Shootouts mask how poor this team is playing

[i1]

We get it; if the Leafs were in a parallel universe where the rules of the league were different, and we pretend they never ever ever got ties or wins because they're not "mentally tough enough" or whatever then yes, they suck. But here today they make the most out of the rules as they currently are and use their considerable skill to their advantage. We're still getting points 3/5 games on average.

These threads reassure me the team is on the upswing. It's like when Mason Raymond was the most hated guy on the Canucks; he's a damn good "worst player on the team" imo

 

[Espher]

Alright, I think the numbers are right this time...

For anyone who just wants to see numbers in a few permutations, I've been kind of keeping an eye on this for a while. Here are how standings would have sat through last night's games under a couple of scoring/standing systems (green indicates a team ranks 'higher' than they would in the current standings, red indicates 'lower', I don't have anything in place for tiebreakers so ties may not be accurately reflected, and it doesn't accurately reflect ranking within the division/wildcard playoff format as it's just to get a 'raw' rating):

Still a logjam, just slightly different ordering within it. Note that these three alternate permutations differ slightly from the ones in the first post of the thread.

For reference, # of OT/SO Games for each team:

18 (Washington)
17 (New Jersey)
16 (Phoenix, San Jose, Toronto, Vancouver)
15 (Chicago)
14 (Buffalo, Los Angeles, NY Islanders, Ottawa, Tampa Bay)
13 (Carolina, Detroit, Florida)
12 (Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Winnipeg)
11 (Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis)
10 (Edmonton)
9 (Nashville, Philadelphia)
8 (Columbus, Pittsburgh)
7 (Boston, NY Rangers)

 

[hoglund]

Now this is where the NHL is great. We have teams that are playing poorly, so along comes the NHL and says "we are going to help you go from poor to mediocre". We will give you a point even if you lose, AND if you don't really win, but just kind of win, we'll give you two points just like you did win!" (we'll also give the "loser" a point kind of like an E for effort). But, if it comes down to a tie breaker, those "kind of wins" are not even considered as good as a regulation win OR an overtime win. Ya follow?? Me neither....

The NHL needs to use the point system that the world juniors use, every games 3 points are awarded 3 for a regulation win or if the game goes to ot or so, 2 points for the winner, 1 for the loser. This way ALL games are worth the same and there's more of an incentive to win in regulation and not hold on for ot.

 

[Mess]

The NHL needs to use the point system that the world juniors use, every games 3 points are awarded 3 for a regulation win or if the game goes to ot or so, 2 points for the winner, 1 for the loser. This way ALL games are worth the same and there's more of an incentive to win in regulation and not hold on for ot.

I agree 100% on the scoring system to improve consistency.

Also points are awarded to teams for SO wins but the goal scorer(s) don't get any stats or credit (GWG), and neither do the goalies (sv%) etc.

SO are an individual skills competition and the individuals are not rewarded but the teams are, again consistency is missing.

 

[ConnorTO]

 

[rojac]

Alright, I think the numbers are right this time...

For anyone who just wants to see numbers in a few permutations, I've been kind of keeping an eye on this for a while. Here are how standings would have sat through last night's games under a couple of scoring/standing systems (green indicates a team ranks 'higher' than they would in the current standings, red indicates 'lower', I don't have anything in place for tiebreakers so ties may not be accurately reflected, and it doesn't accurately reflect ranking within the division/wildcard playoff format as it's just to get a 'raw' rating):

Still a logjam, just slightly different ordering within it. Note that these three alternate permutations differ slightly from the ones in the first post of the thread.

For reference, # of OT/SO Games for each team:

18 (Washington)
17 (New Jersey)
16 (Phoenix, San Jose, Toronto, Vancouver)
15 (Chicago)
14 (Buffalo, Los Angeles, NY Islanders, Ottawa, Tampa Bay)
13 (Carolina, Detroit, Florida)
12 (Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Winnipeg)
11 (Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis)
10 (Edmonton)
9 (Nashville, Philadelphia)
8 (Columbus, Pittsburgh)
7 (Boston, NY Rangers)

I'm curious as to why you present your standings in the now irrelevant conference format.

Also, of course, one needs to remember that the point system used affects how teams play the game. So, if one of these alternate point systems was in use, the results would probably be somewhat different.

 

[Ari91]

So you make this thread on the premise that people are being mistaken for what this team is just because of their shootout wins...hate to break it to you but it's been widely agreed upon around here tha this team hasn't played solid hockey for most of the season despite the number of wins they have. Your creating a thread about something that has been discussed to death but you could at least open up the discussion as shootouts aren't the only thing that has been saving this team...goaltending has been a big part of it as well.

