2017-18 Toronto Maple Leafs - General Discussion

[groundskeeper willie]

Someone actually looked into this in detail yesterday: --snip--

PK% is just like +/-, in that the events are so rare it's hard to get a stable reading for anything predictive. Even shot shares are spiky and highly dependent on deployment.

A deeper cut would probably have to look at PK xG data and some heat maps.

... snip...

I'm not entirely sure how to read these, but dark green is good, right? If Polak is playing the right d position then these are saying he actually is good at suppressing shots in his area of coverage on the pk, don't they?

Of course there is more involved then just this to say whether he is actually good on the pk or not (shot clearings, time spent in the d zone etc) but I'd rather not see any info that might lead to somebody defending Polak's usage

 

[herman]

I'm not entirely sure how to read these, but dark green is good, right? If Polak is playing the right d position then these are saying he actually is good at suppressing shots in his area of coverage on the pk, don't they?

Of course there is more involved then just this to say whether he is actually good on the pk or not (shot clearings, time spent in the d zone etc) but I'd rather not see any info that might lead to somebody defending Polak's usage

Green = fewer shots/60 than average from that area
Purple = more shots/60 than average from that area

Polak is okay in his limited time. I don't think anyone is saying he's not good on the PK; what we're mostly saying is that he's in the box more often than he is in the 4-man box forcing shots outside.

It also doesn't make much sense to not want to see data because it casts a player we don't like in a positive light; we should be telling everyone (we know associated with another hockey organization/GM) how wonderful Polak is as a player and person and how he'd be perfect for a deep playoff drive, just like how he helped the Sharks get to the finals and then us (a 30th place team the year before) reach the playoffs. We totally lost after he went down to injury. But now he's back, and for the paltry price of a 1st and a 3rd, he can be the backbone of your team's playoff success. If you call now, we'll throw in Kerby Rychel for 2nd rder.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Hot take: killing a penalty really isn't that hard for NHL players.

By that I mean coaching and goaltending are much more important aspects of a successful penalty kill than personnel is. Any good NHLer should be successful on the PK as long as those two things are in place. I'd argue a PK on this team consisting of Matthews/Kadri-Marner/Marleau-Gardiner-Dermott would be just as successful if not more successful than Komarov-Hyman-Hainsey-Polak. We'll just never know because 99% of coaches are incredibly stubborn.

 

[herman]

Hot take: killing a penalty really isn't that hard for NHL players.

My take is lukewarm at best. Good NHL players at 5v5 can and usually are good PKers.

I semi-agree with Babcock in shelving your poorest shooters in the PK where goals are not expected and conserving TOI/energy to 5v5/4 situations. PK is also where shot blocking happens a ton (even though I think it is pretty detrimental to the goalie trying to make the save). Poorest shooters is a relative term though, and it definitely doesn't mean you should go out and deliberately buy a player that can't score except for accidentally, can't handle the puck except to dump it, and can't move without taking a penalty.

So imagine a lineup where the bottom of the barrel is replaced by the likes of Kapanen, Johnsson, Marincin, Carrick, Dermott, so your PK group is, even under archaic coaching philosophies, going to be a more mobile, puck-savvy squad. Rising tide and all that.

Some teams are mixing in the likes of Tavares and Bergeron and Marchand, actual skilled players, and it really knocks PPs for a loop because they're now up against someone who can a) think the game just as fast if not faster, b) take the puck away, c) outskate them, d) have the hands to pot a goal in transition. We have the horses to do this, but not the wherewithal to not stuff our lineup with 'easy' options.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/KPapetti/status/950894206683418624

Yaaaassssss.

 

[Coco-puffs]

I tried to find it and failed, albeit have no idea where to look anymore with so many of the advanced stats sites being signed to NHL clubs.

Do we have numbers on PK% with/without Polak?

Someone actually looked into this in detail yesterday:

https://twitter.com/JeffVeillette/status/950734230547587072

Those number are a garbage way to make a point.  So Polak plays the first 1:20 of the PK, doesn't get scored on, Rielly comes on the ice in his place and promptly gives one up on the PK and guess what... the PK percentage with Polak in the lineup takes a hit.

This is what you should be looking at:

GA/60 for 4v5 mins (in order of mins):
Hainsey 4.8
Zaitsev 5.2
Rielly 8.13
Polak 4.43
Gardiner 2.62 (only 22 mins)
Borgman 12.94 (only 9 mins)

Polak also has the best CA/60, FA/60 and SA/60 among the top 5 in that list, if you're looking for underlying numbers presenting expected results moving forward.

*BTW, I don't want him in the lineup and don't think the good he does ON the PK outweighs his poor performance 5v5 or his penchant to take penalties.  Just pointing out those are bad stats to present that Polak doesn't impact the PK positively.

 

[Frank E]

I tried to find it and failed, albeit have no idea where to look anymore with so many of the advanced stats sites being signed to NHL clubs.

Do we have numbers on PK% with/without Polak?

Someone actually looked into this in detail yesterday:

https://twitter.com/JeffVeillette/status/950734230547587072

Those number are a garbage way to make a point.  So Polak plays the first 1:20 of the PK, doesn't get scored on, Rielly comes on the ice in his place and promptly gives one up on the PK and guess what... the PK percentage with Polak in the lineup takes a hit.

This is what you should be looking at:

GA/60 for 4v5 mins (in order of mins):
Hainsey 4.8
Zaitsev 5.2
Rielly 8.13
Polak 4.43
Gardiner 2.62 (only 22 mins)
Borgman 12.94 (only 9 mins)

Polak also has the best CA/60, FA/60 and SA/60 among the top 5 in that list, if you're looking for underlying numbers presenting expected results moving forward.

*BTW, I don't want him in the lineup and don't think the good he does ON the PK outweighs his poor performance 5v5 or his penchant to take penalties.  Just pointing out those are bad stats to present that Polak doesn't impact the PK positively.

That can happen when people try to shoehorn stats to support a narrative.

Thanks for the counterpoint.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Those number are a garbage way to make a point.  So Polak plays the first 1:20 of the PK, doesn't get scored on, Rielly comes on the ice in his place and promptly gives one up on the PK and guess what... the PK percentage with Polak in the lineup takes a hit.

I'm not really sure what all that has to do with that tweet. The argument for keeping Polak in the line-up is that without his role on the PK our penalty kill will suffer. But so far they've played 19 games without him in the line-up and our PK% is 83.8, which is identical to our PK% with him in the line-up. If he was essential to the success of our PK wouldn't our success rate have been even a little bit worse without him in the line-up?

I don't think those stats are there to attack Polak or to suggest that he's garbage. It just says that our PK wouldn't be any better or worse if he wasn't play. He's replaceable, which like I said earlier is something that you could probably say about a lot of penalty killers around the league.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Those number are a garbage way to make a point.  So Polak plays the first 1:20 of the PK, doesn't get scored on, Rielly comes on the ice in his place and promptly gives one up on the PK and guess what... the PK percentage with Polak in the lineup takes a hit.

I'm not really sure what all that has to do with that tweet. The argument for keeping Polak in the line-up is that without his role on the PK our penalty kill will suffer. But so far they've played 19 games without him in the line-up and our PK% is 83.8, which is identical to our PK% with him in the line-up. If he was essential to the success of our PK wouldn't our success rate have been even a little bit worse without him in the line-up?

The problem with both Jeffler's tweet and your analysis of it is Zaitsev was integral to the PK "success" without Polak in the lineup.  With Zaitsev out of the lineup, you'd be playing Rielly more on the PK and his results have not been good.  Gardiner and Borgman have too small of sample sizes to glean much from the data I posted.  Furthermore, Polak has the best underlying numbers on the PK (CA/60, FA/60, SA/60) for anyone who's played more than 10 mins of PK time this year.

When Zaitsev returns, Polak's usefulness on the PK isn't as important and I sure hope he's not in the lineup anymore.  Until that happens, Babcock is playing the known commodity (Polak) despite his flaws because Rielly isn't getting it done and he doesn't have confidence that his other D-men can do it either.  We can argue all we want online that some other guys should get a shot (especially Dermott, who's been great on the PK with the Marlies by all accounts), but Babcock is reticent to go that route.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

When Zaitsev returns, Polak's usefulness on the PK isn't as important and I sure hope he's not in the lineup anymore.

What makes you think Polak will be out of the line-up when Zaitsev returns? His injury opened up a spot for Carrick, not Polak. Polak played in 10 straight games with Carrick in the press box prior to that injury. Yes, Polak's role on the PK increased quite a bit with Zaitsev's injury but his spot in the line-up was basically cemented before that even happened.

Furthermore, Polak has the best underlying numbers on the PK (CA/60, FA/60, SA/60) for anyone who's played more than 10 mins of PK time this year.

