Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Todd Haley Is The Steelers Next Offensive Coordinator

Dave Bolland - Henrik Sedin Head to Head Scoring Chances

Dave Bolland hits a Sedin.  It doesn't matter which one.  (Photo by Rich Lam/Getty Images)  via cdn.picapp.com

In reviewing the scoring chances for the Chicago - San Jose series, we've been able to discredit the notion that Dave Bolland won the battle against Joe Thornton.  Yes, Bolland was starting in his own end constantly, but he was still being beaten on the chances sheet.  It was luck and Antti Niemi that saved his bacon.  Like the Avalanche fans  before them, the Blackhawks' fans that encountered the scoring chances articles took umbrage with the numbers and bristled at the suggestion that the story they were being fed by the media was wrong. 

Seeing as how this story was so far off, I decided to check the scoring chances in the Chicago - Vancouver series, specifically Bolland's head-to-head performance against Canucks' center Henrik Sedin.  Did Bolland's playoff reputation grow out of the Vancouver series, or was it yet another example of getting the story wrong? 

Through the course of this series, Bolland and Sedin were matched against each other for nearly 49 minutes at even strength.  Sedin spent 59.1% of his time against Bolland and Bolland spent 64.6% of his time against Sedin.  Interestingly, Bolland was matched against Sedin a higher percentage of his time on ice on the road as compared to his time on ice at home.  I'm not sure what to make of that; either Alain Vigneault didn't care that Sedin was out against Bolland, or he was being out-coached by Joel Quenneville.

Star-divide

 

I took the chances from Scott Reynolds' scoring chance totals for the series, summarized here.  You'll notice that Bolland was 19/22 at even strength for the series - Sedin was 27/26.

 


Matchup
CF Series CF CDiff
Game 1 Sedin 2 2 0

Bolland 2 2 0





Game 2 Sedin 1 3 -4

Bolland 5 7 +4





Game 3 Sedin 4 7 0

Bolland 0 7 0





Game 4 Sedin 4 11 0

Bolland 4 11 0





Game 5 Sedin 2 13 -1

Bolland 3 14 +1





Game 6 Sedin 2 15 -2

Bolland 3 17 +2





Totals Sedin
15 -2

Bolland
17 +2

 

Two games were a wash, Bolland was +4 once, Sedin was +4 once and Bolland won the other two games 3/2.  Bolland edged out Sedin in the head-to-head matchup, and neutralized Vancouver's best line over the last three games.  It was a great job by the Bolland line, and Joel Quenneville clearly came out on top in this match-up, especially because it allowed him to create mismatches with the Jonathan Toews and Patrick Sharp lines.

Away from Sedin, Bolland was 2/7 and Sedin was 12/9.

Sedin's chances for per fifteen minutes in this series was a microscopic 2.73.  As a comparison, 2.73/15 was lower than ANY regular Edmonton Oiler for the entire season, and equal to Dean Arsene's rate in his brief stint in the NHL.  A rough estimate would put Sedin's reduced playoff rate at about 35-40% of his regular season rate.  That is remarkable work by Dave Bolland's line.

I fully expect Chicago fans to tell me that the numbers are still lying.  That Bolland wasn't effective against Sedin.  Or that the numbers aren't capturing the true match-up.  Or that Sedin really won this match-up.  How about it fellas?

When the two series are compared, it seems like the media and fans simply extended the Bolland narrative against Thornton, then used Thornton's faceoff slash as evidence that Bolland was succeeding.  I've written about this before:

Fans, by and large, rely on what they see, and make snap decisions based on short bursts of data.  From the time that decision is made, a fan will see what they expect to see, that is, they begin to notice the events and data that confirm the observations that led to their conclusion.  They begin to seek new information to confirm their pre-existing bias, subconsciously ignoring the entire data set, especially the pieces that disagree with their conclusion.  In psychology and cognitive science, this is known as confirmation bias.

The media and fans extended the job that Bolland did on Sedin to the job that they wanted him to do on Thornton.  Compare the numbers from the two series - Bolland was +2 vs. Sedin in six games, he was -8 vs. Thornton in four games.  Dave Bolland - turned the tide in the Canucks series; Dave Bolland - saved by Antti Niemi in the Sharks series.

Comment 13 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

This response is pretty awesome.

by Scott Reynolds on May 31, 2010 7:17 PM MDT up reply actions  

I do. Thankfully, the most pious member of SBN Hockey recorded these chances.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on May 31, 2010 7:51 PM MDT up reply actions  

We all hate Alex Burrows. Even me, who sticks up for the slimy bastard from time to time. I do see his value, but he’s a punk.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Jun 1, 2010 3:52 PM MDT up reply actions  

Wow, this is interesting

Thanks for the hard work! Btw, I’m going to post this in my own thread as well — but even though I did make some crackpot conclusions in my FanPost, I was just really sleep deprived and had to come up with something; for the most part, I think the evidence was just inconclusive either way w.r.t. Thornton. But I definitely agree that the storyline was spawned when the Sedins disappeared, and the media was just being, well, the media.

I hope there’s more head-to-head stuff to come, I think it’s really helpful in understanding on a more micro level what’s happening. I do continue to wonder, though, if there’s a way to look at a player’s chance rate relative to how he normally performs as a measure of whether he’s getting limited or not (I would never expect a checking line forward to outchance somebody who was as hard-working and talented as Thornton was in that series). That, and if you want to consider the value of the move, you have to consider the opportunity cost as well, of changing the matchups that your other lines get.

Just so much out there to do; I’m just glad you were able to collect and analyze this stuff so thoroughly, and I hope you don’t take my fellow SCHers’ comments too personally.

by VerStig on Jun 1, 2010 9:59 AM MDT reply actions  

Sorry, I meant the lower post as a reply.

Pittsburgh sports all the way

by GoPens! on Jun 1, 2010 10:08 AM MDT up reply actions  

I do continue to wonder, though, if there’s a way to look at a player’s chance rate relative to how he normally performs as a measure of whether he’s getting limited or not (I would never expect a checking line forward to outchance somebody who was as hard-working and talented as Thornton was in that series). That, and if you want to consider the value of the move, you have to consider the opportunity cost as well, of changing the matchups that your other lines get.

I think you see that in the Pavelski matchup – he was slightly better against Toews than Bolland against Thornton, so in my mind, the Sharks narrowly won that matchup. The unaccounted for variables (by each coach) seemed to be the Sharp line and Logan Couture.

Just so much out there to do; I’m just glad you were able to collect and analyze this stuff so thoroughly, and I hope you don’t take my fellow SCHers’ comments too personally.

Heh, never. I just get to make more fun of them ;)

This stuff is all going to be so much easier once we have a complete set of chances league-wide.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Jun 1, 2010 1:37 PM MDT up reply actions  

I do continue to wonder, though, if there’s a way to look at a player’s chance rate relative to how he normally performs as a measure of whether he’s getting limited or not (I would never expect a checking line forward to outchance somebody who was as hard-working and talented as Thornton was in that series).

Sedin is just as hard working as Thornton, and Bolland did very well against him. Of course the playoffs are a small sample size, but Bolland’s play against San Jose was not as good as in the VAN series.

Pittsburgh sports all the way

by GoPens! on Jun 1, 2010 10:07 AM MDT reply actions  

I don’t know, but I suspect that the Sedin teammates on ice probably had something to do with them being outchanced. The Vancouver D group played terribly against Chicago.

by SJKel on Jun 1, 2010 4:53 PM MDT reply actions  

His CF/15 away from Bolland was 5.14.

Against Bolland 2.73

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Jun 1, 2010 5:58 PM MDT up reply actions  

But perhaps the defensemen on ice were different?

by SJKel on Jun 1, 2010 8:33 PM MDT up reply actions  

Feel free to count

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Jun 1, 2010 8:35 PM MDT up reply actions  

man, i don’t think we have a d-man that could cause half of that by himself.

by Passive Voice on Jun 2, 2010 1:11 AM MDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Dukeriver2_small
A Narrative Revisited: Hemsky 83

Recent FanPosts

Small
Ken Campbell Wants to Make You Angry
Small
Oilers Worst (Quiet) Trade Ever
Ovechkin1_small
How Ryan Smyth Stunted Magnus Paajarvi
2012-01-21-012338_small
Milan Kytnar Loaned To SM-liiga Club HPK Hämeenlinna
N512640129_624767_3878_small
Jay Feaster Revisited : How do the Oilers get back to competing?
Ovechkin1_small
Grading Tambellini (free agent signings)
Ovechkin1_small
Grading Steve Tambellini (Trades)
Mets002_small
Reaching out to The Copper & Blue: Community research project
N512640129_624767_3878_small
Now and Then: the more things change...

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Northwest Standings

GP W L OTL PT
Vancouver 52 32 15 5 69
Minnesota 52 25 19 8 58
Calgary 53 24 22 7 55
Colorado 54 26 25 3 55
Edmonton 53 21 27 5 47

(updated 2.7.2012 at 7:26 AM MST)

21 - 27 - 5

Lost 1

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (22-7, .759)
  2. San Jose Sharks (13-5, .722)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (17-7, .708)
  4. St. Louis Blues (11-6, .647)
  5. Chicago Blackhawks (16-11, .593)
  6. Nashville Predators (11-10, .524)
  7. Los Angeles Kings (9-9, .500)
  8. Phoenix Coyotes (11-12, .478)
  9. Dallas Stars (11-14, .440)
  10. Edmonton Oilers (11-15, .423)
  11. Anaheim Ducks (10-14, .417)
  12. Colorado Avalanche (8-13, .381)
  13. Calgary Flames (9-15, .375)
  14. Minnesota Wild (7-13,.350)
  15. Columbus Blue Jackets (5-19, .208)

Eastern Conference

  1. Boston Bruins (21-3, .875)
  2. New York Rangers (18-8, .692)
  3. Pittsburgh Penguins (16-9, .640)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (14-11, .560)
  5. Toronto Maple Leafs (14-12, .538)
  6. Washington Capitals (13-13, .500)
  7. Montreal Canadiens (11-11, .500)
  8. Ottawa Senators (10-12, .455)
  9. New Jersey Devils (10-12, .455)
  10. Winnipeg Jets (10-14, .417)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (9-13, .409)
  12. Florida Panthers (7-11, .389)
  13. Buffalo Sabres (7-14, .333)
  14. Tampa Bay Lightning (9-19, .321)
  15. New York Islanders (6-14, .300)

Division Standings

  1. Central (50-38, .568)
  2. Northeast (49-38, .563)
  3. Atlantic (45-37, .549)
  4. Pacific (36-36, .500)
  5. Northwest (33-44, .429)
  6. Southeast (33-53, .384)


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Okc_shoulder_small Eric Rodgers

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Contributors

Newtwitter2_small Jonathan Willis

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL