Three and Out?

by J.P. on Oct 14, 2009 4:00 PM EDT

"I think it's been different each game, but now that it has happened a few times I think guys are thinking about it too much and maybe putting a lot of pressure on themselves instead of just playing the way we do the first couple periods. Right now, it is something that might be a little mental, and we have to get over it because we are professionals." - Chris Clark on the team's early season third period struggles

In each of their six games so far this season, the Caps have been either tied or held a lead in the third period, but have just a 2-2-2 record to show for it. If good teams hold third period leads and great teams take them, the Caps at present are, well, something else. They've yet to hold an opponent off the scoresheet in the third period (and have only done so in one second period, as opposed to five of six first periods), and their offense has been somewhat all-or-nothing in those stanzas, scoring two goals in each of three games and just one total in the other three.

Here's a (very early) look at some key stats on a period-by-period basis:

	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period
Goals For Per Game	1.33	1.17	1.17
Goals Against Per Game	0.17	1.50	1.50
Shots on Goal Per Game	9.5	10.7	9.3
SOG Against Per Game	9.8	11.3	8.8
Save Percentage	.983	.868	.830
Power Play Opportunities Per Game	1.83	1.50	1.67
Power Play Goals	2	0	4
Power Play Percentage	18.2	0.0	40.0
Times Shorthanded Per Game	1.50	2.33	1.33
Power Play Goals Against	0	3	3
Penalty Kill Percentage	1.000	78.6	62.5

Those second period numbers ain't so great either, are they?

As for the third periods, it's clear that the Caps haven't gotten great goaltending, defense or penalty killing when they need it most ("Other than that, how'd you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"), but the numbers have been getting better - in three of the last four games, the Caps have had third-period save percentages of .909 or better (then again, they've only successfully killed three of the six third frame penalties they've faced during that span and haven't held an opponent to single-digit shots in any of those four thirds).

Whether the problems are mental (focus), physical (conditioning), philosophical (in-game coaching adjustments) or some combination of these or other factors, the Caps need to finish better. Much better. It's what great teams do.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Lollygaggers!

IS PAЯTY NOW

by EmilyB on Oct 14, 2009 4:33 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

Rec’d for “how’d we ever win eight?..”

by redlineblue on Oct 14, 2009 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Clark’s quote brings to mind something I’ve been thinking for a little while — they don’t look like they’re having any fun out there. This team runs on joy. I hope the Six Flags day was a good mental day off and reminded them how much they like each other.

They’ve needed the criticism and castigations from the coaching staff that they’ve been receiving, but I think that stuff has done all the good it’s going to do. Now they really need to just stop thinking and start playing the way they can.

Atta dinnin stick a who!

by Gould Old Days on Oct 14, 2009 5:16 PM EDT reply actions

Agreed.

I think Gould Old Days got it right. Hopefully they don’t read the Caps boards and see how quickly people are ready to throw them under the bus. They need to tune out everything and just play. I haven’t hit that worrying stage yet because I think it’s just a matter of time before we kick into overdrive like we did against Boston and take total control of the game.

Also we’ve had a tough beginning schedule.

by DaGreatOvechkin on Oct 14, 2009 6:12 PM EDT reply actions

If NHL players are that sensitive to message board rants and bloggorhea, then there is little hope of that group of players ever winning a championship. Compared to the gauntlet of playoff rounds they’d have to go through, it’s the least amount of pressure they’d ever face on their way to a title.

If you've read this far...seek help.

by ThePeerless on Oct 15, 2009 8:18 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs

Rec’d for

bloggorhea

by Knee high to a duck on Oct 15, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions

Something that stands out to me:
- More SOG Against/60 in the 2nd than the 3rd
- More PK situations/60 in the 2nd than the 3rd

Despite these differences, Goals Against are the same between the two periods. The team is allowing less shots and less man advantages, yet goals are being scored at the same rate. This makes me wonder if it’s not goalie fatigue in the 3rd period that’s making the difference.

"If you're gonna die after 24, might as well jump out at 23:59, no?"

by Laich It Or Lump It on Oct 14, 2009 7:02 PM EDT reply actions

This makes me wonder if it’s not goalie fatigue in the 3rd period that’s making the difference.

If I were a gambling man I’d say the safer bet is quality/location of the shots is a pretty big factor also (ie poor backchecking and positioning by the rest of the team)

by Yoshietree on Oct 14, 2009 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Small sample size too. There may not be a true trend there. That’s just when the shots have gotten through.

Atta dinnin stick a who!

by Gould Old Days on Oct 14, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Yep. A save here and/or a goal there and we’re talking about why this team has mental block with performing in the second period of games.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Oct 14, 2009 8:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Small sample size too.

There’s no doubt about it being a small sample size…but it’s also easier to spot the issue when we’re only talking about nine goals.

by Yoshietree on Oct 14, 2009 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions

(nine goals in each of the respective periods)

by Yoshietree on Oct 14, 2009 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Yea, I thought about shot quality too. However, my thinking was that if the D breaks down enough to allow higher quality shots and better shot location, wouldn’t you also expect the number of shots to increase rather than decrease? I guess you could argue that if the shots are going in, there is no need to shoot more often. Anyway, like G.O.D. says, small sample size.

"If you're gonna die after 24, might as well jump out at 23:59, no?"

by Laich It Or Lump It on Oct 14, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions

My favorite article about small sample sizes so far this year:

http://www.behindthenethockey.com/2009/10/13/1083558/vesa-toskala-does-he-really-suck

The point is a fair one — statistically, there is insufficient evidence this season to state definitively one way or another whether Vesa Toskala sucks. This is an illustration of the limitations of statistics, because yeah, he sucks.

Atta dinnin stick a who!

by Gould Old Days on Oct 14, 2009 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions

this information though i bet correlates well against the last 25-30 game stats from last year. My “general” impression of last year they play hard in the first and third. For whatever reason they let up in the second, more so as it seems they can’t keep up their own pace, catch their second winds and finish it out in the third (most of the time). Meanwhile in the 2nd the opposing teams always found a way to catch up and through the early part of the third. It was rare when they improved their play in the second.

How hard would it be to compare 2nd period stats and see if there is any trends that show up? I wonder as 2nd period stats improved so did the winning percentage, I doubt it’s a stretch to say that there will be a direct correlation. Of course you would have to take in quality of competition, say against playoff teams from last year might be something to compare against?

Promote the game, it's the NHL, not SCHL

by kurlNdrag on Oct 14, 2009 8:32 PM EDT reply actions

Re: 2nd period lapses

I noticed that last year as well. Here’s my take. The second period is the hardest period to get a change because your bench is farther away from your D zone. We already know that our heroes enjoy long shifts, and this problem will only be exacerbated in the 2nd period. I’d be willing to bet that the Caps have been caught out on long shifts significantly more often in the 2nd than the 1st or 3rd.

If you're after gettin' the honey, then you don't go killin' all them bees.

by Rob Parker on Oct 14, 2009 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions

your bench is farther away from your D zone

Not if you’re on the road though, right?

"If you're gonna die after 24, might as well jump out at 23:59, no?"

by Laich It Or Lump It on Oct 14, 2009 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions

My point being that with an equal amount of home and away games, any disadvantage caused by the distance from the bench will even out throughout the course of the season.

"If you're gonna die after 24, might as well jump out at 23:59, no?"

by Laich It Or Lump It on Oct 14, 2009 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions

No. Regardless of where you play you are always on a long change in the second period. First OT, OOOT, OOOOOT, etc.

If you're after gettin' the honey, then you don't go killin' all them bees.

by Rob Parker on Oct 14, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Ok, now I see what you mean. I sketched it out on a piece of paper and it made sense.

"If you're gonna die after 24, might as well jump out at 23:59, no?"

by Laich It Or Lump It on Oct 14, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions

That’s quality sleuthing. Or elitist drivel, I get mixed up. Anyway, I’ve often seen a change in energy from the first to second period. The 2nd period Caps are a little clenched, with even the freelancers forcing the issue.

by redlineblue on Oct 14, 2009 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions