Does Flyers' lack of response to Steve Staios hit bother you?
by Travis Hughes on Jan 13, 2012 2:39 PM EST
in Philadelphia Flyers Commentary
Email
PrintMax Talbot got elbowed in the face last night by Steve Staios. If you've yet to see it, here you go. It was a pretty blatant elbow to the head in my eyes, even if some feel the replay was less than conclusive, but at the very least, Talbot was down on the ice for some time following the hit.
Even on clean hits, we see guys go after opposing players when there's an injury on the play.
Anze Kopitar got crushed in a game last night against Dallas. It was a clean hit, yet Kopitar took an awkward tumble into the boards and had to leave the game. Immediately after the hit, Mike Richards stepped up and fought Brendan Morrow, who delivered the check. It's just a matter of making players accountable for hitting skilled players -- whether it's a clean hit or a dirty hit or whatever.
This one was dirty. Talbot's head swung back, he clutched it as he fell to the ice, and he stayed down for a good 12 seconds. The entire team looked pissed as they realized what happened, yet nobody went after Staios. Nobody made him answer for the hit, whether on that shift or another in the final five minutes of the game.
A problem?
I'm going to say no, and it's not because a lack of response is a smart move or anything like that. I would have loved to see a response, but it appears as though it's just a simple matter of the opportunity failing to present itself. Live on television, it wasn't completely clear in real time if the hit was to the head or not.
Maybe on the ice it was different, but the play continued. Matt Read could have left his man at the top of the circle, but that very likely would have opened up a scoring chance for New York. Same goes for Braydon Coburn in front of the net, or the two Flyers in the corner near the puck. They could have jumped Staios, sure, but would the Islanders have been able to get the puck on net before the whistle was blown?
Who knows, really. I do know it was a one-goal game with under five minutes to go and the team may have had other things on their minds. After all, Richards may have jumped Morrow, but he was given a four minutes in penalties and a 10-minute misconduct. Dallas wound up tying the game on that ensuing power play before winning in a shootout, in which Richards couldn't participate.
Also, there wasn't exactly a tough guy on the ice for the Flyers. In fact, there wasn't really one dressed last night, either. (Not that a tough guy would be seeing a shift in this situation of the game, anyway. I don't suppose yelling from the bench would have been a deterrent.)
Consider the personnel on the ice that shift: Coburn, Sean Couturier, Read, Kimmo Timonen and Talbot. Coburn and Talbot are the only two who would really be expected to step up on a guy like Staios, but Coburn was in crucial defensive position and Talbot was busy picking his lip out of his teeth.
The dust didn't really settle until the whistle was blown, anyway, and it was then that it seemed the team realized what happened. By that point, Staios was already on the Islanders bench, and as it turned out, that was his final shift of the night. No chance for retribution.
I'd like to see something come Staios' way for the hit, but I'm just not sold that the opportunity necessarily presented itself at the time last night. According to Tim Panaccio, there will be no fine or suspension to Staios. So, should the Flyers be thinking payback come next Thursday in Philadelphia?
116 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Correct me if I’m wrong, but couldn’t whoever starts a fight in the last five minutes possibly draw an instigator (which Richie did for that fight mentioned above) and get suspended for Saturday’s game?
by everybodyhitswoohoo on Jan 13, 2012 2:44 PM EST reply actions
So between that, and the whole possibly sending the other team to the PP with <5 minutes left up by a goal, and the fact that I don’t really want anyone who was out on the ice at the time getting punched in the face repeatedly…yeah, I’m OK with the decision not to do anything.
by everybodyhitswoohoo on Jan 13, 2012 3:17 PM EST up reply actions
Richards got the instigator for starting a fight while still wearing his helmet because it has a visor. The fight was at 7:30ish left in the third.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
When I said “which Richie did for that fight” I just meant the instigator, not the suspended-for-being-in-the-last-five-minutes thing. Poor wording on my part.
As for the rule in question, I’m pretty sure Richie was going to get the instigator either way, and got the extra two for unsportsmanlike conduct because of the visor. Here’s the rule, emphasis mine:
46.6 Face Protection – If a player penalized as an instigator of an altercation is wearing a face shield (including a goalkeeper), he shall be assessed an additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Should the player (including a goalkeeper) who instigates the fight be wearing a face shield, but removes it before instigating the altercation, the additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty shall not apply.
Wording there makes it sound as if the only way the unsportsmanlike gets called is if they’re planning on calling the instigator anyways.
by everybodyhitswoohoo on Jan 13, 2012 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
You named the time and place
So, should the Flyers be thinking payback come next Thursday in Philadelphia?
I predict that Laviolette will dress either Rinaldo or Shelley for that game. Over the course of three full periods, there will be an opportunity for Mr. Staios to be addressed. Maybe Talbot will even want to take up the cause…
by alaskalovestheflyers on Jan 13, 2012 2:53 PM EST reply actions
Retribution
Absolutely. I was shocked that no one went after him, but I took in consideration the same things that you did. One, that no one on the ice was a player that could challenge Staios. And two, that going after him after a no call would put us on the penalty kill late in the game. Next Thursday is the perfect opportunity to at least make it known that we won’t stand for that type of hit on one of our players.
by ILLadelphiaFLYers on Jan 13, 2012 2:54 PM EST reply actions
Mike Richards is an awful fighter
if you’re going to take a instigator penalty that costs your team the game you might as well land at least one punch.
he also whines when he gets a misconduct for instigating a fight with his visor on after the game to the twitter-world.
Bob > Bryz
Yeah its total crap there’s a penalty for fighting with a visor. Why do they let all the NHL prospect in Canada do it regularly? And why is the visor considered more dangerous than the helmet itself? Because any good fighter knows how to turn his head when a punch is coming. Watch Cillo do it. He’s a pro at timing punches, not only the ones he throws but the ones he sees coming. Maybe the league should make fighters keep their heads straight too? Gotta protect them knuckles!
I thought the way the Islanders were playing, if there would have been any nonsense against Staios, they would have gotten the better of us in the closing minutes. Instead, in my opinion, the Flyers’ stepped their game up allowing Scooter to score not too long after the hit. Is that responding enough?
Bob > Bryz
I have more of a problem with the instigator rule as it is written than I do with no one going after Staios.
This station is non-operational
IT'S TEBOW TIME!
On the twitterverse
This! No instigator, something could have happened. With the instigator we’d immediately go on the PK. Coby was the only one on the ice who could have even thought about fighting but we need him on the PK. We play the Isles a bunch more this year, there will be payback.
by OrangeNblacK on Jan 13, 2012 3:13 PM EST up reply actions
Does it bother me? No
The Islanders are inconsequential in the whole scheme of things.
"Start playing with some jam in here"
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jan 13, 2012 3:03 PM EST reply actions
They’re fuckin’ irrelevant out there.
by everybodyhitswoohoo on Jan 13, 2012 3:06 PM EST up reply actions
I’m not against some form of payback in the next game, but I can’t say its vital. The team showed that their focus was on winning. I just hope this isn’t picked up by the MSM similarly to the incident with Buffalo earlier this year.
Eh, that was different. Not every questionable hit is going to demand an immediate response, players are (or I guess are supposed to be) a bit more sensitive when it comes to their goalies, that was early in the game instead of late in it, and we ended up winning the game while the Sabres gave up six goals AFTER that hit and lost big.
by everybodyhitswoohoo on Jan 13, 2012 3:22 PM EST up reply actions
Times have changed
The Flyers and their fans have matured – Good – Let’s hope it means a Cup if not this year maybe next year.
Ladies and Gentlemen the Flyers are going to win the Stanley Cup! The Flyers ...
by Fr. Orange and Black on Jan 13, 2012 3:22 PM EST reply actions
I agree that the players should police themselves, blah blah blah. But I hate, HATE!, when players fight after a huge, clean hit. Dirty hits should lead to brawls. Clean hits should lead to trash talk. It sucks how every time someone gets blown up (legally), play stops and gameflow is lost. The only exception is if a player thought a clean hit was dirty because it was borderline.
