My Analysis of the Match-Up
I don't think that there could be a similar team to the Flyers than the Hawks. Each team has very similar role players and I really think that the Flyers have an individual player advantage. Here's what I think:
Young Captains Who Have Dominated The Playoffs: Richie and Tawes. Both guys lead their teams and are 1 and 2 in points in the playoffs with 21 and 26 respectively. Each are great leaders, but I think Richie has the advantage for a few reasons. First off, Richie has won at every level back down to Jr's. Not saying Tawes hasn't but Richie has captioned all of those teams except for the Canada team (Where he and Tawes played on the same line). Richie = Clarke and I've heard a lot of Tawes = Yzerman. Mike Richards, although not so much in point scoring, does more for Philly than Tawes does for Chicago and brings the physicality that Tawes doesnt have. This could be a toss up, but I like Richie.
Young Up and Coming (or already there) Star Scores: Carter and Kane. Carter gets my advantage again here. He had 46 goals last year wiht 84 points compaired to Kane's 25 and 70. This year in 8 less games Carter had 3 more goals than Kane. In the playoffs Cartsie has 4 in 6 while kane has just 7 in 16. I have no stats to back it up but I believe that Carter is a better defensive forward as well, having been a PK guy last year. I might be wrong, but I don't think Kane is a PK guy at all.
Two Great D-Men: Pronger & Timo and Kieth and Seabrook. We all know how dominant Pronger and Timo are. Seabrook and Kieth are very good as well, but I don't think that anyone can argue who's better here. I'd go out on a limb and say that Pronger and Timo are the top two in this series followed by three blackhawks then Carle.
Very good offensive 3rd D-man: Carle and Cambell. I think Cambell might edge out Carle on this one, but it doesn't matter because Carle is with Pronger which automatically makes him better. Cambell only has 3 points in 13 games while Carle has 10 in 17 games.
Experienced top line wingers: Gags and Hossa. 7-3-10-(+6) in 13 games. 2-9-11-(+8) in 16 games. By the numbers its Gags easily (He's the first one). Both guys were limited to 57 and 58 games with Hossa getting 50 points and Gags with 41. Once again, Gagne, like Carter, is a better defensive forward and that edge goes to Gags. Hossa's past Stanley Cup expierence could be viewed as better or worse than Gags, having been there twice in two years previous but not performing well. Call me a homer, I'd take Gags.
Great second line centers: Briere and Sharpe. In the regular season Sharpe outscored Briere 66 to 53 with ten more games played, but Danny B has been the man once again in the playoffs. 9-9-18 for Danny with a 7-9-16 for Sharpe. Danny, I think, will have an advantage because of the D-Pairing he'll be playing against. Sharpe will head a 2-line being covered by (guessing) Coburn and Kimmo, which is by far a better pair than who ever Chicago will put out agains Briere-Lieno-Harts.
X-Factors: Grilled Cheese and Big Buff. Its hard to argue that Buff isn't Chicago's x-factor. He was a machine against SJ with lots of game winners. BOLD PREDICTION: WHO EVER OF THESE TWO GUYS PLAY BETTER, THEIR TEAM WILL WIN THE STANLEY CUP. I think that Giroux's (17 points in 17 games, compared to only 47 points in the regular season) playoff numbers are less of a hot thing than Buff's (10 in 16 and only 34 in the regluar season). That was confusing, but I think that Buff will come back down to earth, while Giroux will keep playing at a point per game level. And I also think that he will play at a PPG level for his entire carrier from this point on.
PK Guys: Betts/Lappy and Madden: Not much more to say than these guys are great at what they do and will see a lot of eachothers top guys. I like our two.
Goalies: Leighton/Niemi. Weve all heard a million times how they were never expected to be here, now they are. Look at Leightons numbers as a Flyer. They are mind-boggling.
This is where my lack of Hawk Knowledge hurts me because there are a lot more key components to the sereis. On thier side you have Veersteeg, Brower, Ladd, Eager and Bowland. For us you have Lieno, Ash, Hartnell, and Powe.
Their lines
Line 1-Jonathan Toews,Patrick Kane,Marian Hossa.
Line 2-Patrick Sharp,Kris Versteeg,Dustin Byfuglien.
Line 3-Andrew Ladd,John Madden,Troy Brouwer
Line 4-Ben Eager,Colin Fraser,Tomas Kopecky.
The key will be deciding on who to match up our D-Pairs with. Do we want Pronger on the top line against Tawes Kane and Hosse or agains the freakish in size Byfuglien? I think we put Pronger on the top and Kimmo on the second and let Coburn battle with Buff, so when they go on the PP we can let Pronger take on Buff.
Our lines
Richie/Carts/Gags::::Harts/Danny/Lieno:::::JVR/Giroux/Ash:::::Powe (Carcillo)/Betts/Lappy
We are tougher to match up against because we have three legitimate scoring lines to their two. I don't know why the Hawks are -275 in Vegas. It makes no sence. Look at the playoffs, are they really a 3-1 favorite over us? I think not. Flyers in six.
I believe.
This item was written by a member of this community and is not necessarily endorsed by Broad Street Hockey.
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank You
for posting this. My thoughts exactly. These teams almost seem to be built alike yet their philosophies/styles are different. This is gonna be great.
Flyers and Blue Jackets...nuff said.
just a few notes from a Hawks fan perspective...
I’ll preface this by saying I know a lot more than I do about the Hawks than I do about the Flyers, but I’d just like to point out a few things I thought about after reading this.
While you make some good line comparisons, the lines that you’re using haven’t been used in the postseason. For all the SJ series (and I’m assuming in the finals) the lines were:
Byfuglien/Toews/Kane
Brouwer/Sharp/Hossa
Versteeg/Bolland/Ladd
Eager/Madden/Burish
The top line has been the top contributor because Kane keeps the puck on a string, Toews works the boards, and Buff plants his butt in the crease to get rebounds/ redirects. Since both Kane and Hossa play right wing, they haven’t been effective on the same line. And, since Toews is really the only center that can allow Kane to reach his potential, Hossa is on the 2nd line. They are pretty dangerous as well. The third line has offensive ability, but they are also a checking line. Bolland gets under opponents skin, and was responsible for the Sedin twins/Thorton’s lack of scoring. The 4th line is pure energy, but they have pitched in with some of the biggest goals of the year. Basically, I would argue that like the Flyers, the Hawks have 3 scoring lines, and we can roll 4.
As far as defense, Campbell is partnered with Hjalmarsson, who is (in my opinion) the most underrated player on the team. He quietly does his job, and allows Campbell to play offensively. You won’t see a lot of the third line, but Sopel is a monster on the PK!
Both teams are very good on the PK, Philly has the higher %, but the Hawks lead the league in shorties (regular and postseason).
Overall, we’re probably both homers for our teams because we have the luxury of knowing the story that stats don’t tell…I know my prediction is definitely different than yours :) Anyways, I hope this gives you a little more insight, and I can’t wait until Saturday! It should be a good series
Any opinion on why Brouwer is on the second over Versteeg? Is it for depth and to give the second line a banger?
I get the feeling that the top 3 lines will be matched up against each other, so Bolland will be against Giroux. Unless Bolland can steal all the cheese in Chicago I don’t imagine he’ll get to Giroux.
IMO, its going to come down to goaltending.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
I think Versteeg is a better two-way player and adds some scoring to the third line.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on May 27, 2010 7:33 AM EDT up reply actions
"I think Versteeg is a better two-way player"
Oh, if you could only hear what some guys at SCH have to say about Versteeg some days… :P
But when it was suggested to him that Toews v. Kane seems likely to become a sidebar to every future international hockey tournament, he smiled and said: "I'd like us to win something together, too."
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on May 27, 2010 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Brouwer's got more size
and had a lot of success with Toews/Kane on the first line (of course I could probably have a lot of success on that line, and I can barely stay upright on skates).
IMO it needs to be Saturday already. Only what? 53 hours to go?
Watch it with the jinxing!
Time for some thrillin' heroics!
by shinkicker on May 27, 2010 10:20 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Versteeg/Bolland/Ladd are just playing really well
and Q’s not the type to mess with lines if the chemistry is there. Brouwer’s also shown a bit of offensive flair this year and has worked pretty well with Sharp and Hossa.
But when it was suggested to him that Toews v. Kane seems likely to become a sidebar to every future international hockey tournament, he smiled and said: "I'd like us to win something together, too."
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on May 27, 2010 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll also add...
Hossa does play on the top line now and then but very sparingly. It’s just a switch Coach Q makes occasionally. Depending on the circumstances during the game though Q may mix up a lot of things regardless.
I have no doubt that it is going to be some interesting hockey
but I simply think yuo have the series outcome wrong, I believe it will go the Chicago.
Confusion will be my epitaph.
why Brouwer is on the second over Versteeg
Hawks coach plays a power forward on each line. Buf, Brouwer, Ladd, Kopecky all match up with the two skill guys on each line.
Once in a while he will put Sharp with Toews and Kane. Rarely does he put Hossa up there except after Power plays when he wants the Hawks to control the puck.
Also Versteeg hasn’t played as well with Kane or Hossa as he does as the skill guy on the third line…
As for the original poster who thinks all his Flyers are better then "his choice in comparison" Hawks, here are the GVT numbers for those comparisons. Basically, GVT numbers don’t agree with you even once…
Tom Awad’s GVT numbers…
Toews is 17.1
Richards is 14.6
Kane is 19.1
Carter is 13.3
Keith is 22.4
Seabrook is 11.1
Pronger is 18.5
Timonen is 10.4
Hossa is 15.0
Gagne is 7.3
Campbell is 11.4
Carle is 10.6
Sharp is 14.4
Briere is 9.2
Hjalmarsson is 6.2
Coburn is 4.2
Byfuglien is 1.9
Giroux is 0.4
Niemi is 11.0
Leighton is -5.9
This might come off bad, but it's not you. It's GVT.
Ugh… I was one of only two (apparently Todd makes 3) people who even gave GVT a chance, and I quit. GVT is nowhere near ready to be used to make an analysis. The search feature is down, so I can’t show you my argument for why it’s inaccurate for the Flyers, but let’s just start again with the Blackhawks:
OGVT is fine. You wanna look at that, go for it. But DGVT is not even close to accurate. Now, maybe the ’Hawks numbers make sense to you (I really wish I could find my comment on the Flyers), but tell me if these guys each contributed equally on defense:
Toews: 76 games, 5.0 DGVT,
Hjalmarsson: 77 games, 4.9 DGVT
Versteeg: 79 games, 3.3 DGVT
Madden: 79 games, 3.2 DGVT
Brouwer: 78 games, 3.6 DGVT (0.046 per game)
Fraser: 70 games, 3.2 DGVT (0.046 per game)
Ladd: 82 games, 2.3 DGVT (0.028 per game)
Eager: 60 games, 1.8 DGVT (0.03 per game)
Oh, and was Dustin Byfuglien (1.4 DGVT in 82 games) really your worst defensive player this year?
If John Madden and his 37.1% offensive zone start, 53% faceoff percentage, and only 0.12 GAON/60 higher than Versteeg, while adding an additional 1:20 of SHTOI/G (and allowing fewer goals against per 60) should be EQUAL to Versteeg’s defensive contribution, go ahead. That’s the only one I decided to look at because my eyes tell me is crap and the stats agree with me. DGVT is not even close to capturing a fair image of a player’s contributions on defense.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, I found the comments I made explaining why DGVT is incorrect using the Flyers. It’s here. But to summarize:
Ian Laperriere: 82 games, 1.8 GVT; 2.8 DGVT
Danny Syvret: 21 games, 1.2 GVT; 0.9 DGVT
“Lastly, Claude Giroux (1.7), Scott Hartnell (1.7), Dan Carcillo (1.7), Darroll Powe (1.7), and James van Riemsdyk (1.6) have virtually identical DGVTs. Did they all contribute the same on defense? No.”
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah I remember. After seeing that I was very suspicious of GVT also. Its an attempt but it’s not near perfect.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Yeah. If you want to use it for OGVT, go ahead. I have yet to find a massive flaw (Maybe i’ll look for one now) there, but DGVT is completely useless. You just can’t use it to compare a player’s defensive contributions.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I probably wouldn’t anyway haha.
Have you ever seen a QualComp to QualTeam ratio done?
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Mario did one during the whole “Jones is far superior to Scuderi” debate, so it may have been right, may have been wrong, may have been his own creation, may have been someone elses… you know where I’m going.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
was Dustin Byfuglien really your worst defensive player this year?
Yea pretty much, I’d put Buf last on the list on the defensive side.
To be honest I don’t have a problem with the order of that list for the most part except for Ladd. Madden really wore down this year. He’s not the player he’s been…
You might want to ask some of the regulars at SCH, though.
But the point is that Madden started in the defensive zone FAR more than any other Blackhawk, won a good amount of faceoffs, was better at 5-on-5 than Versteeg, and was better on the PK – while playing more PK minutes – than Versteeg, but GVT sees them as equals. They’re not equals. At all. The numbers tell you that.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Where are you getting those numbers? Are they playoff GVT? That -5.9 Leighton GVT was his numbers in Carolina, not Philly, not complete year, or playoffs. So that right there is inaccurate.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, Leighton’s is 9.2 in Philly… It’s 3.3 for the year.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions
GVT numbers
I got the GVT numbers for the season. Sorry I did it too quick and didn’t notice that players that switched teams were on the list multiple times. Truth is my eyesight isn’t very good and I’ll do stuff like that. :(
Mostly I was trying to respond to a post that I personally thought was absurd (I’m not alone in that, btw) and I tried to do it in the most polite possible way.
I usually use GVT when people say this “guy is better than that guy.” Feel free to dislike GVT all you want but I’ll take it over “opinions”, especially “the seriously homerism type opinions” like this post…
Oh sure, I value the use of numbers to back up what you are trying to prove. But GVT is flawed so I was trying to make the comparison fairer.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Yeah, I just think the better way would have been to compare OGVT scores, rather than GVT relative to team.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Ah I see. I wasn’t saying my way should be dogma, I was just playing with the numbers really.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
haha, yeah. No problem. I’m not offended at all.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Like I said, I didn’t want to sound like I was attacking you. I’m glad you brought over facts and are defending yourself reasonably. And I’m not disagreeing with you over your conclusions, I just have a personal dislike for GVT because of it’s obvious flaw.
I prefer other ways of analysis, but please don’t take my criticisms of GVT as personal. I honestly feel a little betrayed by them since I was a big proponent until I found that half of it is unreliable.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Geoff, if you’re reading this. I did something to try and account for the difference in scoring between the two team, or at least relative contribution to team GVT. Does that seem reasonable?
I got these numbers for the top 4
Keith is 3.91
Seabrook is 1.94
Campbell is 1.99
Hjalmarsson is 1.08
Pronger is 4.82
Carle is 2.76
Timonen is 2.71
Coburn is 1.09
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Does that seem reasonable?
Other then trying to make the Flyers numbers larger then the Hawks numbers no that is NOT reasonable.
GVT is the value of a player, in goals, above what a replacement player would have contributed. It already takes into account the entire league.
I’m not trying to make the Flyers numbers higher, it just worked out that way.
GVT is the value of a player in contribution to the goal differential of his own team. So if his team has a high goal differential then the players GVT will be higher.
So I tried to account for differences in high goal differentials by showing the players relative contribution.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Yeah, it’s tough because it’s not the way you compare GVT. I see what you’re trying to do, but this all goes back to the inherent problem in GVT: Defensive contributions are not accurately calculated at all.
Factors included in DGVT, lifted straight from the PP article:
1. The defensive responsibility for these 10 goals against are distributed evenly among the team’s players, weighted by defensive ice time, with adjustments for each player’s position.
2. We therefore adjust a player’s plus-minus based on the average plus-minus for his team.
3. The sum of all the goaltender’s contributions must be distributed among all the defensive players on the team according to weighted defensive ice time.
So, DGVT is all about team performance, distributed to individual players based on a) ice time; b) relative plus-minus; c) position; and d) his goalie. That makes it really hard to compare players around the league since one-third (but really half) of GVT is calculated heavily dependent of the team in which they’re playing.
Again, this just represents why I no longer use, trust, or care about GVT.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 27, 2010 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions
So I tried to account for differences in high goal differentials
Sorry you can’t do what you did. The Hawks have a 59 goal differential, the Flyers have a 10 goal differential. All you did was penalize the Hawk players for having a better team.
No, I tried to account for the differences in goal differential to show relative contribution. I had no idea how the numbers would turn out, or even if they should be used as I did.
GVT as it is will bias players on teams with higher goal differences, so if you want to do a player by player comparison, as you did, you have to compare on an even playing field.
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Player GVT relative to team GVT
Jonathan Toews 2.988162345
Mike Richards 3.229676401
Patrick Kane 3.337655017
Jeff Carter 3.464088398
Duncan Keith 3.914317926
Brent Seabrook 1.939684329
Chris Pronger 4.818468824
Kimmo Timonen 2.708760852
Marian Hossa 2.988162345
Simon Gagne 1.901341752
Brian Campbell 2.516347238
Matt Carle 2.760852407
Patrick Sharp 2.621195039
Danny Briere 2.396211523
Niklas Hjalmarsson 1.083427283
Braydon Coburn 1.093922652
Dustin Byfuglien 0.366967306
Claude Giroux 2.109707972
Antti Niemi 1.922209696
Michael Leighton 2.396211523
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan

by 

























