't be writing this post about the 2010 Leafs, but I sure didn't think I'd have to wait until 2013. As I put pen to pad (or finger to keyboard) the Leafs have three games remaining before facing what looks like either Boston or Montreal and I think I can safely speak for all of you when I say, "PLAYOFFS!!1"
Here are a few things that are on my mind as we inch closer to hockey's second season.
1) Doesn't Mikhail Grabovski strike you as precisely the kind of player who was made for playoff hockey? Grabbo is, for my money, one of the better two way centres in all of hockey and he's the kind of guy who would put his face through the boards if he thought it would help his team. On a Leaf Matters podcast a little while ago, Anthony Petrielli said that he thought Grabovski was the toughest player on the Leafs and I have a hard time arguing the point. I worry that he may continue to get under-utilized in the playoffs but if he gets the icetime that I feel he deserves, I think he'll emerge as a more mainstream hero among Leaf fans.
2) James Reimer has been stealing games for the Leafs all year and I wouldn't be surprised if the Leafs' playoff run lasts longer than most expect because of it. You don't need to delve too deeply into the aforementioned blogs to find a post that laments how badly the Leafs have been outshot this year which means the reasons they're in the playoffs are 1) a lucky shooting percentage, and 2) James Reimer being one of the better goalies in the NHL this season. I've written more extensively on Reimer here so I wont go on a long diatribe but suffice to say that in addition to being an A+ person, James Reimer has developed into a goalie deserving of our trust.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
What To Expect Moving Forward From Nazem Kadri
If you spend time hanging around Twitter, you've probably heard someone say that Nazem Kadri has had a pretty lucky season. The 22-year old former 7th overall pick has been plugging along at roughly a point per game pace most of the season -- he's sitting at 41 points in 42 games right now -- and has put to bed any fear that he may not have the chops to skate in the top-6.
Anyone who watches the games can tell that Kadri is a dynamic offensive player. He creates chances more consistently than any Leaf forward aside from Phil Kessel, and he's done it while often carrying 6'3", 205 lbs gorilla-winger Colton Orr on his back.
That said, when you look at the numbers, it's clear that things have been going Kadri's way more often than we should reasonably expect.
As things stand today, Kadri's on-ice shooting percentage is a remarkable 14.98 percent which is tops in the league among forwards who have played more than 20 games. Now, while there is some evidence to suggest that on-ice shooting percentage can be sustained at high levels and has predictive value (I'll point you to this post from David Johnson at Hockey Analysis) I would suggest that this season's sample is too small to expect Kadri to definitively be the type of guy who can impact a line's shooting percentage in such a significant way. By way of illustration, I'd point to last season's 9.17 percent in 21 games (7th among Leafs forwards).
What mean should we be expecting Kadri to regress to exactly? Well, I would certainly say that Kadri is an improved player from the Nazem Kadri we saw last season. The challenge is that so few players post an on-ice shooting percentage of over 11 percent (only 22 last year). Is Kadri the kind of talent we can expect to do this on a regular basis? I'm a bit of a homer but personally, I think he can be close.
Anyone who watches the games can tell that Kadri is a dynamic offensive player. He creates chances more consistently than any Leaf forward aside from Phil Kessel, and he's done it while often carrying 6'3", 205 lbs gorilla-winger Colton Orr on his back.
That said, when you look at the numbers, it's clear that things have been going Kadri's way more often than we should reasonably expect.
As things stand today, Kadri's on-ice shooting percentage is a remarkable 14.98 percent which is tops in the league among forwards who have played more than 20 games. Now, while there is some evidence to suggest that on-ice shooting percentage can be sustained at high levels and has predictive value (I'll point you to this post from David Johnson at Hockey Analysis) I would suggest that this season's sample is too small to expect Kadri to definitively be the type of guy who can impact a line's shooting percentage in such a significant way. By way of illustration, I'd point to last season's 9.17 percent in 21 games (7th among Leafs forwards).
What mean should we be expecting Kadri to regress to exactly? Well, I would certainly say that Kadri is an improved player from the Nazem Kadri we saw last season. The challenge is that so few players post an on-ice shooting percentage of over 11 percent (only 22 last year). Is Kadri the kind of talent we can expect to do this on a regular basis? I'm a bit of a homer but personally, I think he can be close.
Sunday, April 14, 2013
James Reimer Is A Very Good Goalie
For the better part of ten years, the Toronto Maple Leafs' Achilles' heel has been their goaltending. Even when the team in front of the goalie was terrible, the goaltending was worse. Not since a 40-year old Ed Belfour have the Leafs had any stability between the pipes and it's probably for that reason that some people haven't been able to fully embrace James Reimer.
It isn't as though we haven't seen the odd flash of competent goaltending. After an abysmal start to his Leafs career, Vesa Toskala was able to finish his first season strong and salvage a .904 save percentage on the season. His strong second-half tricked management into believing that we'd solved our goaltending woes but Toskala would go on to post consecutive seasons of sub-.900 goaltending to close the book on his career as a Maple Leaf.
When Reimer started his NHL career with a .921 save percentage in 37 games, fans were optimistic with an asterisk. It was only half a season -- let's see how he does in a full year.
Well, Reimer started 2011-12 just fine and it looked like we may have finally solved our goaltending problems when a 5'6", 168 lbs ball of fury made an unintentional hit to the head that would have made Scott Stevens proud and de-railed the rest of the young goalie's season. Reimer did return from the injury but he wasn't the same goalie the rest of the year and he struggled in posting a .900 save percentage (partly because of an abysmal penaltykill. but I digress).
It isn't as though we haven't seen the odd flash of competent goaltending. After an abysmal start to his Leafs career, Vesa Toskala was able to finish his first season strong and salvage a .904 save percentage on the season. His strong second-half tricked management into believing that we'd solved our goaltending woes but Toskala would go on to post consecutive seasons of sub-.900 goaltending to close the book on his career as a Maple Leaf.
When Reimer started his NHL career with a .921 save percentage in 37 games, fans were optimistic with an asterisk. It was only half a season -- let's see how he does in a full year.
Well, Reimer started 2011-12 just fine and it looked like we may have finally solved our goaltending problems when a 5'6", 168 lbs ball of fury made an unintentional hit to the head that would have made Scott Stevens proud and de-railed the rest of the young goalie's season. Reimer did return from the injury but he wasn't the same goalie the rest of the year and he struggled in posting a .900 save percentage (partly because of an abysmal penaltykill. but I digress).
Friday, March 29, 2013
How To Talk To Hockey Nerds
One of the great things about the last five to ten years, from my perspective at least, is the relatively new mainstream appeal of being a nerd. I've always been a nerd at heart but I didn't always wear the badge as proudly as I do now and while part of that is a bi-product of growing up, it would probably be dishonest to say that I'd self-identify as one if I were the only person doing it with pride.
In part, I was able to keep my inner-nerd closeted during the time it wasn't so chic because I was reasonably athletic and genuinely loved sports. Given these two interests, it's not particularly surprising that I have a hockey blog.
Being a hockey nerd is a little bit different than liking the Christopher Nolan Batman movies though; it's not exactly universally accepted. Part of that comes from the fact that the advanced stat community often challenges preconceptions that have been held for a very long time in the sport, but part of it comes from misunderstandings. With that in mind, I thought I'd take a little bit of time to clear the air on some of the nerdier elements of hockey analysis.
The Stats We Dislike
(+/-): A lot of advanced statistics is predicated on the idea that "goals" is too narrow a result to be of much predictive value. There aren't enough goals scored to clear up a lot of the statistical noise and a handful of goals against caused by skating with a defensively inept linemate can really skew your own personal results. For this reason hockey nerds tend to seriously dislike (+/-) and this is especially true if you're comparing guys on different teams. (+/-) without regard for context is anathema for us.
Hits: Cam Charron had an exceptional piece over at Backhand Shelf where he touches on how teams with a lot of hits tend to lose a lot of games. The reason behind this is pretty obvious if you actually think about it: In order to make a hit, you can't have the puck which means to make a lot of hits, you have to spend a lot of time without the puck. When a hockey pundit praises a guy for being third in the NHL in hits, you can expect that hockey nerds everywhere are rolling their eyes. To a lesser extent, you can throw out shot blocks for the exact same reason.
In part, I was able to keep my inner-nerd closeted during the time it wasn't so chic because I was reasonably athletic and genuinely loved sports. Given these two interests, it's not particularly surprising that I have a hockey blog.
Being a hockey nerd is a little bit different than liking the Christopher Nolan Batman movies though; it's not exactly universally accepted. Part of that comes from the fact that the advanced stat community often challenges preconceptions that have been held for a very long time in the sport, but part of it comes from misunderstandings. With that in mind, I thought I'd take a little bit of time to clear the air on some of the nerdier elements of hockey analysis.
The Stats We Dislike
(+/-): A lot of advanced statistics is predicated on the idea that "goals" is too narrow a result to be of much predictive value. There aren't enough goals scored to clear up a lot of the statistical noise and a handful of goals against caused by skating with a defensively inept linemate can really skew your own personal results. For this reason hockey nerds tend to seriously dislike (+/-) and this is especially true if you're comparing guys on different teams. (+/-) without regard for context is anathema for us.
Hits: Cam Charron had an exceptional piece over at Backhand Shelf where he touches on how teams with a lot of hits tend to lose a lot of games. The reason behind this is pretty obvious if you actually think about it: In order to make a hit, you can't have the puck which means to make a lot of hits, you have to spend a lot of time without the puck. When a hockey pundit praises a guy for being third in the NHL in hits, you can expect that hockey nerds everywhere are rolling their eyes. To a lesser extent, you can throw out shot blocks for the exact same reason.
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Making Lemonade Out Of Lemons: Internal Fixes For The Leafs Lineup
As things stand today, the Leafs sit in 6th in the Eastern Conference and are 3 points ahead of 9th place Winnipeg following last night's loss to the Jets. Not a bad spot to be and had you told me in the offseason we'd be in a playoff spot 27 games into the season, I would have been pleasantly surprised. The underlying numbers for how we've gotten here suggest that we've been awfully lucky to be so successful but this is where we are and nobody can take those points away from us.
That said, it doesn't mean that you look at the underlying numbers, shrug, and say, "well, we've gotten away with it so far." This team is 3rd last in the NHL in Fenwick Close. For the uninitiated, Fenwick Close is essentially shot +/- when the game is within a goal (during the 1st or 2nd period) or tied (in the 3rd or overtime). It may seem counter-intuitive to a lot of you, but if you isolate this number for road games it actually correlates more closely with home points than points earned on the road does. In a nutshell: This might be the most important number the NHL has for predicting future success.
A lot of what happens during the rest of the season will hinge on how Randy Carlyle is able to manipulate the lineup in an effort to improve our Fenwick number moving forward, thereby improving our odds at success. The good news, in my opinion, is that there are internal solutions for most of what ails this team.
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Success At The Draft: 10 Years Of Maple Leafs Draft Picks
The Toronto Maple Leafs don't know how to draft or develop players; we hear this all the time. Just last week, Damien Cox wondered if the Leafs had finally figured it out as Kadri and Frattin were both making a meaningful impact at the NHL level. Well, it may surprise a lot of you to hear this given what you're forced to read, but the Leafs are actually pretty good at drafting players.
An interesting post by Aaron Chan over at Maple Leaf Muse got me thinking about the Leafs' track record at the draft. I've always felt like it was better than they got credit for. Aaron made some interesting points but I wanted to be a little bit more precise with how picks are compared to one another.
With that in mind, I looked at 10 years worth of draft data (1999 to 2008) and the results are impressive. Over this 10 year period, the Leafs had a first round bust rate of 14% (note: The only bust, Luca Cereda, is an interesting case. He was diagnosed with a heart defect the year after his draft.) Their median first round draft slot over this time was 21st which makes the low bust rate particularly impressive. When compared to the league-wide bust rate of 42% among first round draft picks, the Leafs' draft record stands out yet again. The Leafs' impact draft rate in the first round was over 70% compared against a league-wide average of roughly 39%.
In the second round, the Leafs had a bust rate that was slightly lower than league average and their record for drafting impact players (top-6 forwards or top-4 defense) was double that of the rest of the league.
An interesting post by Aaron Chan over at Maple Leaf Muse got me thinking about the Leafs' track record at the draft. I've always felt like it was better than they got credit for. Aaron made some interesting points but I wanted to be a little bit more precise with how picks are compared to one another.
With that in mind, I looked at 10 years worth of draft data (1999 to 2008) and the results are impressive. Over this 10 year period, the Leafs had a first round bust rate of 14% (note: The only bust, Luca Cereda, is an interesting case. He was diagnosed with a heart defect the year after his draft.) Their median first round draft slot over this time was 21st which makes the low bust rate particularly impressive. When compared to the league-wide bust rate of 42% among first round draft picks, the Leafs' draft record stands out yet again. The Leafs' impact draft rate in the first round was over 70% compared against a league-wide average of roughly 39%.
In the second round, the Leafs had a bust rate that was slightly lower than league average and their record for drafting impact players (top-6 forwards or top-4 defense) was double that of the rest of the league.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Positional Draft Analysis By Round: 10 Years of Forwards and Defensemen
About a week ago, I was talking with a friend about 2013 eligible draft prospect Darnell Nurse. He's huge and athletic and while I'm not a pro-scout, I'd guess that he's a guy with an awfully high ceiling. I suggested that some team that barely missed the playoffs was going to be awfully lucky to draft him and that I wouldn't even be surprised if he snuck into the top-10 on draft day. It was at that point that my friend suggested that taking a defenseman in the top-10 was a risky proposition.
We shot some names back and forth of forwards and defense who had worked out, where star players came from, Cam Barker, &c. &c. Are your odds better of getting a good player in the first round if you take a forward? At what point, if any, are defensemen generally safer picks? We couldn't really come to any reasonable conclusions without doing the work.
So with that, I set about putting together a spreadsheet with 10 years of draft data (1999 to 2008) where each pick in the first three rounds was categorized as an All-Star, an Impact Player, a Replaceable Player, or a Bust. For now, I've held fast to defining an All-Star strictly (must have actually been an All-Star) but I do think this analysis would benefit from a little more flexibility in this regard (ex. Hamonic and Subban are not All-Stars but Justin Williams and Alexander Frolov are.) An Impact Player is a top-6 forward or a top-4 defenseman, a Replaceable Player would be a guy who has predominantly been an NHLer but generally in a support role, and a Bust would be a guy who didn't have a significant NHL career.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Revisiting When Elite Players Breakout
Nazem Kadri has been on fire to start the season, putting up an impressive 8 points in 9 games and creating chances seemingly on every shift. It's early, and I think we're a long way from being able to make anything approximating a conclusion based on statistical data, but a lot of Leafs observers, including myself, have been preaching patience with Kadri.
A while ago, I had a look at some milestones that we should be watching for if we expect our prospects to eventually reach the upper-echelons of NHL scoring. With Kadri off to a fast start, I thought it might be interesting to track his production relative to the development of other premier point producers.
Methodology:
What I did was pretty simple. I looked at every player who scored 70 or more points between 2008-09 and 2010-11, and then tracked a few key measures. First, I looked at their ages when they produced a 60+ point season, a 70+ point season and an 80+ point season. On the graph below, I divided the group by draft position to make the comparisons a little bit tidier.
Here are the results:
As we can see, the 6th - 10th position is a little out of whack with the standard trend which is clearly the result of having a small number of cases (only Selanne, Mikko Koivu, and Doan meet these criteria.) Aside from this aberration, the trend is fairly steady.
A while ago, I had a look at some milestones that we should be watching for if we expect our prospects to eventually reach the upper-echelons of NHL scoring. With Kadri off to a fast start, I thought it might be interesting to track his production relative to the development of other premier point producers.
Methodology:
What I did was pretty simple. I looked at every player who scored 70 or more points between 2008-09 and 2010-11, and then tracked a few key measures. First, I looked at their ages when they produced a 60+ point season, a 70+ point season and an 80+ point season. On the graph below, I divided the group by draft position to make the comparisons a little bit tidier.
Here are the results:
As we can see, the 6th - 10th position is a little out of whack with the standard trend which is clearly the result of having a small number of cases (only Selanne, Mikko Koivu, and Doan meet these criteria.) Aside from this aberration, the trend is fairly steady.
Friday, February 1, 2013
A Brief History Of Dave Nonis
When Brian Burke was shown the door by Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment and Dave Nonis was named as his replacement it may have felt sudden but it was probably a transition that most saw coming to some extent or another. Nonis seemed to be doing an ever increasing amount of the legwork in the Leafs' front office and Burke was always quick to praise his assistant GM for the things he'd accomplished. In essence, the timing was odd but the change was not.
Having adjusted to the surprise of the timing of Burke's dismissal, we were then left to wonder whether this move signalled any change in direction for the franchise. I'm a big believer in not firing coaching or management staff unless you think you can get someone better or if there's some dissatisfaction with the philosophy of the individuals currently in place. In Burke's case, reports seem to suggest that he was let go largely based on his personality which isn't an answer that I'm particularly enamoured with but, be that as it may, the on-ice results were poor enough that it's tough to really take umbrage with his dismissal.
With Burke out and Nonis in, we're left to wonder what we should expect from our new GM and a little bit of history would probably be instructive in this regard. Nonis was General Manager of the Vancouver Canucks from 2004 until the end of the 2007-08 season when he was dismissed following a second season outside of the Western Conference playoff picture during his three year tenure. While his time in Vancouver may have been short, his track record is pretty close to being squeaky clean.
Trades
Out: Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen, Alex Auld
In: Roberto Luongo, Lucas Krajicek, 6th Round Pick
This deal was a clear win for Nonis and really solidified the one area that Burke had been entirely unable to address during his time in Vancouver. Nonis inherited the core of the team that has won the past two President's Trophies but it's fair to say that the acquisition of Luongo was the piece that truly put them over the top.
Monday, January 28, 2013
The Kessel Question
In Monday's Toronto Star, Damien Cox did what Damien Cox does and wrote a piece designed to elicit strong disagreement or passionate approval; it is time, he suggests, to trade Phil Kessel.
While I don't agree with the assertion that Kessel looks "ill-conditioned, isolated [or] troubled", I do have some concerns that this team is running the risk of walking the line between a playoff spot and a realistic shot at a top pick. If you're a team that's building toward something then that doesn't necessarily mean that you move your top young goalscorer to get out of it but if you expect to be in this position for a while then maybe it does.
Kessel is 25-years old and a top-tier offensive player in the NHL. He has four consecutive years of 30+ goals and last season put up a point per game while playing all 82 in a fully healthy season. He probably has another 5 years of all-star level production ahead of him and possibly more depending on how sharply he regresses through his non-prime years.
The problem, as I see it, isn't with Kessel as a player so much as it is with the team as it sits today. Nobody is picking the Leafs to make the playoffs this year and while our system is improved from the group that Burke inherited, the real help (Percy, Rielly, Finn, Leivo) are still at least a couple of years away from being impact contributors. Kadri and Gardiner are both nice players who are still in their development years but neither are the type of player who can, in isolation, bring this team from where it is now to a team that will reliably be a playoff team in the Eastern Conference.
While I don't agree with the assertion that Kessel looks "ill-conditioned, isolated [or] troubled", I do have some concerns that this team is running the risk of walking the line between a playoff spot and a realistic shot at a top pick. If you're a team that's building toward something then that doesn't necessarily mean that you move your top young goalscorer to get out of it but if you expect to be in this position for a while then maybe it does.
Kessel is 25-years old and a top-tier offensive player in the NHL. He has four consecutive years of 30+ goals and last season put up a point per game while playing all 82 in a fully healthy season. He probably has another 5 years of all-star level production ahead of him and possibly more depending on how sharply he regresses through his non-prime years.
The problem, as I see it, isn't with Kessel as a player so much as it is with the team as it sits today. Nobody is picking the Leafs to make the playoffs this year and while our system is improved from the group that Burke inherited, the real help (Percy, Rielly, Finn, Leivo) are still at least a couple of years away from being impact contributors. Kadri and Gardiner are both nice players who are still in their development years but neither are the type of player who can, in isolation, bring this team from where it is now to a team that will reliably be a playoff team in the Eastern Conference.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Re-Evaluating Luongo To The Leafs
Elite goaltending is tough to find. Top-tier goalies are almost never traded and rarely, it seems, hit unrestricted free agency. The only way to get an elite goaltender is to develop one, or to trade for Roberto Luongo at one of the 5-year intervals in which he seems to consistently find himself on the trade block.
With those assumptions in mind, I've been of the opinion that a trade for Roberto Luongo - particularly in light of the fact that he'd be dealt at a value that was far from commensurate to the value he provides a team - would be a good move for the Leafs. The team is more than one piece away, but this is a piece we can add now and we may not get another chance like this.
Over at Pension Plan Puppets there was a great fanpost that measured what the impact of Luongo's contract would be to the Leafs as it pertains to the cap re-capture formula. The post looks at what the cap penalty would be if he retired in each year of the deal and charts the results. In a nutshell, the penalties aren't all that significant.
So if the penalties aren't significant, the cost of acquisition is discounted, and Luongo is still a very good goalie (which in my opinion, he is) then it makes sense to make the move. Strike while the iron is hot, as it were.
Also at PPP, Steve Burtch had a look at how goalies age in an effort to see how many years of Luongo we were buying. His conclusion was that there was virtually no correlation between a goalie's age and performance which was certainly promising, on the face of it. Building off of this post, Eric T at NHL Numbers pointed out an oversight in the original post, namely, that survivorship bias was at work. The question shouldn't be whether your average 34-year old goalie is better than a given 28-year old but rather whether the same goalie was better at 28 than at 34. The conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that goalies tend to get worse as they age.
With those assumptions in mind, I've been of the opinion that a trade for Roberto Luongo - particularly in light of the fact that he'd be dealt at a value that was far from commensurate to the value he provides a team - would be a good move for the Leafs. The team is more than one piece away, but this is a piece we can add now and we may not get another chance like this.
Over at Pension Plan Puppets there was a great fanpost that measured what the impact of Luongo's contract would be to the Leafs as it pertains to the cap re-capture formula. The post looks at what the cap penalty would be if he retired in each year of the deal and charts the results. In a nutshell, the penalties aren't all that significant.
So if the penalties aren't significant, the cost of acquisition is discounted, and Luongo is still a very good goalie (which in my opinion, he is) then it makes sense to make the move. Strike while the iron is hot, as it were.
Also at PPP, Steve Burtch had a look at how goalies age in an effort to see how many years of Luongo we were buying. His conclusion was that there was virtually no correlation between a goalie's age and performance which was certainly promising, on the face of it. Building off of this post, Eric T at NHL Numbers pointed out an oversight in the original post, namely, that survivorship bias was at work. The question shouldn't be whether your average 34-year old goalie is better than a given 28-year old but rather whether the same goalie was better at 28 than at 34. The conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that goalies tend to get worse as they age.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)