Takes and trash talk from both ALL sides of the NHL's most obscure PATHETIC* rivalry

* Thanks, Kevin Lowe!

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

BoC Gameday—Six Games of Jekyll, Seven Games of Hyde

Anaheim Ducks (7-5-1, t-3rd in west) at Los Angeles Kings (3-6-1, 15th in west)
Let's try this again, shall we?

Lots to talk about on the Anaheim end of things, plus I'm sure Rudy's got plenty of Kings stuff to add, so let's get moving. First off is the Six Games of Jekyll / Seven Games of Hyde that's started off the Ducks' year. 1-5-0 in the first six, then 6-0-1 in the last seven, and the primary difference appears to be offense: the Ducks jumped from 2.17 goals scored per game to 4.14, and the power play jumped from a 1-for-24 success ratio to a 10-for-30 over the last seven games. Meanwhile, defense and penalty killing for the Ducks have stayed remarkably consistent (goals-against per game went from 3.33 to 3.29; penalty killing went from 80.6% to 80.5%).

As noted, the primary driver for this improved offense has been the awakening of the three-headed first star of the week: Ryan Getzlaf, Corey Perry, and Teemu Selanne. The table below shows the improvement that each of the three players has shown both in even-strength and power-play situations. Each statistic (goals/60 minutes, assists/60, points/60, plus/60, minus/60, differential/60) is shown twice for each player -- once to show their rates for the first six games and again to show their rates for the last seven games. Pay particular attention to the points/60 and the plus/60 -- the improvement is phenomenal.

Scoring rate splits for Getzlaf, Perry, and Selanne

Stats are shown: Games 1-6 / Games 7-13
(click image for larger view)


It's really not all good news for the Ducks, though (what? negativity?). Over the last seven games there have definitely been stretches where opponents have carried the play against the Ducks, though usually those have come after the Ducks have taken an early lead. The Ducks allowed two straight goals to Toronto, three straight to Ottawa, three straight to Montreal, two straight to Columbus, two straight to Detroit, five straight to Vancouver, and two straight to Calgary. There have definitely been offsetting stretches where Anaheim has owned the play (the Ducks have led 2-0 in five of the seven games), but there have definitely been stretches where Anaheim has sat back and held on for dear life.

Still, I can't complain. The primary objective of accumulating standings points has been wildly successful, and for every stretch where an opponent has controlled the game, there has been an equal-or-greater stretch that the Ducks have manufactured. Look at some of these Anaheim goal outbursts: @TOR - 2g in 5:14 in the 1st, @OTT - 3g in 10:01 in the 2nd, @MTL - 3g in 13:59 in the 2nd, @CBJ - 2g in 6:46 in the 3rd, DET - 2g in 8:06 in the 3rd, VAN - 3g in 1:40 in the 2nd, CGY - 2g in 0:45 in the 2nd. It's not a typical "shut the opposition down" streak that the Ducks have been known for in the past couple of years, but I'll certainly take it.

* * *

Mats Sundin is apparently intrigued by the Ducks? Uh, OK Mats. The Ducks can't really offer any money, easy travel schedule, or even a spot on the top power play unit, but if you're purely interested in the comfort of anonymity, Anaheim certainly is not a town to judge people for mid-season unretirements. As an added bonus, Sammy Pahlsson would automatically become your best friend -- he'd probably talk your ear off, finally given an opportunity to speak Swedish again. So Mr. Sundin, if you're truly interested, the only question remains: would you prefer a December Niedermayer return package or are you interested in the February Selanne plan?

* * *

The Ducks return to Staples Center tonight where they lost 6-3 in the third game of each team's season. Kings fans may be worried, as they haven't won in their past four games, but the Ducks have been streak-busters as of late. In chronological order, they have ended L.A.'s 2-game losing streak, San Jose's 4-game win streak, Montreal's 5-game win streak, Detroit's 5-game win streak, and Calgary's 6-game win streak. Anaheim's streak-ending trend may be just what the Kings need.

Prediction: In lately-typical Ducks fashion, Ducks win 4-3 by scoring the first four goals of the game, then sitting back and letting the Kings dominate the second half of the game. Goals by Perry, Moen, Pahlsson, and Kunitz.

p.s. Careful readers will note that I have said absolutely nothing about today's presidential election. To tell the truth, I haven't followed this race very well at all. Basically, my opinion of voting is the same it was two years ago; certainly vote if you feel led.

Go Ducks.

28 comments:

RudyKelly said...

You don't vote? Say hi to Hitler for me you scumbag.

Alexander Dubcek said...

Earl, I'm glad to see someone else appreciates how fundamentally irrational the act of voting is. I still remember as a freshman reading in a political science class that the odds of casting a deciding vote were worse than the odds you'd get killed en route to the polling place.

Voting: can we really afford to do it?

That said, I'm off to get my "I voted" sticker so I can hit up all dozen Starbucks for free coffee on my way back.

Earl Sleek said...

Say hi to Hitler for me you scumbag.

Hitler probably had an excellent track record of voting, but I will say hi to Hiller next time I see him.

Voting: can we really afford to do it?

Yeah, it's definitely a mixed-up process, but part of my rationale of not voting depends on others actually going to the polls. So please, voters go vote, but don't go too harsh on those of us lazybags who don't care for it. Smugness in the simple act of voting isn't attractive or patriotic.

Ian said...

Well, at the risk of coming across as sanctimonious, you're lucky to be living in a time and place in history where you can choose not to vote, or choose to be apathetic about the way government affects your life. The vast majority of human history hasn't allowed for such self-determination.

And the point of voting isn't to cast the deciding vote (??!!). It's to put your say in along with the rest of the citizenry, so the collective will of the governed shapes our government.

I'm more or less of the belief that if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain about anything related to government, from getting a speeding ticket and the bad potholes on Barranca St. to holy shit I just got drafted into the infantry and am being sent to pacify Tikrit....

Earl Sleek said...

And the point of voting isn't to cast the deciding vote (??!!). It's to put your say in along with the rest of the citizenry, so the collective will of the governed shapes our government.

I guess, but this is a bit more of a symbolic result than an actual result. An extra vote if it were cast tomorrow might make look voting look more popular, but I doubt it changes anything materially in terms of what was decided.

I'm more or less of the belief that if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain about anything related to government, from getting a speeding ticket and the bad potholes on Barranca St. to holy shit I just got drafted into the infantry and am being sent to pacify Tikrit....

I don't know if voting is necessarily just a license to complain (or if even such a notion exists), but whatever. I'm willing to listen to complaints about current issues equally from a person who does vote or a person who doesn't. I'd rather judge the message than the voting practices of the messenger, I guess.

If it helps (and it probably doesn't at all), I don't vote for things like NHL All-Star games, either. I don't see a pressing need for more losing votes or more winning votes when things will be already strongly decided without my involvement.

brokeyard said...

The problem isn't your way of thinking, the problem is that [b]millions of people think that way[/b]. And that really can effect the outcome.

brokeyard said...

Whoops, there I go using BB code. You get the point though.

brokeyard said...

Thought I should comment on the rest of the post: simply outstanding research.

Earl Sleek said...

The problem isn't your way of thinking, the problem is that millions of people think that way. And that really can effect the outcome.

No doubt it affects outcome, but is the solution just to browbeat people until they blindly comply?

If it's crucial that my vote be known, they should either (a) reduce the cost of voting -- I could vote from my computer, if it matters, (b) increase the cost of not voting, though that's kind of lame, (c) increase the importance of my vote, probably doing away with all the silly electoral college that seems strangely persistent, or (d) put me on the ballot.

If this problem is widespread enough, we probably need to look more at the process than the individuals not participating, I'd think.

Thought I should comment on the rest of the post: simply outstanding research.

Thanks, I'm a much better researcher on hockey than on political shit.

Anonymous said...

Im with you on this one Earl...until there is a cantidate that I fully wish to back, my opinion really dosnt matter. To me, this time around it seems to be a decision between voting for the two of lesser evils...like rooting for the Stars or the Wings...as a Ducks fan. Which do I choose? Id just rather not cheer and leave it up to fate...not that my cheering will help determine the winner...so I guess that didnt turn out as well as I had hoped.

Either way, I hope I got my point across.

BTW Earl, you can write yourself onto the ballot...if you truly wish to deal with the wonderful state our country is in at the moment. :)

Morbo said...

Absentee voting. Solves the time spent issue. I still don't get why people stand in line all day to punch holes in a piece of paper.

Although I don't agree with Earl's sentiment, he is partially correct, since he lives in the very blue state of california, his one vote probably doesn't count for much in our current electoral college system. (if he doesn't care about the state propositions on the ballot) Although ask Al Gore what he thinks about this topic and florida ...

I sure would like it if the Electoral college system met George Parros in a dark alley ...

Mike in OC said...

increase the cost of not voting

Actually the penalty is on the registered voter, unless you like jury duty.

That said, I'm off to vote.

Earl Sleek said...

(if he doesn't care about the state propositions on the ballot)

I don't care that much, frankly, or at least I'm willing to let the majority take these issues without any real fight from me.

The only proposition that has interested me, somewhat, is the one about acting humane to livestock (that we're growing just to kill anyway). I'm a cold-hearted bastard, so basically I think it's ridiculous to act "humane" to an animal we're dooming to feed us. May as well just accept our cruel nature and strive for efficiency, I say.

But whatever. It's not an issue I'm going to the polls for, but it's at least an interesting conversation piece.

brokeyard said...

No doubt it affects outcome, but is the solution just to browbeat people until they blindly comply?

Actually I came back to say just that. Not voting is probably the better option than being swayed by loud-mouthed partisan hacks that use lies and slander to get people to go one way or the other. Better to abstain than vote for the wrong reasons.

Everyone voting, and doing it based on an educated opinion, is certainly an idealist stance, and I apologize if I came across as holier-than-thou.

brokeyard said...

The only proposition that has interested me, somewhat, is the one about acting humane to livestock (that we're growing just to kill anyway). I'm a cold-hearted bastard, so basically I think it's ridiculous to act "humane" to an animal we're dooming to feed us.

You have a point there with the "humane" euphemism. However, torture and painless death are two options that, if presented to me with no alternative, would certainly provide an easy option.

Also, does the proposition not include cows and goats raised for Milk, chickens raised for Eggs, and such? Should we subject them to the same "inhumanity" or should we treat some animals better than others based on their ultimate fate?

BTW, I'm no PETA-supporter, but after reading (not "watching") Fast Food Nation (as required reading in college) that their certainly is such a thing as "humanity".

Earl Sleek said...

Everyone voting, and doing it based on an educated opinion, is certainly an idealist stance, and I apologize if I came across as holier-than-thou.

No worries, Brokeyard. I certainly have heard plenty of high-horse reasons why I need to be at the polls today, and I know it almost has to be an idealist argument about what elections are meant to represent.

And holier-than-thou is actually quite a common attitude on this blog, so that's not really an issue either. :)

I really hope I didn't talk anyone out of voting today; that wasn't my intention at all. Really, I just meant to explain my position, which is entirely self-centered and generally terrible, yet I'm comfortable enough to put that inaction into practice annually.

Also, does the proposition not include cows and goats raised for Milk, chickens raised for Eggs, and such?

Probably -- there's a very very high chance that I've misrepresented the proposition (I never read it, but my ex-roommate filled me in on a bit of explanation as this is something we've debated before).

And I'm probably too cynical on the whole topic, but I think the only "humane" alternative is to find a way not to eat cows and chickens the way we do today. So long as we're not going down that path, though, I can't say that making them more comfortable should be the next priority.

Just so you know how cruel and evil I am, I am totally in favor of genetically developing cows without legs for better "stackability", and chickens without bones for easier slaughter-processing. It's horrible, sure, but basically anything that involves breeding-to-kill is generally horrible, and I don't think that technicalities matter much past that. May as well just go for efficiency, I say.

Hmm, now that I think about it, maybe the polls are better off without my evil input.

brokeyard said...

Interesting. If we could just find a way to let the muscles develop without any central nervous system, it'd be just like eating a plant... made of meat. Let's get on with that cloning research... which proposition was that one?

RudyKelly said...

That's awesome that that's the proposition you picked out as meaningful to you.

Earl Sleek said...

It's probably the only one I even know about. I assume those people yelling "Yes on 8" are arguing about retiring Selanne's number.

Grace said...

I hesitate to say this again, because Rudy's post pretty much said it all, but: I HATE RINKSIDE VIEW.

Earl Sleek said...

No kidding. I am getting seasick, I think.

Plus I have no idea how many penalty killers are on the ice at any time. It's so damn limiting!

Ksy92003 said...

The Kings have yet to lose with Rinkside View: 1-0-1. Maybe that is just what the Kings need, as much as us TV viewers hate to admit it.

Then again, I'm really giddy because I finally voted. I know it's not that big a deal, but since I just turned 18, voting for the first time is like the first time you have sex: the feeling doesn't wear off for quite some time.

RudyKelly said...

You cried after you voted?

Nut said...

you voted really, really quickly?

Nut said...

"I sure would like it if the Electoral college system met George Parros in a dark alley ..."

The electoral college grabs Parros' jersey while he falls over his skates to the ice?

brokeyard said...

You didn't know the name of the person you voted for?

JH29 said...

I personally think Sundin is still going back to Toronto. Lots of teams are still in the hunt, but nothing makes more sense to me than toronto.
I wrote up a summary of who is interested and where he might end up.
My thoughts. http://jib-sports-culture.blogspot.com/

Earl Sleek said...

I personally think Sundin is still going back to Toronto.

Yeah, I don't really know why people are spending more than three breaths to talk about this "Sundin to Anaheim" thing. It's ridiculous on a ton of levels, and unless Sundin wants to play for league minimum, it's fairly impossible too.

I don't know where he ends up, but I wager it's a team with some salary cap room, which puts Anaheim squarely on the outside.