Eastern Conference Final: New York Rangers vs Florida Panthers

[Pengwin7]

The thing about the Panthers is their entire team is a defensive juggernaut.
Every center in their line-up, their entire 3rd/4th lines... most of their wings...
Just very good two-way players.

They are a brutal team to try to even get decent shot attempts against.
I'd be curious to see a stat on the "high end" chances against FLA this past regular season versus other NHL teams.
I'd have to imagine they'd be near the top of keeping the chances to "low scoring" opportunities.

The Ranger forwards are a finesse team that does well with space/time... it's a bad match-up for them.
But even I didn't think they'd get shut-down like that in game 1.

[As backing to the 'eye test'... for a team to get up 1-0 in the first... and only give up 23 shots... speaks volumes, statistically, about their ability to suppress the other team's offense.]

[2014olympicgold]

Florida during the regular season was 10th in "High Danger Shots Against" in the regular season with 154 total (5on5). Carolina, Dallas, and Edmonton were higher than them. Florida was 2nd in the league in "Medium Danger Shots Against" and 4th in "Low Danger Shots Against".

Source

Just to note, Dallas in the playoffs has limited their opponents to 1.692 "High Danger Shots Against" per game, Florida is limited their opponents to 2.167 "High Danger Shots" game

[Pengwin7]

Thanks.
I'll have to try to understand those better.

10th (if, out of 32) in "high danger" sounds... actually... not good.

Whereas...
4th (if, out of 32) in "low danger" sounds... really really good.


I wouldn't think those things could exist at same time... statistically...


The link took me to a generic goals chart....
Maybe I just need to learn how to sort it.

[2014olympicgold]

Thanks.
I'll have to try to understand those better.

10th (if, out of 32) in "high danger" sounds... actually... not good.

Whereas...
4th (if, out of 32) in "low danger" sounds... really really good.


I wouldn't think those things could exist at same time... statistically...


The link took me to a generic goals chart....
Maybe I just need to learn how to sort it.

Like every stat is in that chart...just to the right. It's horribly set up so I would search "High Danger" and it will bring you to the area of the chart that shows the high danger stuff. Just look at the "High Danger Against" because it shows the "For" first.

And it's 10th best (like 10th lowest total)

It's probably because Florida was 8th WORST at Defensive Zone Giveaways. So they gave the puck away a lot in their own zone resulting in high danger shots against. But giveaways likely don't tend to result in low danger shots against. So I'm sure there's some corrolation there.

[Pengwin7]

Thanks, got it!
LOL at Toronto being 3rd (worst) in high-danger shots-against... only SJ & CBJ were worse. Woof.


In order of high-danger shots against, regular season:

138 Seattle
138 Minnesota
...
...
144 Anaheim
...
...
148 LA
150 EDM
151 DET
151 DAL
151 VGK
153 CAR
154 FLA
...
...
161 CGY
[for context, in 82gp, all these teams give up less than 2.0 high danger shots against per game. SJ (221), CBJ (218), TOR (205), give up closer to 2.7 per game. NJD & others (190) is quite the "drop-off" from those worst3.]


So... Florida D-system... yes, actually right there in the "pack" of 4th-10th range best.
That IS really good. Always happy when my "feel" matches the stats. Phew.

I always liked how SEA built their big D off their expansion.
I thought that would help them do quite well immediately. Good to see that there.
I do wonder if that was a function of Hakstol - thought he was good coach - didn't think the axe was warranted.

Pengwin7 Bookmark.
Because I'm curious to see how new coaches affect SEA (best) and TOR (3rd worst) with their "high danger" shots against... next season.


BOY - sorry... took this thread off-course.
Sorry, sorry.

[2014olympicgold]

Engineer sees stats, Engineer gets happy, Engineer goes off track. Tale as old as time.

[Pengwin7]

LOL. yes sir. You know me well.

[Daydream Nation]

What is wrong with Fox? He is a shell of the player I'm used to watching. He has to be nursing some type of lower body injury.

[pmorrow]

Kakko healthy scratch

m2i8m2Z5b1K9d3d3.jpeg

[Axeman33]

I watched the game last night and I'm still trying to figure out how Goodrow's goal was allowed. He knocked it down in the neutral zone with what was a clear high stick and the play continued. Yes, I know the rule for playing the puck with a high stick (rule 80) states:

Rule 80 – High-sticking the Puck 80.1 High-sticking the Puck – For infractions involving high-sticks, refer to Rule 60 – High-sticking. Batting the puck above the normal height of the shoulders with a stick is prohibited. When a puck is struck with a high stick and subsequently comes into the possession and control of a player from the offending team (including the player who made contact with the puck), either directly or deflected off any player or official, there shall be a whistle.

I've watched the replay over and over and it was a clear high stick.

Fantastic game, love the aggressiveness from both teams, but that goal shouldn't have counted.

[Daydream Nation]

It was so close that I don't think they should have called it off. I watched several angles and it was probably slightly over the shoulder but not conclusive.

[LuigiC173]

I watched the game last night and I'm still trying to figure out how Goodrow's goal was allowed. He knocked it down in the neutral zone with what was a clear high stick and the play continued. Yes, I know the rule for playing the puck with a high stick (rule 80) states:

Rule 80 – High-sticking the Puck 80.1 High-sticking the Puck – For infractions involving high-sticks, refer to Rule 60 – High-sticking. Batting the puck above the normal height of the shoulders with a stick is prohibited. When a puck is struck with a high stick and subsequently comes into the possession and control of a player from the offending team (including the player who made contact with the puck), either directly or deflected off any player or official, there shall be a whistle.

I've watched the replay over and over and it was a clear high stick.

Fantastic game, love the aggressiveness from both teams, but that goal shouldn't have counted.

I'll consider it as a trade off for Kulikov only getting two minutes for the Wennberg hit.

[Belexus75]

Rangers are my least favorite team remaining but i did not think this was a high stick at all...he started high but when he actually made contact with the puck it was below his shoulders imo.

[Invictus]

Hard to see but this is where I caught it hitting the stick that seems low enough for me.
Capture.JPG

[Axeman33]

Hard to see but this is where I caught it hitting the stick that seems low enough for me.
Capture.JPG

You need a better angle.