Another Late Season Surge

[Ice-Tray]

My issue isn't even with the team winning. Yes, I would rather they lose, but like everyone is saying, players will try to win, and we don't have a tanking roster, so we'll win some games.

I get that.

My issue is with the fans that think winning at the end of a season with the pressure down is going to be some kind of indicator for next year. It's not. We know this.

I remember finishing the season with a killer forcheck that was always pressuring the puck only to be slow and lazy the next year out the gate...

So having success with whatever style you may think( sounder defensive play, let's say) means absolutely nothing for next year.

It doesn't mean that they will come in playing sound defensively next year JUST like when they finished with a hard forcheck didn't mean they would have a hard forcheck the next year...

Like, take our PP. Having a good powerplay last year doesn't mean we have a good powerplay this year. Even with a hall of fame type head coach and assistant coach, we still have a bad powerplay.


So in frustrated with fans that think that because we have success and play sounder defensively this year, that it means we'll win games and have a sound defensive team next year.

What we do this year with the pressure off, and even the style of play we are playing to end this year, has absolutely nothing to do with how we'll play next year with the pressure of making the playoffs.

Absolutely nothing.

Why do fans never learn? I understand the 10 year olds who haven't been around for long. But what's the 20+ year olds excuses, here? Just always wearing rose coloured glasses or what?

I don’t disagree, we’re all welcome to our opinions on what matters and what doesn’t for sure.

But like you say nothing we as fans think or do will have any effect on what happens next season.

To me that means nothing left but to enjoy the wins I’m watching and look forward to what I hope is a busy off season.

I don’t begrudge you your frustrations.

 

[Tuna99]

I interpreted this as us drafting an RD who is a beast and will help Stu choose chickpea pasta and start being a beast.

Hope Parekh is that RD

Nobody talks about the lack of chickpeas with this team.

 

[jbeck5]

What is more valuable, a slightly better draft pick or core players like Tkachuk, Stutzle, Sandy ect actually being capable of winning some games? I choose the latter, if it was early in the rebuild and the roster was filled with a bunch of stop gaps then yeah I’d be a little upset about this win streak.

We said that the last 3 years.

Literally.

It didn't work.

Let's try the high draft pick. Haven't had one of those in a few years now.

 

[jbeck5]

So how often do we get average goaltending? How often does any team?

30 shots * 82 games is 2460 shots. You can calculate averages in there.

But when you talk about a game. A game is 30 shots. Average goaltending is 27 saves. Good goaltending gives you 28 saves more frequently than 26.

Just look at 6 games.

3 with 28 saves.
1 with 27 saves.
2 with 26 saves.

That's.906 goaltending. It's hard to say you win with "average" goaltending when in 5 of 6 games you get way better or way worse than average

Then take it up with the original statement that we can win games with average goaltending.

The numbers show that statistically, we don't do that often.

We have very inconsistent goaltending and we win when we get good goaltending and lose when we get bad goaltending.


We are not, however, good enough to win games consistently with average goaltending.

Some teams are capable of winning most games where they trade chances and aren't able to get the saves. We aren't one of those teams. We NEED the saves to get the win. We can't just outscore out opponents. We aren't good enough.

 

[jbeck5]

fans just want either playoffs or high draft pick. And some fans even prefer high draft pick to losing in the first round. It’s just not realistic.

Of course.

I think the key is to not be caught in that zone for a long time.

It's almost inevitable to go through that zone on the upswing or downswing.

It's no man's land. You want to get out of it when you're in it.

I feel like we've been in it for a few years now. Not competing for a top 3 pick and not making the playoffs.

 

[jbeck5]

So you don’t want Tkachuk, Stutzle, Batherson, Sandy, ect to be good players? Because if those guys are any good they are probably gonna win some games.

Start in October and show consistency and get it done all year and make the playoffs.

Not at the end of a list season. It means nothing.

 

[Adrianopolous]

They're just a mentally weak group

 

[BondraTime]

Of course.

I think the key is to not be caught in that zone for a long time.

It's almost inevitable to go through that zone on the upswing or downswing.

It's no man's land. You want to get out of it when you're in it.

