2012-13 Chicago Blackhawks/NHL/Stink Bowman should be FYERRED Thread

[CT III]

I'm not tryin' to be that YOU SHOULDNA WRITE ABOUT DA HOCKEY CAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT guy, but holy shit, is this terrible.

http://www.beachwoodreporter.com/sports/sportsmondaytuesday_biggest_bl.php

Crawford was good enough and actually, he has been very good through 11 playoff games now. If the Hawks manage to win Game 7 versus the Wings (and remember that Hockey Town's finest just came out of a series in which they played a Game 7 on the road - in southern California for goodness sake - and won it), Crawford is likely the guy in front of the net the rest of the way.

So, if Crawford wins Game 7 it's likely he'll get the nod the rest of the way?  Likely?  What if he loses? 

[Chuck to Chuck]

So, if Crawford wins Game 7 it's likely he'll get the nod the rest of the way?  Likely?  What if he loses? 

The rest of the way means for the rest of the NHL's existence. So, with Gary Bettman, that could be a few weeks.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Overthinking everything all over again, some problems with what I wrote above occurred to me on my drive back into Chicago tonight.

For one thing, I realized that I was overestimating the relative value of the Hawks power play by failing to account for the very real possibility of them scoring during the 5-on-5 not-a-power-play following the penalty shot attempt.

By way of atoning for this glaring boner, here's another amateur attempt at this particular laptop faggotry. (If anyone actually cares after this is all over, they can tell me how I bonered this time around.)

...

5 on 5 in the 2013 regular season, the Hawks scored 0.048 goals per minute and allowed 0.031, for a net of 0.017 goals more than the opposition per 5-on-5 minute.

5 on 4, they scored 0.077 per minute and allowed 0.020, for a net of 0.056 more goals than the opposition per 5-on-4 minute.

The value that a 5-on-4 power play added for the Hawks in the regular season, then, would be the difference between the two:

0.056 net goals per 5-on-4 minute

minus

0.017 net goals per 5-on-5 minute

equals

0.039 additional net goals per 5-on-4 minute

Hawks regular season power plays lasted an average of 1.744 minutes per opportunity (261.6 min/150 PPO). (This is an imperfect number for our purposes, as it also includes 5-on-3s, 4-on-3s and major penalties. But I can't find any numbers on just their total number of 5-on-4 2-minute minors, so this is the best I can manage.)

So the total value of a Hawks 5-on-4 works out to:

0.039 extra goals per 5-on-4 minute

times

1.744 minutes per 5-on-4

equals

0.069 additional net goals per 5-on-4 over what they'd expect 5-on-5

That's the expected net value of a Hawks 5-on-4 power play in place of 5-on-5 hockey: 0.069 goals.

The penalty shot is easier to reckon, as we have Frolik's career stats in penalty-shot-like situations as I shared above (small sample size and all): 4-for-15 or 26.7%, making each attempt by him worth roughly 0.267 expected goals.

That's the expected net value of a Michael Frolik penalty shot: 0.267 goals.

Thus, the total value of taking the shot over the power play is the difference between the two: 0.267 - 0.069 = 0.198 expected net goals.

Basically, if the 2013 Hawks were given five Frolik penalty shots in place of five 5-on-4 power plays in a game against a random opponent, you'd expect the goal differential to increase by one goal in the Hawks' favor.

...

We can also look at this from the Wings' perspective. Slightly more briefly...

5 on 5, the Wings scored 0.035 goals per minute and allowed 0.032, for 0.004 net goals per full strength minute.

4 on 5, the Wings scored 0.012 goals per minute and allowed 0.107, for -0.095 net goals per 4-on-5 minute.

The value the Wings lost going down a man, then, would be -0.099 net goals added per 4-on-5 minute.

Wings penalty kills averaged 1.612 minutes (264.3 min/164 TSH), making the total expected net value for a Detroit 4-on-5 PK -0.159 goals.

Now to the penalty shot. In his career, Jimmy Howard had let in 1 penalty shot in 6 attempts before last night, and 32 shootout goals on 117 attempts. That's 33-for-123, good for a 26.8% success rate by shooters or -0.268 net goals to Detroit per penalty-shot-like attempt.

For the Wings, then, the total "value" of Howard facing a penalty shot instead of having to play down a man is: (-0.268) - (-0.159) = -0.109 expected net goals.

In other words, if a random team were given ten penalty shots against Howard in place of ten 5-on-4 power plays, you'd expect the goal differential to increase by one in Wings' opponent's favor.

...

The truth, as any good sensible moderate will tell you, probably lies in somewhere the middle.

Taking that as our lazy centrist article of faith, we average the two numbers above (0.198 and 0.109) to find our bottom line:

0.1535 expected net goals added in the Hawks favor if they're given a Frolik-on-Howard penalty shot in place of a 5-on-4 power play.

I'll take it!

[Yeti]

I'm still hung up on Huey saying the last two home penalty shot goals are Frolik, and then way back to Troy Murray

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

I'm still hung up on Huey saying the last two home penalty shot goals are Frolik, and then way back to Troy Murray

I know you're an idiot who flunked out of college, but that was not what I said, Gomer.  

Reading iz hard.  

I mean, until Frolik scored on a penalty shot while tearing Corey Schenider's groin in half 2 years ago, a Blackhawk had not scored on a penalty shot at home since Troy Murray in the 1980's

This remains true.  You referenced a successful penalty shot made by Hossa before Frolik vs. Schneider, and you indicate that this goal was on the road, and of course Frolik's on Monday was on the road.  I'd guess there have been others made throughout the years, and of course they'd all have been on the road.  My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

How many home penalty shot opportunities did they get in those 25 years?

How many home penalty shot opportunities on a Sunday?

Also, how many meatballs can you fit in one potato?

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

How many home penalty shot opportunities did they get in those 25 years?

Probably not many, but your research already demonstrates that the success rate is not that great--just greater than a typical power play.

I'm taking issue with the fact that Yeti can't read but insists on being a moronic jackhole.

[Yeti]

I'm still hung up on Huey saying the last two home penalty shot goals are Frolik, and then way back to Troy Murray

I know you're an idiot who flunked out of college, but that was not what I said, Gomer.  

Reading iz hard.  

I mean, until Frolik scored on a penalty shot while tearing Corey Schenider's groin in half 2 years ago, a Blackhawk had not scored on a penalty shot at home since Troy Murray in the 1980's

This remains true.  You referenced a successful penalty shot made by Hossa before Frolik vs. Schneider, and you indicate that this goal was on the road, and of course Frolik's on Monday was on the road.  I'd guess there have been others made throughout the years, and of course they'd all have been on the road.  My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

So, based on your timeline, it was Troy Murray sometime in the 80s, then no goal until Frolik in 2011...

However, this is the very least of what it is because I'm not looking through every game from 2011 and before. (I don't actually have the Murray goal because I don't feel like looking)

Troy Murray: sometime in the 80s
Marian Hossa: vs. Philadelphia 1/23/11
Michael Frolik: vs. Vancouver 4/24/11

Also, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Frolik's goal on Monday was not at home, so I don't really know why you chose that as your criteria for the history of Blackhawks penalty shot goals.

And yes, this is picking nits, but something something potato fuck the Irish TBFA, PAY THE FUCK ATTENTION

[Yeti]

You were probably too busy putting on your Packer bodypaint in preparation for the game that would make Jay Cutler a full-on pussy to remember that Hossa goal

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

I'm still hung up on Huey saying the last two home penalty shot goals are Frolik, and then way back to Troy Murray

I know you're an idiot who flunked out of college, but that was not what I said, Gomer.  

Reading iz hard.  

I mean, until Frolik scored on a penalty shot while tearing Corey Schenider's groin in half 2 years ago, a Blackhawk had not scored on a penalty shot at home since Troy Murray in the 1980's

This remains true.  You referenced a successful penalty shot made by Hossa before Frolik vs. Schneider, and you indicate that this goal was on the road, and of course Frolik's on Monday was on the road.  I'd guess there have been others made throughout the years, and of course they'd all have been on the road.  My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

So, based on your timeline, it was Troy Murray sometime in the 80s, then no goal until Frolik in 2011...

However, this is the very least of what it is because I'm not looking through every game from 2011 and before. (I don't actually have the Murray goal because I don't feel like looking)

Troy Murray: sometime in the 80s
Marian Hossa: vs. Philadelphia 1/23/11
Michael Frolik: vs. Vancouver 4/24/11

Also, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Frolik's goal on Monday was not at home, so I don't really know why you chose that as your criteria for the history of Blackhawks penalty shot goals.

And yes, this is picking nits, but something something potato fuck the Irish TBFA, PAY THE FUCK ATTENTION

I was not aware that Hossa had broken the string.  My bad.  Still somewhat irrelevant to your confusion.

Also, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Frolik's goal on Monday was not at home, so I don't really know why you chose that as your criteria for the history of Blackhawks penalty shot goals.

Who said I was using it a criteria? I referenced the fact that a team went two-and-a-half decades without scoring a penalty shot at home to illustrate the difficulty in doing so.  It was just handy fact--which  technically had wrong but the basic point remained true.  I was wrong about Folik having been the one to have broken the streak but you're almost coming off as obtuse in your seeming inability understand my basic point.

[Brownie]

OK, so is this the last game of the Red Wing rivalry as we know it? They come here once every three years and the Hawks go there once every three years and they don't play once every three years so Bettman can realize his plan of more Hawks games with Winnipeg, Nashville, Dallas, Minnesota, Colorado, Anaheim and San Jose and Detroit can earn the hate of diehard hockey fans in Miami, Tampa, and Raleigh?

[Yeti]

I'm still hung up on Huey saying the last two home penalty shot goals are Frolik, and then way back to Troy Murray

I know you're an idiot who flunked out of college, but that was not what I said, Gomer.  

Reading iz hard.  

I mean, until Frolik scored on a penalty shot while tearing Corey Schenider's groin in half 2 years ago, a Blackhawk had not scored on a penalty shot at home since Troy Murray in the 1980's

This remains true.  You referenced a successful penalty shot made by Hossa before Frolik vs. Schneider, and you indicate that this goal was on the road, and of course Frolik's on Monday was on the road.  I'd guess there have been others made throughout the years, and of course they'd all have been on the road.  My point was that scoring on a penalty shot is not a slam dunk.  The fact that a team went 25 years without scoring one at home was used to illustrated this fact, numbnuts.

So, based on your timeline, it was Troy Murray sometime in the 80s, then no goal until Frolik in 2011...

However, this is the very least of what it is because I'm not looking through every game from 2011 and before. (I don't actually have the Murray goal because I don't feel like looking)

Troy Murray: sometime in the 80s
Marian Hossa: vs. Philadelphia 1/23/11
Michael Frolik: vs. Vancouver 4/24/11

Also, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Frolik's goal on Monday was not at home, so I don't really know why you chose that as your criteria for the history of Blackhawks penalty shot goals.

And yes, this is picking nits, but something something potato fuck the Irish TBFA, PAY THE FUCK ATTENTION

I was not aware that Hossa had broken the string.  My bad.  Still somewhat irrelevant to your confusion.

Also, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Frolik's goal on Monday was not at home, so I don't really know why you chose that as your criteria for the history of Blackhawks penalty shot goals.

Who said I was using it a criteria? I referenced the fact that a team went two-and-a-half decades without scoring a penalty shot at home to illustrate the difficulty in doing so.  It was just handy fact (which  technically had wrong) to do so.  I was wrong about Folik having been the one to have broken the streak but you're almost coming off as obtuse in your seeming inability understand my basic point.

No, I didn't misunderstand your point. I was just proving your facts wrong.

So....

How many home penalty shot opportunities did they get in those 25 years?

How many home penalty shot opportunities on a Sunday?

Also, how many meatballs can you fit in one potato?

[J. Walter Weatherman]

OK, so is this the last game of the Red Wing rivalry as we know it? They come here once every three years and the Hawks go there once every three years and they don't play once every three years so Bettman can realize his plan of more Hawks games with Winnipeg, Nashville, Dallas, Minnesota, Colorado, Anaheim and San Jose and Detroit can earn the hate of diehard hockey fans in Miami, Tampa, and Raleigh?

No. The Hawks will have a home-and-home series against every non-Conference-III team every season. So every team in the league, including the Wings, will play here at least once every year.

[Slaky]

OK, so is this the last game of the Red Wing rivalry as we know it? They come here once every three years and the Hawks go there once every three years and they don't play once every three years so Bettman can realize his plan of more Hawks games with Winnipeg, Nashville, Dallas, Minnesota, Colorado, Anaheim and San Jose and Detroit can earn the hate of diehard hockey fans in Miami, Tampa, and Raleigh?

With realignment the Hawks will play every Eastern Conference team twice a season, home and away. So that'll still happen. And it'll be cool or whatever.

But they can't meet in the playoffs again unless it's for the Cup.

Until Phoenix moves to Quebec in which case we welcome back our friends from the Motor City.

[R-V]

It was just handy fact--which  technically had wrong but the basic point remained true.

This sentence is so good. I just want to bathe in it all day.