Fear The Fin: FanPosts

After game 2, it might sound hard being optimistic on the Sharks' chances going forward. But judging by how The Sharks have virtually outplayed LA so far this series, I'm not feeling too discouraged especially with the group of guys we have this year. Granted some of the mistakes we've made have unfortunately led to LA goals, championship teams are gunna make you pay for them but I believe the amount of good things we've done so far are what will keep us in this series if we keep it up. In fact, some of the goals scored by LA have been off of missed calls (Richards hold on Irwin) but I'll leave the crap officiating in this series there. As a player, nothing hurts more when games are decided off those kinds of calls (personally, I think delay of game penalties called on incidentally dumping the puck out of the ice should be abolished and penalized as if it were icing). But again, as a player, you know those calls will come back around in your favor too. We're playing good hockey and doing pretty much everything a good hockey team does to win games. We're movin the puck, pushing shots outside, opening up the neutral zone, working quick with the shot count, etc. If there were anything we need to touch on a little more it would be clogging the neutral zone a little better on defense, clearing the slot and giving Neme's better looks, and getting guys in front of Quick. I think this 2-0 hole can be a good thing for San Jose and will give them the mental edge that will help them crank it up these next two games.

Need a distraction? (wtf Game 2) Come follow.

2013-05-17T15:55:36Z

It is probably true that anything to do with numbers is the last thing most people will want to read after the first two games of this series. It might go something like this:

A: Man, we lost!!
B: Still out-chanced ‘em. By my count--[A punches B]
A: OH GOD NUMMMMMMBERS [staggers, pets a wounded, yet still-breathing shark, sheds a tear, dries the tear, whispers something to wherever a shark's ear is located, exeunt]

For some, numbers provide no quarter. For others, their ease of manipulation allows us to "keep believing" in spite of harsh realities. Maybe you’re in the middle. I’m still in the latter group. Come on over. Try to the Kool-Aid.

[A re-enters, gives audience skeptical look.]

In a previous Fanpost, I looked at the notion "score effects". I looked at just the recently completed regular season and created expected outcomes for a team Down 2 at even-strength (as this happened to the Sharks in Game 1—sorry to bring that up). There were positives to be drawn (Sharks outperformed the league in Shots For) and negatives (Quick SV%=100).

There was an interesting finding I didn’t mention. In Down 2 situations, at even-strength:

Goals Against (GA) rate > Goals For (GF) rate

I didn’t mention this because I felt that I needed to look at more data to verify it. In looking at the past 6 regular seasons, it is always the case. The rate of a Down 2 team allowing another goal was greater than the rate of getting one goal back.

Now, it’s a little tricky to understand this because I believe the rates are determined by totaling GF and GA in Down 2 situations and then dividing by time on ice (TOI). However, we can conclude that a GA occurs more frequently (and, if I may, is more likely) than a GF. This is the case in each individual season (and obviously in the overall mean).

Then I looked at the last 5 playoffs. The data itself here is a little spotty, plus it is a smaller N, and I think cross-checking with NHL RTSS would help, but I calculated some means anyway. Three quick points: 1) the GF and GA rates fluctuate A LOT more; 2) in two playoffs (2007-2008 and 2010-2011) we saw GF rates larger than GA rates; and 3) in the overall mean, however GA rate was still greater than GF rate in the playoffs and the difference was actually much greater in the 5 playoffs than the 6 regular seasons.

[A reaches for bludgeoning weapon, any bludgeoning weapon.]

	TOI	GF/1	GA/1	SF/1	SA/1	MF/1	MA/1	FEN+	FEN-	opp SV%
REG MEANS (N=6)	3.780055556	0.04697037	0.053122222	0.553132407	0.429240741	0.234322222	0.183561111	0.834425	0.665924074	0.921729457
POFF MEANS (n=5)	3.335	0.04089359	0.055173718	0.455249145	0.365640598	0.210475855	0.159383333	0.70661859	0.58019765	0.917576966
DOWN 2, even-strength; from BTN

What’s this mean? First, regarding Game 2 (sorry to bring it up) Sharks outperformed the league by generating positive Fenwick events and getting a goal in 2.12 minutes of Down 2 play. Second, regarding Games 1 and 2, Sharks outperformed the league in terms of a) positive Fenwick events; and b) not allowing a GA. Three, when we say "score effects" we should know that really we are simply talking about a positive Fenwick differential that is greater than what we typically see in Close situations (demonstrating this with data would be a next step). In the aggregate, the explanation seems to be: in Down 2 situations, teams take greater risks to get shots off, which leads to more shots, but can also lead to odd-man rushes and GA the other way. In fact, this seems to happen more often than actually generating a GF from a Fenwick event. This has not happened to the Sharks, which means that when they are Down 2, they are outperforming most other teams. This is a good thing.

[A yells some stuff like WHERE GRAPH YOU NUMMMMBERS, exeunt.]

Now, if they could just not be Down 2 again on Saturday. Until then...

[Shared spreadsheet with data (individual sheets for season/playoff years; sheet with means by season and in the aggregate, expected outcomes from season/playoff, and Sharks actual outcomes in Games 1 and 2) here.]

It is probably true that anything to do with numbers is the last thing most people will want to read after the first two games of this series. It might go something like this:

[A re-enters, gives audience skeptical look.]

There was an interesting finding I didn’t mention. In Down 2 situations, at even-strength:

Goals Against (GA) rate > Goals For (GF) rate

[A reaches for bludgeoning weapon, any bludgeoning weapon.]

	TOI	GF/1	GA/1	SF/1	SA/1	MF/1	MA/1	FEN+	FEN-	opp SV%
REG MEANS (N=6)	3.780055556	0.04697037	0.053122222	0.553132407	0.429240741	0.234322222	0.183561111	0.834425	0.665924074	0.921729457
POFF MEANS (n=5)	3.335	0.04089359	0.055173718	0.455249145	0.365640598	0.210475855	0.159383333	0.70661859	0.58019765	0.917576966
DOWN 2, even-strength; from BTN

[A yells some stuff like WHERE GRAPH YOU NUMMMMBERS, exeunt.]

Now, if they could just not be Down 2 again on Saturday. Until then...

Unpacking score effects (i.e. dangitquick)

2013-05-15T16:23:33Z

Preface: The notion of "score effects" comes into the conversation when we see one team outshooting another by a significant margin, yet losing. Say a 2-0 loss where the losing team outshoots the other by 50% at even-strength (e.g. Game 1; apologies for bringing it up). This notion is important if we believe shots drive goals for (positively) and goals against (negatively). And by the way, I'm a believer, but this doesn't mean we should stop trying to falsify this (at least, at this stage). But this post isn't about that. Let's move on.

Man, that 3rd period. Thought something was going to happen. Really did. But it didn't. Burns. Man, thought he had one. But he didn't. So, question: should I be upset about this? And if so, at whom?

When the game ended, yeah, I was deflated, but hey, Game 1, right? I figured the shot statistics would favor the Sharks because of the 3rd period. Right away, I could hear someone's internet voice sternly saying: guys, guys... GUYS!... score effects. [Silence.]

I agree. But I wanted to measure up how well the Sharks performed in this score effects situation, i.e. Down 2. To do this, I did a simple test.

1) I looked at the Down 2 Fenwick data from BTN (and I believe this is even-strength).

2) I calculated several per minute average rates across the entire league for the 2012-2013 NHL regular season: Goals For, Shots For, Shots Against, and Save % (of the team Up 2). I did this by simply finding the means for these columns and dividing by 60. The reason I did this is to create a set of expected outcomes for the Sharks time on ice Down 2. Note: I'm leaving Missed shots, er, Fenwick, aside for the moment. Here are the rates:

GF/1 minute: 0.0498
SF/1: 0.579
SA/1: 0.455
SV%: 91.4%

3) The Sharks played 21.63 minutes of Down 2 time at even-strength. (Note: After Richards goal, there were two penalties (Torres, Richards) and Niemi was on the bench for 1.87 minutes. 27.50 minutes from goal 2 to the end of the game. Subtract 2, 2, and 1.87 and you get 21.63.)

4) Given 21.63 minutes of Down 2 time, and based on league-wide rates for Down 2 during the 48-game regular season, what are the expected outcomes? What are the actual outcomes. ... Feels like we're about to see a tabl--

	Expected	Actual	Difference
GF	1.077	0.000	-1.077
SF	12.520	16.000	3.480
SA	9.850	5.000	-4.850
Quick SV%	91.4%	100.0%	8.6%

Table 1. Expected and actual outcomes in the Down 2 time-on-ice. Expected derived from 2012-2013 league-wide Down 2 statistics at BTN. Actual derived from WCSF Game 1 SJS v LA. I cross-checked with NHL's play-by-play to be sure, correct me if I'm wrong.

Let's look at these and answer the original questions. First, if the Sharks had performed in step with the league during the regular season, they should have gotten one back. So, that sucks. Second, the Sharks were putting 50% more shots on goal and (concurrently, if not consequently) also reducing shots against on goal by almost 50%. So, that's good. Third, and I think this is the strongest statement I can make given the data pres--goddamnitjonathanquick.

Bottom line: First, while Sharks outperformed the league in making the opposition goalie make save after save, they were outperformed by dammitthatguy. This is another piece of evidence that Quick contributed significantly to the Game 1 win (since his SV% was so much greater than the league average Down 2). Second, this also suggests, that while we can say that score effects has some impact on the end-game shot differential, the Sharks team talent at possessing the puck and getting shots on goal had a significant impact on Game 1 as well (again, by virtue of outperforming the league average rates by about 50%). Therefore, I ain't so upset. ... Um, drop the puck already.

Man, that 3rd period. Thought something was going to happen. Really did. But it didn't. Burns. Man, thought he had one. But he didn't. So, question: should I be upset about this? And if so, at whom?

I agree. But I wanted to measure up how well the Sharks performed in this score effects situation, i.e. Down 2. To do this, I did a simple test.

1) I looked at the Down 2 Fenwick data from BTN (and I believe this is even-strength).

GF/1 minute: 0.0498
SF/1: 0.579
SA/1: 0.455
SV%: 91.4%

	Expected	Actual	Difference
GF	1.077	0.000	-1.077
SF	12.520	16.000	3.480
SA	9.850	5.000	-4.850
Quick SV%	91.4%	100.0%	8.6%

Time-shifting Bakes and Ruzzie into Second Season (Cue Huey Lewis & The News)

2013-05-14T07:23:42Z

via scrapetv.com

Randy and Drew may be "Outatime," but that doesn’t mean you have to be stuck with the gutless commentary of Jeremy "Biff" Roenick, and company! So grab your flux capacitor and life jacket, Marty McHavlat, because when this baby hits 98.5, you’re going to hear some serious schneid!

Two years ago, I wrote an article on a few ways that fans could maintain the local play-by-play and color commentary of the San Jose Sharks Radio Network for the duration of the Sharks playoff run. The original article was geared more towards syncing the radio with the TV, under the presumption that most fans that cared about local commentary were, well, local.

This updated version rectifies that oversight, and is fin-friendly for those that bleed teal both near and far wanting to hear Dan Rusanowsky (@DanRusanowsky) and Jamie Baker (@Bakes_Jamie13) over the NBC commentary that is almost nonsensical at times.

What it "Time-shifting?"

In a nutshell, Timeshifting is using recording and playback technology to synchronize an audio and a video source. In our case, this involves the NBC Sports video feed, and the Audio feed from KFOX.

For Fans in Teal Sweaters (Those within broadcast range of KFOX):

The options are pretty much the same as the previous article; you have 4 options:

Option #1: Use your PC to "Delay" the radio to match the TV. ($10 cable)

While I could go into great detail on how to do this on a PC, there's a fantastic web page devoted to this topic: Bote's Radio Delay Tips. Hit the Jump, and take a read. All you need is a PC, a radio with a headphone jack, and a 1/8" male-to-male stereo headphone patch cable (available at Fry's and Radio Shack for less than the cost of a beer at The Tank).

Option #2: The iPod Nano ($150)

via photos.appleinsider.com

http://www.apple.com/ipod-nano/

Most people know that the iPod Nano has a radio, but did you know that it also supports time-shifting? You can actually "pause" a live broadcast, and the nano will store up to 1 hour of media before it starts dropping programming (apple calls the feature "Live Pause"). The best part? If you have an iPod dock with speakers, you can share Dan and Jamie with the rest of the viewers in the room. Keep in mind, though, that you will need to leave the headphones plugged in, even while docked, as they are the antenna for the radio in the iPod.

To sync up:

Listen live, then pause at a key moment (say, start of period, a face off, a goal),
Un-pause it when the TV hits the same key moment. This shouldn't be more than a 5-10 second wait.

(Note: the radio is in ALL iPod Nano models, check the Apple website for additional info how to get to it and use the live pause feature).

Option #3: The Griffin radioSHARK/radioSHARK2 (PC/Mac) - $45

via images10.newegg.com

http://www.griffintechnology.com/support/radioshark

This is, quite possibly, the best (and coolest) option. Think of it as a TiVo for radio. Like the iPod, it supports time-shifting, but unlike the iPod, you can set up scheduled recording times, save recordings, and load them into your iPod or MP3 player. Plus it’s a Shark. A RADIO Shark.

These are becoming harder to find: Griffin has ceased production of the device, but you can still find them on some online e-tailers and eBay. Given the Option, go for the newer Black unit—the radioSHARK2: it comes with an external antenna that you’ll have to pay extra for if you get the white version. Other than that, the units are functionally identical.

To sync up:

Listen live, then pause at a key moment (say, start of period, a face off, a goal),
Un-pause it when the TV hits the same key moment. This shouldn't be more than a 5-10 second wait.

Option #4: Timeshift Apps for your iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad/Android phone (free!)

via clubcastpodcast.com

As an iPhone user, and a hockey fan, I often want to listen to other games when the Sharks aren't playing. My favorite is TuneIn Radio, an app that lets you listen to any radio station on the web, and supports time shifting as well. The downside? KFOX streams seem to have a bit of a delay already, which sometimes is actually greater than that on the TV. Your Mileage May Vary. Sync to the TV the same way you would with the iPod Nano: listen live, then pause at a key moment (say, start of period, a face off, a goal), then un-pause it when the TV hits that moment.

(NOTE: As of this writing, the Windows Phone and Flash-based Web versions of TuneIn Radio do not support live pause. Write to them and tell them to add it!)

For Fans in White Sweaters (Those outside of the broadcast range of KFOX):

TIVO, HOPPER, Xfinity DVR, or a third party DVR will be required. Almost all of these systems have a "live TV pause" feature that will let you pause the TV broadcast (a 5 second delay from live) with the WebCast audio stream on http://www.KFOX.com (a 30 second delay from live).

Same rules apply:

Turn on both streams.
When a key moment happens in play (whistle, penalty, goal), pause the DVR.
Wait for the Audio Stream to catch up, and take the DVR off Pause.

Some controls lag a bit, so you may have to try this a few times to make the sync. If you mess it up, just "go to live feed" on the DVR, and start the steps over.

International Options:

People outside of the US have one thing that is enviable to state-side fans: they have no blackout zones on NHL Gamecenter in most markets. That said, there really are only a few options for international viewers, and they are completely subject to local government restrictions, availability of certain sites, and are subject to the technical limitations of latency in your area..

The best solution involves use of "live pause" on NHL Gamecenter and the KFOX audio stream at http://www.KFOX.com. Again, because you’re using the digital stream for KFOX, you have a built-in delay of around 30 seconds. Depending on your location and connection speed, NHL Gamecenter may have an equal or longer delay.

The good news is that you can use Gamecenter’s built in "pause" feature to sync it up with a delayed audio stream, or, if the video stream is delayed, use TuneIn Radio built-in live pause on your iPhone, iPad or Android device to delay the KFOX audio feed (Windows phone and TuneIn Radio web client do not yet support "live pause" feature).

And that about covers it. Please comment below if you have more methods for doing this. I’ll update this post periodically to incorporate constructive comments and additional methods.

GO SHARKS!!!

via scrapetv.com

What it "Time-shifting?"

In a nutshell, Timeshifting is using recording and playback technology to synchronize an audio and a video source. In our case, this involves the NBC Sports video feed, and the Audio feed from KFOX.

For Fans in Teal Sweaters (Those within broadcast range of KFOX):

The options are pretty much the same as the previous article; you have 4 options:

Option #1: Use your PC to "Delay" the radio to match the TV. ($10 cable)

Option #2: The iPod Nano ($150)

via photos.appleinsider.com

http://www.apple.com/ipod-nano/

To sync up:

Listen live, then pause at a key moment (say, start of period, a face off, a goal),
Un-pause it when the TV hits the same key moment. This shouldn't be more than a 5-10 second wait.

(Note: the radio is in ALL iPod Nano models, check the Apple website for additional info how to get to it and use the live pause feature).

Option #3: The Griffin radioSHARK/radioSHARK2 (PC/Mac) - $45

via images10.newegg.com

http://www.griffintechnology.com/support/radioshark

To sync up:

Listen live, then pause at a key moment (say, start of period, a face off, a goal),
Un-pause it when the TV hits the same key moment. This shouldn't be more than a 5-10 second wait.

Option #4: Timeshift Apps for your iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad/Android phone (free!)

via clubcastpodcast.com

(NOTE: As of this writing, the Windows Phone and Flash-based Web versions of TuneIn Radio do not support live pause. Write to them and tell them to add it!)

For Fans in White Sweaters (Those outside of the broadcast range of KFOX):

Same rules apply:

Turn on both streams.
When a key moment happens in play (whistle, penalty, goal), pause the DVR.
Wait for the Audio Stream to catch up, and take the DVR off Pause.

Some controls lag a bit, so you may have to try this a few times to make the sync. If you mess it up, just "go to live feed" on the DVR, and start the steps over.

International Options:

And that about covers it. Please comment below if you have more methods for doing this. I’ll update this post periodically to incorporate constructive comments and additional methods.

GO SHARKS!!!

kings-sharks preview 1 fans opinon

2013-05-13T21:05:29Z

Hi guys,

long time reader first time poster I think the kings have a very good chance of upseting the sharks one they have better top guys kopitar is better than Thorton, two they have a beter goalie jonathon berner is realy good and i Think he can stadn on his head better than a guy like Niemi. third, Dwight Doughty is realy good and I think he can shut down the cootoor-marlow line

neway this is my opinion go kings go baba booie baba booie

Hi guys,

neway this is my opinion go kings go baba booie baba booie

Poll

whoo wil be da best player in da playoffs

Jersey redesign for the fall?

2013-05-10T17:30:41Z

Word is the Sharks will be getting new home and away jerseys for the fall. Taken from Icethetics.com:

Reebok indicates Sharks revamping home/road uniforms

Reebok's 2013 catalog has one last surprise for us. Like the Hurricanes and Canadiens, the San Jose Sharks are apparently looking at new or modified home and road sweaters for the fall. And also like the Canes, the black third jersey seems to be sticking around.

This is unexpected because the Sharks just got new uniforms (and a new logo) back in 2007. That leads me to think the changes — if true — won't be significant. So what could they be?

There have been many rumors floating around the past few months. Might they be dropping the orange from the jerseys? Or perhaps simply swapping out new shoulder patches? It would definitely be nice to see them lose the chest number on the front of the uniforms. But real details are scarce for now.

Anyone have any thoughts or comments on possible new jerseys next season?

The Maturation of Logan Couture.

2013-05-07T22:37:35Z

Has quite honestly been the most fulfilling experience for me this past season. I can't exactly pinpoint when this shift in mindset occurred. Whether it is a result of his growing up in the NHL these past seasons or the leadership qualities of the veteran Sharks core rubbing off on him, the conversion of Logan Couture from fledgling NHL talent to current NHL superstar has been an impressive sight to behold. Whether it is blocking game preserving shots, scoring critical momentum shifting goals or drawing penalties, Logan continues to thrive under the NHL limelight. Whether its current sharks leadership: Thornton, Boyle and especially T-Mac( who should receive huge props for his development of couture) or former sharks greats Nolan & Ricci, they describe this current sharks roster as his team. This leadership is further evidenced by his response to Bieksa and AVs laughable comments about San Jose embellishing to draw calls and cheating to win faceoffs, which is to say none. He continues to make his statements on the ice, and continues to be soft spoken in the locker room. I would be very surprised to not see Ryane Clowe's "A" on his jersey next seasons home opener. Go Sharks.

On the subject of "wanting it more"

2013-05-07T20:21:57Z

A counterpoint to this bullshit article http://hockeenight.com/2013/05/06/maybe-the-playoffs-arent-that-fun-after-all-hunger-strike.aspx

Ask any hockey player this question after a playoff loss: “Did you personally do everything that you possibly could to win that game?”

What do you think the answer would be. It is my belief that they would say no at least 90% of the time. I believe the response would be the same even after a win.

Take the question further - “Did you fight for every puck, did you push as hard as you could every shift, did you sprint to every backcheck, did you always fight for space in front of the net regardless of the physical abuse, did you block every shot possible regardless of the risk of injury, did you take every opportunity to play the puck even though it would mean getting your head smashed into the boards, did you maintain your discipline despite Corey Perry constantly running his bug catching mouth? Every single time?

The answer now? “No.” 100% of hockey players would answer no.

Did the players on the other team do more of those things than you? “Yes.”

Why did they do more of those things? “They wanted it more.”

You would have to get them away from the bright lights of the post-game scrum and into an environment where they could speak freely without backlash, but these are the honest answers and the reality of a sport that is played at full throttle the whole time.

This is why confidence is so important in hockey. It’s one thing to want it more, but it’s another to have the confidence in yourself that if you put out the extra effort, it will amount to something. Confidence is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The better you feel about your game, the harder you are motivated to work, which gets better results, and makes you more confident.

In some ways, It’s a good thing players aren’t able to go 100% all the time. If they were able to, there wouldn’t be any hockey players older than 30. Their bodies would give out on them. Used up beating the shit out of Ryan Kesler.

All of these reasons are why the favorites to win any given playoff series don’t always win. With the team parity in the NHL today, effort and wanting it more can trump skill and talent any day of the week. Call it the democratization of hockey. Some would bemoan this change. A game where the likes of Wayne Gretzky would be far less relevant. Still a huge star, but not able to single-handedly win a game. Some are shocked that the Islanders are giving the Penguins such a hard time. They have Crosby and Malkin!!! They’re the better team!!! They dominated all season!!! Same story for Chicago and Minnesota. Kane and Hossa!!!

Personally I think this is a good thing. It allows players who are willing to put in the work to succeed over players that have more natural talent. I would take Joe Pavelski over Alex Semin anyday (Semin...ewe).

What wanting it more boils down to is not wishing for a Christmas present like Dan Ellis on Christmas morning, but doing all the little things that are required to be successful. Eating the best possible diet, training the smartest, putting in the hours in the off-season to perfect that deke, and most importantly, putting in maximum effort in games. Smart coaches say this all the time. And dumb coaches, well... http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/eye-on-hockey/22020848/randy-carlyle-has-some-theories-on-what-causes-concussions

So for all you people who think Chicago is entitled to go to the finals because they were the best in the regular season, they’re not going to get there if the other teams want it more.

Sharks win tonight because they want it more.

A counterpoint to this bullshit article http://hockeenight.com/2013/05/06/maybe-the-playoffs-arent-that-fun-after-all-hunger-strike.aspx

Ask any hockey player this question after a playoff loss: “Did you personally do everything that you possibly could to win that game?”

What do you think the answer would be. It is my belief that they would say no at least 90% of the time. I believe the response would be the same even after a win.

The answer now? “No.” 100% of hockey players would answer no.

Did the players on the other team do more of those things than you? “Yes.”

Why did they do more of those things? “They wanted it more.”

So for all you people who think Chicago is entitled to go to the finals because they were the best in the regular season, they’re not going to get there if the other teams want it more.

Sharks win tonight because they want it more.

An old issue, but seems like it's gotten worse

2013-05-07T00:51:03Z

Why do certain posts (like the gameday threads) not show up on the SBNation iPhone app? I figured maybe the gameday threads were too large, but it seems like more and more posts are not showing up. For example, "Game 3 By The Numbers". Is this something that needs to be selected when the article is posted, or is it just some kind of failure? I knoe the app pre-dates the site facelift, so maybe they just don't work well together?