I feel like we've been in it for a few years now. Not competing for a top 3 pick and not making the playoffs.

Exactly.

They are a bad team.

Not incredibly bad like 2018-2020, but just a bad team. Outside the playoffs, outside the top picks.

Not good enough to get to the playoffs, not bad enough to have a light at the end of the season in a top 3 pick.

No Man's Land.

Picks are still very valuable at the top of the draft, the further you move away from 1, the worse you are in the Sens position.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Then take it up with the original statement that we can win games with average goaltending.

The numbers show that statistically, we don't do that often.

We have very inconsistent goaltending and we win when we get good goaltending and lose when we get bad goaltending.


We are not, however, good enough to win games consistently with average goaltending.

Some teams are capable of winning most games where they trade chances and aren't able to get the saves. We aren't one of those teams. We NEED the saves to get the win. We can't just outscore out opponents. We aren't good enough.

Our goaltending has been quite consistent all year.

 

[jbeck5]

Our goaltending has been quite consistent all year.

Yes and no.

They've been consistently bad 2 out of 3 games lol.

But most wins have been with good goaltending and we got the odd win here and there throughout the season.

The problem is when a goalie played well and won a game, they were pulled the next game allowing 4 goals on 8 shots. Lol

 

[Flamingo]

Penguins, Red Wings, and Islanders won last night. Flyers lost.

Sens need to win out the rest of their schedule, and these teams to go on a skid.

Flyers: 82 pts, 6 GR -- worse than 3-3-0
Red Wings: 82 pts, 7 GR -- worse than 3-4-0
Islanders: 79 pts, 8 GR - worse than 4-3-1
Devils: 76 pts, 8 GR - worse than 6-2-0
Penguins: 77 pts,, 8 GR - worse than 5-2-1
Sabres: 75 pts, 7 GR - worse than 6-0-1

 

[Byron Bitz]

Start in October and show consistency and get it done all year and make the playoffs.

Not at the end of a list season. It means nothing.

The team finishing in the basement of the standings again does not mean nothing, it means the team that we just spent 6 years rebuilding is terrible.

 

[BondraTime]

Penguins, Red Wings, and Islanders won last night. Flyers lost.

Sens need to win out the rest of their schedule, and these teams to go on a skid.

Flyers: 82 pts, 6 GR -- worse than 3-3-0
Red Wings: 82 pts, 7 GR -- worse than 3-4-0
Islanders: 79 pts, 8 GR - worse than 4-3-1
Devils: 76 pts, 8 GR - worse than 6-2-0
Penguins: 77 pts,, 8 GR - worse than 5-2-1
Sabres: 75 pts, 7 GR - worse than 6-0-1

Sens are at 0%, they can't make the playoffs, not really a need for tracking. Unless it's just to see who we can pass.

NHL Playoff Odds -MoneyPuck 2025 Playoff & Cup Odds

NHL Playoff Odds updated many times a day. Stanley Cup Odds, Playoff seeding, and Draft Lottery Odds

moneypuck.com

https://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL.html

Playoff Probabilities Report | Hockey-Reference.com

Probability of making the Stanley Cup playoffs

www.hockey-reference.com

The team finishing in the basement of the standings again does not mean nothing, it means the team that we just spent 6 years rebuilding is terrible.

I mean, it does, it gives them a better draft pick. What does finishing 24th instead of 28th do?

The team "IS" terrible this season. They are 7th last in the league. We've watched them all season. Winning at the end of the season changes absolutely nothing.

Going from 5th last to 10th last doesn't make them any more or less terrible. They are the exact same team, just with a better draft pick.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

What is more valuable, a slightly better draft pick or core players like Tkachuk, Stutzle, Sandy ect actually being capable of winning some games? I choose the latter, if it was early in the rebuild and the roster was filled with a bunch of stop gaps then yeah I’d be a little upset about this win streak.

Unfortunately this hasn’t really worked. And I don’t think winning these games at the end of the year are valuable.

