Kin
New member
herman said:http://theleafsnation.com/2017/2/7/leafs-postgame-luck-of-the-draw
A lot of last night's goals were scored shortly after winning the draw. Naturally, TSN 'analysts' and commentators alike, chewed that bone to the nib.
Sarcasm translation for the above article: Face-offs are not insignificant in and of themselves. But pursuing and expending assets on a 'face-off specialist' (e.g. 53% vs 47%) is a folly if that face-off specialist is only good at face-offs and bad everywhere else because the difference between being 'good at face-offs' and 'bad at face-offs' is nominal at best.
I think this is an area where the analytics are relatively right but they're coming to a bad conclusion. In the larger macro sense of things the difference between being a 53% face-off guy and being a 47% one isn't big. The problem is at key moments winning face-offs is a big deal and if someone is 47% against the league in aggregate, how are they against someone who might be among the league's best?
Where I'd agree though is that it's not maybe something that should be thought of as "We aren't good at face-offs, let's go acquire someone who is" but rather an element that should be part of development/training and solved internally.
Someone like Matthews, for instance, is strong, quick and has pretty solid hand/eye coordination. I don't see there as being any particular reason that he can't develop into a very good face-off taker.