I wish you could make this sign at Game 3 or 4

2013-05-03T20:34:29Z

It doesnt say anything, its just a picture of Brent Burns' head from his team photo this year. The cutout would be about 3 or 4 feet, it would be an instant classic. I would do it but I have to work at the games. Just get there before the game and go to the opposing end during warm ups and press it against the glass.

Here is the picture.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/brent-burns-hilariously-terrifying-nhl-headshot-now-more-071245013--nhl.html

Here is the picture.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/brent-burns-hilariously-terrifying-nhl-headshot-now-more-071245013--nhl.html

2013 Binomial Prediction Model (Based on Fenwick Close)

2013-05-03T04:25:53Z

Entering the playoffs, quite a few words have been written on the topic of Fenwick (more specifically, Fenwick Close), and it's usage as a measurement for playoff success (Click here to read a great article on the subject). Fresh off of finishing the 2012/13 school year, I figured I'd try my hand at making a playoff prediction model based on the Fenwick close statistic (both out of personal interest, and to make all of the good ol' Toronna boys shut their yappers about the greatness of their beloved Leafs).

Anyway, I've attached a couple screenshots of what the model looks like (it's pretty simple really, I used the binomial distribution and respective team Fenwick Close percentages to create probabilities of series ending in the 8 possible ways) and a link to download the document is listed below as well.

(Click images embiggen)

Download link here!

Feel free to play around with it in whatever way you like, but the most user-friendly manner is to just update the YELLOW highlighted cells in the bottom right corner (P38, P39, etc.) to reflect current series scores, the rest of the document will update itself according to whatever numbers are input in the yellow highlighted cells in the P-column.

Also, there may be mistakes in some of the formulas, and if you find any of these, please let me know! There are 2 sheets in the document, the updated sheet is updated with the results through today (May 2) and the original sheet is the pre-playoff model.

All Fenwick numbers courtesy of behindthenet.ca

If you have any questions/comments about this, post them in the comments below and I'll be happy to answer them.

-Gore51

(Click images embiggen)

Download link here!

All Fenwick numbers courtesy of behindthenet.ca

If you have any questions/comments about this, post them in the comments below and I'll be happy to answer them.

-Gore51

An exercise to flatten fluctuations in optimism: historical cases of below-average goalie performance, yet winning the Cup

2013-05-01T06:39:53Z

Just finished watching ANA-DET and got caught up in thinking about two things that have been topics of discussion here and elsewhere recently. The first is goalie performance in the playoffs and the second (related) are factors that contribute to playoff success. (Also, I need a bump in optimism. If you are already optimistic, check out these sweet line graphs that illustrate "hotness" entering the playoffs. How can you not like them?)

I had said recently that I liked how this year's team was generating more pucks to the net (Fenwick For/60) than any other Sharks team with the exception of the team from 2010-2011. (Note: I think the behindthenet.ca statistics have been updated to reflect the final game since I wrote that fanpost). Plus, Niemi is playing ballsawesome.

As Snark points out (in the comments), goalie performance in the playoffs is volatile in small sample sizes and shouldn't be trusted on its own. Well, fair enough. A fanpost by holidaypark suggested the combination of Fenwick Close%, even strength SV%, and PP/PK% to think about predicting playoff performance. Though preliminary (and pretty high up the "grandness" scale of theorizing), it was helpful in thinking about the following scenario:

Suppose Niemi is below-average during these here playoffs in 2013. What would the Sharks need to look like as a team to compensate? If this first week consists (as it probably will) of me squirming in the fetal position on the couch mumbling cmoncmoncmoncmon because Niemi's SV% has fallen off the cliff, what possession and special team numbers can I find to ~~self-medicate~~ make myself feel better?

Here's an outline of the steps I took to answer this question:

(1) Determine what historical cases exist of goalies playing below average in the playoffs, but their teams still finding high levels of success. (2) Determine what these teams' possession and power play numbers were and eyeball compare them to the Sharks regular season sample of 2012-2013. (3) If differences seem great, freak out. If differences seem reachable, freak out less. (I thought of making a decision tree for this, but it seemed superfluous.)

So, I dragged out data from the past 5 years from NHL.com on goalie playoff performance. There were 122 player-years total, covering 872 total game starts (thus 436 playoff games in the 5 year sample). I summed the total shots and saves and divided to get an average SV%. This--it is true--covers all time on ice, regardless of score or man-advantage. Goalies in this 5 year playoff sample stopped 91.5% of all shots on goal in all situations.

Now, of the Cup-Winning teams, did any of the primary goalies have a SV% of less than 91.5%? For the last two years, we have Jonathan Quick at 94.6% and Tim Thomas at 94.0%. Those two won 16 games on their own. The next two were exactly what I was looking for. Antti Niemi at 91.0% and Marc-Andre Fleury at 90.8%. Both also won 16 games on their own. Lastly, Chris Osgood was at 93.0% and won 14 games en route to the 2008 Cup.

Goalie	SV%
Quick	94.6
Thomas	94.0
Niemi	91.0
Fleury	90.8
Osgood	93.0

Table 1. SV% for last five primary goalies for Cup-winning teams.

Step one done. Step two. I looked at the playoff possession and power play statistics (since penalty kill statistics rely on the goalie to some degree, I set them aside for the moment). I plucked behindthenet.ca stats on Chicago 2009-2010 (22 games) and Pittsburgh 2008-2009 (24 games).

For simplicity, I'm presenting data for these teams (1) in Close 5v5 situations, in terms of Fenwick%, goals for and against, and shots for and against, to get a sense of how they are performing during tight moments in the playoffs where there's no room and you still need to possess the puck, and then (2) in 5v4 situations, looking at goal and shot generation.

Close 5v5	FEN%	GF/60	GA/60	SF/60	SA/60	5v4	GF/60	SF/60
CHI 09-10 PLOF	55.44	3.13	2.11	32.00	25.19		7.40	48.30
PIT 08-09 PLOF	52.40	3.06	2.55	30.26	25.42		7.70	53.30
SJS 12-13 REG	52.41	2.48	2.02	28.29	26.47		6.60	58.10

Table 2. Comparing puck numbers between two Cup-winning teams with below-average performing goalies and one current playoff team that might have a below-average performing goalie.

Eyeball test discloses the following points:

1) These two Cup-winning teams are scoring at lot of goals (>3 GF/60) in 5v5 Close play. Like more goals/60 than the best goal-generating Sharks team in comparable situations in the past 5 years (Sharks 2009-2010, 2.91 GF/60).

2) Related to 1), these two teams also generated more shots on goal/60, though the Sharks team Fenwick is almost identical to the Penguins 2009 Cup team. (On a total nerd note: the difference between 55.4% and 52.4% in Fenwick% looks like about three more Fenwick For events and two less Fenwick against. There is some preliminary stuff here, but this needs more attention to understand more precisely what's going on.)

3) The power play was running at a higher success rate for the Cup teams than the Sharks, though the Sharks were getting more pucks at the net.

This means that if Niemi has a below-average run (that is, a drop from his season SV% of 92.4% in all situations to a SV% < 91.5%) the team may not be out of luck. If the Sharks can continue to possess the puck, they just need to convert a little more often in Close 5v5 and on the power play. Consider this statistic: the Sharks SH% in 5v5 play this season was 6.68%. If we get a SV% of 91.5 and a PDO of 1000, this would actually entail a SH% improvement. I point this out to argue that this is not beyond the variation we might see for teams that can possess the puck in the 48-game stretch we have just completed. In short, to compensate for a lower SV%, we need a bump in SH%. Without it, a deep playoff run is unsustainable. Fortunately, such a bump is definitely reachable, and should not be entirely unexpected.

Ahh. I feel better now.

[Final FYI: feel free to interpret this entire post as a Niemi reverse-jinx.]

Suppose Niemi is below-average during these here playoffs in 2013. What would the Sharks need to look like as a team to compensate? If this first week consists (as it probably will) of me squirming in the fetal position on the couch mumbling cmoncmoncmoncmon because Niemi's SV% has fallen off the cliff, what possession and special team numbers can I find to ~~self-medicate~~ make myself feel better?

Here's an outline of the steps I took to answer this question:

Goalie	SV%
Quick	94.6
Thomas	94.0
Niemi	91.0
Fleury	90.8
Osgood	93.0

Table 1. SV% for last five primary goalies for Cup-winning teams.

Close 5v5	FEN%	GF/60	GA/60	SF/60	SA/60	5v4	GF/60	SF/60
CHI 09-10 PLOF	55.44	3.13	2.11	32.00	25.19		7.40	48.30
PIT 08-09 PLOF	52.40	3.06	2.55	30.26	25.42		7.70	53.30
SJS 12-13 REG	52.41	2.48	2.02	28.29	26.47		6.60	58.10

3) The power play was running at a higher success rate for the Cup teams than the Sharks, though the Sharks were getting more pucks at the net.

Ahh. I feel better now.

[Final FYI: feel free to interpret this entire post as a Niemi reverse-jinx.]

Top 10 Moments in Sharks Playoff History

2013-04-29T23:41:33Z

As the Sharks get ready to embark on what we all hope will be an extended playoff run, I thought it would be a good time to look back. The Sharks have certainly provided us with heartbreak and disappointment over the years. But we all take for granted their relative success. They've now made the playoffs 9 years in a row. And furthermore, in their 16 playoff appearances, they've given us some amazing memories. Here is my list. I'd love to know if you agree or disagree. Put them in the comments! I plan on introducing the Top 10 Heartbreaking Moments in the next couple of days as as well.

10. The Penalty Kill vs. Edmonton (2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7dlxDZhkZ0

This one would be higher if we had actually won this series, but I digress. It was Game 2 of the 2006 Western Conference Semifinals against the Edmonton Oilers. The Sharks were ahead 1-0, and the Oilers were on a 5-on-3 Powerplay for 1:42. During the penalty kill, two Sharks lost their sticks, so the Oilers effectively had a 5-on-1 advantage. Mark Smith and Scott Hannan had lost sticks, leaving the immobile Kyle McLaren with the only Sharks stick on the ice. Somehow, through a series of blocked shots and misses by the Oilers, the Sharks were able to kill the penalty. When Scott Hannan clears the zone with his hand as the 1st penalty is about to expire, the roar at HP Pavilion was something else.

9. Getting over the Hump vs. Colorado (2004)

(no video)

There was no real moment in this game that stood out. Rather it was getting over years and years of anguish to finally make it into the 3rd round of the NHL playoffs. The Sharks had a 3-2 series lead against the Maple Leafs in 1994, and Johan Garpenlov was a crossbar away from sending the Sharks to the conference finals in their 3rd season, but it was not to be. The Sharks also had a 3-2 series lead to these same Avalanche in 2002. The Sharks were ahead by a goal in Game 6, but gave up the equalizer in the 3rd and the game-winner in OT after an earthquake shook the Shark Tank. In 2004, the Sharks raced to a 3-0 lead against the Avs before painfully losing the next two in overtime. I was starting to think that God did not want the Sharks to reach the 3rd round. The Sharks were able to pull it out on goals by rookie Marcel Goc, Vinnie Damphousse and Jonathan Cheechoo.

8. Thornton's Game 6 OT goal against LA (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s-5U1ZyAvc

The imagery was as good as the moment itself. Maligned Joe Thornton, criticized unfairly for his playoff performance over the past few years, slid across the ice with glee as his OT winner sent the Sharks into the 2nd round. This was a grueling series against the Kings. The Sharks had gotten beaten up badly at home in Game 5 after taking a 3-1 series lead, and a loss here would have given the Kings all the momentum.

7. Marleau's Game 4 OT goal against Detroit (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF8DffSxyrY

Another maligned playoff performer, Patrick Marleau, scored this pivotal and exciting goal in Game 3 of the 2010 WCSF against the Wings. The Sharks had appeared to give the Red Wings a golden opportunity with a poor line change, but somehow the change worked to the Sharks advantage as Marleau and Thornton came in 2-on-1 against Wings goalie Jimmy Howard, and Marleau slid the puck into the net. This one is on the list mainly because it was such an exciting play that I almost passed out watching it.

