Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryUnderscore
Okay, well special teams can be measured objectively.
The powerplay is current at 22.2%. Good for 10th in the league. Since that's above average does Gulutzan get credit for it?
The penalty kill is 30th in the league at 73.8%. Obviously that's not good. Is that Gulutzan's fault?
How should we measure breakouts? Would that be measured in passing percentage when the pass originates in the defensive end? Do you have some data on that?
As for "Response to adversity" I have no idea how to measure that. After the defensive breakdown in Dallas, all three of his healthy scratches were brought in while Versteeg, Lazar and Kulak sat. They won in Colorado.
So did the team respond to adversity?
After the embarrassment in Detroit the team came back and won in Philly. Did they respond to adversity?
After losing 6-0 to Ottawa they came back at beat Vancouver 5-2. Was that a response to adversity?
The Flames haven't lost more than two in a row all season. Does that mean they're responding to adversity?
|
That would be an acceptable measure for me. Good teams don't tend to have prolonged losing streaks. Picking yourself up the next night seems to be a decent metric.
I would also include comeback wins when trailing after 1 or 2 periods, but since that gets into the problem of being behind often in games, it's maybe a negative indicator of failing to show up on time.
I could go on. As you see, these get pretty messy, as all measures of things that aren't direct on-ice events get messy when you try to quantify them. That's why I give Corsi and Corsi in context (Corsi relative, Score adjusted Corsi) a break when they're trying to determine a picture of what's happening out there.