GDT: GAME 76 | Devils @ Senators | Imama Mia! Edition | Sat Apr 6 2024, 7PM | CITY

Ouroboros

There is no armour against Fate
Feb 3, 2008
15,621
11,390
20th time this season the Sens have given up a goal on the first or second shot of the game.
That's about right, given that the Sens have an .887 team SV%.

Each shot has an 11.3% chance of going in [not strictly true, but since goals conform so well to Poisson distributions it's ok], meaning there's about a 78.7% chance that neither of the first two shots of the game go in.

So you'd expect this to happen about 18 or 19 times over an 82 game season.
 

DrEasy

Out rumptackling
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2010
11,420
7,296
Stützville
That's about right, given that the Sens have an .887 team SV%.

Each shot has an 11.3% chance of going in [not strictly true, but since goals conform so well to Poisson distributions it's ok], meaning there's about a 78.7% chance that neither of the first two shots of the game go in.

So you'd expect this to happen about 18 or 19 times over an 82 game season.
Get outa here with your mathematics shmathematics!
 

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
19,205
7,199
Ottawa
I missed Demidov at #6 in Bob's list.



We need a "best in class" GM and Coach. We don't have either.
Willing to give the gm a chance.
I would rather have an experienced successful GM than a rookie GM. We have suffered for years with the last rookie GM.

I think he’s including himself. I liked his interview the other day. The whole team needs to shake whatever this is off of them. Need a huge off season.
Need a real coach!

Get outa here with your mathematics shmathematics!
I like it!
 

BankStreetParade

Registered User
Jan 22, 2013
7,043
4,422
Ottawa
Allen let in three softies and he still somehow outplayed forsberg.

Did you guys see chabot after the penalty shot? He was going rabid in the corner in an opponent battling for the puck. Great. But he needs to do that *every* shift.

Chycrun I’m just starting to think is a bit of a loss cause when it comes to physical play. He’s decided he’s not interested and that’s that.

Third period made it clear what the team needs to do. If you want to follow the captain then you stay. But if you’re unwilling to play like that then we will get players who will
This is so overrated for defensemen. I rather guys like Sanderson who take away the player's skating lane, separate them from the puck and make a quick play to get the puck going the other way. Good positioning beats physical play in the modern NHL.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,619
8,531
Victoria
This is so overrated for defensemen. I rather guys like Sanderson who take away the player's skating lane, separate them from the puck and make a quick play to get the puck going the other way. Good positioning beats physical play in the modern NHL.
Not when it comes to the front of the net or physical battles.

Branstrom is often in good position, he simply gets moved out of position.

You need a guy like Sanderson, who is going to be an absolute star, but you also need guys who are big and strong, it’s a simple fact that the playoffs bear out every single year.

What you don’t really need are small weaker dmen with great positional play but little else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix and aragorn

BankStreetParade

Registered User
Jan 22, 2013
7,043
4,422
Ottawa
Not when it comes to the front of the net or physical battles.

Branstrom is often in good position, he simply gets moved out of position.

You need a guy like Sanderson, who is going to be an absolute star, but you also need guys who are big and strong, it’s a simple fact that the playoffs bear out every single year.

What you don’t really need are small weaker dmen with great positional play but little else.
Even that is no longer the case in the modern NHL. Much better to have a defenseman who can take away a guy's stick than to be trying to plow each other out of the way. Positioning is leverage and leverage is very hard to overcome through strength, unless the disparity in strength is massive. Also, our defensemen are terrible at blocking shots and terrible at taking away shooting lanes with positioning. Neither of those things are attributes solely of the physical defenseman.

I'll also disagree on Brannstrom. His defensive positioning leaves a lot to be desired and he's often late to engage, which means he's already at a deficit in leverage. It's one of the main reasons he looks like he loses so many battles. He was late to arrive to the play and he's battling someone who established position and has leverage.

Sanderson is not some physical behemoth, he's not overly large and certainly not "heavy" in the classic sense. What makes him so damn successful is anticipating plays and engaging early. He's there at the time the puck arrives which means he's established, ready to battle and use leverage to his benefit.

Yes, big and strong helps a lot but only if guys have good positioning, good anticipation and good skating. It's why guys like J. Brown and Gudbranson are not stars in the league despite their size and strength advantages. And it's why the top top top defensemen in the league are guys like Makar, Josi, Fox, Hughes, Morrissey, etc. Not guys at the top of any list for big and strong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bicboi64

Burrowsaurus

Registered User
Mar 20, 2013
44,261
17,327
This is so overrated for defensemen. I rather guys like Sanderson who take away the player's skating lane, separate them from the puck and make a quick play to get the puck going the other way. Good positioning beats physical play in the modern NHL.
Sanderson is able to be Sanderson cuz he’s simply better than the players he’s playing against. Chabot and chychrun are not. For most players in the nhl if you’re not willing to engage physical and battle in the corner you’re of no real use in important games.

Look at other teams battle for pucks in the corner. Those guys are going 100%. Chychrun and chabot don’t have that

Not when it comes to the front of the net or physical battles.

Branstrom is often in good position, he simply gets moved out of position.

You need a guy like Sanderson, who is going to be an absolute star, but you also need guys who are big and strong, it’s a simple fact that the playoffs bear out every single year.

What you don’t really need are small weaker dmen with great positional play but little else.
I would say Branny engages way more often than chychrun or chabot. Unfornstrly like you say he’s simply too small. But I look at him battle and I look at chychrun battle…. I wish brannstrom was chychruns size

Even that is no longer the case in the modern NHL. Much better to have a defenseman who can take away a guy's stick than to be trying to plow each other out of the way. Positioning is leverage and leverage is very hard to overcome through strength, unless the disparity in strength is massive. Also, our defensemen are terrible at blocking shots and terrible at taking away shooting lanes with positioning. Neither of those things are attributes solely of the physical defenseman.

I'll also disagree on Brannstrom. His defensive positioning leaves a lot to be desired and he's often late to engage, which means he's already at a deficit in leverage. It's one of the main reasons he looks like he loses so many battles. He was late to arrive to the play and he's battling someone who established position and has leverage.

Sanderson is not some physical behemoth, he's not overly large and certainly not "heavy" in the classic sense. What makes him so damn successful is anticipating plays and engaging early. He's there at the time the puck arrives which means he's established, ready to battle and use leverage to his benefit.

Yes, big and strong helps a lot but only if guys have good positioning, good anticipation and good skating. It's why guys like J. Brown and Gudbranson are not stars in the league despite their size and strength advantages. And it's why the top top top defensemen in the league are guys like Makar, Josi, Fox, Hughes, Morrissey, etc. Not guys at the top of any list for big and strong.
You named a bunch of players on different levels than chychrun and chabot lol. Yes if chychrun or chabot were as good as those guy then I would be pretty cool with them bailing out of most physical battles. But they’re not.

We can be going two thirds of the game with d men who won’t or can’t win a battle

Look at that 4th goal. They both do not want to engage with opponents.

You mention positioning but positioning comes with a physical element. To gain position you need to take or give a beating. Chychrun and chabot don’t like even being near opposing forwards.

Like that 4th goal is just light defending. Very light defending
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ice-Tray

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
19,205
7,199
Ottawa
Even that is no longer the case in the modern NHL. Much better to have a defenseman who can take away a guy's stick than to be trying to plow each other out of the way. Positioning is leverage and leverage is very hard to overcome through strength, unless the disparity in strength is massive. Also, our defensemen are terrible at blocking shots and terrible at taking away shooting lanes with positioning. Neither of those things are attributes solely of the physical defenseman.

I'll also disagree on Brannstrom. His defensive positioning leaves a lot to be desired and he's often late to engage, which means he's already at a deficit in leverage. It's one of the main reasons he looks like he loses so many battles. He was late to arrive to the play and he's battling someone who established position and has leverage.

Sanderson is not some physical behemoth, he's not overly large and certainly not "heavy" in the classic sense. What makes him so damn successful is anticipating plays and engaging early. He's there at the time the puck arrives which means he's established, ready to battle and use leverage to his benefit.

Yes, big and strong helps a lot but only if guys have good positioning, good anticipation and good skating. It's why guys like J. Brown and Gudbranson are not stars in the league despite their size and strength advantages. And it's why the top top top defensemen in the league are guys like Makar, Josi, Fox, Hughes, Morrissey, etc. Not guys at the top of any list for big and strong.
We would have a much better team if we could clone 5 more Sanderson's. :)

Hopefully Kleven will be ready to play in the top 6 D in the NHL next season and we can acquire a big physical RD to play in the top 4 D. We should only keep one of Bernard-Docker, Hamonic and Branstrom as the 7th D. Hopefully we can trade or buy-out Hamonic.
 

BankStreetParade

Registered User
Jan 22, 2013
7,043
4,422
Ottawa
You named a bunch of players on different levels than chychrun and chabot lol. Yes if chychrun or chabot were as good as those guy then I would be pretty cool with them bailing out of most physical battles. But they’re not.

We can be going two thirds of the game with d men who won’t or can’t win a battle

Look at that 4th goal. They both do not want to engage with opponents.

You mention positioning but positioning comes with a physical element. To gain position you need to take or give a beating. Chychrun and chabot don’t like even being near opposing forwards.

Like that 4th goal is just light defending. Very light defending
I didn't mention or talk about either of those guys, so I'm not sure what you're going on about. I said physical play is so overrated for defensemen and provided reasoning why it is in the modern NHL. For what it's worth, Chabot plays similarly to Sanderson's style of play which is why he's been relied on to play so many minutes for almost his entire career.

Btw, since Martin took over, Chabot's ice time continues to be almost identical to what it was under DJ. The fact is his game is effective without the physicality component because his anticipation and defensive positioning are generally excellent. His ability to arrive at the puck and initiate his position negates any physical or strength advantage his opponent may have. He has leverage on his side in those situations.

And, again, most of the league's truly elite defensemen are not the crushing-guys-in-corners types. They establish positioning by anticipating the puck and they use that leverage to win battles.

There's a lot to pick apart about this team's general defensive play but this is just not one of those areas.
 

Burrowsaurus

Registered User
Mar 20, 2013
44,261
17,327
I didn't mention or talk about either of those guys, so I'm not sure what you're going on about. I said physical play is so overrated for defensemen and provided reasoning why it is in the modern NHL. For what it's worth, Chabot plays similarly to Sanderson's style of play which is why he's been relied on to play so many minutes for almost his entire career.

Btw, since Martin took over, Chabot's ice time continues to be almost identical to what it was under DJ. The fact is his game is effective without the physicality component because his anticipation and defensive positioning are generally excellent. His ability to arrive at the puck and initiate his position negates any physical or strength advantage his opponent may have. He has leverage on his side in those situations.

And, again, most of the league's truly elite defensemen are not the crushing-guys-in-corners types. They establish positioning by anticipating the puck and they use that leverage to win battles.

There's a lot to pick apart about this team's general defensive play but this is just not one of those areas.
You responded to my post and highlights a part of a paragraph where I’m VERY specifically talking about chycrun. Sorry if I mislead you

But uh yeah. Chychrun and chabot need to engage more physically. I know Quinn Hughes and Adam fox may not be the most physical guys but we won’t be acquiring those players

Most d men need to be willing to stay close to the players they’re marking.

So let’s take the names out of it.

We need defenders who are more difficult to play against. People on here was right. I was wrong. Goaltending is our biggest issue. But to get past the level that better goaltending will take us too. We need these soft guys replaced.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Ad

Ad