Penguins by the Numbers: Some Metrics to Ponder

View Comments

• LoL, I'm the one grasping at straws and you're bring up Dominic Simon, players no longer on the team, TTS, and FTLOG who knows why you keep bringing up the powerplay.

  I understand where you are coming from, you are unaware that Penalty Killing is important to the game.

  Just to make my last point about goal tending and the PK. When Murray lost 6 of 7 games for the Penguins in the playoffs over his last two seasons his even strength save percentage was .899. His penalty kill save percentage with ZAR was .935. His Penalty Kill percentage with ZAR being a main penalty killer was way better than his even strength numbers.

  Domingue's even strength save percentage was .909.

  Thank you for the debate, Mark Twain is telling me I need to stop.

  PS. I have the same argument with my wife when she buys something that was on sale that we never use. LOL, I've been there.

• If they bring back Austin reese there nuts. In my opinion he is useless..all he does is take up a uniform

  • Sorry Rick, I have to agree with Ted,

    ZAR would not have helped the Pens cause at all this post - season.

    1st - Goaltending was the biggest flaw in conceding those leads. If our Penguins were giving up chance after chance but they weren't. They were smack dab in the middle of the pack in SA/60 5 on 5 and in fact had the 3rd lowest HDCA/60 5 on 5. Unfortunately, our Penguins, who once had the strongest team in the league in Goaltending when they were winning their Cups with Murray and MAF, were reduced to using a Goalie who was very inconsistent even in the AHL, Domingue. And Domingue could even use the excuse of being a young Goalie to hide his inconsistency.

    2nd - ZAR's low regular season 5 on 5 GA/60 was built against bottom 6 players. I don't have time to do an exhaustive list, but against the Rangers big 3, Zebanigad, Kreider, Panarin, he only played 2:19, 2:16, and 2:13 respectively. Although those 3 didn't score, Zebanijad and Kreider dominated the CORSI 0 CF to 3 CA. I wish I could sort by situations, but since the Pens lost 3 of the 4 GP against the Rangers with the 1 win coming in OT on Malkin Goal, those CORSI numbers look worse. Most teams only really push the "O" when behind.

    3rd - I have read several less informed talking heads whining that the Pens should re-sign ZAR for his PK. During the regular season the Pens PK killed 84.4% of their times short handed, in the playoffs that number dropped to 68.4 or a 16% drop. Yes that is significant. However, the reality is, the Penguins are a far cry from the "Broadstreet Bullies" of yore. Our favorite flightless fowl were Shorthanded 2.59 times per game during this past regular season and 2.71 time/game in the playoffs - ties for 2nd least times shorthanded under both conditions. That represents an increase in Goals against of 1 more G/6 games - hardly justification for having an offensive anchor on the team.

    4th - ZAR is 27, he is at his best now, or on the decline. He represents at best a luxury the team can't afford, at worse an oxygen thief stealing a roster spot from a kid coming up and growing into something ZAR never was, a 2 dimensional contributor.

    What is it that they say about doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results? And although I can and may make strong arguments for bringing Malkin, Letang and even MAF back there is no valid argument for bringing ZAR back.

    Even less of an argument for bringing the human pylon back, but if I were a betting man, I would put down a fairly large sum that Sully has or is making a pitch to do just that - bringing Simon and ZAR back. I pray that management has better critical thinking skills than that.

    • 100% agree Coach. Ted is correct. ZAR was marginal at best as is most of our young players in WBS.
      Have we fallen so far that no one can see the forest thru the trees?? Doing the same thing with the same team is just stupid !!! We are just getting older, and older and we have NO fresh talent to work with. The league around us gets better and better every year. If we bring back Geno, Letang,MAF,ZAR, and the human pylon.... God help us...
      FYI...Rangers won last night and their kids looked pretty good.Especially Fox, Chytil, Lafreniere,Miller and their Goalie...You think this experience is going to make their team weaker next year ? Nope...
      This is the same situation with them as we were in 2007 ? and we lost to the Red Wings only to win it all the next year. We need new talent my friend...
      Cheers
      JIM

  • Hello Ted.

    I'm not sure if I agree. Aston-Reese is an excellent defensive player and penalty killer and he does provide at least a degree of physicality and sand. We could've used help in all those areas during the Rangers series.

    Does he have his shortcomings? You bet. The offensive side of his game completely dried up last season. But if the Pens are seeking a budget fourth liner to help in the areas I mentioned above, they could do worse than ZAR.

    Rick

    • Hey Rick,
      Special teams lost the series for the Penguins. Two of the last 3 game winners the Rangers had was on the power play. Aston-Reese was always one of the Penguins top penalty killers. Could he have made a difference? Yes, he could of made a huge difference against a top powerplay team like the Rangers. If the Penguins shut down the Rangers Powerplay, they would have won the series.

      The game Crosby left early, the Rangers powerplay deflated the Penguins. Reading "TOR's Twisted Stats" (TTS) below he tries to discredit ZAR's numbers saying they are against bottom 6 players. ZAR IS a bottom six player so who cares they are great stats.

      The other two guys who did the heavy lifting on the PK last season will be in their 80's this year. I'm sure there will be a few better guys available than ZAR out there. Give it a shot and try to land one. If not, as you mentioned above, they could do worse than ZAR.

      • Interesting Phil,

        Our Penguins only averaged 2.7 times shorthanded (TS) per playoff game, before last night (haven’t looked at the updated states) tied for 2nd least TS, but you assert that it was the Penguins’ special teams that lost the series. In game 7, the rubber match, the Penguins scored 2 PPG and 1 SHG to the Rangers’ 1 PPG but you assert that the Penguins special teams lost the series. The Penguin’s Goalies Sv% over games 5 – 7 was 0.880%. The literally faced 100 shots and stopped 88 of them, but you, who blamed Matt Murray for every loss that he didn’t stop 100% of the shots, assert that it was special teams that lost the series. Hmmm…….

        The only Penguin I can recall who ever played a full 2-minute Penalty Kill was Ian Cole. During his 51 GP this season with the Penguins, ZAR played 119 PK Shifts for 76:12 of TOI or roughly 38 seconds per shift. However, you are insisting that ZAR would have prevented the team from losing the series. You are asserting that it was the loss of ZAR and from the lineup and the loss of maybe 3 minutes of his TOI from the PK that lost this series and not the sub-standard Goaltending.

        Since long before you and I were born, the strongest axiom in hockey is that the Goalie is the most important Penalty Killer on any team, yet you are insisting that it was the loss of ZAR. It was not the nearly 60 minutes per game of poor Goaltending, but the loss of a PK forward, not even a PK Defensemen that represented the series defining factor.

        And you have to engage in personal attacks (TOR Twisted Stats -TTS) to support your argument rather than presenting evidence.

        Interesting indeed Phil

        • I thought it was understood talking about ZAR that we were talking PK Special teams, but cue the TTS.

          In the last three games, two of the Rangers GAME WINNING happened while they were on the power play.

          "but you assert that the Penguins special teams lost the series."
          Yes, I do. 33% of the goals the Rangers scored over the last three games were on the powerplay. You might as well cue TTS and add the empty netters.

          "but you assert that the Penguins special teams lost the series."
          Yes, i still do even with you adding TTS like the non relevant amount of powerplays the Rangers had in the series compared to the rest of the league in this years playoffs. I still do.

          "You are asserting that it was the loss of ZAR and from the lineup and the loss of maybe 3 minutes of his TOI from the PK that lost this series"
          TTS - I did assert ZAR COULD have made a difference, YES to be clear, I said, "Aston-Reese was always one of the Penguins top penalty killers. COULD he have made a difference? Yes, he COULD of..."

          TTS is not a personal attack, it's a fact. I just put an acronym to it. Others in the PPoop comments have pointed out TTS also.

          So you retaliate with a personal attack then go for the sympathy at the end. Brilliant.
          Personal attack " but you, who blamed Matt Murray for every loss that he didn’t stop 100% of the shots" More TTS

          99% of what you have to say is normally very insightful. 1% is TTS. I normally only comment when i read TTS.

        • The best PK is not taking a Penalty and the penguins don't. They were the 2nd least short handed. That is what I wrote way at the top of this thread. I have the same argument with my wife when she buys something that was on sale that we never use. I don't care if it was on sale, if we don't use it. Even if you could distill enough stats stats (facts) to unequivocally establish ZAR as the best PK forward in the league (which is highly doubtful) when our Penguins don't take Penalties, the point becomes moot.

        • Sorry Phil, you are still grasping at straws you still have not made a case for ZAR being important to the Penguins or being the defining factor in the penguins loss. All you have done is showed that he was better than Dominik Simon and nobody is arguing that point.

          Even using the Goal Difference the number isn't significant enough to justify ZAR, particularly when 2 of the players who were on the ice when he scored that SHG aren't on the team anymore either (Ceci and Gaudreau) and you still Refuse to talk about the Penguins' winning the special teams battle in game 7 but losing the war and by your choosing GD to argue ZAR is the BEST PK man on the team and ignoring the GD when citing the OT PPG as evidence that the ZAR would have made a difference. Since the Pens scored a shortie in game 7 the fact the game winner was scored, by your logic, negates the PP aspect of the GW.
          And once again you ignore the 5 Even strength Goals scored as unimportant.

          No ZAR means nothing to this team and is only stealing a roster spot from moving on. The difference between ZAR, Carter, Blueger, and McGinn is negligible. The difference between at least an average playoff goalie and what the Penguins received doomed them.

          Perhaps had Sullivan employed bigger "D" men during the regular season, instead of his stick wavers Jarry does't get hurt and he gets a legitimate chance to redeem himself from last seasons horrible playoff experience. Perhaps if Sullivan kept Filip Lindberg as the backup and not sent him to WBS, instead waving DeSmith and sending him down, Lindberg doesn't get injured last Nov and gains experience, Jarry gets more breaks during the regular season while DeSmith regains his confidence, with the extra breaks he isn't beat up enough to put himself in a position of injury due to fatigue. Regardless of the ifs, the bottom line is Jarry's 0.867 Sv% and Domingue's 0.898 Sv% were the problem not the forwards playing the PK.

          7 of Domingue's 19 GA were considered Low Danger Goals against.

        • Penguins PLAYOFFS PK GD/60 - It's called Goal Difference per 60.
          Takes into effect if a player or person on players line scores during the PK. For instance last year ZAR scored while on the PK.
          ZAR -5.15
          Blueger -6.87
          McGinn -11.70
          Carter -17.26
          Sorry, Bluegers was 6.87 not 6.85.

          "You are in violation of basic scientific principals by not controlling for external factors" LOL That is 100% what TTS is.

          I posted "ALL" Penguins playoff stats, not TTS. Yes, add TTS to the stats, ZAR did not play with Domingue in net. Do you know without using TTS whether Domingue's numbers were worse because ZAR wqs not plalying on the Penalty Kill? Looking at ZAR's playoff numbers and the amount of Powerplay goals scored by the Rangers it's an easy case to make.

          But if it helps...
          PK GD/60 from LAST YEAR, same goalie, same everything.
          ZAR -4.75
          Bleuger -5.61
          Carter -10.54

          and the other guy who logged good PK TOI during these playoffs.
          Tanev -5.63

          "And none of that explains how the special teams lost the series for them when, in Game 7 they won the battle of special teams but lost the game. Goaltending lost that series bottom line. "

          Penguins inability to effectively kill penalties on "SPECIAL TEAMS" lost the series for them. <<SPECIAL TEAMS<<<

          The Rangers two of the last three game winning goals happened on the powerplay against the Penguins SPECIAL TEAMS. Saying it was the goaltenders fault and saying the players in front of the goalie have nothing to do with it pretty much shuts down your "it was poor defense" in front of Murray excuse you used for years.

          I will say it again, it is both defense and goaltending.

          Penguins inability to effectively kill penalties on SPECIAL TEAMS lost the series for them. Henceforth and therefore the Penguins SPECIAL TEAMS lost the series for them.

        • Question Phil,

          Where did you get your stats?
          Looking on Natural Stat trick, in his career (since our last Stanley Cup) ZAR has played 34:54 TOI on the PK and opponents have scored 4 Goals. Natural stat trick only allows 3 consecutive seasons to be averaged. To get data over 3 seasons you have to do the math yourself. So 4 Goals / 34:55 minutes x 60 minutes = 6.87 Goals (6.08 over the last 3 seasons). Post hoc I looked at the NHL web site and Hockey reference. Hockey reference

          Teddy Bluegers GA/60 over the last 3 seasons was 6.03 - 6.87 career (5 Goals / 43.39 TOI minutes x 60 minutes)

          Beyond that, you are comparing apples to oranges again. This years playoff Goaltender was Louis Domingue, ZAR never had to kill a playoff penalty with Domingue in net. You are in violation of basic scientific principals by not controlling for external factors. In 2017-2018 when ZAR played his first Playoff Games, Matt Murray posted a 0.908 Sv%, not his best post season but significantly better than Domingue and Jarry this season.

          ZAR's GA/60 on the PK in his career in Pgh are 9.52 (17-18), 6.77 (18-19), 0.0 (19-20), 9.51 (19-20). The 19-20 season looks like a severe anomaly.

          And none of that explains how the special teams lost the series for them when, in Game 7 they won the battle of special teams but lost the game. Goaltending lost that series bottom line.

          Post hoc I looked at the NHL web site and Hockey reference. Hockey reference shows the same raw data I used to calculate my numbers but they didn't normalize it to 60 minutes. The NHL Web site's raw numbers agree with mine all around, including GA/60. I am not doubting you may have seen 5.71 for ZAR, but where did you find it?

        • I would have read your comments and moved on but was brought in by more TTS.

          Penguins PLAYOFFS PK GD/60 since their last Stanley Cup win:
          ZAR -5.15
          Blueger -6.85
          McGinn -11.70
          Carter -17.26

          Another stat,
          Tanev -2.58
          Tanev could have also been a difference maker.

          This PLAYOFFS ERod played four minutes of PK. Here are his numbers:
          E Rod -14.87

        • Looks like somehow part of what I posted got truncated. What I meant to write was this

          Furthermore, what I present are not my statistics, they are simply statistics. you don’t have to like them. I don’t like the fact that Matheson’s stats aren’t as bad as I feared, but they are facts and as I noted once before, as John Adams once said "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” Best evidence says ZAR was not an integral cog in the Penguins machine. Trading him harmed nothing. Any attempt to bring him back accomplishes no benefit to the team but possibly harms the team by depriving it an opportunity to bring in younger players, players that would benefit from more TOI. The Penguins will not get different results by doing the same thing over and over again.

        • Phil,

          I would have read your comments and moved on but it was you who brought me into the argument with your TTS comment. Furthermore, the data shows that ZAR was not even in the top 3 of the Penguins best PK players, so no ZAR PK contribution was likely to be any better than what the Penguins got. As noted Blueger was the best PK followed by Carter, McGinn and even early season dump Lafferty. You might as well have said the Penguins would have won that series if Lafferty was still here.

          Also, long before any of those 2 PPG WG could occur a host of EV goals were scored against sub-par goaltending. None of those PPG would have meant a thing if the Goaltending would have been at least avg. let alone what it was during the regular season when ZAR built his stats against non-playoff teams. And once again in game 7, the deciding game, the Penguins won the special teams battle overwhelming; all of their goals were special teams and one was a SHG - that is how bad their PK was, it only scored 1 SHG (yes sarcasm).

          And no Phil to write TS is a simple comment to add the negative qualifier is an attack. I don't care about that. I am a big boy. I faced worse criticisms when presenting theses defenses. Furthermore, what I present are not my statistics, they are simply statistics. you don't have to like them. I don't like the fact that Matheson's stats aren't as bad as I feared, but th"; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." Best evidence says ZAR was not an integral cog in the Penguins machine. Trading him harmed nothing. Any attempt to bring him back accomplishes no benefit to the team but possibly harms the team by depriving it an opportunity to bring in younger players, players that would benefit from more TOI. The Penguins will not get different results by doing the same thing over and over again.

        • I was responding to Ricks comment, "Aston-Reese is an excellent defensive player and penalty killer and he does provide at least a degree of physicality and sand. We could’ve used help in all those areas during the Rangers series."

          You mentioned the Penguins powerplay with your TTS . It wasn't mentioned before. What ZAR has to do with the Penguins powerplay no one will ever know. Why you keep talking about ZAR and the Penguins powerplay could never even be guessed by ZAR himself. I know I don't have a clue.

          Just one simple scenario
          In game six when penalty killer Boyle got injured in the game. ZAR could have been used for the penalty kill. Instead the Penguins had O'Connor in the line up. I'm sure those 4 minutes of playing time O'Connor racked up was extremely important to team. But If ZAR, a very good penalty killer for years on the Pens, had been on the roster just one of those powerplay goals could have been stopped according to the odds possibly both. Malkin's goal would have been the go ahead goal. Odd's are the Rangers coach who always pulls the goalie earlier than most would have had the goalie pulled when the Rangers go ahead goal was scored at 18:36 meaning the Pens would have had a 3-1 chance of scoring an empty netter over the Rangers tying it up. Pens win series.

          i didn't want to address this but here it is "You also failed to address one of the most established Hockey axiom that the Goaltender is the most important PK person "
          The goaltender you don't like has a bad game it was him, a goalie you like has a bad game it was the defense. Every time.

          Here's an axiom a good defense makes a good goalie and vise versa.

          Team wins two Stanley Cups with a coach you hate it was the players not the coach, team loses in the playoffs first round a few times it was because of the coach you hate. Your favorite player has a bad corsi he was playing against the best players, guy you hate has a good stat he was playing against the bottom six. Guy you hate has a great offensive rating is only because he took 51% of the draws in the offensive zone. All TTS.

          The last three games 33% of the goals the Rangers had were powerplay goals. Zar is a great penalty killer. No fancy stats needed.

        • Oh and Phil,

          I forgot to add ZAR's PK numbers once traded to Ana jumped from a CORSI of 99.21 to 123.7 or roughly what the Penguins' Playoff CORSI was. Also, let's not discuss the fact that Blueger, Carter, and McGinn all had much lower GA/60 on the PK than ZAR during the regular season (2.87, 4.32, and 5.61 Vs 6.30 respectively). You could even throw Lafferty in there as more important to the PK (6.22 GA/60).

          But you insist that the number 5 Forward in terms of GA/60 was integral to the teams loss.

          It way past time to stop romanticizing an average player.

        • Phil,

          Actually, we were talking about the importance of ZAR to this team and what a difference he could have made in this series and absolutely not, his presence meant nothing to this series.

          You haven’t addressed the blatant fact that the in game 7, the deciding game of the series, the Penguins scored 2 PPG to the Ranger’s 1 PPG – a clear indication that the Penguins won the battle of the special teams 2 – 1. Add to that the Penguins scored a SHG. All three of the Penguins goals in Game 7 were special teams Goal, not a single 1 of our team’s goals were scored Even Strength – while 3 of the 4 goals the Rangers scored were scored Even Strength.
          And I do understand why you won’t address Game 7, that destroys any attempt to argue that special teams lost the series for the Penguins. In Game 7 Penguins Even Strength play let them down, particularly the Goaltending – Jarry’s Sv% was 0.867%. Horrible, absolutely horrible Goaltending.
          If you want to use the excuse that it was Jarry’s first game back after his injury, over 1 month earlier, I can agree to that. However, that calls into question the Coaches decision to play Jarry in that pressure cooker game – most especially when one considers Jarry’s only other playoff experience was completely negative – not a good way to get the kids confidence up.

          You also failed to address one of the most established Hockey axiom that the Goaltender is the most important PK person and the Penguins Goalies stunk out loud, both 5 on 5 and on the PK. Their Sv%, as a team, throughout the series was 0.903%, very weak, and absolutely pathetic in Games 5 – 7, 0.880%. During the regular season, as a team, their Sv% was 0.919%.

          In Game 5 the first attempt at a close out, 3 of the 5 Goals against were scored Even Strength, 1 on the PP and 1 ENG but those Goals didn’t count. In your argument it doesn’t matter that Domingue could only stop 25 of 28 Even Strength Shots of which 1 of those GA was on what was considered a low danger shot. Furthermore the 1 PPG the Rangers scored was scored on what considered medium danger shot.
          I may have agreed with you if the Rangers got a ton of High Danger Chances and scored on their Goal on a HDC, but it was a MDC – little to nothing to do with the PK skaters but heavily on the Goalie.

          Now let’s talk about game 6. Domingue only faced 4 shots on the PK and 2 beat him, one from the HDC range and 1 from the Low Danger Chance range. Once again not a question of poor defense in front of the Goalie but a ton of blame on the Goalie.

          We already addressed Game 7

          Finally, had you created an acronym of TS TOR Statistics, you could argue a neutral statement, but you qualified your acronym with an entirely negative adjective, “twisted”. I personally don’t care that you made the personal attack, I am just pointing your Personal Attack out as evidence that you didn’t have a valid argument. When there is a valid counter argument to what I have written, you would have stuck to a discussion of facts and not added “twisted”.