Monday Roundup
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 6:37 AM EST
31 comments
After a game like Saturday's and with the revolving door to the injured reserve starting to smoke from spinning so fast, it's hard to get a handle on exactly how good the Washington Capitals are right now, but that doesn't stop us from trying.
In the past, I've used a pretty simple formula to rank teams (very roughly, I might add), and comparing that ranking to a list of teams ranked by points percentage, I feel you can get a decent handle on which teams are overachieving relative to their play and which teams are underachieving. What I mean by that is that a team that is exceptional five-on-five and good on both special teams should have a pretty good record. If not, they're underachieving. By the same token, a team that is lousy on special teams and bad five-on-five but somehow has managed a .500 record is overavchieving. In both cases, the likelihood of a regression to their expected points percentage would be likely, all else equal.
Jumping right into it, we'll ranks the 30 teams in five-on-five ratio, power play percentage and penalty kill percentage, add 'em up, and spit out a cumulative ranking (I think Peerless has used something similar in the past, but I'm not positive). That ranking after the jump.
Good, you made it. Here are those rankings I was talking about, through Saturday:
Surprised to see the 'Canes that low? Me too. But how highly ranked can a team really be if they're ranked 20th or worst 5-on-5, on the PP and on the PK? In what facet of the game, pray tell, are they even average? Based upon their rankings in those three categories, they really have no business taking home more than half the points that have been available to them, and yet they have. Not surprisingly, they're near the top of the list, then, of teams which have overachieved (relative to their play) so far:
Heading into Sunday's action, the Minnesota Wild had the seventh-best power-play in the League, the second-best penalty kill and were bad five-on-five. The 'Canes were slightly better five-on-five than the Wild, but atrocious on the special teams, and yet Carolina, at 15-13-4 had one more point than Minny (16-14-2). Is there much question, however, which is the "better" team?
Granted, there are differences in strength of schedule, home/road splits, number of power play and penalty kill opportunities, etc., and 5-on-5 ratio should probably be weighted a little bit (since roughly two-thirds of all goals are scored at five aside), but it certainly seems as if certain teams are lucky to be where they are in the standings based on how they've played so far, and others probably deserve a better fate than they've thus far received.
As far as the Caps go, you've noticed that they're ranked ninth in these power rankings and were ninth in the League in points percentage. With all the adversity this team has faced, it's right where you'd expect it to be given how it has played in each facet of the game and on the whole - good, with plenty of room for improvement.
1 recs |
31 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
I don’t remember having done it, but it is instructive for Caps fans in this sense. There is the old phrase, “your best penalty killer has to be your goaltender.” Well, there are the Caps, 7th in 5-on-5, 6th in power play…and 25th in penalty killing.
I have an unsettling feeling that the best goaltender in the organization played last night (and won), not on Saturday. It gets worse when I look and see that Nikolai Khabibulin hasn’t lost a game in regulation this year for Chicago since the Caps’ opening night (10-1-4).
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Dec 22, 2008 7:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
It gets worse when I look and see that Nikolai Khabibulin hasn’t lost a game in regulation this year for Chicago since the Caps’ opening night (10-1-4).
Maybe I’m just not understanding. But what does the Bulin conversation keep coming up? The Caps cannot afford him. There are not going to be takers for Theodore…and even if they can dump Nyls salary, what are your plans for Jose?
And please please please don’t let me believe that there are people out there that had Bulin as a back-up plan when Huet decided against staying in DC. Because to me, his time in Chicago has not been worth the 6.75 per.
by Yoshietree on Dec 22, 2008 8:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yoshie, I think the Bulin convo comes up because CHI has 10+M wrapped up in goalie contracts and they are in cap hell like we are. I have yet to hear a convincing argument about the merits of a WAS-CHI trade of any sort, whether for Nyls or cap space or a bag of pucks. But for Theo? That makes even less sense, from the CHI point of view. We are not good dance partners at this point, and I share your befuddlement.
by bigonetimer on Dec 22, 2008 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Khabibulin
If anybody was still wondering where the Caps have the biggest need, it was glaringly obvious on Saturday. With the kind of goaltending this team has right now, they’ll be lucky to get out of the first round. So I ask this question, if you could find a way to move Nylander to Chicago for Khabibulin, would you do it? The obvious reason this couldn’t work is the salary cap, but isn’t Khabibulin’s hit much lower than $6.5 million now? Then there’s the JT issue and my answer is bite the bullet and waive him or buy him out (if that’s possible). I’m eating a lot of humble pie on this because I was a big Nylander supporter when he was acquired, but it’s clear he just doesn’t fit into Bruce’s system. And Theo appears to have lost all confidence in his game. And Johnny, well, he’s Johnny. With a top notch keeper like Khabibulin this team goes from a SE Division winner to an Eastern Conference contender. Without a top quality keeper, I don’t see them as anything more than a first round winner.
by b.orr4 on Dec 22, 2008 9:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here’s the thing about Khabi – there’s no way Chicago trades him right now, even though they’d love to free up that salary. How can you move the guy who is most responsible for your team perhaps being the best team in hockey? Granted, they’re a very good team, top to bottom. But they can’t trade him until Huet shows he can handle the #1 duties on his own. I mean, they can, but they’d be stupid to, because, as of right now, it would take them from contender to, well, less than that.
And I agree that with the current state of the Caps goaltending, they’d be lucky to win more than a round in the playoffs (if that) unless someone gets hot at the right time. But we knew that before the season started, didn’t we?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 10:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In theory, I agree but I think Huet has turned the corner for Chicago. In his last four games he is 4-0 with a GAA under 1.00 and a save % of .970. I think the Blackhawks now feel they’ve got the goalie they thought they originally signed ( and the one we wanted to sign). If the deal is right, I think they’d make a move.
by b.orr4 on Dec 22, 2008 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’d be bold. If it ain’t broke…
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1) Agree with Peerless that a team is only as good as it’s goaltending. As good as Johnson has been most of the season its asking a lot to expect he’s suddenly devloped into a true #1 goalie.
2) Can/should GMG try to pull a Bob Gainey move and try to trade J60 at/before the deadline and then ride Varmolov as far as he can take them? The kid looked good in two games, but even he admitted he’s not ready for the rigors of playing a lot of hockey as is needed especially in the post season.
3) For better or worse the caps will have to make due with this current tandem
by Fauxrumors on Dec 22, 2008 8:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
World Juniors
off topic but Stefan Della Rovere had a goal and two assists last night in the world juniors.
http://www.hockeycanada.ca/index.php?ci_id=11728&la_id=1&ss_id=21713&game_id=1623
by Sombrero Guy on Dec 22, 2008 8:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the link. I’ve self-imposed a limit on Delly links because some around here believe my man-crush to be a bit much.
Oh, and links make for great FanShots (wink wink, nudge nudge), whereas they can get lost in comments.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 9:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh we’re well past the point of a man-crush now, JP…You and Della Rovere are now at a full on bromance.
by Hooks Orpik on Dec 22, 2008 9:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think it speaks to the glaring need for a certain type of player in the organization more than anything.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And it’s a largely unrequited bromance at this point (though he did do that interview with me back at Development Camp).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 9:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hear there’s a guy available to “fill that hole”, provided you don’t mind taking Dallas’ sloppy seconds :-)
by Hooks Orpik on Dec 22, 2008 9:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1…well played sir!
If he wasn’t such a douchebag, I’d be all over this one, but then again, he probably wouldn’t be ‘available’…he’s got KHL written all over his pretty mug
by bigonetimer on Dec 22, 2008 10:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Caps Return Giroux to Hershey...
… in a move that warrants little more than a note in these comments.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 10:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’m not advocating a deal with Chicago for Khabibulin by any means…the salary cap arithmetic doesn’t work for it, even if you could move Nylander and Theodore (which doesn’t seem possible, even to separate teams in separate deals). It’s just a reflection on the embarrassment of riches the Hawks have in terms of performance at the moment (although it comes at a stiff price).
Things might get even more interesting next year. If Theodore is, in fact, a bust (and I don’t yet regard this as a certainty…even though he’s trying my patience as a fan), what happens on the emerging log jam? Theodore has another year on his deal, but Johnson is a UFA. He might still get “backup” money under a new deal, but it might be significantly better “backup” money in what might be his last, best chance at a payday. Does he get it with Washington? Will the Caps think Varlamov is ready — or at least “ready enough” — to put him on the parent roster? Do the Caps buy out Theodore, give Johnson a new deal and give Varlamov the keys to the car?
That’s a lot of thinking ahead for this early in the season, but the way the Caps’ goaltending is going (mostly with respect to Theodore), it makes one wonder about the long term.
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Dec 22, 2008 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
It’s just a reflection on the embarrassment of riches the Hawks have in terms of performance at the moment (although it comes at a stiff price).
Imagine where they’d be (in terms of roster/cap flexibility) if they hadn’t wasted their money on signed Huet, and the on-ice loss would be negligible.
As far as the logjam – it’s very early, as you note, but it sure does look like Varlamov will be here next year with every chance to win the #1 job, whether it’s wrestling it away from JT60 or Johnny.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 10:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
(A healthy) JT60 needs to play every game from here on, and leave BJ as what he is – a backup.
by hotdog88gt on Dec 22, 2008 11:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
You would think so, but Bruce has picked Johnny as his starter against the Rangers. That tells me that, despite a terrible game against the Flyers, Bruce has little to no faith in JT.
by b.orr4 on Dec 22, 2008 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No question.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That should read “despite Johnny having a terrible game against the Flyers”
by b.orr4 on Dec 22, 2008 1:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Strunk and White approves….: 0
Actually brings up an interesting point…how good an in-game coach is Bruce? Based on his 2-1 W-L career so far, I’d guess pretty darn good. I don’t know that it’s been a topic before, but it’s a key piece to any coach’s success. Still, I was shocked that JT was in there in the third on Saturday “getting in some work,” per BB; while Johnny was sub-par I didn’t think the 3-0 game was out of reach.
It’s gotta be the hardest part of coaching—the messages, spoken and unspoken, a coach has to make with 23 guys every day.
by bigonetimer on Dec 22, 2008 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting question, but given the injuries and inconsistent goaltending so far (and, to a lesser extent, the slow starts from Alex and Nick) and the record this team has posted, I think it’s pretty clear that Boudreau knows how to coach ’em up.
I mean, raise your hand if you thought the Caps could be 20-11-3 with Tyler Sloan having played 20+ games, Fedorov playing in less than half of the games, and Jose Theodore having a .883 SV%.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Simpleton is as simpleton does
To label the Canes an overachiever and saying they have no business taking home half of the points that they have earned is too simplistic.
I think something else can explain why the Canes would be ranked so low here…it is largely a matter of goal differential (for which the Canes are not very good – only 5 teams have a worse differential – Blues, Thrashers, Stars, Islanders, and Lightning – none of whom are playoff-bound as of now & are all at the bottom of their divisions). So, that’s the explanation, but let’s dig deeper:
The Canes have lost more blow-out games than they have won: They have 1 win by 3 goals or more, and 6 losses by 3 goals or more. Only one of these games were decided by more than 3 goals (the 5-1 loss to the Caps). But in 1-goal games (including 10 games decided in OT and shootouts), the Canes have 11 wins, and 8 losses (4 wins/2 losses in OT, and 1 win/3 losses in SO). To me this all means the Canes have played a bunch of close games (i.e. 1-goal games or games that went beyond regulation) – 19 out of 34; as opposed to blow-out games (7 out of 34).
The Caps on the other hand in games decided by 3 goals or more, have 5 wins, and 6 losses. SIX of these games were decided by more than 3 goals (they are 3-3 in those games). In 1-goal games, the Caps have 7 wins and 6 losses. So, only 13 out of their 34 games have been decided by 1 goal (including OT and shootouts). While almost as many have been decided by blow-out games (11 out of 34).
Conclusion: Losing so many blow out games compared to winning only one, deflates the Canes’ numbers and their goal differential. It worsens their standing in comparison to other teams in terms of 5-on-5; PP; & PK. So the Canes aren’t lucky as you imply; we have held our own in close games and have been “unlucky” almost as many times as we have been “lucky.” The problem is we have been blown out too many times.
The Canes have been consistently close in the majority of our games, even though we have lost a bunch of blow out games. By only having one game decided by more than 3 goals, we lead the league for that stat. Only the Anaheim Ducks match the Canes with – 1 game over 3 goals (a win), but they have 4 wins and 3 losses in games of 3 goals or more, much better than the Canes’ 1W/6L record in those games.
The Canes are not a great team, but we can be a hell of a lot better. We will eventually get our blow-outs, I just hope they come against the Caps, with Semin and Green in the line-up, in your quiet stadium filled to the brim with “fans” who were given tickets by their employers.
by tarheelicane on Dec 22, 2008 4:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
in your quiet stadium filled to the brim with "fans" who were given tickets by their employers.
…I guess it’s been a while since you’ve been to the Phone Booth. I give ya the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re saying this tongue in cheek, but, from my perspective the Caps home crowd is pretty genuine these days. You must be thinking of Philly.
by bigonetimer on Dec 22, 2008 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fooled Me
Here I was reading you post thinking " Wow, here’s a Canes fan giving a reasoned argument to support his team" and then I get to your final cheap shot line ( totally untrue , by the way and laughable considering the way "Canes attendance has dropped off a cliff) and I realize you’re just another bitter Caniac who still can’t believe his team his team choked away the division title in their last game and missed the playoffs for the second year in a row.
by b.orr4 on Dec 22, 2008 5:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You read that whole thing?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 22, 2008 8:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
he probably just stumbled in here looking to rub one out to the ‘2 girls, 1 cup’ post.
by macvechkin on Dec 22, 2008 9:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
22 | 13 | 5 | 4 | 30 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
19 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 23 |
|
Atlanta
|
18 | 10 | 6 | 2 | 22 |
|
Florida
|
20 | 9 | 9 | 2 | 20 |
|
Carolina
|
21 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 13 |
(updated 11.21.2009 at 8:36 AM EST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
