Behind The Net: FanPosts

SB Nation Survey + Chance to donate $500 to a charity of this community's choice

2010-03-20T00:47:50Z

>> Take SB Nation Survey

Hello sports fans! We're always striving to provide you with the best experience possible and it's been quite some time since we checked in with you.

So we're rolling out this survey to learn more about you and your sports world. It should only take about 10 minutes to complete.

We really appreciate your time and this is also going to help make a donation to a good cause.

By next Thursday (3/25) at 11:59pm PST the site that has the highest percentage of their community filling out the attached survey about their sports interests and consumption will win $500 to donate to a charity of their choice. We will leave it up to the discretion of the community manager(s) of the winning blog to decide how to choose the particular charity.

You can take the survey HERE

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WYR2WQT

Thanks for your support!

"Those Damn Homer Refs": Team Edition 2009-10

2010-03-14T02:35:23Z

A little while ago, I took a look at PIM data and found that there is ample evidence that some players (and player types) this year receive considerably different treatment at home games than away games. Using the % of PIM in away games as a virtual "control group," guys like Jarome Iginla, Eric Staal, and Ryan Getzlaf were shown to have a whopping 75%-80% of their penalties called against them on the road, while Mike Knuble, Rene Bourque, and Mike Richards have 75%-80% of their penalties called against them at home. Now, using the away PIM in this manner is debatable, but when the difference is reaching an 80-20 split, it becomes hard to ignore.

While the disparity among players is interesting, I know a lot of you are more interested in the team PIM data. You see, it's a bit easy to propose that players like Crosby and Ovechkin get the slip at home (which is not the case with Crosby; 56% of his penalties care called on him at home); it's not hard to follow a single player over the course of a game. But if you really want to let your conspiracy dreams (or hockey debates) run wild, you need team data, and lots of it.

Now, I've always been one to pester and annoy, and the opportunity to add some fuel to this fire is something I simply can't resist. Flyers fans, you might want to make sure you're sitting down. Or at least not near any sharp objects. Pens fans, you might want to look out for Flyers fans that haven't taken said advice. Rangers fans, too....

And Toronto...oh man, Toronto...

(Note: Before you try to connect the dots, I want to point out that I do division breakdowns later in the post)

%Minor PIM Called at Home, 2009-10

1. Philadelphia Flyers - 58.89

2. St. Louis Blues - 56.4

3. Ottawa Senators - 56.22

4. Tampa Bay Lightning - 54.33

5. Phoenix Coyotes - 52.93

6. Boston Bruins - 51.98

7. Calgary Flames - 51.47

8. Chicago Blackhawks - 50.76

9. Colorado Avalanche - 49.91

10. Detroit Red Wings - 49.8

11. San Jose Sharks - 49.45

12. Edmonton Oilers - 49.21

13. Anaheim Ducks - 48.7

14. Atlanta Thrashers - 48.57

15. Minnesota Wild - 47.33

16. Buffalo Sabres - 47.23

17. Florida Panthers - 46.14

18. New York Islanders - 45.99

19. Washington Capitals - 45.94

20. Dallas Stars - 45.93

21. New Jersey Devils - 45.84

22. Montreal Canadiens - 45.25

23. Vancouver Canucks - 45.14

24. Nashville Predators - 43.68

25. New York Rangers - 43.06

26. Pittsburgh Penguins - 42.02

27. Columbus Blue Jackets - 41.84

28. Carolina Hurricanes - 41.17

29. Los Angeles Kings - 40.31

30. Toronto Maple Leafs - 37.76

Now, before we go too nuts on some of the teams near the middle, realize that, in general, the league is reffing at an approximate 48-52 split among minor PIM home and away. In other words, the "homer bias" argument is slightly justified so far this year (in fact, it is just about every year). But in general the teams at the middle are not seeing substantive benefits or disadvantages over about 20 of the league's teams.

On the other hand, either end of the spectrum shows that some teams are likely getting some kind of edge or detriment beyond the others. Toronto and Philadelphia are at impressively far ends, with a difference of 21 percent.

The differences in percentages among the conferences are, in general, pretty negligible, with the Western Conference seeing a 48.19%-51.81% split home and away, and the Eastern showing a 47.36%-52.64% split. The same can even be said among the divisions; the highest division home PIM % is 48.5%, and the lowest is 47.16%.

What's more interesting is the dynamics within the division averages. Four of the six divisions contain one team that has ~54% or higher of their minor PIM called against them at home; five of the six divisions have one team that has ~42% or lower.

Atlantic %Minor PIM at Home

Red-Headed Stepchildren: Philadelphia Flyers (58.89%)

The Gravy Train: Pittsburgh Penguins (42.02%)

Northeast

RHS: Ottawa Senators (56.22%)

Gravy Train: Toronto Maple Leafs (37.76%)

Southeast

RHS: Tampa Bay Lightning (54.33%)

Gravy Train: Carolina Hurricanes (41.17%)

Central

RHS: St. Louis Blues (56.4%)

Gravy Train: Columbus Blue Jackets (41.84%)

Northwest

RHS: Calgary Flames (51.47%)

Gravy Train: Vancouver Canucks (45.14%)

Pacific

RHS: Phoenix Coyotes (52.93%)

Gravy Train: Los Angeles Kings (40.31%)

The Flyers, in fact, singlehandedly keep the Atlantic Division's numbers in line with the other divisions. Every other team in the Atlantic has 45.99% (Islanders) or less of their PIM assessed at home. The biggest in-division disparity is in the Northeast, with the difference between the Senators and Leafs a whopping 19 percent.

It will be interesting, in the future, to bring this data over a longer span of time and see if there are any trends. What's most concerning to me is that a.) Flyers fans have another reason to be pissed, b.) Flyers fans can't complain about Crosby getting preferential treatment, which will compound the piss-itude of the previous problem, and c.) my Rangers are getting preferential treatment and still suck. So there's that.

It is worth noting at this point that any grand conclusions about team favoritism should be kept on hold until more data is brought together. Even then, my hunch is that you won't find any conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but rather seasons in which teams (like the Leafs and Flyers in this case) experience a steep variance in home/away minor PIM.

The last thing I want to say is this: in the NHL, the power play has returned to its early 1990s' strength as a legitimate opportunity. Some teams will take more penalties, and that's fine. But the homerism has to at least be in balance, if not consciously eliminated altogether. When a team is getting called nearly 1/3 less at home than away, it's getting ridiculous. When a team is at a near 15 percent disadvantage compared to the rest of its division, it's getting ridiculous. In general, if further research uncovers trends that re-affirm these disparities, the NHL must develop a response. There are too many teams that literally cannot afford losing seasons.

P.S. If you want any individual player data, let me know in the comments and I'll get back to you.

P.P.S. Here's the link to the original BN post.

Poll

So, how about those refs?

"Those Damn Homer Refs": Who's Getting an Edge?

2010-03-08T06:51:07Z

You hear the complaint, you've made the complaint, and my mother will never forgive Andy Van Hellemond for it. You know what I'm talking about; it's those goddamn homer refs.

In all honesty, you aren't going to find a sport where the refereeing, officiating, judging, etc. isn't criticized. The exception may be Nickelodeon GUTS, possibly, but it's hard to question Mo' with that marvelous British accent.

Note: A great idea for a drinking game is to watch GUTS, pick your "horse" (contestant), and either slam a beer for each loss or do a "beer tower" after each event. The best part is you all end up yelling at children.

Moira Quirk aside, I want to take a brief look at players who either are a.) getting a lot of love from their homer refs, or b.) are getting slammed by homer reffing.

A quick explanation at how I'm doing this. I'm simply taking the player's penalty minutes in away games and expressing it as a percentage of their total penalty minutes this year. Initially, I've broken the players into two categories, forwards and defensemen, but I have a couple of additional categories worth looking at as well. I've set the minimum games played at 10 away games (with the idea that they would have played around 20 games overall).

As you might know already, Byron Bitz is a very interesting anomaly in these data, getting all of his 31 PIM in away games. A few other guys deserve honorable mention in duplicating this feat:

Quintin Laing, Capitals - 21 PIM (6 Minor PIM{mPIM})

Guillaume Latendresse, Canadiens/Wild - 12 PIM (12 mPIM)

Tom Pyatt, Canadiens - 8 PIM (8 mPIM)

Andrei Markov, Canadiens - 16 PIM (16 mPIM)

There are a couple of others, all lower than 8 PIM, but at that point it's really less interesting. Sorry Brett, Carl, Jordan, Taylor, Cal, Brandon, Jere, Patrick, and David.

So, outside of these crazy cases, who are our leaders? (Note: total mPIM is included to give an idea of how frequently the player fights)

High % of PIM in Away Games, Forwards

1. Wayne Primeau, Leafs - 93.94% (31 of 33 PIM; 18 mPIM)

2. Pavel Datsyuk, Wings - 87.5% (14 of 16 PIM; 16 mPIM)

3. Dan Sexton, Ducks - 87.5% (14 of 16 PIM; 6 mPIM)

4. Dustin Boyd, Flames/Predators - 86.67% (13 of 15 PIM; 10 mPIM)

5. Peter Mueller, Coyotes/Avalanche - 85.71% (12 of 14 PIM; 14 mPIM)

High % of PIM in Away Games, Defensemen

1. Marc Methot, Blue Jackets - 94.29% (31 of 33 PIM; 20 mPIM)

2. Matt Gilroy, Rangers - 90.48% (19 of 21 PIM; 6 mPIM)

3. Tomas Kaberle, Leafs - 90% (18 of 20 PIM; 20 mPIM)

4. Jeff Finger, Leafs - 87.5% (14 of 16 PIM; 6 mPIM) - Note: The Finger's been in two fights?!

5. Darryl Sydor, Blues - 86.67% (13 of 15 PIM; 8 mPIM)

As you can see, a curious number of Maple Leafs among these top 5. On the flip side, we also have a good handful of forwards and defensemen with all of their PIM assessed in home games; most prominently, Sami Salo (10 PIM; 10 mPIM) and Jesse Winchester (15 PIM; 10 mPIM). The remainder are likely more anomalous. The "leaders":

Low % of PIM in Away Games, Forwards

1. Nathan Horton, Panthers - 6.25% (2 of 32 PIM; 20 mPIM)

2. Michael Frolik, Panthers - 9.76% (4 of 41 PIM; 24 mPIM)

3. Andrew Cogliano, Oilers - 11.76% (2 of 17 PIM; 12 mPIM)

4. David Moss, Flames - 12.5% (2 of 16 PIM; 16 mPIM)

5. Devin Setoguchi, Sharks - 13.33% (2 of 15 PIM; 10 mPIM)

Low % of PIM in Away Games, Defensemen

1. Andrew Ference, Bruins - 12.5% (2 of 16 PIM; 16 mPIM)

2. Brian Rafalski, Wings - 14.29% (2 of 14 PIM; 14 mPIM)

3. Mark Stuart, Bruins - 17.02% (8 of 47 PIM; 30 mPIM)

4. Wade Redden, Rangers - 19.05% (4 of 21 PIM; 16 mPIM)

5. Brian Pothier, Capitals/Hurricanes - 20% (2 of 10 PIM; 10 mPIM)

Once again, some interesting recurrences, with Bruin defensemen and Panther forwards getting the short end of the stick this time. One of the things you might notice is the drawback of using percentage to express this; a lot of these players have relatively low PIM totals. So, to get better evidence of a player seeing a major difference in calls home and away, I reset the minimum to include both games played and 50 PIM. At least half of those minutes have to be minors. Now it gets good:

High %, Forwards

1. Eric Staal, Hurricanes - 80.77% (42 of 52 PIM; 32 mPIM)

2. Jarome Iginla, Flames - 78.43% (40 of 51 PIM; 26 mPIM)

3. Ryan Getzlaf, Ducks - 76.47% (52 of 68 PIM; 58 mPIM)

4. Derek Dorsett, Blue Jackets - 76.39% (55 of 72 PIM; 42 mPIM)

5. Todd Bertuzzi, Wings - 67.65% (46 of 68 PIM; 58 mPIM)

High %, Defensemen

1. John Erskine, Capitals - 73.33% (44 of 60 PIM; 30 mPIM)

2. Bryan McCabe, Panthers - 73.13% (49 of 67 PIM; 52 mPIM)

3. Joni Pitkanen, Hurricanes - 69.7% (46 of 66 PIM; 66 mPIM)

4. Andrew Alberts, Hurricanes/Canucks - 65.43% (53 of 81 PIM; 46 mPIM)

5. Matt Greene, Kings - 63.89% (46 of 72 PIM; 52 mPIM)

Low %, Forwards

1. Mike Knuble, Capitals - 22.64% (12 of 53 PIM; 38 mPIM)

2. Rene Bourque, Flames - 25% (19 of 76 PIM; 66 mPIM)

3. Mike Richards, Flyers - 25.76% (17 of 66 PIM; 36 mPIM)

4. Steve Downie, Lightning - 28.8% (53 of 184 PIM; 94 mPIM)

5. Ethan Moreau, Oilers - 39.29% (22 of 56 PIM; 36 mPIM)

Low %, Defensemen

1. Zdeno Chara, Bruins - 30.56% (22 of 72 PIM; 52 mPIM)

2. Jim Vandermeer, Coyotes - 33.93% (19 of 56 PIM; 36 mPIM)

3. Christoph Schubert, Thrashers - 34.78% (24 of 69 PIM; 54 mPIM)

4. Erik Johnson, Blues - 35% (21 of 60 PIM; 40 mPIM)

5. Victor Hedman, Lightning - 36.36% (24 of 66 PIM; 56 mPIM)

A lot of fun conclusions to be had here. Star forwards (and Derek Dorsett?) seem to get the "star treatment" at home, as Staal, Iginla, and Getzlaf have to get their time in the sin bin while traveling. On the flip side, your hard-nosed forwards tend to get highlighted at home, but are curiously given the slip on the road. Rookie defensemen Johnson and Hedberg are getting taught the nuances of the game on-the-job, while some tougher veteran D get virtual playgrounds at home. And nobody likes Steve Downie. Well, maybe a couple of Flyers fans.

In general, when you get to the bigger penalty-takers, favoritism towards teams seems to be all over the map. On the other hand, player-types seem to draw trends, and I will be spending a bit more time with these data in the future.

P.S. Original link at BN here

Poll

Do you like Steve Downie?

2010 U.S. v Canada = 1980 U.S. v Soviet Union? Why It Doesn't, and Why It Does

2010-02-28T21:49:24Z

In light of the Feb. 21st upset of the Canadian nation by the 2010 U.S. hockey team, we've seen a smattering of articles including comparisons of this year's game to the Miracle on Ice. A few journalists trumpeted the great achievement, and more than a few absolutely castigated the said journalists.

1980's Miracle on Ice inhabits a sacred realm for many Americans; not so much for Russians. It's viewed as an untouchable upset, and in many ways it is. For the United States. As Behind the Net points out, there's often a lot of ignorance in the American perspective of upsets. Certainly, Switzerland defeating Canada (indeed, shutting out Canada) at Torino was pretty big. But the Olympics are inherently about nationalism, so I'm rarely surprised when countries analyze these events through their own goggles (although said goggles are likely Made in China).

Before getting into the meat of this post, I want to preface these arguments with two undisputable facts: a.) the 2010 U.S. v Canada game has little to no historical context that could match the 1980 U.S. v Soviet Union game, and b.) the 2010 game had a bit less weight on the final results of the tournament than the 1980 game (2010: round play that got U.S. into quarter-finals; 1980: semi-finals). Context certainly elevates the 1980 game.

So what about the other argument, that it was (in 1980) a "bunch of college kids" upsetting the best team in the world as oppose to (in 2010) "NHL stars" beating "better NHL stars"? After the jump, let's look at both sides of the argument of whether, talent-wise, the 1980 game was a greater upset than the 2010 game.

Arguments for 1980 U.S. v Soviet Union

- The Soviets were the best team in the world. On numerous occasions in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, the Soviet teams challenged NHL teams and beat them. In the Super Series (mini-tournaments between NHL & Soviet teams) over this period, the Soviets would win 14 of 18 series. The team (at the time of the 1980 Olympics) boasted Russian greats Boris Mikhailov, Valeri Kharlamov, Vladimir Petrov, Vladislav Tretiak, and Alexander Maltsev.

- The U.S. team was a "bunch of college kids." Indeed they were, in the truest sense, a bunch of amateurs (as they were supposed to be). Many of the Soviets were considered part of the military to "prove" they were working to provide for themselves and not being paid for hockey. All of the U.S. team were fresh out of college, with the exceptions of Buzz Schneider and Mike Eruzione, who had both played some minor league hockey (Schneider had played on the 1976 team).

- The same Soviet team beat the U.S. 10-3 in an exhibition before the Olympics. Yowza.

Arguments For 2010 U.S. v Canada

- The 1980 Soviet team was in a transitional period. A little summary of Soviet hockey history: in 1980, the Soviet team was experiencing a virtual changing-of-the-guard. Those dominant teams of the 1970s were aging (the average # of pro games after the Olympics for Soviet greats Boris Mikhailov, Valeri Kharlamov, Alexander Maltsev, and Vladimir Petrov before retirement? 39), and in fact had been playing at about 2/3 of their peak production for the 3 years 1978-79 to 1980-81. The future Soviet greats, Slava Fetisov, Alexei Kasatonov, Sergei Makarov, and Vladimir Krutov, were very young (average age - 20) and not at their peaks, either. Makarov was close, but the other two were years away (Note: the famed KLM line, including Krutov, Larionov, & Makarov, was not even an idea at the time). The players that were still playing at a world-class level, including Petrov, Helmuts Balderis, and Vladislav Tretiak, were not as numerous as in previous Olympics.

- The 1980 U.S. team's talent is understated. First of all, of the 18 skaters, 15 had been drafted by NHL teams or both NHL and WHA teams (most in the first 3 or 4 rounds). No less than 10 would be in the NHL within a year. College kids? Yes. NHL-ready? Yes. If you want to evaluate the Soviet team's talent by the future accomplishments of the players, then you cannot deny the high level at which Mike Ramsey, Dave Christian, Mark Pavelich, Ken Morrow, Mark Johnson, Steve Christoff, and Neal Broten played in the most talented league on Earth.

Oh, and the 1980 U.S. team won the gold medal, which I think means they might have played at a high level in the other games, too.

- Tretiak was pulled, Brodeur was not. The classic Soviet argument was that Tretiak should not have been pulled. And I've yet to come across someone who has reasoned that to not be a mistake. The fact of the matter is that his replacement, Vladimir Myshkin, was not particularly good, in part because the Soviets never intended for him to play. Brodeur, like Tretiak one of the best if not the best goaltender of his era, played the entire game.

- The "systems" argument is a wash. The Soviets had a great system; so did the U.S. Nine of the members of the U.S. team were former Brooks understudies at Minnesota, and as a team they played 55-65 games together. The 2010 Canadian and U.S. teams have, in general, not had the time together to perfect a system the likes of which was seen in 1980.

- The results are inconclusive as to whether the Soviets were actually the best team in the world at the time. They may have been the favorites at the Olympics, but they had not consistently shown the ability to defeat the best NHL teams. Many of what were dubbed the "Super Series" games were played against middling to poor NHL teams (in part because the better NHL teams were afraid they would lose). In general, Soviet teams compiled a 61.5 winning percentage in the Super Series spanning from 1976 to 1991. On the other hand, two years before and after the 1980 Olympics, the Soviets record was hovering around 50 percent (against mostly middling and poor NHL teams, mind you). As mentioned before, they were in transition.

- The 2010 Canadian team boasts 1 to 2 (if not 3) of the top 5 players in the world at every position. Martin Brodeur, Roberto Luongo, Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Ryan Getzlaf, Sidney Crosby, Joe Thornton, Duncan Keith, Dany Heatley, Jarome Iginla...the Soviets could not have made a similar claim in 1980.

- The 2010 U.S. team would be lucky to have 1 to 2 of the top 10 players in the world at any position. In general, the comparisons to the above list are Zach Parise, Patrick Kane, and Ryan Miller. And that's about it. Let's put it this way...among Canadian forwards, seven have produced .95 points per game over the last 3 NHL seasons. The U.S.? One (Parise). The average PPG for Canadian forwards is nearly one point-per, while the Americans sit at a meager .72 PPG. Even defensively, the disparity is drastic: the 3-year average adjusted +/- for the Canadians in the NHL (which compares a player's +/- to his team's +/-) is nearly two times higher than the Americans.

As you can probably see, this has been occupying my mind a bit. While I think the backlash against those comparing 2010 to 1980 for shallow reasons is qualified, I also think that a closer look could actually draw the nature of the upsets a bit closer. In sum, the 1980 Russians were a tad mythologized, the 1980 Americans a bit too cheekily "underdogged", and the disparity between the 2010 teams too easily dismissed. The 1980 game will never be matched for context, but "sacredness" of the upset itself could definitely be challenged by the amazing game played by the U.S. team a few nights ago.

P.S. Here's the link to the original post at BN.

Four Tips for a Better Slapshot in Hockey

2010-02-11T14:24:58Z

Slapshot Tips

This article is a great summary of how to take a slap shot. If you want more articles like this then check out our Hockey Tips website. If you want some more tips on shooting you can read our how to take a slapshot article

Slapshots are important for any hockey player to learn. A good slapshot is very important for any player, especially a defensemen.

The following points are important to remember when taking a slapshot:

Weight transfer- Just like other shots in hockey using weight transfer when you shoot gives you a lot more power. To transfer your weight all you have to do is lean into the shot, and move your weight forwards.
Stay low and load the stick- When you take a slap shot you should be hitting the ice first (not the puck) by hitting the ice 3-5 inches behind the puck (sometimes even more depending on your age level and stick flex) you cause the stick to flex. You should line the puck up about two inches behind your front foot. When you are taking the slap shot you want to hit the ice between your legs, lean into it, and don't forget weight transfer. This will load your stick with a lot of flex. Another good tip for defensemen is to shoot low, to mid range. The last thing you want to do is take off the head of your own players. If there is no one in front of the net, by all means let a high shot rip. This brings me to my next point.
Power is important, but Accuracy is key- It is better to be accurate with your slap shot, then to hammer rockets all around the net but never hit it! You will never score if you can not hit the net, so practice your aim first and then work on your power. A good rule is to keep the shot around knee height. You can score goals, and your forwards have a good chance of tip ins
Follow through- Your follow through is important in a slapshot. If you want the puck to go high, you should follow through high, if you are shooting low, than keep your follow through low.

5 Hockey Tips that Will Help you Score More Goals

2010-02-11T14:15:07Z

This is from my Hockey website. I have a lot more articles on my site, but figured I would share this one.

5 Tips to Help You Score More Goals

I have written this summary of my article to help hockey players score more goals. Every hockey player, parent and coach loves to see goals scored! I hope this brief version will help you score more goals in Hockey, visit my Hockey Tips site to see a more detailed version and more hockey tips, drills, videos and more

Shoot the Puck
- If you look at the all time stats from the NHL you will see ten out of ten of the players with the most shots, also ALL have more than 600 goals. In the words of Wayne Gretzky, the highest goal scorer of all time. "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" So do not give up a chance of scoring a goal in an attempt to score a "prettier" goal. Shoot the puck, and maybe one of your team mate will pop in the rebound if you miss
Be Creative
- You don't always have to go top shelf, try shooting low, faking a shot, shoot five hole or deking. If you shoot for the same spot every time the goalie will stop you every time!
Know the Goalie
- If you can watch the goalie in the warm up then you can get a good idea of where the goalies weaknesses are. Once you find the goaltenders weak spots (places he has trouble stopping the puck) then you will know where to shoot and score more goals. You can even tell everyone on your team so they can score easier.
Read Your Players
- Knowing your fellow line mates is a great way to score more goals. If you know how your team mates play, you will know where to be on the ice to get a pass, when to rush the net and when to hang back. This will help you and your team mates set up more plays and score more goals.
Don't Telegraph Your Shot
- Goalies are well trained, highly tuned puck stopping machines. Any hint you give them that you are going to shoot will give them that much more time to react and stop your shot. Some hints that you are going to shoot include stick handling with the puck in front of you, and then moving it to your shooting side when you are going to shoot, looking right where you are going to shoot (it's good to take a peak, but don't make it really obvious) and breaking your stride.

I hope these tips will help you score more goals in hockey. Keep an eye out for my next article called - 7 Traits Every Pure Goal Scorer Possesses. If you would like to get more articles like this when I post them you can enter your email address in the box to the left of my Hockey Tips blog. You will get tips like this sent right to your inbox whenever they are posted on my site.

The Flames-Leafs blockbuster trade: Why Lou Lamoriello Probably Thinks that Both Teams Lose

2010-02-02T15:35:37Z

Everyone has their opinion about who got the upper hand in the recent Flames Leafs trade. But I bet if you ask Lou Lamoriello - the New Jersey Devils GM - who won, he'll just shake his head and laugh at GMs Sutter and Burke and their respective attempts to claw their way ahead by block buster trades.

First off, Lamoriello is one of the most successful GMs in NHL history, having built a team that made the playoffs in 18 of 20 seasons, went to the finals four times, and won it all twice. Obviously he's doing something right. So why might Lou be laughing in derision? Look at Lou's current roster and you'll notice a few things. Of the 33 players on the roster, 55% of them (18 players!) were drafted by Devil management. Some 6 Devils drafted in the first round still play for their drafting team. Only one player on the roster was picked up in a trade; Jamie Langenbrunner, and that was all the way back in 2002.

Lou builds his team through the draft, carefully grooming and nurturing his players in the farm system, and finally debuting them in the NHL when they are ready. And he keeps them. For a long time. Plotting headline grabbing trades doesn't seem to be part of his toolbox.

The Flames and Leafs, on the other hand, are made up of a hodge podge of players drafted by other teams and acquired through trades. Take the Leafs. Only 8 of the 26 players on the Leafs roster were originally drafted by Leafs management (Kaberle, Ponikarovsky, Mitchell, Kulemin, Reimer, Stalberg, Gunnarson, and Schnee). Only 1 player drafted by the Leafs in the first round still plays on the team, that being Luke Schenn. Everyone else has arrived via a trade or free agent signing.

As for the Flames, only seven of its 28 player roster were original Flames drafts (Moss, Nystrom, McElhinney, Prust, Boyd, Pardy, & Backlund). Two first-rounders are still around - Eric Nystrom and Mikael Backlund - but the former has evolved into a fourth liner, and the latter is still untried. Whereas only one player on the Devil's roster arrived via trade, almost half the Flame's roster is a product of trades!

Lou is not alone. As the chart below shows, successful teams like Colorado, Dallas, and Detroit all sport a high number of their own drafts on their rosters.

The above comparison sufficiently highlights the vast difference in management styles between the Lamoriellos of the NHL and the Burkes/Sutters. Both the Flames and the Leafs are trying to build teams by acquisition rather than through the draft. Big trades are sexy and attention grabbing, but if New Jersey is any guide to building an effective team, the slow but steady process of drafting a player and nurturing them through the farm team system has been far more successful.

It might be argued that keeping your players during their slumps rather than surprising them and their families with trades demonstrates to the player a degree of respect and commitment, and may get them to better contribute. Teams operating as "profit maximizing" businesses, surprising their players with sudden transactions that they only hear about after in the press, may be the sorts of teams that don't inspire their players. Perhaps GMs Burke and Sutter should get back to the bricks and mortar method of team-building, treating their players as works in progress rather than trading fodder.

One could make the argument that, while the Flames and Leafs have dealt most of their original drafts away, that's not a knock on the actual quality of the Flames/Leafs scouting departments. A well-chosen draft pick, after all, can be exchanged for a proven veteran. Some statistics will put this argument to a quick death. The chart below shows the number of players currently active that have been drafted by each of the 30 NHL team. Scott Gomez, for example, counts in the New Jersey tally, since the Devils drafted him though he now plays for Montreal.

Now Toronto doesn't look so bad in this graph, having drafted 25 active players. Indeed, that's better than Detroit's 24 active drafs! But take a look at the quality of Detroit's drafts: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Knuble, and many more. Those 24 players have combined for a total of 4655 points since being drafted by the Wings. Toronto's best existing draft is the excellent Thomas Kaberle, but the next best in terms of points is... Fred Modin, followed by Nik Antropov. Hardly elite players. Probably the most decent draft in recent times by Leafs management was Brad Boyes, but he was sent to San Jose for veteran Owen Nolan. Sum the point totals of all Toronto drafts and you get a measly 2885, far below Detroit's totals.

As for Lou and the Devils, they have an impressive 34 players drafted still in action. These players have scored an incredible 7707 points! And that doesn't include the amazing goal tending contribution by Marty Brodeur. Lou and his scouts have a fine eye for young talent, and the numbers prove it.

The Flames have been true duds in the draft. Only 17 players drafted by the Flames still play in the NHL, the most significant being Cory Stillman who had his best years after leaving that organization (Iginla was drafted by Dallas, not Calgary). The other notable active Flame draft, Dion Phaneuf, is no longer Flames' property. Point totals for Flames-drafted players sum to a meagre 2485. That's one third of what Lou Lamoriello's Devils management has contributed to the point totals of the current NHL talent pool.

So to conclude this somewhat long winded essay, Lou probably thinks the Flames and Leafs are nuts, since the true way to long term success is not via trades but old fashioned and arduous team building. This doesn't mean trades should never be used. Rather, it means that they are a secondary tool to complement the vital development chain, which includes a good scouting group, a well run farm system, and hard working team-player relationships department. GMs like Sutter waste valuable time plotting huge trades that might be spent improving their teams in these less sexy but more fundamental ways.

Flames management should know this, since the great Flames teams of the 80s and early 90s were populated with amazing Flames drafts: Gary Roberts, Theo Fleury, Hakan Loob, Gary Suter, Joe Nieuwendyk, and Al Macinnis. Leafs, perennial underperformers, would do well to figure this out too. Don't expect these glitzy trades to turn around either team. The New Jerseys, Colorados, and Detroits of the NHL will continue to dominate.

Developing Player Value: Penalty +/- per 15 Minutes (PPMp15)

2010-01-07T17:28:35Z

I am an admirer of stat geeks of any sport, simply because they do some crazy stuff to try to assess value and can usually confirm my suspicion that Ales Kotalik is worthless. In fact, many puckheads would probably be delighted to know some of their least favorite players (Hal Gill, David Koci, Richard "NHL's Worst Player" Zemlak) were, in fact, statistically crappy as well. So, we here at Bettman's Nightmare are debating, fussing, swearing (sometimes while drinking, sometimes not), and trying to calculate our own way to a metric for assessing player values. A lot of hockey analysts have team analyses down to an art form, but heckling can be much more effective when you have singular targets.

Thanks to that wonderful stats site Behind the Net and others like it, information on player's abilities to draw penalties has become much more accessible to the average beer drinker. But drawing penalties is really only halfway there for us; the ability to draw penalties can only be a virtue for a player if he also doesn't take many penalties. Guys like Tomas Holmstrom draw minor penalties, but if they also get called for a lot of minors, they actually don't gain much (which is fine, because I don't like the Wings).

After the jump, your NHL winners and losers of PPMp15...

So, for this particular chunk of player value, I took Behind the Net's data on penalties drawn (mind you, these are minor penalties, and doesn't include coincidentals) per 60 minutes and subtracted the penalties committed per 60. I wasn't really satisfied with a metric out of 60 minutes, because it actually lets us know what the player did if he played 60 minutes of the game. So, I chopped that down by taking the total from the subtraction, dividing by 4, and bringing us to a more starter-of-the-game-like 15 minutes. Thus, our shiny new metric will give us an idea of how effective or ineffective that player is on a game-to-game basis of gaining power-play opportunities for the ice hockey squad.

For the purposes of this year, I set the minimum games played at 30 to weed out rooks, goons, and gimps.

So, who's the modern-day Esa Tikkanen?

God, he reminds me of Jack Black...

PPMp15 Leaders, 2009-10 (so far)

1. Dustin Brown, Kings .48 PPMp15
2. Zach Parise, Lucifer .40
3. Matt Bradley, The Bandwagon .35
4. Tuomo Ruutu, 'Canes .35
5. Cal Clutterbuck, Adjectives .35
6. Devin Setoguchi, Jaws .35

PPMp15 Leaders Of Not-Being-Good-At-This, 2009-10

1. Nick Boynton, Quacks -.45 PPMp15
2. Hal Gill, Bleu, Blanc, et Rouge -.43
3. Cam Barker, 'Hawks -.40
4. Kent Huskins, Jaws -.35
5. Aaron Ward, 'Canes -.35
6. Craig Rivet, Butter Knives -.35

As you can see, from game to game Dusty Brown is much more likely to gain power-play opportunities for his team, while guys like Boynton and Gill are more likely to hurt their teams.

While it's not the entire of players' abilities, PPMp15 is a skill that gives teams extraordinary opportunities (18-19% PP conversion rates) and should not be overlooked when it comes to contributing to a team's ability to win.

And then you can appreciate the effort when Derek Boogaard or Sean Avery tries to draw a penalty and fails miserably. And by "appreciate," I mean laugh at those monstrosities.

P.S. Any ideas for a better acronym than "PPMp15"? It's just not very catchy, although when you say all the letters it sounds like 50 Cents' "P.I.M.P."

P.P.S. Here's the link at Behind the Net where I got my data.

P.P.P.S Here's the link to my original post, at Bettman's Nightmare.

Statistical To-Do List

2009-10-01T00:38:35Z

I have a never-ending list of statistical measures that I've promised to put on the site. If there's anything from Behind the Net that needs to be fixed or improved, please add a comment.

Cliches needed.

2009-09-29T20:04:09Z

We all know that people who analyze baseball statistics live in their mother's basements. Where do hockey analysts live? What cliche should we apply to them. Winning submission gets a guest post!