GDT: Game 46: Wild @ Coyotes - 6:00pm (AZ) - BSAZ+, 910 AM

[rt]

Natural Stat Trick

team stats 5v5, rates instead of counts

What does “share” indicate?

 

[XX]

What does “share” indicate?

It's another way of expressing the balance of your for and against rates. Anytime you see something like GF%, that's your for rate less your against rate. So the Coyotes give up more goals than they score 5v5, making them a sub 50% ("underwater") GF% team.

Share is just shorthand for the percentage sign here, basically.

Teams that are underwater in a stat aren't always bad. They are usually trading something to gain elsewhere (see Boston). Sometimes they're just shit across the board.

 

[rt]

It's another way of expressing the balance of your for and against rates. Anytime you see something like GF%, that's your for rate less your against rate. So the Coyotes give up more goals than they score 5v5, making them a sub 50% ("underwater") GF% team.

Share is just shorthand for the percentage sign here, basically.

Teams that are underwater in a stat aren't always bad. They are usually trading something to gain elsewhere (see Boston). Sometimes they're just shit across the board.

Got it. I hadn’t seen it expressed as “share” before but it makes sense. That’s why I was curious about source. NST doesn’t use that word, so I wondered if there was another source out there. Thanks!

 

[XX]

When the Coyotes lead, their offense gets even more impotent.

Witness the turtle king
5v5, all scores vs when leading:

Shots for - last (two fewer than the next worst team, 13 fewer than Colorado)
Shot share - last
Corsi for - 22nd to 29th
Corsi share - 23rd to 29th
GA/60 - 21st to 5th
Expected goal share - 21st to 30th
Scoring chance for - 26th to 31st
Scoring chance against - 27th to 30th (lol)
Scoring chance share - 29th to last
High danger chance against - 24th to 30th
High danger chance share - 23rd to 30th
Save percentage - 21st to 4th

If you've ever felt like Rick Tocchet immediately retreats to protect the house and pray when up a goal... that's because he does.

When the Coyotes are up a goal, they generate 4 fewer shots per 60 than the next worst team in the league.

 

[KG]

Great! back-to-back coaches who use the very good strategy of turtling.

 

[Canis Latrans]

McConnell: "...COULD BE A TWO ON ONE IF THEY HURRY!!!"
Me: hmm...another false alarm

I might not be remembering this correctly, but didn't McConnell say something akin to "could be a two on two if they hurry," this past game as well. If I wasn't mishearing, and he didn't get ahead of himself only to realize it wasn't an odd-man rush, then just wow.

 

[rt]

I might not be remembering this correctly, but didn't McConnell say something akin to "could be a two on two if they hurry," this past game as well. If I wasn't mishearing, and he didn't get ahead of himself only to realize it wasn't an odd-man rush, then just wow.

This absolutely happened. It made me physically upset.

 

[Mosby]

Based on the above metrics which of the available or potentially available coaches does best?

 

[XX]

Based on the above metrics which of the available or potentially available coaches does best?

Boudreau has always had excellent results 5v5, regardless of personnel. Goalies failed him in Minny.

Gallant, if his Florida teams are anything to go by, is a pass for me. Balanced but not good.

Rod Brind'Amour is by far the best coach on the market this summer if his teams reflect his coaching ability/philosophy and not just his assistants. I'm guessing he is going to use Seattle as leverage to get a big deal. Pricey.

Maurice I'd stay away from. If MVR coaches the same way as Berube, I do not want him either. Same with Torts. Heavy, heavy defense first teams.

What really surprised me is Claude Julien. His Habs teams the last full 3 years were very good 5v5. Attacked a lot. Lead the league in shot attempts per 60 over those 3 years. I always pictured him as a turtle for some reason but he isn't, or he changed.

Since Nelson joined the Stars, they lead the league in GA/60. They basically play Tocchet's style but competently. A balanced team overall, they aren't underwater in anything. Same low shot rate, they just straight up prevent more dangerous shots against (xGA) and thus get better results. I don't think this is a stylistic fit for the Coyotes personnel but Nelson is very well thought of. Hard to say how these assistants would position their players if they had final say.

That covers everybody I think

Boudreau would be the cheapest good coach and would be amenable to assistant suggestions. Julien would be my second choice.

 

[Mosby]

My primary concerns with Boudreau are age (already 66) and he gets absolutely killed in the NHL playoffs. A lot of the fans of the teams he has coached believe that's a tactics thing. Of course, Quenneville had a terrible playoff record at one point too so...

I do think however that Boudreau would be a perfect coach to get Keller to the next level.

 

[Mosby]

I'm also weary of going for another assistant coach as it is too difficult to quantify their impact.

 

[RemoAZ]

I want a coach that is young and hungry. You can keep the former star players. Very rarely do they make good coaches and get too many passes on their reputation as players which has jack shit to do with their results as a coach. Armstrong doesn't seem like a guy that will get star struck like fan boy Chayka did with Tocchet.

 

[LittlePipes]

Here is one for Alex Meruelo and the corporate guys. I know they like graphs...

I know this isn't quite how graphs work but whatever.

linear inverse relationship with a slope of at least -1

 

[LittlePipes]

Scoring chances per 60: 26th
Scoring chance share: 29th
High danger goals: 29th
High danger share: 27th
Fenwick per 60: 26th
Shots per 60: 31st aka dead last
Shot share: 25th
Corsi share: 24th

^ clearly Jack Adams worthy.

If this team feels boring as shit 5v5... that's because it is.

Those stats spell “change the coaches now!”

 

[cobra427]

I want a coach that is young and hungry. You can keep the former star players. Very rarely do they make good coaches and get too many passes on their reputation as players which has jack shit to do with their results as a coach. Armstrong doesn't seem like a guy that will get star struck like fan boy Chayka did with Tocchet.

I think Barroway being from back east was enamored with RT from his playing days, that had a lot to do with RT being hired. Chayka had zero experience hiring a coach, if he made a good choice it would have been lucky, but in this case, I think Chayka went along with it. I do think RT had the resume, some head coaching experience, and 2 titles in Pitt as an assistant. He paid his dues, and with his reputation, I can see why he was hired. I liked the hire at the time.

The 0-20 start was a monster red flag in his first season. How bad do you have to be as a coach to let that happen? That told me something was majorly wrong with the hire. They gave him more time, I understand that too. They have now waited way too long from knowing he is a poor coach for sure, to finally making a change after this year ends. Maybe BA agreed with our new owner to keep RT and give him a one year evaluation, not sure who's call it was or if our owner influenced it. Maybe he said he didn't want to pay 2 coaches? But it has been 4 years, not one year can we say we had great results.

 

[GiveAFlyingPuck]

I think Barroway being from back east was enamored with RT from his playing days, that had a lot to do with RT being hired.

Pretty sure that's why he was hired.

 

[Jakey53]

I want a coach that is young and hungry. You can keep the former star players. Very rarely do they make good coaches and get too many passes on their reputation as players which has jack shit to do with their results as a coach. Armstrong doesn't seem like a guy that will get star struck like fan boy Chayka did with Tocchet.

I would like to see a proven experienced HC regardless of age. I want a winner, not going on a hope and prayer like with RT. We need stability in this area of the organization.

 

[Jakey53]

I think Barroway being from back east was enamored with RT from his playing days, that had a lot to do with RT being hired. Chayka had zero experience hiring a coach, if he made a good choice it would have been lucky, but in this case, I think Chayka went along with it. I do think RT had the resume, some head coaching experience, and 2 titles in Pitt as an assistant. He paid his dues, and with his reputation, I can see why he was hired. I liked the hire at the time.

The 0-20 start was a monster red flag in his first season. How bad do you have to be as a coach to let that happen? That told me something was majorly wrong with the hire. They gave him more time, I understand that too. They have now waited way too long from knowing he is a poor coach for sure, to finally making a change after this year ends. Maybe BA agreed with our new owner to keep RT and give him a one year evaluation, not sure who's call it was or if our owner influenced it. Maybe he said he didn't want to pay 2 coaches? But it has been 4 years, not one year can we say we had great results.

I agree. Barroway started this mess. You can add the Doan fiasco on Barroway as well.

 

[Jagged Ice]

Those stats spell “change the coaches now!”

We'll find out how smart our GM is in the next 3 to 4 months. It starts with his coaching decision.