Toggle sidebar

Around the NHL: Congrats Hawks on winning the STANLEY CUP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jonathan. said:
The irony of the Hawks win is it came during a game where they were massively outplayed and blocked a ton of shots.
Click to expand...

Not really. They usually always had the better fenwick ratings in individual games. They outplayed each opponents in each series. Maybe the exception is Detroit in the first few games where they were using their puck possession game to dictate flow of the game.
 
Kershaw said:
Not really. They usually always had the better fenwick ratings in individual games. They outplayed each opponents in each series. Maybe the exception is Detroit in the first few games where they were using their puck possession game to dictate flow of the game.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the last game?
 
Kershaw said:
They are a good team that used board-play to create puck possession game and had a ton of players had cold years shooting wise (Gaborik in particular). A lot of that can equate to their top pairing and top line, which played marvelously for them (Hags-Stepan-Nash, Zuccarello, McDonagh-Girardi). I don't think they're far off, but I think they would be much closer with Anisimov and Dubinsky. I am not sure how Brassard will work as a full time 2C with his lackluster possession numbers in Columbus, but we'll see how it goes.

They are what they are, a 2nd round foddle team to a better team like Boston.
Click to expand...

I agree that the team needs more depth up front; I'm hoping that Fast, Lindberg, Miller, Thomas, MSC, etc can provide that depth sooner rather than later. The Rangers may lack a true high-end prospect, but they have a lot of players who will almost certainly be effective NHLers, whether they're top-6 players or not.

Regarding Brassard, I'm of the belief that puck possession is more team-based than player based; if Brassard was on Chicago those years instead of on a bottom-feeder like Columbus, those numbers are likely looking a lot, lot better. Hell, put him on NY the past few years and I bet his possession numbers look better.
 
Kershaw said:
They were outplayed in the 1rst period, but held the Bruins to only 25 shots against. An easy night for Crawford. The game was taken over by the Hawks as it wore on IMO.

Fenwick rating shots directed at Rask vs. Crawford

http://timeonice.com/shots1213.php?gamenumber=30416
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. You discounted shot blocks earlier in the thread. I said I feel it's ironic that they won that game in large part due to shot blocks. Chicago had 20 or so blocks before the 3rd period, IIRC. NBC showed the stats.
 
BB v2 0 said:
Regarding Brassard, I'm of the belief that puck possession is more team-based than player based; if Brassard was on Chicago those years instead of on a bottom-feeder like Columbus, those numbers are likely looking a lot, lot better. Hell, put him on NY the past few years and I bet his possession numbers look better.
Click to expand...
I would agree with this. I think one year Detroit had like 8 of the top 9 CorsiRel players in the league.
 
BB v2 0 said:
I agree that the team needs more depth up front; I'm hoping that Fast, Lindberg, Miller, Thomas, MSC, etc can provide that depth sooner rather than later. The Rangers may lack a true high-end prospect, but they have a lot of players who will almost certainly be effective NHLers, whether they're top-6 players or not.

Regarding Brassard, I'm of the belief that puck possession is more team-based than player based; if Brassard was on Chicago those years instead of on a bottom-feeder like Columbus, those numbers are likely looking a lot, lot better. Hell, put him on NY the past few years and I bet his possession numbers look better.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but what's concerning about Brassard was that his numbers were even mediocre amongst the likes of Umberger, Huselius, Vermette and Upshall on the same roster. There is hope however, Stralman and Nash did improve under the Rangers in possession numbers.
 
-31- said:
A good shot-blocking team will have that reflected in their Fenwick.
Click to expand...

There we go. Which is really funny that the CBS story that Kershaw posted and gave his thumbs up to expressly discounted shot blocking.

Hence why I thought the win last night was a bit ironic re: advanced stat folk.
 
Jonathan. said:
You're missing the point. You discounted shot blocks earlier in the thread. I said I feel it's ironic that they won that game in large part due to shot blocks. Chicago had 20 or so blocks before the 3rd period, IIRC. NBC showed the stats.
Click to expand...

They still directed more shots the other way then Boston, despite the blocked shots. Which is what fenwick accounts for. The probability is much higher of winning if you have a + differential.
 
Jonathan. said:
There we go. Which is really funny that the CBS story that Kershaw posted and gave his thumbs up to expressly discounted shot blocking.

Hence why I thought the win last night was a bit ironic re: advanced stat folk.
Click to expand...
From the article:

The reason the Blackhawks were so low in these two categories wasn't that they lacked grit or toughness or compete level or any other hockey-related buzzword that you can throw out there. It was because of the simple fact that they had more skill than nearly every other team and had the puck way more than their opponents. You can't block shots or hit people when you're the one always playing with the puck.
Click to expand...
 
Jonathan. said:
There we go. Which is really funny that the CBS story that Kershaw posted and gave his thumbs up to expressly discounted shot blocking.

Hence why I thought the win last night was a bit ironic re: advanced stat folk.
Click to expand...

fenwick doesn't take into account of blocked shots. not sure what it has to do with Blocked shots.
 
Kershaw said:
fenwick doesn't take into account of blocked shots. not sure what it has to do with Blocked shots.
Click to expand...

You are completely missing the point. I'm merely kidding around with you. I'm saying I think it's ironic that the Hawks won primarily due to blocked shots last night when they were outplayed for most of the game as well. You posted an article that discounted shot blocks when last night shot blocks probably won them the game.
 
All aspects weighed, with this lockout, at least our off season is shorter and more compact as far as draft, free agency, players updates, training camp preparation, training camp, preseason is concerned!
 
Jonathan. said:
You are completely missing the point. I'm merely kidding around with you. I'm saying I think it's ironic that the Hawks won primarily due to blocked shots last night when they were outplayed for most of the game as well. You posted an article that discounted shot blocks when last night shot blocks probably won them the game.
Click to expand...

Perhaps on the blocked shots, but the Hawks still had better Fenwick rating, which is the better tool to predict winning. So I'm confused as to how game 6 discounts that article.
 
NYR2007 said:
after reading the last 10 - 15 posts i have come to the conclusion this is gonna be a long off season
Click to expand...

unless Slats makes his move early. There's not that much cap space to work with and certainly not with the impending signings and negotiations.
 
moore is new mac said:
hey guys ive been reading ur posts for a long time and finally decided to get a account.. last nights game almost killed me :help:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I lost my **** at that game, dude. I was kind of depressed after the Lucic goal because I wouldn't have been able to see a game seven (going to Great Adventure tomorrow, aw yeah), and then BAM. 3-2 Hawks. Craziest ending to a game I've ever seen in the playoffs.

...still not as good as Richards' tying goal in game five last year, though. I miss that Richards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom