Is this the turning point???

[Kin]

Ok, so I ran some of the numbers I glanced at.

I selected all dmen who took 200 or more shots plus missed shots in a season. That got me a little over 30 dmen - the top point men for each team very roughly - dmen doing a similar role to Dion. I then calculated the % of the attempted shots that hit the goal.

In 2012, Phaneuf was 17th of 33 (average) at 69.8% (high was 74.5% Eric Johnson, low was Goligoski at 62.2% - there is a bit of an exponential drop off from the very top dmen).

In 2011, Phaneuf was 24th of 37 (slightly below average) at 66.9% (high was 72.7% Chara, low was Jack Johnson at 59.3%.

Like the big driver in golf, my sense is the guys who really blast it tend to suffer some in accuracy (I'm also sure there are exceptions to that like Chara). Given that, although there's room for improvement, I can't conclude Phaneuf is awful at hitting the net relative to those doing a similar job in this league. Given his shot velocity, I'd say he's probably about average - maybe slightly less than average in general accuracy (ignoring that he pinches more than average).

Now this season, it's tough because we don't have a very reliable sampling of data as there have been so few games.

In 2013, from the 37 who have taken 22 or more shots, Phaneuf was again 24th of 37 (slightly below average) at 63.0%. But there have been too few games to draw much conclusion from those stats.

I'm curious because I looked and couldn't find it but did you come across the definition of what a missed shot actually was? Do they simply count any shot towards the net that doesn't result in a save or a goal? Or do they not count deflections or blocked shots or hitting your own teammates or other things of that nature.

I just ask because that could explain some of the discrepancies between the numbers and the perceptions.

 

[cw]

Ok, so I ran some of the numbers I glanced at.

I selected all dmen who took 200 or more shots plus missed shots in a season. That got me a little over 30 dmen - the top point men for each team very roughly - dmen doing a similar role to Dion. I then calculated the % of the attempted shots that hit the goal.

In 2012, Phaneuf was 17th of 33 (average) at 69.8% (high was 74.5% Eric Johnson, low was Goligoski at 62.2% - there is a bit of an exponential drop off from the very top dmen).

In 2011, Phaneuf was 24th of 37 (slightly below average) at 66.9% (high was 72.7% Chara, low was Jack Johnson at 59.3%.

Like the big driver in golf, my sense is the guys who really blast it tend to suffer some in accuracy (I'm also sure there are exceptions to that like Chara). Given that, although there's room for improvement, I can't conclude Phaneuf is awful at hitting the net relative to those doing a similar job in this league. Given his shot velocity, I'd say he's probably about average - maybe slightly less than average in general accuracy (ignoring that he pinches more than average).

Now this season, it's tough because we don't have a very reliable sampling of data as there have been so few games.

In 2013, from the 37 who have taken 22 or more shots, Phaneuf was again 24th of 37 (slightly below average) at 63.0%. But there have been too few games to draw much conclusion from those stats.

I'm curious because I looked and couldn't find it but did you come across the definition of what a missed shot actually was? Do they simply count any shot towards the net that doesn't result in a save or a goal? Or do they not count deflections or blocked shots or hitting your own teammates or other things of that nature.

I just ask because that could explain some of the discrepancies between the numbers and the perceptions.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/sports/2011/04/03/nhl-stats-a-fuzzy-science.html
Definition of categories
While interpretations might vary, the NHL provides off-ice officials with descriptions of each action.
...
Missed shot: A missed shot occurs when a shot at the net, not on the net, that missed the net on a clear opportunity to score because it hit a goal post, hit the crossbar, went over the net or is wide of the net.

It might explain the discrepancies. It might not. Since they don't seem to keep the numbers, one would have to dig through the play by play game sheets I guess.

But the common complaint from the game day threads and media (observers) hasn't been so much "Damn it! Phaneuf's shot got blocked again!". It's been "Damn it! Phaneuf's shot missed the net again!"

Having said that, guys like Kaberle and Lidstrom seemed far more careful about avoiding a blocked shot (and I liked that about their games) than Phaneuf or McCabe as examples (who were exposed defensively after some blocks). So there's probably some merit comparing the guys who challenged the shot blockers trying to blow it through vs the guys who feathered it through an opening in shot on net %. Though I think both have their place in hockey.

 

[nutman]

So far so good, I like what I have saw so far. am hoping for a big game tonight after the good effort against Boston.

 

[nutman]

5-5 after 10 games, not bad.

 

[Redleaf]

Regarding the title of this thread...

I don't see this season as being 'the' turning point, but I'm starting to get more optimistic that we could be approaching a legitimate 'turning point' in the next season or two. If the Leafs can add a substantial player at this years draft, and with the additions of Gardiner and Rielly, the return of Lupul, (and Kessel's scoring touch), the emergence of Kadri, Frattin, Reimer and JVR, and maybe one or two winning trades from Nonis, and we could have the makings of a real good team sooner rather than later.

I'm not approaching nutman levels of optimism yet, but with a little luck, this team could really start to make strides in the next few seasons.

 

[Zee]

5-5 after 10 games, not bad.

Remember though your original call was for a 7-3 tear out of the gate.

 

[nutman]

5-5 after 10 games, not bad.

Remember though your original call was for a 7-3 tear out of the gate.

Ya, I sucked on that, hahaha.I was hoping we could win at home, and never thought our goal scoring would dry up.
Same for the next 10.. 7-3 hope I am right this time. At least were on the road more, that may help.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

5-5 after 10 games, not bad.

Remember though your original call was for a 7-3 tear out of the gate.

He was about as right as the multitude that predicted 3-7.

 

[Big Daddy]

Another 10 games of .500 or better would be awesome considering what our line-up could look like in the 3rd set of games.
Lupul-Bozak-Kessel
JVR-Kadri-Frattin
MacArthur-Grabovski-Kulemin
Komorov-McClement-Brown
Phaneuf-Kosta
Gunnar-Gardiner
Franson-Liles

 

[Zee]

5-5 after 10 games, not bad.

Remember though your original call was for a 7-3 tear out of the gate.

He was about as right as the multitude that predicted 3-7.

If we had taken nutman's optimism with my pessimism and averaged our 2 guesses out we would have just about hit it perfect.

 

[nutman]

Another 10 games of .500 or better would be awesome considering what our line-up could look like in the 3rd set of games.
Lupul-Bozak-Kessel
JVR-Kadri-Frattin
MacArthur-Grabovski-Kulemin
Komorov-McClement-Brown
Phaneuf-Kosta
Gunnar-Gardiner
Franson-Liles

That is a nice lineup.

 

[iwas11in67]

5-5 is pretty good. I was predicting 3-7 after i saw the schedule. BUT its always the way they do it that is so frustrating. 1-4 at home versus 4-1 on the road. Beating good teams and losing to weaker ones.

The next 10 games are against weaker teams than the first 10 games. I don't know if thats good or bad. However 7 of the next 10 are on the road.

 

[nutman]

5-5 is pretty good. I was predicting 3-7 after i saw the schedule. BUT its always the way they do it that is so frustrating. 1-4 at home versus 4-1 on the road. Beating good teams and losing to weaker ones.

The next 10 games are against weaker teams than the first 10 games. I don't know if thats good or bad. However 7 of the next 10 are on the road.

Yes.. we can win on the road, and not at home so 7-3 is a good call.  8)

 

[caver]

Can this Jets game be the turning point? Kessel scores, Bozak comes alive, Kadri and Frattin are here to stay, Reimer is getting the job done, team is above .500, maybe they are putting it together??

 

[Corn Flake]

Can this Jets game be the turning point? Kessel scores, Bozak comes alive, Kadri and Frattin are here to stay, Reimer is getting the job done, team is above .500, maybe they are putting it together??

I don't think there's a specific game that is the turning point. I think the road games as a whole suggest this team can win enough to get in, plus enough East teams are in far far worse shape, which helps. 

