Post-Game Talk: Lou unable to beat a team lead by Joe Woll. Leafs win 3-0.

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Actually, what's kind of ironic about the evolution of the Leafs under Keefe is they seem to be trending towards being a bit more like the late 2000s Red Wings stylistically. That is a team that kind of holds the puck like a soccer team and will pitch back and regroup, regroup instead of pushing it forward (just flash back to the Lidstrom Rafalski game of catch). The downward production trend of the Big 4 is also something interesting to track. Is this dip a temporary blip or are are we seeing the early returns on a group that is now buying into a two way mindset and will start sacrificing those numbers a la Datsyuk and Zetterberg?

I don't know if the big 4 is consciously sacrificing their offense so much as they just suck at finishing plays right now (by their standards). They have all been great defensively though. They do have to score more if the Leafs are going to seriously contend for a cup. Strictly in terms of their play I think they have a great balance of creating their own chances and limiting the other team, but it only matters if it translates to goal differential at some point

 

[striker3]

Actually, what's kind of ironic about the evolution of the Leafs under Keefe is they seem to be trending towards being a bit more like the late 2000s Red Wings stylistically. That is a team that kind of holds the puck like a soccer team and will pitch back and regroup, regroup instead of pushing it forward (just flash back to the Lidstrom Rafalski game of catch). The downward production trend of the Big 4 is also something interesting to track. Is this dip a temporary blip or are are we seeing the early returns on a group that is now buying into a two way mindset and will start sacrificing those numbers a la Datsyuk and Zetterberg?

Couldn’t agree more with this. Babcock needed to go, he wasn’t a good coach for this group (and as known prior and even more not the greatest of people some may say a donkey). With that being said I loved the possession game he was trying to push, Keefe has just managed to get the group to start buying into that. I don’t think the production is going to drop off a crazy amount, lack of finish has been a problem, the chances are still there and eventually the pucks going to go in. But I mean I’ll happily sacrifice 10-20 points and some goals for the top guys if it means some success in the postseason.

 

[James Blackley]

Couldn’t agree more with this. Babcock needed to go, he wasn’t a good coach for this group (and as known prior and even more not the greatest of people some may say a donkey). With that being said I loved the possession game he was trying to push, Keefe has just managed to get the group to start buying into that. I don’t think the production is going to drop off a crazy amount, lack of finish has been a problem, the chances are still there and eventually the pucks going to go in. But I mean I’ll happily sacrifice 10-20 points and some goals for the top guys if it means some success in the postseason.

The problem in the post season is how easily our core IS shut down, it doesn't take much to neuter them btw (teams know they play a premiter style), and in the past there wasn't enough secondary scoring to compensate for it, that is why we have been bounced every year. This isn't so much about the team "buying in defensively", it's about the core smartening up and learning to play greasy and go to the net, they need to learn they can't treat the playoffs like it's NHL 94'. If and big IF the core can finally figure that very simple aspect out, this team will go deep, they are too talented and deep not to.

 

[striker3]

The problem in the post season is how easily our core IS shut down, it doesn't take much to neuter them btw (teams know they play a premiter style), and in the past there wasn't enough secondary scoring to compensate for it, that is why we have been bounced every year. This isn't so much about the team "buying in defensively", it's about the core smartening up and learning to play greasy and go to the net, they need to learn they can't treat the playoffs like it's NHL 94'. If and big IF the core can finally figure that very simple aspect out, this team will go deep, they are too talented and deep not to.

That’s fair, I’m not saying that them buying in is the answer by any means especially reflected by last seasons result. I don’t think the team is as far away as a lot of people think though and it seems you agree with that. I do have to disagree with the core being shut down being the biggest issue though. Marner obviously wasn’t very good last year, and matthews looked off after (if memory serves correct game 2, maybe 3?) nylander looked very good, Tavares was out. Historically they’ve dropped off slightly, but I think the real issue has always been lack of depth scoring and pace. For a while it didn’t seem to be there but lately the bottom 2 lines seem to be able to control play and chip in at a decent clip. Is that enough to help push them along? That’s still up for discussion. I’m excited to see a portion of the season where all the lines are clicking offensively at the same time though and see what we really have.

Playoffs are obviously a different game, and you touched on the perimeter style they play but I think the leafs did a good job at bringing in enough net front guys (ala bunting, Ritchie) that can rotate up and down and be that presence, although we haven’t seen a great deal from them to this point.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

The problem in the post season is how easily our core IS shut down, it doesn't take much to neuter them btw (teams know they play a premiter style), and in the past there wasn't enough secondary scoring to compensate for it, that is why we have been bounced every year. This isn't so much about the team "buying in defensively", it's about the core smartening up and learning to play greasy and go to the net, they need to learn they can't treat the playoffs like it's NHL 94'. If and big IF the core can finally figure that very simple aspect out, this team will go deep, they are too talented and deep not to.

And yet the past two years, we were significantly better than our opponents at getting to the middle of the ice even though they specifically stacked up (and were some of the better teams at doing so) in the middle of the ice to stop us from doing so. The Leafs are 3rd in the league at getting HD scoring chances for the past 3 years before this one... They are not a perimeter team at all.

In fact, I would say the fact that guys who are not perimeter threats, like Marner, are a bigger issue than our ability to score in the tighter, physical areas. It is affecting our PP as well.

Unfortunately, in the playoffs, you don't have any time to let things even out like we always do in the regular season. You need to be hot, and we've often been cold. You need the bounces and goals to go in, and even if we are playing the game the right way, we aren't getting those goals/bounces. And of course, having goalies who have spotted way too many easy goals while the other goalie is standing on his head is also a recipe for failure.

That has defined pretty much the last 4 years of Leafs playoff futility. That is probably why the Leafs have always come close to winning a series (7 chances in the last 4 years), but can never get it done (0-7).

 

[Notsince67]

Most advanced stats lack any real veracity. For example, that High Danger chances stats is subjective and therefore of no real mathematical value. It's no wonder many people who argue for them don't actually know how to apply them.

Who told you that?

 

[Metroid]

Not only did we win but I love seeing some leaf fans get butthurt from the title lol

 

[zeke]

While "High Danger Chances" is something tracked by one website (naturalstattrick.com) that uses the most basic definitions only (I.e. strictly based on shot location and nothing else), it is not a stat that has shown to be useful any time it has been tested and the analytics community never uses it for anything.

 

[Zybalto]

While "High Danger Chances" is something tracked by one website (naturalstattrick.com) that uses the most basic definitions only (I.e. strictly based on shot location and nothing else), it is not a stat that has shown to be useful any time it has been tested and the analytics community never uses it for anything.

I agree that the experts tend to disregard HDCF compared to almost any other stat but do you not think we should try and isolate as best we can the most dangerous chances or are you in the camp that leans towards xGF already does a good enough job in that area? HDCF is certainly the sketchiest of the stats but there must be some value there no?

 

[Notsince67]

While "High Danger Chances" is something tracked by one website (naturalstattrick.com) that uses the most basic definitions only (I.e. strictly based on shot location and nothing else), it is not a stat that has shown to be useful any time it has been tested and the analytics community never uses it for anything.

I agree with respect to high danger chances but high danger shots is somewhat nuanced. The analytics community uses similar things such as shot location etc. It just doesnt bin shots into categories... instead using coefficients against each variable for each shot event.
edit ....and property variable

 

[zeke]

I agree that the experts tend to disregard HDCF compared to almost any other stat but do you not think we should try and isolate as best we can the most dangerous chances or are you in the camp that leans towards xGF already does a good enough job in that area? HDCF is certainly the sketchiest of the stats but there must be some value there no?

The studies I've seen think the high danger chances stat is literally useless. Just because they call it High Danger doesn't mean they're actually describing High Danger.

The studies do see value in NST's Scoring Chances stat, though.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I agree that the experts tend to disregard HDCF compared to almost any other stat but do you not think we should try and isolate as best we can the most dangerous chances or are you in the camp that leans towards xGF already does a good enough job in that area?

Expected goals definitely offers more information, but high danger chances can still be valuable information, especially when used in conjunction with other statistics. For example, by looking at high danger chances and high danger shots, we can see that Toronto was good at shutting down the times that New York got into high danger locations, leading to a 39% chance to shot conversion, compared to our 80% conversion on an already higher total.

 

[Bluelines]

The studies I've seen think the high danger chances stat is literally useless. Just because they call it High Danger doesn't mean they're actually describing High Danger.

The studies do see value in NST's Scoring Chances stat, though.

"Studies" ... LOL ... liberal use of the word?

 

[zeke]

"Studies" ... LOL ... liberal use of the word?

the opposite. simple mathematical tests.

 

[zeke]

some tests of HDCF vs. SCF and other stats:

Are Scoring Chances Better Than Corsi?

High-Danger Scoring Chances: An Analysis of the Devilish Statistic

 

[Racer88]

The Leafs won so you can feel good but I’d reign in the title of this thread until we at least match where the Islanders got playoff wise last year.
Some teams are also average regular season teams but really good playoff teams. We are trying to establish both but haven’t yet.

I’m with you. I’m thrilled they are winning but the playoffs are where it’s at

 

[PromisedLand]

I think he might've watched the wrong game. 15 high danger chances for the Isles yesterday ? Advanced stats are just horrible imo, your eyes will always be the best way to evaluate a game or player.

high danger chances and expected GF are DUMBASS stats

example:

A player takes a shot from a given distance "X" from the net that is defined as a high danger chance

• Does not matter that the shot was blocked/deflected/highandwide/well defended etc...
• Does not matter that while in that defined "high danger slot" the "shot attempt" was garbage as the offensive player had two defensemen on him etc...
  
• xGF works in a similar fashion; league wide the goals are scored from a certain area... if a player in any game take the shot from the same area then it counts as xGF regardless of shot quality/well defneded etc...
• Imagine Ovi taking the shot from left wall versus someone with a muffin taking a shot from exact same distance/area on the ice.
• Furthermore, goalie quality is also not taken into account

Stats with "context" are useful; stats without context are STUPID and DUMB. Most of the hockey stats available are without "context" and hence stupid and dumb.

 

[PromisedLand]

The Bruins fan is a different but equally sad masquerade.

It is just hard to hate everybody on your most hated teams. I absolutely DETEST bruins and habs. But I just can't find the hate for Bergeron and Price. They are both classy hockey players!

 

[PromisedLand]

here we go he’s backkkk more useless stats for us guys without proper context. It’s not hard to use your brain, it’s true of anything in life. If you are unhappy with a situation or work environment productivity goes down, effort level goes down.

when you are happy and in an environment you like productivity goes up.

additionally YOU have to factor in the abysmal defense cores we had from 2016-2019, they were God awful so you go ahead with your bias arguments man and the fact that you have so many minions that just go along with your nonsense is just crazy to me

morgan Rielly said last week, and I quote, “the core has finally bought into playing team defense” which means prior to ill give you 2020 they really didn’t value it, that is on the players.

When Garret Sparks and Hutch are your starters and you compile statistics to show.. "see the team defense sucks" while Ceci and Barrie were your top4 guys with youngsters still learning the art of hockey a year or two removed from rebuild.

Advance Stats eh?

The hockey advanced stats... there is nothing "advanced" about it! LOL

 

[PromisedLand]

How is Babcock better without the leafs?

Well... He's still getting paid tens of millions of dollars and instead of the intense pressure in the Toronto spotlight coaching entitled spoiled millionaires, he's working with young students who are eager to improve. Seems to me he's living the dream.

Man I wish I got paid millions to do absolutely nothing..... What a life!

 

[Notsince67]

"Studies" ... LOL ... liberal use of the word?

All stats get correlated to wins. I know corsi correlates poorly at something like .19 which is far less than a flip of a coin. Further parsing the data to exclude medium and low danger shots gives a datapoint that might be interesting but in isolation says little about the game other than the opposing team's intent.

It isn't rocket science...it's data science. BTW...this has zero correlation to being liberal.

 

[Notsince67]

When Garret Sparks and Hutch are your starters and you compile statistics to show.. "see the team defense sucks" while Ceci and Barrie were your top4 guys with youngsters still learning the art of hockey a year or two removed from rebuild.

Advance Stats eh?

The hockey advanced stats... there is nothing "advanced" about it! LOL

Stats used by a bad practitioner is akin to a racecar driven by a poor driver.

 

[Bluelines]

All stats get correlated to wins. I know corsi correlates poorly at something like .19 which is far less than a flip of a coin. Further parsing the data to exclude medium and low danger shots gives a datapoint that might be interesting but in isolation says little about the game other than the opposing team's intent.

It isn't rocket science...it's data science. BTW...this has zero correlation to being liberal.

My point is 30 -40 -50 years ago a "study" had defined processes, with controls to minimize biases, now a guy builds a website or publishes something in a blog, and it's considered a "study".

Aside for capfriendly, I don't trust many of these pop up "fan stats" websites/blogs.

 

[Bluelines]

Stats used by a bad practitioner is akin to a racecar driven by a poor driver.

Yep, we have plenty of examples of bad racecar drivers on this forum.

 

[inthe6ix]

We played well, but we have to calm down a bit, they had Bridgeport out there.. however, it was still nice to shut that place up for JT.