|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 9, 2018 8:21:01 GMT -4
I remember quite a few years ago, our beloved Christian Larue mentioned to Neil Hodge that teams always strive for a combined PK + PP value of 120. Today we have a PK at 90% and a PP at 27.3% ... combining to 117.3 ... close ... but of course it is a very small sample. But it is something to keep an eye on going forward.
Other notable teams have the following numbers in no particular order ...
Chicoutimi ... 23.2 + 96.2 = 119.4
Rouyn-Noranda ... 31.1 + 84.9 = 116.0
Rimouski ... 44.0 + 77.8 = 121.8
Halifax ... 14.3 + 85.7 = 100.0
Baie-Comeau ... 17.9 + 75.8 = 93.7
Drummondville ... 13.3 + 78.8 = 92.2
Saint John ... 0.0 + 69.6 = 69.6
Bathurst ... 25.7 + 80.0 = 105.7
Cape Breton ... 22.2 + 84.0 = 106.2
Charlottetown ... 14.3 + 81.8 = 96.1
It is interesting to look at the numbers and see Rimouski with a 44% PP ... and Halifax and Drummondville with such talented rosters with PP% under 15%. Baie-Comeau have a PP of 17.9% but have scored the 2nd most goals (behind Rimouski). Obviously these are areas that the top teams will work on and improve.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Oct 9, 2018 8:35:30 GMT -4
Without putting a lot of thought into the variables, I am assuming the league wide average would be 100, as for every PP goal someone scores, someone else gave one up on the PK ... so anything between 95-105 is probably average ... 110 is good ... and 120 would likely be elite ... likewise, 90 is probably bad, and anything below becomes horrid ...
Anyone have time to show us what full season numbers looked like last year?
|
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Oct 9, 2018 8:53:10 GMT -4
These are all last seasons numbers, I think striving for 120 combined is a little high, I’ve always thought the number to be ower since 120 is basically unattainable. I always thought teams wanted to aim to be 100 or higher on the season. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing anything below 90 is absolutely terrible, 90-95 is bad, 95-100 is probably average, 100-105 is good, 105-110 is elite and anything above 110 is amazing.
BLB 28.1 + 79.3 = 107.4
BAT 25.4 + 84.3 = 109.7
VIC 23.2 + 84.8 = 107.5
CAP 22.4 + 80.2 = 102.6
GAT 22.0 + 80.1 = 102.1
ROU 21.0 + 83.2 = 104.2
DRU 20.6 + 80.7 = 101.3
BAC 20.1 + 78.3 = 98.4
SHE 20.0 + 77.4 = 97.4
HAL 19.6 + 82.1 = 101.7
QUE 19.5 + 81.4 = 100.9
MON 19.5 + 79.9 = 99.4
RIM 18.8 + 85.8 = 104.6
CHI 17.5 + 76.9 = 94.4
SNB 15.5 + 77.1 = 92.6
VDO 15.3 + 76.9 = 92.2
CHA 15.1 + 80.2 = 95.3
SHA 14.9 + 71.6 = 86.5
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Oct 9, 2018 8:55:47 GMT -4
These are all last seasons numbers, I think striving for 120 combined is a little high, I’ve always thought the number to be a little lower since 120 is basically unattainable. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing anything below 90 is absolutely terrible, 90-95 is bad, 95-100 is probably average, 100-105 is good, 105-110 is elite and anything above 110 is amazing. BLB 28.1 + 79.3 = 107.4 BAT 25.4 + 84.3 = 109.7 VIC 23.2 + 84.8 = 107.5 CAP 22.4 + 80.2 = 102.6 GAT 22.0 + 80.1 = 102.1 ROU 21.0 + 83.2 = 104.2 DRU 20.6 + 80.7 = 101.3 BAC 20.1 + 78.3 = 98.4 SHE 20.0 + 77.4 = 97.4 HAL 19.6 + 82.1 = 101.7 QUE 19.5 + 81.4 = 100.9 MON 19.5 + 79.9 = 99.4 RIM 18.8 + 85.8 = 104.6 CHI 17.5 + 76.9 = 94.4 SNB 15.5 + 77.1 = 92.6 VDO 15.3 + 76.9 = 92.2 CHA 15.1 + 80.2 = 95.3 SHA 14.9 + 71.6 = 86.5 It's a pretty telling stat, two of the top 3 teams ended up in the final. Top team won. |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Oct 9, 2018 9:14:14 GMT -4
Just a little more data to look at for comparisons sake.
2016/17:
SNB 29.9 + 85.4 = 115.3
CHA 25.7 + 77.2 = 102.9
SHE 25.3 + 74.8 = 100.1
CHI 25.0 + 76.0 = 101.0
VIC 23.8 + 79.4 = 103.2
SHA 23.2 + 83.0 = 106.2
GAT 23.0 + 74.9 = 97.9
RIM 22.6 + 80.7 = 103.3
ROU 22.2 + 81.5 = 103.7
BLB 22.1 + 79.4 = 101.5
CAP 22.0 + 79.7 = 101.7
BAT 22.0 + 77.6 = 99.6
QUE 18.7 + 76.9 = 95.6
HAL 18.5 + 76.9 = 95.4
VDO 18.1 + 71.1 = 89.2
DRU 17.6 + 81.5 = 99.1
BAC 16.6 + 78.5 = 95.1
MON 13.4 + 74.8 = 88.2
2015/16:
SHA 29.1 + 75.8 = 104.9
CHI 25.9 + 79.0 = 104.9
CHA 24.9 + 78.6 = 103.5
VIC 23.9 + 76.0 = 99.9
SHE 23.6 + 75.8 = 99.4
ROU 23.6 + 83.6 = 107.2
RIM 22.8 + 81.1 = 103.9
VDO 22.5 + 77.0 = 99.5
CAP 22.3 + 80.3 = 102.6
MON 22.0 + 77.7 = 99.7
SNB 21.9 + 80.5 = 102.4
BAT 21.8 + 77.9 = 99.7
GAT 21.2 + 85.2 = 106.4
DRU 19.4 + 74.2 = 93.6
QUE 19.0 + 74.3 = 93.3
HAL 17.2 + 75.6 = 92.8
BLB 16.7 + 80.4 = 97.1
BAC 16.1 + 74.0 = 90.1
|
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Oct 9, 2018 9:24:07 GMT -4
These are all last seasons numbers, I think striving for 120 combined is a little high, I’ve always thought the number to be a little lower since 120 is basically unattainable. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing anything below 90 is absolutely terrible, 90-95 is bad, 95-100 is probably average, 100-105 is good, 105-110 is elite and anything above 110 is amazing. BLB 28.1 + 79.3 = 107.4 BAT 25.4 + 84.3 = 109.7 VIC 23.2 + 84.8 = 107.5 CAP 22.4 + 80.2 = 102.6 GAT 22.0 + 80.1 = 102.1 ROU 21.0 + 83.2 = 104.2 DRU 20.6 + 80.7 = 101.3 BAC 20.1 + 78.3 = 98.4 SHE 20.0 + 77.4 = 97.4 HAL 19.6 + 82.1 = 101.7 QUE 19.5 + 81.4 = 100.9 MON 19.5 + 79.9 = 99.4 RIM 18.8 + 85.8 = 104.6 CHI 17.5 + 76.9 = 94.4 SNB 15.5 + 77.1 = 92.6 VDO 15.3 + 76.9 = 92.2 CHA 15.1 + 80.2 = 95.3 SHA 14.9 + 71.6 = 86.5 It's a pretty telling stat, two of the top 3 teams ended up in the final. Top team won. I didn’t look at every team for all the seasons but it’s pretty telling when looking at the winners of the last 10 Championships. You need to be elite on special teams (which we all knew) but to see the numbers behind it, basically tells you that you need to be at minimum about 105 combined and most likely closer to 110 to win the league. 2017/18: Bathurst 109.7 2016/17: Saint John 115.3 2015/16: Rouyn-Noranda 107.2 2014/15: Rimouski 105.8 2013/14: Val d’Or 111.4 2012/13: Halifax 109.2 2011/12: Saint John 104.9 2010/11: Saint John 108.8 2009/10: Moncton 110.0 2008/09: Drummondville 114.7 |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Oct 9, 2018 9:37:45 GMT -4
These are all last seasons numbers, I think striving for 120 combined is a little high, I’ve always thought the number to be ower since 120 is basically unattainable. I always thought teams wanted to aim to be 100 or higher on the season. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing anything below 90 is absolutely terrible, 90-95 is bad, 95-100 is probably average, 100-105 is good, 105-110 is elite and anything above 110 is amazing. BLB 28.1 + 79.3 = 107.4 BAT 25.4 + 84.3 = 109.7 VIC 23.2 + 84.8 = 107.5 CAP 22.4 + 80.2 = 102.6 GAT 22.0 + 80.1 = 102.1 ROU 21.0 + 83.2 = 104.2 DRU 20.6 + 80.7 = 101.3 BAC 20.1 + 78.3 = 98.4 SHE 20.0 + 77.4 = 97.4 HAL 19.6 + 82.1 = 101.7 QUE 19.5 + 81.4 = 100.9 MON 19.5 + 79.9 = 99.4 RIM 18.8 + 85.8 = 104.6 CHI 17.5 + 76.9 = 94.4 SNB 15.5 + 77.1 = 92.6 VDO 15.3 + 76.9 = 92.2 CHA 15.1 + 80.2 = 95.3 SHA 14.9 + 71.6 = 86.5 If you add up the totals, my hunch was right and 100 is an average performance ... based on the results, it would appear that over 102 is good, 98-102 is average, and below 98 is poor - in 2017-18 there were six teams in each of those brackets. As for Larue striving for 120, either he was out to lunch, or SteveUL's memory is off ... given SteveUL's exemplary posting history, I am betting on the former ...  |
