Post-Game Talk: Lundqvist'd. Jets lose 3-1.

[Jetfaninflorida]

They include missed shots from a certain range around the net. I don't believe it's a great metric myself but it is useful in showing that the majority of chances went the Jets way last night.

That's true. But I would focus more in on high quality scoring chances. Keepers like Lundqvist and Helle don't let many low quality scoring chances get by. I believe that we had more high quality chances just based on the eye test, but I would like to see the stats from the game. They owned us in the second.

 

[Ducky10]

That's true. But I would focus more in on high quality scoring chances. Keepers like Lundqvist and Helle don't let many low quality scoring chances get by. I believe that we had more high quality chances just based on the eye test, but I would like to see the stats from the game. They owned us in the second.

Lol, hardly. They had some PP opportunities and other than that the whole period was pretty much a non event from both teams. Nobody owned anyone.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

Lol, hardly. They had some PP opportunities and other than that the whole period was pretty much a non event from both teams. Nobody owned anyone.

Did you miss post #214?

 

[Ducky10]

Did you miss post #214?

Nope

 

[YWGinYYZ]

That's true. But I would focus more in on high quality scoring chances. Keepers like Lundqvist and Helle don't let many low quality scoring chances get by. I believe that we had more high quality chances just based on the eye test, but I would like to see the stats from the game. They owned us in the second.

Jets were stronger in the 1st and 3rd, NY was stronger in the second (but not by much). In the end, we definitely got Lundqvist'd, as the Jets had the higher number of shot attempts, higher number of dangerous shot attempts, etc.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

I am looking at naturalstattric.com. I have never used the site before. But what I see if I am reading it right (and I may not be) is the following:

High Danger (scoring) Chances For:
Winnipeg 5
NYR 9

So we gave up almost twice as many high danger scoring chances. So much for being Goalied.

Unless I am reading it backwards and we had 9 to their 5?

 

[AlphaLackey]

Jets were stronger in the 1st and 3rd, NY was stronger in the second (but not by much). In the end, we definitely got Lundqvist'd, as the Jets had the higher number of shot attempts, higher number of dangerous shot attempts, etc.

To think that I'm still alive and well within my prime to see such a thorough post-game analysis, and yet I can remember being alive in a time where people thought +/- was a profoundly meaningful stat. Makes me excited to see what hockey arguments I'll get into in my 70s.

 

[Ducky10]

6 minutes short handed in the 2nd didn't help. Penalties were a big reason the Rangers got pummeled in the shot dept in the 3rd as well.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

NYR not much stronger in the second? Come on, man. The lack of objectivity is getting out of hand. Credit Corsica.hockey

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

6 minutes short handed in the 2nd didn't help. Penalties were a big reason the Rangers got pummeled in the shot dept in the 3rd as well.

Yes, penalties are a part of hockey games. It's best if you take less of them. It's also good if you score when you get a power play. You often take more penalties when you are being outplayed and are chasing the game.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I am looking at naturalstattric.com. I have never used the site before. But what I see if I am reading it right (and I may not be) is the following:

High Danger (scoring) Chances For:
Winnipeg 5
NYR 9

So we gave up almost twice as many high danger scoring chances. So much for being Goalied.

Unless I am reading it backwards and we had 9 to their 5?

Here are the shot charts:

Similar number down the middle, but the rest of our shots were from further out / above the circle, and NY's were from the outside but below the circle (minus the herp/derp shots from outside the blueline)

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

So the game summary stats say:
We owned them in the first (paraphrasing).
We had a late period breakdown which led to a breakaway goal against.
They owned us in the second (paraphrasing).
We went into the third pretty even Cumulative Corsi For (Rangers just a bit ahead of us)
We outplayed them in the third.
We outshot them overall, but with shots from farther out.
We gave up 9 High Danger Scoring Chances, they gave up 5 High Danger Scoring Chances
They won.

I don't see a 'we got goalied' story in those stats. I would agree with the 'we got goalied' story, if I have the HDSC summary backwards and we had almost 2x High Danger Scoring Chances as them, but it doesn't appear that way. It appears as though we had more low danger scoring chances, but they had a huge advantage in high danger scoring chances - almost double.

Just saying.

 

[Ducky10]

Yes, penalties are a part of hockey games. It's best if you take less of them. It's also good if you score when you get a power play. You often take more penalties when you are being outplayed and are chasing the game.

I was referring to the shot differential. Getting outplayed and getting owned are two different things. It's pure hyperbole to claim the Jets were owned in the 2nd.

 

[surixon]

So the game summary stats say:
We owned them in the first (paraphrasing).
We had a late period breakdown which led to a breakaway goal against.
They owned us in the second (paraphrasing).
We went into the third pretty even Cumulative Corsi For (Rangers just a bit ahead of us)
We outplayed them in the third.
We outshot them overall, but with shots from farther out.
We gave up 9 High Danger Scoring Chances, they gave up 5 High Danger Scoring Chances
They won.

I don't see a 'we got goalied' story in those stats. I would agree with the 'we got goalied' story, if I have the HDSC summary backwards and we had almost 2x High Danger Scoring Chances as them, but it doesn't appear that way. It appears as though we had more low danger scoring chances, but they had a huge advantage in high danger scoring chances - almost double.

Just saying.

The ES shot totals show each team with 7 shots in tight so not sure how the site your using just gives the Jets 5. Plus Laine shooting from just a bit further away is a high danger chance that the model doesn't account for.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

I was referring to the shot differential. Getting outplayed and getting owned are two different things. It's pure hyperbole to claim the Jets were owned in the 2nd.

Just so I get where you are coming from. You don't like that I said that the Jets 'owned' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'owned' the Jets in the second. Too much hyperbole for a hockey fan board. You want me to say the Jets 'outplayed' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'outplayed' the Jets in the second.

Really? Like, seriously?

 

[Channelcat]

Just so I get where you are coming from. You don't like that I said that the Jets 'owned' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'owned' the Jets in the second. Too much hyperbole for a hockey fan board. You want me to say the Jets 'outplayed' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'outplayed' the Jets in the second.

Really? Like, seriously?

I would prefer if you said, "Jets had the edge in gameplay"

 

[Ducky10]

Just so I get where you are coming from. You don't like that I said that the Jets 'owned' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'owned' the Jets in the second. Too much hyperbole for a hockey fan board. You want me to say the Jets 'outplayed' the Rangers in the first, and the Rangers 'outplayed' the Jets in the second.

Really? Like, seriously?

Hey, it's not like I'm all twisted up about it, you shouldn't be either. Let's not pretend using certain adjectives doesn't paint a certain picture over others though. Lundquist playing lights out describes his game much more adequately than saying he played well for example.

Just so you get where I'm coming from, I disagree the Jets were that much worse than the Rangers in the 2nd. They both pretty much sucked really, it was a crap period.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

The Rangers played about 15 minutes yesterday, should they have expected to win? Most of their game was embarrassing, never mind just one period. When you put up 38 shots, many in prime locations, give up less than 30 and lose 2-1, you can say you were goalied.

I agree about not getting twisted up about these difference. BTW, I really enjoy the vast majority of your posts. BTW, you are wrong about the second. We were owne... , oops, badly outplayed.

Now, just to be equitable, can you please go back and edit your post where you said 'The Rangers played about 15 minutes yesterday', in responding to one of my posts. I believe that you used too much hyperbole because let's be honest, which 15 minutes did they play since they were ahead of us in SOG after 40 minutes. I mean, that is painting an unfair picture of their play. They obviously played more than 15 minutes if they were better than us after 40 minutes if you know what I mean. So in the spirit of 'owned' is hyperbole vs 'outplayed' is not, I would like you next time to just say that 'Team X played a few less hard minutes than the Jets' in trying to make your point. Remove the hyperbole.




Of course I am just kidding. Express your opinion using exactly the words that you prefer. A little hyperbole is good now and then. And when Maurice is throwing horse**** around in public press conferences to describe Jet's play and calling it a technical term, I think 'owned' is pretty light as far as hyperbole goes in discussing sports.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

IMO.. King Henrik made multiple huge saves... So did Helle...

But it certainly looked like the Jets had more chances to score and looking at those charts there... Looks like im right but we also missed hitting the net a bunch more .

King Henrik stood on his head in the first.. Helle in the 2nd... Both in the 3rd but Hank made more timely saves .He made saves he had no business making .

 

[DashingDane]

Jets were stronger in the 1st and 3rd, NY was stronger in the second (but not by much). In the end, we definitely got Lundqvist'd, as the Jets had the higher number of shot attempts, higher number of dangerous shot attempts, etc.

Quit be so rational. It's all ELL's fault and now we are going to miss the playoffs

 

[Jets 31]

A little off topic but we could use some humor , at the game last night the wife , who likes hockey but not crazy about it like we are , says to me , that Laine isn't very good on his skates is he , he needs to practice on his skating . Made me laugh .

 

[TheGovernment]

A little off topic but we could use some humor , at the game last night the wife , who likes hockey but not crazy about it like we are , says to me , that Laine isn't very good on his skates is he , he needs to practice on his skating . Made me laugh .

My wife says the same thing.... they are not wrong.

 

[JetsFan815]

Yeah I wouldn't say this was a case of getting "out-goalied", based on my "eye test" at best that game is around 50-50 coinflip which wouldn't be too bad had it been against team like the Blues or the Predators but Rangers are spectacularly bad and ravaged by injuries at the moment.

 

[KingBogo]

Yeah I wouldn't say this was a case of getting "out-goalied", based on my "eye test" at best that game is around 50-50 coinflip which wouldn't be too bad had it been against team like the Blues or the Predators but Rangers are spectacularly bad and ravaged by injuries at the moment.

And they got the winner off a guys back on a puck going 4 feet wide and we had 2 goals called back. We out played them and have won most games like that this season thanks to our fire power. Actually we have won more than a few where we played considerably worse. A hot goalie and a little puck luck went against us. 5-5 Corsi was 55.26 - 44.74 for us. How many games have we lost this season at over 55%?

 

[JetsFan815]

And they got the winner off a guys back on a puck going 4 feet wide and we had 2 goals called back. We out played them and have won most games like that this season thanks to our fire power. Actually we have won more than a few where we played considerably worse. A hot goalie and a little puck luck went against us. 5-5 Corsi was 55.26 - 44.74 for us. How many games have we lost this season at over 55%?

Corsi aside, I am talking about what I saw with my eyes that game