In Antwort auf
Im going to write in defence of Capitals RW Alex Ovechkin, if only because there have been some recent attacks and, while I can certainly live with them being directed at Ovechkin, the analytical process ought to be better, particularly if its going to be a hit piece on the leagues leading goal-scorer. Nomar Garciaparra Red Sox Jersey . Yes, Im writing to defend a player that is on pace for a 59-goal season, when the second-best goal-scorer in the NHL this season, Torontos Phil Kessel, is on pace for 43. Naturally, I didnt think that Ovechkin would be a player that needed much defending, but hes taken some hits lately. Im going to largely ignore his contributions on the power play because its not in any dispute that Ovechkin is great with the man advantage and can make a difference even when he doesnt score. On one side of the discussion, we have the Toronto Star, with their Department of Hockey Analytics, and while there are plenty of flaws in Ovechkins game, they somehow determined that his goals-for/against percentage was the way to illustrate the problem. Never mind that goals for/against percentage is essentially measuring plus-minus. Ill get to that in a moment but, first, also peruse the Hockey News piece by Ken Campbell who, after Ovechkin was minus-5 against Columbus, decided that Ovechkin has to decide what kind of player he is. After all, Ovechkin was minus-17 on the season after that game. Whats odd about using plus-minus to denigrate Ovechkins contributions is that anyone doing serious analytical work in hockey has been against using plus-minus because it involves so many factors beyond an individual players control (not least of which are the contributions of nine other skaters and two goaltenders when the game is 5-on-5) and, generally, involves small samples because goals are relatively rare events. Its funny to find myself in this position, because I can be a bit of an apologist for plus-minus. You spend enough time around the game and that thinking can be pretty common, and when the sample is large enough, you can get a pretty decent list of players at both ends of the spectrum. (For example, heres the list of players with the best cumulative plus-minus since 2000, and here are the worst.) But, Ive at least learned that there are many other factors that go into whether a player is a plus or minus player, and they must be considered if youre going to attempt to pass judgment on a single season or, especially, a portion of a season. So, lets take a look at some factors that are at play to make Alex Ovechkin a minus-17. First off, the shooting percentage of others on the ice with Ovechkin at 5-on-5 is ridiculously low. His 6.3% is only ahead of fourth-liners Aaron Volpatti and Jay Beagle among Capitals forwards. The suggestion could be made -- and of course it has been -- that Ovechkin isnt making those around him better, but here are the 5-on-5 on-ice shooting percentages when Ovechkin has been on the ice for the past five seasons: 10.36%, 8.62%, 8.05%, 11.76%, 9.09%. Youre really going to have to dig for reasons, other than poor luck and ineffective shooters, to explain even-strength shooting effectiveness declining by 40% over last season, especially when Ovechkin himself is shooting 10.6% (18 goals, 170 shots) at 5-on-5. Taking away Ovechkins 18 goals on 170 shots, leaves the other Capitals to score eight goals on 242 shots (3.3%) with Ovechkin on the ice. Marcus Johansson, his most common left winger, has one goal on 51 shots. This undeniably effects plus-minus, right? Of course it does. Give Ovechkin an average on-ice shooting percentage (say, 8%) and that is a difference of about seven goals. At the other end of the rink, Ovechkin is getting burned with a .909 save percentage at 5-on-5. Naturally, the argument will be that Ovechkins defensive play is what leads to that low percentage. Keep in mind, that percentage is well below career norms for him (.922 over the past five seasons, including this one) and ranks near the bottom on the Capitals roster. Use that typical save percentage, on 439 shots against, and that becomes a difference of 5-6 goals. So, why not take a look at where the shots are coming from with Ovechkin on the ice? According to Some Kind of Ninjas Shot Tracker, shots against the Capitals with Ovechkin on the ice at even strength, come from an average distance of 34.5 feet. In the previous five seasons, it has been 34.2, 36.6, 35.8, 34.6 and 35.9 feet on average. There can be an argument made, based on those average shot distances, that Ovechkins most effective defensive performances were in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 (the Dale Hunter season), but there really isnt a huge difference; goaltenders arent suddenly flummoxed by 34-foot shots when 36-footers are easy pickings. On top of that, best of luck trying to identify those particular seasons as anything close to Ovechkins best. Why? Because he scored 70 goals and 150 points in 157 games over those two seasons, producing the two lowest point scoring rates of his career. Yes, even lower than this season, when virtually no one else puts the puck in the net with him on the ice. Of course Ovechkin is not a defensive whiz, but that shouldnt stand as an indictment any more than it has for elite offensive players throughout the history of the game. Seriously, take a look at the Top 10 goal-scorers in the league, none of whom put the puck in the net like Ovechkin, and identify the ones that are notably strong backcheckers. Some are: Joe Pavelski, Alexander Steen, Patrick Sharp, but theres no reason to believe that right wingers Kessel or Corey Perry or Patrick Kane are doing brilliant work in the defensive end. Heres the thing: theyre all great players! Part of the trouble for Ovechkin is that the Capitals havent been able to win in the postseason, so he gets painted with the brush of failure for a whole host of team shortcomings. Thats what comes with being a superstar. This Capitals team is flawed. They rank in the bottom third of the league in Fenwick Close (measuring shot attempts, not including blocks, at even strength, with the score close), which is a good indication of team puck possession, yet Ovechkin has relatively solid possession numbers. If you want to break down a players overall contribution, and feel that you must use one statistic in order to do so (better yet, dont), then at least reduce the impact of others on the ice and look at the possession stats, because it wont matter that linemates arent finishing or that, for whatever reason, goaltenders arent stopping the puck. Shooting and save percentages fluctuate and while they affect perception -- just ask Tyler Bozak -- they dont get to the bottom of a players on-ice contribution, and so it is with Ovechkin this year, who is having a fine season, no matter what his plus-minus says. Scott Cullen can be reached at Scott.Cullen@bellmedia.ca and followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/tsnscottcullen. For more, check out TSN Fantasy on Facebook. Wade Boggs Jersey .A. remained bitter for Henrik Lundqvist and the Rangers on the long flight back home to New York. Andrew Benintendi Jersey . -- Wide receiver Sidney Rice should be fully recovered from a torn knee ligament by the time the Seattle Seahawks start defence of their Super Bowl title, general manager John Schneider said Wednesday. http://www.redsoxapparelsshop.com/travis-shaw-jersey-c-36/ .com) - Rakeem Christmas scored 21 points, B.Major League Baseball may one day return to Montreal, but that day will not be coming any time soon, according to Bud Selig. Speaking with TSNs Michael Farber, the commissioner said that while franchise relocation and expansion is not currently being considered, the sour ending of baseball in Montreal would not keep the city from being awarded a franchise in the future. "With the 30 teams, you know we just went from 15 to 15 in scheduling, that was a very complicated process so there are really no expansion plans at all," he explained. "Fortunately, we dont really have any club that wants to move right now and havent for a long time. Its my last year and I cant, in the foreseeable future, see any expansion." Selig didnt rule out the possibility of Montreal landing a franchise again in the future, but added that one of the key steps would be getting a new stadium. "The first thing you need, and this has been true everywhere, even in existing places, is to build a stadium that can produce the kind of revenue you need today to compete," he said. "This is a sport now that is at an all-time high in popularity and revenue and everything else, but teams do generate a lot of revenue to compete and without a new ballpark, its not possible. So the first condition everywhere is to have a new ballpark." Selig also noted that having a local owner is crucial in establishing a franchise in a city. "You really need a group with local roots, who understands their market, but is also committed to keeping it in that market," he added. "Local ownership is vital." Speaking on the Expos and the series of events that led to their relocation in 2004, Selig said that he did not necessarily believe the sale of the franchise in 1991 was the "death knell" for the Expos, but called it "a sad day for baseball and a sad day for Montreal." He added that as the team was failing in the early 2000s, he tried to find another owner in Montreaal to keep the team in the city, but couldnt find support. Boston Red Sox Hoodie. "(I) spent quite a bit of time, worked a lot with (team president) Claude Brochu, who was very good," said Selig. "Claude did everything in the world he could, and he was a wonderful citizen when it came to baseball. I know how he felt about Montreal, it just didnt work, but it wasnt for lack of effort. I came up there and we tried and we just didnt get anywhere." The commissioner also disagreed with the sentiment of some fans that Major League Baseball quit on the city of Montreal long before moving the Expos. "Thats regrettable," he said. "I dont believe that, in understanding of the historical facts and what happened, justifies that. I dont think MLB ever quit on Montreal. I think what happened, if you asked before and after Charles Bronfman sold the team, you bet I worked a lot with people to try to get permanent ownership and stable ownership but they obviously had a stadium problem. The Montreal people themselves talked about it a lot. So, I really dont think it was a matter of us quitting on Montreal. Montreal was a great part of baseball for all the years Charles Bronfman owned them, we had no reason to go against that in any way. I think we (MLB), every place we have been, we have made a very sincere attempt to really change the situation, and build stability into it, and weve succeeded everywhere else. And we tried in Montreal." With a decade gone by and the Expos firmly entrenched in Washington, D.C. as the Nationals, Selig added that the sour ending of baseball in Montreal would not keep the city from being awarded a franchise in the future. "The Montreal situation was one that we didnt want to happen, but with no ownership group and the very things that we have discussed here today, we had no choice," he said. "But as far as Im concerned, if and when that time comes, and there is a team, why wouldnt Montreal be considered?" Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Jerseys From China Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Cheap Jerseys ' ' '
Diese Seite versucht auf deinen addPics.com Account zuzugreifen.
Aus Sicherheitsgründen, erlaubt addPics.com nur den Zugriff von autorisierten Webseiten. Wenn du dieser Webseite vertraust, kannst du mit einem Klick auf den folgenden Link, den Zugriff erlauben.
Bitte logge dich mit deinem bereits existierenden Account auf addPics.com ein.
Dem Beitrag angehängte Bilder
oder ein bereits hochgeladenes diesem Beitrag hinzufügen. Ordner bearbeiten
- Mit deiner Emailadresse, verwaltest du all deine Bilder auf addPics.com
- diese Nutzung von addPics.com ist für dich kostenlos!
- weitere Informationen findest du hier
Mit anderen addPics.com Account anmelden