Talk about Capitals hockey & more! > Washington Capitals & Other Hockey Discussion
GDT#74 Lightning @ Capitals 7:30pm Wed Mar 20, 2019 NBCSN
Kaz:
--- Quote ---I’d completely agree with you almost all of time. But when a center who takes a large amount of your faceoffs, after four years still can’t win 40% of them on a regular bastdwhat else do you thaj putting someone in that that will win 50 or even 40% of them?
--- End quote ---
Because it makes very little difference. Kuznetsov takes about 14 faceoffs a game. He wins about 5.5 of them on average. Dowd averages 7 out of every 14. So we're talking about 1 or 2 faceoffs per game. Dowd is also a righty, so he's not the ideal guy to sub in for Kuzy regardless.
So when you don't have a faceoff stud on the roster, you address lackluster faceoff numbers by sheltering zone starts, and only then if the difference is glaring. But when the choice is Eller or Backstrom -- guys with only a 10% better chance at winning the draw than Kuzy -- then you just play Kuzy. In the D zone, sure, go with the percentages to prevent direct scoring chances off the draw, but since all of our LH faceoff guys are sub-50% the actual difference is minimal.
There are many other things you can do to mitigate faceoff weaknesses. Guys with known issues often just go for the contest -- just swiping/shoveling at it or stick-checking so they don't lose them cleanly, minimizing direct chances against. Hell, just anticipating losing a draw is often preparation enough.
In other words, faceoffs aren't the end of the world. It's a good thing to be good at, but it's rarely crucial.
If you're losing because of 1.5 faceoffs per game, you have much bigger problems.
DC_1908:
--- Quote from: Kaz on Saturday March 23, 2019, 01:04:40 AM Eastern ---
Because it makes very little difference. Kuznetsov takes about 14 faceoffs a game. He wins about 5.5 of them on average. Dowd averages 7 out of every 14. So we're talking about 1 or 2 faceoffs per game. Dowd is also a righty, so he's not the ideal guy to sub in for Kuzy regardless.
So when you don't have a faceoff stud on the roster, you address lackluster faceoff numbers by sheltering zone starts, and only then if the difference is glaring. But when the choice is Eller or Backstrom -- guys with only a 10% better chance at winning the draw than Kuzy -- then you just play Kuzy. In the D zone, sure, go with the percentages to prevent direct scoring chances off the draw, but since all of our LH faceoff guys are sub-50% the actual difference is minimal.
There are many other things you can do to mitigate faceoff weaknesses. Guys with known issues often just go for the contest -- just swiping/shoveling at it or stick-checking so they don't lose them cleanly, minimizing direct chances against. Hell, just anticipating losing a draw is often preparation enough.
In other words, faceoffs aren't the end of the world. It's a good thing to be good at, but it's rarely crucial.
If you're losing because of 1.5 fachoeoffs per game, you have much bigger problems.
--- End quote ---
Again, correc and I agree. Generally speaking, it isn’t that big of a deal early in or over the course of the regular season. Particularly, with the stupid new rules they put in.
However, the game in queston maybe an exception. As we know, we gave up four goals in one period, they shut us down from midway in the second to the very end of the third where lost in OT, while being down a D. Granted by team we edged them on faceoffs, Kuzy was getting throttled by TBL. He took the most faceoffs on the team that game went 5 for 15 over all, doing good in the offensive zone going 3 for 7 in the offensive zone, 2 for 5 in the Nutral Zone, and 0 for 3 in the defensive zone. When you factor in not only the score situation, the plays with some of our top scores and two of our best defensive players, that’s a lot of opportunities handed over to the other team.
We also had the last change, so Reirdon could have easily sent one of the other three centers that where doing better to take faceoffs for him.
Yes, this was not the sole reason for the loss, and most times we can get buy with his abysmal faceoff
percentage, by protecting him by zone etc But when you allow five goals and get shut down for most of the game, the center taking the most faceoffs was only wins 5 of 15 is a bigger factor in the loss than it normally would be.
Kaz:
But again, everyone else is dodgy at faceoffs, too. If you have a guy that's routinely 60%, yes, you might consider a strategic deployment or two. But we don't have that guy. We have guys that are, overall, 10% better than Kuzy.
You can't double-shift Backstrom because you benefit greatly from him getting proper rest AND the matchups you want with him. So your only alternative is Eller, a guy that is just as streaky at the dot. You're also surrendering your matchup selection with Kuznetsov, easily one of your most dangerous forwards -- all for a 10% better chance at winning one faceoff. That's not a good idea.
You're overestimating the importance of faceoffs. 0% on the PK, 16% on the PP. That's what did us in. Kuzy being brutal at the dot was a non-issue because of how they managed his deployment. We dominated at evens, took only 3 penalties, had twice as many hits, twice as many shots, and won as many faceoffs as could be expected.
0-for-3 on the PK. 1-for-6 on the man advantage. That was the ballgame.
Surreylily:
--- Quote from: Kaz on Friday March 22, 2019, 05:43:14 PM Eastern ---Longtime listener, first-time caller.
Blackice is right about the faceoff issue. The Steckel/Beagle point is moot because we don't have a faceoff specialist anymore. There isn't anyone we can use (especially LH) to utilize the tactic you're describing. Sheltering Kuznetsov's deployments isn't much of an option, and the only worthwhile wings we have in our top 6 that can reasonably help with faceoffs are both right-handed. So this was an odd point to bring up as a criticism of Reirden.
The Orpik vs. Orlov point is a lesser of two evils thing. With Kempny hurt, Orlov is our best LD. Unfortunately he's also all the things that DC says he is, which makes the loss of Kempny that much worse. What this amounts to would typically be a reason to NOT shelter your 3rd pair if they can play. Jensen has been solid since his arrival and the chemistry with Orpik isn't terrible. With Kempny out we need that pair to eat more minutes.
Tampa is a bad metric to make that kind of choice. If this continues versus lesser teams, I'd consider shuffling the pairs if it'd help Reirden distribute minutes better.
Getting edged out in OT by the best team in the league isn't terrible. The PP goals sank us, and refs swallow their whistles in the playoffs, so I'm not that concerned. I think we can hang with them at evens. Dialing up the physical play without taking penalties would be key.
I'm not wild about Reirden's coaching this year either, but Tampa is a bitch to match up with for any team.
--- End quote ---
Wow!And welcome. ;D
DC_1908:
--- Quote from: Kaz on Saturday March 23, 2019, 01:27:58 PM Eastern ---But again, everyone else is dodgy at faceoffs, too. If you have a guy that's routinely 60%, yes, you might consider a strategic deployment or two. But we don't have that guy. We have guys that are, overall, 10% better than Kuzy.
You can't double-shift Backstrom because you benefit greatly from him getting proper rest AND the matchups you want with him. So your only alternative is Eller, a guy that is just as streaky at the dot. You're also surrendering your matchup selection with Kuznetsov, easily one of your most dangerous forwards -- all for a 10% better chance at winning one faceoff. That's not a good idea.
You're overestimating the importance of faceoffs. 0% on the PK, 16% on the PP. That's what did us in. Kuzy being brutal at the dot was a non-issue because of how they managed his deployment. We dominated at evens, took only 3 penalties, had twice as many hits, twice as many shots, and won as many faceoffs as could be expected.
0-for-3 on the PK. 1-for-6 on the man advantage. That was the ballgame.
--- End quote ---
Sure, but (now I don’t have the exact stats I’m front of me), there is easily a correlation between the Kuzys faceoffs and the 1-6 PP. I also don’t have the exact data in front of me, but loosing faceoffs on the PowerPlay, eats into the two minutes you have. So, in the case of the Power Play our faceoffs become greatly more important than even strength, Now, when your power playis working and your leadijng, then sure it’s of lesser importance. But if your PP isn’t working, obviously you need every advantage you can get, risk nothing. and don’t just hope for luck.
If you continue to put one of the (maybe the worst), starting center taking faceoffs, who also is a complete defensive liability, when you also have a questionable D, you can typically trace a large amount of the other teams opportunities, failed power plays, or even a goals, a the faceoff loss.
Now yes, a 10-20% improvement only amounts to 2 or 3 faceoff wins, that still is 2 or 3 more opportunities for the other team that could by putting someone else in the dot.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version