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Oct 9, 2018 10:02:17 GMT -4
Just a little more data to look at for comparisons sake. 2016/17: SNB 29.9 + 85.4 = 115.3 CHA 25.7 + 77.2 = 102.9 SHE 25.3 + 74.8 = 100.1 CHI 25.0 + 76.0 = 101.0 VIC 23.8 + 79.4 = 103.2 SHA 23.2 + 83.0 = 106.2 GAT 23.0 + 74.9 = 97.9 RIM 22.6 + 80.7 = 103.3 ROU 22.2 + 81.5 = 103.7 BLB 22.1 + 79.4 = 101.5 CAP 22.0 + 79.7 = 101.7 BAT 22.0 + 77.6 = 99.6 QUE 18.7 + 76.9 = 95.6 HAL 18.5 + 76.9 = 95.4 VDO 18.1 + 71.1 = 89.2 DRU 17.6 + 81.5 = 99.1 BAC 16.6 + 78.5 = 95.1 MON 13.4 + 74.8 = 88.2 2015/16: SHA 29.1 + 75.8 = 104.9 CHI 25.9 + 79.0 = 104.9 CHA 24.9 + 78.6 = 103.5 VIC 23.9 + 76.0 = 99.9 SHE 23.6 + 75.8 = 99.4 ROU 23.6 + 83.6 = 107.2 RIM 22.8 + 81.1 = 103.9 VDO 22.5 + 77.0 = 99.5 CAP 22.3 + 80.3 = 102.6 MON 22.0 + 77.7 = 99.7 SNB 21.9 + 80.5 = 102.4 BAT 21.8 + 77.9 = 99.7 GAT 21.2 + 85.2 = 106.4 DRU 19.4 + 74.2 = 93.6 QUE 19.0 + 74.3 = 93.3 HAL 17.2 + 75.6 = 92.8 BLB 16.7 + 80.4 = 97.1 BAC 16.1 + 74.0 = 90.1 Seeing that 2016/2017 wildcats pp #  |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 9, 2018 10:24:00 GMT -4
These are all last seasons numbers, I think striving for 120 combined is a little high, I’ve always thought the number to be ower since 120 is basically unattainable. I always thought teams wanted to aim to be 100 or higher on the season. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing anything below 90 is absolutely terrible, 90-95 is bad, 95-100 is probably average, 100-105 is good, 105-110 is elite and anything above 110 is amazing. BLB 28.1 + 79.3 = 107.4 BAT 25.4 + 84.3 = 109.7 VIC 23.2 + 84.8 = 107.5 CAP 22.4 + 80.2 = 102.6 GAT 22.0 + 80.1 = 102.1 ROU 21.0 + 83.2 = 104.2 DRU 20.6 + 80.7 = 101.3 BAC 20.1 + 78.3 = 98.4 SHE 20.0 + 77.4 = 97.4 HAL 19.6 + 82.1 = 101.7 QUE 19.5 + 81.4 = 100.9 MON 19.5 + 79.9 = 99.4 RIM 18.8 + 85.8 = 104.6 CHI 17.5 + 76.9 = 94.4 SNB 15.5 + 77.1 = 92.6 VDO 15.3 + 76.9 = 92.2 CHA 15.1 + 80.2 = 95.3 SHA 14.9 + 71.6 = 86.5 If you add up the totals, my hunch was right and 100 is an average performance ... based on the results, it would appear that over 102 is good, 98-102 is average, and below 98 is poor - in 2017-18 there were six teams in each of those brackets. As for Larue striving for 120, either he was out to lunch, or SteveUL's memory is off ... given SteveUL's exemplary posting history, I am betting on the former ... That was the number he stated. It doesn't really matter so much that it is not quite attainable ... setting it at 100 is too low. But where the top teams change their look from before and after Xmas, their pre-Xmas numbers tend to hold back their post-Xmas numbers. I would think that some of the top teams have achieved 120 over the final 30 games of the regular season. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Oct 9, 2018 10:39:34 GMT -4
I would think that some of the top teams have achieved 120 over the final 30 games of the regular season. Perhaps, but it would be rare ... and outstanding. If we add the top PP and PK numbers in the league (not necessarily posted by the same team), for 2017/18 you get 114, 2016/17 115, and 2015/16 114 ... of note the 2016/17 numbers both belonged to the same team, the Sea Dogs - so probably your best bet in recent years to have eclipsed 120 over the 2nd half ... wonder who coached them? Almost seems like he knew what he was doing ... huh RKI? |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Oct 9, 2018 11:13:05 GMT -4
If you add up the totals, my hunch was right and 100 is an average performance ... based on the results, it would appear that over 102 is good, 98-102 is average, and below 98 is poor - in 2017-18 there were six teams in each of those brackets. As for Larue striving for 120, either he was out to lunch, or SteveUL's memory is off ... given SteveUL's exemplary posting history, I am betting on the former ... That was the number he stated. It doesn't really matter so much that it is not quite attainable ... setting it at 100 is too low. But where the top teams change their look from before and after Xmas, their pre-Xmas numbers tend to hold back their post-Xmas numbers. I would think that some of the top teams have achieved 120 over the final 30 games of the regular season. Bathurst last year was really good in their final 30 games and they could “only” muster up a 112.4% (26.2 on the PP and 86.2 on the PK). Saint John in 2016/2017 over their final 30 games was 28.0% on the PP and 87.5% on the PK, still only getting them to 115.5%... 120 appears to be so far out of the realm of possibilities that I don’t think it’s attainable even by the most stacked teams over their final 30 games. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Oct 9, 2018 11:16:26 GMT -4
That was the number he stated. It doesn't really matter so much that it is not quite attainable ... setting it at 100 is too low. But where the top teams change their look from before and after Xmas, their pre-Xmas numbers tend to hold back their post-Xmas numbers. I would think that some of the top teams have achieved 120 over the final 30 games of the regular season. Bathurst last year was really good in their final 30 games and they could “only” muster up a 112.4% (26.2 on the PP and 86.2 on the PK). Saint John in 2016/2017 over their final 30 games was 28.0% on the PP and 87.5% on the PK, still only getting them to 115.5%... 120 appears to be so far out of the realm of possibilities that I don’t think it’s attainable even by the most stacked teams over their final 30 games. 90% PK is very very hard to attain, so is 30% PP...the best PP's are around 25-27%. Even if you led the league in both you might only get to 115% as you said. Anything above 110% is excellent. |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Oct 9, 2018 11:26:21 GMT -4
Bathurst last year was really good in their final 30 games and they could “only” muster up a 112.4% (26.2 on the PP and 86.2 on the PK). Saint John in 2016/2017 over their final 30 games was 28.0% on the PP and 87.5% on the PK, still only getting them to 115.5%... 120 appears to be so far out of the realm of possibilities that I don’t think it’s attainable even by the most stacked teams over their final 30 games. 90% PK is very very hard to attain, so is 30% PP...the best PP's are around 25-27%. Even if you led the league in both you might only get to 115% as you said. Anything above 110% is excellent. That’s exactly what I thought too, anything above 110 is basically as good as you’re going to get. Somewhere between 105-110 is for the upper echelon teams and where I think you’d find most contenders on a yearly basis. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 9, 2018 12:49:17 GMT -4
Look ... I'm not suggesting that Larue is right in the number he chose ... but it is the number he quoted in the article. But again, if I'm going to set a goal for my team I want to set something that is just barely out of reach. So if 115 is reachable then I want my team to shoot for 120.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2018 17:33:53 GMT -4
When you set a Goal of 120 maybe it is not easily attainable but striving for something doesnT mean you reach your goal. SometIke’s you set a stretch goal that is very very hard to reach but you have to keep pushing if you want a shot at it.
|
|