It's just a matter of not blowing leads in home games, which to me is all that is really going wrong at home ... if they had those two back in which they held the lead early and put the wins away, they would be in 4th place and looking very solid.

Reimer is playing well enough for sure.  Scrivens looks capable as a backup too.  Seems to be it will come down to consistent offense and the PP needs to improve. 

 

[Erndog]

I think the road games as a whole suggest this team can win enough to get in, plus enough East teams are in far far worse shape, which helps. 

I heard Pierre McGuire's theory about why we are winning on the road and suck at home (which dates back to last year also).

On the road, the Leafs face less pressure and the other team says, 'meh, it's the Leafs coming here... they arent going to make the playoffs' and they don't "get up" for the game.

In Toronto, everything is magnified, and players always hear how Toronto is the hockey mecca (etc) but when they get there, the ACC is a morgue and the visitors are jacked because they know its a popular game so it's easy for them to play through.

I dunno, but I think some of it makes some sense yeah.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I think the road games as a whole suggest this team can win enough to get in, plus enough East teams are in far far worse shape, which helps. 

I heard Pierre McGuire's theory about why we are winning on the road and suck at home (which dates back to last year also).

On the road, the Leafs face less pressure and the other team says, 'meh, it's the Leafs coming here... they arent going to make the playoffs' and they don't "get up" for the game.

In Toronto, everything is magnified, and players always hear how Toronto is the hockey mecca (etc) but when they get there, the ACC is a morgue and the visitors are jacked because they know its a popular game so it's easy for them to play through.

I dunno, but I think some of it makes some sense yeah.

Yeah, it would be hard to quantify that, but you do feel that the media has some part to play in the players ultimately, feeling comfortable in their own barn.

I'm not too sure about how much teams are underestimating the Leafs though, coming into their arena that is. I suppose a minimum of at least as much as other teams.

 

[maplesyrup]

Lots of GTA/Ontario players in this league who want to step up in front of friends and family. - Could be a factor.

 

[Zee]

I think the road games as a whole suggest this team can win enough to get in, plus enough East teams are in far far worse shape, which helps. 

I heard Pierre McGuire's theory about why we are winning on the road and suck at home (which dates back to last year also).

On the road, the Leafs face less pressure and the other team says, 'meh, it's the Leafs coming here... they arent going to make the playoffs' and they don't "get up" for the game.

In Toronto, everything is magnified, and players always hear how Toronto is the hockey mecca (etc) but when they get there, the ACC is a morgue and the visitors are jacked because they know its a popular game so it's easy for them to play through.

I dunno, but I think some of it makes some sense yeah.

I heard Pittsburgh is the new hockey mecca so this shouldn't be valid any longer.

 

[Corn Flake]

I heard Pierre McGuire's theory about why we are winning on the road and suck at home (which dates back to last year also).

On the road, the Leafs face less pressure and the other team says, 'meh, it's the Leafs coming here... they arent going to make the playoffs' and they don't "get up" for the game.

In Toronto, everything is magnified, and players always hear how Toronto is the hockey mecca (etc) but when they get there, the ACC is a morgue and the visitors are jacked because they know its a popular game so it's easy for them to play through.

I dunno, but I think some of it makes some sense yeah.

I don't think I buy any of his argument. 

on the road... in some barns, such as last night, half the fans are Leafs fans. Does that not get the opposing team going a bit? I would think so.  They don't shrug that stuff off.  I think it helps the Leafs too.

at home... while the ACC has quiet moments during games, it gets loud when things are happening.. maybe not MTS Centre loud but loud enough.  I do agree that opposing teams have players who get up for games in Toronto for sure but not sure other than a few early shifts how that translates into dominance.  Some local kids, perhaps it does get them going with family in the crowd.  Leafs fans are easier on their team when they aren't doing well than other teams like the Flyers, etc. 

Again to me, two of the losses this year (NYI and Car) were very winnable games they let the lead slip away and became blowouts.  To me that is just them not playing well for 60 mins and not some unknown home ice factor.  The Boston game was very close as was the Buffalo one which Miller stole the show in. 

Marginally more than coincidence, IMO.