3/4 point summary - Player data

Having already discussed the team stats, I'll move onto looking at the players.

First, forwards who have played at least 100 minutes minutes overall at even strength. This excludes 5 players (Devane, Leivo, Broll, Abbott and McKegg):

F/20, A/20 and N/20 are the even strength chance rates per 20 minutes ice time.

Overall	Pos	ESF	ESA	ESD	ES%	ESTOI	AvESTOI	F/20	A/20	N/20
D'Amigo	F	30	29	1	50.8%	130:01	06:50	4.6	4.5	0.2
Kessel	F	347	363	-16	48.9%	1057:55	17:03	6.6	6.9	-0.3
Van Riemsdyk	F	306	328	-22	48.3%	956:04	15:56	6.4	6.9	-0.5
Bozak	F	194	216	-22	47.3%	630:03	16:34	6.2	6.9	-0.7
Kulemin	F	153	172	-19	47.1%	683:40	13:40	4.5	5.0	-0.6
Kadri	F	254	287	-33	47.0%	876:40	15:06	5.8	6.5	-0.8
Bolland	F	41	47	-6	46.6%	202:59	13:31	4.0	4.6	-0.6
Clarkson	F	136	168	-32	44.7%	608:02	14:49	4.5	5.5	-1.1
Ashton	F	34	44	-10	43.6%	182:02	06:04	3.7	4.8	-1.1
Smith	F	51	67	-16	43.2%	257:14	09:53	4.0	5.2	-1.2
Raymond	F	210	291	-81	41.9%	880:14	14:11	4.8	6.6	-1.8
Orr	F	33	46	-13	41.8%	248:00	05:30	2.7	3.7	-1.0
Lupul	F	191	272	-81	41.3%	842:45	15:54	4.5	6.5	-1.9
McClement	F	133	191	-58	41.0%	734:58	12:02	3.6	5.2	-1.6
Bodie	F	41	59	-18	41.0%	205:02	07:35	4.0	5.8	-1.8
Holland	F	90	131	-41	40.7%	369:23	11:32	4.9	7.1	-2.2
McLaren	F	10	17	-7	37.0%	105:56	04:04	1.9	3.2	-1.3
Smithson	F	10	27	-17	27.0%	125:02	06:56	1.6	4.3	-2.7

Jerry D'Amigo definitely seemed to deserve another shot at the NHL, as he was very effective in his relatively limited time, the only Leaf who was on for more chances for than against. 

Nazem Kadri led this list at the halfway point, but has fallen behind the players on the big line, with Phil Kessel pulling up to lead the current roster in percentage and in chances overall. The big line is the worst defensive line, but is also on for farm more chances against than any other set of forwards; Kadri is almost as poor defensively, but generates almost a chance/20 minutes less than Kessel, and Raymond and Lupul generate two chances/20 fewer.

Nik Kulemin continues to impress, posting a differentialy almost as good as the top line players, and it certainly seems like any move to trade him, while keeping struggling chance players like Raymond and Lupul, would be a big mistake.

Joffrey Lupul has consistently been the most disappointing forward on the team, really struggling to generate chances, despite being moved around in the lineup; separating Kessel and JVR seems to be insane, but if one of those players could be effective without another, it might be worth it to jumpstart Lupul. 

The return of David Bolland will be an interesting point, as it's not clear what level of play he'll manage after his return from injury; if he can be around the 47% level he put together while healthy, it would be a big boost, reducing the ice time of players like Smith (43%), McClement (41%) and Holland (41%).

The big three have been the best offensive performers on the team, with Kadri the next best in terms of generating chances. Defensively, the best numbers belong to the low-event fourth liners, along with the injured Bolland; other than those players, the best is the aforementioned Kulemin.

I also put together some data on forward lines:

These have some pretty small sample sizes, but here's every line on for at least 20 total chances (unfortunately, I don't have icetime for these line combos).

Line	Total	For	Against	Ch%
Bozak-Kessel-Van Riemsdyk	164	146	18	52.9%
Kadri-Kessel-Van Riemsdyk	83	72	11	53.5%
Kadri-Lupul-Raymond	30	39	-9	43.5%
Kadri-Lupul-Kulemin	26	32	-6	44.8%
Holland-Lupul-Raymond	22	35	-13	38.6%
Kadri-Clarkson-Raymond	21	25	-4	45.7%
Kadri-Lupul-Clarkson	19	27	-8	41.3%
Holland-Kessel-Van Riemsdyk	17	26	-9	39.5%
Smith-Clarkson-Raymond	18	24	-6	42.9%
McClement-Clarkson-Kulemin	23	19	4	54.8%
Smith-Lupul-Clarkson	14	15	-1	48.3%
McClement-D'Amigo-Kulemin	17	9	8	65.4%
Holland-Bodie-Raymond	10	15	-5	40.0%
McClement-Raymond-Kulemin	13	11	2	54.2%
Bozak-Kessel-Raymond	8	14	-6	36.4%
Kadri-Kessel-Lupul	12	10	2	54.5%
Kadri-Lupul-Broll	7	13	-6	35.0%

Kessel and JVR are the key to the Leafs' two consistently effective lines, but Kulemin also has been useful with McClement, whether Clarkson, D'Amigo or Raymond has been the winger. Holland-Lupul-Raymond has beeen a really poor line, and Holland was much worse than Kadri with Kessel and JVR.

Next, the defense:

Overall	Pos	ESF	ESA	ESD	ES%	ESTOI	AvESTOI	F/20	A/20	N/20
Gunnarsson	D	266	281	-15	48.6%	1005:37	16:29	5.3	5.6	-0.3
Phaneuf	D	278	317	-39	46.7%	1072:45	17:52	5.2	5.9	-0.7
Gleason	D	74	86	-12	46.3%	314:52	16:34	4.7	5.5	-0.8
Rielly	D	214	265	-51	44.7%	832:38	15:42	5.1	6.4	-1.2
Ranger	D	146	186	-40	44.0%	625:08	16:01	4.7	6.0	-1.3
Gardiner	D	259	339	-80	43.3%	1086:35	18:06	4.8	6.2	-1.5
Fraser	D	57	75	-18	43.2%	241:31	12:42	4.7	6.2	-1.5
Franson	D	229	315	-86	42.1%	978:04	16:18	4.7	6.4	-1.8

Gunnarsson continued to be the top defenseman, but the addition of Gleason has been a clear positive, as he slots in close to Phaneuf in terms of performance. Reducing the burden on the likes of Franson and Ranger has an excellent result, and Gleason has been an excellent addition (for comparison, Liles was at 43.8% this season).

Cody Franson's poor season continues, as he remaines mired at the bottom of the team percentages, not generating much offense and having one of the worst defensive records as well. Rielly is on for as many chances, but is one of the better Leafs at generating chances. 
 

Pairing	Total	For	Against	Ch%
Phaneuf-Gunnarsson	193	205	-12	48.5%
Franson-Gardiner	100	125	-25	44.4%
Rielly-Gardiner	60	61	-1	49.6%
Ranger-Gardiner	50	62	-12	44.6%
Franson-Rielly	39	62	-23	38.6%
Ranger-Rielly	48	42	6	53.3%
Franson-Gleason	35	37	-2	48.6%
Fraser-Ranger	22	34	-12	39.3%
Phaneuf-Gardiner	19	27	-8	41.3%
Gleason-Rielly	19	26	-7	42.2%
Franson-Gunnarsson	21	16	5	56.8%
Phaneuf-Franson	14	22	-8	38.9%
Gunnarsson-Gardiner	18	15	3	54.5%
Fraser-Rielly	12	18	-6	40.0%

It's pretty clear that using Franson with Gleason has been vastly superior to using him with one of the rookie defensmen, who had been his primary partners to this point; The Leafs can now actualyl put together three solid ES defensive pairings in Phaneuf-Gunnarsson, Franson-Gleason and Rielly-Gardiner, as all three of these partnerships have been over 48% when on the ice. It's the likes of Franson/Gardiner and Franson/Rielly, along with Ranger/Gardiner, that have been troublesome.



For questions/comments, feel free to add below or on twitter @BAWDisease

3/4 point summary - Team, period and score related data

Here is a summary of the Leafs scoring chance data I've been tracking so far this season. Data related to players is in another post. 

First, the team totals:

	Overall				ES				PP				SH
	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%
First Half	655	815	-160	44.6%	505	630	-125	44.5%	141	17	124	89.2%	8	167	-159	4.6%
Q3	338	408	-70	45.3%	270	318	-48	45.9%	55	20	35	73.3%	10	66	-56	13.2%
Total	993	1223	-230	44.8%	775	948	-173	45.0%	196	37	159	84.1%	18	233	-215	7.2%

The Leafs have seen a marginal increase in their chance percentage over the last 20 games, but still remain around the 45% mark. They've been much better at generating chances shorthanded, but have also been more permissive on the powerplay themselves.

From extraskater.com, here are the Corsi data for the Leafs in the same situations:

	Overall				ES				PP				SH
	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%
First Half	2121	2744	-623	43.6%	1596	2125	-529	42.9%	347	45	302	88.5%	25	409	-384	5.8%
Q3	1125	1380	-255	44.9%	1005	1223	-218	45.1%	179	42	137	81.0%	15	215	-200	6.5%
Total	3246	4124	-878	44.0%	2601	3348	-747	43.7%	526	87	439	85.8%	40	624	-584	6.0%

The increase in chance percentage is matched by an increase in Corsi percentages.

Game	Opp	Overall				ES				PP				SH
		ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%	ChF	ChA	Net	%
42	DET	11	22	-11	33.3%	9	16	-7	36.0%	2	0	2	100.0%	0	6	-6	0.0%
43	NYR	19	27	-8	41.3%	18	21	-3	46.2%	0	0	0	-	0	6	-6	0.0%
44	NYI	15	11	4	57.7%	11	9	2	55.0%	4	1	3	80.0%	0	1	-1	0.0%
45	CAR	13	23	-10	36.1%	12	13	-1	48.0%	0	1	-1	0.0%	1	9	-8	10.0%
46	WAS	23	17	6	57.5%	13	16	-3	44.8%	8	0	8	100.0%	2	1	1	66.7%
47	NJD	20	22	-2	47.6%	15	17	-2	46.9%	5	0	5	100.0%	0	5	-5	0.0%
48	BOS	13	22	-9	37.1%	7	17	-10	29.2%	5	2	3	71.4%	1	3	-2	25.0%
49	BUF	15	13	2	53.6%	12	11	1	52.2%	2	0	2	100.0%	0	2	-2	0.0%
50	MTL	16	20	-4	44.4%	13	16	-3	44.8%	3	0	3	100.0%	0	4	-4	0.0%
51	PHX	12	24	-12	33.3%	8	13	-5	38.1%	4	5	-1	44.4%	0	6	-6	0.0%
52	COL	17	18	-1	48.6%	13	16	-3	44.8%	4	1	3	80.0%	0	1	-1	0.0%
53	DAL	8	22	-14	26.7%	8	19	-11	29.6%	0	2	-2	0.0%	0	1	-1	0.0%
54	WPG	15	19	-4	44.1%	12	15	-3	44.4%	3	1	2	75.0%	0	3	-3	0.0%
55	TBL	17	23	-6	42.5%	13	13	0	50.0%	2	3	-1	40.0%	2	7	-5	22.2%
56	FLA	17	18	-1	48.6%	12	14	-2	46.2%	4	1	3	80.0%	1	3	-2	25.0%
57	OTT	16	13	3	55.2%	13	12	1	52.0%	2	0	2	100.0%	1	1	0	50.0%
58	FLA	15	19	-4	44.1%	14	19	-5	42.4%	0	0	0	-	1	0	1	100.0%
59	TBL	31	20	11	60.8%	28	20	8	58.3%	3	0	3	100.0%	0	0	0	-
60	VAN	16	12	4	57.1%	14	7	7	66.7%	2	0	2	100.0%	0	5	-5	0.0%
61	NYI	14	25	-11	35.9%	12	19	-7	38.7%	1	2	-1	33.3%	0	0	0	-
62	MTL	15	18	-3	45.5%	13	15	-2	46.4%	1	1	0	50.0%	1	2	-1	33.3%

Here is ES chance data for the Leafs by period:

	First Half			Q3			Total
Period	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%
1	156	200	43.8%	80	110	42.1%	236	310	43.2%
2	164	204	44.6%	86	95	47.5%	250	299	45.5%
3	150	198	43.1%	95	95	50.0%	245	293	45.5%
4	25	13	65.8%	7	14	33.3%	32	27	54.2%

Despite the increase overall, the Leafs have been worse in first periods than in the first half; the uptick has come in the second, and especially in the third, where Toronto has been much more effective.

	First Half			Q3			Total
State	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%
Close	295	372	44.2%	155	188	45.2%	450	560	44.6%

The uptick for the Leafs in chances has also come in close situations, though 45% is still very low in these situations.


I looked again at the Leafs in the third period, to compare how they were at defending and chasing leads.

	First Half			Q3			Total
State	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%
3rd Chasing	47	46	50.5%	28	18	60.9%	75	64	54.0%
Down 1	31	27	53.4%	20	16	55.6%	51	43	54.3%
Down 2	16	19	45.7%	8	2	80.0%	24	21	53.3%
3rd Defending	54	83	39.4%	31	28	52.5%	85	111	43.4%
Up 1	35	54	39.3%	12	16	42.9%	47	70	40.2%
Up 2	19	29	39.6%	19	12	61.3%	38	41	48.1%

The Leafs were strongly improved in both areas during the third period; wht most striking difference was their performance while defending two goal leads, which was substantially improved over the first half, Toronto managed to generate more chances than their opponents while defending 3rd period leads, which is almost the reverse situation that they were encountering in the first half.


Next, an overall summary of the Leafs' performance at different score states.

	First Half			Q3			Total
State	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%	For	Against	Ch%
-4	6	9	40.0%	7	5	58.3%	13	14	48.1%
-3	16	20	44.4%	5	3	62.5%	21	23	47.7%
-2	37	52	41.6%	27	21	56.3%	64	73	46.7%
-1	90	93	49.2%	51	53	49.0%	141	146	49.1%
Trailing	149	174	42.1%	90	82	52.3%	239	256	42.9%
0	168	231	42.1%	94	118	44.3%	262	349	42.9%
Leading	152	196	44.4%	72	91	44.2%	224	287	44.9%
1	103	129	44.4%	42	49	46.2%	145	178	44.9%
2	33	46	41.8%	21	19	52.5%	54	65	45.4%
3	12	9	57.1%	5	22	18.5%	17	31	35.4%
4	4	12	25.0%	4	1	80.0%	8	13	38.1%

The Leafs have  increased while trailing, but are almost the same when trailing by one; they've seen their improvement come when trailing by multiple points. They also haven't improved much while leading overall, but it's bin the opposite, as a couple of early leads in games have meant that they have much worse numbers when leading by three, but have slightly improved with one and two goal leads.