Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

Enoch Root · 04-21-2018, 05:16 PM

I have been meaning to start a thread about this for a long time, and with the coaching change, this seems like as good a time as any. So here goes…

IMO, points from the defense is a very important and telling stat that correlates very highly with team success. I also think it is an area where the Flames are woefully underperforming, relative to their roster talent. With the pending change in coaches, I would like to start a conversation about how we get the team back to where it should be, and what you think the Peters regime (presuming he is in fact hired) will look like.

First, some background numbers to illustrate how important this stat is… Here are some correlations from this season that you might find interesting (at least I did):

The correlation between goals for and standings (points) was .86 (quite high obviously, and no surprise)

The correlation between goals against and standings was .79 (surprised that it was lower, personally)

The correlation between goal differential and standings was .96! It will surprise no one of course, that if you score more than the other team, you’re probably going to win a lot of games, but .96 is really high – very close to a straight cause and effect.

(Note: these are explanatory relationships here, I am not trying to predict next season, just explaining this season).

Obviously, if we can improve GF, or reduce GA, we will improve goal differential, and thus improve in the standings. Easy. Except everything that happens in hockey affects these things, so isolating issues is difficult and conversations become convoluted quite quickly. I want to talk about scoring from the D because I think it’s pretty important and hopefully can be isolated for useful conversation. And you might be surprised by the correlation.

The correlation between points by defensemen (PBD) and standings was .79.

Yes, the correlation between PBD and success is just as strong as the correlation between GA and success (that really surprised me). Not only that but:

15 of the top 16 teams for PBD made the playoffs. 15 of 16 (and most years that I have looked at it is at least 14). The only outliers this year were: the Islanders were 11th and the Devils made the playoffs even though they were 23rd. That’s it.

The top 10 teams all made the playoffs, and 5 of those 10 teams will make
the 2nd round (WPG was 12th, PIT was 14th, and BOS was 16th)

The interesting thing about this, IMO, is that it is something that you can somewhat isolate to discuss, and can directly work on and improve. Which brings us to the Flames.

Calgary was 24th in PBD this year, 27th in GF, 19th in GA, and finished the year 20th overall. I think you would have been hard pressed to find anyone who would have predicted that the Flames would have finished in the bottom 30% of the league in PBD before the season started. But they did. Personally, I don’t think it’s a talent issue – the Flames PBD in the last 5 years is:

13/14: 163 Pts (Gio, Brodie, Russell, Wideman, Butler, Smid, O’Brien)
14/15: 195 Pts (Wideman, Gio, Brodie, Russell, Engelland, Diaz, Smid)
15/16: 203 Pts (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton, Wideman, Russell, Engelland, Jokipakka, Nakladal)
16/17: 176 Pts (Hamilton, Gio, Brodie, Wideman, Engelland, Stone, Jokipakka, Kulak)
17/18: 146 Pts (Hamilton, Gio, Brodie, Hamonic, Stone, Kulak, Bartkowski)

IMO, this year’s group was the best of the bunch. A case can be made for the 15/16 group, but Wideman was already past his best-before date, and Hamilton was only 22. Regardless, there is no case that can be made that this group was the worst of the bunch, or to justify the paltry 146 points.
So I have two questions: how do we improve this? And how will Peters’ coaching affect it?

In so far as how we can improve it, three things immediately come to mind: have the D join the offense more; make better personnel choices on the PP; and have more team success in general. But I would like to hear your thoughts.

And I would like to hear your thoughts on Peters and his utilization of the D. I haven’t watched his teams enough to have any strong opinions. I have heard some mixed comments though, some saying he likes to involve the D, others saying he doesn’t. The purpose here is not to create a bitch about Peters thread (not at all), but the fact is that CAR was 26th with 134 pts, despite their D consisting of Hanifin, Faulk, Slavin, Pesce, van Riemsdyk, Fleury and Dahlbeck.

So which is it? And how do we Make OurD Great Again?

And please, for the love of all things hockey, don’t turn this into another Peters-whining thread. Or Gulutzan-bashing, for that matter. Thanks.

04-21-2018, 05:16 PM	#1
Enoch Root Franchise Player Join Date: May 2012 Exp:	PBD Points By Defensemen I have been meaning to start a thread about this for a long time, and with the coaching change, this seems like as good a time as any. So here goes… IMO, points from the defense is a very important and telling stat that correlates very highly with team success. I also think it is an area where the Flames are woefully underperforming, relative to their roster talent. With the pending change in coaches, I would like to start a conversation about how we get the team back to where it should be, and what you think the Peters regime (presuming he is in fact hired) will look like. First, some background numbers to illustrate how important this stat is… Here are some correlations from this season that you might find interesting (at least I did): The correlation between goals for and standings (points) was .86 (quite high obviously, and no surprise) The correlation between goals against and standings was .79 (surprised that it was lower, personally) The correlation between goal differential and standings was .96! It will surprise no one of course, that if you score more than the other team, you’re probably going to win a lot of games, but .96 is really high – very close to a straight cause and effect. (Note: these are explanatory relationships here, I am not trying to predict next season, just explaining this season). Obviously, if we can improve GF, or reduce GA, we will improve goal differential, and thus improve in the standings. Easy. Except everything that happens in hockey affects these things, so isolating issues is difficult and conversations become convoluted quite quickly. I want to talk about scoring from the D because I think it’s pretty important and hopefully can be isolated for useful conversation. And you might be surprised by the correlation. The correlation between points by defensemen (PBD) and standings was .79. *Yes, the correlation between PBD and success is just as strong* as the correlation between GA and success (that really surprised me). Not only that but: 15 of the top 16 teams for PBD made the playoffs*. 15 of 16 (and most years that I have looked at it is at least 14). The only outliers this year were: the Islanders were 11th and the Devils made the playoffs even though they were 23rd. That’s it. The top 10 teams all made the playoffs, and 5 of those 10 teams will make the 2nd round (WPG was 12th, PIT was 14th, and BOS was 16th) The interesting thing about this, IMO, is that it is something that you can somewhat isolate to discuss, and can directly work on and improve. Which brings us to the Flames. Calgary was 24th in PBD this year, 27th in GF, 19th in GA, and finished the year 20th overall. I think you would have been hard pressed to find anyone* who would have predicted that the Flames would have finished in the bottom 30% of the league in PBD before the season started. But they did. Personally, I don’t think it’s a talent issue – the Flames PBD in the last 5 years is: 13/14: 163 Pts (Gio, Brodie, Russell, Wideman, Butler, Smid, O’Brien) 14/15: 195 Pts (Wideman, Gio, Brodie, Russell, Engelland, Diaz, Smid) 15/16: 203 Pts (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton, Wideman, Russell, Engelland, Jokipakka, Nakladal) 16/17: 176 Pts (Hamilton, Gio, Brodie, Wideman, Engelland, Stone, Jokipakka, Kulak) 17/18: 146 Pts (Hamilton, Gio, Brodie, Hamonic, Stone, Kulak, Bartkowski) IMO, this year’s group was the best of the bunch. A case can be made for the 15/16 group, but Wideman was already past his best-before date, and Hamilton was only 22. Regardless, there is no case that can be made that this group was the worst of the bunch, or to justify the paltry 146 points. So I have two questions: how do we improve this? And how will Peters’ coaching affect it? In so far as how we can improve it, three things immediately come to mind: have the D join the offense more; make better personnel choices on the PP; and have more team success in general. But I would like to hear your thoughts. And I would like to hear your thoughts on Peters and his utilization of the D. I haven’t watched his teams enough to have any strong opinions. I have heard some mixed comments though, some saying he likes to involve the D, others saying he doesn’t. The purpose here is not to create a bitch about Peters thread (not at all), but the fact is that CAR was 26th with 134 pts, despite their D consisting of Hanifin, Faulk, Slavin, Pesce, van Riemsdyk, Fleury and Dahlbeck. So which is it? And how do we Make OurD Great Again? And please, for the love of all things hockey, don’t turn this into another Peters-whining thread. Or Gulutzan-bashing, for that matter. Thanks.