I just don’t see wanting to lose or being mad we’re “winning when it doesn’t matter”. I don’t think this team is winning because games all of a sudden don’t matter. The games right now mean as much as the games that we lost 6 in a row lol. We’re winning because sometimes we play good and win. And we’re not bad enough to go like 2-17-1 to finish the season and secure best odds in the draft.

 

[Flamingo]

Sens are at 0%, they can't make the playoffs, not really a need for tracking. Unless it's just to see who we can pass.

I'm here to watch our silent drift over the event horizon. Let me have my fun.

 

[Micklebot]

Then take it up with the original statement that we can win games with average goaltending.

The numbers show that statistically, we don't do that often.

We have very inconsistent goaltending and we win when we get good goaltending and lose when we get bad goaltending.


We are not, however, good enough to win games consistently with average goaltending.

Some teams are capable of winning most games where they trade chances and aren't able to get the saves. We aren't one of those teams. We NEED the saves to get the win. We can't just outscore out opponents. We aren't good enough.

The issue is using sv% as an indicator of average goaltending on a game by game basis, you can get a shutout with average goaltending or you can get blown out, sv% really only works as an indicator when the sample is large enough.

Even then, as JD1 pointed out, remove one bad goal and an average .900sv% becomes a .933sv%, if you try to argue only games with a sv% of .900 +/- .01 is average goaltending, only 9 games all season qualify, a guy like Skinner with pretty average sv% on the season would only have 4 average games out of 54.

So what is average in this context? The standard deviation league wide of a games sv% is .06, so anything from .966 to .841 would fall into that. Even at half a standard deviation you'd get Vezina caliber sv% of .935 all the way down to league worst of .872.

Here's Korpisalo's games in which he got credited with a decision;

Korpisalo Sv% Range W L OTL
1 std Dev .841-.967 15 14 4 --- 85 pts pace
1/2 std Dev .873-.935 10 8 3 --- 90 pts pace
1/4 std Dev .888-.920 9 4 1 --- 111 pts pace
1/8 std Dev .896-.912 4 1 0 --- 131 pts pace

Outside 1 std dev >.967, <.841 4 7 0 --- 60 pts pace

So what's average goaltending? Take your pick, but the .900 - .910 range you alluded to earlier is a pretty damn narrow definition, and the closer we get to average, the more our win % climbs.

 

[Butchy Dakkar]

I'm here to watch our silent drift over the event horizon. Let me have my fun.

not a "mocking" laugh, I got a chuckle, we need more emoji choices!

 

[jbeck5]

The team finishing in the basement of the standings again does not mean nothing, it means the team that we just spent 6 years rebuilding is terrible.

I meant it means nothing positive worth carrying over to next season lol.

The issue is using sv% as an indicator of average goaltending on a game by game basis, you can get a shutout with average goaltending or you can get blown out, sv% really only works as an indicator when the sample is large enough.

Even then, as JD1 pointed out, remove one bad goal and an average .900sv% becomes a .933sv%, if you try to argue only games with a sv% of .900 +/- .01 is average goaltending, only 9 games all season qualify, a guy like Skinner with pretty average sv% on the season would only have 4 average games out of 54.

So what is average in this context? The standard deviation league wide of a games sv% is .06, so anything from .966 to .841 would fall into that. Even at half a standard deviation you'd get Vezina caliber sv% of .935 all the way down to league worst of .872.

Here's Korpisalo's games in which he got credited with a decision;

Korpisalo Sv% Range W L OTL
1 std Dev .841-.967 15 14 4 --- 85 pts pace
1/2 std Dev .873-.935 10 8 3 --- 90 pts pace
1/4 std Dev .888-.920 9 4 1 --- 111 pts pace
1/8 std Dev .896-.912 4 1 0 --- 131 pts pace

Outside 1 std dev >.967, <.841 4 7 0 --- 60 pts pace

So what's average goaltending? Take your pick, but the .900 - .910 range you alluded to earlier is a pretty damn narrow definition, and the closer we get to average, the more our win % climbs.

See, if you can't use save percentage in a specific game, what stat do we use to determine whether we got good-average-or bad goaltending within a game?

Is it just a he said/she said situation? Everyone's opinion is equally as valid? Or do we have some data we can look at within a game?

 

[OgieO]

What is more valuable, a slightly better draft pick or core players like Tkachuk, Stutzle, Sandy ect actually being capable of winning some games? I choose the latter, if it was early in the rebuild and the roster was filled with a bunch of stop gaps then yeah I’d be a little upset about this win streak.

You new here? There hasn't been any value in winning late in the year in the previous 3-4 seasons. Winning now means absolutely nothing.

 

[Flamingo]

not a "mocking" laugh, I got a chuckle, we need more emoji choices!

We need a Hanna-Barbera catalogue of emojis.

 

[Micklebot]

I meant it means nothing positive worth carrying over to next season lol.



See, if you can't use save percentage in a specific game, what stat do we use to determine whether we got good-average-or bad goaltending within a game?

Is it just a he said/she said situation? Everyone's opinion is equally as valid? Or do we have some data we can look at within a game?

Well, you can look at the quality of chances that ended up in the back of the net, and you can broaden what is average since the typical sv% on a game by game basis is going to be broad.

Much like Stützle can have a good game without scoring, a goalie can have bad or good games regardless of their sv%, if the goalie is caught out of position, and letting out bad rebounds, that will eventually catch up to them, but they might get away with it for a game. To me, bad games are the ones where one or more goals can be placed on the goalie, bad goals if you will, or when they are allowing goals at a much higher clip than expected. Even then, it's going to be subjective since there is no perfect way to calculate what shots should score and what shouldn't. But, given a large enough sample you can see the trends.

 

[jbeck5]

Well, you can look at the quality of chances that ended up in the back of the net, and you can broaden what is average since the typical sv% on a game by game basis is going to be broad.

Much like Stützle can have a good game without scoring, a goalie can have bad or good games regardless of their sv%, if the goalie is caught out of position, and letting out bad rebounds, that will eventually catch up to them, but they might get away with it for a game. To me, bad games are the ones where one or more goals can be placed on the goalie, bad goals if you will, or when they are allowing goals at a much higher clip than expected. Even then, it's going to be subjective since there is no perfect way to calculate what shots should score and what shouldn't. But, given a large enough sample you can see the trends.

I don't disagree with you, however it's not very useful, or rather hard to argue.

Like, if you thought korpisalo allowed 8 weak goals in October (making it average goaltending or something), but I thought he allowed 12 weak goals in October(making it poor goaltending) then how would we go about figuring out who's right 6 months later?

have everyone watch videos of every goal and dissect it?

I don't disagree with you, I just don't see how we get to any conclusion using a bunch of different visual opinions half a year later.

it's a lot easier to have a stat or multiple stats to look at where it can give you a rough idea of if a player had a strong game or not.

like, if you see Giroux finished with a goal and an assist and finished +3 and was 80% on the dot, you could say he had a strong game...regardless of a visual test where maybe he missed 3 open net chances and let people walk around him all game...


but you can look at stats and get it right most of the time.

 

[chipsens]

Statistical significance. Giving Korpi more games in rest of the season will generate a reasonable sample size to see what his save% truly is..
(with the team playing credible Jacques defense in front of him)

GSG!
And play Kleven on Sens too. Forget BSens.

 

[HSF]

we just went on a losing streak and now on a winning streak

seems like on par with what we have seen for a while under Martin?

 

[JD1]

Then take it up with the original statement that we can win games with average goaltending.

The numbers show that statistically, we don't do that often.

We have very inconsistent goaltending and we win when we get good goaltending and lose when we get bad goaltending.


We are not, however, good enough to win games consistently with average goaltending.

Some teams are capable of winning most games where they trade chances and aren't able to get the saves. We aren't one of those teams. We NEED the saves to get the win. We can't just outscore out opponents. We aren't good enough.

We're actually 14th in the league in goals scored/game. Right in between Florida and Las Vegas. The problem is we're 28th in goals against

Chances are pretty good that if in goals against we were roughly 14th to 18th, middle of the pack kinda thing, we'd be smack in the middle of a playoff race. And if that was the case, I'd have beer on ice and a pile of wings ready to go for tonight's game. But we're not and I'm nursing a cold so I might be in bed by 9