| Overall | ES | PP | SH | ||||||||||||
| ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % |
| 313 | 400 | -87 | 43.9% | 230 | 296 | -66 | 43.7% | 77 | 7 | 70 | 91.7% | 6 | 97 | -91 | 5.8% |
It's pretty clear the Leafs have been badly outchanced at even strength, averaging a deficit of more than three per game at even strength and more than four overall. From extraskater.com, here are the Corsi data for the Leafs in the same situations:
| Overall | ES | PP | SH | ||||||||||||
| CoF | CoA | Net | % | CoF | CoA | Net | % | CoF | CoA | Net | % | CoF | CoA | Net | % |
| 1053 | 1352 | -299 | 43.8% | 810 | 1067 | -257 | 43.2% | 208 | 18 | 190 | 92.0% | 17 | 245 | -228 | 6.5% |
It's pretty clear the two stats have tracked fairly well together so far. While there have been a couple of individual games where the Leafs substantially outchance their Corsi, or vice versa, on the whole it has balanced out. Below are the overall numbers for each game.
| Game | Opp | Overall | ES | PP | SH | ||||||||||||
| ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % | ChF | ChA | Net | % | ||
| 1 | MTL | 22 | 24 | -2 | 47.8% | 10 | 18 | -8 | 35.7% | 11 | 3 | 8 | 78.6% | 1 | 3 | -2 | 25.0% |
| 2 | PHI | 10 | 20 | -10 | 33.3% | 7 | 11 | -4 | 38.9% | 2 | 0 | 2 | 100.0% | 1 | 9 | -8 | 10.0% |
| 3 | OTT | 27 | 19 | 8 | 58.7% | 21 | 18 | 3 | 53.8% | 6 | 0 | 6 | 100.0% | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0.0% |
| 4 | COL | 18 | 17 | 1 | 51.4% | 15 | 16 | -1 | 48.4% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0.0% |
| 5 | NSH | 17 | 13 | 4 | 56.7% | 13 | 8 | 5 | 61.9% | 4 | 0 | 4 | 100.0% | 0 | 5 | -5 | 0.0% |
| 6 | EDM | 16 | 21 | -5 | 43.2% | 13 | 14 | -1 | 48.1% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 7 | -7 | 0.0% |
| 7 | MIN | 7 | 18 | -11 | 28.0% | 3 | 11 | -8 | 21.4% | 4 | 1 | 3 | 80.0% | 0 | 6 | -6 | 0.0% |
| 8 | CAR | 13 | 23 | -10 | 36.1% | 11 | 18 | -7 | 37.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 50.0% | 1 | 4 | -3 | 20.0% |
| 9 | CHI | 9 | 25 | -16 | 26.5% | 6 | 19 | -13 | 24.0% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 6 | -6 | 0.0% |
| 10 | ANA | 11 | 15 | -4 | 42.3% | 10 | 10 | 0 | 50.0% | 1 | 0 | 1 | 100.0% | 0 | 5 | -5 | 0.0% |
| 11 | CLB | 13 | 22 | -9 | 37.1% | 9 | 16 | -7 | 36.0% | 4 | 2 | 2 | 66.7% | 0 | 4 | -4 | 0.0% |
| 12 | PIT | 13 | 21 | -8 | 38.2% | 7 | 12 | -5 | 36.8% | 4 | 0 | 4 | 100.0% | 2 | 9 | -7 | 18.2% |
| 13 | EDM | 12 | 19 | -7 | 38.7% | 11 | 16 | -5 | 40.7% | 1 | 0 | 1 | 100.0% | 0 | 3 | -3 | 0.0% |
| 14 | CGY | 13 | 17 | -4 | 43.3% | 12 | 13 | -1 | 48.0% | 1 | 0 | 1 | 100.0% | 0 | 4 | -4 | 0.0% |
| 15 | VAN | 12 | 20 | -8 | 37.5% | 9 | 15 | -6 | 37.5% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 5 | -5 | 0.0% |
| 16 | NJD | 18 | 15 | 3 | 54.5% | 9 | 15 | -6 | 37.5% | 8 | 0 | 8 | 100.0% | 1 | 0 | 1 | 100.0% |
| 17 | BOS | 14 | 20 | -6 | 41.2% | 11 | 15 | -4 | 42.3% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 5 | -5 | 0.0% |
| 18 | MIN | 14 | 26 | -12 | 35.0% | 9 | 17 | -8 | 34.6% | 5 | 0 | 5 | 100.0% | 0 | 9 | -9 | 0.0% |
| 19 | BUF | 17 | 10 | 7 | 63.0% | 14 | 5 | 9 | 73.7% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 5 | -5 | 0.0% |
| 20 | BUF | 17 | 14 | 3 | 54.8% | 13 | 12 | 1 | 52.0% | 4 | 0 | 4 | 100.0% | 0 | 2 | -2 | 0.0% |
| 21 | NYI | 20 | 21 | -1 | 48.8% | 17 | 17 | 0 | 50.0% | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100.0% | 0 | 4 | -4 | 0.0% |
Next, a quick look at the players, starting with the forwards. It's worth noting that I don't see these numbers tracking nearly as well with Corsi as with the team numbers; I suspect that small sample size is an issue, as even for the most frequently used players, we're talking less than 400 minutes of data.
First, forwards who have played at least 90 minutes minutes overall at even strength (the most notable missing players are McLaren, Bodie & Smithson):
F/60, A/60 and N/60 are the even strength chance rates per 60 minutes ice time.
| Overall | Pos | # | ESF | ESA | ESD | ES% | EVTOI | AvESTOI | F/60 | A/60 | N/60 |
| Kessel | F | 21 | 99 | 115 | -16 | 46.3% | 335:23 | 15:58 | 17.71 | 20.57 | -2.86 |
| Raymond | F | 21 | 74 | 95 | -21 | 43.8% | 304:35 | 14:30 | 14.58 | 18.71 | -4.14 |
| Lupul | F | 19 | 62 | 91 | -29 | 40.5% | 297:20 | 15:38 | 12.51 | 18.36 | -5.85 |
| Van Riemsdyk | F | 19 | 84 | 88 | -4 | 48.8% | 275:40 | 14:30 | 18.28 | 19.15 | -0.87 |
| McClement | F | 20 | 42 | 66 | -24 | 38.9% | 260:12 | 13:00 | 9.68 | 15.22 | -5.53 |
| Kadri | F | 18 | 74 | 89 | -15 | 45.4% | 253:48 | 14:06 | 17.49 | 21.04 | -3.55 |
| Bolland | F | 15 | 41 | 48 | -7 | 46.1% | 202:59 | 13:31 | 12.12 | 14.19 | -2.07 |
| Bozak | F | 11 | 48 | 55 | -7 | 46.6% | 176:44 | 16:04 | 16.30 | 18.67 | -2.38 |
| Clarkson | F | 11 | 41 | 41 | 0 | 50.0% | 169:03 | 15:22 | 14.55 | 14.55 | 0.00 |
| Orr | F | 19 | 16 | 20 | -4 | 44.4% | 119:24 | 06:17 | 8.04 | 10.05 | -2.01 |
| Kulemin | F | 9 | 20 | 33 | -13 | 37.7% | 115:47 | 12:51 | 10.36 | 17.10 | -6.74 |
| Ashton | F | 13 | 19 | 21 | -2 | 47.5% | 101:09 | 07:46 | 11.27 | 12.46 | -1.19 |
| Smith | F | 12 | 18 | 23 | -5 | 43.9% | 96:13 | 08:01 | 11.2 | 14.3 | -3.1 |
Through 21 games, only David Clarkson has been even in ES chances for the Leafs, for forwards or defense. His numbers have been pretty consistently solid, especially when you consider he has the lowest OZone start % on the team, and by a fairly wide margin (18.1 to Bolland's 22.2). McClement and Kulemin are the worst, somewhat indicative of their more defensive role. JVR's season has been strong, as he's been the best of the 'top-6' forwards.
In terms of rates, the best at producing chances per 60 have been JVR and Kessel, hardly surprising when you watch them play, and see the level of talent they possess. Bozak, the normal third man on that line, is one of the better Leafs, but a decent way behind those two, while Kadri, who is close to Kessel, is well ahead of any potential linemates. This fuels my desire to see a Kessel-Kadri-JVR trio for a while longer, though it may be more effective to spread out offensive talent onto two lines. The biggest dissapointment is probably Lupul, who has tailed off since a strong start. For the Leafs to continue their run in the standings, they'll need to get some more dominant play from Lupul and whatever line he lands on.
Kadri and Kessel have a downside to go with their offensive prowess, though, as they are the worst 2 forwards in preventing chances. Given that JVR is third worst, this kind of tamps my enthusiasm to see those three as a line. As mentioned, Clarkson's defensive effectiveness despite tough zone starts has been impressive.
A word about Colton Orr (and to some extent Carter Ashton). From these numbers, Orr looks like a strong defensive player, and, in fact, the fourth line has not been on for many chances against. This is likely because they play most against other fourth lines, who, like the Leafs' fourth, don't drive a lot of play or generate chances. So you end up with shifts that feature plenty of forechecking and aggressive play, but not as many chances, as least that's my thinking.
If you want to go for pure numbers without qualification, Spencer Abbott was the Leafs' worst forward thus far, on ice for 6 chances in 5:16 for a wopping 68.4 CA/60. And, following on with that, there is one Leaf player who is a plus at ES, Jamie Devane, who was on the ice for 3 chances for and 2 against in 11 minutes.
Next, the defense:
| Overall | Pos | # | ESF | ESA | ESD | ES% | ESTOI | AvESTOI | F/60 | A/60 | N/60 |
| Gardiner | D | 21 | 83 | 111 | -28 | 42.8% | 355:28 | 16:55 | 14.0 | 18.7 | -4.7 |
| Phaneuf | D | 21 | 81 | 93 | -12 | 46.6% | 355:18 | 16:55 | 13.7 | 15.7 | -2.0 |
| Ranger | D | 21 | 80 | 96 | -16 | 45.5% | 341:59 | 16:17 | 14.0 | 16.8 | -2.8 |
| Gunnarsson | D | 21 | 74 | 84 | -10 | 46.8% | 337:17 | 16:03 | 13.2 | 14.9 | -1.8 |
| Franson | D | 21 | 69 | 108 | -39 | 39.0% | 331:35 | 15:47 | 12.5 | 19.5 | -7.1 |
| Rielly | D | 16 | 58 | 80 | -22 | 42.0% | 241:52 | 15:07 | 14.4 | 19.8 | -5.5 |
| Fraser | D | 7 | 18 | 22 | -4 | 45.0% | 73:32 | 10:30 | 14.7 | 18.0 | -3.3 |
I just included all the D-men in this one, as Fraser is the only one who wouldn't make a cutoff. First, I was surprised to see that Jake Gardiner actually leads the team in ES ice time, though just barely over Phaneuf. Phaneuf and Gunnarson, despite playing against the best of the opposition, have clearly superior chance numbers to the rest of the defense. This is a real clear sign of their strength as a top pairing, relative to their teammates. Paul Ranger, while often maligned, has been more often one of the Leafs better defenseman than not, chance-wise. It seems like he is more prone to big gaffes that draw attention than the other defensemen, and that the likes of Gardiner and Rielly get more forgiven for them because of their clear offensive abilities. How fair that is, I'm not really all that certain.
What's also evident is that Franson has struggled badly early in the year. It's been relatively rare to see him break even in chances on a night so far this season. His partnership with Rielly consistently struggled, and hockeyanalysis.com has both being better in their time with other partners, though this is again in small sample sizes, as they've played mostly with each other. Still, if there's one Leaf player I'd highlight that needs to step up, it's Franson, as he's been the biggest disappointment this season to me. The real troubling stat is that he's been on for the lowest rate of chances for on the defense corps, showing that he isn't offensively driving the way he should be able to.
Next, the powerplay. Here's every player with at least 30 minutes in PP time (closest to the cut are Bolland, Ranger and Clarkson).
PP/2 indicates the number of net chances a player is on for per 2 minutes of power play time.
| Overall | Pos | # | PPF | PPA | PPD | PP% | PPTOI | AvPPTOI | PP/2 |
| Phaneuf | D | 21 | 52 | 4 | 48 | 92.9% | 74:28 | 03:32 | 1.29 |
| Van Riemsdyk | F | 19 | 45 | 2 | 43 | 95.7% | 62:23 | 03:17 | 1.38 |
| Bozak | F | 11 | 19 | 3 | 16 | 86.4% | 35:36 | 03:14 | 0.90 |
| Franson | D | 21 | 44 | 4 | 40 | 91.7% | 66:29 | 03:09 | 1.20 |
| Kessel | F | 21 | 47 | 4 | 43 | 92.2% | 66:05 | 03:08 | 1.30 |
| Lupul | F | 19 | 42 | 2 | 40 | 95.5% | 51:44 | 02:43 | 1.55 |
| Kadri | F | 18 | 28 | 3 | 25 | 90.3% | 47:24 | 02:38 | 1.05 |
| Raymond | F | 21 | 27 | 3 | 24 | 90.0% | 48:06 | 02:17 | 1.00 |
| Gardiner | D | 21 | 29 | 3 | 26 | 90.6% | 46:02 | 02:11 | 1.13 |
| Rielly | D | 16 | 13 | 1 | 12 | 92.9% | 30:17 | 01:53 | 0.79 |
The Leafs have had one of the league's best powerplays, though unfortunately I can't determine how their rate of chances compares to others in the league. The oddity to me is Bozak, who, despite primarily playing on the first unit when out there, has much lower chance % and rate stats. I don't have cumulative percentages on hand, but cobbling together some quick per minute stats from Extra Skater (not sure if cumulative stats are available somewhere), but the Leafs PP seems to be about the same in terms of goals since Bozak left (slumping and then recovering), but has clearly improved in its Corsi, which is mirrored in the pattern of chances. Whether Bozak's absence on the PP has directly led to the improvement, or whether it's just a fact that he hasn't been around playing as the PP figured it out isn't clear.
Lupul's powerplay success is evident here, but the big gap is notable between the first and second units, which probably has to do with the distribution of time and offensive zone chances as much as any skill. still, when everyone's healthy, inserting Kadri into the top PP unit seems like a good option.
Shorthanded next. Players with at least 20 SH minutes. Again, SH/2 is equivalent to PP/2, net chances per 2 minutes shorthanded.
| Overall | Pos | # | SHF | SHA | SHD | SH% | SHTOI | AvSHTOI | SH/2 |
| McClement | F | 20 | 4 | 66 | -62 | 5.7% | 87:28 | 04:22 | -1.42 |
| Phaneuf | D | 21 | 2 | 62 | -60 | 3.1% | 80:11 | 03:49 | -1.50 |
| Gunnarsson | D | 21 | 2 | 61 | -59 | 3.2% | 77:36 | 03:41 | -1.52 |
| Kulemin | F | 9 | 0 | 19 | -19 | 0.0% | 32:54 | 03:39 | -1.16 |
| Van Riemsdyk | F | 19 | 3 | 32 | -29 | 8.6% | 44:27 | 02:20 | -1.30 |
| Franson | D | 21 | 2 | 29 | -27 | 6.5% | 47:48 | 02:16 | -1.13 |
| Ranger | D | 21 | 4 | 24 | -20 | 14.3% | 46:21 | 02:12 | -0.86 |
| Bozak | F | 11 | 2 | 19 | -17 | 9.5% | 21:45 | 01:58 | -1.56 |
| Raymond | F | 21 | 2 | 23 | -21 | 8.0% | 39:11 | 01:51 | -1.07 |
| Bolland | F | 15 | 1 | 15 | -14 | 6.3% | 27:17 | 01:49 | -1.03 |
Now, we're getting to the point of dealing with some pretty small sample sizes, so things become pretty murky. In this case, the worst three in terms of rate are the main 3, McClement, Phaneuf and Gunnarsson. As with the powerplay, I would take this to indicate that they get the bulk of the time against settled first units. The same would be true for Bozak, who has the worst net rate on the team. It does bear the question as to whether Bozak, who is a 33% faceoff man shorthanded, should really be out there to start penalty kills. JVR is the other player not on the top unit who has lagged behind a bit, while Bolland and Raymond have been solid. On the defense, Ranger seems to have done a good job so far, with Fraser (not shown) also having solid numbers in too few minutes to qualify.
Finally, the goaltenders. I haven't said much about them, because I feel like, for the most part, there's not a very clear effect of goalies on these numbers, and it's hard to get any real takeaway from them. Still, here are the stats when each is in.
| Overall | Pos | # | F | A | D | % | TOI | ESF | ESA | ESD | ES% | EVTOI | F/60 | A/60 | N/60 |
| Bernier | G | 14 | 202 | 251 | -49 | 44.6% | 820:33 | 155 | 185 | -30 | 45.6% | 646:36 | 14.4 | 17.2 | -2.8 |
| Reimer | G | 9 | 111 | 149 | -38 | 42.7% | 450:18 | 75 | 111 | -36 | 40.3% | 362:17 | 12.4 | 18.4 | -6.0 |
| Overall | Pos | # | PPF | PPA | PPD | PP% | PPTOI | AvPPTOI | SHF | SHA | SHD | SH% | SHTOI | AvSHTOI | PP/2 | SH/2 |
| Bernier | G | 14 | 44 | 3 | 41 | 93.6% | 75:55 | 05:25 | 3 | 63 | -60 | 4.5% | 98:02 | 07:00 | 1.1 | -1.2 |
| Reimer | G | 9 | 33 | 4 | 29 | 89.2% | 42:56 | 04:46 | 3 | 34 | -31 | 8.1% | 44:28 | 04:56 | 1.4 | -1.4 |
At ES, the Leafs have been better when Bernier is in then when Reimer is in. The percentages are perhaps misleading for the special teams, though the Leafs have been marginally worse on the PK with Reimer in, and marginally better on the power play (which, given how much effect a goalie has on the powerplay, may tell you how big a grain of salt to take with the numbers).
CA: Chances against
CGA: Chance goals against
NCGA: Nonchance goals against
CSV%: Chance "save" percentage
| Goalie | CA | CGA | GA | NCGA | CSV% | ESCA | ESCGA | ESGA | ESNCGA | ESCSV% |
| Reimer | 149 | 16 | 17 | 1 | 0.893 | 75 | 10 | 11 | 1 | 0.867 |
| Bernier | 251 | 23 | 28 | 5 | 0.908 | 155 | 17 | 20 | 3 | 0.890 |
| Goalie | PPCA | PPCGA | PPGA | PPNCGA | PPCSV% | SHCA | SHCGA | SHGA | SHNCGA | SHCSV% |
| Reimer | 33 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0.818 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.000 |
| Bernier | 44 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 0.886 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.667 |
Threw this table together quickly, not necessarily sure what value it has, but it shows the number of chances against each goalie that ended up as goals, including "save" percentage (which is a misnomer, as it includes missed shots as chances). It also shows the number of non-chance goals against (long/bad angle shots, deflections from your own team, misplays, etc.). Bernier has a better percentage of stopping chances, but has allowed more non-chances, which certainly fits well with how I remember games going. Not having league numbers to compare this to is unfortunate, but it's pretty clear from the overall SV% standings that both goalies have been excellent, and have been critical to the Leafs' sucess. How they get there is what differs, with Bernier more prone to bad and strange goals, but managing to stop more chances than Reimer.
Thanks to extraskater.com and stats.hockeyanalysis.com for some of the non-chance stats I use here. For questions/comments, feel free to add below or on twitter @BAWDisease
No comments:
Post a Comment