SIGN IN or REGISTER
USERNAME or EMAIL
PASSWORD

FORGOT YOUR USERNAME OR PASSWORD?
FRANÇAIS Official Site of the Ottawa Senators

Jump to content


Photo

Penalties and Lack of Power Plays


  • Please log in to reply
576 replies to this topic

#1 Sweatred

Sweatred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 810 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 07:33 PM

For years I have suggested that the Senators get the short side of calls which came to a peak in the Stanley Cup finals against the Ducks. Several have suggested to me that Sens should just work harder and not whine about the subjective nature of calls. Anyway I thought I would break down the first ten games to exploit any disadvantage we might have.

PP in first period 12. PK in first Period 20. Minus - 8
PP in second period. 16. PK in second 17.5. minus - 1.5
PP in third period. 14. PK in third. 21. minus - 7

Now if I remove calls where the goal differential is over 3 ( out of reach) the numbers get worse.

PP in first period 11 PK in first Period 20. minus - 9
PP in second period. 10 PK in second 17.5. minus - 7.5
PP in third period. 5 PK in third. 21. minus - 16

So basically over 10 games when the game is close we have had 32.5 extra penalties below even or a minus 65 minutes on the PK. We have only has 2.6 power plays per game when the game is within 3 goals.

We have had two games where we had more time on the PP and one where we had more PP time in the first period. Keep in mind that the majority of teams to score first win. We also received a measly 5 PP in ten games in the third period of close games.

Humor yourself and compare the Leafs PP's and when they occur during the game. Their quantity of 5 on 3 stats are fun to also follow.

#2 dellsharpie

dellsharpie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:56 PM

I like what you want to prove, but an arbitrary collection of numbers isn't really evidence. You should use statistics, normalize the factors and give standard deviations from the league.

With those values your numbers because much more significant.

#3 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 10:50 PM

man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?
Posted Image

#4 dellsharpie

dellsharpie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 11:03 PM

man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?


Becareful with the slinging around of 'you guys', these types of generalizations are why a lot of people think you are attacking them.

I told him to normalize the data with league standard deviations, I bet if he did that he will find that comparatively the Sens take a normal amount of penalties in relation to the league/themselves.

#5 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 11:18 PM

Becareful with the slinging around of 'you guys', these types of generalizations are why a lot of people think you are attacking them.

I told him to normalize the data with league standard deviations, I bet if he did that he will find that comparatively the Sens take a normal amount of penalties in relation to the league/themselves.


sorry dell i wasnt referring to you.

the people who buy into the conspiracy theories know who they are. i was not trying to offend anyone else
Posted Image

#6 Sweatred

Sweatred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 810 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 06:35 AM

I am equally frustrated as you are about " those guys" who ramble on about conspiracy theories as people with your belief that the number penalties and the time of penalties is insignificant. When the Ducks turned into the cleanest team in the playoffs against the Sens and the Sens turned into the dirtiest I understand you would suggest the Sens were outplayed and had to take penalties to slow the better team down. I respectfully disagree.

There are penalties on nearly every shift by the book in the NHL.. Referees do not call all penalties. I rarely have a problem with most calls against the Sens and I realize that many others go uncalled. They do tend to have some phantom calls that the broadcast crews fail to find (such as the Neil hit last game and Gonchar's first slash/hook). My main problem is with the timing of the calls against the Sens and the quantity of non calls that go the other way. In the third period of close games we have had a total of 5 power plays to help us cushion a lead or catch up. Opposing teams have had 21 PP's during the same time to do the same. I do not need to calculate SD to know that puts us in a disadvantaged position.

The Sens have the most number of penalties against them and the fewest power plays. MacLean has yet to complain publicly for obvious reasons but he will at some point. Clouston and Murray have complained publicly in the past about the lack of PP chances Interfering with their "PP rhythm" which is their indirect way of complaining about the calls.








uote name='23sens23' timestamp='1320205821' post='311621']
man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?
[/quote]

#7 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:51 AM

I am equally frustrated as you are about " those guys" who ramble on about conspiracy theories as people with your belief that the number penalties and the time of penalties is insignificant. When the Ducks turned into the cleanest team in the playoffs against the Sens and the Sens turned into the dirtiest I understand you would suggest the Sens were outplayed and had to take penalties to slow the better team down. I respectfully disagree.

There are penalties on nearly every shift by the book in the NHL.. Referees do not call all penalties. I rarely have a problem with most calls against the Sens and I realize that many others go uncalled. They do tend to have some phantom calls that the broadcast crews fail to find (such as the Neil hit last game and Gonchar's first slash/hook). My main problem is with the timing of the calls against the Sens and the quantity of non calls that go the other way. In the third period of close games we have had a total of 5 power plays to help us cushion a lead or catch up. Opposing teams have had 21 PP's during the same time to do the same. I do not need to calculate SD to know that puts us in a disadvantaged position.

The Sens have the most number of penalties against them and the fewest power plays. MacLean has yet to complain publicly for obvious reasons but he will at some point. Clouston and Murray have complained publicly in the past about the lack of PP chances Interfering with their "PP rhythm" which is their indirect way of complaining about the calls.


the sens have to earn those PP's when they are trying to cushion a lead. when the sens have a lead they have been known for years as a team that tries to sit on it rather then keep the pedal to the metal and strive for a blow out. when teams do this that means they are not hard on the forecheck and not making it tough for opposing teams dmen to make plays and cause them to create turnovers which leads teams to take penalties to prevent goals. looking at it from the otehr side when the sens sit back and sit on a lead they allow the otehr team to break out and get in the sens zone and work it around and with a young team like the sens they end up taking a panalty to make up for them losing positioning. this isnt rocket science

as for the two calls you referenced. both of gonchars hooking penalties he had he stick parallel to the icce and in on a players hands that is a penalty 100% of the time. and i dont know which neil penalty you are talking about the because all 3 that he took were legitimate penalties. the slash he came down on lucics stick and took away a scoring chance=penalty, the goalie interference he ran into the goalie = penalty every time, and the boarding he hit someone violently into the boards = you guessed it......penalty


and your first paragraph you mean to say the refs were out to get the sens is a more likely explanation then the fact a younger, smaller senators team could not keep up to the bigger, faster, stronger ducks team? did you actually expect a d core that contained preissing, corvo, meszaros (age 21) and redden to be able to contain getzlaf, perry, penner(when he was a beast) and selanne over a 7 game series without having to take penalties to slow them down? yeah you are right it must of been a conspiracy.....good grief people
Posted Image

#8 Superstu

Superstu

    Advanced Member

  • Newbies
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:59 AM

I also have no problems with most the calls made against the Sens, they take way to much silly undisciplined penalties. I also can see that they are missed calls both ways. My frustration is with the inconsistency of the calls. If the refs are going to be strict they need to the whole game. Most recent example is the Rangers game with the call on Konopka and then the Alphy hit. These type of calls are game changers and would be no problem for me if they could maintain consistency. It may be because I am biased to the sens but I do get the impression that more often than not the Sens are at the short end of this stick.

#9 mpsensfan1

mpsensfan1

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 131 posts
  • LocationBurlington, Ontario, Canada

Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:59 AM

Not at NHL ice level to know, but might any beaking from player towards ref calls have an influence as to what is called thereafter?

Whereby the unsportsman isn't called outright, but the "take your number and see you next period" low key is?

These refs have got to have thick skin by the time they reach the NHL level, but I wonder if their egos don't allow for a subliminal "questionable" call now and again.

With the extra ref on the ice now you do however expect a bit more consistency of calls made, regardless of how many or to which team. They should set the standard for the game early as to what is going to be tolerated and leave it up to the players/coaches to continue in the same vain they know will be called or not for that contest.

A league standard in theory is sought but doesn't occur always in practice. Hits, hooks, etc., seem to be called at various levels of intensity from game to game, but should be at least on par during the SAME game, IMHO.

Cheers
Posted Image

#10 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 11:08 AM

I also have no problems with most the calls made against the Sens, they take way to much silly undisciplined penalties. I also can see that they are missed calls both ways. My frustration is with the inconsistency of the calls. If the refs are going to be strict they need to the whole game. Most recent example is the Rangers game with the call on Konopka and then the Alphy hit. These type of calls are game changers and would be no problem for me if they could maintain consistency. It may be because I am biased to the sens but I do get the impression that more often than not the Sens are at the short end of this stick.


your post started off so promising then byt the end you contradicted what you said in the beginning

i dont understand why you are upset about the calls in the rangers game. in that game the right calls were made. konopka has a history and when they saw anisimov was staying down the refs assessed a major penalty. I can guarantee you that if a guy like greening made the hit it wouldnt of been 5 minutes.

and on the alfie play the refs got it right during the geam by assessing wolski with a 2 minute penalty. there was no way that was worth a 5 minute major.

where the ball was dropped was after the game during the review by the disciplinary board. but lets not side track this topic into one that we are already discussing in depth in the hockey talk tab
Posted Image

#11 Superstu

Superstu

    Advanced Member

  • Newbies
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 12:24 PM

Hey 23,

I probably used a bad example. I chose it because it was fresh in people’s minds.

To me the refs made a good call initially (as you pointed out) by 2 minutes for boarding. Then on review of the replay they changed it to a Major + 10 misconduct. To me this is where they where inconsistent. They should not have taken similar action on review of the hit on Alphy?

I understand the point on who is was also, However is it not the leagues roll to make that decision when evaluating suspensions. The refs (again in my opinion) should be calling the game consistently based on the hit not the person.

is being a physical player the same as a dirty or malicious player? Granted I don’t know much about him so correct me if he is, I didn’t know much about him before the Sens.

Again sorry for using that example, I am trying to point out the consistency.

#12 west77

west77

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,894 posts
  • LocationVancouver Island

Posted 02 November 2011 - 02:54 PM

If a person uses the "stats cruncher" on the main NHL.com site, there isn't anything too significant on there about who gets what PP opportunities, PP time, PKs and PK time, whatever.

A lot of this probably just has to do with varying coaching systems, styles of play, skill, aggressiveness, experience levels of players, etc.

I agree though that consistent refereeing is important.

The Columbus Blue Jackets lead the league in PPs and time on the PP and their PP goals are ironically the lowest in the league. Carolina leads the league with 5-on-3 opportunities. Nothing too exciting here. Ottawa seems to be middle of the pack in a lot of areas relative to other teams, except in one area.

Ottawa is tied with Vancouver for the league lead with 13 PP Goals! :)
Posted Image

#13 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 03:11 PM

If a person uses the "stats cruncher" on the main NHL.com site, there isn't anything too significant on there about who gets what PP opportunities, PP time, PKs and PK time, whatever.

A lot of this probably just has to do with varying coaching systems, styles of play, skill, aggressiveness, experience levels of players, etc.

I agree though that consistent refereeing is important.

The Columbus Blue Jackets lead the league in PPs and time on the PP and their PP goals are ironically the lowest in the league. Carolina leads the league with 5-on-3 opportunities. Nothing too exciting here. Ottawa seems to be middle of the pack in a lot of areas relative to other teams, except in one area.

Ottawa is tied with Vancouver for the league lead with 13 PP Goals! :)


Wait a minute Westy, just wait one minute. are you telling me that after you actually looked at the stats there isnt a conspiracy against the Ottawa Senators?????? How can that be????
Posted Image

#14 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 03:21 PM

Hey 23,

I probably used a bad example. I chose it because it was fresh in people’s minds.

To me the refs made a good call initially (as you pointed out) by 2 minutes for boarding. Then on review of the replay they changed it to a Major + 10 misconduct. To me this is where they where inconsistent. They should not have taken similar action on review of the hit on Alphy?

I understand the point on who is was also, However is it not the leagues roll to make that decision when evaluating suspensions. The refs (again in my opinion) should be calling the game consistently based on the hit not the person.

is being a physical player the same as a dirty or malicious player? Granted I don’t know much about him so correct me if he is, I didn’t know much about him before the Sens.

Again sorry for using that example, I am trying to point out the consistency.


konopka isnt necessarily a dirty player but he does play physical and has received suspensions in the past for some of his questionable decisions on the ice.

i know you are trying to make a consistency point but comparing a boarding penalty to a check to the head penalty on consistency is a tough comparison to make. now comparing apples to apples. if you look at similar plays that happened to alfie like when ference hit halpern in the playoffs last year. he was only assessed a two minute penalty for almost the exact same play. so that is pretty consistent if you ask me (ference was not suspended either). the boarding call on konopka i think if you asked a 10 refs i bet 5 would say 2 minutes and 5 would say major penalty. it was a penalty no doubt but bordered on the 2 minute or 5 minute penalty. throw in the fact konopka was the one who threw the hit and the fact anisimov sold it like a pro it resulted in 5 minutes

but refs notice that sort of thing that anisimov did more then anything else. he made the refs look bad and i can guarantee the next time he gets ran into the boards the refs will not be as willing to call a penalty on him let alone a 5 minute major
Posted Image

#15 ClarkL

ClarkL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,159 posts
  • LocationSaskatchewan

Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:19 PM

Yah, Anisimov made it look like he was near death and couldn't move, get the stretcher boys. And then once they've got the power play he's on his feet on the power play less than a minute later.

I think they should carry over the quite time rule to things like that, if you're so injured on a hit from behind that you're on the ice for a minute, you have to go sit in the quite room with a Doctor for 10 to be sure you're OK to play.

Under no circumstances should we see a player so injured that a major was needed to be called out on the ice within a minute of the event occurring.

#16 First_Overall

First_Overall

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:39 PM

the sens have to earn those PP's when they are trying to cushion a lead. when the sens have a lead they have been known for years as a team that tries to sit on it rather then keep the pedal to the metal and strive for a blow out. when teams do this that means they are not hard on the forecheck and not making it tough for opposing teams dmen to make plays and cause them to create turnovers which leads teams to take penalties to prevent goals. looking at it from the otehr side when the sens sit back and sit on a lead they allow the otehr team to break out and get in the sens zone and work it around and with a young team like the sens they end up taking a panalty to make up for them losing positioning. this isnt rocket science

as for the two calls you referenced. both of gonchars hooking penalties he had he stick parallel to the icce and in on a players hands that is a penalty 100% of the time. and i dont know which neil penalty you are talking about the because all 3 that he took were legitimate penalties. the slash he came down on lucics stick and took away a scoring chance=penalty, the goalie interference he ran into the goalie = penalty every time, and the boarding he hit someone violently into the boards = you guessed it......penalty


and your first paragraph you mean to say the refs were out to get the sens is a more likely explanation then the fact a younger, smaller senators team could not keep up to the bigger, faster, stronger ducks team? did you actually expect a d core that contained preissing, corvo, meszaros (age 21) and redden to be able to contain getzlaf, perry, penner(when he was a beast) and selanne over a 7 game series without having to take penalties to slow them down? yeah you are right it must of been a conspiracy.....good grief people


i realize that there are always gonna be weak and questionable calls by the refs, but do you seriously think neil deserved that goalie interference penalty?, from what i saw he was shoved into thomas by a boston player, if he wasnt shoved there by that player i doubt he wouldve made contact, maybe you saw somthing different but thats what i saw and beleive
Posted Image

#17 23sens23

23sens23

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,811 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 05:57 PM

i realize that there are always gonna be weak and questionable calls by the refs, but do you seriously think neil deserved that goalie interference penalty?, from what i saw he was shoved into thomas by a boston player, if he wasnt shoved there by that player i doubt he wouldve made contact, maybe you saw somthing different but thats what i saw and beleive


from how i saw it neil was tangled up with a bruins player and yes he was pushed but the rule on that states the player has to make an effort to get out of the way of the goalie. especially when the goalie is in the blue paint. which in this case neil did not do. and not knocking neil because i love when he does the same thing and gets away with it which he has done on a few occasions where he is tangled up with a player and ends up on top of the goalie. but this time it did not work out and it is a penalty
Posted Image

#18 First_Overall

First_Overall

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 06:27 PM

i hear what your saying about the rule, i guess it depends on the ref and their interpretation of the rule because like u said ive seen that happen countless times before with no penalty
Posted Image

#19 west77

west77

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,894 posts
  • LocationVancouver Island

Posted 03 November 2011 - 09:33 AM

Yah, Anisimov made it look like he was near death and couldn't move, get the stretcher boys. And then once they've got the power play he's on his feet on the power play less than a minute later.

I think they should carry over the quite time rule to things like that, if you're so injured on a hit from behind that you're on the ice for a minute, you have to go sit in the quite room with a Doctor for 10 to be sure you're OK to play.

Under no circumstances should we see a player so injured that a major was needed to be called out on the ice within a minute of the event occurring.


That is ludicris. Drives me nuts.

I agree with you 100% Clark on the quiet time rule. It makes perfect sense to me.
Posted Image

#20 Sweatred

Sweatred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 810 posts

Posted 03 November 2011 - 12:55 PM

Bettman works for the owners and his most significant responsbility is to increase the bottom line of the league. He has pubically stated that the league's primiary goal is to pursue and expand a national televesion contract in the US (Versus / NBC / Comcast etc).

The CBC's contract with the NHL is lucrative and heavily driven by the large fan base of the Maple Leafs and to a lesser extent Montreal, Vancouver, etc. etc.... with Ottawa contributing the smallest fan base (not sure about Winnipeg). Bettman does not care if the Leafs win the Stanley Cup. He only cares if people who start watching CBC and/or Leafs broadcast are still watching close to the end of the game. That ensure AD revenues remain high which allows the NHL to maintain/demand their lucrative contract with the CBC for games shown in Canada.

Ottawa's hockey market is close to saturated and our national television exposure and financial contribution to the NHL's pocket is limited. This is the first year that most Sens games are shown on a Saturday night (CBC). The last 10 years most of our Saturday games were against a team that was already plaing (TOR, MON, VAN, PITT, BUFF etc.) The potential for growth in Ottawa's television market is limited. For the most part most of us will remain fans through the good and bad and we do not require a "fantastic playoff experience" to generate new fans.

Bettman's best way to sell tickets in cities where sucess if financially needed to maintain revenue or provide growth is to ensure that fans have a good experience and the only thing that guarentees that is winning. A good power play can score around 30% of the time so if one team has 10 extra PP's over a 10 game stretch that results in 3 extra goals which likely translate to any etra tie/win etc or more is they are timed appropiately.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users