Islanders 2009 vs. 2008: What a difference a year makes?
by Dominik on Nov 18, 2009 1:44 PM EST
in Big Picture Musings
25 comments
Just got back from the optometrist. They do a lot of "is this better, or is this better?" tests on you, to check how your eyes are working and make sure you don't mistake Andy Sutton for Zdeno Chara on the eye chart.
Me: "A ... E ... G ... N ... Y ... I ... Chara ... M--"
Doc: "Sorry, did you say Chara? It was Sutton ... We may need to adjust your prescription."
They start off with really easy ones before they refine them, so of course the first either/or test was: "The New York Islanders: Is this better, or is this better?" Through 21 games, the 2009-10 New York Islanders are vastly superior to the 2008-09 version, right?
Intuitively yes. But with some of the numbers, it's closer than you might think. Because game #21 of last season, a shootout "win" over Montreal (the night of the O'Byrne own goal), was actually the high-water mark for the year (9-10-2). After that, the Isles won only once in their next 13 games (1-11-1), and Tank for Tavares became the clear Christmas-time mission.
Qualitatively, few would disagree that this year's top line is more consistent, more dangerous, and more effective on the powerplay (I mean, Tavares + Moulson easily trumps Comrie/Weight + Guerin, right?). Meanwhile, the goalies are more reliable. But some of the team numbers are fun to compare and contrast -- along with an expanded record that doesn't obscure extra-time wins and shootout losses.
I had a table of specific players' performances through 21 games last year vs. this year, but it crashed in the story editor, and well, serves me right for flying without a chute. But there were a few interesting factoids, such as Doug Weight having 4-17-21 through 21 games last year (versus 0-9-9 in just 13 games in 2009-10), while Kyle Okposo just had 2-3-5 at this point last year.
Anyway, here's a comparison of some team numbers. Keep in mind the Islanders have played 6 more OTs than they had at this point last year, so that adds minutes and can change the way teams play in those minutes.
The Record
| Year | W | OTW | SOW | L | OTL | SOL |
| 2008-09 (9-10-2) | 7 | 2 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 |
| 2009-10 (8-6-7) | 5 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 4 |
The Islanders have won two fewer games in regulation than this point last year, but they've lost four fewer as well. And they've been in basically every game except for the Montreal drubbing.
The Goals and Shots and Such
| Year | GF | GA | SF | SA | Sh% | Sv% |
| 2008-09 | 54 | 65 | 642 | 677 | 8.4% | .904 |
| 2009-10 | 59 | 60 | 642 | 701 | 9.2% | .914 |
How about that? Their shot differential is worse, but their goal differential is better. In other words, the Isles' shooting accuracy has been higher (thank you young snipers), as has their save percentage (thank you old goalies).
The Special Teams
| Year | PPG | PPop | PP% | PPGA | PKop | PK% |
| 2008-09 | 17 | 100 | 17 | 18 | 106 | 83% |
| 2009-10 | 16 | 76 | 21% | 16 | 81 | 80.2% |
The Islanders have drawn fewer powerplay opportunities but made more hay of them. They've also been shorthanded fewer times (hmmm...fewer penalties on both sides: "New NHL" behavior fully adapted, or old-style officiating creeping back in?), but they've been less efficient killing them off.
That's just a 21-game look. A few key differences, as Scott Gordon often cites, has been health on the blueline. Doug Weight, Trent Hunter and Frans Nielsen have actually played fewer games so far than at the same point last year, but Andy Sutton only had 13 under his belt at this point (after missing all but one game in October 2008), and the whole blueline was in constant injury flux.
The happiest thing for me: This squad has flat-out been more fun to watch. In a year where I've pretty much not concerned myself with playoffs, that counts for something. Also, I'm going to go ahead and assume the Islanders aren't about to go on a 1-11-1 run like they did after the 21st game of last season. Call it a hunch.
Anything else you pick up on, either numerically or "I just got a feeling"-wise?
0 recs |
25 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
I’m going to go ahead and assume the Islanders aren’t about to go on a 1-11-1 run like they did after the 21st game of last season
oh you best hope so now or we will vilify you sir :-)
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
by bob l on Nov 18, 2009 3:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Don’t think for a moment that didn’t cross my mind.
I’m like, “Surely I can safely type this without the gods smiting me … right?”
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 18, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m going to go ahead and assume the Islanders aren’t about to go on a 1-11-1 run like they did after the 21st game of last season
Dom, you CANNOT even mention stuff like that!!! Do you want to make the hockey gods angry?!!! Now go outside, turn around three times and spit—-do it now!!!
by BCISLEMAN on Nov 18, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How come everyone else can use multiple exclamation points and the like but not me?
Is it because I’m Irish?
That’s racist.
by AP77 on Nov 18, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now I’m just confused. I’ve got illiterate Italians, pugilistic Irish and superstitious hockey gods — just can’t please them all.
Not relevant but: As a kid, when I’d ask my Czech dad if he was coming to see my game, he’d say: “I don’t know. Are you going to win?” That’s a tough one to answer.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 18, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you go outside and do the thing yet?
by BCISLEMAN on Nov 18, 2009 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I did it twice. Is that overkill, or…?
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 19, 2009 2:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if Moulson scores against the Wild...
that will be a sign that the hockey gods have been appeased.
by BCISLEMAN on Nov 19, 2009 4:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I won’t be vilifying him (unless he keeps up his ridiculous obsession with Andy Sutton).
Tank for Taylor Hall!
by AP77 on Nov 18, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now there is definitely a line that might come back to haunt you. ;-)
Hey, everybody! Yeah, it’s me. I’m alive. I swear.
Going back to the Moulson interview after the game on Monday, I would just like to point out something that maybe went unnoticed by the untrained eye: Confidence. Moulson was a relative unknown before this season and he and the rest of this team have come together as a team and a family. This will be a much different year from the 21st game on based only the confidence that’s permeating that locker room. I would be surprised if this team didn’t battle for some sort of playoff spot come April…really.
From the Penalty Box to the Blog Box! Check it out at Isles Official's Outlook!
by IslesOfficial on Nov 19, 2009 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes, we've been discussing that...
Dom is right to point out that a lot of things may have to break in our favor, but…this team is developing that contender’s swagger. It is starting to go into games with the attitude of how are we going to win this one rather than what will happen that will cause us to blow it. And even if we fall short this year, that is of immense value in the building of a champion for future years…which was Garth’s objective in rebuilding.
by BCISLEMAN on Nov 19, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“Islanders Hockey: Feel the Swagger.”
I have to agree. I felt silly mentioning it the other night, but the way they went off the ice at the end of the 2nd looked different. Gordon’s been talking about how they don’t have to think as much as when they first learned his system. Are they finally going into games knowing “this is what we can do” instead of thinking “this is what we’re supposed to do”?
P.S. Doug’s alive! ;)
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 19, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Looking at last season, we lost by multiple goals 7 times through the first 22 games.
This season we’ve only lost by multiple goals 4 times through 21 games. One was Rollies bad night, another was against the Sharks, and two were against the Sabres.
Plus its tough to go by the beginning of the season. Apparently it took 20 games for the league to pass around the tape on how to beat Joey McDonald.
by WebBard on Nov 18, 2009 3:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Apparently it took 20 games for the league to pass around the tape on how to beat Joey McDonald.
November 2008’s winningest goalie!
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 18, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It seems to be that the Isles early schedule was tougher this season than last season. Isles have already played 3 games against 2 of the top teams in the conferemce, games against other top teams, etc.
Lets go Islanders...
by TheMetalChick on Nov 18, 2009 4:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Goal differential
A change of +10 from last year.
Historically speaking: the Isles current GD puts a team on the playoff bubble. Last years GD pace if extended the whole season is lottery contending
by neologizer on Nov 18, 2009 5:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I see what you did there
Using a “historically speaking” caveat, warding off the hockey gods like garlic to a vampire.
It’s an interesting question though: If they play at this caliber for the rest of the season, is it good enough to make the playoffs, or does some luck in the other direction get in the way? I know one thing: I did not head into this year prepared to watch so many games on a knife edge.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 18, 2009 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This has been a nice run
but there are plenty of losing streaks in Santa’s bag. Overall, after Thanksgiving and into January have never really been all that kind to us. Last year and the year before we were all pointing at the nay sayers saying, “See, I told you so!!!!”. This team goes on a tailspin and the floor crashes in on the season.
This team is better than last years but our D is still very shoddy and also injury prone. One more defensemen goes down and this team is in deep shit.
It’s been nice and I’ve enjoyed this. I’ve also been teased a lot by this team in the early going to be allow them to fool me anymore. Thus far they have performed as I’ve predicted and will fall out of the playoff hunt by the dead line. We’re still lookin at a top ten pick this season.
I would consider this year our 91/92 season.
by Chickendirt on Nov 18, 2009 6:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
There goes Chickendirt the soothsayer. Call me impatient, but I would like to see them make it to the playoffs this year.
by LI2Brnx on Nov 18, 2009 11:33 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
playoffs would be awesome
but considering a month ago I was expecting them to seriously contend for the Taylor Hall sweepstakes again, I’m perfectly happy with them just playing good hockey and competing for a playoff spot. The rebuild has been sped up a bit.
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
by cjmulrain on Nov 19, 2009 1:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m perfectly happy with them just playing good hockey and competing for a playoff spot.
That’s where I’m at. I’m happy and pleasantly surprised by recent play — two three-goal wins are a nice sign. But I’m prepared for a tough-luck losing streak as much as I am continuing this rather impressive 5-2-2 run. Not being a broken record, but I just thing there’s a thin margin of error here. Nothing like last year (we were due for some good injury luck relative to other teams) but not taking over the world yet, either.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 19, 2009 2:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jeez, I Cannot Believe What I just Read!
This guy is writing an article about Ken Hitchcock and Filatov- not the Islanders per se. However, he uses the Islanders as an example of- GET THIS- an offensively minded team with no defense. This guy actually BELIEVES this about the New York Islanders. Oh YES, we are watching a bunch of finesse-minded scoring forwards with no grit and “no ide about defense”, arent we! What a difference a year makes, indeed. When I read what he wrote, I thought about all the comments I have read here and elsewhere and I just couldnt believe it. How could this guy be so completely and totally wrong about this team???
I let him have it in the comments section… but I dont know if he will delete my comment because, even though Im commenting on his article, he MEANT for the article to be about Hitchcock. Mission: Fail.
When a guy like Trent Hunter is held up by your coach as a great example of his system, for someone to call that an offensive system that lacks defense is beyond ridiculous. If he writes telling others about the Isles system without even watching them then he is unethical. And if he actually believes that garbage after watching the Isles system at work, then he shouldnt even be writing about hockey.
In case he deletes it- here is what he wrote:
raises an interesting point: Offensive-minded players like offensive-minded coaches, but it doesn’t always translate into wins and/or success. Especially with younger players.
Scott Gordon is pushing a high-risk offensive system on a very young Islanders team, and so far, it’s only translated into a lot of ties. It could be years before we see the impact his system is having on the development of his players. He could be producing future offensive giants, but he could just as easily be producing talented skaters who have no idea how to play defense; in essence, human pylons.
And here is my response:
Hahahaha, WHAT? The Islanders are a “high-risk offensive system”? Producing “offensive giants” who with “no idea how to play defense”? LOL!!!!!! Holy * now I have read everything.
Ill actually forgive your ridiculously inaccurate dismissal of the Islanders record as producing “nothing but ties” but when it comes to you getting on here and telling others WTH the Isles system is all about, you are showing a baffling level of ignorance that cannot be ignored.
FYI, the ENTIRE POINT of the Isles system is to be a tough game to play against DEFENSIVELY, keep up the forecheck and minimize the other teams chances, and then to take quick advantage of the mistakes that solid play causes other teams to make. The Islanders young forwards play very good defensively- and when they dont, they dont even get ice time. Ask Shremp and Tambs bout that- they are both FAR more offense-minded than players like Sim and Hunter and Comeau and Park, but who is getting the ice time?
You know, I see where you were trying to go in praise/defense of Ken Hitchcock… and thats fine with me. However, your presumptuous ‘evaluation’ of the ISLANDERS of all teams is positively asinine. Watch an Islanders game, why dont you? You actually believe that the Islanders are offense-focused with a disregard for defense? You are clueless!! Do you know anything about the players who are the shining examples of players Coach Gordons system? How about this- try watching Kyle Okposo or Matt Moulson or Trent Hunter or Richard Park actually PLAY- and THEN form an opinion. What a concept! If you watch guys like that play- guys who have been identified by the Coach as playing his system well- and think that they are all about the offense then no offense but you do not even belong writing about this sport.
Lets go Islanders...
by TheMetalChick on Nov 19, 2009 11:04 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
bravo sister! bravo!
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
by bob l on Nov 20, 2009 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t stand Bleacher report. I once got in an argument with a guy who claimed the Jets “trade” of Bill Bellichek was the worst trade in NFL History. As though Bellichek had some great history as a Head Coach previously, or that the Jets could do anything with Bellichek refusing to coach for them. It wasn’t like the Gruden situation where Gruden was a proven quality coach. Plus anytime you can get two draft picks for a non player is fine by me.
by WebBard on Nov 20, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t want to sound like the guy who’s purely bashing competitors (since BR is in some ways a competitor, although the “competition” side of all this medium isn’t a factor for me), but they have real problems with reliability and plagiarism. A lot of good people who used to write there threw up their arms at what they saw as fading accountability. I reached a point where weeding through what’s what wasn’t worth it anymore.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Nov 21, 2009 1:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Lighthouse Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Atlantic Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New Jersey
|
58 | 36 | 20 | 2 | 74 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
59 | 35 | 22 | 2 | 72 |
|
Philadelphia
|
57 | 29 | 25 | 3 | 61 |
|
New York Rangers
|
59 | 26 | 26 | 7 | 59 |
|
New York Islanders
|
58 | 23 | 27 | 8 | 54 |
(updated 2.9.2010 at 9:00 AM EST)
Islanders Schedule
Next 5 Games
|
Nashville
|
Tue 02/09 | 7:00 PM EST |
|
@
Pittsburgh
|
Wed 02/10 | 7:30 PM EST |
|
Tampa Bay
|
Sat 02/13 | 2:00 PM EST |
|
Ottawa
|
Sun 02/14 | 5:00 PM EST |
|
Chicago
|
Tue 03/02 | 7:00 PM EST |
Last 5 Games
|
Carolina
|
Sat 02/06 | L 1 - 3 |
|
@
Tampa Bay
|
Thu 02/04 | L 2 - 5 |
|
@
Florida
|
Sun 01/31 | L 0 - 2 |
|
@
Philadelphia
|
Sat 01/30 | L 1 - 2 |
|
@
Carolina
|
Thu 01/28 | L 1 - 4 |
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
