{"id":608118,"date":"2017-01-12T21:53:46","date_gmt":"2017-01-13T02:53:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesportsdaily.com\/?p=608118"},"modified":"2017-01-12T21:53:46","modified_gmt":"2017-01-13T02:53:46","slug":"sens-selling-structure-but-is-anyone-buying-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportsdaily.com\/news\/sens-selling-structure-but-is-anyone-buying-it\/","title":{"rendered":"Sens selling structure, but is anyone buying it?"},"content":{"rendered":"
It\u2019s the 2016 hockey offseason.<\/p>\n
Consider the circumstances: the newly appointed GM\u2019s organization has won one playoff series in the last nine years and having missed the playoffs for the third time in its last four seasons. His organization\u2019s internal budget precludes him from papering over mistakes or outbidding other organizations for free agents who represent upgrades over players who are already in place.<\/p>\n
Pierre Dorion is tasked with the responsibility of selling the status quo while simultaneously creating optimism in this fan base.<\/p>\n
Rather than make the kind of wholesale changes, Dorion shitcanned Dave Cameron and replaced him with Guy Boucher \u2013 selling fans on Boucher\u2019s work ethic, communication skills, diligence and attention to detail.<\/p>\n
In Travis Yost\u2019s latest for TSN.ca<\/a>, he points out that the Senators are back in the familiar position of fighting for a playoff spot despite the fact that the team has cut the number of goals it has allowed down.<\/p>\n Yost questioned whether Boucher\u2019s system or coaching is effective because the neutering of the offence<\/em> has essentially worked against the club. Not only did Yost emphasize its impacts on the first pairing, but he lamented the performance of the team\u2019s second pairing that was supposed to be buoyed by the addition of Dion Phaneuf last season.<\/p>\n Essentially Yost\u2019s article has opened the door for people and companies to take a closer look at how the Senators have performed through the first half of the year:<\/p>\n The @Senators<\/a> are last in the NHL at OZ possession time (3:35 per game) and successful OZ passes (59.5 per game).<\/p>\n \u2014 SPORTLOGiQ (@SPORTLOGiQ) January 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js<\/a><\/p>\n The @Senators<\/a> are last at OZ loose puck recoveries (74.6 per game).<\/p>\n \u2014 SPORTLOGiQ (@SPORTLOGiQ) January 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js<\/a><\/p>\n The @Senators<\/a> get 14 scoring chances per game, ranking second last in the league.<\/p>\n \u2014 SPORTLOGiQ (@SPORTLOGiQ) January 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js<\/a><\/p>\n The @Senators<\/a>‘ opposition possess the puck in their zone for 23 more seconds per game than the NHL median. Fifth highest (4:55 per game).<\/p>\n \u2014 SPORTLOGiQ (@SPORTLOGiQ) January 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js<\/a><\/p>\n The @Senators<\/a> rank 28th in the NHL at on net slot shots (8.3 per game).<\/p>\n \u2014 SPORTLOGiQ (@SPORTLOGiQ) January 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/p>\n Despite getting the discrepancy in Corsi events, Ottawa\u2019s still slightly on the right side of the scoring chance data. The number has regressed considerably since the beginning of the year however, and maybe Ottawa\u2019s recent struggles can help be explained by this change in luck.<\/p>\n The numbers however aren\u2019t too far off last season\u2019s marks.<\/p>\n Like each of the past three seasons, Ottawa\u2019s a sub-50 SF% team. Although the Senators have enjoyed a slight uptick in their shots for per 60 and a decrease in the opposition\u2019s shot attempts per 60.<\/p>\n While their goals allowed metric has essentially held true these past three seasons, the Senators are scoring less at five-on-five than they have in the past, but they\u2019re also still shooting at a comparable rate to last season. Hopefully that means that some improved luck can help fill the net a little more in the second half of the season.<\/p>\n Across those metrics however, the Senators don\u2019t appear to be too different from previous iterations.<\/p>\n Through 39 games last season, the Senators allowed 114 goals while scoring 108 (note: both totals do not include shootout game-winners). Through 39 games this season, the have tallied 96 goals while allowing 101 goals to the opposition.<\/p>\n So why the big discrepancy between in terms of goals allowed between the two seasons?<\/p>\n You don\u2019t have to look any further than the team\u2019s historical performance on the penalty kill.<\/p>\n From HockeyAnalysis.com\u2019s data, the Senators gave up a disproportionate amount of shorthanded goals last season relative to their recent history. This year, it\u2019s been the quite the contrast. The Senators are giving up 3.4 fewer goals per 60 minutes of shorthanded ice time which makes for a sizable improvement in the goals column.<\/p>\n What\u2019s interesting about the penalty kill is the Senators are still giving up a significant volume of Corsi events per 60 (101.6 this season to 102.5), fewer shots of the opposition\u2019s shots are hitting the net and when they are, the goaltenders are doing a better job of stopping them.<\/p>\n I\u2019d have to really watch the penalty kill units to see what\u2019s accounting for this discrepancy. Maybe the Senators are simply doing a better job congesting the shooting lanes, blocking shots or forcing bad ones. It could be a luck-driven thing or hell, maybe after leading the league with 17 shorthanded goals last season, the coaching staff has emphasized a more conservative approach.<\/p>\n Taken together, there\u2019s enough statistical evidence here to make management leery of buying too heavily into the idea that Boucher\u2019s structure<\/em> has significantly impacted this team or that Boucher can get considerably more from this group.<\/p>\n More than anything, the numbers and eye test should affirm that this roster needs significant change for this team to reach another level.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n
\n Season<\/strong><\/td>\n CF60<\/strong><\/td>\n CA60<\/strong><\/td>\n CF%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20072008<\/td>\n 55.29<\/td>\n 52.40<\/td>\n 51.34<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20082009<\/td>\n 51.82<\/td>\n 53.50<\/td>\n 49.21<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20092010<\/td>\n 55.70<\/td>\n 51.40<\/td>\n 52.01<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20102011<\/td>\n 54.36<\/td>\n 54.67<\/td>\n 49.86<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20112012<\/td>\n 60.89<\/td>\n 55.52<\/td>\n 52.31<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20122013<\/td>\n 62.97<\/td>\n 54.35<\/td>\n 53.67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20132014<\/td>\n 63.03<\/td>\n 57.24<\/td>\n 52.41<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20142015<\/td>\n 56.68<\/td>\n 56.11<\/td>\n 50.25<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 53.25<\/td>\n 58.98<\/td>\n 47.45<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 53.92<\/td>\n 59.15<\/strong><\/td>\n 47.69<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n \n\n
\n Season<\/strong><\/td>\n SCF60<\/strong><\/td>\n SCA60<\/strong><\/td>\n SCF%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20072008<\/td>\n 8.70<\/td>\n 8.18<\/td>\n 51.56<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20082009<\/td>\n 7.72<\/td>\n 7.64<\/td>\n 50.27<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20092010<\/td>\n 8.94<\/td>\n 7.92<\/td>\n 53.02<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20102011<\/td>\n 8.27<\/td>\n 9.02<\/td>\n 47.85<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20112012<\/td>\n 8.58<\/td>\n 9.04<\/td>\n 48.70<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20122013<\/td>\n 8.11<\/td>\n 7.87<\/td>\n 50.76<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20132014<\/td>\n 8.05<\/td>\n 8.83<\/td>\n 47.68<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20142015<\/td>\n 8.64<\/td>\n 7.37<\/td>\n 53.95<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 8.00<\/td>\n 8.30<\/td>\n 49.10<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 8.30<\/td>\n 8.20<\/td>\n 50.30<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n \n\n
\n Season<\/strong><\/td>\n SF60<\/strong><\/td>\n SA60<\/strong><\/td>\n SF%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20072008<\/td>\n 30.36<\/td>\n 29.61<\/td>\n 50.62<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20082009<\/td>\n 28.42<\/td>\n 28.79<\/td>\n 49.68<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20092010<\/td>\n 29.84<\/td>\n 27.04<\/td>\n 52.46<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20102011<\/td>\n 29.62<\/td>\n 29.98<\/td>\n 49.69<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20112012<\/td>\n 31.81<\/td>\n 30.94<\/td>\n 50.69<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20122013<\/td>\n 33.06<\/td>\n 30.34<\/td>\n 52.15<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20132014<\/td>\n 33.67<\/td>\n 33.88<\/td>\n 49.85<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20142015<\/td>\n 29.82<\/td>\n 32.19<\/td>\n 48.09<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 27.74<\/td>\n 32.26<\/td>\n 46.24<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 28.70<\/td>\n 30.25<\/td>\n 48.68<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n \n\n
\n Season<\/strong><\/td>\n GF60<\/strong><\/td>\n GA60<\/strong><\/td>\n GF%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20072008<\/td>\n 2.74<\/td>\n 2.50<\/td>\n 52.27<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20082009<\/td>\n 2.09<\/td>\n 2.37<\/td>\n 46.82<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20092010<\/td>\n 2.33<\/td>\n 2.73<\/td>\n 46.01<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20102011<\/td>\n 1.95<\/td>\n 2.74<\/td>\n 41.55<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20112012<\/td>\n 2.53<\/td>\n 2.42<\/td>\n 51.12<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20122013<\/td>\n 1.99<\/td>\n 1.97<\/td>\n 50.34<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20132014<\/td>\n 2.51<\/td>\n 2.69<\/td>\n 48.31<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20142015<\/td>\n 2.40<\/td>\n 2.26<\/td>\n 51.53<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 2.29<\/td>\n 2.27<\/td>\n 50.17<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 2.08<\/td>\n 2.25<\/td>\n 48.09<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n \n\n
\n <\/td>\n GA60<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20072008<\/td>\n 7.18<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20082009<\/td>\n 6.61<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20092010<\/td>\n 5.55<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20102011<\/td>\n 5.78<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20112012<\/td>\n 6.78<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20122013<\/td>\n 4.11<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20132014<\/td>\n 7.02<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20142015<\/td>\n 6.09<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 9.22<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 5.81<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n \n\n
\n <\/td>\n GA60<\/strong><\/td>\n SA60<\/strong><\/td>\n Sv%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20152016<\/td>\n 9.22<\/td>\n 59.20<\/td>\n 87.65<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 20162017<\/td>\n 5.81<\/td>\n 47.00<\/td>\n 84.44<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n