Is Bruce Boudreau Hiding Mike Green?
Earlier this week The Globe and Mail's Eric Duhatschek did something that may be a first for a Canadian journalist: he wrote an article about Mike Green which praised the two-time Norris Trophy finalist's defense.
Unsurprisingly, both jokes and legtimate counterpoints were made in response (particularly to the assertion that "Bruce Boudreau is using Green and Jeff Schultz as his shutdown defensive pair"), the latter of which tend to focus primarly on the premise that Green is playing "easy" minutes, sheltered by his coach from facing high-quality competition.
If one can get past the absurdity of the notion that a player who has averaged nearly 28 minutes per night over the seven games for which he has been healthy can be "hidden," there are some valid underlying points. Green's five-on-five QualComp (which essentially measures the quality of the players against whom an individual has played) is lowest among all Caps blueliners and ranks near the bottom among big-minute rearguards League-wide. And he does start a lot of his shifts in the offensive zone (as you would expect from someone with his offensive prowess on a team where that skill-set at that position is decidedly lacking).
But is Mike Green really being protected?
Let's begin with the premise that a coach can "hide" a player (or play him in a match up of his choosing) at home by matching lines, but can't do so on the road nearly as easily, due to the fact that visiting squads have to put their lines out first at every whistle. Bruce Boudreau - who notoriously doesn't match lines, even at home - is going to play his guys when he wants to on the road (and the other team is going to react if they so choose), but could try to get away from or into certain match ups if he wanted to at home. So we're not going to look at road games here. Also, this issue is primarily concerned with five-on-five hockey, as the concept of "hiding" a guy is largely inapplicable to special teams (though it should be noted that Green is getting big penalty kill minutes, which one wouldn't expect from someone whose defensive shortcomings are being buried). Finally, when examining the opponents against whom Green is skating, we're only concerned with the forwards (though the QualComp metric includes blueliners), since coaches don't ordinarily send out defensemen to shut down opposing defensemen. With that in mind, here's a game-by-game look (remember, home games only) at how Bruce Boudreau has used Mike Green:
Game 2, NJD - Green played the most against Zach Parise, Travis Zajac and Ilya Kovalchuk
Game 3, OTT - Green played the most against Jason Spezza, Milan Michalek and Daniel Alfredsson
Game 4, NYI - Green played the most against Blake Comeau, Matt Moulson and Trent Hunter (with John Tavares out of the Isles' lineup)
Game 6, BOS - Green did not play
Game 8, ATL - Green did not play at even strength
Game 9, TOR - Green played the most against Phil Kessel, Kris Versteeg and Mikhail Grabovski
So what do we see? First and foremost, Green is playing more of his minutes against opponents' top forwards than against anyone else. Granted, he may not be sent out to shut opposing top lines down (in some of those games he was the top Cap against these trios, in others he was not, lending credence to the suggestion that Boudreau is in fact not using him as a "shutdown" defender), but he's certainly not being protected from playing against opposition's best offensive threats.
You'll also notice that this (tiny) sample is four games against teams that rank (as of this writing) 30th, 21st, 20th and 26th in the League in goals per game, respectively, and 24th, 20th, 30th and 12th in goals against. Teams with those rankings aren't likely going to have too many players who are going to boost opponents' QualComp (missing those two Boston games and the Nashville tilt certainly hurt Green here). And, of course, the sample size itself at this point of the season also contributes to some silly results... unless you think Bruce Boudreau has been using Brian Fahey as his shutdown guy.
Green's QualComp, generally, also takes a hit from the fact that when he's on the ice, it's usually with one of the Caps' top two lines, which often means that opposing coaches put out their checkers... which tends to mean inherently lower QualComp, precisely because those checkers tend to face an abundance of high-scoring competition and not score much at all. (On the flip side of that coin, see Fahey, against whom opposing coaches have poured their skill guys over the boards in order to try to maximize an advantage.)
The bottom line here is that you can chalk up Green's low QualComp mostly to the teams the Caps have faced, the number of games he's played so far, and the players opposing coaches put on the ice to stop the Caps' Young Guns, but saying that he's being intentionally "hidden" from top competition? That's a much harder sell.
And the next time someone tells you that Mike Green plays easy minutes, tell him he's right - Mike Green does play easy minutes. And hard minutes. And everything in between. As the commercial says, he's been on the ice the whole time.
57 comments
|
14 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
____
Alternatively, I could have just FanShotted this:

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Nov 5, 2010 1:05 PM EDT reply actions 12 recs
52 has looked pretty sharp this year for the majority of the time, and hasn’t been a liability. The tough part is that if you don’t like a player you can always find something to complain about, be it opposing fans, media, or caps fans themselves. Maybe the new/old sticks have something to do with it?
Refs allow play to continue....
Hey, give the dude some credit, he’s lost weight.
And I hear you talk the talk, but I don't see you walk the walk and I still don't believe a thing you say.
by D'ohboy on Nov 5, 2010 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
And, of course, the sample size itself at this point of the season also contributes to some silly results
In the Caps-Leafs preview at PPP, the quote in the article about Green being a shutdown blueliner came up. Knee high had this great post:
The Caps haven’t played a load of tough teams yet. ATL twice, the Devils, MIN, CAR, CGY, BOS is about the only good squad out of the lot. Since QComp is unadjusted (and generally not as good as Corsi-computed measures) to the team competition and the sample size is tiny, I’m not sure why you’re putting too much stock in that result.
If you sort by Corsi Rel Comp, he’s like 5 names under a guy who plays for Detroit. A guy with a Swedish last name. A guy with six Norris trophies and three second-place finishes. He’s ahead of Andrei Markov (speaking of small samples) and he’s ahead of Chris Pronger by a mile. Those measurements don’t mean anything yet.
I really hope the Norris voters stop thinking that if you’re not being put on the ice to shut down the other top line, you’re being hidden. There’s a whole range of intermediate situations which seem to get overlooked.
I think two facts explain everything: 1) he missed (at ES) the games against the best teams in the analysis (Boston and Atlanta) and 2) other teams tend to put their checkers out against him.
Good enough for me.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Nov 5, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
He also missed Nashville – another supersolid team. (And, to clarify, he missed Boston twice and Atlanta, essentially once out of the two times.)
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Pretty much.

You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
by EmilyB on Nov 5, 2010 1:13 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
It was easy to imply that the Canadian Media disliked Ovechkin and always painted him in an unflattering light, now it seems that they’re giving Green the same treatment.
Guilt by association perhaps?
nothing new, although not limited to just the traditional Canadian hockey media.I think there’s enough material out there to write a dissertation on why Mike Green’s fauxhawk is a clear indication that he’s not sufficiently committed to playing defense. And of course, every time he scores, some guy up in Philly starts twitching and screaming “He’s the worst defenseman EVER!!!!!!!!”
Pledge Drive 2010-2011: SO KIDS CAN!! Help build a playground
I happened to peruse the ESPN hockey night chat last night. Said Philly writer is still on the campaign.
"It's always good to have vikings."
did you commit some horrible sin and your punishment was to peruse the ESPN hockey chat? You’re a braver woman than I!
Pledge Drive 2010-2011: SO KIDS CAN!! Help build a playground
Perhaps this is why Laich got rid of his fauxhawk…..to gain respect! Now he’s up for SI’s Sportsman of The Year!
Pre fauxhawk = no nomination.
Fauxhawk free = nomination.
Excellent theory Red!!!
Game 2, NJD – Green played the most against Zach Parise, Travis Zajac and Ilya Kovalchuk
Game 3, OTT – Green played the most against Jason Spezza, Milan Michalek and Daniel Alfredsson
Game 4, NYI – Green played the most against Blake Comeau, Matt Moulson and Trent Hunter (with John Tavares out of the Isles’ lineup)
Game 6, BOS – Green did not play
Game 8, ATL – Green did not play at even strength
Game 9, TOR – Green played the most against Phil Kessel, Kris Versteeg and Mikhail Grabovski
What about games 1, 5, and 7? Is JP hiding Mike Green?
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
So we’re not going to look at road games here.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Uh, yeah. Post, read, think.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
And since half the games he’s played have been on the road the opposing coaches have as much say as BB does in his competition scores. I hate those stats in general, but right now they are utterly meaningless. Todd Richards put Koivu out every chance he could get against Fahey. He was purposely avoiding Green. Fahey had the tougher competition in that game, but what is really the logical conclusion?
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
Mike Green should never win the Norris or be on the Canadian Olympic Team.
/PPP’d
Patron saint of quality footwear.
Right (and exactly the point I made in the post re: Fahey).
QualComp has every bit as much to do with how other coaches play a player as how his coach does.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I was just fleshing it out with one game that was a stark example. I remember clearly watching Koivu feast on Fahey that entire evening. I just wonder why people, even presumably smart people like PPP, continue to ignore the obvious problems with QComp scores. Is it because people want so desperately to have a quantifiable number that allows them to sound authoritative in conversation?
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
I can’t speak for others, but I think it’s like any other metric – a tool to be used in evaluation which is only of real value if you are aware of its limitations.
For example, John Erskine had a great +/-ON last year (at 5v5). His teammates had a lot to do with that. So did the fact that he had a very low QualComp. Was Erskine’s QualComp low because opponents were keeping their scorers away from him? I doubt. Was it because he was, in fact, protected? Much more likely. And obviously a 50-game sample means a lot more than a 7-gamer.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I agree, I’ve argued the “full context” side of it enough that everyone here knows that. I was just disappointed with how Chemmy was using the QComp stats as some sort of definitive marker without acknowledging all this stuff.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
Oh, and happy birthday, brother.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Nov 5, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is some of the best work on this site in some time. Kudos.
And I hear you talk the talk, but I don't see you walk the walk and I still don't believe a thing you say.
by D'ohboy on Nov 5, 2010 1:20 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Minor nitpick:
With that in mind, here’s a game-by-game look (remember, road games only) at how Bruce Boudreau has used Mike Green:
You mean home games only, right?
Great analysis, loved the post.
Shit. Yes – it wasn’t in the original and I added it when Emily missed it (see comments above). Le sigh.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Chemmy, rebuttal?
"DON'T SAY THAT! Please! That is the worst, most stupid thing anyone could say! Cause it quite clearly isn't "only a game." I mean if it was do you honestly think I'd care this much?"
I think Chemmy is right to question the statement regarding Bruce using MG52 as a shutdown D (and I acknowledge as much in the post).
But I think Bruce also uses his defensemen differently than some other coaches might, likely do to the respective abilities of the guys he has to work with. Whereas one coach might try to put his “top pair” on the ice for every shift the opponent’s top line skates, that’s not Bruce (though maybe it could it be if he had a Mitchell or Pronger or whomever). If you want to know who Bruce’s shutdown guys are, check out who’s out there at the end of the game with a 1- or 2-goal lead.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
If you want to know who Bruce’s shutdown guys are, check out who’s out there at the end of the game with a 1- or 2-goal lead.
This reasoning is why I’m not really miffed about the style points of the games so far (because Calznerson have been seeing those situations while Green and Poti have been tweaked), but that’s another discussion.
"DON'T SAY THAT! Please! That is the worst, most stupid thing anyone could say! Cause it quite clearly isn't "only a game." I mean if it was do you honestly think I'd care this much?"
Further to this point, I think the marginal utility of using Mike Green primarily to shut down an opposing forward (versus using Carlson, Alzner, Erskine, Schultz or Poti) is far less than the marginal utility of using Mike Green primarily to generate offense (versus using those guys), hence all the O-zone starts. So the coach who wants to maximize what he gets out of his lineup is going to play Mike Green when he wants to, not in reaction to the other coach’s line changes.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’ve noted that BB likes to get Green out there with the top lines as much as possible. I wish I had something more to back this up, but Dobberhockey won’t tell me what forwards he plays with at even strength.
And I hear you talk the talk, but I don't see you walk the walk and I still don't believe a thing you say.
He does, I was looking at it last night – easiest (or “easiest”) way to do that is to look at the shift charts at Time On Ice for a certain game. For example, here‘s the shift chart for the Toronto game. If you move the red vertical line around to line it up you can see where Mike Green’s time matches up with 8-19-28.
If anyone needs me, I'll be at Kettler.
There’s a guy named Mike at U New Brunswick who tracks those kinds of things for the Canadiens:
http://www.cs.unb.ca/~mwf/habs/2010-11/preseason/index.html
He lists his email if you want to ask him questions.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
Having said that, sounds like they’re trying to get away from it a bit – from the Duhatschek piece:
"Our job is to shut down top lines now and we take pride in that," Green says. And how, you may ask, is that different than before? Green averaged 25 1/2 minutes of ice time a game last season so he would have had to go out against top lines then, too.
"At times, yes," answered Green, "but I think we were worried more about who I was on the ice with on our team and creating chances. Now, it’s about stepping up and playing a complete game. So my role has had to change a little this year and that’s fine."
Obviously with Green playing 25-28 minutes a night and Ovie playing 23-25 minutes a night, and both playing the entire power play, they’ll be out together quite a bit regardless. But I thought that was interesting for Green to mention, that before his role was mostly about creating offense and now it’s more well-rounded.
If anyone needs me, I'll be at Kettler.
I think he meant for the season. You can easily see which D Green’s been paired with the most, but not which forwards.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I figured, but I thought I’d at least provide a way someone could look game by game. If it happens in 3 or 4 games in a row you’ve probably got yourself enough evidence to back that up.
…or you could just read Green’s quote I just posted where he says BB has been doing exactly that :D
If anyone needs me, I'll be at Kettler.
I like this. I, too, fail to see how someone who plays half the game can be effectively hidden without an inordinate amount of work going into it, and HCBB, as you said, doesn’t seem to be inclined to do that sort of thing anyway.
This might speak to the increasing trend highlighted at Hockey Prospectus that teams are matching power versus power rather than putting grinders out against the other team’s scorers.
Thanks. I’ve definitely thought about the power vs. power and whether teams try to send out their scorers or checkers against the Caps. An analysis for another day, I think…
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
If Green is playing against lower quality of competition on the road, I’d say that speaks favorably about Mike Green’s ability and reputation. It suggests that other teams, who have the last change, are keeping their best players away from him.
You had me at no problem.
Well, they’re not necessarily keeping their best players away from him, but their players most likely to have a good rating that will bump up his QualComp, meaning that the guys they are sending out against him are the guys with low ratings. And how do they get low ratings? Lots of D-zone starts and lots of time against opposing scoring lines (i.e. your Steckels of the world). These guys may be the best defensive players opposing teams have, but those abilities don’t necessarily translate well in these specific metrics.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
So, I saw the Twitter fight you had with @FelixPotvin yesterday on the subject, and it got me thinking: Isn’t there also a little bit of circular cause and effect happening? In other words:
Player A is an exactly average forward, but goes up against Stud Defenseman for 82 games.
Player A doesn’t score, not even once, so his “Quality of Competition” rating is the worst in the league.
By extension, the quality of Stud Defenseman’s opponents looks like the softest in the league. And then Stud’s “being hidden” by his coach.
I understand their ratings come from all their games, but when we’re 10 or 12 games into the season, one bad game against a good defensive defenseman (if that’s what Green, in fact, is) reduces their rating by a big jump. In other words, he’s been penalized by @FelixPotvin for doing his job: keeping opponents off the score sheet.
Does that make sense?
We're Hüsker Dü and we're on MTV. Who are you, and what are you on?
Well, the fact that guys aren’t going up against just one guy all the time removes a lot of the circularity from it, but it does, to a very minor degree, “punish” players for doing their job similar to how the BCS does with respect to strength of schedule (beat a team and a portion of your strength of schedule computation goes down because that opponent’s record is worse; note: I could be wrong about that).
One note, though:
Player A doesn’t score, not even once, so his "Quality of Competition" rating is the worst in the league.
If Player A doesn’t score, his QualComp is uneffected – it’s Stud Defenseman’s QualComp that takes a hit (which is what you were saying).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yes, I meant Player A’s contribution to the QualComp rating—you understood.
And than you for the BCS reference—I think it’s very analogous: A team that wins every game is, on average, going to have a lower strength of schedule rating than a team that loses every game.
We're Hüsker Dü and we're on MTV. Who are you, and what are you on?
by bilspacecadet on Nov 5, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice work.
Thoughtful bit of analysis. I am fascinated by the new metrics, but I think they are relied upon a bit too much yet in some corners of the blogosphere. Nice work.
jrwendelman
The Artist Formerly Known as "Junior", who blogs at heroesinrehab.ca/blog
"But if someone so eager to engage into fist talk, we can always meet after season end in Minsk." (Mikhail Grabovski and a well-meaning but not particularly skillful translator) CERTIFIED GRABBO LOVER






































