OUR MAN CORSI

There is some very good news behind last night’s 5-4  opening night chaos loss to the Winnipeg Jets. Along with the villains, there were several heroes on the stats  sheet–beginning with our man Corsi.

Azorcan3

Yesterday on the LDWLT, I mentioned the “game within the game” and suggested that even a loss last night wouldn’t mean the end of the earth IF the Oilers could win the shot differential (Corsi) game. And they did, despite a serious second period dip (using Parkatti’s numbers)

  • 1st period Corsi events: 19-10 Edmonton
  • 2nd period Corsi events: 23-13 Winnipeg
  • 3rd period Corsi events: 17-9 Edmonton
  • Total Corsi evens events: 49-42 Edmonton

In Parkatti’s excellent game notes (here) we find out that the Oilers won the Corsi game 6 times last season in 48 games (12.5%). I’m sure there are some reading this thinking this is grasping at straws, but the fact is: if you win the Corsi battle consistently, good things are going to happen. History is on your side, and if you’re cheating Corsi (as Toronto did a year ago) it will eventually bite you in the ass (as it did during the final period of their season) because your team isn’t built to win the “game within the game”: field position.

TRAVIS YOST’S ROLLING CORSI 2012-13 (EDMONTON OILERS)

yost capture

Would you look at this? Just LOOK at it! We lived it, ladies and gents, and it was not good. Parkatti COUNTED it (if he needs therapy we should all chip in) a year ago and the meter clicked black just 6 times. SIX! Holy hell. Last night’s loss is doubly tough because it was winnable, but the coach should have the full attention of his 22 this morning. There is some good news in the secondary stats and that’s a very good thing.

THE GOATS

  • Devan Dubnyk: A tough outing for DD, I’m not one to turn on the goalie (his resume is solid) but it’s also true that the last line of defense is going to stand out when at least 2 of the GA were “ones he’d like to have back” in a one goal outcome. He needs to be better. 
  • Taylor Hall: I thought Eakins summed up Hall’s evening perfectly (without ever saying Hall’s name) when he talked about turning the puck over 1-on-3 and then the errant cross-ice pass that led to the tying goal. Every great player who ever played the game had a bad night or several, and there were good things, too. I’d bet on Hall 100 times out of 100, the young man will no doubt come back better than ever Saturday. Hall’s Corsi (12-17, -5) came against the best available opposition, so Eakins didn’t appear to be shying away from tough v tough matchup (and rightly so).
  • Ryan Smyth: He looked unable. Absolutely heartbreaking.

THE HEROES

  • Jesse Joensuu: Had a terrific evening. We have to temper the verbal a little because he did it against the soft parade, but Joensuu was outstanding (16-11 Corsi) all night long. I’m thrilled with his play, and suspect he’ll see more than 14 minutes on Saturday night. 
  • Boyd Gordon: Had the best Corsi on the night, scored on the PP and generally looked like he knew what he was doing. Gordon’s tip on the PP suggests we might be looking at a strong set of boxcars if he keeps getting these chances.
  • Jordan Eberle: A wonderful night to my eye, I think the Oilers might have an insane partnership in Eberle-Perron.

 LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE


Today on the show, we’ll talk to Michael Parkatti at 10:05 and break down this thing six ways to Sunday, talk development with Tim Fragle at 10:25 and at 11 Alan Hull from Copper and Blue will give his take on G1. We’ll round out the morning with Corey Graham as the Oil Kings hit the road and acquire a player (Reid Petryk, who should be familiar to Oilers fans from rookie camp).

@Lowetide_ or 10-1260 via text. TSN 1260 10am, hope you tune in!

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

146 Responses to "OUR MAN CORSI"

  1. RMGS says:

    I’d add Coach Eakins as a hero. What a great presser – talking shot attempts, the analytics supporting pulling a goalie, saying it like it is about the team’s bad habits. Great stuff.

  2. Lowetide says:

    Agreed. Eakins is gold.

  3. mumbai max says:

    This game had the opposite feel to it of some recent early season flukey wins. In the last few years there were early wins that were filled with luck and hot goaltending and little else. This was much different. Swap Yak and Smyth and play this game 81 more times, and we are in the playoffs. Feeling as good as is possible following a loss. Go Oil.

  4. RMGS says:

    As for the shot differential, what’s most encouraging is that they outshot the opposition most when tied or in the lead (Fenwick-close). That’s what good teams do.

  5. mumbai max says:

    Despite the -2, i would also nominate Belov as a hero. Or at least a future hero. Joensuu, Perron, Gordon, Belov, Acton. Way to go MacT.

  6. sliderule says:

    I thought Arcobello played a very good game..Last year they didn’t give him a fair shot at earning a spot.If he keeps playing like that it will be hard not to keep him on team.
    Hall showed why you can forget him on Olympic team.Did his usual skate into one on three turnover and a dangerous careless pass that resulted in goal.These mistakes can easily be corrected but he has had three years of more or less doing his own thing.Eakins has to set him straight.
    Do we get it why MacT thought job one was a goalie.Dubnyk will continue to break the oiler hearts.He is a big guy and some nights the shots will hit him but man can he let in team deflating soft goals.

  7. Its a Trap says:

    But did Eakins give Smitty too many minutes? Everyone was screaming for him to get off the ice. He should have sat after the first. He’s an anchor. I don’t mind PP time. But 5 on 5. No way.

  8. Canadas Jamaican says:

    Perron, Joensuu and Acton look good in the battles…elbows up and don’t back down to anyone. J Schultz was a bit of a mess.

  9. Ryan says:

    Lt, I was at the game which isn’t something I can typically claim. :)

    In defense of Taylor Hall, the kid skated miles and miles. While he did make a few critical errors, he was playing the toughs with Smytty who looked completely finished and Hemsky who wasn’t much help. Lordy, I”m not sure how RNH would look playing the toughs with those wingers.

    By eye, he also seemed to be out with Belov and Shultz sr. quite often. Schultz sr like Smytty looks completely finished.

    On the critical cross ice gaffe, Hemsky skated the puck around the net or something to the blueline and passed it to Hall who was at a dead stop. Bad play by both on that one…

    When the game was tied, one thing that annoyed me is Eakins kept sending out the 4 line for o-zone draws. What’s your take on that? I’ve always preferred the Vigneault method of throwing the “Sedin line” over for these myself… instead of the Renney method of trying to shelter a disasterous 4 line by giving them o-zone draws.

    Words cannot describe how bad our 4 line was live on the ice either with the exception of one fluke goal… I had flashbacks of Renney putting MacIntyre line out against Heatley, Marleau and Thornton for ozone draws. It pretty much looked like that every time they took a draw in that the puck would re enter the Oilers zone within 5 seconds flat from the ozone draw.

    Dubbie let in some real stinkers as we all know in which he had clear sight of the shots and got beat badly. Looked like he was way too far deep in his net for most of them…

    J Schultz looked perplexed as he was sent out for a few d-zone draws with Ference. One in particular didn’t end well and the kid is pure chaos in his own zone.

  10. DeadmanWaking says:

    SportsClubStats finally put up fresh NHL numbers in the wee hours last night.

    Edmonton Oilers Playoff Chances 50/50

    It’s possible for the Oilers to make the playoffs with 88 points (17% chance) or miss the playoffs with 93 points (13% chance). There could of course be even more extreme outcomes in a freakshow finale. But I would pick these numbers as representative tails.

    90 points (most typical record 40-31-10) gives us a 44% chance.
    91 points (most typical record 41-31-9) gives us a 60% chance.

    The weighted method takes the opponents record and home field advantage into account when randomly picking scores, so the better team is more likely to win.

    The 50/50 method gives each opponent an equal chance of winning each game.

    Both methods let an appropriate percent of games end in a tie or go into overtime in leagues where that matters.

    When it’s finished “playing” all the remaining games it applies the league’s tie breaking rules to see where everyone finished.

    For my money, neither of these is the right approach. One does want to take into account the league average home barn advantage. I’m not a big fan of using present standings to precondition future outcomes on implied strength-of-team. It’s particularly pernicious right after a team suffers a roster change of a pivotal player, newly injured or putatively recovered.

    If one holds complete conviction that the present standing serves as a reliable gauge of team strength (unafflicted by chance), then half the reason to run a simulation goes out the door. But it isn’t unaffected by chance, so it’s dubious to feed this forward into the simulation under the guise of “strength-of-team”.

    I’m inclined to treat the 50-50 as more authoritative.

    It’s probably less accurate most of the time, but far more accurate when life throws a curve-ball. I prefer to have sensible advice I can mostly trust all the time than sage advice that sometimes completely loses its marbles (e.g. ignoring Crosby returning to the line-up in perfect health for the final month of the season on the same day the Vezina candidate on their main rival blows a kneecap passing the torch to Ty Conklin and a fresh-faced call-up as 1A and 1B, while the regular back-up rests his hammy).

    The weighted method will sail on predicting past results.

  11. russ99 says:

    Belov played well in the offensive zone, but otherwise looked all over the place. It’s his first NHL game, so hopefully more consistency comes as he plays. A bit odd that he has to learn on the job, but he’s surely a better option that Grebs or Potter.

    J. Schultz logged a ton of minutes (23:07), second on the team to Hall. Not sure if that’s smart, at least until he shows more defensive acumen and/or gets used to playing with Ference.

    Kind of ironic, they sent down Omark due to not playing a team game and Hall played one of the worst team games I’ve ever seen.

    Still want to see the Oilers add another center. Acton looked good on the faceoff and PK, but didn’t do much else. Arcobello doesn’t belong at this level, he was as much of a drag on his line as Smyth was to the first.

    Only 1.75 centers on the team, but hey, that sure was a nice fight!

    I also want to see some smarter line matching next time out.

  12. pboy says:

    It’s Game 1 of 82 and I can’t bring myself to kill these guys. That’s probably the worst game Dubnyk will play all season, but he’s been pretty solid for much of the last 2 years and I expect him to revert back to his norm. Hall is playing out of position and I thought he was trying to do a little to much last night. I wonder if they wouldn’t be better off having Lander come up and play C and then shift Hall back to the wing and move Smytty down the line-up and possibly to the press box before too long. Brett Hull played the first 5 games of the season for the Coyotes in 2005 and then pulled the plug on his career. I hope Smyth is able to find his sea legs and his game but to be that out of it already is a bad sign. The guy was legitimately gassed after the 1st period, Eager would have been more useful IMO. Looking forward to Saturday night.

  13. DeadmanWaking says:

    I should clarify that the point thresholds adduced are computed on the starting-block assumption that all teams are equally strong.

    The reality is that you can probably exclude three Ringos and three dingos from the cluster bunch, leaving you with six fewer bubble-dwellers, and this smaller N could well exacerbate variance (aka freak outcomes).

    Counter to this effect, GMs who read the morning news in the newspaper and not the almanac (as was recently practiced here) will ransom the future to maintain connection to the main peloton, which would tend to decrease end of season standings variance.

    There are merely serviceable estimates and not etched in stone.

  14. goldenchild says:

    LT, Not sure how Ales Hemsky didnt make the Heroes, thought he played a terrific game. The goal was wonderous and I saw Woodguy tweet this and it looked the same to me that he was the best back checker all night, came back and broke up a number of Jet rushes.

    Jonensuu was real surprise to me, if we can get that kind of game 60-65 times this year hes a huge addition, Like Gordons play as well.

    I would add Archobello to the Goat column, he had three 5 star-point blank opportunities to score, maybe against an AHL goalie he scores on 1 or even 2 of them but against a middling NHL goalie he got nothing and it ended up costing 2 points. Maybe it was just luck but playing with 14 and 57 he is goint to get a lot of chances, if he cant finish that becomes a major problem the first month.

    It also seemed to me the D-men played an unsure game which I think we had to expect moving from the passive style of the last few years to Eakins new aggressive swarm style. There was too much space and some terrible angles taken. Dubnyk was terrible but his D didnt give him much help.

    Its a waste to spend even a minute worrying about Hall, he will be one of the 3 or best playes on the ice for 65-70 games this year.

    Finally on the fighting debate that has turned viral again I will say this, if PJ stock is going to be the voice of fighting and Vigilante justice, Im happy to be on the other side and like our chances.
    Poor Poor Eliotte.

  15. Bushed says:

    Ryan,

    Yeah, Hemsky wasn’t much help. He only scored a goal and covered on D for Hall’s stupid plays multiple times during the game.

    Good grief.

  16. godot10 says:

    russ99:

    Kind of ironic, they sent down Omark due to not playing a team game and Hall played one of the worst team games I’ve ever seen.

    Omark was sent down because he had to produce offense, and he didn’t. Small sample size. True. Trying to hard. True. Nothing wrong with sending him down to OKC to re-find the North American game and relax.

    Hall played over 20 minutes, on the PP and the PK, out of position, and with a boat anchor and an enigma against the toughest line on the other team. I think that qualifies as being a team player. Did he make mental mistakes after being tasked with pushing the bus? (And they were doozies.) Yes. But under quite different circumstances than Omark.

    I’ve been refraining from saying very much until I see more. I’m a contrarian poster. When things are relentlessly negative, I tend to look for silver linings. When things are hopeful, as they have been in the blogosphere lately, I tend to look for the banana peels.

    The blogosphere expected Ralph Krueger to fix everything in 48 games, with no training camp, no tactically-experienced assistant coach, a compressed schedule with limited practice time, one roster spot tied up in Peckham (whom management wouldn’t waive) and a one-legged defensemen, and games only against Western Conference teams. (Winnipeg is only a pseudo Western Conference team at this point. When the Oilers out-Corsi a REAL Western conference team…)

    i.e. Krueger had a lot on his plate. Just like Taylor Hall in this game. And wasn’t perfect in all aspects of the task, the first time out. Krueger didn’t get a chance to fix things. Taylor will, and will. Just like Krueger probably would have.

    I think Eakins is fine. I just don’t like the “blame Ralph meme”.

  17. wheatnoil says:

    Ryan:

    When the game was tied, one thing that annoyed me is Eakins kept sending out the 4 line for o-zone draws.What’s your take on that?I’ve always preferred the Vigneault method of throwing the “Sedin line” over for these myself… instead of the Renney method of trying to shelter a disasterous 4 line by giving them o-zone draws.

    Words cannot describe how bad our 4 line was live on the ice either with the exception of one fluke goal…I had flashbacks of Renney putting MacIntyre line out against Heatley, Marleau and Thornton for ozone draws.It pretty much looked like that every time they took a draw in that the puck would re enter the Oilers zone within 5 seconds flat from the ozone draw.

    It’s tough because we tend to notice when the 4-line is out there. I mean, you notice when Hall, Perron, Eberle, or Yak is out there and on the 4-line they’re not. That’s said, they barely played over 5 minutes the whole game, so I think it’s tough to say Eakins was playing them too often. Also, I’d rather Eakins put the guys out for o-zone draws for their 5 minutes a game than d-zone draws.

  18. bookje says:

    I think its time we start booing Hall. Did anyone else notice his body language?

  19. rickithebear says:

    Bushed: Yeah, Hemsky wasn’t much help. He only scored a goal and covered on D for Hall’s stupid plays multiple times during the game.

    Horcoff sat in front of the TV and thought how’s it feel bitch!

  20. Clarkenstein says:

    It’s official. Ryan Smyth has played one game too many. Taylor Hall looks completely lost and frustrated playing centre and I blame MacT. This experiment is going to be a cluster. I’m not sure I agree with you LT that Dubnyk’s resume is solid but whatever… maybe it gives Jason LaBarbera a chance to be this team’s version of Dwayne Roloson. This could be a tough month. Eakins head may explode.

  21. wheatnoil says:

    Eakins response to Hall playing over 23 minutes last night, “Yeah, that’s not bad.” He preached fitness levels and went on to say that he expects he should be able to run a forward for 27-28 minutes and have them not flag by the end.

    I don’t think he would actually run a forward for that long, but what I’m more interested in is his response to the idea that Hall played too much. My instinct would be to think, “Well maybe I played Hall too much and he can’t handle it. I better cut him down a couple minutes at least.”

    Eakins response is to not lower his standards but demand that the player gets better. He’s saying that he expects his thoroughbreds to run, damn it, and if they can’t they better up their fitness level so they can. “Hall, you’re my horse and if I ask you to run 30 minutes a night, you better damn well do it.”

    There’s an argument to be made against Eakins’ strategy, but I kind of like it. It goes with the “this isn’t a ‘young team’ ” mentality. Eakins doesn’t want to develop Hall, he wants Hall to perform. If the Oilers falter this year, you can be sure that it won’t be because the coach was busy driving the Pinto around while the Porsche was sitting in the garage.

  22. FastOil says:

    We had guests I had to pay attention to so only caught the end. That was some high speed chaos. Hall – I don’t know what to say. He is getting run at because his style is an open invitation to the “big hit”. I didn’t catch which Jet I noticed – luckily Hall caught him in his peripheral and avoided it.

    Hall either:
    1. Needs to be incredibly lucky
    2. Needs to beat the next guy who tries to line him up into smithereens or end up with the guy’s liver impaled on his stick
    3. Needs to pay more attention so he can play long enough to get his jersey hauled up with those other ones.

  23. Henry says:

    Bushed,

    I agree. Hemsky at 30 looks like he kind of knows what he’s doing. That was a fine, fine game.

  24. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    It’s Bourbon Week here in Toronto, so I had some guys over last night to crack a few bottles of the sweet southern restorative with the games.

    Elijah Craig: the belle of the ball. fantastic.
    Bulliet: a solid mistress. tempts you away from the stalwart.
    Maker’s Mark: old flame reliable. steady and delicious.
    Knob Creek: wow… bottled too strong at 50%. too close to fire water. a couple of cubes evened it out.

    some randoms:
    Copper Fox (Virginian Rye): delicious, smokey.
    Dark Horse: best doused in coke. meh.

    ———–
    The games through Bourbon eyes:

    Parros… jesus… if that isn’t a poster for how pointless the extravagance of this player type is, I don’t know what is. That was disgusting to watch.

    Looked to me like the leaves managed to continue their sweet ride of %s into the new season. What I saw was a Habs team buzzing and a leaves team looking slow and stupid… but sometimes variance pulls the wool over our eyes. This leaves season is going to be interesting to watch develop.

    The Oil game. Wow that team — with some big exceptions painted across the barn in all caps — looked like a contender for the playoffs. I know we lost and I was drunky… but they seemed in control of the pace of the game for most of the contest. It looks like I’m going to enjoy this new “puck possession” iteration of the team. Play that game over 100 times and we win most of the time.

    Despite my abject frustration, I woke up happy.

    The standout goods:
    JJ was outstanding. I thought Perron and Eberle (and hon. mention to Arco) played well. Hemsky looked great. His goal was pure magic. J. Schultz looks good moving the puck. Petry and Smid looked fine and Smid rubbing out Scheifle was hard to watch but also why I love him.

    The standout bads:
    DD just had an awful game. I’m not going to freakout about it, but that was just plain bad. Smyth looks out of place so far up the lineup. I wonder if him and JJ switch for next game. N. Schultz I barely noticed… I don’t think the coach has a lot of confidence in him (the A on his jersey over Smid or Petry is confounding). Belov looked IMO to have his first off game, seemed out of position a couple of times. Hall had a chaos night.

    Randoms:
    Gazdic… haha. I laughed so hard when he scored that goal… and then his fight where he popped the other guy’s helmet off (not unlike Brown beating a man with his own helmet)… all I could think was… this guy just bought himself an extraordinary amount of goodwill with the fans.

  25. Woodguy says:

    Can’t wait for RNH to get back.

    I keep Arco here until 89 gets back and go:

    4-93-14 (out corsi’d and out scored some of the best lines in hockey last year)
    57-26-64 (soft minute killers)
    6-27-83 (dzone starts and 2nd toughs)
    94-41-20 (5 min/gm)

    Hemsky had a lot of success with Penner and Horcoff. Joensuu and Gordon can easily play those roles and handle some tougher sledding.

    Hope Ferrence and J.Shultz get better, was a gong show at times with them.

    J.Shultz in particular looked like his head was somewhere else at times.

    Brown and Gazdic had 5min each. That’s almost perfect.

  26. Doomoil says:

    holy crap are the comments on willis’ oilersnation article unreadable garbage.

    oiler fans: the definition of hyperbole.

  27. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    goldenchild: Poor Poor Eliotte.

    I wonder about two things:

    when do CBC’s rights to HNIC expire and when does Elliotte’s contract expire. I’ll be very interested to see where he ends up. He is a phenomenal commentator.

    One thing though… me and the boys couldn’t get over his little kid haircut… usually he puts gel or something in there… last night it looked like he got out of the shower, put his suit on and was ready to go… I loved it.

  28. rich says:

    Love Smytty to death but the man is on his last legs. He’s not going to last thru mid-October let alone the season though. He just can’t do the minutes any more.

    DD has historically been a goalie who gets better with more work and the lay-off between the last exhibition game and the first regular season game probably didn’t help. If he’s still letting in easy ones by mid-October, then we have a real problem.

    Still not happy about the game winning goal though. Guys not picking things up in front and looking like a dog chasing it’s tail is going to be a problem. Maybe as everyone becomes more familiar with the system that will change, but if WPG can do that to us, imagine what a skill team will do.

  29. Henry says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    I like your bourbon selections. You might want to try Wild Turkey Rare Breed as well. So strong it needs a tablespoon of water to open up, but man it is good when it does.

    Through other (mine) Bourbon eyes:

    The Oilers had some nervous guys and it hurt them.

    The Jets weren’t as dull as I feared.

    Joensuu looks like a terrific find.

    I don’t understand the swarm defense, at least as I saw it last night.

  30. goldenchild says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: It’s Bourbon Week here in Toronto, so I had some guys over last night to crack a few bottles of the sweet southern restorative with the games. Elijah Craig: the belle of the ball. fantastic.Bulliet: a solid mistress. tempts you away from the stalwart.Maker’s Mark: old flame reliable. steady and delicious.Knob Creek: wow… bottled too strong at 50%. too close to fire water. a couple of cubes evened it out. some randoms:Copper Fox (Virginian Rye): delicious, smokey.Dark Horse: best doused in coke. meh. ———–.

    Rom I’m normally a Scotch drinker but bought a bottle of Buffalo Trace on Weekend to diversify my cabinet, thoughts?

  31. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Henry: Wild Turkey Rare Breed

    Looks like the LCBO only carries this Wild Turkey:

    http://www.lcbo.com/lcbo-ear/lcbo/product/details.do?language=EN&itemNumber=281824

    I’ll have to wait till I’m stateside or elsewhere to try it. Thanks for the tip.

  32. Bushed says:

    rickithebear,

    More likely: “Oh,so that’s how that skating and scoring stuff works….sure glad I cashed in on that guy’s play before anyone noticed I can’t even one-time a pass anymore…”

  33. Radman says:

    Lots to like about the game. Joensuu, the fourth line, playing more as a team, Eakins and his clarity. I suspect October will be an uneven month with an upward trajectory in November. I was strangely positive on the way home after another disappointing loss. Maybe the 8 dollar beer.

    I know the stats guys love Dubnyk and that he posts solid numbers. Can’t dispute that. Don’t want to crap on the guy. Still, there is no stat for “gut punch” goals against, that steal team momentum and suck the life out of the crowd. Suspect he is among the league leaders in that one, and I’ll bet the higher ups grow impatient.

    Smytty got the biggest cheer during the intros. For good reason. Long mutual love affair. Everyone wants the guy to succeed, and go out on top. Sadly, can’t help thinking we are headed for an Old Yeller style ending. He just can’t keep up and I’m not sure where he fits in this line up.Hope I’m wrong.

  34. cabbiesmacker says:

    The thing I am most happy with is MacT sitting on his hands regarding the whole C position thingy, assuming all was smooth sailing. Using just ONE example, and assuming (4 pts) Grabovski would have asked for one extra year or one extra million to play in Edmonton, would it not have been worth just putting out feelers MacT? Or is Oiler management still smarter than the other 29 in the NHL?

    Nope. Facepunchers capable of playing 2.5 mins a night was a far greater priority.

    Well done chaps. The C position is going to be a bone of contention and a playoff deterrent on this team until these guys finally figure it out.

  35. G Money says:

    I feel better about this loss (where the Oilers were the better team most of the night) than some of the opening night wins (where hot goaltending overcame an otherwise putrid team).

    Some good things from last night:

    - Positive Corsi, by a mile. Hallelujah.

    - Joensuu! A big man who skates, hits, goes to the blue paint, has hands!

    - Smid & Petry appear to have recovered from the “Krueger” effect

    - Gadzic can skate???

    Obviously some adjustments to make:

    - Dubynk had a bad game (.821 sv%). Every goalie does. Given his track record, nothing to worry about.

    - Hall still not comfortable playing C. Looked OK against pre-season, still has work to do against real competition.

    - Need to clean up the dumb cross-ice passes.

    - Swap Smyth and Yak

    - A 60 minute game. A 4-2 lead is not a comfortable lead.

  36. theres oil in virginia says:

    Henry,
    Romulus Apotheosis,
    I second that Rare Breed recommendation. I’m not a liquor drinker in general, but that is pretty smooth stuff. I believe it is “bottle proof”, so presumably they don’t water it down for the sake of standardization, and it’s higher than 80 proof. I wonder if that affects where/how it is available. I think it comes in to our local ABC stores in batches and you may even have to ask for it. Not sure about that though.

  37. oliveoilers says:

    Doomoil:
    holy crap are the comments on willis’ oilersnation article unreadable garbage.

    oiler fans: the definition of hyperbole.

    Unreadable garbage? Try capital letters at the start of sentences. And question marks at the end of questions.

    Signed,

    Your friendly neighbourhood grammar police.

    PS: People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

  38. Henry says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    The 80 proof is not a good whiskey. 101 is good, with a characteristic burn. Russells Reserve is very, very good and Rare Breed is excellent. $36 in Houston, $50 in Calgary.

  39. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    goldenchild: Rom I’m normally a Scotch drinker but bought a bottle of Buffalo Trace on Weekend to diversify my cabinet, thoughts?

    I’m a fan of whisky/whiskeys in broad strokes. Single Malts are so fun because there is such an amazing variety of flavors to experience. Love, love, love scotch.

    But. I would encourage all scotch lovers to give bourbons a try. There are a variety of crappy staples of the genre… but also a large selection of really good, quality bourbons with their own distinct sensibility.

    Buffalo Trace is a great place to start. Funnily enough, a good friend of mine was just at the distillery on a tour. Apparently it is free and they pillory you with booze and various knick-knacks.

    Thing about bourbon… though is that it runs on the sweeter side of things and has a rich smoothness (when it’s good). If you like say Dalmore and Balvenie scotches you will probably do fine with bourbon…(mind you the flavor profiles between bourbon and scotch are very different).

    oh… and good bourbon (excepting say Blantons) is actually quite affordable. Makes poor people like me take an extra interest in it.

  40. G Money says:

    The day after a complex multi-faceted opening night loss … and the conversation quickly turns to drinking.

    Life as an Oilers fan.

  41. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    G Money: – Gadzic can skate???

    let’s not get carried away here ;)

    He to my drunk eye looked like he had really good straight-away speed for a big face-puncher. I was pleasantly surprised. However, he also looked to be the radical opposite of RNH on his edges…

    The opposition just needs to Pedro Cerano him with a curve ball and it’s good night!

  42. Woodguy says:

    Ryan:
    Lt, I was at the game which isn’t something I can typically claim.

    In defense of Taylor Hall, the kid skated miles and miles.While he did make a few critical errors, he was playing the toughs with Smytty who looked completely finished and Hemsky who wasn’t much help.Lordy, I”m not sure how RNH would look playing the toughs with those wingers.

    By eye, he also seemed to be out with Belov and Shultz sr. quite often.Schultz sr like Smytty looks completely finished.

    On the critical cross ice gaffe, Hemsky skated the puck around the net or something to the blueline and passed it to Hall who was at a dead stop.Bad play by both on that one…

    When the game was tied, one thing that annoyed me is Eakins kept sending out the 4 line for o-zone draws.What’s your take on that?I’ve always preferred the Vigneault method of throwing the “Sedin line” over for these myself… instead of the Renney method of trying to shelter a disasterous 4 line by giving them o-zone draws.

    Words cannot describe how bad our 4 line was live on the ice either with the exception of one fluke goal…I had flashbacks of Renney putting MacIntyre line out against Heatley, Marleau and Thornton for ozone draws.It pretty much looked like that every time they took a draw in that the puck would re enter the Oilers zone within 5 seconds flat from the ozone draw.

    Dubbie let in some real stinkers as we all know in which he had clear sight of the shots and got beat badly.Looked like he was way too far deep in his net for most of them…

    J Schultz looked perplexed as he was sent out for a few d-zone draws with Ference.One in particular didn’t end well and the kid is pure chaos in his own zone.

    The 4th line only got 5min 5v5

    Starting them in the ozone (also saw at least one neutral zone FO) is the best way to minimize their exposure.

    I thought Eakins handled the 4th line perfectly.

  43. spoiler says:

    oliveoilers: Unreadable garbage? Try capital letters at the start of sentences. And question marks at the end of questions. Signed,Your friendly neighbourhood grammar police.PS: People I glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

    The original poster’s first statement isn’t a question, and thus shouldn’t have a question mark. And your last sentence isn’t really a sentence. Nor is it the aphorism you think it is. Nor is it relevant, as he was not criticizing the grammar of the posters at ON. Nor is his post unreadable. …Are you sure you have your grammar badge?

  44. Jordan says:

    Moments that stick…

    Smid Crushing Scheifle in the corner, and then crosschecking the back of his head.

    Joensuu taking offense to Buff’s hit on Eberle and taking on the whole Jets line to get at him behind the Jets net.

    Hemsky flying through the defense, taking a hard pass at the goal mouth an not quite getting it on his stick for a great scoring chance

    Arco with infinite time aftera cross crease pass and he can’t find a hole.

    Gazdic with the centre ice bout, the judges decision & the take down. Note – the goal should still be his – brown never touched it.

    Great transition play up ice, Hall breaking out of the zone, throwing a pass cross-ice to Smyth who can’t get to the pass, and it’s intercepted for an odd man rush (what turned into the GWG).

    Lots of great to talk about, and some real issues.

    I’m not sure if it’s too early to talk about what to do with our man Ryan Smyth, or if it’s too late…

    Regardless the outcome, that was a stellar game.

  45. oliveoilers says:

    spoiler: The first statement isn’t a question, and thus shouldn’t have a question mark.And your last sentence isn’t really a sentence.Nor is it the aphorism you think it is. Nor is it relevant, as he was not criticizing the grammar of the posters at ON.…Are you sure you have your grammar badge?

    I’m sorry, I just saw red. Complaining about comments in a comments section on a public site is like complaining the swimming pool is wet. It’s almost like the people who complain their privacy is violated on Facebook. On Facebook. Oh, and it’s the inflection that makes it a question and the modern rules of the English language state it is acceptable to start a sentence with the word ‘and’.

  46. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Woodguy: The 4th line only got 5min 5v5

    Starting them in the ozone (also saw at least one neutral zone FO) is the best way to minimize their exposure.

    I thought Eakins handled the 4th line perfectly.

    I think that is right. In an ideal world those guys are going to crash, burn and try to “cycle” the puck in the o-zone. best to give them a leg up.

    Mind you, that is only if you extremely limit their minutes, exposure to competition, etc.

    There’s some really interesting things in the TOI reports:

    http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20132014/TH020003.HTM

    He doesn’t appear to have much confidence in N. Schultz. 13.41 TOI is nothing for a D. Last year he was consistently around 18 and in Minn around 22.

    The yak thing is weird.

    Hemsky getting near 20m is music. This coach sees some things we’ve been seeing but no one else has (Hemsky and N. Schultz) and has his own ideas on some other things (Yak).

  47. denny33 says:

    Taylor Hall – clearly one of the best players in the game right now….however, does anyone want to apologize to Lindy Ruff? ( not that it was JUST Lindy Ruff that pointed out Taylor’s glaring weakness ) Taylor has a part of his game that is a major liability…Could Taylor be one of the players that Hitchcock was referring to yesterday?

    Taylor Hall got a mock ‘hat’ in the Jets locker room. He earned it.

    Puck Possession Guys:

    Nothing sums up better the Edmonton Oilers than watching a 19 year old rookie teenager kill the last minute of the game by pinning the puck to the boards as 3 helpless Oilers try to gain possession back. How to retrieve a puck….

    Arco:

    You are not going to get many better looks than you did last night…..pulled the parachute going into the corner against Mark Scheifle. Classic….

    Ryan Smyth was two steps ( one step too slow inside Edmonton ) too slow Last year….so Dallas Eakins promotes him to the 1st line.

    Ryan Smyth’s footspeed is so out of touch the speed of the game – it is eerily similar to watching Ryan Whitney last year.

    Jeff Petry looked like he was out of sorts last night….not sure it was a good omem to have our top pairing running around…..By my eye – lots of fires when they were out.

    JJ – looked unreal and seemed to be all over the ice….Hemmer with some sweet dangling.

    Strong game from Gordon. Decent game from acton.

    Overall – team looked pretty good – insert Gagner and RNH and I am not sure how you stop the waves of attacking Oilers…

    Thought Yak was pretty quiet…..

    Jeff Petry looked wild in his own end at times…

  48. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Woodguy: Hope Ferrence and J.Shultz get better, was a gong show at times with them.
    J.Shultz in particular looked like his head was somewhere else at times.

    I wonder if you can say more. I thought they looked fine. But, I wasn’t in tensed watching mode.

    Looks like they nearly broke even on the corsi. I see Bruce really didn’t think much of their game either:

    http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2013/10/02/edmonton-oilers-player-grades-dubnyks-struggles-puck-management-issues-spill-oil/

    esp. J Schultz comes in for a dressing down. just curious what you saw.

  49. Doomoil says:

    cabbiesmacker,

    you’re making the assumption that mact didn’t put out feelers at all when there’s no evidence to support it.

    what we know about grabo: he wanted top 6 guaranteed.
    what we know about the oilers: could not guarantee top 6.

    the failure to upgrade at the center position is a very real problem from this off season but this idea that mactavish sat on his hands and stared at the wall is baffling.

  50. Colonel Obvious says:

    The good of the game is obvious. Hemsky, Perron, and Joensu were the best forwards for the Oilers.

    On the bad side, other than the obvious Dubnyk, I thought Belov looked stiff and slow. J. Schultz was invisible, which for him is a bad thing.

    Some people are on Arcobello for missing the scoring chances. Myself, I think it is a good thing that he had scoring chances.

    On the whole a frustrating game. They should have won this one against a mediocre team with a bad goalie. I hope they don’t miss the playoffs by a point.

  51. spoiler says:

    Woodguy: The 4th line only got 5min 5v5Starting them in the ozone (also saw at least one neutral zone FO) is the best way to minimize their exposure.I thought Eakins handled the 4th line perfectly.

    Agreed. Eakins handled them well.

    I’d liked how Gazdic (and the rest of the 4th) positioned himself last night. And I liked his ability to take and make a pass. He seems to have some hockey sense. But skating and carrying the puck look pretty weak.

  52. denny33 says:

    wheatnoil,

    Out of all the games to complain about the 4th line – especially given the incredible performance of hte 1st line…..

    4th line held there own…..scored a goal even. Hello Arco….

  53. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Doomoil:
    cabbiesmacker,

    you’re making the assumption that mact didn’t put out feelers at all when there’s no evidence to support it.

    what we know about grabo: he wanted top 6 guaranteed.
    what we know about the oilers: could not guarantee top 6.

    the failure to upgrade at the center position is a very real problem from this off season but this idea that mactavish sat on his hands and stared at the wall is baffling.

    Well… we only really have Grabo’s post-buyout press conference and MacT’s words to go on here…

    but I’m not sure we can conclusively say Grabo demanded those things (though it’s a fair bet).

    and, MacT repeatedly said (before and after Gagner’s injury) that he was fine with the C depth and that he wasn’t looking to make any changes or bring anyone in (he may have been blowing smoke mind you). we do have his actions to match his words though. All Summer he avoided alternatives in favor of in-house options. that should be a tell of some kind.

  54. spoiler says:

    My Gord… Are we really going to start using Corsi on a line-by-line or pairing basis within a single game and think it tells us something meaningfull?

  55. Doomoil says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    that’s a fair point, but mactavish didn’t come out and say that right at the beginning of the summer. i’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he did at least the minimum amount of work in contacting the available centers.

    he did a lot of work and improved the team in other areas so i just have a hard time believing that he didn’t also see the lack of depth at center as a problem.

  56. 719 says:

    Looks like Gazdic just played Eager off the team.

  57. Hammers says:

    Proved one thing . Hall back on the wing when RNH is back and Arcobello did well playing with Ebs & Perron . Surprised the number of faceoffs he won . Leave that line alone . If you based this on 1 game I would put Lander between Hall & Hemsky . That won’t happen but when you think on it your trading Smyth for Lander . Belov did well . In fact he should be with Ference and move Justin down with either Nick or Grebs . Smyth getting 5-6 minutes on 4th line & some PK work needs to happen .

  58. striatic says:

    spoiler,

    The positive Corsi could mean that certain Jets lines were bad last night. It could mean certain Oilers lines were good last night. It COULD be meaningful in a number of different ways but teasing out how is impossible until the Oilers perform against some diversity of opposition.

  59. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Doomoil:
    Romulus Apotheosis,

    that’s a fair point, but mactavish didn’t come out and say that right at the beginning of the summer. i’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he did at least the minimum amount of work in contacting the available centers.

    he did a lot of work and improved the team in other areas so i just have a hard time believing that he didn’t also see the lack of depth at center as a problem.

    Oh, I agree. He probably made some calls to other clubs, had his pro scouts look over the FA and waiver options, etc.

    I’m not saying he didn’t kick tires. I’m saying he felt enough security in his own options to not feel the need to force a solution externally. I think that may be a case of him overvaluing his own options.

  60. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler:
    My Gord… Are we really going to start using Corsi on a line-by-line or pairing basis within a single game and think it tells us something meaningfull?

    It’s information. I think one ignores it to their peril. I’m not sure there is any over-interpreting the data here. Though, I think it certainly could appear that way considering there is so little data to discuss and good/bad in tiny samples tend to glare and can be unhelpful.

  61. oliveoilers says:

    Eager on waivers, any takers?

  62. striatic says:

    oliveoilers,

    i’m more interested to see who the Oilers recall to take his press box slot.

  63. justDOit says:

    Not sure who ‘downgoesbrown’ is, but he’s clever:

    Down Goes Brown ‏@DownGoesBrown

    Fire alarm currently going off during the game in Edmonton. It saw terrible hockey being played in Alberta and immediately detected Flames.

  64. GriffCity says:

    At least we can all agree that the game was entertaining. Surely it ended not in our favor, but ya win some ya lose some. The Oilers really have no business losing a 2 goal lead at home especially in the opener where the crowd is electric. I really thought we were going to start running away with it when Hemsky sniped the 4th goal. Unforced turnovers and suspect net minding was the eventual downfall.

    I, like everyone else, LOVED the play of big #6. If this guy can keep up that level of intensity and grit, he will be a force. He could have had 2 or 3 goals easy and isn’t afraid to muck it up in the dirty areas either . Number 1 star for the Oil last night, Jesse Joensuu

    Hemsky, also demonstrated why he is still a valuable scorer and elite play maker. If the guy could just stay healthy for a whole year, anyone who thinks he;s done is dead wrong.

    Perron, kids got some serious hands. Hard to see every little play he does with the puck but i saw him knock a couple down out of the air and turn it into a play and some tricky moves that are highly skilled, I like his play.

    Now for the Bad

    Hall, yes he is a great player but looked out of sync at center, losing draws and forcing the puck too much. He missed the net on any scoring chances he had and his two giveaways led directly to goals.

    Dubnyk, failed to make the routine saves when he had to. Goals 1 and 2 were soft and he didnt make any huge saves either which could outweigh the bad ones. Has to be better

    Smyth, cant play first line minutes. Love him as much as the next guy but he looks spent.

    The Rest

    Eberle, looked pretty average. Can play better

    Yak, same as above

    Arcobello, Has yet to impress me. Had a scoring chance off the stick of Smyth and took about 3 seconds to get his shot off which just wont cut it in the NHL. Have seen him get several chances to score over the last few games which is good, but when he gets those chances he doesn’t shoot hard enough or release quick enough to become a scoring threat.

    All in all, it was a close game and that would be fine if we were playing the hawks or the pens but against a Jets team who isn’t really supposed to be a contender, it didn’t look promising. Of course we are missing our top two centers and we need em.

  65. Spydyr says:

    Lowetide,

    He also played Smyth more minutes then Yak.Not so gold.

  66. G Money says:

    striatic:
    spoiler,

    The positive Corsi could mean that certain Jets lines were bad last night. It could mean certain Oilers lines were good last night. It COULD be meaningful in a number of different ways but teasing out how is impossible until the Oilers perform against some diversity of opposition.

    True enough. In that respect, the game is a single data point, which is why it’s not worth getting too bent out of shape or enthusiastic.

    That said:

    - It *is* a refreshing change from previous season openers, where the team for the most part was badly outplayed (at least by my memory)

    - Winnipeg is one of the teams the Oilers are supposed to be better than this season. Regardless of the actual final score, the fact that we were able to generally outplay a 95% healthy Jets lineup (only Clitsome was missing by my recollection) while without our top two centres, is at least a positive data point, even as it is a single data point.

  67. Woodguy says:

    justDOit:
    Not sure who ‘downgoesbrown’ is, but he’s clever:

    Down Goes Brown ‏@DownGoesBrown

    Fire alarm currently going off during the game in Edmonton. It saw terrible hockey being played in Alberta and immediately detected Flames.

    Excellent comedic hockey writer/blogger, named Sean McIndoe.

    Highly recommend his stuff.

    Had a Globe and Mail column for a while due to the popularity of his blog.

    Writes for Grantland a bit I think.

    Published a book of his posts last year.

    http://www.downgoesbrown.com/

  68. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: It’s information. I think one ignores it to their peril. I’m not sure there is any over-interpreting the data here. Though, I think it certainly could appear that way considering there is so little data to discuss and good/bad in tiny samples tend to glare and can be unhelpful.

    There is a huge difference between what you said, “ignoring information”, and what I said “attributing meaning to the information”.

    striatic: The positive Corsi could mean that certain Jets lines were bad last night. It could mean certain Oilers lines were good last night. It COULD be meaningful in a number of different ways but teasing out how is impossible until the Oilers perform against some diversity of opposition.

    Exactly my point.

    I hope we are not going to continue to analyze this data on a game-by, line-by and pairing-by basis for the rest of the season, but it appears like we are going to do so.

    And it seems like a colossal waste of time and effort when Behind the Net already aggregates the data, and NHL.com already approximates it on a game basis. Far be it from me to advise Parkatti how to spend his game-watching, but If one is going to put in that kind of time and effort, one might as well sit there with a stopwatch.

  69. spoiler says:

    oliveoilers: Eager on waivers, any takers?

    Wow. He’s a much better skater than Gazdic. I’m a little surprised, despite the redundancy of the situation.

  70. Bag of Pucks says:

    Posted yesterday that we’d get 25 games out of Smytty before his legs gave out. Based on last night’s game, I should’ve went more aggressive with the under.

    As far as the silver linings go, silver linings & excuses are for losers. I think Eakins has made it clear the time for excuses are past and the time for results are now. I couldn’t agree more. Taylor Hall is not a rookie anymore. Dubnyk has been in this organization for nine years now. etc.

    The problem with giving players a free pass for poor play (e.g. Dubnyk had a long layoff since his last exhibition game) is that it goes completely against the grain of creating a culture of consistent excellence. If Dubnyk plays like this again the next game, LaBarbera gets at minimum the next 3 starts after that. Home game points are too valuable to squander over brain farts and that is the message Eakins needs to send.

    Btw, the team clearly made the right call on Ference as captain. The post game pressers made it clear that he hates to lose and takes it personally. Hall meanwhile referred to the giveaways in the game not from the standpoint of personal accountability “I” but from the standpoint of the collective “we.” That is evading personal accountability, not leadership.

    Oiler fans have been very patient with this rebuild, but I believe the time has come for us to start expecting results as well. Let’s park the friggin’ silver linings. I’m all for making allowances for bad bounces, injuries, variance, etc. but mental errors like I saw last night – no way.

  71. hunter1909 says:

    Missed last night’s game, thankfully.

    Sooo Lowetide/Eakins running down the most exciting young player in the world? And after he presumably was forced to ‘try’ to play hockey with a 100% washed up old man Ryan Smyth, and Ales Hemsky the player who effortlessly skates through the blue line, past the circles, behind the goal then instantly forgets which fucking city he’s in, let alone what hockey move to try next??

    Lowetide is loyal to his faves, if nothing else. Too bad loyalty to rotten players, and the new coach’s fear of the GM and his cronies equates to another losing season.

    Oh well, and all that.

  72. hunter1909 says:

    PS: Corsi is obviously useful, but wtf is it with the refusal of the NHL to recognise the significance of goals scored vs goals scored against?

    In the soccer world(a sport that’s a thousand times more popular and financially viable than ice hockey is ever likely to be in a million billion light years), ‘goal differential’ as they call it can often mean the difference between whether a team stays in the division/gets relegated to a lower division – and it certainly held up as a primary gauge to break ties in any championship race.

    PPS: Saw a bit of the Leafs game. Fun to see goalies letting in goals again(through their legs etc).

  73. rickithebear says:

    Man: i hate the Bad goals Narrative re Dubnyk.
    when looking at Bad Ga games.4+goals.
    Dubnyk one of best at providing 3G or less games.

    In what world does the team that averaged 30th place and gave up the 2nd most shots.
    Give up less quality chances than CHI, NYR, VCR, BOS to justify dubnyk being equal or better at not having 4+ goals aginst games.

    Yep, 3 of the last cup winners, A cup finalist, give up more chances than our D.
    got to be ADD or crack use.

  74. Bag of Pucks says:

    Ricki, the problem with the Dubnyk/bad goals narrative is that as much as the quantative analysis says it’s not a thing, the qualitative analysis screams otherwise.

  75. Colonel Obvious says:

    And it seems like a colossal waste of time and effort when Behind the Net already aggregates the data, and NHL.com already approximates it on a game basis.Far be it from me to advise Parkatti how to spend his game-watching, but If one is going to put in that kind of time and effort, one might as well sit there with a stopwatch.

    One of my pet peeves is the identification of Corsi with possession and the associated argument that a “stopwatch” would be better. In my opinion this gets the causal relationship all wrong. Possession isn’t a good thing in-itself, it is good because it leads to shots. This talk of stopwatch implies that having this information would be good but this inverses the relationship and mistakes what is good about Corsi. Corsi works because it has shots in it, not because it is a proxy for possession.

    This is why Fenwick is better than Corsi. It has less noise. The Corsi defenders argue that it is better because the higher number of events gives you a larger sample size quicker, however a larger sample size is not better if the numbers themselves are noise.

    Or, once again, the adoption of Corsi depends upon the untrue assumptions that shot attempts are a proxy for possession, and that time of possession is the independent variable that leads to wins. But this is completely backwards.

    So my request to people like Parkatti who are doing the noble grunt work, please start using Fenwick. The smaller number of events make it more difficult to come to conclusions quickly but the data is so much better that those conclusions you come to are far more likely to be valid.

    And whatever you do never use a stopwatch. That would be a giant step backwards.

  76. Radman says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    Ricki, the problem with the Dubnyk/bad goals narrative is that as much as the quantative analysis says it’s not a thing, the qualitative analysis screams otherwise.

    BINGO.

  77. LMHF#1 says:

    hunter1909:
    Missed last night’s game, thankfully.

    Sooo Lowetide/Eakins running down the most exciting young player in the world? And after he presumably was forced to ‘try’ to play hockey with …Ales Hemsky the player who effortlessly skates through the blue line, past the circles, behind the goal then instantly forgets which fucking city he’s in, let alone what hockey move to try next??

    Yeah..you wouldn’t be saying this if you had indeed caught the game last night. Hall was very fortunate to have #83 watching his back.

    Smyth was indeed atrocious though.

  78. Zipdot says:

    The people claiming Hemsky and Arcobello had bad games, or that Arcobello is out of his league because he whiffed on a chance, don’t have very good hockey eyes. Or credibility.

  79. oilswell says:

    Henry: The 80 proof is not a good whiskey. 101 is good, with a characteristic burn. Russells Reserve is very, very good and Rare Breed is excellent.

    Agree with this. I also like Booker’s in the high proof category.

  80. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler: There is a huge difference between what you said, “ignoring information”, and what I said “attributing meaning to the information”.

    Exactly my point.

    I hope we are not going to continue to analyze this data on a game-by, line-by and pairing-by basis for the rest of the season, but it appears like we are going to do so.

    And it seems like a colossal waste of time and effort when Behind the Net already aggregates the data, and NHL.com already approximates it on a game basis.Far be it from me to advise Parkatti how to spend his game-watching, but If one is going to put in that kind of time and effort, one might as well sit there with a stopwatch.

    I can’t follow your first point (it doesn’t help that you’ve quoted things not said).

    There is no incompatibility between these two general maxims: “one ignores [information] to their peril” and one must contextualize information (which I took to be your initial argument, i.e., that one must not over-value a small sample size).

    My comment was merely an attempt to illustrate the compatibility between the two maxims.

    It seems, however, your argument is much stronger than I first took it for. You appear to be saying that the information gleaned from these exercises is not meaningful at all, i.e., not that it offers limited insight, but none at all.

    If that is your opinion, you must also hold that no information is gleaned from this exercise because by definition all information carries meaning, value, knowledge, etc.

    Again, if that is your opinion (I’ll provide that I may have misunderstood you here), I really, strongly disagree with you.

    I find all the single-game efforts (King’s, Staples’, McCurdy’s, Parkatti’s etc.) invaluable. Which is not to say, that one can dismiss the limited context in which they operate. I think we can easily add all the appropriate caveats and still glean worlds of information concerning how a particular game unfolded.

    A couple of points on where I find this information useful:

    1. When I watch the game I miss things. Every bit of information I can get after the fact helps me to form a more complete picture of the game. Unless we wish to write off analysis of single events (say a scoring chance, a goal, a penalty or even a whole game or block of games), I don’t see a strong argument to ignore all data available. To mitigate its meaning vs. sample yes. But not to ignore it.

    2. There is no agreement about how to track in-game play. Staples and the rest all have different methods (what constitutes a “shot attempt”; what constitutes a “scoring chance” etc.). Having multiple, independent points of data collection is highly beneficial towards gleaning a more balanced view of what took place.

    I think, with all points of data, even a corsi number for a whole season, we need to be mindful of the limitations in the data and what it means. However, I think that is very different from declaring a limited piece of information meaningless… which is what it appears you are doing (again, I may have misread you).

  81. supernova says:

    interesting from Mirtle

    http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2013/10/2013-14-nhl-teams-by-height-weight-and.html

    Oilers are almost right at the Average for Height and Weight.

    2 inches and 10,5 pounds separates first to 30th.

  82. cabbiesmacker says:

    Doomoil:
    cabbiesmacker,

    you’re making the assumption that mact didn’t put out feelers at all when there’s no evidence to support it.

    what we know about grabo: he wanted top 6 guaranteed.
    what we know about the oilers: could not guarantee top 6.

    the failure to upgrade at the center position is a very real problem from this off season but this idea that mactavish sat on his hands and stared at the wall is baffling.

    Let me try to word this gently. You want to give MacT credit for what he “might” have been doing that he did not speak about, but this is the same guy that made no bones about announcing, prematurely and stupidly I might added, that both Horcoff and Hemsky were gone.

    Lets just opine that MacT would not be a good poker player ok? His tells are pretty easy to read.

    AND…if Grabovski WAS considered and approached but the Oilers turned away because he was demanding of top 6 time….so what? He’s a lot better C than Sam Gagner is right now. For a lot less money. This is how good teams get better and why the Oilers don’t.

    Oilers C depth was suspect to all but themselves and it’ll probably end up biting them in the ass. Hall is not a C. RNH is. Gagner is not a top 6 C. Grabovski is. Gordon is Gordon…a 3-4.

    Grabovski wasn’t the only option either but hey, Oilers management are smarter than the other 29. They’re so smart they actually believe they could fill from within which might be even more hilarious considering their draft history at anywhere but #1 OV + Eberle.

    When K Lowe is down the road and you can look at an Oiler bench and not see patronage appointments for the unqualified then you’ll know things have turned.

  83. hunter1909 says:

    LMHF#1: Yeah..you wouldn’t be saying this if you had indeed caught the game last night. Hall was very fortunate to have #83 watching his back.

    Smyth was indeed atrocious though.

    I really hate arguing with you. Taylor Hall is probably 100x the talent your guy has been, will be, and I say this notwithstanding the Czechs, you, and Lowetide plus a dwindling gang of followers. This is a basic fact shared by most of the hockey world.

    The fools running the SS Oilers certainly continue to behave like their MO, don’t they? What’s next? A campaign to strip Hall of his captaincy?

  84. LMHF#1 says:

    hunter1909: I really hate arguing with you. Taylor Hall is probably 100x the talent your guy has been, will be, and I say this notwithstanding the Czechs, you, and Lowetide plus a dwindling gang of followers. This is a basic fact shared by most of the hockey world.

    The fools running the SS Oilers continue to behave like their MO, don’t they? What’s next? A campaign to strip Hall of his captaincy?

    Just trying to keep you on the straight and narrow re: last night’s game. He was good. Hall had that 1-in-100 game where you wonder what the hell is wrong. He’ll be back driving the bus next game I’m sure. Have you read recap yet?

  85. hunter1909 says:

    LMHF#1: Just trying to keep you on the straight and narrow re: last night’s game. He was good. Hall had that 1-in-100 game where you wonder what the hell is wrong. He’ll be back driving the bus next game I’m sure. Have you read recap yet?

    Thanks man. You’re one of the few people who post in here that I totally respect, and if I were the coach I’d stick Hemsky with Hall and another of the young uber Oilers, because once they did that and there was serious cool potential instantly forming. It’s just that I saw a bit of the OKC game, and Hall looked terrible there also, and that’s 2 bad games in a row, and unless I’m taking in/direct orders from Kevin Lowe Smyth plays in the bottom 6, permanently, for as long as he plays on the Oilers.

    Smyth even looks old out there. Just like a boxer who ages 20 years in a single round of a boxing match, he’s finished as a hockey force. Just seems weird that I’m alone in saying it.

  86. Bag of Pucks says:

    If we’re raking MacT over the coals for not acquiring a player in hypothetical transactions, I’m reserving my virtual ire for him failing to theoretically land Tim Thomas – not Mikael Grabovski.

    That said, if you need a guy to play the character of the stereotypical office fondler, Grabovski is definitely the go-to name for that role.

    “He did what? He grabbed your boob?! Oh, that Grabovski, he’s a scamp!!!” ; )

  87. hunter1909 says:

    I used to have a theory: K Lowe and MacT we never more than complimentary players on a dynasty, and as such were/are jealous that they weren’t anywhere near as good and/or felt they received the recognition of say, Glenn Anderson.

    Since I returned to following the Oilers, they’ve always been more or less a lunchpail team of pluggers. Skilled flawed players meanwhile, drafted, like Schremp were simply allowed to wither and die on the vine, while third raters and no hopers like Thorenson/Toby Peterson were held up as the ‘right’ kind of Oiler acceptable to these spear carriers.

    While I feel MacT so far has been a pretty good GM, I’m hardly prepared to accept bone headedness from this California Golden Seals level franchise. Naming another player than Hall captain bothers me, as does playing Hall with Smyth+Hemsky. It stinks of that good-old-boys 2007 draft.

  88. Colonel Obvious says:

    By Fenwick the Oilers best players were Joensu and Arcobello both over 70%, Petry, Smid and Belov were all over 50%.

    Worse players Ference (38%) and N Schultz (27% in a small sample size, nothing happens when he is on the ice).

    For the Jets Setoguchi, Wheeler, and Enstrom stand out on the positive side while Postma, Stuart, Slater, and Frolik really struggled.

    http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-10-01-jets-oilers

    One problem with the individual data is it may be gross data and include special teams.

  89. RMGS says:

    Colonel Obvious: Corsi works because it has shots in it, not because it is a proxy for possession.

    Yeah, I also think we should talk about attempted shot differential (whether Corsi or Fenwick) in terms of its correlation and predictive relation to scoring chance, goal, and win/loss differentials.

    That said, possession, if effectively tracked (as done in top soccer leagues, though not with stopwatches), can be used to test and pose hypotheses about what contributes to winning. Does possession correlate with shot attempts? If so, what kind of possession (e.g. carrying the puck over the blue line or dumping it in)? What about a particular type of possession tactic generates more shot attempts (thus, scoring chances, goals, wins)?

    For example, a recent study in soccer debunked the myth that a strong possession game leads to more wins in part because it tires the opposition more. So, ‘tiring out the opposition’ in soccer becomes a less convincing argument for using a possession game to generate more wins. Of course, we can’t come to this ‘conclusion’ without being able to effectively track possession.

  90. hunter1909 says:

    I’ll put it another way: if anyone can fuck up having THREE CONSECUTIVE FIRST OVERALL PICKS, and keeping the team in the darkest parts of hockey purgatory it’s KLowe’s gang.

  91. G Money says:

    Colonel Obvious: One of my pet peeves is the identification of Corsi with possession and the associated argument that a “stopwatch” would be better. In my opinion this gets the causal relationship all wrong. Possession isn’t a good thing in-itself, it is good because it leads to shots.

    This is why Fenwick is better than Corsi. It has less noise. The Corsi defenders argue that it is better because the higher number of events gives you a larger sample size quicker, however a larger sample size is not better if the numbers themselves are noise.

    I fully agree with you about the foolishness of arguing for a stopwatch measure of possession over shots. The latter matters, the first does not (except to the extent it leads to shots).

    I don’t buy the Fenwick argument though, and never have.

    If you’re going to argue from a signal processing point of view (“Corsi has more noise”), I will counter with the argument that the added noise is “non-correlative over the long-term”. That is to say, within a single game or a few games, the noise might cancel the value of the larger sample size, but over many games, the noise cancels out and the signal therefore becomes stronger. (This concept is quite close to what my company uses in its business).

    To put it in hockey instead of signal processing terms: shots matter, even if they’re blocked.

  92. G Money says:

    hunter1909: It’s just that I saw a bit of the OKC game, and Hall looked terrible there also, and that’s 2 bad games in a row, and unless I’m taking in/direct orders from Kevin Lowe Smyth plays in the bottom 6, permanently, for as long as he plays on the Oilers.

    Smyth even looks old out there.

    I said from quite early in the preseason that I thought that Hall did not look particularly good at C.

    I was roundly criticized for daring to say so e.g. “Did you even see the game? Hall and Hemsky were magic”. Which misses my point, which is that both Hall and Hemsky are uber-talented and you expect them to make things happen. But I thought Hall was far less effective as a C, and in fact, the things he did make happen often happened because he was acting like a winger on the play.

    I thought last night, against genuine NHL calibre opposition, really highlighted that. That’s not to say Hall won’t be effective playing C, but I would say unequivocally that he’s not there yet.

    But in that regard … Smyth was not the problem.

  93. hunter1909 says:

    G Money: That’s not to say Hall won’t be effective playing C, but I would say unequivocally that he’s not there yet.

    I thought Hall looked great at C in pre’C’son, lol. He’s insanely talented, and imo has enough Messier in him to excel. I probably didn’t watch him as closely as you did, to be honest.

    Thing is, since 2001 or whereabouts, the franchise has a great long tradition of putting it’s most talented players in a position to FAIL. And those in control are essentially the exact same gang (aside from a pair of old timey trainers that got sacrificed by those cowering behind the bench and in the front office).

    They could still manage to throw away everything, like idiots.

  94. M Parkatti says:

    spoiler,

    Each passing game will give us a clearer and clearer sense as to the shot differential of the team and of specific players that comprise it. You can’t draw conclusions yet. But the point of looking at the game data is that it does reflect a game story of what actually happened on the ice in terms of shot metrics. You can’t use that game’s data and say, hey, “Taylor Hall sucks!”, but you can use the data to say something like, “Taylor Hall’s line had a tougher time in this game than the other lines”, and then follow the logic to propose reasons why/how. I’m not too worried about a 41% Corsi game for him. I would be worried if I saw a 10% Corsi game from someone.

    I think you’re confusing compiling the numbers with drawing ill-gotten conclusions from the numbers, which I’m not sure many people are doing here.

  95. Bulging Twine says:

    MacTavish certainly does makes quicker decisions than Tambellini!

    Gazdic, gets one game, boom, Eager is out. Decision made.

  96. Bag of Pucks says:

    G Money, I think you have to stay committed to the Hall at C experiment because A) injuries currently leave you no choice & B) Gagner’s downsides at C re: faceoffs and dzone coverage will always leave you wanting more

    The errors I saw from Hall last night were not positional errors as much as they were what Eakins described as ‘bad habits’ Those late cross ice passes are low percentage forays nine times out of ten and it’s exactly those kind of systemic behavioral patterns that Eakins will unfortunately likely end up spending the first third of the season eliminating. People want this team to go from bad to good, when the reality is, they need to go from bad to mediocre first – with the mediocre being the elimination of systemic self defeating errors that result in home teams gassing a two goal lead in the third (i.e. the actions of a BAD team).

    What really stood out for me in last night’s game is how much players like Ference and Gordon, who are coming from well coached teams, stand out in comparison to the born and bred Oilers. They’re quite frequently the lone beacons of sanity amidst positional chaos. J Schultz in particular is going to make Ference’s head explode.

  97. Zipdot says:

    hunter1909: You’re one of the few people who post in here that I totally respect

    That’s not very nice, Hunter…

  98. wheatnoil says:

    Bulging Twine:
    MacTavish certainly does makes quicker decisions than Tambellini!

    Gazdic, gets one game, boom, Eager is out. Decision made.

    I wonder if that was a move to clear up as much cap room as possible. There didn’t seem to be any pressure with regard to waiving Eager right away. Maybe they thought waiving him now would increase the likelihood of someone picking him up and clearing a contract? The move would give the Oilers almost an extra million in cap room but leave them essentially no healthy reserve players and certainly no healthy reserve forwards. There’s always the possibility of MacT clearing some cap room for a move… dare to dream?

  99. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I can’t follow your first point (it doesn’t help that you’ve quoted things not said).There is no incompatibility between these two general maxims: “one ignores [information] to their peril” and one must contextualize information (which I took to be your initial argument, i.e., that one must not over-value a small sample size).My comment was merely an attempt to illustrate the compatibility between the two maxims.It seems, however, your argument is much stronger than I first took it for. You appear to be saying that the information gleaned from these exercises is not meaningful at all, i.e., not that it offers limited insight, but none at all.If that is your opinion, you must also hold that no information is gleaned from this exercise because by definition all information carries meaning, value, knowledge, etc.Again, if that is your opinion (I’ll provide that I may have misunderstood you here), I really, strongly disagree with you.I find all the single-game efforts (King’s, Staples’, McCurdy’s, Parkatti’s etc.) invaluable. Which is not to say, that one can dismiss the limited context in which they operate. I think we can easily add all the appropriate caveats and still glean worlds of information concerning how a particular game unfolded.A couple of points on where I find this information useful:1. When I watch the game I miss things. Every bit of information I can get after the fact helps me to form a more complete picture of the game. Unless we wish to write off analysis of single events (say a scoring chance, a goal, a penalty or even a whole game or block of games), I don’t see a strong argument to ignore all data available. To mitigate its meaning vs. sample yes. But not to ignore it.2. There is no agreement about how to track in-game play. Staples and the rest all have different methods (what constitutes a “shot attempt”; what constitutes a “scoring chance” etc.). Having multiple, independent points of data collection is highly beneficial towards gleaning a more balanced view of what took place.I think, with all points of data, even a corsi number for a whole season, we need to be mindful of the limitations in the data and what it means. However, I think that is very different from declaring a limited piece of information meaningless… which is what it appears you are doing (again, I may have misread you).

    I’m beginning to think mis-reading is a particular talent of yours. Or maybe your talent is simply to be argumentative.

    You equated my warning abut imputing meaning into small sample size information with “one ignores information at their peril”. For a guy who apparently loves the semantical argument, this is pretty disingenous.

  100. Colonel Obvious says:

    G Money: I fully agree with you about the foolishness of arguing for a stopwatch measure of possession over shots. The latter matters, the first does not (except to the extent it leads to shots).

    I don’t buy the Fenwick argument though, and never have.

    If you’re going to argue from a signal processing point of view (“Corsi has more noise”), I will counter with the argument that the added noise is “non-correlative over the long-term”. That is to say, within a single game or a few games, the noise might cancel the value of the larger sample size, but over many games, the noise cancels out and the signal therefore becomes stronger. (This concept is quite close to what my company uses in its business).

    To put it in hockey instead of signal processing terms: shots matter, even if they’re blocked.

    I believe that this has been studied and that in the long term Fenwick correlates better with goals than Corsi. Hence, in signal processing terms, the blocked shots do not matter.

    RMGS,

    That’s interesting.

  101. G Money says:

    Bag of Pucks: G Money, I think you have to stay committed to the Hall at C experiment because A) injuries currently leave you no choice & B) Gagner’s downsides at C re: faceoffs and dzone coverage will always leave you wanting more

    The errors I saw from Hall last night were not positional errors as much as they were what Eakins described as ‘bad habits’ Those late cross ice passes are low percentage forays nine times out of ten and it’s exactly those kind of systemic behavioral patterns that Eakins will unfortunately likely end up spending the first third of the season eliminating.

    I’m not suggesting that Hall at C is a bad idea – as you say, what choice do we have? I’m really just saying that last night’s results were not that surprising, I thought there was at least a non-zero risk it would happen once the bullets started flying for real.

    And as far as the bad habits go, yes I agree, a lot of the ‘seen him bad’ issues last night were not positional mistakes. I do think it’s true however that you can get away with those things much moreso as a winger than you can as a C, and that is part of Hall’s learning curve.

    The real reason Eakins banned donuts: he’s already got too many things with holes in the middle.

  102. Zipdot says:

    hunter1909: I used to have a theory: K Lowe and MacT we never more than complimentary players on a dynasty, and as such were/are jealous that they weren’t anywhere near as good and/or felt they received the recognition of say, Glenn Anderson.

    Kevin Lowe:
    - 1st round selection, went straight from being English speaking captain of QMJHL team to the NHL
    - 7 all star appearances
    - 6 cups
    - a Canada cup
    - shutdown defenseman with 432 points
    - top 75 all time points for d-men
    - 17th all time +/- with +252
    - wore A on all 6 cups

  103. Lucinius says:

    Hemsky had a good game last night. Inside the top six (Hall, Hemsky, Smyth, Eberle, Perron, Arcobello) he had the best game. He got two points, one of which was a beautiful goal, created a number of chances to score and back-checked hard and was good on the penalty kill.

    Unfortunately, Hall had one of his rare horrendous games and Smyth had a game that pandered to every Smyth critic in existence. Re-watching the goals against that Hemsky was on the ice for… I didn’t see a single goal against that he made a mistake on. He did his part and he did it well.

    The second line took forever to get going and then couldn’t cash and struggled a bit defensively.

    The third line was real good. Yakupov was actually the worst player on that line last night and it wasn’t close. Joensuu just had one of those games that usually result in a hat trick, Gordon was solid and offensively aware. Yakupov needed a better game.

    The bottom six.. outside of some errors by Action in the defensive zone I didn’t have a problem with them. Gadzic can fight and play, it seems (though we need a larger sample size).

    As for the defense.. we saw shades of last season with Smid/Petry, where Petry had some mistakes and Smid was having to try and clean up after him.

    Ference and J. Schultz had some good times.. and some real bad times. One of the goals against they were primary contributors by both making the wrong decisions around the net.

    Third pairing was likely the worst. N. Schultz looked like a 6th d at times that was struggling to earn his spot. Belov was more up and down, and quite frankly looked like he had the jitters. Could be trouble if he doesn’t settle down. However, I think there were some bad match-ups that exposed that third pairing a bit.

    Dubnyk, like Hall, had a stinker of a game. Unlike Hall.. his are more common. One of the goals against that he ‘should have had’ actually wasn’t so bad — it was going to miss the net, then deflected off Belov’s skate to pick top corner. The other two? Should have had, especially the Trouba goal.

  104. spoiler says:

    M Parkatti: Each passing game will give us a clearer and clearer sense as to the shot differential of the team and of specific players that comprise it. You can’t draw conclusions yet

    Each passing game doesn’t… some games can confuse the data, and some clarify. However, I understand your general point as it is the point that I am making (obvious to everyone but Rom apparently).

    M Parkatti: You can’t use that game’s data and say, hey, “Taylor Hall sucks!”, but you can use the data to say something like, “Taylor Hall’s line had a tougher time in this game than the other lines”, and then follow the logic to propose reasons why/how.

    All due respect but this is drawing conclusions, which you said a few sentences earlier is something we cannot do.

    M Parkatti: I think you’re confusing compiling the numbers with drawing ill-gotten conclusions from the numbers, which I’m not sure many people are doing here.

    Not in the least. I’m merely confused because there already is a site that compiles the information, effort-free. Is there some issue with the data there? If not, why are you doing this?

    Am I also wrong in believing that the data you are compiling on a game-by-game basis is going to be analyzed and interpreted on a game-by-game basis (as well as the aggregate, which we already have, without your considerable efforts)?

  105. Ryan says:

    Zipdot:
    The people claiming Hemsky and Arcobello had bad games, or that Arcobello is out of his league because he whiffed on a chance, don’t have very good hockey eyes.Or credibility.

    Don’t get me wrong, Hemsky had a nice goal and he certainly wasn’t the problem BUT he also wasn’t part of the solution either really. Parkatti’s numbers have Hemsky on a line that got crushed on the shot clock. In fairness, Hall was lost at sea playing centre and 94 looks done.

    Arcobello centered a line with arguably the two best available wingers on the team (excluding Hall of course).

    While their Parkatti numbers look pretty good, by eye they didn’t seem to do much tough sledding in terms of zone starts or opposition. Also by eye, I think they played a lot with Smid / Petry which is a huge boost too.

    Other than Eberle and Arco getting an assist on a PPG, that line didn’t accomplish much in the game given the push that line got.

    However, let’s pile on Taylor Hall today. I’d have to slice the toi data, but I think his line face the toughs mostly with behindtheshed / belov and ference / j schultz.

  106. G Money says:

    Colonel Obvious: I believe that this has been studied and that in the long term Fenwick correlates better with goals than Corsi. Hence, in signal processing terms, the blocked shots do not matter.

    - The correlation is only marginally better (which is why Fenwick proposed it in the first place). GIven the inherent bias in the statistic (see next point), it should be *a lot* better and it is not.

    - Fenwick is a biased statistic relative to Corsi. Not sure what the name is, “outcome bias” is probably the closest you can get. Basically, Fenwick as a statistic magically includes ineffectively blocked shots (e.g. if a shot was blocked but went off the blocker and scored, or if a shot was blocked but went on net), yet magically excludes effectively blocked shots i.e. that did not then end up on net. This makes the statistic look more valid, and improves the correlation. That’s a “fake”, though. In fact there is *no way* to know a priori whether a shot about to be taken will be effectively blocked, or end up on net or in the goal. What matters is that the shooting team was in a position to take a shot and did.

    - So Fenwick’s appearance of higher correlation is false. Corsi is a better statistic.

    - If you truly believe Fenwick is better than Corsi, you should actually eschew them both and stick with actual SOG (the same criticism re: blocked shots also applies to missed shots).

    Include them all (Corsi) or exclude them all (SOG) but to argue that some partial methodology that excludes valid data with no a priori ability to determine which data should be excluded weakens the validity.

  107. RMGS says:

    Zipdot: went straight from being English speaking captain of QMJHL team to the NHL

    Don’t want to draw away attention from those six cups (SIX!), but the Lachute native is fluent in French as well. :)

  108. sliderule says:

    I don’t think you can excuse Hall by saying that his problems last night were because he was playing center.In his own zone he held his own and his FO number was good.
    When he plays wing he tends to roam so playing center suits his regular game and tends to put the puck on his stick more.The problems he has at center are the same ones he has at wing.His nature is to try to use his speed to try to beat defenders.That may work one on one but one on two or three they just wait and let him skate into coverage and take the puck away.The weak or errant pass that he forces creating turnovers are another example of not looking for safe play.Those two tendencies were the reason Team Canada coaches benched him and limited his ice time.
    If Renney and RK had made him accountable we wouldn’t be talking about this.It sounds like Eakins is going to make him accountable so if Hall changes his behavior the oil will get a player who can lead them out of the wilderness.

  109. G Money says:

    Ryan: However, let’s pile on Taylor Hall today. I’d have to slice the toi data, but I think his line face the toughs mostly with behindtheshed / belov and ference / j schultz.

    Not sure anyone is piling on Taylor Hall. He played a pretty lousy game. He usually plays the toughs, and he usually tilts the ice in a good way, not a bad way.

    Nothing wrong with discussing that – as fans we want to understand why our best player didn’t look so good in the season opener. If last nights Hall & Dubnyk are representative of what we’ll see the rest of the year, we might as well start preparing for another #1 pick.

    Unless you mean the broadcast crew, in which case, yeah they were piling on, and yeah, a lynch mob is probably in order!

  110. Colonel Obvious says:

    G Money,

    I didn’t know that and will have to consider it. However, in addition to the correlation test, Fenwick makes greater rational sense. While shot quality may not be discernible on a large scale, blocked shots are. Some teams block more shots than others by design and skill which Corsi doesn’t take into account.

    Consider this rational test. A hit post counts as a missed shot. This is a lot closer to a goal than a blocked shot. What is true on a macro scale must be also true on a micro scale or you risk spurious correlations.

  111. jake70 says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    Btw, the team clearly made the right call on Ference as captain. The post game pressers made it clear that he hates to lose and takes it personally. Hall meanwhile referred to the giveaways in the game not from the standpoint of personal accountability “I” but from the standpoint of the collective “we.” That is evading personal accountability, not leadership.

    Did you listen to all Hall’s comments?

    from Oilers website….

    “….myself included, we have to manage the puck a little bit better, I had a couple of tough turnovers there in the 3rd period…….”

  112. FastOil says:

    G Money,

    Everything I’ve read says Corsi is better short term but Fenwick correlates more closely to winning the larger the sample. It’s too bad we don’t have Hawerchuk and Ferrari blogging much or at all anymore who could tear these things apart properly. I miss that.

  113. denny33 says:

    Lucinius,

    Great assessment – captures my view of the game as well.

    Regarding Taylor Hall – some here seem to dismiss this as a bad game particularly playing out of position. Meanwhile – his head coach ( without naming him ) is talking about ‘bad habits’.

    Definition of Habit – a usual way of behaving : something that a person does often in a regular and repeated way

    Taylor Hall – has some bad habits – and those are the same bad habits he had playing LW.

    This is not an indictment of Taylor Hall’s play from the game last night – it is a clear recognition of a significant gap in his game. Most players have gaps in their game but Taylor keeps making that same mistake ( habit ) of 1 on 3 rushes, gross on the rush turnovers, etc, etc,

    Many coaches have referred to this – including Ralph K. In fact, insinuated his young core players at times were not listening.

    Taylor Hall is in his 4th year now in the NHL. Those bad habits Eakins referenced have been evident since Taylor’s FIRST NHL game. And they are still present today….

  114. Bag of Pucks says:

    jake70: Did you listen to all Hall’s comments?

    from Oilers website….

    “….myself included, we have to manage the puck a little bit better, I had a couple of tough turnovers there in the 3rd period…….”

    Thought I had, but clearly it was just an extract. Glad to hear it.

    That said, these born and bred Oilers are sure getting good at rationalizing these losses with the tired old tagline that they’ll be better next time out. Common theme in those pressers.

    Fack, I’m tired of these losers making excuses for themselves. It’s like listening to a bunch of alkies swear that their 10th trip to rehab is going be the one that gets it done.

  115. bookje says:

    Fighting in the NHL – A Logical Proposal.

    First, lets clarify the rational put forward for fighting. Fighting is said to be a means of self policing beyond that provided by the formal refing system. It allows teams to create an incentive for good behaviour (i.e. not spearing each other or not making dangerous hits, etc) beyond that of the formal reffing system which is limited in its ability to see all incidents and in the types of penalties applied (minors, majors, misconducts, and suspensions) which are not seen to be as effective as the penalty administered through a fight (i.e. getting beaten up). Additionally, there is evidence that these kinds of fights contribute to the enjoyment of watching fighting and as such contribute to the overall revenue of the league.

    So, accepting that the enforcement argument is true, there is the risk of more serious injuries, such as that which we saw in Montreal the other day that nobody wants to see, and there are also cumulative effects of being punched in the head with no forms of protection. As such, there are costs to the game in this form of policing that may manifest themselves through lawsuits in the future (see the NFL) or through lost revenues from fans (some people don’t like seeing people become brain damaged – it makes them squeamish).

    So, I have a proposal that can address many of the issues with fighting without removing the enforcement mechanism from the game. It involves some rule changes around fighting.

    As it stands now, if Player A wants to fight Player B, he either approaches him and challenges him or he simply starts hitting him and then the two engage in a fight on the ice. However, the equipment they are wearing and their location makes them particularly vulnerable to long term injury along with the desired short term pain (the goal of fighting as enforcement). So, the solution is simple – ‘The Glove Slap Rule’. The glove slap rule is as follows At any moment during or after play a player may skate up to another player and slap him with a glove, upon this happening, the player who received the slap has three options: a – proceed to the combat box where the two combatants will enter into combat, b – designate another player currently on the ice to undertake combat in place of the player, or c – receive a game misconduct for cowardliness.

    Once combatants have been identified, the two move off the ice into a special box about the size of two penalty boxes. This box is padded and has a rubber floor to prevent injury. The box would be designed with a number of protected cameras to provide outstanding views of the combat. The two fighters quickly put on boxing gloves or specially designed headgear (i.e less than 30 seconds to outfit themselves) and then proceed to battle with one another until one give up or the combat referee calls off the match.

    In this case, the offending player or his ‘enforcer’ linemate is subjected to the full short term risk of combat (getting hit still hurts even with gloves), but the risk of long term harm is minimized. The fans get a wonderfully televised fight to watch. A bit of time is lost to getting set up, but it is minimal. The Glove Slap Rule preserves the notion of enforcement of respect in the game while preventing long term injury and as such, it solves the problem.

    I know that hockey is a game of emotion and some will argue that players won’t be able to restrain themselves for the glove slap and set up, but even in situations where players are full of rage, I have never seen a player spear another player in the face (for example), they limit their attack to the socially acceptable act of punching one another, so I think it is reasonable to suggest that once the new system is established as a norm, players will conform.

    Now, some will argue that this is totally stupid. For the record, I would agree with them, but I would add that doing the exact same thing on the ice surface is even stupider though.

  116. rickithebear says:

    Colonel Obvious: One of my pet peeves is the identification of Corsi with possession and the associated argument that a “stopwatch” would be better.In my opinion this gets the causal relationship all wrong.Possession isn’t a good thing in-itself, it is good because it leads to shots.This talk of stopwatch implies that having this information would be good but this inverses the relationship and mistakes what is good about Corsi.Corsi works because it has shots in it, not because it is a proxy for possession.

    This is why Fenwick is better than Corsi.It has less noise.The Corsi defenders argue that it is better because the higher number of events gives you a larger sample size quicker, however a larger sample size is not better if the numbers themselves are noise.

    Or, once again, the adoption of Corsi depends upon the untrue assumptions that shot attempts are a proxy for possession, and that time of possession is the independent variable that leads to wins.But this is completely backwards.

    So my request to people like Parkatti who are doing the noble grunt work, please start using Fenwick.The smaller number of events make it more difficult to come to conclusions quickly but the data is so much better that those conclusions you come to are far more likely to be valid.

    And whatever you do never use a stopwatch.That would be a giant step backwards.

    We talk procession;
    I have tryied to express it it in so many ways.
    But this covers it’s basics.

    What do we know
    145 phase control plays
    Aproximatly 57 Faceoffs leading to procession
    88 waves of procession off of puck turnover.

    In the game what do we try to do.

    1.Gain procession
    pocession% = team Pocession/total Pocessions.

    2.Try to enter zone
    Entry %: = successful entry/% pocession
    A won faceoff and turned over puck in Ozone is step 1 & 2 all in One.

    3.Try to direct the puck at net
    corsi% = Corsi/Successful entry

    4.Do our best to insure the directed puck gets to the net .
    Shot% = Shots/corsi

    5.Direct the puck in the best way to score
    shooting % = goals/shots

    we are looking for overall goal %= goals/Pocession

    Goals =(((((Total Pocesson * pocession%) * Entry%) * Corsi%) * Shot%) * Shooting%)

    Cannot be anymore clear about were Corsi stands in the understanding.

    now each ratio is a more complex break down but

    Behind teh net gives us Corsi, Shots, Goals, and Zone based FO procession.
    we lack Free flow pocession and entry rates.

  117. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler: I’m beginning to think mis-reading is a particular talent of yours.Or maybe your talent is simply to be argumentative.

    You equated my warning abut imputing meaning into small sample size information with “one ignores information at their peril”.For a guy who apparently loves the semantical argument, this is pretty disingenous.

    I honestly can’t follow your line of thought here. If you have no wish to make yourself clearer to me, fine, but I’m certainly not trying to draw you into an argument for argument’s sake.

    Again, it doesn’t help that you have misread me. I tried to make myself more clear in my response, but I will try again.

    I didn’t equate your statement about anything with “one ignores information at their peril.” In fact, if you re-read this exchange you will see (and I repeated myself on this point) that I took the opposite view initially, i.e., I took you to be following a very general and worthy maxim about drawing conclusions with small sample sizes. I simply wished to add that this maxim is not in conflict with taking information for what it is, hence: “one ignores information at their peril.”

    Nowhere did I say you were guilty of ignoring information. I was merely adding one good rule of thumb to another. The way things usually go around here. Moreover, in my response I tried to make that even more clear by giving a account on how I initially read your comment and what my response was intended to do.

    In that response, I also acknowledged that I may have misread your comment as you seem to be arguing that this exercise is a complete waste of time, rather than that it is in need of contextualization. (BTW. I have no idea why acknowledging you may have misread something and trying to engage that person on their own terms is so fraught for you… it seems the most productive and amicable way to proceed IMO). How is either trying to sort your position out, or arguing with it (whatever it may be) disingenuous?

    I frankly don’t understand either what your position is on the matter or why you have such a problem with the way I’ve engaged you on the matter.

    ———–

    spoiler: Each passing game doesn’t… some games can confuse the data, and some clarify. However, I understand your general point as it is the point that I am making (obvious to everyone but Rom apparently).

    But as your next section to Parkatti shows, you aren’t making the same point as him. You appear to only agree with him insofar as he believes our inferences should be limited based on minute data.

    The two of you disagree strongly about how big the limit ought to be. And, yes, this is where I was quite confused as I believed you merely held that we must be cautious, now, however, it appears you are content to break the maxim I thought universal earlier (“one ignores information at their peril”)

    spoiler: All due respect but this is drawing conclusions, which you said a few sentences earlier is something we cannot do.

    But this is absurd unless you believe that provisional conclusions either simply can’t be made or are fruitless.

    Parkatti is clearly taking the line that one can draw provisional conclusions about an event while acknowledging that the limitations built into the data. This seems a pretty straightforward empirical premise to follow.

    We constantly draw conclusions provisionally as we concomitantly revise those conclusions as more information presents itself.

    —-
    I sorry this is so long and terribly tortuous. I’m just trying to sort this out as clearly as possible.

  118. M Parkatti says:

    spoiler: Each passing game doesn’t… some games can confuse the data, and some clarify.However, I understand your general point as it is the point that I am making (obvious to everyone but Rom apparently).

    I’m not going to continue arguing a pretty basic point here. The accumulation of data does give us a better idea about teams and players. Not sure WTF you’re on about here.

    All due respect but this is drawing conclusions, which you said a few sentences earlier is something we cannot do.

    All due respect, you’re totally missing what I’m saying here. You can’t adjudge someone’s true talent level based on one game. But the shots can tell you what happened in that game. Two totally different concepts, and if you can’t grasp that, we’re done here.

    Not in the least. I’m merely confused because there already is a site that compiles the information, effort-free. Is there some issue with the data there?If not, why are you doing this?

    Am I also wrong in believing that the data you are compiling on a game-by-game basis is going to be analyzed and interpreted on a game-by-game basis (as well as the aggregate, which we already have, without your considerable efforts)?

    What makes you think compiling this data takes considerable effort? I wrote a macro that grabs it in about 10 seconds. I like having it on my local machine in full detail so I can run my own customized analysis of it, however the hell I want, without someone else’s interface to get in the way. Some of my graphs provide information that you cannot find at other sites.

    And who pissed in your corn flakes anyways? I go to the effort of posting it because people seem to like reading it and it adds to the conversation. If you don’t like what I’m doing, I invite you to ignore it. I really couldn’t care less.

  119. mc79hockey says:

    @Spoiler

    In general, I’m with you on the limited value of the drill down stuff. There are a lot of bounces that come into play in things and you can play pretty well and have a red number at the end of the night becuase you didn’t get the breaks. I went through this last year with Michael when he thought Krueger should have matched his lines differently against Zetterberg/Datsyuk. I didn’t think there was enough in the data to make a conclusion and it bothers me, to a certain extent, that Michael does because I don’t think that it’s good statistical practice and when people who know better do this stuff, it kind of makes everyone look bad. That said, I like to look at these things, if only to check my own observations during the course of a game. I’m not sure in the value much beyond that though.

    As far as looking at numbers early – I’m interested in big swings. Like with the Oilers this year. If guys are beating their best 10 game chunk in the first 10 games this year Corsi-wise, I think that that probably tells us something and I’d be more comfortable expecting good things. That’s only big swings though.

  120. hunter1909 says:

    Zipdot: That’s not very nice, Hunter…

    If I wrote it the way you’re getting it, maybe.

    LoudmouthHemskyfan is a cool cat.

    Zipdot: Kevin Lowe:
    - 1st round selection, went straight from being English speaking captain of QMJHL team to the NHL
    - 7 all star appearances
    - 6 cups
    - a Canada cup
    - shutdown defenseman with 432 points
    - top 75 all time points for d-men
    - 17th all time +/- with +252
    - wore A on all 6 cups

    I think you’ve made my original argument. Kevin Lowe was an extremely good if not great defenceman, and MacTavish was a brilliant shut down centreman: But compared to the original ‘Big 5′ they still pale in comparison – anyway it’s all just a wack theory, made during some very bleak times Mr. Lowe.

  121. nycoil says:

    I was pessimistic going into the start of this season, but came away from the game a lot more optimistic.
    1) Eakins: Listened to his presser. He was on top of every issue. Perfect. As long as he can convey that message to the troops and get them to buy in, we’ll be fine. Love his analysis and candor.

    2) Hall: He is going to be fine. Love that Eakins kept running him out there after a couple of turnovers and played him 23 minutes. We’ve got to ride the horses. He has arrived as a player. I think first game adrenaline had him pressing a bit too much and trying to impress in the middle. He just needs to back off a tad and let the game come to him, like Hemsky did on his goal (the way he slowed down, took his time to deke two defenders was sublime. Hope he can keep it up). Hall, by contrast was trying the full-speed toe drag again, and putting himself in harm’s way a few times. He just needs to slow down and pick his spots, make the high percentage passes/plays and he is going to be fine. His effort back-checking was good to see.

    3) Dubnyk. It’s the same issue with him. I think he does better the more pucks he sees, but he gives up one stoppable goal per game (last night I think he had three he should have stopped). He will be better, but he isn’t going to steal too many games for us this year. That’s okay, so long as he can be solid. Usually his weakness is high blocker side, so I think he’ll be fine on those glove hand misses he had last night. He’ll get better as the year goes on. I like that he held himself accountable on those bad goals, but the body language on a couple of screened shots was a bit poor. I think with the scramble D, there’s some ironing out to be done on shooting lanes and visibility for the goalie due to our own men screening him.

    4) Puck possession may work better on the road than at home due to Rexall ice just getting worse and worse. I feel like we have to score early on home ice because late, pucks are going to hop over sticks or bounce, the wrong way, etc., when we are pressing to tie like we were late. That bad ice favours grind -it-out teams late in periods more than puck possession.

    5) Joensuu and Gazdic: Hopefully they can keep this up just enough to ensure we stop wasting time and assets chasing the coke machine unicorn all year. Liked Joensuu going after Buff to stick up for himself and Eberle without crossing the line.

    6) When RNH and Gagner return, having the guys like Hall and Smyth play out of their comfort level in the 15 games to start the year is going to pay dividends down the line. Our line combination possibilities are going to be outstanding and give Eakins so many options… Hall between Gagner and Yakupov, for example, while Perron and Eberle flank RNH..

    7) The lessons learned from coughing up this lead last night and learning you have to keep it simple, focus for 60mins, and that this is the NHL and you can’t hand your opponents “fruit baskets” are going to make us a better team. I’m glad we didn’t win in spite of all the bad habits. This loss STINGS, and hopefully Coach and the boys aren’t going to want to relive that again.

    PS… Love Hemmer!

  122. godot10 says:

    1) Hemsky scored a nice goal, but the dangles really only work now against Eastern Conference teams, who haven’t seen him on a regular basis. The Jets are still more Eastern Conference than Western Conference. They haven’t seen much of Hemsky. Against the Western Conference, most of that dangling will go for naught.

    2) Ladd, Little, Wheeler is one the most solid even strength lines in the league. It is hardly surprising that Smyth-Hall-Hemsky with Ference-JSchultz fared miserably against them. At home, you really have to give Gordon two good wingers to take on a line like that.

    3) Hall best position will always be wing. Hall’s strength is his attacking instinct. In today’s NHL, a centre has to play with more defensive awareness than a winger, and thus, playing centre will take away the thing that most makes Taylor Hall, Taylor Hall. On wing, one will just have to tweak Hall’s game to make him a two way stud. To make him a solid (and mediocre) centre, one will eliminate any potential for greatness.

  123. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    bookje: ‘The Glove Slap Rule’

    “Corky St. Clair: What the city council did was really… give me a challenge, and it’s a challenge that I am going to… accept. It’s like in the olden days, in the… days of France, when men would slap each other with their gloves… say, y’know… “D’Artagnan!”… y’know, “how dare you talk to me like that, you!,” and… smack ‘em!

  124. Bulging Twine says:

    Who did Hall play the most against?
    and where can I find that info?

  125. denny33 says:

    From Edmonton Journal:

    Coach Dallas Eakins found lots to criticize in his team’s performance, emphasizing this: “Managing the puck! To go in and try to beat three guys by yourself, or these cross-ice passes when you have no support, I don’t understand that. I don’t understand why any player would do it. … It can’t happen, those are the basics of the game.”

    Basics of the game….could not agree more Dallas.

    Dallas Eakins meet Taylor Hall….

  126. B S says:

    bookje,

    Well, it would certainly get fighting out of hockey. After 30 seconds of changing equipment most guys would probably be second guessing themselves. Also, I think this would make Cherry’s head explode, so I’m all for it. At least it’s not the usual “lets ban fighting” kneejerk reaction.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lli4fbNOGfA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2h7rX2rC-w

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT3UqBIobcA

    There is always such a controversy over fighting in hockey, even among non-hockey fans, so I thought I’d Just show that fighting happens in other sports, they just don’t have clear definitions and rules governing it, other than possibility of suspension, and contrary to popular belief having a set of rules and system in place for fighting is actually a good thing. How it is implemented is open to discussion, but at least you have a set method of dealing with fights and brawls, rather than guys headbutting each other while the refs run around like headless chickens. You will never take fighting out of hockey, just like you can’t keep it out of baseball or soccer, so might as well try to control it.

  127. Bar_Qu says:

    I am generally disappointed with the game last night, not for anything specific, but simply that the score did not end up the way it should have. I also have significant concerns that the Oil scored 4 times and did not win. I am not convinced that is totally the goalie’s fault, but apparently he played badly (I can’t judge “good” goals from “bad” ones).

    I will venture the opinion that I cannot wait until the Hall at centre experiment ends. He looked like he was trying too hard and forcing too much. But again, what do I know?

    But imo, last night was a must-win game and the odds of coming out of the first 10 games at .500 is imperilled as a result.

  128. cabbiesmacker says:

    Zipdot: Kevin Lowe:
    - 1st round selection, went straight from being English speaking captain of QMJHL team to the NHL
    - 7 all star appearances
    - 6 cups
    - a Canada cup
    - shutdown defenseman with 432 points
    - top 75 all time points for d-men
    - 17th all time +/- with +252
    - wore A on all 6 cups

    Anyone who watched the presser announcing MacT’s hiring has seen all of this before. No need to repeat.

    6 rings baby. Count em. 6 rings. I believe no other athlete in the history of the planet can top…6 rings. Hell there’s only 5 rings in the Olympic logo…6 rings is better.

    6 rings makes one an expert on how to build a competitive hockey team ya see. Doesn’t explain the steaming pile of shit this org has put on the ice for close to 10 years but hey. 6 rings is 6 rings…any way you wanna count em.

    Say it with me. 6 rings.

  129. Hammers says:

    nycoil:
    I was pessimistic going into the start of this season, but came away from the game a lot more optimistic.
    1) Eakins: Listened to his presser. He was on top of every issue. Perfect. As long as he can convey that message to the troops and get them to buy in, we’ll be fine. Love his analysis and candor.

    2) Hall: He is going to be fine. Love that Eakins kept running him out there after a couple of turnovers and played him 23 minutes. We’ve got to ride the horses. He has arrived as a player. I think first game adrenaline had him pressing a bit too much and trying to impress in the middle. He just needs to back off a tad and let the game come to him, like Hemsky did on his goal (the way he slowed down, took his time to deke two defenders was sublime. Hope he can keep it up). Hall, by contrast was trying the full-speed toe drag again, and putting himself in harm’s way a few times. He just needs to slow down and pick his spots, make the high percentage passes/plays and he is going to be fine. His effort back-checking was good to see.

    3) Dubnyk. It’s the same issue with him. I think he does better the more pucks he sees, but he gives up one stoppable goal per game (last night I think he had three he should have stopped). He will be better, but he isn’t going to steal too many games for us this year. That’s okay, so long as he can be solid. Usually his weakness is high blocker side, so I think he’ll be fine on those glove hand misses he had last night. He’ll get better as the year goes on. I like that he held himself accountable on those bad goals, but the body language on a couple of screened shots was a bit poor. I think with the scramble D, there’s some ironing out to be done on shooting lanes and visibility for the goalie due to our own men screening him.

    4) Puck possession may work better on the road than at home due to Rexall ice just getting worse and worse. I feel like we have to score early on home ice because late, pucks are going to hop over sticks or bounce, the wrong way, etc., when we are pressing to tie like we were late. That bad ice favours grind -it-out teams late in periods more than puck possession.

    5) Joensuu and Gazdic: Hopefully they can keep this up just enough to ensure we stop wasting time and assets chasing the coke machine unicorn all year. Liked Joensuu going after Buffto stick up for himself and Eberle without crossing the line.

    6) When RNH and Gagner return, having the guys like Hall and Smyth play out of their comfort level in the 15 games to start the year is going to pay dividends down the line. Our line combination possibilities are going to be outstanding and give Eakins so many options… Hall between Gagner and Yakupov, for example, while Perron and Eberle flank RNH..

    7) The lessons learned from coughing up this lead last night and learning you have to keep it simple, focus for 60mins, and that this is the NHL and you can’t hand your opponents “fruit baskets” are going to make us a better team. I’m glad we didn’t win in spite of all the bad habits. This loss STINGS, and hopefully Coach and the boys aren’t going to want to relive that again.

    PS… Love Hemmer!

    Re #1 He needs to get mad once in a while #2 Hall can play 23 minutes , Hemsky maybe 19 but Smyth only 12-15 so a new LW is needed .Joensuu anyone with Smyth to 3rd .#3 Dubnyk give him 4-5 games and he needs to come around or we are in big trouble . #4 seemed Ok to me for 1st game. #5 see#2 #6 RNH will be back first and I would put him with Hall & Hemsky leaving Arco with Ebs & Perron . This will also start making the 4th line a better line .By the time Gags is back the season is decided . #7 The coach needs to handle this #8 You forgot our “D” Both Nick & Justin had bad games effecting Ference & Belov so I would play those two together .

  130. cabbiesmacker says:

    denny33:
    From Edmonton Journal:

    Coach Dallas Eakins found lots to criticize in his team’s performance, emphasizing this: “Managing the puck! To go in and try to beat three guys by yourself, or these cross-ice passes when you have no support, I don’t understand that. I don’t understand why any player would do it. … It can’t happen, those are the basics of the game.”

    Basics of the game….could not agree more Dallas.

    Dallas Eakins meet Taylor Hall….

    Eakins could have just gone all Sean Connery and stated it’s tough bringing a knife to a gunfight.

  131. cabbiesmacker says:

    wheatnoil:. There didn’t seem to be any pressure with regard to waiving Eager right away. Maybe they thought waiving him now would increase the likelihood of someone picking him up and clearing a contract?

    Or maybe they thought they could turn him into a centre.

    Beats the hell out of drafting and trading for them apparently and if one hits that square peg long enough and hard enough it’s bound to go in that round hole sooner or later…right

  132. Lucinius says:

    The problem I have with removing fighting from hockey is it would lead to an increase in the dirtier plays. If you watch college hockey or have played it you know this. There is no fear of having to pay the piper, so over time your form the habit of using your stick more to speak, trip, chop, and wave it up high.

    Personally, I think the removal of fighting can only be undertaken when the league and NHLPA have made strides in clamping down and removing the dirt from the game. This would likely mean tying suspensions to injury length of the victim before you even hand out the suspension length for the act, harsher penalties for high sticking (4 minute base, 5 and game if the player is cut), actually calling embellishments and diving, and severely penalizing any and all elbows to the head, regardless of impact on the receiving player (5 and a game, minimum, guaranteed 3 game suspension, so on).

    Until then, I believe you not only need to keep fighting in the game, but should remove the instigator penalty so that the fighters can actually go after the players committing the acts rather than having to square off against only those who are willing combatants.

    Lastly, for those who doubt the idea that without fighting you’d see more risky behavior I simply point you to high sticking penalties since visors became prevalent. Especially in the lower leagues a lot of players are extremely sloppy with their sticks because everyone is wearing visors, if not full cages — there is almost no risk of actually getting a player with your stick, so players fall into the habit of not controlling their stick as they should — and then they hit the NHL and it takes them awhile to learn they need to keep their sticks down and in control. Some never do.

    Watch a college game, or junior game and you see sticks waved everywhere — its ridiculous. But there’s almost no incentive for them to learn to control their sticks like they used to. The NHL pre-2000 was, in many ways, far more brutal than what we see today; but most of that brutality was within the bounds of the rules (head shots and so forth were legal if the hit itself wasn’t overly late). High sticking was rarer back then (but, yes, often far worse in terms of damage done due to shitty protection) than it is now.

  133. Rebilled says:

    Dubnyk’s goals against were not that easy to stop, and he always seems to get seeing-eye goals scored on him.

    1. Not sure if anyone ever clarified it but looked to go off Belov’s skate(this goal may have rattled him). This goal also on their power play.
    2. Partial screen by dman.
    3. Frolik seeing-eyes top corner, also screened
    4. Partial screen by dman
    5. Frolik gets between the legs pass all alone in front of net. Poor coverage,

    2 and 4 were the ‘easy’ goals.

  134. B S says:

    Hammers,

    #8 yeah what a joke JSchultz was, backchecking on two incredibly bad pinches by Ference, taking the player Ference should have been covering and preventing a breakaway, yep he just doesn’t seem to get this whole defense thing!

    I get that Schultz had a “blonde” moment with Kane, but beyond that I didn’t see him make any other overt gaffs last night. He also didn’t do a lot when he had the puck either, but I’m getting a little tired of this narrative that he’s the playing crappy D whenever the Oilers lose.

  135. G Money says:

    Colonel Obvious: However, in addition to the correlation test, Fenwick makes greater rational sense. While shot quality may not be discernible on a large scale, blocked shots are. Some teams block more shots than others by design and skill which Corsi doesn’t take into account.

    Consider this rational test. A hit post counts as a missed shot. This is a lot closer to a goal than a blocked shot. What is true on a macro scale must be also true on a micro scale or you risk spurious correlations.

    Hmmm, I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. A hit post actually counts in both Corsi and Fenwick – as it should. But not sure how that in any way supports the idea that blocked shots shouldn’t count – in fact, a heavy on-target shot that is blocked is (at the point it leaves the stick), actually a more dangerous situation than a shot that goes off the post (which was fated to not score).

    Your other point, about shot-blocking, is actually the path of reasoning that made me conclude Corsi is superior to Fenwick! Imagine a hypothetical situation of two teams, one that is better at shooting and one that is worse. Imagine the better shooting team does not block shots, the poorer one does, a lot. (This is not so hypothetical – a poor team that blocks a lot of shots? Ladies and gentlemen, your 2012-13 Edmonton Oilers!).

    The difference between the two will be highlighted by Corsi, which is exactly what you want to understand in using the statistic. The difference between the two will actually be minimized by Fenwick. (As in: Team A Corsi 35/30 = +5, Team B 30/35 = -5. But Team B blocks 5 shots. Corsi = +5
    for Team A, Fenwick = even).

    FastOil: Everything I’ve read says Corsi is better short term but Fenwick correlates more closely to winning the larger the sample. It’s too bad we don’t have Hawerchuk and Ferrari blogging much or at all anymore who could tear these things apart properly. I miss that.

    As I said, I believe a lot of this has to do with the bias built into the statistic. It gives it a better correlation but lower predictive value. Kind of like those stock prediction systems you see advertised – they work because they overfit the historical data, but have zero value in predicting future results.

    As far as the bloggers go – indeed. The more the better. Tremendously enjoy Dellow and Parkatti’s work (who’ve both posted in this thread), sure glad they do what they do. Personally, I actually have a comp sci/math/stats background and could dig into these things a lot deeper (albeit I suspect with far less elegant prose), but between running two companies and being run by three kids 9 and under, typing my verbose posts chews up what little free time I have!

  136. Colonel Obvious says:

    Rebilled:
    Dubnyk’s goals against were not that easy to stop, and he always seems to get seeing-eye goals scored on him.

    1. Not sure if anyone ever clarified it but looked to go off Belov’s skate(this goal may have rattled him). This goal also on their power play.
    2. Partial screen by dman.
    3. Frolik seeing-eyes top corner, also screened
    4. Partial screen by dman
    5. Frolik gets between the legs pass all alone in front of net. Poor coverage,

    2 and 4 were the ‘easy’ goals.

    That’s excuse making. #1 is absolutely a bad goal. It makes no difference whether it was deflected since the deflection was at the point of release and hence there was no dramatic change of direction. Shots like that happen many times a game. If these were difficult stops the average save percentage would be a lot lower than it is.

    And your description of #4 is disingenuous. A partial screen from the blueline is irrelevant. Brutal goal.

    Come to think of it #3 wasn’t a particularly good goal either. Goalies make that save all the time.

    There is no other conclusion than to say that was a terrible game by Dubnyk.

  137. delooper says:

    Keep in mind, Hall looked a little off-pace all through the pre-season. He played quite well for much of the game, but it looked to me like he was starting to run out of steam in the 3rd period. He could still skate, but his brain wasn’t fully into it. I imagine Hall will tune in fairly quickly now. It must really sting him that he gets mentioned so often in the reasons they lost.

  138. khildahl says:

    Last night was bad for goalies all around. The only one with a save percentage above .900 was Reimer.

  139. Bag of Pucks says:

    Do we have any posters that have played goal at a fairly high competitive level?

    If yes, I’m curious as to whether this theory holds water?

    For me, athletes have always shared a common attribute with musicians that, for the sake of expedience, roughly breaks them down into 4 key groups.

    1. Those born with zero talent* – this is actually extremely rare as most people are born with the necessary motor skills to demonstrate at least minimal proficiency
    2. Those born with minimal to moderate talent – this represents the greater population
    3. Those born with exceptional talent
    4. Those born with prodigy level talent – again, extremely rare

    *Where talent=innate proficiency

    As we all know, talent requires refinement & application (i.e. practice & performance) to achieve its optimal potential.

    With this in mind, assuming the group subjects above develop their talent to its utmost, the typical outcomes are as follows.

    1. Never going to happen no matter how hard they try. Will eventually gravitate to other endeavours.
    2. Through extreme dedication, can develop a workmanlike proficiency at best
    3. Able to reach elite levels of performance
    4. Virtuosos/Hall of Famers

    Dubnyk is somewhere in between Group 2 and 3. He has some expectional innate talent (e.g. size, visual acuity, reflex) but lacks mission critical exceptional level athleticism. Thus his achieving optimal results is very dependent upon him maximizing both his refinement process (this is why he took such a long and gradual process through each level of his minor and pro development curves) and his application skills (application in this case represents learned or accummulated traits like positioning, conditioning, technique, etc.).

    Because DD is not a ‘natural’ he’s had to work exceptionally hard to achieve elite level status, with significant effort made towards the accummulation of learned traits to compensate for the lack of innate ones (i.e. he’s practiced himself perfect). As a result, because DD is not a ‘natural’ whose talent can immediately compensate for breakdowns in his application skills, he’ll never be a true elite level goaltender. And when his application skills falter, his lack of athlecism is exposed and he looks dreadful. If Hardy Åström represents one side of the median and Patrick Roy the other for professional level netminders, Dubnyk will unfortunately always reside nearer the Åström group (i.e. those good enough to make the show, but not good enough to truly excel in it).

    Someone like Carey Price could represent the opposite dynamic to Dubnyk (i.e much more innate natural talent with far less emphasis on learned traits). Price’s challenge is thus allowing himself to be ‘coached’ enough and then refining those skills through dedicated practise to take that next step from exceptional to prodigy.

  140. Rebilled says:

    Colonel Obvious,

    Dubnyk did have a terrible game. I thought every shot was going to go in.

    If it’s disingenuous then why did you still call it a partial screen? It was a bad goal. Somehow he didn’t see it.

    I’d have to disagree with you on #3.

  141. cc says:

    Ryan,

    Was this your first taste of NHL hockey? Hemmer played very well considering. Hall was a mess last night. Lost for most of the evening and turned the puck over countless times. Sure it was his first game at centre, but I like his speed coming off or down the wall mush more and at least he knows where he’s supposed to be.

    That said, I’m willing to be patient for a time to allow him to find his centre game. I ask a question though, do you think Hall was playing as though he was upset he never got the “C” and was out to prove it?

    Second point: Schultz sr. played very well. And if you follow this blog you know I’ll defend him. He made some great hits, none better then the one on the wall in the offensive zone in the first. Just a great play. He moved the puck well but the one time he looked bad was when he was hung out to dry by Hall when he turned over the puck 1 on 3 and casually skating back up ice leaving Schultz sr. defending a 2 on 1. BTW Dubby should have stopped the puck. Bad goal.

  142. Rebilled says:

    Rebilled,

    It also seemed Hrudey understood why he missed #1 with that deflection.

    I would have liked him to save those two ‘easy’ goals as well. I’m thinking of the next game in Van and who the starter is gonna be.

  143. bookje says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    Do we have any posters that have played goal at a fairly high competitive level?

    If yes, I’m curious as to whether this theory holds water?

    For me, athletes have always shared a common attribute with musicians that, for the sake of expedience, roughly breaks them down into 4 key groups.

    1. Those born with zero talent* – this is actually extremely rare as most people are born with the necessary motor skills to demonstrate at least minimal proficiency
    2. Those born with minimal to moderate talent – this represents the greater population
    3. Those born with exceptional talent
    4. Those born with prodigy level talent – again, extremely rare

    *Where talent=innate proficiency

    As we all know, talent requires refinement & application (i.e. practice & performance) to achieve its optimal potential.

    With this in mind, assuming the group subjects above develop their talent to its utmost, the typical outcomes are as follows.

    1. Never going to happen no matter how hard they try. Will eventually gravitate to other endeavours.
    2. Through extreme dedication, can develop a workmanlike proficiency at best
    3. Able to reach elite levels of performance
    4. Virtuosos/Hall of Famers

    Dubnyk is somewhere in between Group 2 and 3. He has some expectional innate talent (e.g. size, visual acuity, reflex) but lacks mission critical exceptional level athleticism. Thus his achieving optimal results is very dependent upon him maximizing both his refinement process (this is why he took such a long and gradual process through each level of his minor and pro development curves) and his application skills (application in this case represents learned or accummulated traits like positioning, conditioning, technique, etc.).

    Because DD is not a ‘natural’ he’s had to work exceptionally hard to achieve elite level status, with significant effort made towards the accummulation of learned traits to compensate for the lack of innate ones (i.e. he’s practiced himself perfect). As a result, because DD is not a ‘natural’ whose talent can immediately compensate for breakdowns in his application skills, he’ll never be a true elite level goaltender. And when his application skills falter, his lack of athlecism is exposed and he looks dreadful. If Hardy Åström represents one side of the median and Patrick Roy the other for professional level netminders, Dubnyk will unfortunately always reside nearer theÅström group (i.e. those good enough to make the show, but not good enough to truly excel in it).

    Someone like Carey Price could represent the opposite dynamic to Dubnyk (i.e much more innate natural talent with far less emphasis on learned traits). Price’s challenge is thus allowing himself to be ‘coached’ enough and then refining those skills through dedicated practise to take that next step from exceptional to prodigy.

    Dubnyk is somewhere between the top 10 and top 60 goalies in the world and you are suggesting that he is somewhere between the average and exceptional amongst the genera’ public. He falls somewhere in the top 0.01% of goalies in Canada never mind the general public.

    What are you talking about?

  144. bookje says:

    I would add that to be at that level both his innate ability and his effort would need to be stellar.

  145. Lowetide says:

    bookje:
    I would add that to be at that level both his innate ability and his effort would need to be stellar.

    I honestly thought that was a joke. Clearly Dubnyk is an outstanding goalie based on world wide man on the street standards. He’s a #1 NHL for the third year in a row–he’s a good goalie by NHL standards.

    Oiler fans need a playoffs.

  146. Zipdot says:

    Dwayne Roloson said that the way to get good is to practice each type of shot 10,000 times.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca