Interesting Info: Part XVI (All Jackets-related "tidbits" in here)

[cslebn]

I need me some Dubi right now.


I think losing 50 critical faceoffs yesterday made me feel that way.

This is something I've been watching and I honestly think is a big part of why we are playing so badly compared to last year even.

Joey:
2015-16 - 48.8%
2014-15 - 52%
2013-14 - 52.7%

Nick:
2015-16 - 49.1%
2014-15 - 47.5%
2013-14 - 46.2%

Boone:
2015-16 - 45.7%
2014-15 - 49.3%
2013-14 - 46.7%

Karlsson:
2015-16 - 46.6%
2014-15 - N/A
2013-14 - N/A

Wennberg:
2015-16 - 37.3%
2014-15 - 42.7%
2013-14 - N/A

Dubi:
2015-16 - 49.8%
2014-15 - 50.7%
2013-14 - 53%

Letestu:
2015-16 - 43.8% (Campbell)
2014-15 - 52.9%
2013-14 - 51.4%

Also for 2013-14 DMac was 51.5% and AA was 49.4% (AA not included in 14/15 due to injuries and playing wing).

Dubi is down a bit, but the loss of Letestu and Joey being down are the worst. It's bad when the only players on the team over 50% are Boll and Saad.

NOTE, 14/15 and 15/16 stats from NHL.com; 13/14 stats from hockey-reference

 

[spintheblackcircle]

 

[niflheim]

This is something I've been watching and I honestly think is a big part of why we are playing so badly compared to last year even.

Joey:
2015-16 - 48.8%
2014-15 - 52%
2013-14 - 52.7%

Also for 2013-14 DMac was 51.5% and AA was 49.4% (AA not included in 14/15 due to injuries and playing wing).

Dubi is down a bit, but the loss of Letestu and Joey being down are the worst. It's bad when the only players on the team over 50% are Boll and Saad.

NOTE, 14/15 and 15/16 stats from NHL.com; 13/14 stats from hockey-reference

If I remember correctly ( in our history) Malhotra had best FO%, next after him Vermette. Nowadays our FO% is mediocre, Ryan is best, but he has only 69 ( or 70?) position in NHL rankings same as Granlund from Wilds.

 

[CBJx614]

This is something I've been watching and I honestly think is a big part of why we are playing so badly compared to last year even.

Joey:
2015-16 - 48.8%
2014-15 - 52%
2013-14 - 52.7%

Nick:
2015-16 - 49.1%
2014-15 - 47.5%
2013-14 - 46.2%

Boone:
2015-16 - 45.7%
2014-15 - 49.3%
2013-14 - 46.7%

Karlsson:
2015-16 - 46.6%
2014-15 - N/A
2013-14 - N/A

Wennberg:
2015-16 - 37.3%
2014-15 - 42.7%
2013-14 - N/A

Dubi:
2015-16 - 49.8%
2014-15 - 50.7%
2013-14 - 53%

Letestu:
2015-16 - 43.8% (Campbell)
2014-15 - 52.9%
2013-14 - 51.4%

Also for 2013-14 DMac was 51.5% and AA was 49.4% (AA not included in 14/15 due to injuries and playing wing).

Dubi is down a bit, but the loss of Letestu and Joey being down are the worst. It's bad when the only players on the team over 50% are Boll and Saad.

NOTE, 14/15 and 15/16 stats from NHL.com; 13/14 stats from hockey-reference

Jenner, if he was forced to play center consistently would probably see his numbers rise a bit.

Also look at the ages of our successful centers vs those who aren't. Not saying that's a huge factor but obviously the more experience the better. Johansen has always been a beast in the dot so this year is a disappointment. And then I can't say anything about Wennberg or Karlsson because I don't know how much, if at all playing on a bigger effects the ability to win a face-off. Also just the fact that they've played under 100 games in the NHL needs to be taken into consideration.






Either way your point remains. We need help winning faceoffs.

 

[major major]

Jenner, if he was forced to play center consistently would probably see his numbers rise a bit.

Also look at the ages of our successful centers vs those who aren't. Not saying that's a huge factor but obviously the more experience the better. Johansen has always been a beast in the dot so this year is a disappointment. And then I can't say anything about Wennberg or Karlsson because I don't know how much, if at all playing on a bigger effects the ability to win a face-off. Also just the fact that they've played under 100 games in the NHL needs to be taken into consideration.

Either way your point remains. We need help winning faceoffs.

I agree, Jenner improved greatly on the dot over the course of his stint at center last year. I wouldn't pay too much attention to his number for this year because he hasn't played center enough.

Wennberg and Karlsson could definitely use some more experience. I'd only add that they don't necessarily need to learn on the job with NHL experience. You can take draws in the AHL too.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Wasn't the Campbell signing touted because of his PK and FO abilities? Dude is a career 50%er and can't even win 44% this season. What a joke.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

The Jackets rank dead last at 46.8% FO won.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?repor...byzone&season=20152016&gameType=2&aggregate=0

Last year the CBJ won 49.8% of FO, ranking 18th in the league.

 

[Mayor Bee]

This is something I've been watching and I honestly think is a big part of why we are playing so badly compared to last year even.
...
Also for 2013-14 DMac was 51.5% and AA was 49.4% (AA not included in 14/15 due to injuries and playing wing).

Dubi is down a bit, but the loss of Letestu and Joey being down are the worst. It's bad when the only players on the team over 50% are Boll and Saad.

NOTE, 14/15 and 15/16 stats from NHL.com; 13/14 stats from hockey-reference

There has never been a study conducted that has demonstrated a positive correlation between faceoff win percentage and actual team success. And the gap between the absolute best in the league and the absolute worst in the league at faceoffs isn't a big one at all, and can be more than offset by actual offensive and defensive differences between the two players.

 

[CBJx614]

There has never been a study conducted that has demonstrated a positive correlation between faceoff win percentage and actual team success. And the gap between the absolute best in the league and the absolute worst in the league at faceoffs isn't a big one at all, and can be more than offset by actual offensive and defensive differences between the two players.

Not trying to start anything, but Torts was saying it was a big deal this game. 3 faceoffs, 3 goals. Directly because of a critical faceoff loss.

Something else he mentioned that doesn't really come up in stats is that faceoffs are more of a team stat, in the sense that a lot of guys are just going for the tie up so centers are really dependent on their wingers to get in and help as well. And he was saying that was something they needed to work on.

 

[EspenK]

There has never been a study conducted that has demonstrated a positive correlation between faceoff win percentage and actual team success. And the gap between the absolute best in the league and the absolute worst in the league at faceoffs isn't a big one at all, and can be more than offset by actual offensive and defensive differences between the two players.

In general I have always wondered about this. I mean the difference between 48% and 52% spread over 1000 fo's is 40 wins. I'm not sure how many there are over a season but even at 4000 or about 50 a game that's 2 a game. So no biggie there imo.

I think where it makes a difference is like what happened Sunday where losing 3 fo's led to 3 goals. The cumulative effect is minimal but losing a crucial one can kill you.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

There has never been a study conducted that has demonstrated a positive correlation between faceoff win percentage and actual team success..

The best team in the NHL in faceoffs is Carolina.

 

[We Want Ten]

Spending half your shift chasing down the puck has to be a negative though. I noticed this several times after a FO, they would be chasing the puck then get it, then dump it. Switch.

No idea on how this correlates to wins and loses though.

 

[db2011]

Every face off you lose is a face off your opponent wins. That's a possession you don't have. Seems like it's a good idea to win as many as you can.

 

[Light the Lamp]

I saw some statistics that state losing the face-off in the defensive zone does not correlate to more goals.

I was miffed and still don't like losing the face-off at any point.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

With an average of about 60 faceoffs per game, so the best team in the league would win 32 face offs and the worst would win 28. While of course you want to be over 50%, we are basically talking about 1 face off every 15 minutes. I don't consider that a major factor in wins and losses. It needs to get better, but it's not hand-wringing to me.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Not trying to start anything, but Torts was saying it was a big deal this game. 3 faceoffs, 3 goals. Directly because of a critical faceoff loss.

Something else he mentioned that doesn't really come up in stats is that faceoffs are more of a team stat, in the sense that a lot of guys are just going for the tie up so centers are really dependent on their wingers to get in and help as well. And he was saying that was something they needed to work on.

In general I have always wondered about this. I mean the difference between 48% and 52% spread over 1000 fo's is 40 wins. I'm not sure how many there are over a season but even at 4000 or about 50 a game that's 2 a game. So no biggie there imo.

I think where it makes a difference is like what happened Sunday where losing 3 fo's led to 3 goals. The cumulative effect is minimal but losing a crucial one can kill you.

Both are true, and there are definitely times where winning a draw is extremely crucial. Up one, empty net, defensive zone faceoff...yeah, that needs to be won and either pinned or cleared. Or vice versa for the team down one looking at an offensive zone faceoff.

 

[Nanabijou]

There has never been a study conducted that has demonstrated a positive correlation between faceoff win percentage and actual team success. And the gap between the absolute best in the league and the absolute worst in the league at faceoffs isn't a big one at all, and can be more than offset by actual offensive and defensive differences between the two players.

Agreed, I personally have thought that face-off win %, as it is measured now, is the most over-rated stat out there. The best regular centers generally have a win percentage just over 50% (~53-55%) which equates to about 1 extra face-off win per game over most of the lower-tier centers. That one win could have been a center ice face-off. Also, try determining face-off wins for yourself one game and comparing it to the official stats - a good percentage of them are pretty ambiguous as to who actually won them.

While I don't think overall % is important, I'd be interested in some stat that quantifies the number of face-offs that are cleanly won (and conversely, cleanly lost), especially in the offensive and defensive zones that led to a scoring opportunity during the winning team's possession immediately after the faceoff. Clearly, the CBJ lost some key ones cleanly last game and it cost them.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Spending half your shift chasing down the puck has to be a negative though. I noticed this several times after a FO, they would be chasing the puck then get it, then dump it. Switch.

No idea on how this correlates to wins and loses though.

Every face off you lose is a face off your opponent wins. That's a possession you don't have. Seems like it's a good idea to win as many as you can.

But how many times does what's credited as a faceoff win even result in a clean possession? I don't know that anyone's ever bothered to track the percentages, but there's a decent number of faceoffs where, within two seconds of the puck being dropped and Team A winning the draw, Team B has possession. Maybe the defenseman flubbed the puck near the blueline, or maybe the wing was out of position, or maybe the center was simply outmuscled for the puck out in space. And it's not a small number like 5% or 7%, it has to be at least 20% or higher; I may be underestimating it badly.

 

[cslebn]

It's just been a noticeable trend. Under HCTR, we won face offs and used that to leverage our possession game. It's the same thing you see with Detroit. It may not be super critical, but there are without a doubt phases of a game and times that it impacts.

The 3rd period defensive zone draws, the PP draw to set up the PP, etc. You can't possess the puck if you are always chasing the other team. There is another part on that note though. It's not just about winning or losing the draw, but how the team reacts immediately. You can lose the draw but still gain possession through puck battling in circle for instance. We're losing all of those as well right now (eye test) which again relates to less possession and more chances for our opponents.

 

[cslebn]

But how many times does what's credited as a faceoff win even result in a clean possession? I don't know that anyone's ever bothered to track the percentages, but there's a decent number of faceoffs where, within two seconds of the puck being dropped and Team A winning the draw, Team B has possession. Maybe the defenseman flubbed the puck near the blueline, or maybe the wing was out of position, or maybe the center was simply outmuscled for the puck out in space. And it's not a small number like 5% or 7%, it has to be at least 20% or higher; I may be underestimating it badly.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

I think a lot of the time, the CBJ lose the draw and then stand around too much to fight to regain possession and that's been part of the killer.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Agreed, I personally have thought that face-off win %, as it is measured now, is the most over-rated stat out there. The best regular centers generally have a win percentage just over 50% (~53-55%) which equates to about 1 extra face-off win per game over most of the lower-tier centers. That one win could have been a center ice face-off. Also, try determining face-off wins for yourself one game and comparing it to the official stats - a good percentage of them are pretty ambiguous as to who actually won them.

While I don't think overall % is important, I'd be interested in some stat that quantifies the number of face-offs that are cleanly won (and conversely, cleanly lost), especially in the offensive and defensive zones that led to a scoring opportunity during the winning team's possession immediately after the faceoff. Clearly, the CBJ lost some key ones cleanly last game and it cost them.

It's like in baseball, where the difference between a .275 hitter and a .300 hitter is roughly 15 hits over the course of an entire season. It's simply not a significant total, especially when there are other ways to produce offense and others ways outside of offense to offset that gap.

I'm with you; I'd like to see more clearly defined stats. I'd be willing to bet that if faceoff wins were tabulated differently by who possessed the puck one second after the drop, there'd be a ton where it would be neither team.

 

[We Want Ten]

But how many times does what's credited as a faceoff win even result in a clean possession? I don't know that anyone's ever bothered to track the percentages, but there's a decent number of faceoffs where, within two seconds of the puck being dropped and Team A winning the draw, Team B has possession. Maybe the defenseman flubbed the puck near the blueline, or maybe the wing was out of position, or maybe the center was simply outmuscled for the puck out in space. And it's not a small number like 5% or 7%, it has to be at least 20% or higher; I may be underestimating it badly.

Beats me man.

I do know the game that caused torts to speak up about this favored SJS 57/43 though.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Johansen: "Softly in play."

 

[db2011]

Beats me man.

I do know the game that caused torts to speak up about this favored SJS 57/43 though.

Richards talked about it, too. Said it was an indicator of guys' readiness to play or something. 57/43 is a significant difference. I don't understand poo-pooing faceoffs, or rather the stat. Coaches talk about it as meaningful, and won faceoffs can directly be seen to lead to goals even if it's a minute or two later.

 

[CBJx614]

Richards talked about it, too. Said it was an indicator of guys' readiness to play or something. 57/43 is a significant difference. I don't understand poo-pooing faceoffs, or rather the stat. Coaches talk about it as meaningful, and won faceoffs can directly be seen to lead to goals even if it's a minute or two later.

exactly, it may not lead to a goal exactly, but it completely changes the game everytime you win a faceoff. Like what was said earlier, obviously some are weighted more than others.