That said, the hit on Talbot was clearly an elbow, or at least a shot, to the head. Staios should have been knocked the $&"! out…
LeClair > Any Non-Flyer > Lindros > Any Non-Flyer
- The Department of Redundancy Department
I am all for some form of retirbution IF
~ it is in the course of the natural play/flow of the game, meaning no one should go out of their way to deliver retribution AND
~ it doesn’t put us in a position where we won’t win the game and not collect the 2 points which is far more important than retribution AND
~ it is Talbot who delivers it.
I am all for sticking up for your teammates, and especially when a guy on the other team takes a cheap shot (this was dirty, but it wasn’t blatantly overly dirty), but winning the game should take precedence.
If Staios is starting on Thursday in Philly, you start Rinaldo or someone that will fight him right off the bat. They fight. It’s over.
Like Booth v. Richards.
No reason to even give the Isles a chance of having a powerplay that late in a close game.
Flyers Fans: We've survived Lock-outs, Lindros and Cooperalls. If you want to get rid of us, you'll have to split an atom or two.
Actually, I was quite pleased with how the Flyers responded after that hit…….
Editor at SB Nation's Philadelphia Union blog, The Brotherly Game. Follow me on Twitter.
Retribution should be left to either:
1. Laviolette, in the tunnel
2. Sheriff Hughes, on the blog
Seriously, I’m happy nobody did anything stupid to get back at them. The outcome of the game was in doubt. Two points is payback. Perfect response, I thought.
As an aside, I believe this was the kind of hit that two years ago most of us would have said “awesome check,” as opposed to many hits we’ve seen this year that were just as dirty before the Rule 48 change.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 3:39 PM EST reply actions
Elbow action wise it reminded me of Stevens on Lindros.
"Call me dumb, call me stupid, whatever. I block shots."
#FireRoseman
@boknows71
I ranted about this in an earlier thread but there’s enough difference in what’s been observed that I should recant.
I just don’t see the elbow making the contact separate from the upper arm and shoulder. I see his arm against his body, with the bicep and/or shoulder making contact with Talbot’s head while his elbow is hitting Talbot’s chest. It’s closer to a roughing or charging penalty, in my opinion. But I think you have to have legislated a full ban on headshots to suspend this one, in my crotchety opinion.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
I was going to say that I’m glad they didn’t go for retribution and take a stupid penalty in the waning minutes of a close game, especially when the instigator rule makes it even more dangerous to do so, but then I saw this:
By that point, Staios was already on the Islanders bench, and as it turned out, that was his final shift of the night. No chance for retribution.So then it’s really a moot point. He’s on the bench, nothing you can do.
Either way, I’m far happier that the responded with a goal. Scoreboard, bitches, scoreboard.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
"I think there is virtue in pissing off idiots." - Fehr and Balanced
Tom Sestito disagrees with you.
"Call me dumb, call me stupid, whatever. I block shots."
#FireRoseman
@boknows71
the only thing bothering me right now
is these Schenn for JVR rumors.
by bleedorangewhiteblack on Jan 13, 2012 3:59 PM EST reply actions
let’s “fix” our defense right now with a defenseman who’s underachieving right now but could be good in the future… am i missing something? oh but they’re brothers so we should do it. ugh.
by bleedorangewhiteblack on Jan 13, 2012 4:06 PM EST up reply actions
Not saying you are wrong or anything but I don’t pay much attention to any of the teams from Canada so just wondering how Schenn is underachieving? His points seem to be about average and the only really noticable difference is his dropping in shots on goal. He does only have 1 goal this year which happens when you don’t shoot the puck but is this all you meant by underachieving or is there more?
Its his “advanced” stats like Corsi, where he is underperfoming compared to last year.
by Anders Jensen on Jan 14, 2012 7:06 AM EST up reply actions
Tough guys
I’m going to quibble on the no tough guy issue. I would say Sheriff Simmonds can go with anybody. Hartnell is also capable. No goons, but those two are plenty tough.
Doesn’t really bother me that nobody took care of it on the ice. The refs & the league can take care of that. I like when it happens, but I’m not going to go saying guys are soft because they don’t do it every time.
I was sitting a couple rows behind the Flyers bench and there’s a good chance the guys on the bench barely saw the hit since it was directly to the right of the bench and up against the boards. It was almost entirely out of my peripheral vision. I saw something happen but no way would I have been able to tell if he had elbowed him in the head because Staios’ huge body was directly in between Talbot’s head and the bench’s line of sight.
DAMN RIGHT IT BOTHERED ME!
But the way the rules work these days I have to accept my 70’s roots and beliefs are outdated. It’s a damn shame too.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
And let me add I believe it will be handled in the next game if Staios is even playing in the NHL at that point. And if it is addressed I will be completely settled on the matter. In other words I can wait and Talbot knows the situation never presented over the remainder of the game.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
I’m a huge fan of hockey fights but even I was ok with nobody stepping up. The game was almost over and we were clinging to a one goal lead. It may have been different if we had been dominating but we were lucky to have that lead to begin with thanks to Bob’s spectacular play. The Islanders had been getting shots and chances all night and risking giving them a power play would almost have been disrespectful to Bob. He worked his ass off don’t give the Islanders an unnecessary chance to get back in the game. Also, Talbot is a big boy and I’m sure if he’s upset about the hit he’ll make sure the Islanders know about it come Thursday. I’m expecting a fight off the faceoff. That way the fight actually gives us momentum instead of potentially hurting us.
NOT A POPULAR IDEA
This is why the Flyers need a player like Rinaldo, or Shelly. These are the guys that go out and take care of problems like this and make other players be accountable. It’s leadership. While I understand that Shelly and Rinaldo are no exactly popular players with some folks, they do serve their purpose.
As someone stated earllier, it is a moot point with Staios doing the deed on his last shift of the evening. However, I’d like to see Shelly earn his keep and go out there and take that guy apart. Send the message.
(I don’t post here on BSH very often, but read everyday. So, one might be led to believe I’m a blood thirsty goon lover… not the case. However, I see these cheap shots and know that professional hockey has a specific mechanism to deal with it… guys like Shelly/Rinaldo).
If Richards did it
I support it.
I guess the glory that was the Philadelphia Eagles off-season counter-acts the dump that was the Flyers. Hmph.
I hated that nobody did anything, especially since the hit was so flagrant and against Talbot. Not sticking up for a guy like Talbot (and Rinaldo, for that matter), a guy who puts his body on the line for the team day in and day out, says a lot of bad things about your team. Face it, the most obviously of which is that you’re soft. Talbot can’t feel good that nobody stuck up for him. Not so much on a personal level, but in undertanding that it’s not that kind of team. He is a pro’s pro and that won’t sit well with him.
The Flyers are soft. Maybe you like it. Maybe you call it ‘smart’. Whatever, it’s a non-response that becomes a cancer.
Please answer the following questions
1). Both Shelley and Rinaldo were (rightfully) scratched for this game. It’s a 1-goal game with under five minutes left. Don’t you think that in such situations the available resources are better used on the ice and not in the locker room for the rest of the game?
2). Staios is a bad hockey player. When you have no agitators/enforcers in the line-up, don’t you think it is not the brightest of moves to have a Flyers with more skill than Staios fight him and take himself out of the game?
3). Staios never saw the ice again after that shift. How do you go after someone not on the ice?
4). While it is certainly up for debate whether Talbot should have been out there on the ice or in the quite room being examined for a possible concussion, soon after the hit, Max Talbot set up Sean Couturier for what ultimately proved to be the game-winning goal against a divisional rival. How is that not a better response than pounding the face of a useless hockey player?
it’s a non-response that becomes a cancerPlease. Save the narrative-driven, idiotic statements for Philly.com.
Editor at SB Nation's Philadelphia Union blog, The Brotherly Game. Follow me on Twitter.
I am not arguing your points and believe this or not I actually agree with them all, especially #3. This is why honor can still be restored at a future date and Talbot knows it. But you don’t think something like a team losing its self respect can fester and cancer a team? How about the Buffalo Sabres and how their season has gone down the shitter pretty much right after that debacle with Boston and Lucic. They started out the year on a nice winning pace, 10-5-0, but since then they are 8-14-5 and in 11th place in the East. Yes they have had some injuries as every other team has suffered as well. But I listen to a lot of Canadian radio and HNIC radio, and they still note that occurrence as a turning point in their season. I just know as men something like not answering the bell festers and never goes away.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
How about the Buffalo Sabres and how their season has gone down the shitter pretty much right after that debacle with Boston and Lucic.They started out the year on a nice winning pace, 10-5-0, but since then they are 8-14-5 and in 11th place in the East.
An excellent example of regression that was predicted by advanced statistics, which the mainstream prefers to attribute to a mostly-unrelated narrative.
Take a look at this link. On the left, we see that it took about five games for their shot ratio to settle in at about 48%, where it remains. On the right, we see that the reason they are losing a lot more despite an unchanged shot ratio is because they were unsustainably lucky with shooting percentages at the start of the year, and have tended back towards the mean since then.
You don’t have to invoke a cancerous loss of self-respect to explain it. It’s the same phenomenon that’s hitting the Wild this year or the Stars last year or the Avs the year before that — shooting luck can drive short-term results, but teams bow to the Corsi gods in the end.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
But the Wild, Stars and Avs were not playoff teams last year or the year before that. The Sabres have been winning at a playoff contending pace with this group for 3 years, except for this year after that incident. Now while I know your data is not fabricated you can not say for any certainty that my belief is not true. I can’t prove that it is true either, but I have been around teams and played a lot of team sports. While you might not want to believe this because its not mathematically quantifiable but when a group of guys, especially testosterone driven prideful guys, wear a similar sweater there is a belief among them that the man standing next to you has your back, as neanderthal as that may seem to you it does exist. Other then the mathematic statistic of luck maybe some human emotion has led to their slump.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
The Sabres have been winning at a playoff contending pace with this group for 3 years, except for this year after that incident.
Last year, the Sabres got 52.2% of the shots, which put them fifth in the league. They had a 1.002 PDO (shooting percentage plus save percentage, a measure of how lucky/unlucky they were with their shots).
At the time of the Boston game, they were getting 48.5% of the shots and had a 1.032 PDO (9.3% shooting, 93.9% save percentage). They are now at 48.9% of the shots and 0.995 PDO.
In other words, the ability to drive play towards the other net was very good last year, bad in the first quarter of this year, and bad in the second quarter of this year. Their possession metrics didn’t change at all near the time of that incident.
Their shooting percentages were average last year, unbelievably great in the first quarter of this year, and unbelievably bad in the second quarter of this year, landing them at average through the first half. So the “but they were good last year” argument seems pointless — through those early games they were running much better with their shots than they ever did before.
To argue that their shooting percentage was the result of a talent that disappeared with that hit, you would have to argue that it’s a talent that they developed in the off-season and suddenly lost that night. Again, given that there is a long, virtually unblemished history of teams with low shot percentages and high PDOs tailing off, it seems a lot more likely that they just aren’t as hot now.
Are you really going to argue that this year they finally all banded together and developed that magic brotherhood that you apparently need for good shooting percentages, but then that one hit broke it all apart?
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Before
then
after
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
Uh-huh.
It’s just that this year’s Sabres looked a lot more like this year’s Wild, last year’s Stars, or the previous year’s Avs (all high-PDO, low-Corsi teams) than they did like last year’s Sabres (average PDO, high Corsi).
The whole point of separating the possession stats (which have repeatedly been shown to be reproducible and predictive) from the shooting stats (which have repeatedly been shown to be irreproducible and have little predictive power) is so you can tell which teams are genuinely good and which aren’t with a better assessment than “well they were good last year.”
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Except the Sabres established a level of success in previous seasons. They were successful enough to contend for the playoffs despite their highs and lows. You are telling me they averaged out, but their average was in the top eight of the eastern conference. Those other teams average was not playoff worthy.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Yeah, last year the Sabres were good. They controlled the game, and with average luck finished in the playoffs.
This year, they weren’t good. The opponents were controlling play, and the only reason the Sabres had a good record was because of unsustainable shooting percentages. And then those shooting percentages dropped — whether it’s because of dumb luck or morale failure or butterflies in Asia, it was predictable, unsurprising, and consistent with what routinely happens to teams that don’t control play but have great shooting percentages (regardless of how good they were in previous seasons).
Their polar opposite this year is probably Ottawa. Ottawa has missed the playoffs in recent years, but they have a good record this year. And unlike the early-season Sabres, that good record is predominantly driven by outshooting their opponents rather than by getting a higher shooting percentage, so you should fully expect them to take Buffalo’s playoff spot away from them this year.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Unless Ottawa regresses which by your calculations is inevitable. Which would resign them to exactly what they really are…out of the playoffs. I mentioned this the day after the Lucic incident to keep an eye on the Sabres and you and geoff and even Ubi poked at me saying yea not having push back is really hurting the team seeing as they have twenty points or something.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Unless Ottawa regresses which by your calculations is inevitable. Which would resign them to exactly what they really are…out of the playoffs.
Huh?
You’re the one saying past seasons are the predictor and that Ottawa should finish out of the playoffs. I’m saying that Corsi is the predictor and that Ottawa should finish in the playoffs.
I’m saying that they do have a record that approximates their talent level (their PDO is 1.004), that we shouldn’t expect them to suddenly drop off a cliff the way we did for Buffalo when they were riding .939 goaltending and 9.3% shooting early in the year.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
I am saying a team like the Sabres didn’t just forget how to play hockey. And I believe morale and other intangibles are involved in success and failure. I am saying that if Ottawa makes the playoffs after being out it’s because this group found some common ground to come together as a cohesive unit and play tough hockey, winning hockey.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
If you want to argue that morale and cohesiveness and toughness are a part of what helps teams win the possession battle, that’s fine. I have no evidence to the contrary.
If you want to argue that teams that lose the possession battle can still consistently win games in the long run through morale and cohesiveness and toughness, then I disagree wholeheartedly, because there are mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Teams that lose the possession battle might win in the short run, but not the long run. So I call their short-term hot run “luck”. You can call it “morale and cohesiveness and toughness that are never sustained for a whole season” if you want. Just don’t argue that those things are going to win in the long run.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Now we agree. If a team goes out and lose puck battles and the possession game they are going to lose. That is simple hockey. I just believe there is a mixture of intangibles that are in the equation of winning those battles. Confidence, morale, etc.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
They’ve lost 188 man-games to injury, fourth in the league.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
Who else is in the top ten?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Here’s the list I used, and I found another as well (thru 1/4/12). Unofficial.
They vary a bit, but they agree the following are in the top ten: Pittsburgh, Montreal, Buffalo, Toronto, St. Louis, Vancouver , Florida.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
So man games lost doesn’t really relate to success, I guess?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Depends on who you lose and who you replace them with. I don’t think there’s a positive correlation, but if you’re looking for reasons the Sabres “forgot how to play the game” and had a major change in Corsi, this is one plausible explanation.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
You are telling me they averaged out, but their average was in the top eight of the eastern conference.
I guess what I’m trying to say is: their average in previous years might have been in the top 8, but this year the numbers clearly showed that they were playing worse than that.
I believe that how they’re playing this year (as measured by Corsi) is a better predictor than their record this year (which is influenced by shooting luck) or their record last year (which is a different team).
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
How different? They added talent they didn’t lose any.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
I dunno. People got older, or people got hurt, or the coach is doing something different, or Leino is single-handedly crippling their offense.
I can’t explain it, but their Corsi is below average this year and has been all year, and by this point it’s a pretty reliable indicator of the team’s skill level.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
If they turn it around what do you give the credit to a mere reversal of fortune?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Depends what you mean by “turn it around”.
If you mean “start winning while still having a bad Corsi”, then I credit it to hot goaltending and/or shooting.
If you mean “start having a top-tier Corsi again”, then I credit it to a reversal of whatever injuries or Leino-poisoning is currently afflicting them.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Same guys but different results equates to intangibles for me. They didn’t get to the pros by luck and they didn’t just forget how to play hockey. And I do allow for injuries as an excuse.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Well Played Sir!
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
All I am saying is your calculations and stats never involve the human aspect of these players and if a shift in morale occurred due to those events their play on the ice might be influenced. I understand there are ups and downs in a season but I believe it is more then a coincidence or quotient of luck. Neither of us can prove morale one way or another. It’s something I believe in. Geoff and I came to some common ground yesterday and it’s very true. I come from an entirely different angle when it comes to hockey then you and him. I can’t observe the game through the eyes of the statistics, its just not in my nature. I am not saying I even completely believe what I say sometimes.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
More seriously,
1.) I thought the Sabres responded when Tootoo ran Miller. Three guys jumped on top of him and the others immediately grabbed another opponent.
2.) The times I’ve felt my teammates had each other’s backs didn’t have as much to do with fighting as with blocking shots, taking a hit to make a good play, covering for a less-skilled teammate without bitching, playing hurt, etc. Getting knocked around without responding, I think, does take something out of a team, but there are a lot of ways to remedy that, starting with just standing back up and going out for more.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:05 PM EST up reply actions
I am not even saying just fighting either, but they did nothing and it did eat at Gaustad because he spent days accounting for it and regretting not doing anything. The tootoo was a knee jerk reaction born out of regret I believe because his hit was a hockey play whereas Lucic was a pure and simple intimidation move. If you played then you know it pumps a team up when one of your guys steps up to a situation and doesn’t back down. It flows through the bench like lightning.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
It’s definitely part of the game. What happened to Buffalo in that moment (Lucic) is unusual in today’s game. But I think the meter re-sets every game – you get a new chance to stand tall – more often than it builds in a locker room over a season. And I also think there are many other more common ways for a locker room to lose its unity.
No idea what’s going on in Buffalo’s locker room. I’ve seen them three times since the Lucic hit. I didn’t think they looked mousy to me, any more or less than the two times I’d seen them before. But we all watch from a great distance.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:21 PM EST up reply actions
Your right I am reacting to win/loss results and not regarding playing mousy. They aren’t playing as a unified group, which is more why teams lose then regression and shooting luck. How do you explain the underdogs who prevail against superior talent, dumb luck?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Many reasons, including specific key-moment luck, and the kind of intangibles you are talking about, and general randomness, and injuries (especially undisclosed), and the refs, and swings in confidence, and favorable matchups, and a hot/cold goalie, etc.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
I am the kind of guy that likes to believe the miracle on ice was a group of guys that found a bond to play and fight for each other and refuse to quit. Other people just believe it was dumb luck. What a bummer.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Guys can form a bond and play and fight for one another and refuse to quit and still lose. Those things you mentioned are all good, but they’re no guarantee of success.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
My relationship between statistics and the kind of approach that you are talking about is kind of like the relationship between determinism and free will.
I can more or less make any choice I want at any given moment. I usually make choices that are predictable and within a narrower range than I would like to admit to my hero-self. Stats give me a more reliable range of probabilities than my story of my hero-self. They don’t crush it, though.
One of my primary objections to statistics is emotional. I think they want to tell me that I can’t hope. But, really, that’s my problem and not a fair interpretation, more like a snap reaction. But sports is a place where we look for human heroes in a world increasingly dominated by impersonal technology.
Ok I can try to make a more sweeping and bloated generalization than that last sentence but it will be difficult.
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:39 PM EST up reply actions
/reply fail, should be to the right
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:40 PM EST up reply actions
Talking to yourself.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
...
there’s a whole team in there
/s, more often than not
by flyersfaninchicago on Jan 13, 2012 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
They aren’t playing as a unified group, which is more why teams lose then regression and shooting luck.
And yet every time a team has a 1030 PDO and below-average Corsi, we predict that they will regress and they do.
Maybe you’d feel better if with each of those teams we predicted “they’re going to stop playing as such a unified group” instead of “they’re going to stop getting so lucky”? I’m not sure what different makes if the end result is that they lose.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
How do you explain Boston last year. You are telling me their corsi was really great all year and finally their luck came around with it?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Boston had a slow start last year, but had a 51.5% Corsi over the last 60 games — a very solid record.
On top of that, they had the best goaltender of this generation having the best season of his career. Because of their extreme goaltending and forward skill, they are the rare team that can sustain a high PDO.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
So some luck is sustainable? If Thomas falters then there corsi/PDO is in line with how the season started. Or who the team really is without a shit ton of luck.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Imagine we have a bunch of coins, most of which will come up heads 50% of the time in the long run, but some will be 50.3% and fewer will be 50.5% and maybe a few might be 51%.
You pick up a coin and flip it twenty or fifty or a hundred times. If it comes up heads 52% of the time, it’s possible that you found the very very rare 52% coin, but it’s more likely that you found a coin that’s somewhere near 50% that ran hot. If you’re betting on how the next 1000 coins will turn out, you should bet that they’ll be well below 51%.
But there are a few 51% coins in there. The Bruins appear to be one of them.
@BSH_EricT
Writer at Broad Street Hockey
Whatever, it’s a non-response that becomes a cancer.
IT’S NOT A TUMOR!
But seriously, Justin asks good questions. Curious to hear your answers.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
"I think there is virtue in pissing off idiots." - Fehr and Balanced
How do you like my response?
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
"I think there is virtue in pissing off idiots." - Fehr and Balanced
Just Chuck Testa
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
In a word: No... But...
While watching the game last night I saw there was no one on the ice to take on Staois after the hit. It didn’t really bother me that no one jumped on him, as there wasn’t really anyone who could. Not to mention that play continued for 8-10 seconds after the hit, and as everyone else noted; the situation (score, time left, etc) didn’t afford an opportunity for retribution.
The angles from the Flyers telecast last night didn’t really lend a good view of the hit. It was quite hard to tell how much Staois threw his elbow out. What bothered me the most was the grin on Staois’ face on the bench while Max was being tended to. For that alone Staois should have to answer the bell next Thursday.
This situation gave me a serious case of deja vu...
Specifically, to Flyers/Senators, March 23, 2010. Gagne gets boarded; and it’s an ugly hit. Richards and Carcillo approach Volchenkov with a few pushes and some words; which with Gagne still down on the ice creates a 4 on 2. Play doesn’t stop, the Senators score, and after Gagne fights back to get retribution he winds up in the box while Ottawa gets a 7 minute power play. Feel free to go back and revisit the situation if you want to. If anyone had abandoned their defensive position last night to go to Talbot’s defense, we could have been looking at a very similar end result, the puck in the back of our net and no penalty on Staios.
Maybe if it hadn’t been in the final 5 minutes and Staios had ever had another shift my response would be different, but last night we weren’t really in a position to retaliate.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
Its funny Richard ends up costing his team the victory for a similar play, putting his team in a very long powerplay situation and not able to be on the ice for the OT or SO.
by Anders Jensen on Jan 14, 2012 7:43 AM EST up reply actions
last night we weren’t really in a position to retaliate.
I guess this, in the end, is the answer to Travis’ question.
Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
Thanks All
Had fun guys I have to go, my flight for Nashville leaves at 7 am. I will be seeing the boys tomorrow night. Maybe even Snevik, Bud,and
F2lyers8. I will around section 114.Commenter formerly known as M from Pdaddy, but still just Call Me "M"!
DISCLAIMER: Information written above may not be entirely factual nor provable with the use of complex statistics. But it may induce thought, humor and possibly laughter.
It's Simple
No One Like Talbot
"Line brawl på Long Island!? Matt Moulson i huvudrollen!!!?! Wot!?" SwedishIslander
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
Absolutely. I said this as soon as it happened. I don’t care about any sort of misconducts or fines or suspensions this pansy-fied version of the NHL would dole out. You stand up for your teammates when someone takes liberties. Period. No if, ands or buts.
"Jagr doesn’t have moves. He has grizzled old man power. He bends reality to his will with a scowl alone." - BannedStreetBully
Opposing Ilya Bryzgalov as Philadelphia Flyers' goalie since June 23, 2011.
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Jan 14, 2012 11:13 AM EST reply actions
If the Flyers could talk to Suter (back channels, thru agent, somehow) and see if he would be willing to play for the Flyers long term, JVR would be worth that trade if there were no other current flyers forwards as part of the deal. If Suter is willing to play for Philadelphia, the Flyers will pay him somehow. Suter is a legitimate #1 defenseman. They seldom hit the market and with Kimmo and Prongers age, the Flyers desperately need one. If it is just a rental, none of the defensemen listed are a serious upgrade worth major assets.
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Broad Street Hockey
Related FanShots on Broad Street Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
- Adam Henrique sends New Jersey Devils to Stanley Cup Final with OT goal vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
