[CP Story] Home Woes

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They suck because, randomness! Great.

Except no, it's not luck. Their style of play at home is terrible - too focused on trying to make the great play and not focused enough on simplifying the game. They lack the commitment to defensive play that permeates their road play.

On the road, they play a simple, solid game. Getting outshot is no big surprise considering last change. But shot attempts interest me little.

Their home woes are not going to turn around because their shooting percentage will creep up. It will turn around when they play a smarter brand of hockey.

I disagree - their home losses, the recent ones anyway, had them largely deserving of wins, but a some big mistakes or outright flukes caused a loss (usually with a point). Look at the Vegas game, for example.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I disagree - their home losses, the recent ones anyway, had them largely deserving of wins, but a some big mistakes or outright flukes caused a loss (usually with a point). Look at the Vegas game, for example.

Yes, but attributing all these gaffs to luck is not really accurate, at least for the most part as there is obviously some element of luck in any sport.

The Flames are making many critical errors at home simply because they're playing a tentative, reactionary game that we do not see from them on the road where they tend to dictate play. For me, this is why they have been blown out half a dozen times in the dome this year compared to maybe once on the road all season.

It has been said ad nausea - good teams win when they are not at their best. The Flames need to figure out how to do this at home and it starts and ends with a powerplay that is now moving the puck confidently like we are starting to see (20% over the last 8 games). If this continues to be the case, I would expect this team to easily wrap up a divisional spot. If not, it could easily be golf time in April.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Yes, but attributing all these gaffs to luck is not really accurate, at least for the most part as there is obviously some element of luck in any sport.

The Flames are making many critical errors at home simply because they're playing a tentative, reactionary game that we do not see from them on the road where they tend to dictate play. For me, this is why they have been blown out half a dozen times in the dome this year compared to maybe once on the road all season.

It has been said ad nausea - good teams win when they are not at their best. The Flames need to figure out how to do this at home and it starts and ends with a powerplay that is now moving the puck confidently like we are starting to see (20% over the last 8 games). If this continues to be the case, I would expect this team to easily wrap up a divisional spot. If not, it could easily be golf time in April.

IMHO they dictated play against the Jets (but couldn't solve Hellebyuck and the fourth line got scored on), Sabres (this was more even and Chad Johnson had one of his huge nights), Knights (Frolik made a critical error in a game they had well in hand), Kings (the Flames had 41 shots and Smith had an off night IMO) and Hawks (they won). Not against TB, obviously. This sounds like I have an excuse for every loss, but it's not so much an excuse (they found a way to lose, certainly) rather, it's simply saying that they were in a position to win most of their recent home games, and that means they played well for the most part. IMO it's largley a reflection of the powerplay that sucked the hardest during that timeframe, way more than some home-road differences.

[Classic_Sniper]

I’ve actually liked the way the team plays at home. I just think the biggest difference has been goaltending. Mike Smith has reverse sophomore Johnny Gaudreau syndrome. If you look at his home and road splits. On the road, he’s been a terrific .944 sv% goaltender allowing 1.97 GAA. At home though, he’s a very underwhelming .905 sv% goaltender allowing 2.90 GAA.

The games have been tight, so when the difference is an entire goal allowed per game, you can see why this team has struggled to pull out victories from the fire.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I’ve actually liked the way the team plays at home. I just think the biggest difference has been goaltending. Mike Smith has reverse sophomore Johnny Gaudreau syndrome. If you look at his home and road splits. On the road, he’s been a terrific .944 sv% goaltender allowing 1.97 GAA. At home though, he’s a very underwhelming .905 sv% goaltender allowing 2.90 GAA.

The games have been tight, so when the difference is an entire goal allowed per game, you can see why this team has struggled to pull out victories from the fire.

Smith has to look after all those kids when he's at home. He must be exhausted by game time.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

...Maybe the team’s potential is better than the coaches are getting from it

Coaching involves putting forth a game plan, and opposing coaches are doing the same, having researched your game plan.

At home, you have the benefit of choosing the right lines to implement your game plan, with last change. On the road, you live with the matchups you are dealt. Less control of coaches, better results where it matters.

...Maybe the coaches are fine at putting forth a mediocre and competitive game plan, yet despite finding a way to generate advanced stats that support a hypothesis that the Flames are unlucky, are rather simply not making decisions that are helping the team to succeed beyond that of an effective staff

If the huge discrepancy between the home and road records is primarily a coaching issue, then I should expect that ALL the numbers—and not just the results—would point clearly to a fundamental discrepancy that is exploited by line deployments. In other words, IF the issue is coaching, then how does one explain the actual data?



The biggest problem with this team is psychological—I firmly believe that, and I think it serves largely to explain why the Flames's shooting and save percentages are so dramatically different at home and on the road, and it helps to explain why they struggle so much on the powerplay. At home, players are too often looking more for pretty finishes and have a tendency to overplay the puck. Mike Smith seems far less impregnable at home. The powerplay as a whole is neutralized by the players' own poor puck movement and slow decision making.

I am encouraged because I think these issues are all easily resolved—certainly moreso than by shuffling players or coaches.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If the huge discrepancy between the home and road records is primarily a coaching issue, then I should expect that ALL the numbers—and not just the results—would point clearly to a fundamental discrepancy that is exploited by line deployments. In other words, IF the issue is coaching, then how does one explain the actual data?



The biggest problem with this team is psychological—I firmly believe that, and I think it serves largely to explain why the Flames's shooting and save percentages are so dramatically different at home and on the road, and it helps to explain why they struggle so much on the powerplay. At home, players are too often looking more for pretty finishes and have a tendency to overplay the puck. Mike Smith seems far less impregnable at home. The powerplay as a whole is neutralized by the players' own poor puck movement and slow decision making.

I am encouraged because I think these issues are all easily resolved—certainly moreso than by shuffling players or coaches.

So, say if a team plays a road style where they know they aren't getting favorable line match-ups, so they play a very disciplined defensive system, block lots of shots, keep the shots to the perimeter, clear up the rebounds and patiently wait to capitalize on the other team's mistakes for their offense. A team could find success with that approach but probably would have really crappy possession and shot attempt based stats.

Now if the same team plays a style at home where they are the ones trying to dictate play and get lots of shots off, but are turning the puck over a lot for counter attacks and fast breaks without enough coverage dropping back, they might end up with good possession/shot stats, but not such good results on the score board.

In that example, wouldn't you agree that the coaches need to figure out a way to turn things around?

You can argue that this isn't the case with the Flames, but I don't buy that there is not a system or strategy problem just because the results don't live up to the contrived possession stats.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If the huge discrepancy between the home and road records is primarily a coaching issue, then I should expect that ALL the numbers—and not just the results—would point clearly to a fundamental discrepancy that is exploited by line deployments. In other words, IF the issue is coaching, then how does one explain the actual data?



The biggest problem with this team is psychological—I firmly believe that, and I think it serves largely to explain why the Flames's shooting and save percentages are so dramatically different at home and on the road, and it helps to explain why they struggle so much on the powerplay. At home, players are too often looking more for pretty finishes and have a tendency to overplay the puck. Mike Smith seems far less impregnable at home. The powerplay as a whole is neutralized by the players' own poor puck movement and slow decision making.

I am encouraged because I think these issues are all easily resolved—certainly moreso than by shuffling players or coaches.

Yeah I don't follow the blame Gulutzan for having his team playing well but not winning on home ice, and playing poorer but getting results on the road.

There is a randomness to it.

And I agree I think they're tight so things bother them more on home ice and they find a way to lose.

Some leaguewide stats ...

Flames are ...

5 on 5
2nd in home ice CF%
2nd in CF
6th in Shots For
1st in Scoring Chance splits

All Situations
3rd in home ice CF%
2nd in CF
8th in Shots For
3rd in Scoring Chance splits

That's dominant hockey folks

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

So, say if a team plays a road style where they know they aren't getting favorable line match-ups, so they play a very disciplined defensive system, block lots of shots, keep the shots to the perimeter, clear up the rebounds and patiently wait to capitalize on the other team's mistakes for their offense. A team could find success with that approach but probably would have really crappy possession and shot attempt based stats.

Now if the same team plays a style at home where they are the ones trying to dictate play and get lots of shots off, but are turning the puck over a lot for counter attacks and fast breaks without enough coverage dropping back, they might end up with good possession/shot stats, but not such good results on the score board.

In that example, wouldn't you agree that the coaches need to figure out a way to turn things around?

You can argue that this isn't the case with the Flames, but I don't buy that there is not a system or strategy problem just because the results don't live up to the contrived possession stats.

What exactly is contrived?

Every attempted shot is counted
Every attempted shot within a region is counted

This isn't voodoo.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

So, say if a team plays a road style where they know they aren't getting favorable line match-ups, so they play a very disciplined defensive system, block lots of shots, keep the shots to the perimeter, clear up the rebounds and patiently wait to capitalize on the other team's mistakes for their offense. A team could find success with that approach but probably would have really crappy possession and shot attempt based stats.

Now if the same team plays a style at home where they are the ones trying to dictate play and get lots of shots off, but are turning the puck over a lot for counter attacks and fast breaks without enough coverage dropping back, they might end up with good possession/shot stats, but not such good results on the score board.

In that example, wouldn't you agree that the coaches need to figure out a way to turn things around?

But this example does not really describe the Flames. While it is true their road possession numbers are down from at home, they are still an excellent possession team on the road, and not merely "patiently wait to capitalize on the other team's mistakes for their offense." And as a home team the Flames are not "trying to dictate play"; they are actually consistently doing so.

But even if this picture is an accurate description of the Flames' play this season (it is not), I disagree that the coaches should be doing anything differently systemically on home ice. The coaches should always be doing their best to ensure that the team is controlling the play as much as possible—which is precisely what the Flames are doing.

You can argue that this isn't the case with the Flames, but I don't buy that there is not a system or strategy problem just because the results don't live up to the contrived possession stats.

That's fine. You are free to hand-wave, and conclude that there is a systemic issue in the absence of any evidence of one. But it seems more reasonable to conclude that if there are no data to show an issue with the systems, then that is likely not the problem.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bingo

...Some leaguewide stats ...

Flames are ...

5 on 5
2nd in home ice CF%
2nd in CF
6th in Shots For
1st in Scoring Chance splits

All Situations
3rd in home ice CF%
2nd in CF
8th in Shots For
3rd in Scoring Chance splits...

How do the Flames rank on the road, Bingo?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Sometimes the team with the most shots doesn’t play the better game. It is as simple as that.

Shot location as proxy for danger or quality is a fine start but insufficient.

The basic premise here, that the team is playing well enough to win, but simply unlucky, is long in the tooth. Luck should be random, not persistent

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What exactly is contrived?

Every attempted shot is counted
Every attempted shot within a region is counted

This isn't voodoo.

Can you point me to any bit of research that shows that having more attempted shots than the opposition will inevitably mean lead to winning more games or even dominating play or possession? I understand that there is correlation between winning and these stats, but there is a big difference between a causal relationship and correlation.

Baseball stat geeks have done a good job of being able to isolate what players abilities can control, and which are luck based that will eventually regress. Unless you can point me at convincing things, I don't believe the hockey stats are there yet or even close.

We're pretty deep into the season now, and luck and bounces should have mostly evened out, yet there is a huge gap between our road success and home success. There are rules in the NHL that give the home team a distinct advantage, and not only are we not seeing that advantage, but we are considerably worse at home.

[Bingo]

Flames on the Road

5 on 5
15th in road CF%
11th in CF
19th in Shots For
10th in Scoring Chance splits...

All Situations
17th in road CF%
9th in CF
16th in Shots For
12th in Scoring Chance splits...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Sometimes the team with the most shots doesn’t play the better game. It is as simple as that.

Shot location as proxy for danger or quality is a fine start but insufficient.

The basic premise here, that the team is playing well enough to win, but simply unlucky, is long in the tooth. Luck should be random, not persistent

I don't believe that is the premise. Bingo has said that the numbers against the results are anomalous, but he has also commented on various reasons for that discrepancy. Players struggling to score or stop pucks because of nerves is not the same thing as "bad luck."

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Can you point me to any bit of research that shows that having more attempted shots than the opposition will inevitably mean lead to winning more games or even dominating play or possession? I understand that there is correlation between winning and these stats, but there is a big difference between a causal relationship and correlation.

Baseball stat geeks have done a good job of being able to isolate what players abilities can control, and which are luck based that will eventually regress. Unless you can point me at convincing things, I don't believe the hockey stats are there yet or even close.

We're pretty deep into the season now, and luck and bounces should have mostly evened out, yet there is a huge gap between our road success and home success. There are rules in the NHL that give the home team a distinct advantage, and not only are we not seeing that advantage, but we are considerably worse at home.

The Sharks made the playoffs last year I think with an under .500 record at home.

It happens for full seasons.

All good though, you don't have to read anything into any of this. But the eye test firmly matches the statistics since the new year in my opinion. They're playing solid road games and finding a way to lose.

So in this case I think the shot attempts are aligned to carrying the play.

[Flash Walken]

Is there a metric for how often the flames allow the first goal at home, and how often they lead after 1 periods or 2 in those games?

[The Boy Wonder]

I think this season is a prime example of where advanced stats and the eye test can differ immensely.

We've all seen the way the flames play and if we removed the words home and road from the two sets of advanced stats bingo posted and were told to blindly pick which set represented the flames at home and on the road based on record every single person would have them reversed.

It is very interesting and I dont know the answer but what my eyes tell me is that you can dominate a game despite not having the best corsi and shot attempts etc and vice versa


Also would love to see these breakdowns by period and maybe s fluctuation in CF% from period to period for home / road because I think we would see a very different story and more fluctuation (very good stretches and then very bad stretches at home and bigger swings compared to a more steady game on the road)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I think this season is a prime example of where advanced stats and the eye test can differ immensely...

It is very interesting and I dont know the answer but what my eyes tell me is that you can dominate a game despite not having the best corsi and shot attempts etc and vice versa...

Are you suggesting that the Flames opponents are consistently dominating games at the Saddledome? What do you mean by this?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I think this season is a prime example of where advanced stats and the eye test can differ immensely.

To me, on the recent home stand, the eye test and the stats matched up - the Flames looked good (just as good as they looked in their winning streak). It was the results that didn't. This isn't a function of luck. It was various factors - hot goalies, a lack of finish at times and a couple huge one of a kind mistakes.