In a vacuum, there’s nothing wrong with getting a single point on the back half of a road back-to-back at the end of a road trip.
Hockey, as they say, isn’t played on paper, nor is it played in a vacuum. It is played on the ice. One reason hockey analytics are difficult compared to baseball or even basketball is that in those sports, every event has been broken down to independent states. Possessions in basketball are even something that can be measured on the box score, meaning the distinction between offence and defence is easier to draw.
Hockey is a bit more random and a bit more chaotic. The context of a given shift matters a lot, just as the context for any given game. A single point on the back half of a back-to-back, at the end of a five-game road trip and playing three games in four nights is fine. Usually. It’s not usual that this back-to-back game is against the worst team in the standings, that you’ve taken a 3-1 lead in the third period, and you’ve had a goal against called back to even force the overtime in the first place.
These Maple Leafs have tested the patience of their fans often over the past six seasons. While I’m by no means going to argue this is a good loss or that the team hasn’t exhibited some reason for concern, I’d be optimistic about this team’s ability to turn it around. The Leafs have yet to break a game open and score that 4th goal or 5th goal.
This is still a good corsi team beset by a low PDO (these stats got popular to use for a reason). The problem is that the 10-game start is more reminiscent of the 2016-17 team that started slow (out-chancing and getting a few bad bounces) versus the 2021-22 version (dominating and get a lot more bad bounces). The bar to clear for this team to deem the regular season successful is a lot closer to 2022 than 2017, when the team had several rookies, not Auston Matthews in his prime.
Watching this team, a few things look off, and that doesn’t mean it takes a coaching change or a personnel change for things to start to look a bit better. Don’t bobble passes on breakouts or in the neutral zone, be less selective with shot selection, try and avoid entry passes where the receiving player has no speed.
OK, how do we analyze this one?
5v5 shots and scoring chances
This was an even game territorially, with the Ducks having a more distinct advantage in scoring chances.
Surprisingly, this wasn’t a 1st period/rest of game split (I had the chances at 11-11 in P1, and 16-14 Anaheim the rest of the way). The Leafs were quite a bit better in the first period though, even if it didn’t show up on the shot clock, we will why later on.
For now, though, let’s concentrate on the fact that the Ducks did a great job of making Erik Kallgren work, putting 16 of their 28 scoring chance attempts on net. The Leafs forced Gibson to make just 4 “good” saves at 5v5 in the second period and beyond.
In addition, the Ducks had 6 scoring chances in the third period. They failed to get the shot away twice, and missed the net twice. Guess where the two chances that were on net went?
(I found a shot I could categorize as “miscellaneous”: Marner took a 45-footer at 5v5 after having gained the line at 4v4, and I don’t count 4v4 zone entries so it wasn’t labelled a “rush” chance)
The Leafs were better off the rush in this game, although 5 of their 7 rush chances came in the first period. In the second and third they played a bit tighter and weren’t exiting with speed as much or looking to force those opportunities. Malgin’s goal was a direct result of the Leafs twice, forcing a play in tight space and benefiting from the aggressive (both Robertson’s and Nylander’s passes were made under pressure).
Also, the Ducks cleaned up in transition chances, 9-0. That’s a sign that the Leafs were winning few battles in the neutral zone and weren’t able to create their own, but it’s also a staple of this Ducks team. They’re bad, sure, but they have enough weapons to hit hard if you let your guard down.
Leafs:
- It feels like a waste of time to analyze the individual efforts each night since we know what we’re looking for at this point. However, here we see that Marner wasn’t the main distributor in the offensive zone: Matthews was. And Bunting was the primary shooter, not Matthews
- Every line got some scoring chances, at the expense of the defenders who didn’t. Splitting Tavares and Nylander seemed to do the trick, although now you have two lines that kind of work instead of one line that really clicks. Maybe the Leafs do make a deal for bottom-six help to prevent against this. Clearly, the coaching staff doesn’t trust Nick Robertson, who had just three shifts in the third, and Aube-Kubel, who is now a press box regular after being pretty ineffective to start the season.
Ducks:
- The Ducks rank high on the PDOCast’s “Watchability” rankings, because they have defencemen that can transition the puck quickly and lots of real good offensive talent that can create scoring chances out of nowhere, like Troy Terry, Trevor Zegas, and apparently Derek Grant.
- Terry had a big night… kind of. He’s been on and off the ice with Zegras this season, and I would prefer, as a big Ducks fan, to have the two together so that Zegras can add to Terry’s shot. While Terry had five scoring chances, they were all rush or transition attempts where Terry would gain the blueline, come in close to the net, and whip one,, usually facing some defensive pressure. None of those scoring chances hit the net.
- While the Leafs had ever forward pick up some chances, so did the Ducks.
