...let's do some stat comparisons!
Last year, the 18-2 Wolverines were scoring 4 goals per game and allowing just 1.9. At the moment, the 08-09 squad is 13-7, scoring 3.4 a night and giving up 2.3. Clearly you're going to lose some games when the scoring margin dips by a full goal per game.
We scored fewer than three goals in a game just twice in our first twenty last year. This year, it's happened seven times. We've also given up 3+ nine times out of twenty, compared to five times at this point last year.
That being said, aside from the 7 goal disaster at BU, our goalies haven't given up more than 3 in a game (Alaska's fourth goal in our loss to them was an ENG). That's a good sign for the rest of the season, because with Hogan in net we haven't had any problems scoring goals. Clearly 3 goals allowed isn't what you're striving for, but if the offense is going, we should still win the majority of those games (and we are 6-3 this year when giving up more than 2 goals--and we scored just three goals total in the three losses, all with Sauer in net).
Let's put it in perspective how they've played in front of Hogan. As I said, at this point last year we were scoring 4 goals a night, and everyone thought our offense was ridiculous. Well we're scoring 4.7 a night for Hogan, including 27 goals in his last 5 starts. In front of Hogan, we're the #1 offense in the country by a long shot (Air Force has the overall mark right now at 4.05 goals per game). In front of Sauer, we'd be dead last in offense at 1.30 goals per game (Tech is last at 1.32 gpg right now).
This is impressive: The big duo of Porter and Kolarik had combined for 31 goals and 55 points at this time a year ago. Palushaj and Caporusso have 26 and 50.
Caporusso has already bettered last year's totals in goals, points, shots on goal, and PPGs. Palushaj's numbers aren't much better (8-17--25 this year vs. 6-16--22 last year), but considering he was second in the country in assists last year, how much improving are you really going to do (especially considering our power play has taken a big dip)?
Hogan has been very solid in his own right. He's not putting up quite the numbers that Sauer put up last year (1.80/.930 at this point), but he's in the ballpark. A 1.95/.917 is going to win you a lot of hockey games. He's been really steady, but he's also gotten a ton of support.
Even with only getting 17 games (out of a possible 60) from Mitera, Burlon, and Kampfer, we're giving up fewer shots per game this year than we did last year (24.9 vs. 26.2). Take out the ENGs and we've given up 7 more goals than this time a year ago. Really not all that bad, all things considered. There's also been a difference of 5 PPGs allowed, which is understandable when you're missing 3 of your top 4 dmen. We're also getting nearly identical production out of our blueliners on the offensive end. Last year they had 38 points in the first 20 games. Right now they've got 39 (again, with no Mitera, no Kampfer, and Burlon for about half the time).
Ten games ago, our opponents were converting on 22.6% of their power plays. Now it's down to 15.7% because we've only given up 5 PPGs on the last 55 opportunities. Clearly the PK is moving in the right direction. They're 26th overall, but after the hole they dug themselves, it's a major improvement.
The PP has been at a pretty consistent clip the whole year. They were 14.9% after 10 games, and it's 14.8% now. Not good enough, and clearly an area that needs to be improved in the second half. Last year's team was 20.4% in the first half and 20.5% overall. We're 32nd in the country on the PP right now. Gotta get that cranked up. I suppose it's a pretty good sign that we have the #8 offense in the country with our power play that far down the charts.
The special teams are probably the biggest difference between last year and this year (well, that and a strange inability to play in front of Billy Sauer). At this point last year, we were +14 in goals scored on special teams. This year, we're +1. You want the biggest reason for that goal per game difference in scoring margin, that'd be it. The power play isn't as good, the PK is worse. Though, ya lose Pacioretty, Porter, and Kolarik, it's tough to improve the PP.
Keep in mind that in the second half last season Kolarik and Pacioretty exploded. Kolarik had 18 goals in his last 19 games and Pacioretty had 10-11--21 in the last 19 games. Porter also had 32 points in the last 23 games. Turnbull also had a great second half, and Mitera shockingly had 17 points in his last 23. It's also worth mentioning, though, that our goals per game stayed exactly the same.
One guy who I fully expect to break out in the second half is Robbie Czarnik. He has one goal, but he's fourth on the team in shots (behind Caporusso, Hagelin, and Turnbull) with 45. He's been playing pretty well as of late and the most important thing is that he's getting scoring chances. They're going to start going in.
We need more out of Rust as well. He had 12-11--23 in 43 games last year and this year he has 2-6--8 in 17 games. He's only got 21 shots on goal so far and he's done virtually nothing on offense since Palushaj was moved off his wing. Since the two of them played pretty well together in the World Juniors, I'm hopeful that we'll see them reunited back in Ann Arbor. Caporusso doesn't need the "Palushaj boost". He was off to a great start before the duo was even put together. He was great in the GLI without Palushaj, and he clearly has some chemistry with Wohlberg. I'd love to see the Hagelin-Rust-Palushaj line back together, personally.
Those are the obvious ones. I'd like to see a few more goals out of Hagelin, but he's got 4 in his last 10. I'd like to see him up around 15 by the end of the year. He's got 5 right now.
So yeah, take what you want out of those numbers. Just thought I'd put them out there. Keep 29, 8, and 25 going bonkers, continued improvement in the PK, get the power play going at a little higher clip, and get Czarnik and Rust going offensively. Those are some of my keys to the second half.
I think this team is really primed to make a run. They're scoring a ton of goals and they're getting solid goaltending. The defense should be getting better and better as Kampfer, Burlon, and Pateryn get more comfortable back there. Summers also went through an adjustment period and he's been playing fantastic hockey. All the pieces are in place. The CCHA Championship is probably out the window (unless we sweep ND and Miami) but if they keep moving in the right direction I don't think anyone would be excited about playing these guys.
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Monday, January 05, 2009
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Another Excuse to Update
We're coming at you fast and furious this week! Thanks to the latest Linkorama at The World of Junior Hockey I have a few more things to put out there:
Hockey's Future has started releasing their Top 20 Prospect lists for each NHL team. Out of the teams that have been released, the lists of the Panthers, Blues, and Devils include Wolverines. Matt Rust is listed as the #10 prospect in the Panthers organization (up from #13 last year).
He's gotta cut out the stupid late-game penalties before I'd go as far as they did in the first sentence, but I imagine that's something that won't continue this year. I agree with the rest.
Brandon Burlon is listed as the #8 prospect in the New Jersey organization. HF likes him. A lot.
Aaron Palushaj has moved from #14 to #10 in the Blues organization. And here we have one of the problems with Hockey's Future, because, quite honestly, there's not a whole lot of information in his profile that was correct. He didn't play on the top line (at least not when everyone was in the lineup) and his linemates weren't upperclassmen, as he usually played with Rust and Hagelin. They are correct that he needs to shoot the puck more.
They also list Kevin Porter as one of the preseason Top 15 candidates for the Calder. The Calder is prrrobably not gonna happen, but he should make Phoenix's roster.
Lastly, here's something that I think is kind of interesting. Here are our winning percentages with the various CCHA refs over the past 5 years, with the number of games officiated in parenthesis (for comparison's sake, our overall winning percentage is .693):
Aaron: 56% (17)
Brown: 60% (5)
Hall: 79% (17)
Hill: 83% (6)
Hoberg: 80% (5)
Klosowski: 100% (3)
Kotyra: 100% (4)
Lisko: 78% (9)
McInchak: 74% (29)
Murphy: 100% (1)
Piotrowski: 72% (38)
Pochmara: 33% (6)
Sergott: 80% (5)
Shegos: 64% (32)
Wilkens: 78% (18)
Do keep in mind that strength of schedule isn't included as a factor. But it appears that my immense dislike of Aaron is partially due to the fact that we lose a lot when he does our games. And, well, perhaps The Miami Student would like to know that we don't actually have that great of a record with Matt Shegos as the head official.
Hockey's Future has started releasing their Top 20 Prospect lists for each NHL team. Out of the teams that have been released, the lists of the Panthers, Blues, and Devils include Wolverines. Matt Rust is listed as the #10 prospect in the Panthers organization (up from #13 last year).
An intelligent, heady player, winner of the University’s Athletic-Academic Achievement award, Rust has managed to play well in just about any type of situation he was thrown into. In particular, Rust excelled this past year on the Wolverines energy line with Carl Hagelin and Aaron Palushaj (STL). He did an exceptional job on the penalty kill, too, but beyond energy and defensive play, Rust has a still-developing scoring touch, which will show through more in the coming season. Rust was sixth on the team in total points in 2007-08, and with the senior tandem of Chad Kolarik and Hobey Baker winner Kevin Porter (PHO) no longer in the picture, Rust’s offensive role should be expanded in his sophomore season.
He's gotta cut out the stupid late-game penalties before I'd go as far as they did in the first sentence, but I imagine that's something that won't continue this year. I agree with the rest.
Brandon Burlon is listed as the #8 prospect in the New Jersey organization. HF likes him. A lot.
The Devils second-round selection at the 2008 NHL draft makes a splashy debut all the way up in eighth spot. A lot of weight in Burlon's ranking is based on the fact that his overall upside is through the roof, and when you combine that with the tools that he already has, it's scary to think about how good he might get once he gets more experience and fills out his frame. Burlon is a multi-purpose defenseman, but his skating and offensive skills are what really sets him apart from other defense prospects in the organization. Set to play at the University of Michigan this fall, he's probably at least three collegiate seasons away from turning pro, but he is only going to get better and better and his skill set is tailor made for the up-tempo style of play in the NHL. This will quite possibly be the lowest that Burlon will ever be ranked in the top 20.I really can't wait to see that kid play. And I'd love to keep him three years.
Aaron Palushaj has moved from #14 to #10 in the Blues organization. And here we have one of the problems with Hockey's Future, because, quite honestly, there's not a whole lot of information in his profile that was correct. He didn't play on the top line (at least not when everyone was in the lineup) and his linemates weren't upperclassmen, as he usually played with Rust and Hagelin. They are correct that he needs to shoot the puck more.
They also list Kevin Porter as one of the preseason Top 15 candidates for the Calder. The Calder is prrrobably not gonna happen, but he should make Phoenix's roster.
Lastly, here's something that I think is kind of interesting. Here are our winning percentages with the various CCHA refs over the past 5 years, with the number of games officiated in parenthesis (for comparison's sake, our overall winning percentage is .693):
Aaron: 56% (17)
Brown: 60% (5)
Hall: 79% (17)
Hill: 83% (6)
Hoberg: 80% (5)
Klosowski: 100% (3)
Kotyra: 100% (4)
Lisko: 78% (9)
McInchak: 74% (29)
Murphy: 100% (1)
Piotrowski: 72% (38)
Pochmara: 33% (6)
Sergott: 80% (5)
Shegos: 64% (32)
Wilkens: 78% (18)
Do keep in mind that strength of schedule isn't included as a factor. But it appears that my immense dislike of Aaron is partially due to the fact that we lose a lot when he does our games. And, well, perhaps The Miami Student would like to know that we don't actually have that great of a record with Matt Shegos as the head official.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Media Roundup: CCHA Quarterfinals
I haven't done one of these in a few weeks, so it's time to take a look-see at what the media thought of Michigan's series sweep of the UNO Mavericks.
The Michigan Side:
Varsity Blue wins at the internet for having a montage of Sideline Charlie's reports from Friday night's game. I'm posting it here because it's awesome, but you should shoot over to his site for highlights of the actual game Friday as well.
I should also say that I know from experience how hard talking behind a mic can be, and that I'm actually really jealous of the WOLV-TV guys because I really wish I had worked for the station when I was in school. That's something I regret not doing.
Michigan Daily live blogs of Friday and Saturday. I'm not sure why they're always fooled into thinking the crowd will be small just because it's not packed 10 minutes before faceoff, but a good job blogging as usual. Some great photos Friday night as well. Also a nice, if biased (you'll see a completely different, biased as well, recap by reading at MavPuck) recap of the fight.
Daily game stories from Friday and Saturday.
Daily reporter Scott Bell has a great recap of the emotions of his final game at Yost as a student. Based on the headline, I thought it was going to be about Kolarik and Porter. I'm glad it wasn't. I had similar emotions running through me after my final game there as a student--ironically also against Nebraska-Omaha in the playoffs. I didn't know at the time that I was going to spend another three years in Ann Arbor, so I spent a good hour walking around the arena, taking pictures (including one at center ice that a staff member was gracious enough to allow/take), reminiscing, and soaking everything in. Yost is a special place. I only got to one game this season at the Old Barn, and the students weren't there. It was an ass-kicking of Minnesota, so that was pretty great, but not a Friday/Saturday night goes by that I don't miss that place. Fantastic column and I echo a lot of the sentiments (though personally, I enjoy the game itself way too much to get drunk beforehand).
It's impossible to overstate what Kolarik has meant to this team. I've been through this before. He deserves to be one of the ten Hobey Finalists and it's going to be a travesty when he's not.
Elmblad did a nice job pressed into duty in a tough situation.
No Ann Arbor News stuff this week in protest of them letting Jim Carty continue his agenda against the University of Michigan and certain academic programs, and for printing a lot of one-sided trash this week with a few valid points mixed in. Unless there's something really great, I'm probably not linking to them until next season.
Friday's and Saturday's game stories from MGoBlue.
The UNO Viewpoint:
The Friday and Saturday articles from UNO's website.
Friday's story from the UNO student newspaper. The majority of their coverage won't take place until the March 25th issue, sadly.
Mike Kemp was "bitterly disappointed" about this season. The Mavericks lose a ton of offense (Marshall, Lawrence, Scero) but he's more concerned with improving a horrid defense.
Friday's game story from the Omaha World Herald. Kemp called the game "Probably the most dominating performance I've seen by a team in an awful long time."
Saturday's game story. I feel for Bryan Marshall. Sad that a player as good as he is had to end his college career in the press box instead of on the ice.
Stat Hunting:
They combine for 55 goals, 102 points, +52, 310 shots on goal, 11 game winners, 19 power play goals, and five short-handed goals, but Chad Kolarik and Kevin Porter have just 38 PIMs between them. Pretty impressive.
With 69 goals, the three players that traditionally make up our top line outscored Alabama-Huntsville (60 goals) and Brown (67) this season. Add in contributions from other players taking the place of Kolarik or Pacioretty due to injury/WJC and they likely outscored Minnesota-Duluth (74) and Merrimack (71) as well.
We had 56 goals (42 power play, 14 short handed) on special teams last season but allowed 59 (47-12) for a net of -3. This year, we have 50 goals on special teams (42-8) and have allowed just 32 (30-2) for a next of +18. Big difference right there.
At this point, Mark Mitera's +30 rating is tied for the second-highest mark we've had in ten years (David Rohlfs, +33 last year).
Chad Kolarik's seven game winning goals is the third highest total over the last ten seasons (Muckalt and Dale Rominski each had 8. This is also the first time in ten years that we've had a player net three hat tricks in a season.
Kevin Porter's 14 power play goals are the most by a Wolverine in a season in the last ten years. With one more PPG, Kolarik will tie Bill Muckalt for the second-highest total in that span. Max Pacioretty's eight would have led last year's team.
It's kind of a down year for scoring in the NCAA. Porter's 56 points would be just the eight-best single-season total in the last ten years for Michigan and yet he appears to be a shoo-in for the Hobey (though in points per game he's #3). #1, of course, would be Hensick's year last year, which evidently wasn't good enough to even be in the Hobey Hat Trick. Lunacy. Just a reminder to Hobey voters, Porter has no misconducts this season. It's ok to vote for him.
Kolarik led last year's team in shots on goal by 35. In just 34 games this season, he has bettered last season's 41 game total. Bombs away! Porter is in close proximity to him this year (20 behind), though he's also played four more games.
The goals against average for the team has gone from 3.14 to 2.01 while the offense has only dipped slightly (about a quarter of a goal per game). The team save percentage is also 31 points higher.
The penalty kill is an impressive 85.7%. If you account for SHGs scored, it improves to 89.6%. Last year's squad was 80.5%/86.3%.
We've actually gotten worse at faceoffs (47.7% this year).
We could very reasonably have 12 players reach the 20 point plateau (8 have already done so). Since 99-2000, only the 04-05 team has had more than 12 players reach the 20 point mark (they had 13).
The Michigan Side:
Varsity Blue wins at the internet for having a montage of Sideline Charlie's reports from Friday night's game. I'm posting it here because it's awesome, but you should shoot over to his site for highlights of the actual game Friday as well.
I should also say that I know from experience how hard talking behind a mic can be, and that I'm actually really jealous of the WOLV-TV guys because I really wish I had worked for the station when I was in school. That's something I regret not doing.
Michigan Daily live blogs of Friday and Saturday. I'm not sure why they're always fooled into thinking the crowd will be small just because it's not packed 10 minutes before faceoff, but a good job blogging as usual. Some great photos Friday night as well. Also a nice, if biased (you'll see a completely different, biased as well, recap by reading at MavPuck) recap of the fight.
Daily game stories from Friday and Saturday.
Daily reporter Scott Bell has a great recap of the emotions of his final game at Yost as a student. Based on the headline, I thought it was going to be about Kolarik and Porter. I'm glad it wasn't. I had similar emotions running through me after my final game there as a student--ironically also against Nebraska-Omaha in the playoffs. I didn't know at the time that I was going to spend another three years in Ann Arbor, so I spent a good hour walking around the arena, taking pictures (including one at center ice that a staff member was gracious enough to allow/take), reminiscing, and soaking everything in. Yost is a special place. I only got to one game this season at the Old Barn, and the students weren't there. It was an ass-kicking of Minnesota, so that was pretty great, but not a Friday/Saturday night goes by that I don't miss that place. Fantastic column and I echo a lot of the sentiments (though personally, I enjoy the game itself way too much to get drunk beforehand).
It's impossible to overstate what Kolarik has meant to this team. I've been through this before. He deserves to be one of the ten Hobey Finalists and it's going to be a travesty when he's not.
Elmblad did a nice job pressed into duty in a tough situation.
No Ann Arbor News stuff this week in protest of them letting Jim Carty continue his agenda against the University of Michigan and certain academic programs, and for printing a lot of one-sided trash this week with a few valid points mixed in. Unless there's something really great, I'm probably not linking to them until next season.
Friday's and Saturday's game stories from MGoBlue.
The UNO Viewpoint:
The Friday and Saturday articles from UNO's website.
Friday's story from the UNO student newspaper. The majority of their coverage won't take place until the March 25th issue, sadly.
Mike Kemp was "bitterly disappointed" about this season. The Mavericks lose a ton of offense (Marshall, Lawrence, Scero) but he's more concerned with improving a horrid defense.
Friday's game story from the Omaha World Herald. Kemp called the game "Probably the most dominating performance I've seen by a team in an awful long time."
Saturday's game story. I feel for Bryan Marshall. Sad that a player as good as he is had to end his college career in the press box instead of on the ice.
Stat Hunting:
They combine for 55 goals, 102 points, +52, 310 shots on goal, 11 game winners, 19 power play goals, and five short-handed goals, but Chad Kolarik and Kevin Porter have just 38 PIMs between them. Pretty impressive.
With 69 goals, the three players that traditionally make up our top line outscored Alabama-Huntsville (60 goals) and Brown (67) this season. Add in contributions from other players taking the place of Kolarik or Pacioretty due to injury/WJC and they likely outscored Minnesota-Duluth (74) and Merrimack (71) as well.
We had 56 goals (42 power play, 14 short handed) on special teams last season but allowed 59 (47-12) for a net of -3. This year, we have 50 goals on special teams (42-8) and have allowed just 32 (30-2) for a next of +18. Big difference right there.
At this point, Mark Mitera's +30 rating is tied for the second-highest mark we've had in ten years (David Rohlfs, +33 last year).
Chad Kolarik's seven game winning goals is the third highest total over the last ten seasons (Muckalt and Dale Rominski each had 8. This is also the first time in ten years that we've had a player net three hat tricks in a season.
Kevin Porter's 14 power play goals are the most by a Wolverine in a season in the last ten years. With one more PPG, Kolarik will tie Bill Muckalt for the second-highest total in that span. Max Pacioretty's eight would have led last year's team.
It's kind of a down year for scoring in the NCAA. Porter's 56 points would be just the eight-best single-season total in the last ten years for Michigan and yet he appears to be a shoo-in for the Hobey (though in points per game he's #3). #1, of course, would be Hensick's year last year, which evidently wasn't good enough to even be in the Hobey Hat Trick. Lunacy. Just a reminder to Hobey voters, Porter has no misconducts this season. It's ok to vote for him.
Kolarik led last year's team in shots on goal by 35. In just 34 games this season, he has bettered last season's 41 game total. Bombs away! Porter is in close proximity to him this year (20 behind), though he's also played four more games.
The goals against average for the team has gone from 3.14 to 2.01 while the offense has only dipped slightly (about a quarter of a goal per game). The team save percentage is also 31 points higher.
The penalty kill is an impressive 85.7%. If you account for SHGs scored, it improves to 89.6%. Last year's squad was 80.5%/86.3%.
We've actually gotten worse at faceoffs (47.7% this year).
We could very reasonably have 12 players reach the 20 point plateau (8 have already done so). Since 99-2000, only the 04-05 team has had more than 12 players reach the 20 point mark (they had 13).
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Debunking the WCHA Myth
Let me be perfectly clear about this at the outset: I do think the WCHA is the best conference.
Where I disagree, however, is with the people who think that the mediocre teams in the WCHA are better than they are, solely because they're in the WCHA. I also disagree that the CCHA is a joke and that outside of the top 4, it's a horrible conference.
One of my favorite things to do is to take a look at numbers, with almost no idea about where they're going to lead me. I did it with the CCHA officials and I think that piece ended up being fairly interesting. The majority of this article was written over at USCHO in the "Minnesota State is over-rated" thread, which was basically making fun of the WCHA fans.
I find it amusing that when Miami loses to Ferris or Alaska, it's evidence that they're overrated and supports the idea that the CCHA sucks. But when CC loses to Michigan Tech, it's evidence of how deep that conference is...how even the bad teams are still really good.
The strength of schedule of the WCHA is part of the reason that everyone thinks they're so good, and why there are so many teams in position to make the tournament. I decided to take a closer look at things to see what I found. It was pretty interesting. At least to me.
One of the best ways to compare teams between the conferences is to look at how they did out of conference.
CC beat Clarkson twice, RPI, Air Force, and Bemidji. Lost twice to UNH and lost to UMass.
NoDak killed MSU, beat Northeastern, split with UNH, swept Bemidji and tied BC.
Denver swept Maine, split with Notre Dame, beat Sacred Heart, Bemidji and Dartmouth. And lost to Air Force by 3.
Wiscy beat Notre Dame, swept Robert Morris, beat BGSU, tied MSU and Colgate, lost to OSU and Michigan.
St. Cloud swept Bemidji, beat Harvard, took 3 of 4 points from Canisius, split with Clarkson and lost to Miami.
Those are the top five teams in the WCHA and they have a stellar 25-10-4 record out of conference. But what do you notice? Lots of games against Bemidji, lots of games against the smaller conferences and the EZAC. What happens when they play the other "power" conferences, the CCHA and Hockey East? Well, they're a combined 8-8-2 (3-3-1 against the "Big Four" in the CCHA). That's hardly dominance.
To keep going, MSU-Mankato is 6-2 out of conference. Really good right? But. The wins came against UAH (2), Bemidji (2), Princeton and Yale. Whoa daddy stand back. They are 0-2 against Hockey East and the CCHA, both losses to 8th-place-in-the-CCHA Nebraska-Omaha (they're tied for 5th at the moment but are locked into the 8th seed).
These next two hurt my argument but I'll include them in the interest of being fair since they're in the tournament hunt as well. Minnesota-Duluth is 4-1-1 and 3-0-1 against Hockey East and the CCHA. The Gophers are 6-2-2 and 3-1-1 against the other two major conferences--though they lost to fricken RIT.
Still, the top eight are 14-11-4 against the CCHA and Hockey East (and the top 4 are 8-7-2). That doesn't paint the picture of WCHA dominance that people would have you otherwise believe.
To compare, here are the top 8 in the CCHA against the other 2 conferences:
Michigan: 7-1-0 overall, 7-1-0 against the WCHA/HE
Miami: 8-0-0, 3-0-0 (4-0-0 if you count a non-conference against OSU as a win over a "power" conference team)
MSU: 4-3-2, 0-3-2 (thanks for helping the cause, Sparty)
Notre Dame: 7-3-0, 1-3-0
BGSU: 3-3-0, 0-2-0
NMU: 3-4-1, 2-1-1
Ferris: 3-2-1, 0-0-0 (awesome schedule)
UNO: 4-3-0, 2-0-0
That's 15-10-3 against the power conferences (11-7-2 for the top 4), if you don't count Miami's win over OSU as a "good" win.
.552 winning % for the OMG TOURNAMENT BOUND WCHA teams.
.589 for the scum-sucking CCHA teams.
What's especially interesting is that while the CCHA and WCHA teams are both playing Hockey East, the CCHA teams have to go up against the theoretically tougher WCHA teams in this comparison, whereas the WCHA teams get to take on teams from the CupCake Hockey Association.
And even if you take out Michigan, who has clearly carried the banner (and whom, I assume, most WCHA fans would have no problem admitting is a legit team), they're still at a .475 against the WCHA and Hockey East (or 3 points out of 40 from having the same winning % as the WCHA teams...and that's without Michigan).
Take out Michigan and the WCHA's best team against good conferences (Duluth at 3-0-1) and it's:
.475 for the remaining 7 in the CCHA (.500 if Miami's win counts)
.500 for the remaining 7 in the WCHA
Straight up WCHA dominance.
I would also like to point out that the four teams tied for fifth in the CCHA right now are a combined 4-2-1 against WCHA squads, including UNO's two wins over Minnesota State.
In my view, a mediocre team is a mediocre team no matter what conference they play in. Just because NoDak, CC, and Denver are tough doesn't mean MSU-M and St. Cloud are better than their record appears.
It looks great that the top 8 in the WCHA are 41-15-7 out of conference. But when you break it down, maybe it's not as impressive as you'd think. I'd also point out that almost a quarter of those out of conference wins are against Bemidji State (9).
The WCHA is better top to bottom than the CCHA, but they're really not as different as people want you to believe. The WCHA will get more teams in, but of the true contenders, you've got one really scary team from each conference (Michigan and North Dakota), one team from each that looks good but has a question mark due to their play out of conference (CC and Michigan State), and one team from each that is highly ranked but a question mark due to recent play (Denver and Miami).
I'm sure I've opened a can of worms, but the numbers just don't show this WCHA dominance that the Westerners love to throw out there. The conference is the best top to bottom, and it deserves respect having won five of the last six and six of the last eight titles (by four different teams to boot). But I think it's a tired argument that the middle of the CCHA is crap and the middle of the WCHA is phenomenal. Some years, they're right. But an average team is an average team and this year I think we've got a little SEC syndrome going on in the Dub. The top couple teams are really good. The next couple could get a little rowdy. After that, you've got some average teams that everyone elevates far too much just because of what conference they're in.
Where I disagree, however, is with the people who think that the mediocre teams in the WCHA are better than they are, solely because they're in the WCHA. I also disagree that the CCHA is a joke and that outside of the top 4, it's a horrible conference.
One of my favorite things to do is to take a look at numbers, with almost no idea about where they're going to lead me. I did it with the CCHA officials and I think that piece ended up being fairly interesting. The majority of this article was written over at USCHO in the "Minnesota State is over-rated" thread, which was basically making fun of the WCHA fans.
I find it amusing that when Miami loses to Ferris or Alaska, it's evidence that they're overrated and supports the idea that the CCHA sucks. But when CC loses to Michigan Tech, it's evidence of how deep that conference is...how even the bad teams are still really good.
The strength of schedule of the WCHA is part of the reason that everyone thinks they're so good, and why there are so many teams in position to make the tournament. I decided to take a closer look at things to see what I found. It was pretty interesting. At least to me.
One of the best ways to compare teams between the conferences is to look at how they did out of conference.
CC beat Clarkson twice, RPI, Air Force, and Bemidji. Lost twice to UNH and lost to UMass.
NoDak killed MSU, beat Northeastern, split with UNH, swept Bemidji and tied BC.
Denver swept Maine, split with Notre Dame, beat Sacred Heart, Bemidji and Dartmouth. And lost to Air Force by 3.
Wiscy beat Notre Dame, swept Robert Morris, beat BGSU, tied MSU and Colgate, lost to OSU and Michigan.
St. Cloud swept Bemidji, beat Harvard, took 3 of 4 points from Canisius, split with Clarkson and lost to Miami.
Those are the top five teams in the WCHA and they have a stellar 25-10-4 record out of conference. But what do you notice? Lots of games against Bemidji, lots of games against the smaller conferences and the EZAC. What happens when they play the other "power" conferences, the CCHA and Hockey East? Well, they're a combined 8-8-2 (3-3-1 against the "Big Four" in the CCHA). That's hardly dominance.
To keep going, MSU-Mankato is 6-2 out of conference. Really good right? But. The wins came against UAH (2), Bemidji (2), Princeton and Yale. Whoa daddy stand back. They are 0-2 against Hockey East and the CCHA, both losses to 8th-place-in-the-CCHA Nebraska-Omaha (they're tied for 5th at the moment but are locked into the 8th seed).
These next two hurt my argument but I'll include them in the interest of being fair since they're in the tournament hunt as well. Minnesota-Duluth is 4-1-1 and 3-0-1 against Hockey East and the CCHA. The Gophers are 6-2-2 and 3-1-1 against the other two major conferences--though they lost to fricken RIT.
Still, the top eight are 14-11-4 against the CCHA and Hockey East (and the top 4 are 8-7-2). That doesn't paint the picture of WCHA dominance that people would have you otherwise believe.
To compare, here are the top 8 in the CCHA against the other 2 conferences:
Michigan: 7-1-0 overall, 7-1-0 against the WCHA/HE
Miami: 8-0-0, 3-0-0 (4-0-0 if you count a non-conference against OSU as a win over a "power" conference team)
MSU: 4-3-2, 0-3-2 (thanks for helping the cause, Sparty)
Notre Dame: 7-3-0, 1-3-0
BGSU: 3-3-0, 0-2-0
NMU: 3-4-1, 2-1-1
Ferris: 3-2-1, 0-0-0 (awesome schedule)
UNO: 4-3-0, 2-0-0
That's 15-10-3 against the power conferences (11-7-2 for the top 4), if you don't count Miami's win over OSU as a "good" win.
.552 winning % for the OMG TOURNAMENT BOUND WCHA teams.
.589 for the scum-sucking CCHA teams.
What's especially interesting is that while the CCHA and WCHA teams are both playing Hockey East, the CCHA teams have to go up against the theoretically tougher WCHA teams in this comparison, whereas the WCHA teams get to take on teams from the CupCake Hockey Association.
And even if you take out Michigan, who has clearly carried the banner (and whom, I assume, most WCHA fans would have no problem admitting is a legit team), they're still at a .475 against the WCHA and Hockey East (or 3 points out of 40 from having the same winning % as the WCHA teams...and that's without Michigan).
Take out Michigan and the WCHA's best team against good conferences (Duluth at 3-0-1) and it's:
.475 for the remaining 7 in the CCHA (.500 if Miami's win counts)
.500 for the remaining 7 in the WCHA
Straight up WCHA dominance.
I would also like to point out that the four teams tied for fifth in the CCHA right now are a combined 4-2-1 against WCHA squads, including UNO's two wins over Minnesota State.
In my view, a mediocre team is a mediocre team no matter what conference they play in. Just because NoDak, CC, and Denver are tough doesn't mean MSU-M and St. Cloud are better than their record appears.
It looks great that the top 8 in the WCHA are 41-15-7 out of conference. But when you break it down, maybe it's not as impressive as you'd think. I'd also point out that almost a quarter of those out of conference wins are against Bemidji State (9).
The WCHA is better top to bottom than the CCHA, but they're really not as different as people want you to believe. The WCHA will get more teams in, but of the true contenders, you've got one really scary team from each conference (Michigan and North Dakota), one team from each that looks good but has a question mark due to their play out of conference (CC and Michigan State), and one team from each that is highly ranked but a question mark due to recent play (Denver and Miami).
I'm sure I've opened a can of worms, but the numbers just don't show this WCHA dominance that the Westerners love to throw out there. The conference is the best top to bottom, and it deserves respect having won five of the last six and six of the last eight titles (by four different teams to boot). But I think it's a tired argument that the middle of the CCHA is crap and the middle of the WCHA is phenomenal. Some years, they're right. But an average team is an average team and this year I think we've got a little SEC syndrome going on in the Dub. The top couple teams are really good. The next couple could get a little rowdy. After that, you've got some average teams that everyone elevates far too much just because of what conference they're in.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Power Play Opportunity Analysis
As I said yesterday, because I've been thinking so much about power play opportunities lately, I decided to take a look at the data over the last 5 years (well, four previous years plus this season) to see if there are any trends based on official or opponent.
One important thing to mention is that I do not believe that you can look at a box score and say "That was a poorly officiated hockey game." It's not fair to the official, who does have one of the hardest jobs in sports. I'm not trying to make a judgment upon the competency of an official solely based on this data. I've got opinions on most of these officials already, however.
I do believe, however, that as a general rule of thumb, the higher-skilled team should generally end up on the power play more often than its opponent. It's not always the case--I'm on record as really liking the games that Sergott has called this year and he didn't exactly favor us in that regard--but I've said for years that I don't understand how we always seem to end up short-handed so much when we play LSSU.
Basically what I wanted to find out is if there are any trends as to which referees tend to give Michigan more power plays, which refs have left us short-handed more often, which refs tend to let us play, what opponents do we take more penalties against, what teams should we expect to be playing a man up against, do we have a home ice advantage with the refs, etc. In the long run, I would fully expect a team as talented as Michigan to end up with significant edges in power plays over most of the teams in the CCHA, with the exception of Michigan State. Michigan and MSU are the only CCHA teams that have proven to be able to sustain success over the long haul, though Miami and Notre Dame are up at the moment. Time will tell if they're here to stay.
I considered including the score of the game as well as the shot totals to see if the team that "carried the game" was getting the benefit of more power plays as well, but I decided that's still not necessarily fair--and it would've been a huge undertaking. There are examples, however, that blew my mind. One that jumps to mind, which wasn't included since it was an exhibition game, came in 2004 when we played Windsor. We won the game 12-1, outshot them 59-14 (including 20-1 in the second period), and yet we had less power plays (9-8). Justify that one to me, Aaron. They had almost as many PPs as shots.
Onto the data. I hope you find it as interesting as I did.
The first thing to look at is the number of power play opportunities we've gotten versus our opponents over the years. Following the totals, I've expressed the number of games that we've received more PPOs, the # of times we had less PPOs, and the number of times they were even (I'm calling this the "record" for the duration of the article).
2007-08: Michigan: 132, Opponents: 141, 8-14-4
2006-07: Michigan: 241, Opponents: 241, 18-19-4
2005-06: Michigan: 254, Opponents: 233, 22-14-5
2004-05: Michigan: 273, Opponents: 244, 21-12-9
2003-04: Michigan: 241, Opponents: 175, 33-3-7
The first thing that jumps out is the 2003-04 season. Holy crap. We were only short-handed more than our opponent on three occasions: The tournament game against BC, a game at MSU, and a game at Alaska. It was the 28th game of the season before we faced more power plays than we were given.
But as much as that jumps out, look at this season. Michigan is (was?) off to the best start in the history of the program, has been #1 for a fair portion of the season, is one of the fastest and most-skilled teams in the country, and, I would point out, they don't have a player that takes an absurd number of penalties. Yet, in over half their games, they've had a deficit in PPOs. This includes games against NMU, UNO, LSSU (twice, including an absurd -7, which I'll get to later), BGSU (twice), and WMU, which is a rarity for that team.
What does it mean? I'm really not sure. Boston College, North Dakota, and New Hampshire also are in the negative, and DU and CC are close. But in the league that seems to call more penalties than any other, the CCHA, the elite teams have benefited. Miami is +20, Notre Dame is +26, and MSU is +24. And yet we're -9. I find it very strange, especially with the "Officials love Michigan" notion that is bandied about by fans throughout the conference.
The analysis of games at home vs. games on the road is probably what you'd expect. Over the five years studied, Michigan is +8 in PPOs on the road with a "record" of 28-24-12. At neutral sites, we're +10 at 17-12-5. But at home, the Yost advantage comes into play. We're +89 in PPOs at home and are 57-26-12 in that span. We've been negative once under each of Aaron (5 games), Hall (9), Hill (2), Hoberg (2), Kotyra (4), Lisko (4), and Murphy (1). Piotrowski has done 22 of our games, we're +52 in that span, and we've been negative just three times--never more than -1. Disclaimer: The road/neutral numbers may be slightly off. I'm fairly confident I counted some of the neutral site Joe Louis games as road games. It likely wouldn't change things though.
Strangely enough, even though Hall has had us in the negative just one time in nine game at Yost, at the six neutral site games and two road games he's done, we've been positive just twice, and even once.
Breaking it down by referee and by opponent is where it gets really fun, however.
I'm sure it will shock no one to hear that Hoberg was the most whistle-happy official that we've had more than once or twice. He's called an average of 16 power plays in the five games he's done, and never less than 11. The CCHA ref that lets teams play the most? Matt Shegos actually, at 9.6 power plays per game. For the record, this "Wolverine lover" has done 26 of our games in the last 5 years, and we're +13 in power plays (about one additional PP per weekend). Amazingly, since it's the Sparties that love to accuse him of being Wolverine fan #1, we're actually -4 in the nine Michigan/MSU games that he's done.
Here's the breakdown by referee (PPO/game numbers are for the teams combined):
Aaron: 12.2 PPO/game, +11, 10-3-4 over 17 games
Brown: 11.2 PPO/game, +4, 3-0-2 over 5 games
Hall: 10.8 PPO/game, +4, 7-6-4 over 17 games
Hill: 11.3 PPO/game, -7, 1-3-0 over 4 games
Hoberg: 16 PPO/game, +2, 2-2-1 over 5 games
Klosowski: 8.7 PPO/game, +4, 1-0-2 over 3 games
Kotyra: 10.8 PPO/game, +3, 2-2-1 over 5 games
Lisko: 10.6 PPO/game, -8, 3-4-0 over 7 games
McInchak: 13.4 PPO/game, +9, 15-9-3 over 27 games (that's too much McInchak FTR)
Murphy: 18 PPO/game, -4, 0-1-0 over 1 game
Piotrowski: 10.4 PPO/game, +66, 27-7-4 over 38 games
Pochmara: 14.5 PPO/game, +7, 3-3-0 over 6 games
Sergott: 13 PPO/game, -1, 1-2-0 over 3 games
Shegos: 9.6 PPO/game, +13, 16-8-2 over 26 games
Wilkens: 10.8 PPO/game, +6, 6-7-5 over 18 games
Since, at least to my knowledge, everyone around the conference has viewed Piotrowski as the standard of excellence in officiating over the years, I think it's pretty telling when you look at the numbers by his name. None of the other refs that we frequently have (double digit times over 5 years) is higher than +.65/game, whereas Pio is at +1.74/game for Michigan. Dare I say that's probably closer to how it should be, given that Michigan is always in the top 3 in the conference?
And before he's accused of being nothing but a Michigan-lover, he did 4 Michigan/MSU games (that's all?) and we're -3 in those games.
Hill and Lisko (at least on paper) deserve the biggest punches in the face. Brian Aaron would be up there but I can't track waived-off goals. We're 4-7-0 in PPOs when we've had Hill or Lisko and are -15 in those games. So you figure they've done some games where we've played against top-notch competition and we took some penalties due to the opposing speed right? Wrong. Here are our opponents in those games: BGSU four times, WMU three times, LSSU three times, and Quinnipiac. We were negatives in all five road games that those two did.
As for the breakdown by opponent, this stems from my anger over the fact that it seems like we always seem to be short-handed when we play LSSU. It's completely inexplicable. My theory has been that officials can't possibly call a team for everything when they clutch and grab all the time, so they wait for a flagrant violation to whistle them. Meanwhile, when they've got a team that doesn't play that way, the little things are more obvious, so they get called for those. Personally I think there's some merit to it.
But yeah, so I was mainly curious to see what the breakdown of our games against LSSU has been. And I was right. In the last 10 games against LSSU, we're incredibly -7, and are 4-4-2 with regard to PPOs. Less surprisingly, we were +4 and 2-0-0 when Piotrowski called our games with them.
The breakdown by opponent:
Alabama-Huntsville: 17 PPO/game, -5, 0-1-0 in 1 game (thanks, Hoberg)
Alaska: 13.4 PPO/game, +14, 7-3-3 in 13 games
BC: 9 PPO/game, +4, 2-1-1 in 4 games
BGSU: 13.1 PPO/game, +5, 6-5-1 in 12 games
BU: 10.7 PPO/game, +2, 2-1-0 in 3 games
CC: 12.5 PPO/game, -5, 0-2-0 in 2 games
Connecticut: 20 PPO/game, -2, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Ferris: 11.3 PPO/game, +12, 6-3-3 in 12 games
LSSU: 10.1 PPO/game, -7, 4-4-2 in 10 games
Mercyhurst: 11 PPO/game, +1, 1-0-0 in 1 game
Merrimack: 18 PPO/game, +6, 1-0-0 in 1 game
Miami: 12.4 PPO/game, +10, 7-3-0 in 10 games
Michigan Tech: 12.6 PPO/game, +7, 4-1-0 in 5 games
Minnesota: 10.8 PPO/game, -1, 3-2-1 in 6 games
MSU: 9.0 PPO/game, -9, 9-10-3 in 22 games
Nebraska-Omaha: 9.6 PPO/game, +6, 6-5-4 in 15 games
New Hampshire: 10.5 PPO/game, +1, 1-0-1 in 2 games
Notre Dame: 11.6 PPO/game, even, 6-6-3 in 15 games
Northeastern: 16.3 PPO/game, +3, 1-2-0 in 3 games
Niagara: 11 PPO/game, +3, 1-0-0 in 1 game
NMU: 10.8 PPO/game, +23, 10-2-2 in 14 games
NoDak: 11.5 PPO/game, -1, 1-1-0 in 2 games
OSU: 10.8 PPO/game, +19, 10-2-2 in 14 games
Providence: 9 PPO/game, -1, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Quinnipiac: 13.5 PPO/game, +8, 3-0-1 in 4 games
St. Lawrence: 15 PPO/game, -1, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Western Michigan: 10.8 PPO/game, +8, 7-3-2 in 12 games
Wisconsin: 10.8 PPO/game, +7, 4-2-0 in 6 games
Now that I think about it, you can't really use PPOs to determine which games are the most chippy, as I had stated yesterday. Those type of games are going to have a lot of scuffles after the whistle which, unless Shegos is reffing, don't usually lead to a team being short-handed. Proof: The games against MSU actually have the least amount of power plays.
The teams which we have a significant edge against: NMU, OSU, and Alaska. We've got decent edges over Miami, Ferris, and Western. Seems appropriate for the most part (especially when you consider that the Notre Dame and Miami series have swung back in their favor since they got good recently).
It's data like the above which makes that LSSU number so odd to me. I can see being in a deficit against MSU (though we've never been above +2 in those games, and that's only happened three times, whereas we've been -3 or worse on four occasions). We've been short-handed lately against Miami and Notre Dame. But Lake State? I don't understand that one. The degree of those negatives is strange as well: -4, -6, -7, -2. How exactly is this happening? How does that team get power plays? Let alone 7 more than a team like Michigan. Weird...
The Bowling Green one seems a bit low too. Then again, we've been -3, -1, -3, and -3 the last four times we've played them.
I think most everyone agrees that we've got a problem in the CCHA: The only good ref (Piotrowski) has retired. And the data, at least in my opinion, seems to back that up. I'm not asking for Michigan to always have the upper hand, but it seems that the other officials around the league try and even out the penalties more often than not, regardless of the skill level of the teams or how the game is going. I also believe they have the tendency to "ref the score" so to speak, which is equally annoying.
It's pretty telling to me that in the 38 games that Pio--largely known as the best ref in the CCHA--did, we were given more PPOs 20 more times than our opponent was (27-7-4). In the 155 games that Pio didn't officiate, we were given more PPOs 20 more times than our opponent (75-55-25). It's kind of amazing.
I've uploaded the spreadsheet here, if anyone else would like to play around with it and see if anything jumps out that I've neglected to mention. I plan on maintaining my local copy so that I can use the data in weekend previews and whatnot.
One important thing to mention is that I do not believe that you can look at a box score and say "That was a poorly officiated hockey game." It's not fair to the official, who does have one of the hardest jobs in sports. I'm not trying to make a judgment upon the competency of an official solely based on this data. I've got opinions on most of these officials already, however.
I do believe, however, that as a general rule of thumb, the higher-skilled team should generally end up on the power play more often than its opponent. It's not always the case--I'm on record as really liking the games that Sergott has called this year and he didn't exactly favor us in that regard--but I've said for years that I don't understand how we always seem to end up short-handed so much when we play LSSU.
Basically what I wanted to find out is if there are any trends as to which referees tend to give Michigan more power plays, which refs have left us short-handed more often, which refs tend to let us play, what opponents do we take more penalties against, what teams should we expect to be playing a man up against, do we have a home ice advantage with the refs, etc. In the long run, I would fully expect a team as talented as Michigan to end up with significant edges in power plays over most of the teams in the CCHA, with the exception of Michigan State. Michigan and MSU are the only CCHA teams that have proven to be able to sustain success over the long haul, though Miami and Notre Dame are up at the moment. Time will tell if they're here to stay.
I considered including the score of the game as well as the shot totals to see if the team that "carried the game" was getting the benefit of more power plays as well, but I decided that's still not necessarily fair--and it would've been a huge undertaking. There are examples, however, that blew my mind. One that jumps to mind, which wasn't included since it was an exhibition game, came in 2004 when we played Windsor. We won the game 12-1, outshot them 59-14 (including 20-1 in the second period), and yet we had less power plays (9-8). Justify that one to me, Aaron. They had almost as many PPs as shots.
Onto the data. I hope you find it as interesting as I did.
The first thing to look at is the number of power play opportunities we've gotten versus our opponents over the years. Following the totals, I've expressed the number of games that we've received more PPOs, the # of times we had less PPOs, and the number of times they were even (I'm calling this the "record" for the duration of the article).
2007-08: Michigan: 132, Opponents: 141, 8-14-4
2006-07: Michigan: 241, Opponents: 241, 18-19-4
2005-06: Michigan: 254, Opponents: 233, 22-14-5
2004-05: Michigan: 273, Opponents: 244, 21-12-9
2003-04: Michigan: 241, Opponents: 175, 33-3-7
The first thing that jumps out is the 2003-04 season. Holy crap. We were only short-handed more than our opponent on three occasions: The tournament game against BC, a game at MSU, and a game at Alaska. It was the 28th game of the season before we faced more power plays than we were given.
But as much as that jumps out, look at this season. Michigan is (was?) off to the best start in the history of the program, has been #1 for a fair portion of the season, is one of the fastest and most-skilled teams in the country, and, I would point out, they don't have a player that takes an absurd number of penalties. Yet, in over half their games, they've had a deficit in PPOs. This includes games against NMU, UNO, LSSU (twice, including an absurd -7, which I'll get to later), BGSU (twice), and WMU, which is a rarity for that team.
What does it mean? I'm really not sure. Boston College, North Dakota, and New Hampshire also are in the negative, and DU and CC are close. But in the league that seems to call more penalties than any other, the CCHA, the elite teams have benefited. Miami is +20, Notre Dame is +26, and MSU is +24. And yet we're -9. I find it very strange, especially with the "Officials love Michigan" notion that is bandied about by fans throughout the conference.
The analysis of games at home vs. games on the road is probably what you'd expect. Over the five years studied, Michigan is +8 in PPOs on the road with a "record" of 28-24-12. At neutral sites, we're +10 at 17-12-5. But at home, the Yost advantage comes into play. We're +89 in PPOs at home and are 57-26-12 in that span. We've been negative once under each of Aaron (5 games), Hall (9), Hill (2), Hoberg (2), Kotyra (4), Lisko (4), and Murphy (1). Piotrowski has done 22 of our games, we're +52 in that span, and we've been negative just three times--never more than -1. Disclaimer: The road/neutral numbers may be slightly off. I'm fairly confident I counted some of the neutral site Joe Louis games as road games. It likely wouldn't change things though.
Strangely enough, even though Hall has had us in the negative just one time in nine game at Yost, at the six neutral site games and two road games he's done, we've been positive just twice, and even once.
Breaking it down by referee and by opponent is where it gets really fun, however.
I'm sure it will shock no one to hear that Hoberg was the most whistle-happy official that we've had more than once or twice. He's called an average of 16 power plays in the five games he's done, and never less than 11. The CCHA ref that lets teams play the most? Matt Shegos actually, at 9.6 power plays per game. For the record, this "Wolverine lover" has done 26 of our games in the last 5 years, and we're +13 in power plays (about one additional PP per weekend). Amazingly, since it's the Sparties that love to accuse him of being Wolverine fan #1, we're actually -4 in the nine Michigan/MSU games that he's done.
Here's the breakdown by referee (PPO/game numbers are for the teams combined):
Aaron: 12.2 PPO/game, +11, 10-3-4 over 17 games
Brown: 11.2 PPO/game, +4, 3-0-2 over 5 games
Hall: 10.8 PPO/game, +4, 7-6-4 over 17 games
Hill: 11.3 PPO/game, -7, 1-3-0 over 4 games
Hoberg: 16 PPO/game, +2, 2-2-1 over 5 games
Klosowski: 8.7 PPO/game, +4, 1-0-2 over 3 games
Kotyra: 10.8 PPO/game, +3, 2-2-1 over 5 games
Lisko: 10.6 PPO/game, -8, 3-4-0 over 7 games
McInchak: 13.4 PPO/game, +9, 15-9-3 over 27 games (that's too much McInchak FTR)
Murphy: 18 PPO/game, -4, 0-1-0 over 1 game
Piotrowski: 10.4 PPO/game, +66, 27-7-4 over 38 games
Pochmara: 14.5 PPO/game, +7, 3-3-0 over 6 games
Sergott: 13 PPO/game, -1, 1-2-0 over 3 games
Shegos: 9.6 PPO/game, +13, 16-8-2 over 26 games
Wilkens: 10.8 PPO/game, +6, 6-7-5 over 18 games
Since, at least to my knowledge, everyone around the conference has viewed Piotrowski as the standard of excellence in officiating over the years, I think it's pretty telling when you look at the numbers by his name. None of the other refs that we frequently have (double digit times over 5 years) is higher than +.65/game, whereas Pio is at +1.74/game for Michigan. Dare I say that's probably closer to how it should be, given that Michigan is always in the top 3 in the conference?
And before he's accused of being nothing but a Michigan-lover, he did 4 Michigan/MSU games (that's all?) and we're -3 in those games.
Hill and Lisko (at least on paper) deserve the biggest punches in the face. Brian Aaron would be up there but I can't track waived-off goals. We're 4-7-0 in PPOs when we've had Hill or Lisko and are -15 in those games. So you figure they've done some games where we've played against top-notch competition and we took some penalties due to the opposing speed right? Wrong. Here are our opponents in those games: BGSU four times, WMU three times, LSSU three times, and Quinnipiac. We were negatives in all five road games that those two did.
As for the breakdown by opponent, this stems from my anger over the fact that it seems like we always seem to be short-handed when we play LSSU. It's completely inexplicable. My theory has been that officials can't possibly call a team for everything when they clutch and grab all the time, so they wait for a flagrant violation to whistle them. Meanwhile, when they've got a team that doesn't play that way, the little things are more obvious, so they get called for those. Personally I think there's some merit to it.
But yeah, so I was mainly curious to see what the breakdown of our games against LSSU has been. And I was right. In the last 10 games against LSSU, we're incredibly -7, and are 4-4-2 with regard to PPOs. Less surprisingly, we were +4 and 2-0-0 when Piotrowski called our games with them.
The breakdown by opponent:
Alabama-Huntsville: 17 PPO/game, -5, 0-1-0 in 1 game (thanks, Hoberg)
Alaska: 13.4 PPO/game, +14, 7-3-3 in 13 games
BC: 9 PPO/game, +4, 2-1-1 in 4 games
BGSU: 13.1 PPO/game, +5, 6-5-1 in 12 games
BU: 10.7 PPO/game, +2, 2-1-0 in 3 games
CC: 12.5 PPO/game, -5, 0-2-0 in 2 games
Connecticut: 20 PPO/game, -2, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Ferris: 11.3 PPO/game, +12, 6-3-3 in 12 games
LSSU: 10.1 PPO/game, -7, 4-4-2 in 10 games
Mercyhurst: 11 PPO/game, +1, 1-0-0 in 1 game
Merrimack: 18 PPO/game, +6, 1-0-0 in 1 game
Miami: 12.4 PPO/game, +10, 7-3-0 in 10 games
Michigan Tech: 12.6 PPO/game, +7, 4-1-0 in 5 games
Minnesota: 10.8 PPO/game, -1, 3-2-1 in 6 games
MSU: 9.0 PPO/game, -9, 9-10-3 in 22 games
Nebraska-Omaha: 9.6 PPO/game, +6, 6-5-4 in 15 games
New Hampshire: 10.5 PPO/game, +1, 1-0-1 in 2 games
Notre Dame: 11.6 PPO/game, even, 6-6-3 in 15 games
Northeastern: 16.3 PPO/game, +3, 1-2-0 in 3 games
Niagara: 11 PPO/game, +3, 1-0-0 in 1 game
NMU: 10.8 PPO/game, +23, 10-2-2 in 14 games
NoDak: 11.5 PPO/game, -1, 1-1-0 in 2 games
OSU: 10.8 PPO/game, +19, 10-2-2 in 14 games
Providence: 9 PPO/game, -1, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Quinnipiac: 13.5 PPO/game, +8, 3-0-1 in 4 games
St. Lawrence: 15 PPO/game, -1, 0-1-0 in 1 game
Western Michigan: 10.8 PPO/game, +8, 7-3-2 in 12 games
Wisconsin: 10.8 PPO/game, +7, 4-2-0 in 6 games
Now that I think about it, you can't really use PPOs to determine which games are the most chippy, as I had stated yesterday. Those type of games are going to have a lot of scuffles after the whistle which, unless Shegos is reffing, don't usually lead to a team being short-handed. Proof: The games against MSU actually have the least amount of power plays.
The teams which we have a significant edge against: NMU, OSU, and Alaska. We've got decent edges over Miami, Ferris, and Western. Seems appropriate for the most part (especially when you consider that the Notre Dame and Miami series have swung back in their favor since they got good recently).
It's data like the above which makes that LSSU number so odd to me. I can see being in a deficit against MSU (though we've never been above +2 in those games, and that's only happened three times, whereas we've been -3 or worse on four occasions). We've been short-handed lately against Miami and Notre Dame. But Lake State? I don't understand that one. The degree of those negatives is strange as well: -4, -6, -7, -2. How exactly is this happening? How does that team get power plays? Let alone 7 more than a team like Michigan. Weird...
The Bowling Green one seems a bit low too. Then again, we've been -3, -1, -3, and -3 the last four times we've played them.
I think most everyone agrees that we've got a problem in the CCHA: The only good ref (Piotrowski) has retired. And the data, at least in my opinion, seems to back that up. I'm not asking for Michigan to always have the upper hand, but it seems that the other officials around the league try and even out the penalties more often than not, regardless of the skill level of the teams or how the game is going. I also believe they have the tendency to "ref the score" so to speak, which is equally annoying.
It's pretty telling to me that in the 38 games that Pio--largely known as the best ref in the CCHA--did, we were given more PPOs 20 more times than our opponent was (27-7-4). In the 155 games that Pio didn't officiate, we were given more PPOs 20 more times than our opponent (75-55-25). It's kind of amazing.
I've uploaded the spreadsheet here, if anyone else would like to play around with it and see if anything jumps out that I've neglected to mention. I plan on maintaining my local copy so that I can use the data in weekend previews and whatnot.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
A Couple of Cool Stats
With Saturday's win over Western Michigan, the Wolverines reached the 20-win plateau for the 21st consecutive year. We now have the longest such streak in the history of college hockey, breaking the record of 20 set by the Minnesota Golden Gophers from 1977-1997.
It goes without saying, then, that we have the longest current streak. For the record, the next longest active streak is held by Michigan State, which has won 20+ games for 16 consecutive years. They haven't yet reached the 20 win mark this year, but they will likely extend it to 17 shortly. Fire Comley.
Western College Hockey went one step farther with the "Wow the refs hate Western" stat I had last week. By receiving 6 power play opportunities to Michigan's four on Saturday night, that was the first time the entire season that Western has had the man advantage more than their opponent. That's so weird, especially for a team that isn't all that heavily penalized. Of course, it's also more support for my theory that the CCHA refs really don't love Michigan.
It goes without saying, then, that we have the longest current streak. For the record, the next longest active streak is held by Michigan State, which has won 20+ games for 16 consecutive years. They haven't yet reached the 20 win mark this year, but they will likely extend it to 17 shortly. Fire Comley.
Western College Hockey went one step farther with the "Wow the refs hate Western" stat I had last week. By receiving 6 power play opportunities to Michigan's four on Saturday night, that was the first time the entire season that Western has had the man advantage more than their opponent. That's so weird, especially for a team that isn't all that heavily penalized. Of course, it's also more support for my theory that the CCHA refs really don't love Michigan.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Michigan Sweps WMU, Moves to 20-2-0
After beating the WMU Broncos 6-1 and 5-1 over the weekend, the Wolverines now stand at 20-2-0 on the season. Let's put this in perspective a little bit:
Those 20 wins match or exceed the total of four teams that participated in the 2007 NCAA Tournament, another 4 had 21-22, and Miami had 23. After biting our nails down the stretch the last few seasons, it's pretty impressive that by the middle of January, the Wolverines have already likely punched their ticket to the Big Dance--or are very close to doing so.
Also in 2007, the #1 seeds had 25, 26, 30, and 31 wins. Michigan's and BC's 26 wins were the most by any team that didn't get a #1 seed.
The year before, the top seeds had 24, 25, 26, and 27 wins. Three teams got in with 20 wins or less, three more had 21-22 wins, and one had 23. There were, however, four 26 win teams that weren't given #1 seeds.
In 2005, the top seeds had 25, 26, 28, and 29 wins. Two teams made it in with 20 or less, two made it with 21-22, and 3 made it in with 23. Michigan's 30 wins were tops amongst teams not receiving a #1 seed.
So with at least 16 games left until tournament time (but likely at least 18), two more wins will give them as many as half of the 2007 field, and 7 more wins will give them more than half of the #1 seeds, plus every team that wasn't given top billing in their regional. 11 wins (and that's only a .611 winning percentage) virtually guarantees them a #1 seeding.
This year, the Wolverines hit the 20 win plateau on January 12th. The last four years, that mark was reached on February 2, March 11, January 29, and February 13. Pretty impressive, especially considering how powerful that team three years ago was.
On to thoughts about the WMU games:
I wasn't able to watch the Friday night game, so I'm sure I'll talk about it more in the media round-up, once I've had a chance to read other peoples' impressions. From the sounds of it though, there wasn't a whole lot of drama. With Rich Rodriguez in the house, dropping the ceremonial first puck and giving a valiant effort in Score-O, the Wolverines led 1-0 after one, scored two quick ones in the second before taking a 4-0 lead into the intermission, and despite giving up a goal seven seconds into the third period, came out of there with a 6-1 victory, outshooting WMU 44-22 in the process. That was probably the longest sentence I've ever written.
Stop me if you've heard this before: Kevin Porter and Chad Kolarik each had 3 points in the game. Travis Turnbull, Chris Summers, and Matt Rust all contributed a pair of points. Billy Sauer had an off-night, allowing a goal and only stopping 21 shots.
Kevin Quick deserves a pat on the back as well, scoring his first career goal. He'd later add #2 on Saturday night.
And on a sad note, Mark Mitera was on the ice for an even-strength goal. I believe that was the first time since the season opener, which...I'm not even sure incredible is the right word for that.
The next night it was more of the same, only it didn't take as long for Michigan to start running a train all up in 'em. Kolarik scored 30 seconds into the game and added three more for the first hat trick + 1 Michigan has seen since Dwight Helminen did it a few years back against Ohio State.
After Kolarik put us up 2-0, the second coming on what looked like a kick-in, Western got back into the game with an absolute bullet from Nathan Ansell--some of those WMU defensemen can fire it! Michigan regained the two goal margin just 19 seconds later on a goal from Quick that Riley Gill quite simply can't give up. Kolarik's third of the night, which pretty much sealed the deal, also fell into that category. Chad just slapped the puck toward the net on a faceoff, rather than drawing it back, and it went in. Cool goal, but an awful one nonetheless.
Kolarik's fourth came on a beautiful pass from Brandon Naurato, who had a nice game with two assists and a couple other nice feeds.
For the record, Chris Frank finished the weekend -4. Ha.
Brian Hill did both games, and I wasn't overly impressed Saturday night. He called Tim Miller for elbowing on one of the prettiest hits you'll ever see--and on one of the dirtiest players in the CCHA to boot. There were a couple other plays that had me laughing, though I've forgotten what they were. Not the worst ref we've ever had, but he still caused me to say "This two-referee system is going to be an absolute disaster" on at least one occasion.
I thought Saturday was kind of a rough night for Langlais. He didn't do much in the way of offense and had a couple of bad giveaways, including one where he fell behind our net and the WMU player walked right out in front.
Matt Rust: So nice to have him back. He had a pair of assists Friday night, and may have saved a goal on Saturday with an absolutely gorgeous back-check to steal the puck from a Western player who would've been in all alone.
Sauer was very good again. Couldn't fault him on the WMU goal and he made 31 saves, including a few dandies.
The big downer of the weekend was a shoulder injury to Max Pacioretty. He didn't play Saturday night and I haven't heard how he's doing. Hopefully it's not serious, but I'm guessing Rivals/The Daily will have something for us sometime today on his status.
It's nice to have Caporusso and Rust back in the faceoff circle. They were a combined 39 and 26 on the weekend, which is 60% and very helpful to the cause.
The power play was definitely effective, going 4 for 10 on the weekend and 3 for 4 on Saturday night.
I also have to point out that even though Michigan was the more-talented team, obviously dominated the weekend (outscoring the Broncos 11-2 and outshooting them 82-54), and were playing a team -45 in power play opportunities so far this season, we were still -1 for the weekend. I can't figure it out.
In the CCHA, Nebraska-Omaha couldn't give us any help against Miami, so we remain tied with the Redhawks, but with two games in hand. Michigan State took 3 of 4 points from the Irish, so we lead the Irish by 3 points with 2 games in hand, and the Spartans by 4, with the same number of games played.
Now the schedule starts to pick up. In the last 14 games of the regular season, 8 are against the other three "elite" teams in the CCHA, including 6 of the next 8. Next up is Notre Dame, with a game at Yost and then one at The Palace of Auburn Hills. A Michigan sweep would pretty much bury the Irish, with Michigan up 7 points and having twelve games to play to ND's ten.
Those 20 wins match or exceed the total of four teams that participated in the 2007 NCAA Tournament, another 4 had 21-22, and Miami had 23. After biting our nails down the stretch the last few seasons, it's pretty impressive that by the middle of January, the Wolverines have already likely punched their ticket to the Big Dance--or are very close to doing so.
Also in 2007, the #1 seeds had 25, 26, 30, and 31 wins. Michigan's and BC's 26 wins were the most by any team that didn't get a #1 seed.
The year before, the top seeds had 24, 25, 26, and 27 wins. Three teams got in with 20 wins or less, three more had 21-22 wins, and one had 23. There were, however, four 26 win teams that weren't given #1 seeds.
In 2005, the top seeds had 25, 26, 28, and 29 wins. Two teams made it in with 20 or less, two made it with 21-22, and 3 made it in with 23. Michigan's 30 wins were tops amongst teams not receiving a #1 seed.
So with at least 16 games left until tournament time (but likely at least 18), two more wins will give them as many as half of the 2007 field, and 7 more wins will give them more than half of the #1 seeds, plus every team that wasn't given top billing in their regional. 11 wins (and that's only a .611 winning percentage) virtually guarantees them a #1 seeding.
This year, the Wolverines hit the 20 win plateau on January 12th. The last four years, that mark was reached on February 2, March 11, January 29, and February 13. Pretty impressive, especially considering how powerful that team three years ago was.
On to thoughts about the WMU games:
I wasn't able to watch the Friday night game, so I'm sure I'll talk about it more in the media round-up, once I've had a chance to read other peoples' impressions. From the sounds of it though, there wasn't a whole lot of drama. With Rich Rodriguez in the house, dropping the ceremonial first puck and giving a valiant effort in Score-O, the Wolverines led 1-0 after one, scored two quick ones in the second before taking a 4-0 lead into the intermission, and despite giving up a goal seven seconds into the third period, came out of there with a 6-1 victory, outshooting WMU 44-22 in the process. That was probably the longest sentence I've ever written.
Stop me if you've heard this before: Kevin Porter and Chad Kolarik each had 3 points in the game. Travis Turnbull, Chris Summers, and Matt Rust all contributed a pair of points. Billy Sauer had an off-night, allowing a goal and only stopping 21 shots.
Kevin Quick deserves a pat on the back as well, scoring his first career goal. He'd later add #2 on Saturday night.
And on a sad note, Mark Mitera was on the ice for an even-strength goal. I believe that was the first time since the season opener, which...I'm not even sure incredible is the right word for that.
The next night it was more of the same, only it didn't take as long for Michigan to start running a train all up in 'em. Kolarik scored 30 seconds into the game and added three more for the first hat trick + 1 Michigan has seen since Dwight Helminen did it a few years back against Ohio State.
After Kolarik put us up 2-0, the second coming on what looked like a kick-in, Western got back into the game with an absolute bullet from Nathan Ansell--some of those WMU defensemen can fire it! Michigan regained the two goal margin just 19 seconds later on a goal from Quick that Riley Gill quite simply can't give up. Kolarik's third of the night, which pretty much sealed the deal, also fell into that category. Chad just slapped the puck toward the net on a faceoff, rather than drawing it back, and it went in. Cool goal, but an awful one nonetheless.
Kolarik's fourth came on a beautiful pass from Brandon Naurato, who had a nice game with two assists and a couple other nice feeds.
For the record, Chris Frank finished the weekend -4. Ha.
Brian Hill did both games, and I wasn't overly impressed Saturday night. He called Tim Miller for elbowing on one of the prettiest hits you'll ever see--and on one of the dirtiest players in the CCHA to boot. There were a couple other plays that had me laughing, though I've forgotten what they were. Not the worst ref we've ever had, but he still caused me to say "This two-referee system is going to be an absolute disaster" on at least one occasion.
I thought Saturday was kind of a rough night for Langlais. He didn't do much in the way of offense and had a couple of bad giveaways, including one where he fell behind our net and the WMU player walked right out in front.
Matt Rust: So nice to have him back. He had a pair of assists Friday night, and may have saved a goal on Saturday with an absolutely gorgeous back-check to steal the puck from a Western player who would've been in all alone.
Sauer was very good again. Couldn't fault him on the WMU goal and he made 31 saves, including a few dandies.
The big downer of the weekend was a shoulder injury to Max Pacioretty. He didn't play Saturday night and I haven't heard how he's doing. Hopefully it's not serious, but I'm guessing Rivals/The Daily will have something for us sometime today on his status.
It's nice to have Caporusso and Rust back in the faceoff circle. They were a combined 39 and 26 on the weekend, which is 60% and very helpful to the cause.
The power play was definitely effective, going 4 for 10 on the weekend and 3 for 4 on Saturday night.
I also have to point out that even though Michigan was the more-talented team, obviously dominated the weekend (outscoring the Broncos 11-2 and outshooting them 82-54), and were playing a team -45 in power play opportunities so far this season, we were still -1 for the weekend. I can't figure it out.
In the CCHA, Nebraska-Omaha couldn't give us any help against Miami, so we remain tied with the Redhawks, but with two games in hand. Michigan State took 3 of 4 points from the Irish, so we lead the Irish by 3 points with 2 games in hand, and the Spartans by 4, with the same number of games played.
Now the schedule starts to pick up. In the last 14 games of the regular season, 8 are against the other three "elite" teams in the CCHA, including 6 of the next 8. Next up is Notre Dame, with a game at Yost and then one at The Palace of Auburn Hills. A Michigan sweep would pretty much bury the Irish, with Michigan up 7 points and having twelve games to play to ND's ten.
Monday, January 07, 2008
Sports World Wrap-Around
With no real need to write a preview for an exhibition game tomorrow, I figured today might be a good time to post some random thoughts bouncing around in my brain.
-Maize n Brew Dave provides a case for rooting for OSU tonight. It ain't happening in these parts. I appreciate that it would make the conference as a whole look better, but I fail to see how the benefit Michigan might gain by some people being like "Hey, maybe the Big Ten isn't that bad" wouldn't be off-set by OSU being able to claim 2 national titles and 3 title game appearances in what? 6 years? People have their stereotypes about the Big Ten. Michigan keeps beating SEC teams in bowl games and every year we hear about how the SEC is better and how Michigan won't be able to match-up with the SEC speed. Would an OSU win over LSU really make people change their tune? Or would we just hear, "Yeah but in a playoff system, Georgia would've smoked them"?
Plus, no matter what you think of him as a coach, the way the job search went down, or even if you wanted him as our coach, I have to root for a guy like Les Miles, who loves U of M as much as he does.
-Next up, Mike Tomlin. Is he getting killed in media? He should be. I haven't read too much about the Steelers/Jaguars game, but based on what I read on ESPN and in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette the night of the game, I can't believe he's not getting skewered over that completely indefensible decision to go for 2 from the 12 yard line with a ton of time left and down by 5 points. I didn't agree with the decision to go for it from the 2 yard line, but it was at least understandable. But after you get called for holding, you have to kick the football.
What are the chances of making a 2 point conversion in the NFL? Probably 40%ish? What would the chances be at making it from the 12 yard line? It has to be under 10%. And the only benefit you gain is if there's no scoring (or you match scores) the rest of the game and you need a FG to tie. It was unnecessary and the odds were so far against them making it, the decision was asinine. If you kick the PAT, then on the next TD, you're also kicking the PAT, and then you're up 3 rather than 1. Then Jacksonville either has to take some shots at the endzone, or settle for OT.
It blows my mind how coaches still find a way to bungle when to go for two and when not to go for two. Quick rules of thumb: Don't do it before the fourth quarter (preferably deep into the fourth quarter). Don't do it unless it's absolutely necessary. If it's a high scoring game, there are probably going to be more points, and take into account the ramifications if you miss. Realize that the odds are against you making it.
-Speaking of the Jaguars, I'm one of the people who was really pulling for a Pats/Jags matchup in the second round, because I like a lot of the things that the Jaguars bring to the table. I'm less excited now. I'd still give them a chance in that game, and I think the Pats giving 13 (Gotta plug BetUS right there) in that game is way too high, but I'm less excited about that matchup than I was when I saw the score at the start of the 4th quarter in the Steelers/Jags game.
-One of my childhood favorites is back! American Gladiators started up again last night, and I know a lot of people didn't like it, but I enjoyed myself.
No, it's not as good as the old one. I think they're trying to hard to make it all dramatic, and I almost had a seizure from the way they change camera angles but overall it's still pretty great.
That event, the Pyramid (or whatever it's called), is amazing. People getting rocked all over the place on that one. The skinny Asian dude got literally thrown off of it at least 3 times. I don't remember it being on the show before, but someone said that it was. Either way, it's sweet!
And the new Eliminator? Awesome. That's just mean to put the hand bike toward the end (when your hands are wet) followed by the reverse treadmill, when your shoes are wet. There aren't going to be too many people getting through that thing on the first try. I do wonder why the contenders even bother with the hand bike. There doesn't seem to be a "penalty pit" anymore and it's a lot quicker to just fall and go up the ladder.
I was really disappointed that neither of the contenders won in Assault last night. I wanted to see the Gladiator go flying into the water. That's a really nice touch.
I didn't like the new Hang Tough because the course just isn't long enough. One time the contender and gladiator went right at each other and they hit when they were both reaching for their second ring.
The gauntlet is always fun. And there's no better event for people getting rocked than Powerball.
I love that show...I don't think they ruined it at all. I just wish they had more "classic" camera angles--particularly on Powerball and Assault.
-In light of the fact that they just promoted the guy that headed up one of the worst offensive lines in the league, shouldn't the Lions have waited to see what would happen with Cam Cameron before bringing in a new Offensive Coordinator? It is the Lions....
-The Wings are a machine, and both of their goalies are playing great hockey. Osgood probably deserves to be an All-Star and Hasek has played every bit as well over the last month and a half. Check out these numbers over each of their last ten starts:
Hasek: 8-1-1, 1.47 GAA, .930 save percentage, 2 shutouts
Osgood: 9-1-0, 1.70 GAA, .934 save percentage, 1 shutout
That's not even fair. And the team as a whole is making good hockey teams look really bad. Look what we just did to Dallas in that home-and-home. The Stars are right up there with the (second) best in the West, and they didn't even belong on the same ice as Detroit in either game. It makes me wish the playoffs were starting now, because no one in the league is even close to the Wings at this point.
Rather than just winning another Norris (which is a foregone conclusion barring injury), isn't it high time Nick Lidstrom wins the Hart or Pearson? He leads the league in defense scoring, he's the best defensive defenseman in hockey, and he has been for years. He plays 30+ a night, and he's ::knock on wood:: out there every night. I'd have a hard time picking a more valuable player in the league, and I'm not so sure that he shouldn't have a couple of those trophies in his case by now.
-The NHL's outdoor game was a success--the highest rated game in a decade. I still have to wonder what kind of number it would've drawn had it not been on New Year's Day, and if it had included one team that people care about. These outdoor games are awesome. The sight of the snow coming down, the massive crowd around the rink, the hats over the goalie masks...it's all amazing. I'd be curious to know how much it costs to put one of these games on, and if the huge crowd offsets it enough to make it more profitable than a normal game. They need to put on more of these games and involve some bigger name teams. I don't know that I'd go as far as Mike Wilbon's suggestion to play an outdoor game every Sunday or Kornheiser's suggestion that every team play 5 of these a year, but I do think they need to have more outdoor games.
Since the new schedule will allow for every Original Six team to play the others at least one time a year (NOT ENOUGH) I'd like to see them schedule a yearly informal round-robin tournament between the teams (maybe I could expand this idea in a future post), and have a few of the games outside at least for the for the first year. Leafs/Canadiens at Skydome or Molson Stadium where the Alouettes play, Wings/Blackhawks at the Big House, Bruins/Rangers at Giants Stadium or Fenway...it'd be awesome.
-Maize n Brew Dave provides a case for rooting for OSU tonight. It ain't happening in these parts. I appreciate that it would make the conference as a whole look better, but I fail to see how the benefit Michigan might gain by some people being like "Hey, maybe the Big Ten isn't that bad" wouldn't be off-set by OSU being able to claim 2 national titles and 3 title game appearances in what? 6 years? People have their stereotypes about the Big Ten. Michigan keeps beating SEC teams in bowl games and every year we hear about how the SEC is better and how Michigan won't be able to match-up with the SEC speed. Would an OSU win over LSU really make people change their tune? Or would we just hear, "Yeah but in a playoff system, Georgia would've smoked them"?
Plus, no matter what you think of him as a coach, the way the job search went down, or even if you wanted him as our coach, I have to root for a guy like Les Miles, who loves U of M as much as he does.
-Next up, Mike Tomlin. Is he getting killed in media? He should be. I haven't read too much about the Steelers/Jaguars game, but based on what I read on ESPN and in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette the night of the game, I can't believe he's not getting skewered over that completely indefensible decision to go for 2 from the 12 yard line with a ton of time left and down by 5 points. I didn't agree with the decision to go for it from the 2 yard line, but it was at least understandable. But after you get called for holding, you have to kick the football.
What are the chances of making a 2 point conversion in the NFL? Probably 40%ish? What would the chances be at making it from the 12 yard line? It has to be under 10%. And the only benefit you gain is if there's no scoring (or you match scores) the rest of the game and you need a FG to tie. It was unnecessary and the odds were so far against them making it, the decision was asinine. If you kick the PAT, then on the next TD, you're also kicking the PAT, and then you're up 3 rather than 1. Then Jacksonville either has to take some shots at the endzone, or settle for OT.
It blows my mind how coaches still find a way to bungle when to go for two and when not to go for two. Quick rules of thumb: Don't do it before the fourth quarter (preferably deep into the fourth quarter). Don't do it unless it's absolutely necessary. If it's a high scoring game, there are probably going to be more points, and take into account the ramifications if you miss. Realize that the odds are against you making it.
-Speaking of the Jaguars, I'm one of the people who was really pulling for a Pats/Jags matchup in the second round, because I like a lot of the things that the Jaguars bring to the table. I'm less excited now. I'd still give them a chance in that game, and I think the Pats giving 13 (Gotta plug BetUS right there) in that game is way too high, but I'm less excited about that matchup than I was when I saw the score at the start of the 4th quarter in the Steelers/Jags game.
-One of my childhood favorites is back! American Gladiators started up again last night, and I know a lot of people didn't like it, but I enjoyed myself.
No, it's not as good as the old one. I think they're trying to hard to make it all dramatic, and I almost had a seizure from the way they change camera angles but overall it's still pretty great.
That event, the Pyramid (or whatever it's called), is amazing. People getting rocked all over the place on that one. The skinny Asian dude got literally thrown off of it at least 3 times. I don't remember it being on the show before, but someone said that it was. Either way, it's sweet!
And the new Eliminator? Awesome. That's just mean to put the hand bike toward the end (when your hands are wet) followed by the reverse treadmill, when your shoes are wet. There aren't going to be too many people getting through that thing on the first try. I do wonder why the contenders even bother with the hand bike. There doesn't seem to be a "penalty pit" anymore and it's a lot quicker to just fall and go up the ladder.
I was really disappointed that neither of the contenders won in Assault last night. I wanted to see the Gladiator go flying into the water. That's a really nice touch.
I didn't like the new Hang Tough because the course just isn't long enough. One time the contender and gladiator went right at each other and they hit when they were both reaching for their second ring.
The gauntlet is always fun. And there's no better event for people getting rocked than Powerball.
I love that show...I don't think they ruined it at all. I just wish they had more "classic" camera angles--particularly on Powerball and Assault.
-In light of the fact that they just promoted the guy that headed up one of the worst offensive lines in the league, shouldn't the Lions have waited to see what would happen with Cam Cameron before bringing in a new Offensive Coordinator? It is the Lions....
-The Wings are a machine, and both of their goalies are playing great hockey. Osgood probably deserves to be an All-Star and Hasek has played every bit as well over the last month and a half. Check out these numbers over each of their last ten starts:
Hasek: 8-1-1, 1.47 GAA, .930 save percentage, 2 shutouts
Osgood: 9-1-0, 1.70 GAA, .934 save percentage, 1 shutout
That's not even fair. And the team as a whole is making good hockey teams look really bad. Look what we just did to Dallas in that home-and-home. The Stars are right up there with the (second) best in the West, and they didn't even belong on the same ice as Detroit in either game. It makes me wish the playoffs were starting now, because no one in the league is even close to the Wings at this point.
Rather than just winning another Norris (which is a foregone conclusion barring injury), isn't it high time Nick Lidstrom wins the Hart or Pearson? He leads the league in defense scoring, he's the best defensive defenseman in hockey, and he has been for years. He plays 30+ a night, and he's ::knock on wood:: out there every night. I'd have a hard time picking a more valuable player in the league, and I'm not so sure that he shouldn't have a couple of those trophies in his case by now.
-The NHL's outdoor game was a success--the highest rated game in a decade. I still have to wonder what kind of number it would've drawn had it not been on New Year's Day, and if it had included one team that people care about. These outdoor games are awesome. The sight of the snow coming down, the massive crowd around the rink, the hats over the goalie masks...it's all amazing. I'd be curious to know how much it costs to put one of these games on, and if the huge crowd offsets it enough to make it more profitable than a normal game. They need to put on more of these games and involve some bigger name teams. I don't know that I'd go as far as Mike Wilbon's suggestion to play an outdoor game every Sunday or Kornheiser's suggestion that every team play 5 of these a year, but I do think they need to have more outdoor games.
Since the new schedule will allow for every Original Six team to play the others at least one time a year (NOT ENOUGH) I'd like to see them schedule a yearly informal round-robin tournament between the teams (maybe I could expand this idea in a future post), and have a few of the games outside at least for the for the first year. Leafs/Canadiens at Skydome or Molson Stadium where the Alouettes play, Wings/Blackhawks at the Big House, Bruins/Rangers at Giants Stadium or Fenway...it'd be awesome.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Projected Stats: The Breakdown
The other day, I projected stats for the rest of the season for the hockey team. Today, I'll break down the numbers with my thoughts on what you can take from them--and what might be a little misleading.
It's highly unlikely that Kevin Porter is going to score 41 goals. Ted Cook led the nation in goals last year with 32. The stats on USCHO only go back to 1998-99, but nobody has hit 40 in that timespan. Barring an injury he'll get into the 30s, which is usually good for the national lead, but I can't see him keeping this pace up all year. That said, the most goals a Michigan player has had since 98-99 is 31 (Muckalt). Porter should top that fairly easily.
Colin's research for his inaugural post (beyond an intro) indicates that since 99-00, Michigan has had just three freshmen score more than 1 point per game, and only five have have scored .8 ppg or more. Over the last 7 years, there have only been 57 .9 ppg freshmen. Currently, we've got two freshmen at or above a point per game, and three above .8 ppg. I think it's reasonable that Pacioretty's numbers will continue to improve, as he got off to a slow start due to a broken hand. History suggests that all three of them won't continue at the pace they're on, however.
Chad Langlais is on pace for 27 assists, which would be the highest total ever for a freshman defenseman at Michigan (23, Patrick Neaton) and the highest total by any defenseman over the referenced timespan (26, Jeff Jillson). With the way our power play is working, and with Langlais being the quarterback, it wouldn't shock me a bit if he continued on this pace. It's very likely that he'll get the freshman record. He only needs to average about a half assist a game the rest of the year to attain that mark. That's kind of incredible if you think about all the greats that have come through this program.
Look at those goals against and shots on goal totals. Sauer is on pace to allow 45 less goals than a year ago (albeit that would be in 4 less games). The team as a whole is on pace to allow 42 less goals than a year ago (not counting ENGs). A big reason for that is the play of the defense in front of our netminders. At this rate, we'll give up right around 200 less shots. Pretty impressive.
It should also be mentioned that Billy Sauer's current save percentage would be the best mark a Michigan goalie has posted since Al Montoya's stellar sophomore season.
The biggest surprise amongst the returning skaters has to be Steven Kampfer. In just 17 games, he's had 2 1/2 times the amount of points he had last season and he's on pace to make a 19 point jump (and a +20 jump). He's been really, really good.
Looking at the numbers, there aren't too many players that you can consider to be a "disappointment". Miller, Naurato, Lebler, Mitera, and Summers are the players on pace to score less points than a year ago.
Naurato is playing a lot less, which isn't surprising. Chris Summers's numbers are skewed, as he got a lot of points playing forward at the end of last year, and he's been up front for just a game and a half thusfar. Mitera's numbers are down, not insignificantly, but he's been so good defensively (I believe I read that he's been on the ice for just one even-strength goal all year) that it's impossible to say that he's been disappointing in any fashion.
Tim Miller puzzles me. He made a big jump forward offensively last year, scoring 7 goals and 24 points after tallying 15 points as a freshman. For a forward that didn't see a lot of power play time, those are pretty good numbers. He played with Cogliano and Kolarik for a little while, but most of the year he was playing on the third line, and his points were pretty spread out. He's been really quiet this year, with just six points and no goals.
If you are looking for a breakout player in the second half, he and Chris Summers would probably be the best bets. I think Caporusso's injury hurt him because even though he was playing with Rust, it kind of jumbled the second and third lines. I like him on the wing, and with Caporusso coming back, he should be able to slide back outside full-time. He's not going to be a huge scorer, but he should be closer to .5 ppg rather than .33 ppg. He's only on pace for 14 points, but I bet he ends up closer to 20.
Brian Lebler has been disappointing. Last year he wasn't great, but he was able to contribute offensively at times, and when he wasn't getting on the score-sheet, he was doing a nice job on the checking line. He's taken waaay too many penalties this season, and they've been of the dumb variety. He's had a couple of checking-from-behind majors, and he had a really stupid penalty that negated a power play during the loss to Ohio State. Perhaps he's trying too hard to make an impact physically when he's in the lineup, in an effort to stay there.
If Palushaj continues the pace that he is on, and ends up with 32 assists, he would be tied for 6th on the freshman assists list, just two behind TJ Hensick and ahead of the great Brendan Morrison.
Last year we had seven players with double digit goals and nine guys with 20+ points. This year, we're on pace to match those totals.
Currently we're averaging just a tenth of a goal per game less than we did last year when we led the nation in goals. The schedule gets tougher in the second half with as many as six games against MSU and at least two with both of Notre Dame and Miami. I expect the offense to take a slight turn down, and the goals against to rise a little bit. But as it is, our goal differential is nearly a goal per game better than last year, so we've got some leeway. I don't think anyone would object to averaging say, 3.9 goals per game and allowing 2.3 or 2.4 gpg. That's a vast improvement over 3.1 last year even if they aren't as wonderful in the second half.
It's highly unlikely that Kevin Porter is going to score 41 goals. Ted Cook led the nation in goals last year with 32. The stats on USCHO only go back to 1998-99, but nobody has hit 40 in that timespan. Barring an injury he'll get into the 30s, which is usually good for the national lead, but I can't see him keeping this pace up all year. That said, the most goals a Michigan player has had since 98-99 is 31 (Muckalt). Porter should top that fairly easily.
Colin's research for his inaugural post (beyond an intro) indicates that since 99-00, Michigan has had just three freshmen score more than 1 point per game, and only five have have scored .8 ppg or more. Over the last 7 years, there have only been 57 .9 ppg freshmen. Currently, we've got two freshmen at or above a point per game, and three above .8 ppg. I think it's reasonable that Pacioretty's numbers will continue to improve, as he got off to a slow start due to a broken hand. History suggests that all three of them won't continue at the pace they're on, however.
Chad Langlais is on pace for 27 assists, which would be the highest total ever for a freshman defenseman at Michigan (23, Patrick Neaton) and the highest total by any defenseman over the referenced timespan (26, Jeff Jillson). With the way our power play is working, and with Langlais being the quarterback, it wouldn't shock me a bit if he continued on this pace. It's very likely that he'll get the freshman record. He only needs to average about a half assist a game the rest of the year to attain that mark. That's kind of incredible if you think about all the greats that have come through this program.
Look at those goals against and shots on goal totals. Sauer is on pace to allow 45 less goals than a year ago (albeit that would be in 4 less games). The team as a whole is on pace to allow 42 less goals than a year ago (not counting ENGs). A big reason for that is the play of the defense in front of our netminders. At this rate, we'll give up right around 200 less shots. Pretty impressive.
It should also be mentioned that Billy Sauer's current save percentage would be the best mark a Michigan goalie has posted since Al Montoya's stellar sophomore season.
The biggest surprise amongst the returning skaters has to be Steven Kampfer. In just 17 games, he's had 2 1/2 times the amount of points he had last season and he's on pace to make a 19 point jump (and a +20 jump). He's been really, really good.
Looking at the numbers, there aren't too many players that you can consider to be a "disappointment". Miller, Naurato, Lebler, Mitera, and Summers are the players on pace to score less points than a year ago.
Naurato is playing a lot less, which isn't surprising. Chris Summers's numbers are skewed, as he got a lot of points playing forward at the end of last year, and he's been up front for just a game and a half thusfar. Mitera's numbers are down, not insignificantly, but he's been so good defensively (I believe I read that he's been on the ice for just one even-strength goal all year) that it's impossible to say that he's been disappointing in any fashion.
Tim Miller puzzles me. He made a big jump forward offensively last year, scoring 7 goals and 24 points after tallying 15 points as a freshman. For a forward that didn't see a lot of power play time, those are pretty good numbers. He played with Cogliano and Kolarik for a little while, but most of the year he was playing on the third line, and his points were pretty spread out. He's been really quiet this year, with just six points and no goals.
If you are looking for a breakout player in the second half, he and Chris Summers would probably be the best bets. I think Caporusso's injury hurt him because even though he was playing with Rust, it kind of jumbled the second and third lines. I like him on the wing, and with Caporusso coming back, he should be able to slide back outside full-time. He's not going to be a huge scorer, but he should be closer to .5 ppg rather than .33 ppg. He's only on pace for 14 points, but I bet he ends up closer to 20.
