News Article: The Boston Bruins Look Good On Paper, So Why Do They Suck?

[wintersej]

These stats are pointless. Were talking about running offense from the point, you do realize D-man can obtain assists from other areas of the ice besides the offensive zone?

If you can't see that the skill-sets of Colin and Morrow are more suited than Kevan and McQuaid to run offense from the point I don't know what to tell you.

Having skills and producing are different things. I like Colin, but its not like he has actually been producing enough to force Julien's hand. Last night excluded! You can't out of one side of your mouth say "just because the Bruins are getting all these shots it doesn't mean anything, because they are not producing" and then say "who cares if Colin and Morrow are not producing, they have skillz!"

 

[wintersej]

Surprisingly, half a season is not a very big sample.

To illustrate, look at team ES shooting percentages over the previous 2.5 years (a decent sample):

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/teamstats.php?disp=1&db=201417&sit=5v5&sort=SHPCT&sortdir=DESC
The best team is at 9.1%. Second best at 8.6%. Teams 3 through 27 are clustered from 8.2% to 7.0%. Worst team is at 6.7%. League median of 7.6%

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/teamstats.php?disp=1&db=201617&sit=5v5&sort=SHPCT&sortdir=DESC
Now take a look at just 2016-17. Four teams above 9.1%, the best score for the previous 2.5 years. Six teams below 6.7%, the worst score for the previous years. Bruins are dead last at 5.9%. Way more variance due to the smaller sample. However, note that the league median of 7.7% is roughly the same, so the true talent NHL shooting percentage hasn't changed.

Whether Bruins fans want to accept it or not, shooting at 5.9% at 5v5 is not sustainable. There is an element of bad luck involved. How much I'm not sure, but that shooting percentage number will trend up as the season draws to a close. Wins should follow.

The regression to the mean is going to happen all at once before the TDL leading to a big win streak, the Bruins are going to make a short term move, and then they are going to go cold again

 

[BruinDust]

Having skills and producing are different things. I like Colin, but its not like he has actually been producing enough to force Julien's hand. Last night excluded! You can't out of one side of your mouth say "just because the Bruins are getting all these shots it doesn't mean anything, because they are not producing" and then say "who cares if Colin and Morrow are not producing, they have skillz!"

I'm only comparing their skill-sets.

 

[wintersej]

I'm only comparing their skill-sets.

Sure, and their skill sets have to adjust for the fact that the Bruins have the #2 PK while being one of the most penalized teams. We take other teams PPs not being that good against us for granted.

 

[Bergyesque]

It's a lack of talent on the back end. In years past, they had guys like Chara (in his prime), Hamilton, Wideman, Ference, Seidenberg, Boychuk, etc to chip in with the scoring. This year, they have Krug with 31 points and then a sharp drop off to Carlo with 12 points, and the shell of Chara with 11. That's the issue. They don't have guys that can contribute offensively on the back end anymore. So why do they continue to run the offense through the point? That's a coaching issue. The lack of an adjustment is the real problem, like usual.

I think the pointmen should move around a little more in ordrer to get better angles to shoot or pass and to position themselves more often for the one-timers.
Showing the use of one-timers might force other teams to commit more and thus opening other lanes.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I think the underlying numbers bode very well for us to closeout the year. Yes, other teams have a lot more offensive talent, but we still have been hit with a lot of bad luck in terms of low shooting percentages. Problem is other teams have so many games in hand.

 

[wintersej]

I think the underlying numbers bode very well for us to closeout the year. Yes, other teams have a lot more offensive talent, but we still have been hit with a lot of bad luck in terms of low shooting percentages. Problem is other teams have so many games in hand.

Bruins also have the easiest schedule in the conference to close out the season.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Bruins also have the easiest schedule in the conference to close out the season.

Easiest? Or hardest? Because the Bruins tend to royally screw themselves against weaker teams or in situations that they should be ok.

 

[PB37]

I think the lighter schedule bodes well for some of the guys that the team leans hard on to perform. We'll see; players respond to rest differently.

 

[TMac21]

Goals per game is definitely trending up right now, would be great to grab a 3rd line RW with a bit of a scoring touch to bump Nash down to the 4th.

 

[DKH]

Rask 41 games 54 points

Averages to 108 points over full season last year that puts them top 3 out of 30 one point out of 2

Back up goalie killing them

Should have taken my advice and signed Mike Condon

 

[wintersej]

Easiest? Or hardest? Because the Bruins tend to royally screw themselves against weaker teams or in situations that they should be ok.

Touche

 

[wintersej]

(If my math is right) ... Since Frank Vatrano came back to the lineup (12/22), the Bruins have scored 2.88 goals per game. That would be the 8th best in the NHL if it was over the entire season. The power play has been at 26%. The would be 1st in the NHL if it was over the entire season.

Maybe the shooting percentage woes are already evening out and we were just missing it while the team was giving up goals with Morrow and JML in the lineup?

 

[LSCII]

God, I hate when people extrapolate stats out from a small sample size to an entire season because it never ends up that way. Projections are literally the most useless stats to consider, IMO.

 

[DitClapper]

God, I hate when people extrapolate stats out from a small sample size to an entire season because it never ends up that way. Projections are literally the most useless stats to consider, IMO.

Jimmy Hayes was projected to 'bounce back' this year according to advanced stats.

 

[Gator Mike]

God, I hate when people extrapolate stats out from a small sample size to an entire season because it never ends up that way. Projections are literally the most useless stats to consider, IMO.

I don't think wintersej is saying the Bruins are going to score 2.88 goals/game for the rest of the season.

I think he's using the goals/game stat to illustrate that the offense is producing at a fairly high level since Vatrano has returned.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

I don't think wintersej is saying the Bruins are going to score 2.88 goals/game for the rest of the season.

I think he's using the goals/game stat to illustrate that the offense is producing at a fairly high level since Vatrano has returned.

Only proves a flash in the pan.

 

[Spanky185]

You see it the other way with Toronto and Calgary making the playoffs when their Corsi sucked...only to go back to sucking afterwards. You saw it the other way when LA finished 8th in the middle of their run of Cups. You see it in baseball ALL the time. It's not JUST luck, they don't decide games on Corsi, you have to produce, but as a predictor of future performance, for all it's real flaws, it's the best we have. Bruins clearly need to add a top 6 forward and a top 4 D that can move the puck and score. At least one of those is going to have to be a kid stepping up.

I know that it happens in baseball all the time. I've spent the last two years listening to the Yankees manager talk about how players are going to "break out" of months long slumps because they're "putting together good at bats" only to see nothing come of it. Some players who played well the previous year, others who did not.

I compare advanced stats to meteorology. For all the data that gets put into their supercomputers, there's still plenty of busts. As us New Englanders should know

 

[Bergyesque]

I know that it happens in baseball all the time. I've spent the last two years listening to the Yankees manager talk about how players are going to "break out" of months long slumps because they're "putting together good at bats" only to see nothing come of it. Some players who played well the previous year, others who did not.

I compare advanced stats to meteorology. For all the data that gets put into their supercomputers, there's still plenty of busts. As us New Englanders should know

The Bs under Julien showed over the last few years that they can sustain a better Sh%.
This year is some kind of an outlier.

 

[LSCII]

With all this talk and pointing to Shooting percentages or backup goalies being the problem, I have to say I can't disagree enough with those theories. I stick to the issue that the defense is just too suspect and has been declining every year since the cup win. To that point, the team right now is a collective -71. The year before, they were a plus 20. The year before that they were a plus 62. Before that, plus 392, plus 111, and plus 286. So what's the real outlier here? A slight dip in shooting percentages or a huge decline in plus minus by the entire team?

Fact is this team is terrible defensively to the point where forwards are being forced to do more on the defensive side, just to try and cover up those glaring holes, and the scoring has declided greatly because of it, IMO.

 

[Bergyesque]

With all this talk and pointing to Shooting percentages or backup goalies being the problem, I have to say I can't disagree enough with those theories. I stick to the issue that the defense is just too suspect and has been declining every year since the cup win. To that point, the team right now is a collective -71. The year before, they were a plus 20. The year before that they were a plus 62. Before that, plus 392, plus 111, and plus 286. So what's the real outlier here? A slight dip in shooting percentages or a huge decline in plus minus by the entire team?

Fact is this team is terrible defensively to the point where forwards are being forced to do more on the defensive side, just to try and cover up those glaring holes, and the scoring has declided greatly because of it, IMO.

That is not a slight dip. Their Sh% is almost historically bad. Had they maintained their average over the last few years, that's nearly 30 goals more for this year's squad.
Same thing with the Opp Sh%; minus 25 goals allowed. The backup goalies performance has a lot to do with this one.

That being said, I agree that the Bs D position is lacking in quality.

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

The regression to the mean is going to happen all at once before the TDL leading to a big win streak, the Bruins are going to make a short term move, and then they are going to go cold again

I had to double check the date on this post!

Sue enough my deepest fears were confirmed....it is, in fact, Groundhog Day!

 

[bobber]

It's a fact that a lot of players are not performing up to standard this season. Bruins pick up players from other squads and try to make a silk purse out of a sows ear with them. That is the way the Leafs ran their squad. Doesn't work. You have to build a team with good draft picks. In todays world with the cap , teams throw all their marbles at the top four or five players and cross their fingers hoping the lessor salaried guys can score buckets of goals and play great D. Throw all those stat papers out the window. If you are losing looking at stats that show you are losing means nothing if you have no way of correcting the issue. Drew Doughty said he doesn't believe in analytics. Either you have the skill to win games or you don't.

 

[Bergyesque]

It's a fact that a lot of players are not performing up to standard this season. Bruins pick up players from other squads and try to make a silk purse out of a sows ear with them. That is the way the Leafs ran their squad. Doesn't work. You have to build a team with good draft picks. In todays world with the cap , teams throw all their marbles at the top four or five players and cross their fingers hoping the lessor salaried guys can score buckets of goals and play great D. Throw all those stat papers out the window. If you are losing looking at stats that show you are losing means nothing if you have no way of correcting the issue. Drew Doughty said he doesn't believe in analytics. Either you have the skill to win games or you don't.

They can tell you what you need to do though.
This year's low Sh% might tell me for example that they should concentrate more on getting stronger on the back end than trying to find a second line winger.

What's the point of bringing Drew Doughty into the discussion?

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

It's a fact that a lot of players are not performing up to standard this season. Bruins pick up players from other squads and try to make a silk purse out of a sows ear with them. That is the way the Leafs ran their squad. Doesn't work. You have to build a team with good draft picks. In todays world with the cap , teams throw all their marbles at the top four or five players and cross their fingers hoping the lessor salaried guys can score buckets of goals and play great D. Throw all those stat papers out the window. If you are losing looking at stats that show you are losing means nothing if you have no way of correcting the issue. Drew Doughty said he doesn't believe in analytics. Either you have the skill to win games or you don't.

Because Drew Doughty is the foremost authority on how to build a successful hockey team. Typically great hockey players turn out to be some of the worst coaches and GMs because they never developed the perspective needed to critique their own game because things come so naturally to them.

Moreover, the point about the Bruins shooting percentage is that if they were to continue at the 5.8% level at even strength, it would be historically bad. Teams in today's NHL don't have shooting percentages below 6.75% in the long run. Nor do they have shooting percentages above 8.50%.

Once again, I point you to the following: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/teamstats.php?disp=1&db=201317&sit=5v5&sort=SHPCT&sortdir=DESC

So unless you think this Bruins team is historically bad at converting their shots, you should acknowledge that they're likely suffering from some bad luck. That doesn't invalidate some of the concerns that you and other posters have about the team. It doesn't mean the Bruins will be a top shooting team going forward. Just that they will likely start to convert on more of their shots going forward.