It doesn't really make any sense to use those specific stats when dealing with speciality teams though. There's no real-world basis to them. What it does matter how many shots against per 60 minutes are allowed? Do you even know how many PK shifts a defenceman takes in a span of 60 minutes? It's somewhat needlessly blowing up the numbers. We use per 60 at 5-on-5 because a NHL game is 60 minutes. Why not use per 2 when dealing with speciality teams because penalties are 2 minutes? Here's what our defencemen's CA/2 would look like:

Hainsey 3.3
Zaitsev 3.7
Rielly 2.9
Polak 2.8
Gardiner 3.1

So that essentially says for every 2 minute penalty our defencemen each all about 3 shot attempts against. They're all basically even, with Zaitsev being a tad hit ahead. But doesn't looking at it like that make more sense from a practical standpoint? Does it make a significant difference in a game if Gardiner allows 0.3 more shot attempts on every kill? Yes that number adds up over time but that doesn't really make a difference on a 2 minute penalty.

 

[AvroArrow]

New conspiracy theory: Babcock will do anything to prevent Lou and shanahan from fast tracking... He's showing them the crap on the team by playing them heavily.

 

[freer]

New conspiracy theory: Babcock will do anything to prevent Lou and shanahan from fast tracking... He's showing them the crap on the team by playing them heavily.

LOL humour that is great, and I love it!

 

[Strangelove]

There is no longer any doubt that Babcock?s decision-making (both in game and roster) is hurting the team. He?s playing the wrong line up, the wrong lines, and the wrong system for the make up of this team, and he refuses to make adjustments.

Just for example, why is the team still chipping the puck out of their own zone and dumping it in rather than rushing with it? They have elite speed and yet barely ever draw penalties because they almost never have the puck in the neutral zone.

The sad part is that nothing in his post game comments suggests that he?ll be making changes following the bye week.

 

[freer]

There is no longer any doubt that Babcock?s decision-making (both in game and roster) is hurting the team. He?s playing the wrong line up, the wrong lines, and the wrong system for the make up of this team, and he refuses to make adjustments.

Just for example, why is the team still chipping the puck out of their own zone and dumping it in rather than rushing with it? They have elite speed and yet barely ever draw penalties because they almost never have the puck in the neutral zone.

The sad part is that nothing in his post game comments suggests that he?ll be making changes following the bye week.

We have elite speed, yes but we also have players who can't score anymore Kadri, or won't shot the damn Puck Marner because he is selfish and is trying to be pretty. Something has to change quickly or we will not make the playoffs

 

[hockeyfan1]

There is no longer any doubt that Babcock?s decision-making (both in game and roster) is hurting the team. He?s playing the wrong line up, the wrong lines, and the wrong system for the make up of this team, and he refuses to make adjustments.

Just for example, why is the team still chipping the puck out of their own zone and dumping it in rather than rushing with it? They have elite speed and yet barely ever draw penalties because they almost never have the puck in the neutral zone.

The sad part is that nothing in his post game comments suggests that he?ll be making changes following the bye week.

We have elite speed, yes but we also have players who can't score anymore Kadri, or won't shot the damn Puck Marner because he is selfish and is trying to be pretty. Something has to change quickly or we will not make the playoffs

I wouldn't make too harsh a judgement on the statements.  Kadri is obviously not in sync and Marner, well, yes, he likes to get fancy when he has an opportunity to just shoot.  Marner also has a love of skating and it shows.  Selfish?  No.  A little bit more awareness perhaps, but he'll eventually get the hang of what needs to be done better.  I have faith in #16.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/LeafsPR/status/951469522900410369

Not a surprising development with the Leafs on their bye-week. The question is: do they come back up when it's over?

 

[Bender]

Dermott has looked remarkably steady IMO. Should come back, slot in easily over Roman Penalty. I mean Polak.

 

[ZBBM]

Dermott, yes.  Gauthier hasn't been any better than Moore.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Dermott, yes.  Gauthier hasn't been any better than Moore.

Yeah, after a few games I really don't quite get the Gauthier call-up. Babcock is barely playing him too: he's only averaging 6:31 minutes a game at 5-on-5. Moore averaged 8:45 per game at 5-on-5 all season, and was actually at 8:53 in his last 10 games (so it's not like his ice-time was trending down or anything).

 

[Frank E]

Dermott, yes.  Gauthier hasn't been any better than Moore.

Yeah, after a few games I really don't quite get the Gauthier call-up. Babcock is barely playing him too: he's only averaging 6:31 minutes a game at 5-on-5. Moore averaged 8:45 per game at 5-on-5 all season, and was actually at 8:53 in his last 10 games (so it's not like his ice-time was trending down or anything).

I think that's probably due to Gauthier not being as good as Moore, yet.

I don't know if he'll be better, and honestly it's a nice story and all with him coming back from a bad injury, but he doesn't look like he'll bring anything more than what you can sign off the scrap heap UFA market every August.