2019-2020 Toronto Maple Leafs General Discussion
- Thread starter herman
- Start date
herman
Well-known member
Their zone starts are hilariously skewed, and it's pretty clear why Babcock has favoured Shore/Timashov over Spezza/Petan in the early goings
via NaturalStatTrick
At the same time:
Spezza-Petan were assigned to play: Columbus, St. Louis, Tampa
Shore-Timashov got: Ottawa, Montreal, Detroit, Minnesota, Washington
Not shown above are the faceoffs taken. Gauthier has 51 5v5 DZ faceoffs taken in his 8 games. Shore also has 51 5v5 DZ draws taken in his 5 games played and winning his draws (regardless of zone) at 68.75%. Only Gauthier is better at 70.27%. Spezza is 4 for 12.
The caveat is these are awfully low sample sizes to draw any predictive conclusions, and quality of competition miiiight be a factor -- although line 4 vs line 4 might be more of a wash, other than Tampa. But the thing with coaching decisions with limited TOI is that you probably have to lean on your 'hot' hand while the results are in your favour. Top 9 decisions are where you take a slightly longer view because they have way more puck touches to normalize.
| 5v5 | TOI | CF60 | CA60 | CF% | GF60 | GA60 | OZS | NZS | DZS | OTF |
| Frederik Gauthier | 71:40 | 57.77 | 60.28 | 48.94 | 3.35 | 5.02 | 1 | 11 | 33 | 53 |
| Dmytro Timashov | 44:30 | 56.63 | 68.76 | 45.16 | 4.04 | 4.04 | 0 | 7 | 27 | 34 |
| Nick Shore | 43:40 | 56.55 | 70.34 | 44.57 | 4.14 | 2.76 | 1 | 7 | 34 | 28 |
| Jason Spezza | 20:22 | 79.54 | 32.41 | 71.05 | 2.95 | 5.89 | 1 | 4 | 10 | 17 |
| Nic Petan | 21:25 | 81.25 | 33.62 | 70.73 | 2.8 | 5.6 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 19 |
At the same time:
Spezza-Petan were assigned to play: Columbus, St. Louis, Tampa
Shore-Timashov got: Ottawa, Montreal, Detroit, Minnesota, Washington
Not shown above are the faceoffs taken. Gauthier has 51 5v5 DZ faceoffs taken in his 8 games. Shore also has 51 5v5 DZ draws taken in his 5 games played and winning his draws (regardless of zone) at 68.75%. Only Gauthier is better at 70.27%. Spezza is 4 for 12.
The caveat is these are awfully low sample sizes to draw any predictive conclusions, and quality of competition miiiight be a factor -- although line 4 vs line 4 might be more of a wash, other than Tampa. But the thing with coaching decisions with limited TOI is that you probably have to lean on your 'hot' hand while the results are in your favour. Top 9 decisions are where you take a slightly longer view because they have way more puck touches to normalize.
herman said:
Spezza's two 5-on-5 goals against were both scored off the rush. One was (what I would consider) an easily stoppable slapshot by Oscar Sundqvist that went through Andersen's five-hole against St. Louis. The other was in the Tampa game, the puck was dumped into Toronto's end after a Leafs powerplay and Andersen passed it directly to a wide-open Stamkos for some reason and he passed it to Kucherov who scored.
Shore's two 5-on-5 goals against were the Sabourin goal against Ottawa and the Mayhew goal against Minnesota. Both goals were the result of poor defensive zone coverage on cycles, and both saw Shore not collapsing down low and picking up the open player who scored. Both goals conveniently enough were also scored by non-NHLers.
hockeyfan1
New member
[tweet]1184915795266211842[/tweet]
https://theathletic.com/1302592/2019/10/17/john-tavares-is-out-until-november-what-do-the-maple-leafs-do-now/
L K
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
I mean Spezza did lose the offensive zone faceoff leading to the rush on the Sundqvist goal, but yeah, it was a shot that should have been stopped and that turover goal was just typical October Andersen where he makes boneheaded plays with the puck at times.
L K said:
Well, I pulled up their gamelog's/shift charts on NST to find the exact goal I was looking for then headed to the game pages on NHL.com. But yeah, just brute force.
If I had to guess, I would say the largest deciding factor for Babcock in Spezza over Shore would be their role on the penalty kill. Spezza's played 2:49 on the PK and was on the ice for 2 goals against. Shore has played 4:54 and hasn't been scored on yet.
The first goal against was the Atkinson one against Columbus. Face-off to the right of Andersen where Spezza wins the draw after a bit of a scramble but he puts it past Muzzin. Andersen tries to play it... misplays it... and then a Columbus players gets on the loose puck and fires it into the net.
The second goal was a one-timer by Stamkos. Spezza was playing the box near Stamkos' side and didn't collapse to him. If everyone who ever left Stamkos open for a PP one-timer got scratched though we'd be running out of NHLers.
With all that said though, why does Spezza even need to play on the penalty kill to be in the line-up? I don't get that. Both him and Shore are already behind Mikheyev, Marner, Kapanen, and Moore as those guys are the core 4. They're also slightly behind Gauthier, who plays the same FOGO role they do. And soon enough they'll be behind Hyman when he returns. That's 6 guys who can play on the PK ahead of either of them. Is Shore more useful to the team in a very, very limited PK role than Spezza would be playing consistent PP2 minutes?
The first goal against was the Atkinson one against Columbus. Face-off to the right of Andersen where Spezza wins the draw after a bit of a scramble but he puts it past Muzzin. Andersen tries to play it... misplays it... and then a Columbus players gets on the loose puck and fires it into the net.
The second goal was a one-timer by Stamkos. Spezza was playing the box near Stamkos' side and didn't collapse to him. If everyone who ever left Stamkos open for a PP one-timer got scratched though we'd be running out of NHLers.
With all that said though, why does Spezza even need to play on the penalty kill to be in the line-up? I don't get that. Both him and Shore are already behind Mikheyev, Marner, Kapanen, and Moore as those guys are the core 4. They're also slightly behind Gauthier, who plays the same FOGO role they do. And soon enough they'll be behind Hyman when he returns. That's 6 guys who can play on the PK ahead of either of them. Is Shore more useful to the team in a very, very limited PK role than Spezza would be playing consistent PP2 minutes?
L K
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
Spezza strikes me as a 3rd/4th line+PP guy for the lineup so I'd agree there.
I'm still kind of disappointed that Babock has stuck to Shore/Timashov and Petan/Spezza instead of looking at mixing that up. Is there really a big problem with trying Spezza with Shore and Gauthier?
Coco-puffs
New member
herman said:
Corsi For since 2016:
Ben Smith 41.8%
Byron Froese 45.6%
Luke Glendening 42.7%
Nick Shore 53.4%
One of these things is not like the others.
I don't want to make it seem like I dislike Shore here either. In my original projected line-ups I had both him and Spezza making the team on the 4th line. I was actually rooting for Shore because he was always a bit of an under-the-radar analytics darling and Spezza because I'm a sucker for a good 'veteran returns home' story. But it was clear almost right from the very first moment Babcock mentioned Spezza's name that he didn't seem to care for him or the signing and I think that's obviously showed in his deployment/usage of him.
The one bright side to Tavares' injury is that it'll give Spezza another chance to show he belongs on the team. Otherwise in a week or so I think he would have found himself on waivers. Hopefully he can take advantage of this.
The one bright side to Tavares' injury is that it'll give Spezza another chance to show he belongs on the team. Otherwise in a week or so I think he would have found himself on waivers. Hopefully he can take advantage of this.