6. Pavelski's Game 4 OT goal against Colorado (2010)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzDIhgk7bL4

Let's set the scene here. The Sharks had the number 1 seed and President's Trophy in 2009, and lost the 8-seeded Ducks in the 1st round. The Sharks again secure the 1-seed, but in the first game of the 2010 playoffs against the Avs, they give up a goal in the final minute and lose. After a nice last-minute comeback in Game 2, the Sharks head to Denver with the series tied at 1. I won't post this video because it's too painful, but Dan Boyle puts the puck into his own net in OT, and the Sharks lose the game 1-0. So to say I was nervous going into Game 4 was an understatement. The game was the third straight in the series to go to overtime, and Joe Pavelski's drag-and-shoot play sent me into a state of pure euphoria. The Sharks came back to win the series and advanced all the way to the conference finals.

5. Game 7 vs. Detroit (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yYkQDbpH9U

I don't think I've ever been more freaked out about a game than I was about this one. The Sharks had a 3-0 series lead against the Red Wings in the WCSF for the 2nd year in a row. This time, they let the Red Wings come all the way back to tie the series at 3. In both Games 5 and 6, the Sharks had leads in the 3rd Period and had blown them. With the HP Pavilion crowd providing support, the Sharks won the game 3-2. I almost lost it when the Sharks were up 3-1, and Pavel Datsyuk sniped one on his backhand to bring the Wings within 1, but the Sharks somehow held on and advanced to the Conference Finals.

4. Comeback against the Kings (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay4T0WMkphE

I had already thought about how screwed we were. The series was tied 1-1, and the Kings had raced out to a 4-0 lead in Game 3. It was over. The only thoughts we had were whether the Sharks could recover for Game 4. Somehow, the Sharks mounted an epic comeback, capped by an OT winner from Devin Setoguchi. Major kudos to Antero Nitiimakyi for relieving Niemi in net that night. (Bonus to this video: watching Michal Handzus slam his stick against the net when Setoguchi nets the game winner).

3. Nolan's Shot from Center vs. St. Louis (2000)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2r3eHGIk88

This was another series the Sharks almost blew. They had miraculously gone up 3-1 as an 8-seed against the 1-seeded St. Louis Blues. In Game 5, they lost in OT, and they got embarrassed at home in Game 6. It was back to St. Louis for Game 7. With a 1-0 lead, Owen Nolan decided to take matters into his own hands. He fired a laser from just past center that caught Blues Goalie Roman Turek off-guard. The Sharks won the game and secured the shocking upset.

2. Baker's Goal beats Detroit (1994)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxkKiy65iU

It's hard to state just how unlikely this was. The previous season the Sharks had gone 11-71-2, and they had started this campaign 0-8-1. Somehow, they turned it around to make the playoffs, but surely they had no chance against the top-seeded Red Wings, right? The Sharks, in one of the greatest upsets in NHL history, defeated the Red Wings in 7 games, capped off by 3rd period game-winner from just inside the blue line by Jamie Baker. I was 8 at the time, and I had never been happier.

1. Ray Whitney's OT winner vs. Calgary (1995)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWaviZ62DWI

The Sharks were pretty much manhandled the entire game. A goalie who had no good NHL moments before or after this game, Wade Flaherty, somehow had the night of his life. And Ray Whitney (still in the league, impressively) finished it off way past my bedtime. This is what sports is all about.

10. The Penalty Kill vs. Edmonton (2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7dlxDZhkZ0

9. Getting over the Hump vs. Colorado (2004)

(no video)

8. Thornton's Game 6 OT goal against LA (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s-5U1ZyAvc

7. Marleau's Game 4 OT goal against Detroit (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF8DffSxyrY

6. Pavelski's Game 4 OT goal against Colorado (2010)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzDIhgk7bL4

5. Game 7 vs. Detroit (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yYkQDbpH9U

4. Comeback against the Kings (2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay4T0WMkphE

3. Nolan's Shot from Center vs. St. Louis (2000)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2r3eHGIk88

2. Baker's Goal beats Detroit (1994)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxkKiy65iU

1. Ray Whitney's OT winner vs. Calgary (1995)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWaviZ62DWI

Using Statistics to Predict the NHL Playoffs

2013-04-28T22:51:43Z

Now that the regular season is about over, the hockey-watching universe is turning its attention to the first-round matchups, and the question of who will win the Stanley Cup. At sophisticated places like Fear the Fin, of course, readers understand that simplistic, narrative-driven analyses, like won-lost records, home-ice advantage, or player matchups are often less meaningful than statistics that attempt to measure the underlying quality of a team's hockey. Within the world of advanced hockey stats, no statistic is more frequently cited than teams' Fenwick Close %, or their proportion of Fenwick events (shots on goal and misses) across their various games.

While FenClo% has a strong relationship to playoff success, both empirically and intuitively (i.e., to me, a team's ability to consistently tilt the ice in their favor is a great measure of "good at hockey"), it's obviously not perfect: recent hockey history includes possession-dominant teams like the 2009 Sharks, 2010 Capitals, and 2012 Penguins who failed to advance past the first round, and the 3rd-best FenClo% team this season, the New Jersey Devils, is planning its golf schedule rather than playing postseason hockey. Intuitively, a couple of explanations come to mind. FenClo% is measured at even-strength, so it stands to reason that poor special-teams play could undo good possession play at evens. And, of course, there's goaltending: as was the case with this year's Devils and last year's Penguins, weak play in goal can undermine teams that are "good at hockey", and the 2010 Canadiens can tell you that the converse is true also. So, if I want to understand how teams are playing and make guesses as to what the playoffs hold, I need to set up some metric that incorporates possession, goaltending, and special teams.

So, I made a spreadsheet that listed out each team's FenClo%, even-strength Sv%, PK% and PP%, and because I was too lazy to do some regression-based thing, I decided to experiment with weighted averages of these four statistics. (Note: I downloaded the data for this last Friday, so the season wasn't quite finished.) For example, say you want to see how teams rank if equal weight is placed on possession, goaltending, and special teams (if you're really into the stats thing, think of this as a flat prior); this would mean a weight of 0.3333 on each team's FenClo%, 0.3333 on each team's Sv%, and (0.3333/2) on each of PK% and PP%. This would give San Jose (FenClo% 53.03%, Sv% 92.8%, PK% 84.9%, PP% 20.1%) a weighted average of 66.10; if you're curious, only LA, Chicago, and Boston have higher total scores.

To keep this manageable, I ran five different scenarios: 1) the one with equal weight on all three components, 2) a nod to the Fenwick crowd, with 75% on FenClo%, 12.5% on goaltending, and 12.5% on special teams, 3) a more conservative possession-driven scenario, with 50% weight on FenClo% and 25% each on goaltending and special teams, 4) a special-teams-driven scenario, with 50% total weight on special teams and 25% each on FenClo% and Sv%, and 5) a goaltending-driven scenario, with 50% total weight on goaltending and 25% each on FenClo% and special teams. The results are in the table, below.

Possession 75% Scenario	Possession 50% Scenario	Neutral Scenario	Special Teams 50% Scenario	Goaltending 50% Scenario
LA	LA	CHI	CHI	CHI
CHI	CHI	LA	LA	OTT
NJ	BOS	BOS	SJ	BOS
BOS	SJ	SJ	OTT	LA
STL	STL	OTT	BOS	SJ
NYR	OTT	STL	STL	DET
SJ	NJ	DET	DET	STL
MTL	DET	MTL	MTL	NYR
DET	NYR	NYR	PHI	MTL
OTT	MTL	VAN	PIT	PIT
NYI	VAN	PIT	VAN	VAN
VAN	NYI	NJ	WSH	WSH
CAR	PIT	NYI	NYR	NJ
PHX	PHI	PHI	ANA	ANA
PIT	ANA	WSH	NYI	NYI
WPG	PHX	ANA	TOR	PHX
PHI	WSH	PHX	NJ	PHI
ANA	CAR	TOR	EDM	TOR
WSH	MIN	MIN	CGY	EDM
FLA	WPG	CAR	MIN	MIN
MIN	CGY	EDM	PHX	CAR
CGY	DAL	DAL	DAL	DAL
DAL	FLA	CGY	TB	WPG
COL	TOR	WPG	CAR	CBJ
NSH	EDM	FLA	WPG	TB
CBJ	COL	TB	CBJ	CGY
TOR	NSH	CBJ	FLA	NSH
EDM	CBJ	COL	COL	COL
TB	TB	NSH	NSH	FLA
BUF	BUF	BUF	BUF	BUF

Some conclusions to be drawn:

It sort of looks like Chicago and LA are the only obstacle to the other reaching the Stanley Cup Final. And Boston: I'll leave it up to you whether you think touching the Prince of Wales Trophy is bad luck.
Much talk has been directed at the "paper tiger" qualities of Anaheim and Toronto, but it's interesting to me that Pittsburgh is seldom included in this discussion. For a presumptive Cup favorite, their poor PK and weak possession game has to be a concern. Unless the PDO Fairy continues to sprinkle good fortune on the Penguins, this could be another early exit. Given Ottawa's strong possession game, goaltending, and penalty killing, they should give Pittsburgh all they can handle in the first round.
Teams that appear to be clearly overmatched: Minnesota, Toronto, and the Islanders. Teams that may be overmatched: Anaheim (better PP than Detroit, but far inferior possession game) and St. Louis (though I'm really looking forward to this series).

Some caveats:

In any small number of games, luck can render any of the above meaningless.
The above is based on the full-season statistics for each team, which may not fully represent how they'll be playing now. The Sharks have played well above their season-ending FenClo% since the trades that sent Douglas Murray, Michal Handzus, and Ryane Clowe out of their lineup, and obviously St. Louis' blueline additions at the deadline, and the presumed return of Jaroslav Halak, will help their FenClo% and Sv%.

Possession 75% Scenario	Possession 50% Scenario	Neutral Scenario	Special Teams 50% Scenario	Goaltending 50% Scenario
LA	LA	CHI	CHI	CHI
CHI	CHI	LA	LA	OTT
NJ	BOS	BOS	SJ	BOS
BOS	SJ	SJ	OTT	LA
STL	STL	OTT	BOS	SJ
NYR	OTT	STL	STL	DET
SJ	NJ	DET	DET	STL
MTL	DET	MTL	MTL	NYR
DET	NYR	NYR	PHI	MTL
OTT	MTL	VAN	PIT	PIT
NYI	VAN	PIT	VAN	VAN
VAN	NYI	NJ	WSH	WSH
CAR	PIT	NYI	NYR	NJ
PHX	PHI	PHI	ANA	ANA
PIT	ANA	WSH	NYI	NYI
WPG	PHX	ANA	TOR	PHX
PHI	WSH	PHX	NJ	PHI
ANA	CAR	TOR	EDM	TOR
WSH	MIN	MIN	CGY	EDM
FLA	WPG	CAR	MIN	MIN
MIN	CGY	EDM	PHX	CAR
CGY	DAL	DAL	DAL	DAL
DAL	FLA	CGY	TB	WPG
COL	TOR	WPG	CAR	CBJ
NSH	EDM	FLA	WPG	TB
CBJ	COL	TB	CBJ	CGY
TOR	NSH	CBJ	FLA	NSH
EDM	CBJ	COL	COL	COL
TB	TB	NSH	NSH	FLA
BUF	BUF	BUF	BUF	BUF

Some conclusions to be drawn:

It sort of looks like Chicago and LA are the only obstacle to the other reaching the Stanley Cup Final. And Boston: I'll leave it up to you whether you think touching the Prince of Wales Trophy is bad luck.
Much talk has been directed at the "paper tiger" qualities of Anaheim and Toronto, but it's interesting to me that Pittsburgh is seldom included in this discussion. For a presumptive Cup favorite, their poor PK and weak possession game has to be a concern. Unless the PDO Fairy continues to sprinkle good fortune on the Penguins, this could be another early exit. Given Ottawa's strong possession game, goaltending, and penalty killing, they should give Pittsburgh all they can handle in the first round.
Teams that appear to be clearly overmatched: Minnesota, Toronto, and the Islanders. Teams that may be overmatched: Anaheim (better PP than Detroit, but far inferior possession game) and St. Louis (though I'm really looking forward to this series).

Some caveats:

In any small number of games, luck can render any of the above meaningless.
The above is based on the full-season statistics for each team, which may not fully represent how they'll be playing now. The Sharks have played well above their season-ending FenClo% since the trades that sent Douglas Murray, Michal Handzus, and Ryane Clowe out of their lineup, and obviously St. Louis' blueline additions at the deadline, and the presumed return of Jaroslav Halak, will help their FenClo% and Sv%.