Jump to content

Otto Leskinen recalled


huzer
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, huzer said:

Next up in the rotating cast of D.

Nice, some (me) thought both Olofsson and Leskinen might deserve the call, maybe Leskinen will make Julien feel a bit more warm and fuzzy than he was with Olofsson (all of 5 something minutes in  last game).

12pts in 24gms as rookie this year

31pts in 57gms in FIN league last year

https://habsprospects.com/leskinen.html

 

I didnt see horrible in Olofsson, but got beat on a few occasions for sure (he had 32 shifts in 3 game call up).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, JoeLassister said:

I tells a lot on how CJ wants to avoid Reilly at all cost. 

And yet Reilly is a +1 compared to Olofsson and Petry at -4, or Kulak and Fleury at -6. I understand Petry has tougher matchups and more minutes (then again so does Weber at +9), but the Kulak comparison is perhaps more revealing. 
 

Then again, Folin is +2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+/- is a terrible stat, and we will all be better off when people don't use it to compare players. 

 

I'm going to not compare Olofsson because we already looked at his stats and he's garbage. 

Let's deep dive look at the defencemen you mentionned. 

 

Reilly has a 61.01% offensive zone start percentage 
Kulak has a 63.46
Fleury has a 67.07
Petry has a 49.6%

So.... Reilly, Kulak and Fleury are being sheltered about the same amount in terms of O-Zone starts, with Reilly's small sample size, the difference in Ozone starts is negligible.  We see that all three are being used as third pairing guys when they play, and that Julien is sheltering his third pair (as he probably should).  For comparison, Weber is at 48, Chiarot at 51 and Mete our lowest at 41 (meaning least sheltered). 


Reilly has a PDO of 1.006 (close to expected, but a slight touch on the "lucky" side)

Kulak's PDO is 0.938 (very unlucky)

Petry PDO is 0.973 (moderately unlucky)

Fleury PDO is 0.977 (moderately unlucky)

The PDO explains almost entirely the differences in plus/minus.   In the small sample sizes, Habs goalies have come up with a higher save percentage than the opponent for Reilly, but haven't for the other three defenders.  Kulak looks so bad because really goalies have been bad when they are on the ice. 

 

But we still can look farther... is there something any of these d are doing to create more scoring chances against their goalie than against the other team?  Is that why the PDO is down?  Let's look

Reilly has a High Danger Chance of 45.59%  (ie the other team gets more high danger chances when Reilly is on the ice than the Habs do)
Kulak has a high Danger Chance 52.5% (habs get more high danger chances when he is on the ice then the other team does).

Fleury has a high Danger chance of 38.84 (this surprises me and is a lot concerning)

Petry 57.69  (no surprise, he is the best of these defencemen in this stat... cause Petry is Damn good, and he's doing this against tougher opposition and with shittier zone starts). 

 

 

 

Conclusions


1) Petry is a stud and shouldn't be in this comparison.  he's head and shoulders above the other D.  This shouldn't be a surprise, anyone with a good eye test could have told you that before I looked at that stats.  The fact that the eye test and the stats are confirming each other, gives credence to the value of the stats. 

 

2) Fleury might be being overused as a rookie and third pair RD could also use some improvement.  This isn't solely a LD problem.  This surprised me a little bit.  That said, he's a rookie who should get better, and his only competition is Folin right now, and he's better than Folin.   We've seen the Kulak-Reilly pair where one of them was on the right side, and that was very bad, and so playing them out of position is not the answer.  Fleury is still probably our best bet on the right. 

 

3) Kulak is better than Reilly despite the plus/minus differences.  The Habs control the scoring chances much better when Kulak is on the ice vs Reilly.   That said Reilly is better than Olofsson, so while Mete is injured, Reilly should be considered.  However the team seems to want to give Leskinen a chance.  Given that Reilly is a replacement level #7 D, this isn't a bad strategy as maybe a rookie can be better than replacement level.  That said if Leskinen doesn't work, you can always go back to Reilly on the third pair. 


PS I didn't write down Chiarot's stats, but his stats show that he's been good.  Not great, but good.   (51% zone starts, 1.003 PDO, 58% HDCF)

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Reilly has a High Danger Chance of 45.59%  (ie the other team gets more high danger chances when Reilly is on the ice than the Habs do)
Kulak has a high Danger Chance 52.5% (habs get more high danger chances when he is on the ice then the other team does).

Fleury has a high Danger chance of 38.84 (this surprises me and is a lot concerning)

Petry 57.69  (no surprise, he is the best of these defencemen in this stat... cause Petry is Damn good, and he's doing this against tougher opposition and with shittier zone starts). 

Thanks Commandant, that is what I remembered. 

 

I think a difference between Kulak and Reilly is the ability to carry the puck up the ice vs the shutdown ability. Depending who you are playing one will draw in vs the other. But Kulak is the more reliable of the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2019 at 12:15 PM, alfredoh2009 said:

Thanks Commandant, that is what I remembered. 

 

I think a difference between Kulak and Reilly is the ability to carry the puck up the ice vs the shutdown ability. Depending who you are playing one will draw in vs the other. But Kulak is the more reliable of the two.

The biggest diff is hockey IQ

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

Reilly reminds me of beaulieu. Shows good skill and potential and then makes a horrendous decision that erases all of the good stuff.

I was thinking Marc-André Bergeron. But yes, I agree on that assessment on Reilly. Not consistent, not the best hockey IQ but may surprise you with a solid game here and there because of skating and skill = a #7 D :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

Reilly reminds me of beaulieu. Shows good skill and potential and then makes a horrendous decision that erases all of the good stuff.

good comparison.

 

MAB was one poor excuse of a d-man and even Reilly isnt that bad a defender.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...