Only hours away before puckdrop, and in visiting my usual blog suspects this morning, I got a little more interested in the goaltending matchup.  On the podcast (scroll down) David said that Anderson needs to have a near-perfect series in order to win, and I guess I might have mistakenly took this to mean that the Sharks have a goaltending advantage.  Gabe Desjardins disagrees, to put it mildly:

Is there any aspect of the game where Colorado’s better than San Jose?  Just one: goaltending.  Craig Anderson is a vastly better goaltender than Evgeni Nabokov, even if Nabokov has somehow managed to put up respectable numbers this season.

I asked him about it a bit in the comments saying I’d put them about even, and his reply was:

Since the lockout: Craig Anderson save percentage = .916; Nabokov = .910. Nabby sucked for four seasons; he didn’t become good this year.

Interesting.  I wouldn’t make the claim that Nabby is an elite goaltender, and reading the great Brodeur Is a Fraud blog where the argument is made that SV% isn’t the perfect stat, but it’s a hell of a lot better than all the others, seems to back this up.  However, Nabby does have a better SV% this year than Anderson – .921 to .916.  Also, after reading this and this from Jonathan Willis, we see that Nabby and Anderson are above average in consistency, with SV% standard deviations of 0.064 and 0.054, respectively.  Those are new numbers I calculated based on their stats from the entire regular season.  We did see Nabby regress a bit in save percentage, as Gabe pointed out, but stayed relatively consistent.

Also, since Nabby ‘sucked’ the last four years, I wanted to find out the difference between sucking and not.  So let’s look at last year, where Nabby’s SV% was 0.910, good for 27th in the league.  Certainly not great, not even good.  If Nabby faced the exact same number of shots, and ended up with a 0.921 SV%, a tick better than Bobby Lou and good for 4th in the league, I think we could call that a great (or even elite) performance.  So what was the difference between Nabby’s and Luongo’s performances?

That’s seventeen goals over the course of the season, equivalent to around 4 or 5 wins.  Another way to put it , since Nabby only played 62 games, that’s one goal every 3.6 outings.  To me, that doesn’t sound like a lot.  It really shows that the difference between an average or below-average goalie and an excellent goalie is very small- just one fewer shot facing a late lateral push, an open 5-hole or a sluggish glove.  If Nabokov didn’t do that once every 216 minutes of playing time he would have been a top-5 goalie in the NHL last year, versus a top-30.

Oh yeah, GO SHARKS.

After a nail-biting good time yesterday watching the three games on tap at noon Pacific time, the Sharks finally caught a break.  It didn’t always look good.  The Avs were up 1-0, which was the be-all end all: if the Avs won in regulation, there was no chance the Sharks played the Wings. But the Avs coughed up a goal with 4 minutes left, and I was a little peeved, to put it lightly.  I would have thrown a snow blower at Joe Sakic at that moment if I could have.  And when the Hawks tied Detroit and then went on the power play with less then two minutes left, I had an instant feeling of dread.  And although we were all collectively forced to root for our sworn enemies, the Red Wings, they managed to kill the penalty and go on to win in overtime.

Which gives us the Avs, of course.  We are trying to line up an Avs voice for the podcast tomorrow, but either way, you’ll have the mp3 in your grubby little hands on Wednesday morning.  Some good listening before the Sharks’ playoff start.  Could this be the easiest draw in Sharks playoff history?  Could the Sharks possibly sweep, like my co-host Chetan thought on the radio show last night?  Or will those plucky Avs give the Sharks a good run, and Scott Hannan will be the making of nightmares?  Predictions in the comments, please.

This comes from an email we got for the podcast (make sure to listen, we actually have a guy with credibility this week), asking essentially, “Does the Sharks losing streak (or later, the winning streak) help or hurt the Sharks’ playoff chances?  Does success in the last 10 or 20 games result in deep playoff runs?”

This is an important question, and let me be perfectly honest- Gabe Desjardins’ recent post on something similar is probably a lot better than this one is going to be.  So I’d read this first with a sense of charity, then click over to Behind the Net and read the real stuff.  To defend myself, I was planning this post since a week ago, so I’m not copying Gabe- I swear.

To answer this question, I compiled the record of the last 10 and 20 games of every playoff team since 2001.  This gives us 112 teams, which isn’t a giant sample size, but it should smooth over some rough edges.  I correlated this (Pearson product-moment if you must know) against the round where they eventually lost (or not), but then I decided to copy Gabe just a little and use playoff wins instead, because that gives us more granularity than just rounds achieved- we get 16 gradations instead of 5.

Here’s the chart.  I’ll explain in a minute.

blah blah blah math

Ok, so this is what’s called an XY scatter plot, with the number of points in the last n games (red dots are last 10 games, blue dots are last 20) versus how deep that team went in the playoffs.  0 wins is swept in the first round, 16 is the Stanley Cup Champions.  If there were a strong correlation, we would see something of a line going from the lower left to upper right in each color.  That is, the teams that do poorly in the last bit of the season also bow out early.  Or we might see something completely counter-intuitive-  a negative correlation, in a line that goes from the upper left to bottom right.  That would signal that teams that do well in the final stretch “peak too early” and are more likely to bow out in the first few rounds.

We have what we call in the mathematics world, a “mess”.

Of course there’s going to be some variance, and the graph would be more like a cloud than a line, but here we just have a plate of spaghetti.  If you want numbers, the correlation for the last 20 games points and playoff wins is 0.12, and the last 10 wins 0.08.  Correlation ranges from -1 (late points always means bowing out early) to +1 (late points means going deep in the postseason).  0.12 is slightly positive- it’s probably a tiny bit helpful to do well late in the season- but it’s certainly nothing predictive.  It’s essentially a crapshoot- performing worse (or better) doesn’t mean much.  Let’s look at some extremes:

• The team with the most points in the last 20 games among all teams I looked at is the 2006 Red Wings, who only lost one game in regulation in the last 20.  That team lost in the first round to Edmonton.
• That very same year, the Carolina Hurricanes scored only 21 points in the last 20, barely .500.  That’s the second worst record of any of the playoff teams that year (only the #8 New York Islanders were worse).  For those that remember, the Canes won the Cup.
• Last year, the team that had the best late record of all playoff teams, the Pittsburgh Penguins, won the Cup.  They played the Wings (again) in the Finals, who had 12 fewer points in the same number of games, good for 13th amongst playoff teams.

Does anything correlate better to playoff success?  The answer is yes.  The overall 82-game record correlates better: 0.32.  And even better is the correlation of seeding to playoff wins: -0.37 (negative because a lower number (seed) correlates to a higher number (playoff wins)).  This does tell us something interesting- it’s better to be lucky than good.  It’s better to luck into a higher seed with a worse record (in a weak division) than score a ton of standings points and only get the #4 or #5 seed.  With the Sharks guaranteed the #1 or #2, they are in the best possible position.  Now the question is, can they transform this advantage, however slight, into real playoff happiness?

We’re going to find out.  I’m nervous.

Craig Custance, the NHL writer from the Sporting News (and new podcaster) joins the Dudes in starting the playoff coverage.  He talks about the top prospects, and the Sharks prospects in the soon-to-be playoffs.  Mike and Doug then continue those points in reading listener emails.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Alexei Semenov, who has 4 points and 30 PIMs for Moscow Dynamo of the KHL this year, was brought back into the fold by general manager Doug Wilson today, signing a multi-year deal just in time for the playoff push.  Semenov, who played for the Sharks previously in 2007-8 and 2008-9, totalling 10 points in 69 games and a -5, is seen as a savior for a team that has struggled recently and is suffering injuries.  “Semenov may be quite slow, and doesn’t really have the best hands,” Wilson said.  “Also, I wouldn’t say his first pass is exactly top notch, and his slap shot could use a little work, but on the plus side… um….”  Wilson then claimed he “had to go.”

With Marc-Edouard Vlasic and Joe Thornton both out currently with injuries, it’s expected Semenov will play both defense and offense at the same time.  Given his size, it’s possible Semenov might be the backup for Thomas Greiss in case he struggles in net.  When current Moscow Dynamo players and former NHL players Jiri Hudler and Karel Rachunek were contacted for their thoughts on Semenov, they said, “Oh, great guy.  Really fun to hang out with after the games.  And he does the best Carol Channing impression you’ve ever seen!”  When this reporter then pressed for details on the positives of Semenov’s contribution to the Dynamo on the ice, the two players were quickly called away by team officials.

Semenov was reached for comment, but only grunted.

The Sharks turned on a dime once in the past 10 days, ripping off a 4-game winning streak after a 6-game losing streak.  Now they’ve turned on a dime again with a terrible effort against the Stars.  Mike and Doug break it down, talk about the injuries to Thornton and Vlasic (and Clowe), and give an update on the playoff picture.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

This movie sucks!

Although the Sharks didn’t play, last night was a great night for San Jose.  The Hawks lost, 5 points behind with only one game in hand.  The Coyotes lost, Breezy giving up 4 goals on 29 shots. And the Wings won, which in our Convoluted Calculus of Counterparties™ is actually a good thing.  As loyal readers and listeners know, I want to avoid the Red Wings in the first round at all costs.  Seriously, if it meant the Sharks had to dump the last six games of the season, I might be able to work up an argument for that.  But as it happens, it’s not required.  The Winged Wheel is on fire.  They’ve won six straight, and are 11-1-1 in their last 13 games.

Detroit is now only one point behind Nashville.  Given they have three (!) more games against the Blue Jackets and one against Philly (plus one against Nashville), I’d say their chances are very good they end up the five seed.   My earlier prediction of the Sharks facing the Wings in the first round is getting dimmer by the day.  With Phoenix faltering just a bit, I’m hoping this gives the Sharks an easy path to the #1 seed, hopefully facing the reeling Avs in the first round.

Speaking of reeling, how ’bout them Hawks?  Their early season strategy of “who needs a decent goalie?  We’ll just give up 20 shots a game and win anyway” isn’t working out so hot lately.  Although they still lead the lead in shots allowed with 24.9, they’ve given up more than that in eight out of their last ten.  One of the games where they did better than their average, they lost.  To Columbus.  Niemi got most of those starts, so does this mean they will go back to Huet?  I’m sure Coach Q is just thrilled he has such a thoroughbred stable of goaltenders to choose from.

So the Sharks seem to be back in a good position, actually, a great one.  They have a bit of competition from below in Phoenix, whose trapping style could easily eat up some teams struggling for motivation late in the season.  They have Detroit on a run, destined for a seeding far from the Sharks’ first-round gun-sights.   And Chicago’s once-impenetrable armor is now looking like Swiss cheese.

It’s a great opportunity to continue the run tonight against Dallas, who are all but eliminated from postseason play.  No Modano means no Shark-killer.  I say the win streak continues.  Look for the podcast to be posted tonight sometime after the game.

Seems so long ago that the Sharks got crushed by the worst team in the NHL 5-1.  But it’s only been eight days.  I think Adrian Dater said it best (from Colorado’s perspective):

Here’s the problem: they didn’t win the game. And another: that wasn’t the real Sharks they played tonight. That was San Jose’s B Team. No Joe Thornton, no Evgeni Nabokov, no Rob Blake. First-line center, starting goalie, arguably the top D-man – not in the lineup.

Well, ok, maybe not.  Blake is ‘arguably’ the Sharks’ top D-man? Please.    But he was right in the first part- the Sharks were missing some key players, fought against a much better team than the Oilers and won.  Despite the sinking feeling that inevitably comes with Jumbo being out of the lineup, the fact that the Sharks can still pull off wins against playoff teams is very encouraging.  The latest news on Joe is that it might not be serious- tests are being done today (Pollak), and he’ll most likely be on the road trip.  If he sits out a few games, it’s not the end of the world.  It was particularly interesting to see how the Sharks would respond without an all-world passer in the lineup, and they responded exactly how I hoped they would- with gritty goals.

Despite my criticism for Todd McLellan this year about his (in my view) overplaying of Nabokov, one marked difference between this year and last is the care the coaching staff has taken with injured players.  I think the lesson was learned from last year’s playoffs when Marleau played the Ducks series with a fairly serious knee injury.  This is a situation I’m sure T-Mac does not want to replicate, and sitting Blake and Thornton is absolutely the right plan.  I hope he sits both of them an extra game or two just to be sure.  Blake could probably use the rest anyway, and we need Joe 100%.  It also makes the last games more interesting – I like to watch Couture mature (I’m a poet and I don’t even know it), and the Demers-Vlasic combo could be the #2 pairing next year.

In other news, it seems Cheechoo has been suspended two games for this hit (thanks for the link, Joel)

While I admire Cheech’s ingenuity with the poolhall-type combination shot, it was a pretty dangerous play, and deserves to sit.

Not to say the Sharks couldn’t immediately fall into another slump starting Saturday in Vancouver, but the play over the last two games has shown to me real promise.  Less east-west drop passes and stickhandling, more north-south drives to the net and grit in the corners.  And although the win last night against Dallas was far from perfect, it’s the general approach to the game that seems the most encouraging.  Less fuss, more effort.  Clowe with a move on Robidas that looked like the dressing-down he gave Ehrhoff a week ago.  Seto going a thousand miles per hour and hitting everything possible.  Nabby challenging shooters.  Steve Ott playing like a cheap-ass.  Nice to see the world is back on its axis.

Certainly the biggest downside of last night’s game was Rob Blake’s early exit.  Sure, we’ve been on him quite a bit lately, but his play the last two games was on par with the best he’s had as a Shark.  Although I still would like to seem him get a couple of fewer minutes, especially since Vlasic is back, it’s hard to argue with his success the last two games.  The question is, can he keep it up?  If he’s a little banged up and needs to sit out a couple of games, that could be a blessing in disguise.  We can certainly use him battling in front of the net and getting the point shots on net like he’s been doing recently.  What we don’t need is him fatigued and looking a bit like the proverbial pylon.

Also nice to see the ice-time has settled out a little, defense-wise.  I was just looking at the Vancouver box score from last week, and Huskins had over 22 minutes of ice time to Wallin’s 14.  Very strange.  But last night, Wallin had 15:08, Huskins 14:18.  That’s more like it.  Although Boyle had almost 30 minutes, with a whopping 7:40 on the PP.  That’s three minutes more than anyone else.

Speaking of Wallin, thanks to Jeremy for creating this YouTube gem.  Make sure to comment and rate.  I’ve watched this at least 5 times already, and laughed out loud every time.  Well done, sir.  It’s no doubt the best video on YouTube that combines Wallin, techno, and food.  

The Dudes breathe a sigh of relief because the Sharks have finally ended their jarring 6-game losing streak. Mike and Doug talk about the ‘little things’ the Sharks did right in the game against Minnesota, and try and identify what went wrong during the precipitous slide. The Dudes also give a fantasy league update, take some listener email, and check in with some of the Sharks prospects in various amateur and minor leagues, many of whom are going to the playoffs.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download