Jump to content

Photo

Matt Shaw taking coaching/GM job with Dubuque Fighting Saints, per TG


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 njd3b1ink

njd3b1ink

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 10:50 PM

I agree that it isn't totally on the coach to have a good pp and that the players should be held accountable, but Shaw was just completely awful. At least with Oates it was middle of the pack. Shaw's PP was just horrid. No creativity at all and having kovy on the right point half the time took away the biggest scoring threat we have on the PO (Kovy's one-timer). I don't expect another coach to make us a top 5 PP team but I know another coach could do a much better job than Shaw.
  • 0

#22 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 08:48 AM

I agree that it isn't totally on the coach to have a good pp and that the players should be held accountable, but Shaw was just completely awful. At least with Oates it was middle of the pack. Shaw's PP was just horrid. No creativity at all and having kovy on the right point half the time took away the biggest scoring threat we have on the PO (Kovy's one-timer). I don't expect another coach to make us a top 5 PP team but I know another coach could do a much better job than Shaw.

 

PP in 2010-11:  14.35%

PP in 2011-12:  17.23%

PP in 2012-13:  15.91%

 

I don't really see a huge difference here.  Granted NJ had Marek Zidlicky all last year but they didn't have Kovalchuk the entire time.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#23 HellOnICE

HellOnICE

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 09:06 AM

I think it's the personell as well. i think coaching certainly has something to do with it, in terms of squeezing more out of what we have. But if you look at it, Kovy is the only one with a great shot. We don't have very many weapons to fire it in the net. We have some creativity with Kovy, Elias, Zid but could always use more.


  • 0

#24 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 09:24 AM

PP in 2010-11:  14.35%

PP in 2011-12:  17.23%

PP in 2012-13:  15.91%

 

I don't really see a huge difference here.  Granted NJ had Marek Zidlicky all last year but they didn't have Kovalchuk the entire time.

 

For 2011-2012 year specifically, do you have second half numbers?  You could chalk up the pedestrian overall 2011-2012 PP percentage to the Devils finding their sea legs with Parise coming back after a year off, and having a new head coach. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#25 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 09:55 AM

For 2011-2012 year specifically, do you have second half numbers?  You could chalk up the pedestrian overall 2011-2012 PP percentage to the Devils finding their sea legs with Parise coming back after a year off, and having a new head coach. 

 

Why would having a new head coach or Parise have anything to do with it?  Point is, power plays are in large part luck-based - the puck has to get in the net, and it only does that on about 13% of 5 on 4 shots - and it's silly to dump on an assistant coach over 48 games worth of luck.

 

Also power play percentage is silly and should be replaced by power play goal differential.


Edited by Triumph, 31 May 2013 - 09:55 AM.

  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#26 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 10:51 AM

Why would having a new head coach or Parise have anything to do with it?  Point is, power plays are in large part luck-based - the puck has to get in the net, and it only does that on about 13% of 5 on 4 shots - and it's silly to dump on an assistant coach over 48 games worth of luck.

 

Also power play percentage is silly and should be replaced by power play goal differential.

 

It matters, because your coaches and, more importantly, your personnel matter.  Different coaches run different powerplays that sometimes do or do not suit the players you have, and whether your players are any good.  And last year, when you had an important piece to your powerplay come back after a year off, you would expect some kind of adjustment period.  And if I recall correctly, there was some experimentation with putting Larsson on the powerplay at the beginning of the year, until it became clear that he was not ready for that role.

 

And note, that I was never one to dump on Shaw.  I mean if the powerplay continued to be bad for all of next year and assuming no injuries, etc., I would have a bone to pick with him.  Right now, I don't feel one way or the other about him leaving.

 

Yes, getting the breaks does play some role, but the absolute dreadfulness of some powerplays, like the Rangers, gets to the meat and potatoes of it all. 

 

Also, I like the idea of measuring the effectiveness of a powerplay on some kind of combination of shooting percentage and offensive zone time of possession.  I don't love the idea of shots, since a lot PPs are designed to generate those bombs away point shots that either end up in the goalie's chest protector, or wide and quickly cleared out of the zone.  The Devils' PP this year seemed to be a lot of that, at least from the eyeball test.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#27 LucifersDog

LucifersDog

    Broken Record

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,786 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:45 PM

IMO Shaw will not be a big loss. As for the PP the team has to have the talent first and then go to the net often. The Devils didn't have and didn't do.


  • 0

#28 iamtheprodigy

iamtheprodigy

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,969 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:33 PM

IMO Shaw will not be a big loss. As for the PP the team has to have the talent first and then go to the net often. The Devils didn't have and didn't do.

 

I don't think it's a big loss but I think it's ridiculous to celebrate that he's gone, as if getting rid of Shaw will suddenly fix all of our powerplay woes. The Devils had an average team with an average powerplay. When they lost their best powerplay player, they had a below-average powerplay. I also agree that the shortened season and luck play a big role in the percentage we ended up with.


  • 0

#29 Vic Rattlehead18

Vic Rattlehead18

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 03 June 2013 - 12:24 PM

I think the biggest problem is our 2nd unit being utter trash. As Chico has said, this team lacks pure talent. The second unit is just a mix up of the next few guys in the depth chart.

Henrique-zubrusbernier...really?

 

edit: Oh, and Kovalchuk for the full 2 minutes.


Edited by Vic Rattlehead18, 03 June 2013 - 12:25 PM.

  • 0
Devils.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users