5v5 offensive zone entries
Controlled entries:
The Leafs entered with control 48% of the time in P1 and 35% of the time the rest of the way. They weren’t even getting the puck deep all the time when they took their foot off the gas after P1, with 20% of their entry attempts being failed (up from 14% in the first period). Most of their failed entries were dump-in attempts.
Meanwhile, the Ducks got a lot faster as the game went along, entering with control 39% in the first period but 50% thereafter. Maybe this was a fatigue thing, but it really did feel like the Leafs played far too cautiously with the lead.
Dump-ins:
Both teams’ forechecks were really working, but you can see the level of aggression, again in period splits. In the first, the Leafs recovered 73% of dump-ins (56% after), while the Ducks recovered just 40% (82% after). Forechecking is like the offensive line in football–it’s hard to notice for the casual viewer, but once you do, you really notice it.
Leafs:
- Kerfoot had a big entry attempt night in the 2LW position. He was a bit of the whipping boy here, failing to tap in an open net chance in the first period (that immediately turned into the 1-1 goal at the other side) and didn’t convert on the gift penalty shot in the third period. He looked fast and was noticeable, but I would have liked to see him carry the puck more.
- Bunting was not only taking shots, it was off his zone entries that the Leafs top line was generating a lot of its chances. Here’s what that looks like in practice, as an example: any of these shot attempts really could have gone in, with that line looking its best: winning puck battles, working around the OZ, and getting in close. The play also came after a DZ faceoff win. Just really feels like they’re close, even if the results aren’t there, making changes for changes can lead to making things worse, it’s just that you have a different idea of what changed when things eventually go right:
Ducks:
- We covered Terry’s scoring chances and entries above. There are some empty calories there, but it is impressive he was able to gain the blueline 7 times, even if I’d like to see him make better plays when he does.
- Real good night for Trevor Zegras, entering with control on all 7 of his attempts. I really hope this Anaheim team takes a big step this season, because the world may not be prepared for just how good a player he is. He scored twice, including the OT winner, of course, but that kind of downplays just how good a puckhandler and playmaker he is. If you keep west coast hours, you should be paying attention to this team.
Entry defence
Leafs:
- Rielly had a tough night here, allowing 10 controlled entries and the majority of Ducks scoring chances against came with him defending the original entry.
- Brodie and Holl also had trouble containing Anaheim’s rush, but held steady once in the zone and didn’t allow them very much. Both had some good sequences that stood out where they just tracked the forward deep in the zone and forced a perimeter shot or the attacker to just rim the puck around the glass. Not flashy, but it’s textbook stuff.
Ducks:
- My favourite Duck in this game was Kulikov, who has some fantastic defensive awareness. I’ve joked about the Hakanpaa Line (named after former Duck Jani Hakanpaa), similar to the Mendoza Line in baseball, it’s the minimum level of puck moving ability a defender needs to maintain his spot in the lineup. I would also like to introduve the Kulikov Line, which is similar, except in this case, it’s the minimum level of offensive talent you need to still be a productive defenceman in the NHL. Yes, I know he scored a goal in this game, but moving the puck is not his strength. Applying defensive pressure is. He was fantastic.
5v5 defensive zone exits and touches
Once again, we can look at the period splits and find the Leafs moved the puck far more efficiently early in the game. The Ducks began pressuring higher in the zone and Leafs forwards exited with control 41% in the 2nd and 3rd periods after doing so 65% of the time in the first. This level of conservative play didn’t prevent turnovers (the forward group turned it over 13% of the time in both periods)
[disregard the original line about turnovers here. I mis-read a column, and the Leafs were strong all night forcing Ducks turnovers]
Leafs:
- The D were pretty good call night when it came to exiting the DZ with control, and indeed, nobody did so less than half the time. Every D was also good at puck management, keeping themselves to 1 or 2 turnovers, all in double-digit touches (though since Kral’s turnover that led to a breakaway was in the neutral zone, it isn’t counted here)
- Marner, Kampf, and Engvall were the culprits for the Leafs in exiting less often with control as the game progressed. While Kampf flipping the puck out is understandable, Engvall and Marner need to be looking to exit with speed, given their strengths as players.
Ducks:
- Good night again for Terry in terms of puck movement.
- Klingberg was the only Ducks D that was moving the puck out of the zone well, but he also commit 3 turnovers on 22 touches. As mentioned, Kulikov has some puck management issues, but he’s so good defensively you can live with it.
- What’s the opposite of a perfect game? He didn’t play much, but Colton White did it.
—
Thank you for reading. I hope you found something informative in here. I’m not a huge fan of website comments, so if you have suggestions, notes on what you liked or didn’t like, kindly get at me on Twitter @camcharronyvr, or send me an email camcharron@gmail.com.
This will be the last free postgame report. I am still working out payment prices and trying to figure out the system. I’m also hoping to have time to renovate the site a little before it becomes paid.
Cam Charron's Hockey Stats 