Brian Lebler has been disappointing. Last year he wasn't great, but he was able to contribute offensively at times, and when he wasn't getting on the score-sheet, he was doing a nice job on the checking line. He's taken waaay too many penalties this season, and they've been of the dumb variety. He's had a couple of checking-from-behind majors, and he had a really stupid penalty that negated a power play during the loss to Ohio State. Perhaps he's trying too hard to make an impact physically when he's in the lineup, in an effort to stay there.
If Palushaj continues the pace that he is on, and ends up with 32 assists, he would be tied for 6th on the freshman assists list, just two behind TJ Hensick and ahead of the great Brendan Morrison.
Last year we had seven players with double digit goals and nine guys with 20+ points. This year, we're on pace to match those totals.
Currently we're averaging just a tenth of a goal per game less than we did last year when we led the nation in goals. The schedule gets tougher in the second half with as many as six games against MSU and at least two with both of Notre Dame and Miami. I expect the offense to take a slight turn down, and the goals against to rise a little bit. But as it is, our goal differential is nearly a goal per game better than last year, so we've got some leeway. I don't think anyone would object to averaging say, 3.9 goals per game and allowing 2.3 or 2.4 gpg. That's a vast improvement over 3.1 last year even if they aren't as wonderful in the second half.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Projected Stats
We're now 18 games into the season and I think it's high time we come up with some projected stats for the rest of the year to give a little context to the pace that some of our guys are on. For comparison's sake, I'll be projecting it over 41 games, which is how many Michigan played last year. We could play as many as 45 games, however (I'm assuming in this "maximum" that we still will have a bye in the first round of the CCHA playoffs, which seems to be a pretty safe assumption).
For Louie Caporusso, I've done two projections: One for his current pace, another for if he misses no additional time. I'm also listing Summers as a defenseman and am assuming the defensive rotation continues.
First, the raw data. I'll break it all down in my next post and talk about what's surprising, what's shocking, what's disappointing, what you can take from this data, and what might be a little misleading.
Forwards:
Kevin Porter: 18 GP, 18-11--29, 8 PIMs, 59 SOG, +13
Projected: 41 GP, 41-25--66, 18 PIMs, 134 SOG, +30
Last year: 41 GP, 24-34--58, 16 PIMs, 128 SOG, +23
Chad Kolarik: 18 GP, 12-12--24, 6 PIMs, 80 SOG, +11
Projected: 41 GP, 27-27--54, 14 PIMs, 182 SOG, +25
Last year: 41 GP, 18-27--45, 24 PIMs, 163 SOG, +13
Aaron Palushaj: 18 GP, 5-14--19, 4 PIMs, 32 SOG, even
Projected: 41 GP, 11-32--43, 9 PIMs, 73 SOG, even
Max Pacioretty: 18 GP, 5-13--18, 32 PIMs, 54 SOG, +14
Projected: 41 GP, 11-30--41, 73 PIMs, 123 SOG, +32
Matt Rust: 17 GP, 7-5--12, 29 PIMs, 21 SOG, +6
Projected: 39 GP, 16-11--25, 67 PIMs, 48 SOG, +14
Carl Hagelin: 18 GP, 5-7--12, 12 PIMs, 28 SOG, +10
Projected: 41 GP, 11-16--25, 27 PIMs, 64 SOG, +23
Travis Turnbull: 18 GP, 5-4--9, 32 PIMs, 32 SOG, +9
Projected: 41 GP, 11-9--20, 73 PIMs, 73 SOG, +21
Last year: 41 GP, 8-9--17, 52 PIMs, 75 SOG, +6
Louie Caporusso: 9 GP, 3-5--8, 0 PIMs, 10 SOG, +6
Projected: 21 GP, 7-11--18, 0 PIMs, 22 SOG, +14
Projected (assuming he misses no additional time): 32 GP, 11-18--29, 0 PIMs, 36 SOG, +21
Tim Miller: 18 GP, 0-6--6, 12 PIMs, 15 SOG, even
Projected: 41 GP, 0-14--14, 27 PIMs, 34 SOG, even
Last year: 41 GP, 7-17--24, 57 PIMs, 53 SOG, +13
Ben Winnett: 18 GP, 3-2--5, 4 PIMs, 26 SOG, +4
Projected: 41 GP, 7-5--12, 9 PIMs, 59 SOG, +9
Brandon Naurato: 12 GP, 2-2--4, 10 PIMs, 30 SOG, -1
Projected: 27 GP, 5-5--10, 23 PIMs, 68 SOG, -2
Last year: 40 GP, 12-11--23, 34 PIMs, 108 SOG, +4
Brian Lebler: 13 GP, 2-1--3, 42 PIMs, 11 SOG, even
Projected: 30 GP, 5-2--7, 97 PIMs, 25 SOG, even
Last year: 37 GP, 7-4--11, 34 PIMs, 48 SOG, +2
Danny Fardig: 12 GP, 1-2--3, 10 PIMs, 13 SOG, +1
Projected: 27 GP, 2-5--7, 23 PIMs, 29 SOG, +2
Last year: 41 GP, 2-4--6, 36 PIMs, 38 SOG, +5
Anthony Ciraulo: 7 GP, 1-1--2, 2 PIMs, 5 SOG, +1
Projected: 16 GP, 2-2--4, 4 PIMs, 11 SOG, +2
Last year: 24 GP, 1-1--2, 2 PIMs, 15 SOG, +3
Defensemen:
Chad Langlais: 18 GP, 0-12--12, 22 PIMs, 24 SOG, +7
Projected: 41 GP, 0-27--27, 50 PIMs, 55 SOG, +16
Steve Kampfer: 17 GP, 2-8--10, 16 PIMs, 22 SOG, +10
Projected: 39 GP, 5-18--23, 37 PIMs, 50 SOG, +23
Last year: 35 GP, 1-3--4, 24 PIMs, 32 SOG, +3
Mark Mitera: 18 GP, 1-5--6, 24 PIMs, 23 SOG, +14
Projected: 41 GP, 2-11--13, 55 PIMs, 52 SOG, +32
Last year: 41 GP, 1-17--18, 52 PIMs, 47 SOG, +23
Chris Summers: 18 GP, 1-4--5, 18 PIMs, 21 SOG, +10
Projected: 41 GP, 2-9--11, 41 PIMs, 48 SOG, +23
Last year: 41 GP, 6-8--14, 58 PIMs, 42 SOG, +13
Tristin Llewellyn: 13 GP, 0-1--1, 18 PIMs, 6 SOG, +1
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 42 PIMs, 14 SOG, +2
Kevin Quick: 13 GP, 0-1--1, 8 PIMs, 6 SOG, +5
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 18 PIMs, 14 SOG, +12
Scooter Vaughan: 13 GP, 0-1--, 12 PIMs, 13 SOG, +8
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 28 PIMs, 30 SOG, +18
Goalies:
Billy Sauer: 16 GP, 14-2-0, 2.06 GAA, .915 Save %, 33 goals, 354 saves
Projected: 36 GP, 31-5-0, 2.06 GAA, .915 Save %, 74 goals, 797 saves
Last year: 40 GP, 25-14-1, 3.03 GAA, .896 Save %, 119 goals, 1,028 saves
Bryan Hogan: 2 GP, 2-0-0, 2.01 GAA, .920 Save %, 4 goals, 46 saves
Projected: 5 GP, 5-0-0, 2.01 GAA, .920 Save %, 10 goals, 115 saves
For Louie Caporusso, I've done two projections: One for his current pace, another for if he misses no additional time. I'm also listing Summers as a defenseman and am assuming the defensive rotation continues.
First, the raw data. I'll break it all down in my next post and talk about what's surprising, what's shocking, what's disappointing, what you can take from this data, and what might be a little misleading.
Forwards:
Kevin Porter: 18 GP, 18-11--29, 8 PIMs, 59 SOG, +13
Projected: 41 GP, 41-25--66, 18 PIMs, 134 SOG, +30
Last year: 41 GP, 24-34--58, 16 PIMs, 128 SOG, +23
Chad Kolarik: 18 GP, 12-12--24, 6 PIMs, 80 SOG, +11
Projected: 41 GP, 27-27--54, 14 PIMs, 182 SOG, +25
Last year: 41 GP, 18-27--45, 24 PIMs, 163 SOG, +13
Aaron Palushaj: 18 GP, 5-14--19, 4 PIMs, 32 SOG, even
Projected: 41 GP, 11-32--43, 9 PIMs, 73 SOG, even
Max Pacioretty: 18 GP, 5-13--18, 32 PIMs, 54 SOG, +14
Projected: 41 GP, 11-30--41, 73 PIMs, 123 SOG, +32
Matt Rust: 17 GP, 7-5--12, 29 PIMs, 21 SOG, +6
Projected: 39 GP, 16-11--25, 67 PIMs, 48 SOG, +14
Carl Hagelin: 18 GP, 5-7--12, 12 PIMs, 28 SOG, +10
Projected: 41 GP, 11-16--25, 27 PIMs, 64 SOG, +23
Travis Turnbull: 18 GP, 5-4--9, 32 PIMs, 32 SOG, +9
Projected: 41 GP, 11-9--20, 73 PIMs, 73 SOG, +21
Last year: 41 GP, 8-9--17, 52 PIMs, 75 SOG, +6
Louie Caporusso: 9 GP, 3-5--8, 0 PIMs, 10 SOG, +6
Projected: 21 GP, 7-11--18, 0 PIMs, 22 SOG, +14
Projected (assuming he misses no additional time): 32 GP, 11-18--29, 0 PIMs, 36 SOG, +21
Tim Miller: 18 GP, 0-6--6, 12 PIMs, 15 SOG, even
Projected: 41 GP, 0-14--14, 27 PIMs, 34 SOG, even
Last year: 41 GP, 7-17--24, 57 PIMs, 53 SOG, +13
Ben Winnett: 18 GP, 3-2--5, 4 PIMs, 26 SOG, +4
Projected: 41 GP, 7-5--12, 9 PIMs, 59 SOG, +9
Brandon Naurato: 12 GP, 2-2--4, 10 PIMs, 30 SOG, -1
Projected: 27 GP, 5-5--10, 23 PIMs, 68 SOG, -2
Last year: 40 GP, 12-11--23, 34 PIMs, 108 SOG, +4
Brian Lebler: 13 GP, 2-1--3, 42 PIMs, 11 SOG, even
Projected: 30 GP, 5-2--7, 97 PIMs, 25 SOG, even
Last year: 37 GP, 7-4--11, 34 PIMs, 48 SOG, +2
Danny Fardig: 12 GP, 1-2--3, 10 PIMs, 13 SOG, +1
Projected: 27 GP, 2-5--7, 23 PIMs, 29 SOG, +2
Last year: 41 GP, 2-4--6, 36 PIMs, 38 SOG, +5
Anthony Ciraulo: 7 GP, 1-1--2, 2 PIMs, 5 SOG, +1
Projected: 16 GP, 2-2--4, 4 PIMs, 11 SOG, +2
Last year: 24 GP, 1-1--2, 2 PIMs, 15 SOG, +3
Defensemen:
Chad Langlais: 18 GP, 0-12--12, 22 PIMs, 24 SOG, +7
Projected: 41 GP, 0-27--27, 50 PIMs, 55 SOG, +16
Steve Kampfer: 17 GP, 2-8--10, 16 PIMs, 22 SOG, +10
Projected: 39 GP, 5-18--23, 37 PIMs, 50 SOG, +23
Last year: 35 GP, 1-3--4, 24 PIMs, 32 SOG, +3
Mark Mitera: 18 GP, 1-5--6, 24 PIMs, 23 SOG, +14
Projected: 41 GP, 2-11--13, 55 PIMs, 52 SOG, +32
Last year: 41 GP, 1-17--18, 52 PIMs, 47 SOG, +23
Chris Summers: 18 GP, 1-4--5, 18 PIMs, 21 SOG, +10
Projected: 41 GP, 2-9--11, 41 PIMs, 48 SOG, +23
Last year: 41 GP, 6-8--14, 58 PIMs, 42 SOG, +13
Tristin Llewellyn: 13 GP, 0-1--1, 18 PIMs, 6 SOG, +1
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 42 PIMs, 14 SOG, +2
Kevin Quick: 13 GP, 0-1--1, 8 PIMs, 6 SOG, +5
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 18 PIMs, 14 SOG, +12
Scooter Vaughan: 13 GP, 0-1--, 12 PIMs, 13 SOG, +8
Projected: 30 GP, 0-2--2, 28 PIMs, 30 SOG, +18
Goalies:
Billy Sauer: 16 GP, 14-2-0, 2.06 GAA, .915 Save %, 33 goals, 354 saves
Projected: 36 GP, 31-5-0, 2.06 GAA, .915 Save %, 74 goals, 797 saves
Last year: 40 GP, 25-14-1, 3.03 GAA, .896 Save %, 119 goals, 1,028 saves
Bryan Hogan: 2 GP, 2-0-0, 2.01 GAA, .920 Save %, 4 goals, 46 saves
Projected: 5 GP, 5-0-0, 2.01 GAA, .920 Save %, 10 goals, 115 saves
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
