Where the Islanders goals are coming from
The easy answer to the headline -- is: "Duh! John Tavares and Matt Moulson."
That's the issue of the moment: That these two childhood friends and 2009 newcomers are the only ones scoring for the Islanders. Outside of Richard Park's tally in a 6-1 loss in New Jersey, no Islander besides JT and Mighty Matt has scored a goal since Nov. 27, a 3-1 win over Pittsburgh six games ago.
But when we jump on guys for not scoring, it's good to remember a huge chunk of scoring comes from the powerplay. Of the Islanders' 79 goals so far, 22 (28%) have come via that route. Eight of Tavares's 15 goals have come with the man advantage. If you're not on the powerplay, it's that much harder to wrack up points. Worse, if most of your ice time is spent killing penalties or carrying subpar wingers at 5-on-5, then you're spending most of the time just fighting to keep the puck out of your own net.
So one way to look at this issue: Take the powerplay out of the equation. Who are the Islanders' best scorers at 5-on-5?
One metric, with the aid of Gabe at Behind the Net: Who is scoring the most goals per 60 minutes of 5-on-5 ice time?
As you'll see below [Warning: Table ahead!], the answers are ... the usual suspects. However, the order has been shuffled a bit, making Matt Moulson look even better than you might already think. And by this metric at least, one much-debated streaky forward still looks pretty good -- even though he has scored exactly one goal since his October hat trick.
| Goals | PP Goals | ES Goals | G/60min. 5on5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moulson | 14 | 3 | 11 | 1.57 |
| Tambellini | 7 | 3 | 4 | 1.02 |
| Tavares | 15 | 8 | 7 | 0.98 |
| Hunter | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0.94 |
| Bailey | 7 | 1 | 5 | 0.73 |
| Nielsen | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0.65 |
| Bergenheim | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0.49 |
| Sutton | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0.44 |
| Jackman | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.43 |
| Witt | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.33 |
| Park | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.31 |
| Okposo | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0.3 |
| Martinek | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0.2 |
| Sim | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0.19 |
| Hillen | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.14 |
| Striet | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0.11 |
Matt Moulson, with 11 even-strength goals, is the team's 5-on-5 king to this point. [Video fun: His recent natural hat trick in Atlanta, captured below, featured two even-strength goals and one powerplay goal that wasn't even a traditional setup-in-the-zone PP play]:
But back to that table: Other than Jeff Tambellini at the high end and Kyle Okposo at the low end, where everyone ranks isn't too shocking. Okposo gets a lot of minutes, period, so his low goal total thus far makes him stand out (in a bad way), even though he's still been generating a lot of chances. Tambellini, who scored once in November, is (numerically at least) living off that October hot streak.
Okposo's experience -- clanging shots off crossbars, yet setting Tavares up in his office -- tells us that even after 30 games and good linemates, your numbers won't always reflect the work that you've been doing. Meanwhile, the two young centers we're hoping will be two-way producers, Josh Bailey and Frans Nielsen, each have fewer even-strength points (7 each) than Richard Park and Sean Bergenheim (9 each), who are hardly looked at as scorers.
Of Course I Will Find a Way to Blame This on the Blueline
There are a hundred ways to try to get a handle on what's happening in hockey's flowing, chaotic, difficult-to-encapsulate game -- both in strictly numeric terms and in nebulous descriptive terms. (Who's been playing with better linemates? Who's been playing against tougher competition? Who's been fatigued from playing so much PK? Who can't find a groove because they're never on a consistent line and they never get more than 11 paltry minutes? And of course the tried-and-true: Who suffers because the coach just hates him, I know it, I can see it in his eyes?) Everything is a cascade of factors, from the goalie behind you to the health of the lineup to the luck of the schedule.
So subjectively, I look at the names on that table and see the makings of a passable "top six" forward corps that ought to put up decent numbers over the long haul. And if that supposition is true (you may easily disagree), you know what I keep coming back to as a reason it's not happening? The blueline. The transition game. Aside from Jack Hillen, probably Andy Sutton (who's frankly been good this year by any measure), and certainly Mark Streit (who has not been as dominating as he was last year, in part because partner Bruno Gervais has not replicated last year's growth), this group isn't fit to consistently get the puck out and supply the Islanders forwards at 5-on-5.
As has been the issue since Scott Gordon arrived, the group as a whole cannot consistently deliver the promise of Gordon's scheme, so we're going to get fits and starts. We're going to get glimpses of the excitement the future will bring, mixed with doses of reality about the blueline Garth Snow has gone with and the below-average forwards who remain.
Until the cavalry of better defensemen arrive. I think.
That's one round-about theory. With the given that the eternal answer is "The Islanders need better players," I'm curious to hear yours.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gervais Stinks!
Could Scott at least scratch Gervais? Every game I see him making horrible decisions and giving up odd man rushes, he is physically as well as mentally weak and he does not contribute offensively! Why ,Oh Why, do we have to suffer with him every night? I would rather see DeHaan develop in the NHL even if he will make mistakes than see Gervais . Anyone know whats Bergenheims stat?us
by Lakewood Islander on Dec 10, 2009 1:33 PM EST reply actions
Not until a body comes back
If Sutton comes back Saturday, then they can scratch someone. They’ve scratched Bruno once this year (for a game or two?). I doubt they’ll take the step of scratching Witt any time soon. Personally I want MacDonald to remain. He’s been steady thus far.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
Isles should build for the future
After reading the Puck Prospectus analysis if the Toronto Maple Leafs I think the main points apply equally to the Isles. They should not add any salary this year for a playoff run. I’m as happy as anyone that the Isles have been doing better this year. I’ve watched almost every game. But I don’t understand why they would trade anything of value for a veteran player this year. It makes no sense. I love Doug Weight but they need to trade him for young talent while he can still bring something. He’s still good. They also should trade Richard Park for some young talent, perhaps a 3rd round pick or a promising minor leaguer. I love Richard Park and would be sad to see him go but it makes no sense to keep him. Honestly I think they should trade both Biron AND Roloson once DiPietro comes back. What’s the down side? If they lose 5 more games this year than they would without them they draft that much higher. Get whatever you can for Brendan Witt too. I like Witt but he will not help this team at all when they are finally in a position to contend.
Witt is untradeable
no one will want him, especially with a $3 mil cap hit…don’t see trading Roly as well as Marty unless Mikko is NHL-ready and DP is in top form.
Welcome
Thanks for joining and commenting.
But I don’t understand why they would trade anything of value for a veteran player this year. It makes no sense.Full agreement there.
I find myself liking a lot of players you note who would be tough to see go but should nonetheless go if they’ll return anything of value. Even if he comes back hot, they really can’t count on DiPietro yet though — they have to keep Roloson simply as insurance.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
partial agreement here
i agree we should not give up anything significant for a rental, but we do have alot of cap space and afew years til we have to resign JT and KO long term , so if the right salary dump deal comes along Brad Richards? I would look into it
by Lakewood Islander on Dec 10, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
Salary dump
Oh yes, a salary dump — basically anything that helps the long-term outlook, I’m a fan of. I sort of count on at least picking up one contract that another team can no longer fit, either this spring or summer. If it helped things this year, that’s just a bonus.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
Dallas is in the mix so
I think Richards is unlikely. If they did trade him or if anyone traded a player of that caliber, they would want serious assets—picks and prospects—coming back. I would wait for the offseason to leverage deals and FA signings along with a very good draft.
joennsu
is joennsu supposed eo play for the injurd Bergenheim? maybe 4th line duty to charge the net with Nate and Park? I just want to see Gervais gone already, a mistake waiting to happen, lackluster play and weak… When is DW coming back,the PP looks lost w/o him. Is it just me or does it seem that the Isles play very soft with the exception of Sutton, we could use a steve webb or a real enforcer
by Lakewood Islander on Dec 11, 2009 10:21 AM EST reply actions
aren’t all 4 of JT’s goals these last 2 games PPG’s?
granted i only saw the clips online but still…
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
overall its still been pretty pathetic. JT is jusy 1 guy and they dont set up well
by Lakewood Islander on Dec 11, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions
They were PP
It has looked bad. One was a 5-on-3, so an almost “have to score” thing.
But with Schremp there I think it looked better than it has lately: More like an umbrella, with Streit at the top, Okposo still at the point but freed to go down the left side, and Schremp on the right boards but also drifting back up, while JT was still in his corner office. Of course, the non-5-on-3 goal in the last game was right off the faceoff, but it was very good: JT wins it, Schremp goes back to win the puck from JT, dishes to KO, who takes it right down the left faceoff circle and feeds across to JT at the doorstep.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by 


