Leafs aren't playing well despite their record. In other news, water is wet.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Last year the big topic of debate was Toronto's unsustainable shooting % and poor possession. The Boston Bruins were absolutely killing us in possession. But Toronto had the superior shooting % and save% in the playoffs series (poor Reimer is thrown under the bus a lot. Our goalies are under a microscope. But we never pay attention to the mistakes that goalies make on other teams. Whenever a Leaf scores on Tuuka Rask, it's because the Leafs are awesome. It's never because Tuuka Rask made a mistake. Every time Reimer or Bernier makes a mistake, they hear about it...) That's why Toronto came very close to beating Boston. Whenever our goalies are human or our defense gives off a bad pinch on a play or lapses, the deficiencies in our game (which are usually hidden by solid goaltending and what not) become magnified.

We came close to beating Boston because Boston has no idea how to deal with speed. They fared poorly against the two speedy teams they faced (3 regulation wins in 13 tries) and feasted on the two slow and plodding teams.

 

[Warden of the North]

Why isnt the rest of the NHL up in arms over Washington being good in shootouts too? Why just the Leafs?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Actually winning percentage is calculated as a percentage of points obtained vs points possible.
So if you tied every game you would have a 'winning' percentage of .500 not zero.

Sorry but you are dead wrong. That's called "points percentage".

 

[zeke]

last year the leafs were 0-5 in the shootouts, and nobody said anything about it. If it was talked about at all, it was only ever the question "why are the leafs so bad at shootouts?" and the answer was always "they lack skill".

now the leafs are 9-4 in the shootouts, and it's all anyone can talk about - but its no longer about talent, it's about the leafs being lucky.


When the leafs were bad at shootouts, it was proof that the leafs are bad. When the leafs are good at shootouts, its also proof that the leafs are bad.


The leafs are 9-9 in shootouts over this year and last - that's just luck balancing out finally.


The Leafs have missed the playoffs more than once based entirely on shootout points. There is no need to apologize for finally getting some luck in the shootouts for the first time...ever.

 

[likeabosski]

Why isnt the rest of the NHL up in arms over Washington being good in shootouts too? Why just the Leafs?

This is evident in the standings table I produced as well. Both Toronto and Washington are benefiting from the shootout. At the expense of New Jersey and Detroit. Two teams that we coincidentally beat in shootouts recently.

 

[zeke]

This is evident in the standings table I produced as well. Both Toronto and Washington are benefiting from the shootout. At the expense of New Jersey and Detroit. Two teams that we coincidentally beat in shootouts recently.

and NJ and DET are the two teams that benefit most from a cynical "drag it out to a shootout to get the point and hope for the extra point" strategy, so they deserve everything they get.

 

[likeabosski]

So you make this thread on the premise that people are being mistaken for what this team is just because of their shootout wins...hate to break it to you but it's been widely agreed upon around here tha this team hasn't played solid hockey for most of the season despite the number of wins they have. Your creating a thread about something that has been discussed to death but you could at least open up the discussion as shootouts aren't the only thing that has been saving this team...goaltending has been a big part of it as well.

Leafs aren't playing well despite their record. In other news, water is wet.

It's been known that that the shootout has helped the Leafs. But how many people have actually crunched the numbers and provided a standings table based on the old points system to illustrate how much the Leafs (and Capitals) have benefited from shootouts? Shootouts make the difference between Toronto being a near-average .541 winning pct team (by Eastern conference standards average is .545) with a 8th seed in the East vs. being an 11th seed team with a .439 winning pct team... That is a huge difference. Even when you consider that the average would only be .480 for the East using the old points system (.523 for the west! And .589 for the new points system. The west is kicking the East's ass).

And since we can't take advantage of shootouts in the playoffs and we choked under pressure vs. Boston in Game 7 last season, how does the fact that we are so heavily reliant on shootouts and have such a poor regulation record not concern Leafs fans?

 

[Ichigo*]

Why isnt the rest of the NHL up in arms over Washington being good in shootouts too? Why just the Leafs?

haha so true. all i hear from sens fans is that they would be in the playoffs if not for the leafs shootout success.

 

[likeabosski]

and NJ and DET are the two teams that benefit most from a cynical "drag it out to a shootout to get the point and hope for the extra point" strategy, so they deserve everything they get.

This doesn't make logical sense. Under the old points system, New Jersey and Detroit would have placed 7th and 8th respectively in the East. Because their competition (ie. Toronto and Washington) wouldn't be able to amass so many extra points from shootout wins. Since there wouldn't be any shootouts.

 

[Espher]

I'm curious as to why you present your standings in the now irrelevant conference format.

[...] and it doesn't accurately reflect ranking within the division/wildcard playoff format as it's just to get a 'raw' rating [...]

As in, a) it's just to compare relative performance between teams (especially for people who wanted to look at a straight 1-8, since that's another 'what if we changed the standings this way' thing that gets thrown around) and b) I didn't want to bother coding something to take seeding into account as team's leapfrog each other for 1-3 in the division and skip/aren't eligible for wildcards because I didn't care enough at the time (and it's pretty easy to eyeball it).

I wasn't exactly planning on throwing it out for any sort of debate but I figured it would be good to give some other example point totals for the other permutations I've seen often bounced around here.

Also, of course, one needs to remember that the point system used affects how teams play the game. So, if one of these alternate point systems was in use, the results would probably be somewhat different.

No doubt, but I'm not going to go for the hypothetical of "if teams had to play more aggressively because they didn't want to eschew the extra point more games would end in regulation and in situations where the game opens up this favours teams X, Y, and Z and does not favour teams J, K, and L, so I ran an intricate involved series of 1,000 simulations which has given a likely permutation based on some ad hoc opened-up-game ranking system I drummed up" type of post, and even if someone did, I'd wager four people (myself among them) would actually be interested in it.

But yes, teams will play differently if the rules are different and this will impact the results of games. Astute observation.

 

[Evileye]

Sorry but you are dead wrong. That's called "points percentage".

Yes, technically its called points percentage, but the literal 'winning percentage' stat is of zero relevance for standings because points are used, not just wins.

 

[likeabosski]

Alright, I think the numbers are right this time...

For anyone who just wants to see numbers in a few permutations, I've been kind of keeping an eye on this for a while. Here are how standings would have sat through last night's games under a couple of scoring/standing systems (green indicates a team ranks 'higher' than they would in the current standings, red indicates 'lower', I don't have anything in place for tiebreakers so ties may not be accurately reflected, and it doesn't accurately reflect ranking within the division/wildcard playoff format as it's just to get a 'raw' rating):

Still a logjam, just slightly different ordering within it. Note that these three alternate permutations differ slightly from the ones in the first post of the thread.

For reference, # of OT/SO Games for each team:

18 (Washington)
17 (New Jersey)
16 (Phoenix, San Jose, Toronto, Vancouver)
15 (Chicago)
14 (Buffalo, Los Angeles, NY Islanders, Ottawa, Tampa Bay)
13 (Carolina, Detroit, Florida)
12 (Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Winnipeg)
11 (Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis)
10 (Edmonton)
9 (Nashville, Philadelphia)
8 (Columbus, Pittsburgh)
7 (Boston, NY Rangers)

The only thing I don't like about those tables is the use of points instead of winning percentage (or points percentage if you prefer that terminology instead). Because not every team has played the same amount of games thus far. There are some teams that have only played 45 games while there are others that have already played 50! This is why I have went with winning percentage for my break down. Washington has 1 pt below Toronto in the standings right now. But they have an extra game in hand. So Washington is a .542 team while we are at .541.

 

[mikebel111*]

I think its simple

Whatever we do. People will complain

I seriously believe when we win the cup, people will still complain

 

[Ari91]

It's been known that that the shootout has helped the Leafs. But how many people have actually crunched the numbers and provided a standings table based on the old points system to illustrate how much the Leafs (and Capitals) have benefited from shootouts? Shootouts make the difference between Toronto being a near-average .541 winning pct team (by Eastern conference standards average is .545) with a 8th seed in the East vs. being an 11th seed team with a .439 winning pct team... That is a huge difference.

And since we can't take advantage of shootouts in the playoffs and we choked under pressure vs. Boston in Game 7 last season, how does the fact that we are so heavily reliant on shootouts and have such a poor regulation record not concern Leafs fans?

You don't need to crunch numbers to figure that out. I can look at how tight the standings are and just look at that nice little ROW number listed for each team to get a very good idea of which teams are largely benefitting from the SO. I can also look at the standings and loser points for each team to see who is benefitting from the loser points to keep them in a playoff race.

There are factors that can come into play that could be the reason why they go to so many shootouts. There is no way of measuring those factors so it's too simplistic to assume that how the regular season goes will translate the exact same way in the playoffs. If that were the case, Leafs would have never made it to game 5 against the Bruins. The year Florida made playoffs was strictly off the back of collecting loser points. If those didn't exist than Florida wouldn't have made playoffs...they would have been tied with Tampa in points. But that's how the system works and that same team took a 102 point Devils team to game 7 in the first round.

The reality is that the regular season is all about points that get you to the playoffs. In the regular season, that is the goal of every player and in order to get there, you need to grab points no matter how they come. It's common knowledge that playoff hockey is a whole other beast than regular season hockey so I'm not inclined to be so concerned about this team's shootout record. Going to shootouts isn't what will sink this team. It will be overworking their goalies and poor defensive coverage that are the more concerning factors. So yeah, SO are at the bottom of the list and it isn't masking anything. We all know how this team plays...this thread isn't shedding new light on anything.

 

[cannucky]

as long as your charting Pejorative Slured imaginary points systems how about charting the Canadian system of 2 points for a win 1 point for a regulation tie , game ends after 60 minutes ? adding a 5 minute 4 on 4 has no basis in your arguement that overtime is part of the playoffs because overtime in the playoffs is 20 minute periods until there is a winner not 5 minutes then the skills comp .

 

[Daisy Jane]

Why isnt the rest of the NHL up in arms over Washington being good in shootouts too? Why just the Leafs?

Silly - because the leafs are GOOD at them too!
and we all know if the Leafs had the exact same record last year (including shootout losses), it would be "Oh the Leafs could own X spot if they could only win the shootout).

I like how now everyone is all complaining how the shootouts are unfair: Just look at the Leafs, they are 9-5! (let's ignore washington who have been using the shootouts for two+ seasons to get into the playoffs, let's just pick on the Leafs who have been historically bad at them. Or let's change the rules so more shooters have to go out, because JVR-Lupul-Bozak have an unfair advantage or some crap like that).

most people hate shootouts
Bettman is probably not going to get rid of them.
and if overtime goes on 3 on 3 people will get all "look how extra gimmicky it's looking" (I truthfully don't mind a tie. play a game, play 5 minutes of overtime, get 0 points. if you got 0 points, people will go for it in overtime i guarantee it).

and because the shootout isn't going anywhere: teams have to be good at it. I do not feel sorry for the fact that Detroit is what? 1-8? or something like that [naturally we're their only win]. and the Devils are 0-whatever their record is. Why should I? would they feel sorry for US if WE were doing poorly? No.

we don't know how the team will play in the playoffs until they get to the playoffs. everyone and their mother were all like "Bruins will sweep" and even taking game Seven into hand the Leafs played pretty darned well.

 

[Espher]

rojac: Here's the same set of data listed by division, with the two wildcard slots having a cyan background. I could do that as an easy copy-paste job, but I'm not interested in the tweaking it would require to do a 1-3, 1-3, wildcards grouped setup every time data changed.

(For anyone who missed the last image, Column 1 is current NHL point scoring, Column 2 is 3P Reg Win - 2P OT/SO Win - 1P OT/SO Loss - 0P Reg Loss, Column 3 is 2 PT Reg/OT/SO Win, 0 PT Reg/OT/SO Loss, and Column 4 is 2 PT Reg Win, 1 PT OT/SO Win/Loss (i.e. ties), 0 PT Reg Loss.)

The only thing I don't like about those tables is the use of points instead of winning percentage (or points percentage if you prefer that terminology instead). Because not every team has played the same amount of games thus far. There are some teams that have only played 45 games while there are others that have already played 50! This is why I have went with winning percentage for my break down. Washington has 1 pt below Toronto in the standings right now. But they have an extra game in hand. So Washington is a .542 team while we are at .541.

Changes the order of a couple of top-3 seeds (esp. in the West) and has two changes to the wildcard. Not a big deal, but, here you go.

as long as your charting Pejorative Slured imaginary points systems how about charting the Canadian system of 2 points for a win 1 point for a regulation tie , game ends after 60 minutes ? adding a 5 minute 4 on 4 has no basis in your arguement that overtime is part of the playoffs because overtime in the playoffs is 20 minute periods until there is a winner not 5 minutes then the skills comp .

That's the last column in my table.

 

[Vexed]

All of this is useless.

All that matters is the point totals after game 82. If by some small chance there is a tie than that will be the only time that Reg. Wins matters.

If you are coaching for strategic points, you really can't assume that such a rarity will occur and anyways in that case, taking as many games into OT as possible is a good thing. We say they could have been Reg. wins but it is more likely they were salvaged Reg. losses