Where Will The Leafs Finish This Year And Why?

[Nick]

just a conversation I agree. I just don't see the love for the players being tossed around consistently - and the mediocre love for the team matches.

Lots of guys hate on Dion, Reimer, Bozak (all?), Lupul the glass figurine of a 1st line winger, Franson the dman who benefited from a shortened season, etc.


Lots of value seems to go to last year's #, every off-season -> the years before or a slow trend upwards (or down) are always discarded.




--- stats:

I tried to regress shots differential on goal differentials a few years ago, numbers do not support it. I do not recall which years data.

[shooker]

Seriously, can we get this guy a fucking team already?

kind of agree with this. Seems we have two teams without GMs and both need to get salary cap compliant. If we are going to make a switch, lets do it soon to give buddy a chance.

[Mike]

who should we cut?

[Robin Hood]

who should we cut?

BUF and COL seem like obvious options.

[shooker]

who should we cut?

BUF and COL seem like obvious options.

yea I thought it went without saying.

I actually like Phion and wish he'd make his way back but it looks as though he has lost interest.

[Nick]

Aidan has checked in & I believe posted his missing CBS pieces? Hard to get into the league when times are slow... I do not believe he's been given a fair kick-at-the-proverbial can, yet.

[The BBKL Insider]

who should we cut?

BUF and COL seem like obvious options.

yea I thought it went without saying.

I actually like Phion and wish he'd make his way back but it looks as though he has lost interest.

The new/hot girlfriends pussy has wore out

happens to the best of us

[Robin Hood]

Aidan has checked in & I believe posted his missing CBS pieces? Hard to get into the league when times are slow... I do not believe he's been given a fair kick-at-the-proverbial can, yet.

Aidan has been MIA since last season when hockey was going on. Even mid-season Bruyns was more active than Aidan. We've been doing this long enough to know which GMs commit time to this league and which don't Aidan has been given more than a year.

Why should we be loyal to someone who logs on once every couple of months in the off-season? I realize that is when the league is slowest. But encouraging members who contribute to the league slowing down in that crucial time is not a good thing. Not to mention how crucial it is to always stay on top of your stuff mid-season.

Phion would be my second choice but he deserves some more time I guess. But replacing Aidan is a no-brainer.

[Mike]

Aidan has checked in & I believe posted his missing CBS pieces? Hard to get into the league when times are slow... I do not believe he's been given a fair kick-at-the-proverbial can, yet.

Aidan has been MIA since last season when hockey was going on. Even mid-season Bruyns was more active than Aidan. We've been doing this long enough to know which GMs commit time to this league and which don't Aidan has been given more than a year.

Why should we be loyal to someone who logs on once every couple of months in the off-season? I realize that is when the league is slowest. But encouraging members who contribute to the league slowing down in that crucial time is not a good thing. Not to mention how crucial it is to always stay on top of your stuff mid-season.

Phion would be my second choice but he deserves some more time I guess. But replacing Aidan is a no-brainer.

How is Aidan more cutable than Phion? Phion already has three warnings for removal and has not checked in with his placeholders, Aidan has.

[Robin Hood]

Aidan has checked in & I believe posted his missing CBS pieces? Hard to get into the league when times are slow... I do not believe he's been given a fair kick-at-the-proverbial can, yet.

Aidan has been MIA since last season when hockey was going on. Even mid-season Bruyns was more active than Aidan. We've been doing this long enough to know which GMs commit time to this league and which don't Aidan has been given more than a year.

Why should we be loyal to someone who logs on once every couple of months in the off-season? I realize that is when the league is slowest. But encouraging members who contribute to the league slowing down in that crucial time is not a good thing. Not to mention how crucial it is to always stay on top of your stuff mid-season.

Phion would be my second choice but he deserves some more time I guess. But replacing Aidan is a no-brainer.

How is Aidan more cutable than Phion? Phion already has three warnings for removal and has not checked in with his placeholders, Aidan has.

Didn't know that. Then both should be replaced.

[Nick]

So many good GMs have had slow starts... taking over right before our trade-deadline/ roster-lock is a hard time to do so. I do not believe Aidan has been given his chance yet, plus he hasn't broken our rules (that I recall).

IMO Aidan has been miles better then Phion as a BBKL GM. Perhaps not as a forum activist, however that is a secondary (still necessary) aspect. Too much turnover with a grass is always greener perspective regarding new GMs is a mistake we as a collective whole have made before. GMing ownership decisions need to be made with patience.

[anton]

it's frustrating because it feels like COL's assets have been off-limits for so fucking long due to inactive GM's with that team.

[Nick]

Likely magnified because during Neel's time there he was slow trading as well. But that is not Aidan's fault - what he does during these next few weeks will be a big decider on his fit for the league - IMO. As interest and activity is going to be high.

[The BBKL Insider]

interest is really picking up

[inferno31]

Ah the on-going argument I've been having with Shiv for months. I'll explain why I feel the way I do, doubt I'll convince many but hopefully give you a bit of insight into my pessimism.

1. Last year we got incredibly lucky
As Bruyns posted the Leafs enjoyed the second highest PDO last year, which is generally regarded as a measure of luck. I understand the arguments against using PDO as well, it's practically a measure of your team's shooting percentage and save percentage compared to average. The idea is that you'll eventually regress to the mean. Obviously it isn't always the case as good teams will normally have better PDOs, but unless you think the leafs are the 2nd best team it's hard to deny we did have some luck on our side.

But my main issue with last year isn't PDO, it's actually what our Corsi % was. Which by the way is a ridiculous name. What this really is a shot +/-, the same way we have +/- for goals this is for shot attempts (missed shots + blocked shots + actual shots). Now the huge issue with actual +/- is that we all agree it's a useless stat because it's affected by so much and you can get a + if you just jump on the ice at the right time etc. The way Corsi functions is to simply introduce a ton of more data into this equation, so you don't just judge goals which are relatively rare, but shots which are 10-15x more frequent. It adds a lot more data into the analysis, and Corsi ends up being a fair predictor of a team's overall possession. Where did the Leaf's finish last year? 30th. Dead Last. We were out shot consistently, throughout the season. Of the top 16 teams in Corsi % last year, 13 made the playoffs the major exception was New Jersey. In the last two seasons of the 20 teams that finished bottom 10 in Corsi %, 4 made the playoffs. Almost all of them on the back of outstanding goaltending (Rinne & Lundqvist last year). I think Reimer gave us that last year to be honest, and his outstanding play at the end of the season stopped a slide that could of been devastating.

It's not a be end all of statistics or even analysis, but this along with PDO is certainty suggestive.

2. Lack of Depth
What player started as a greater % in the offensive zone out of all leaf players last year? Must be Kessel.. No he's #3. JVR? No he's #5. Kadri? #8. The top two spots go to Mclaren and Orr. We have a fourth line which can NOT actually play hockey, but are also actively shielded by our coach from defensive responsibilities. This is frustrating one because plays that start in the offensive zone are more likely to be converted into goals, and to protect our goons we squander the ability to score several times a game. It's even more frustrating because it means our top 9 are leaned on for more difficult minutes, and when the game is close we have to play 3 lines. Over 48 games this is a problem, over 82 games it's a disaster. Even without injuries this will catch up to us in the long run, with injuries it'll be a tragedy. You cannot play 3 line hockey all season, it not only makes life more difficult for our forwards it limits our scoring chances too.

Due to trades and other personnel decisions our bottom 6 are now Jay McClement, Bolland, Kulemin, McLaren, Orr and maybe one of Colborne/D'Amigo. Due to the lack of cap space we probably can't call up rookies to take up roster spots either. So we will likely be playing one of McLaren or Orr every single night, and many nights we'll be playing both of them.

3. Poor Personnel Decisions
Dave Nonis now has us entering the season with the bottom 6 I just mentioned. That's pretty horrific if you ask me. I personally hated the grabo buyout. I constantly heard people shit on him for his lack of production last season. He put up a paltry 16 points in 48 games. In the two seasons prior he'd put up on average 58 points in an 82 game season. One bad stretch of 48 games and he got bought out. But why did he do so badly this year? Let's take a closer look.

Grabovoski started a stunning 36.7% of starts in the offensive zone. Some comparables among centers in the league - Brodziak, Chris Kelly, Marty Reasoner, Eric Belanger, Brandon Suter (who put up only 19 points btw). Not a ton of offensive names really jump out at you do they? Turns out it's ridiculously tough to score when you start 150+ feet from the net.

But don't worry, Bolland will take his role and Bolland is a much better two way, or at least defensive center. You mean the Dave Bolland who started 49.6% of his starts in the offensive zone and managed 14 points in 35 games? Bolland played 37% of his time last year with Kane & Sharp as linemates, He played another 25% of the time with Kane in some measure. The year before Bolland played much more defense with around a 33% offensive zone state. So Bolland last year did not play much of defensive role, and struggled to produce in an offensive role (With Kane & Sharp). To me this means if he returns to form we'll be okay, but even still he likely can't slot well into a number 2 slot. If he doesn't return to form we may be in trouble, as that third line will face some of the toughest defensive minutes in the league.

Bozak Signing. Where to start? Shiv says Bozak is a perfect placeholder because we couldn't go out and get a number 1 center. I understand that line of thinking, I disagree the fact that he's a placeholder really at all. Bozak struggles to keep up with the number 1 line, and in my opinion actually is holding them back. There's a ton of articles showing Kessel's production with all other Centers - Grabovoski, Kadri, even Connolly and consistently Bozak ranks as the worse possible option offensively. I think faceoffs are grossly overrated which you can read more about here http://theleafsnation.com/2013/5/8/talkin-faceoffs and the HNIC crew put way too much emphasis on them last year. I think even if you think faceoffs are a useful skill, Bozak's ability at them are overstated. He ranks about 8th in Faceoff % of the top 20 faceoff takers in the league. I think he's a totally wasted signing and I don't necessarily think other options weren't there be them Weiss, Stastny or even keeping Grabovoski and letting Bolland play third line.

Clarkson signing not many people disagree that they don't quite like one of the term or the contract. I don't think David Clarkson is a bad hockey player. I think he'll be a good addition, but I think our fans will vilify him within 3 years for that contract. Offensively over the last 3 seasons he's put up slightly less points per game as MacArthur (Who I also thought it'd be wise to bring back) at 88 points for about a 0.42 pt per game pace vs Mac 125 points for 0.65 pt per game. So we lost some offense which Macarthur also accomplished with arguably less talented line mates in less ice time. But Clarkson adds quite a bit of presence and hitting. The issue is the type of game he plays, those sort of players normally dramatically fall off at 32 or so. The long term implications of this contract may haunt us, even if the cap does go up.

Cap Management - With two RFAs unsigned into September it's easy to point fingers, but my biggest beef is this - What did the leafs really need coming into the off season - Number 1 Center & Number 2/3 D man to take pressure off Phaneuf, we had 20 million in cap space, it seemed feasible. Now as training camp is about to open what do the leafs really need? - Number 1 Center & Number 2/3 D man, and arguably some bottom 6 help.. With no cap space. I don't mind Bernier, but we didn't address the depth lost in that deal, but people need to stop falling in love with where he was taken in the draft and look at his actual play. We spent bottom 6 depth and cap space to get him, holding over cap in the deal and having no issues giving him nearly the same money Kadri is now demanding. We played hardball with Kadri, we didn't with Bernier.

Now we enter next season and to make the playoffs we need to suffer from minimal injuries, need Kadri to not miss a beat from last year (it's likely he'll regress but how much?), and for Reimer/Bernier to step in and provide top 10 goaltending all next year. It's possible, I'm unsure how probable it is.




I think this is more than I really wanted to write, but that pretty much sums up my arguments with Shiv over the last 2 months. I think Carlyle is a great tactician but horrible at personnel selection (hell he didn't even play the best roster vs Boston until injuries forced him to) and overall a mediocre coach. I think Nonis botched this off season, I don't like his decisions in the slightest and managed assets quite poorly.

Saying all this, I hope I'm wrong and the Leafs do incredible.

I'm available 12-5 to pop balloons and steal candy from children as well.

[inferno31]

I'm a big fan of advanced stats, but only in context.

On one front, winning games is what those numbers are trying to predict, and it's often twisted and taken in the context of predicting who didn't deserve to win games (measuring luck as a factor of subjective good teams and 'deserved' distance from the mean).

I recall when, after the fact, everyone pointed to PDO when the Wild collapsed and their numbers actually fell below the mean - but that just means they lost games.


Or when shot differentials was taken as a MUST be posititve stat - yet teams like the penguins, bruins and others were actually negative or neutral on the measured shots, and many of the cup winners were actually negative on shot attempts per game, but had really high blocked shots - Red Wings - Canes - etc... But I still believe the big error in both of these, is the urge to derive too much meaning from one stat, or worse, to apply a league wide generalization.

I think you'd like this article - http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2013/ ... to-fenwick

The issue with Fenwick/Corsi which do measure shot differential is it doesn't take into account the game situation. A team with a 5-0 lead likely takes less shots and plays it safer and gives up more shots. That's not a negative necessarily, which is why you'll see teams like the wings and penguins have negative shot differentials at times. So that's why people rely on fenwick close which is a measure of shot differential when the game is tied or within a goal either way. Using that you'll see most of the cup winners actually do quite well.

[inferno31]

Likely magnified because during Neel's time there he was slow trading as well. But that is not Aidan's fault - what he does during these next few weeks will be a big decider on his fit for the league - IMO. As interest and activity is going to be high.

Hey.. I take my time making moves..

On the topic of kicking anyone out, how can you justify booting someone if they don't have at least 2 strikes etc. Shouldn't they be getting strikes if they've been inactive or not setting up things correctly? If they haven't whose fault is that? What's the point of the warning system if you escalate to booting instantly?

Unless both of these guys are both on 2 strikes or whatever the system it is, can't see how your kicking both of them out. The league has a ton of systems to deal with these situations, theres just a tendency to bypass them all when we want to get something done.

[Mike]

Now I have Mr Bruin's video to watch AND Neel's novel to read as homework

THANKS BBKL

[Arian The Insider]

6-8 seed

[Nick]

Well written and interesting perspective.


Corsi is interesting no doubt, and extremely useful in a within-team comparison (whereas even within team +/- is closer to useless). However across teams do you not feel like it's comparing apples to oranges? Tactically, are the leafs supposed to try and shoot when the Hawks or Canucks do? Because this stat comparison assumes they do. Does a team's positioning not encourage the spots another team shoots from?

I agree PDO + Corsi is a good amount of information, and it does add insight into what's going on. However was Reimer THAT good last year? Did the leafs score on a disproportional # of shots that won't be repeated? Both PDO and Corsi are shot based - not exactly a novel concept that they suggest the same thing.

In terms of a more direct measure of stats, the info suggest the leafs were fine. 5v5 GF/GA is 1.05 or 12th in the league, PP% was 14th, PK was #2, we were 10th in earning a point%. We were actually 7th in winning when we were out-shot, which is actually really interesting, Detroit and us both lose games when we out-shoot our opponents. they win 43% of the games where they out-shoot their opponent, but win 66.7% when they are out-shot. Our numbers are similar 41.7% when we shoot more and 58.3% when we are out-shot. To me that screams teams that play a certain way when they have the lead - and the advanced stats do no take into consideration a change is tactics - this is actually true for a lot of team.

So I'll suggest that Corsi is heavily influenced by in game tactics, and due to cases where a coach changes how he wants his players to play, when they have a lead, it will be common for the lower-Corsi rated players, to be winning more games. Kinda against the purpose of the measure, no?