Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    Bookboy chided someone in NAS' thread because someone dared to say the Bruins blow a lot of games. Clearly all the games we see are in our imagination. Book said the B's have the 4th highest wins in the NHL, so according to him and NAS, we must be stupid poopy heads.

    So I went to NHL.com and looked up "team stats." I looked under "winning % when LEADING after 2 periods." (remember, this doesnt count when the Bs are tied going in, get a lead and blow it, only when leading after 2 and blow it. The list is in order of rank.

    Ld 2%OS%OSB%FO%
    1-30 of 30 results.
    1
    1 PITTSBURGH 43 33 10 0 66 .767 3.35 2.46 1.36 24.0 79.3 30.1 28.7 .821 .667 .864 1.000 .833 .706 51.3
    2 COLUMBUS 44 21 16 7 49 .557 2.36 2.46 1.01 12.4 83.9 26.3 30.1 .556 .423 .667 1.000 .455 .483 51.6
    3 NY RANGERS 42 21 17 4 46 .548 2.33 2.29 1.10 15.4 82.0 31.1 28.7 .813 .308 .889 1.000 .522 .474 50.2
    4 WINNIPEG 43 22 19 2 46 .535 2.58 2.88 0.92 13.3 79.4 28.8 29.5 .700 .348 .900 .944 .556 .478 49.2
    5 PHOENIX 42 18 17 7 43 .512 2.55 2.62 1.03 14.5 82.4 30.5 30.2 .750 .231 .769 .929 .550 .300 52.5
    6 CAROLINA 42 17 23 2 36 .429 2.60 3.17 0.85 15.2 78.0 32.8 31.6 .529 .320 .636 .923 .435 .389 51.1
    7 CHICAGO 42 33 5 4 70 .833 3.17 1.98 1.62 15.4 86.1 31.2 26.0 .920 .588 .882 .889 .793 .750 50.8
    8 MINNESOTA 43 24 16 3 51 .593 2.56 2.49 0.96 18.3 82.7 28.4 27.3 .762 .364 .727 .889 .591 .500 52.6
    9 OTTAWA 42 22 14 6 50 .595 2.38 2.07 1.08 17.2 88.1 32.4 32.3 .682 .350 .636 .889 .526 .476 49.4
    10 NASHVILLE 44 15 21 8 38 .432 2.23 2.66 0.91 17.0 76.9 26.0 27.3 .688 .143 .700 .889 .316 .304 50.4
    11 ANAHEIM 43 27 10 6 60 .698 2.81 2.44 1.27 21.2 80.1 27.4 27.8 .727 .524 .786 .875 .619 .667 47.4
    12 ST LOUIS 42 24 16 2 50 .595 2.57 2.48 1.00 19.4 84.3 27.9 24.1 .750 .333 .733 .875 .560 .563 50.2
    13 TORONTO 43 24 14 5 53 .616 3.05 2.63 1.09 18.1 87.0 27.0 31.9 .630 .438 .750 .857 .455 .594 50.4
    14 LOS ANGELES 43 24 14 5 53 .616 2.79 2.40 1.13 20.3 82.7 30.3 24.7 .818 .286 .929 .850 .533 .615 51.7
    15 WASHINGTON 43 24 17 2 50 .581 3.05 2.77 1.06 25.8 76.6 28.1 32.0 .625 .474 .769 .850 .750 .484 50.6
    16 TAMPA BAY 43 17 22 4 38 .442 3.14 3.07 1.14 19.1 79.4 27.1 30.3 .722 .160 .867 .846 .438 .375 51.1
    17 NY ISLANDERS 43 22 16 5 49 .570 2.81 2.86 0.93 21.6 81.4 30.7 28.3 .727 .286 .786 .833 .565 .421 49.1
    18 DETROIT 43 20 16 7 47 .547 2.46 2.46 1.00 17.6 80.7 29.7 28.2 .609 .300 .583 .833 .393 .643 50.5
    19 PHILADELPHIA 43 19 21 3 41 .477 2.74 3.00 0.80 22.9 84.6 29.0 28.0 .636 .238 .733 .833 .478 .412 48.3
    20 FLORIDA 42 13 23 6 32 .381 2.33 3.48 0.62 20.6 73.5 29.6 31.3 .667 .111 .700 .833 .278 .304 49.5
    21 SAN JOSE 43 23 13 7 53 .616 2.35 2.33 0.96 19.1 86.1 31.8 29.2 .783 .250 .813 .824 .583 .467 53.7
    22 MONTREAL 43 26 12 5 57 .663 3.07 2.58 1.22 21.9 81.3 30.7 27.2 .714 .400 .789 .789 .586 .643 49.2
    23 VANCOUVER 43 24 12 7 55 .640 2.65 2.28 1.17 15.0 84.2 28.1 28.7 .667 .375 .737 .773 .500 .583 47.3
    24 CALGARY 43 17 22 4 38 .442 2.70 3.35 0.69 19.4 80.9 27.3 29.2 .591 .190 .688 .769 .294 .500 46.9
    25 DALLAS 42 21 18 3 45 .536 2.76 2.98 1.01 17.2 81.6 26.4 30.7 .696 .263 .737 .750 .545 .483 47.6
    26 EDMONTON 42 16 19 7 39 .464 2.48 2.79 0.79 22.3 83.3 27.0 32.9 .476 .286 .643 .714 .700 .300 46.0
    27 NEW JERSEY 42 15 17 10 40 .476 2.24 2.57 0.81 15.3 80.8 28.5 23.6 .706 .120 .700 .692 .400 .273 48.0
    28 BUFFALO 44 19 19 6 44 .500 2.46 2.86 0.96 12.9 78.4 28.0 33.3 .636 .227 .600 .667 .333 .500 46.2
    29 BOSTON 42 26 11 5 57 .679 2.71 2.17 1.30 14.8 88.7 32.0 28.6 .773 .450 .857 .650 .621 .545 56.4
    30 COLORADO 43 14 22 7 35 .407 2.37 3.09 0.83 14.3 80.9 29.6 31.3 .533 .214 .625 .583  

     

    Sorry the table didnt convert well, but the point is this.:THE BRUINS ARE #29 IN THE NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE IN WIN % WHEN LEADING AFTER 2, WITH a PUTRID .650 %!

    #29.

    Second to LAST.

    Commence flaming. Surely this is my fault.

    Losers.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    Yes, it's a problem, and yes they need to get that straightened out for the playoffs because there will not be much margin for error.

    But there needs to be some context, too.

    Of their games so far, the Bruins have entered the 3rd with a lead 48% of the time.  Only Chicago, Vancouver, and Toronto have done better.

    They've entered the 3rd behind 24% of the time.  Only Chicago has done better, and only Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Anaheim have a better win percentage in such situations.

    They are 10-2-0 when entering the 3rd tied.

     

    Holding a late lead appears to be this team's biggest cause of struggle.  Compared to many other potential problems though, that's one they really ought to be able to figure out, especially given how much better they were at it in recent years.  They just need to get the Murphy's Law mentality they've got going out of their heads.  They do that, and they go on a good run.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

                    "They are 10-2-0 when entering the 3rd tied."

    Heavens to murgatroid! Someone calm down Glum "We are all doomed"!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    And as I responded on the other thread, without calling you a freaking drama queen or a "stupid poopy head" - because I can do better than that - even at 29th in the league, the Bruins still hold a lead 2 out of every 3 times they enter the third period with the lead.  Now, to be clear, we are accustomed to that being better, and maybe more importantly, we remember the mid-to-late 90s when they truly could not hold a lead.  As DrCC says, they need to straigten it out, and it's connected to getting their PK mojo back given that both the loss to the Habs and the loss last night were the result of last minute PP goals, and the PK has been in decline for weeks.  But the blanket statement that they cannot hold a third period lead is an exaggeration, and the way you make it is what makes you sound like a 13 yr old off his Ritalin.  It's a problem they need to fix; it's not evidence of their fundamental inability to play the game.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    You're coming off the rails Sox Fan.  

    My diagnosis:  More reading, less writing -- start with the three posts above.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    I'd also look at that list and compare it to the overall standings before deciding what I think it means.  Pittsburgh's at the top, okay...then it's two 8th place teams, a 9th place team, a 13th place team and a 14th place team.

    The raw numbers - 13-4-3.  Which also means the Bruins have gone into the 3rd leading in half of their games this year.

    What a terrible team.

    Only Vancouver has had more games where they were leading entering the third. 

    Boston's also 3-5-2 when trailing entering the third.  They've been leading going into the 3rd twice as often as they've trailed.

    Awful.  Just awful, Eeyore.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    Yes, it's a problem, and yes they need to get that straightened out for the playoffs because there will not be much margin for error.

    But there needs to be some context, too.

    Of their games so far, the Bruins have entered the 3rd with a lead 48% of the time.  Only Chicago, Vancouver, and Toronto have done better.

    They've entered the 3rd behind 24% of the time.  Only Chicago has done better.

    They are 10-2-0 when entering the 3rd tied.

     

    Holding a late lead appears to be this team's biggest cause of struggle.  Compared to many other potential problems though, that's one they really ought to be able to figure out, especially given how much better they were at it in recent years.  They just need to get the Murphy's Law mentality they've got going out of their heads.  They do that, and they go on a good run.




    Am a big believer in statstics, but the key is always sample size, and utilizing all available data, otherwise misleading results occur.

    Obviously, to most of us, the B's seem to be blowing way more 3rd period leads.  We shouldn't need an abyccus to figure that out.  What's odd, is that has been a real dominant part of the team for the last few years.  

    What a lot of this stuff keeps telling me, is the importance of not doing something stupid, from a management perspective.  They can turn a contender into a pretender in jig time, if they attempt to "fix" every little problem that comes along.  I think the prospect of jetisoning Lucic would apply.

    Sometimes random things happen to sports teams, then they randomly revert back if the area is constantly focused on and practiced.  We're sold otherwise, but there are constant examples of making a bad thing worse by over reacting.  

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

                    "They are 10-2-0 when entering the 3rd tied."

    Heavens to murgatroid! Someone calm down Glum "We are all doomed"!




    LMAO Dawg ....

    Also if we're going to look at stats we should not compare each other to the West.  How do we know which conferences is the stronger one ?  They only play against each other therefore cannot be compared. 

     

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Bruins winning % when leading after 2-HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? Book? NAS?

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    What a lot of this stuff keeps telling me, is the importance of not doing something stupid, from a management perspective.  They can turn a contender into a pretender in jig time, if they attempt to "fix" every little problem that comes along.  I think the prospect of jetisoning Lucic would apply.

    Sometimes random things happen to sports teams, then they randomly revert back if the area is constantly focused on and practiced.  We're sold otherwise, but there are constant examples of making a bad thing worse by over reacting.  




    Agree 100%. 

    I've always thought this was one of Julien's strengths - not, as many have suggested, one of his glaring weaknesses.  He looks at his team and says "what gives this roster the best chance to win?"  And he designs lines, pairings, strategies to maximize the strength of the roster...and then he sticks with it.  People yell at him two periods into a bad game that he needs to switch it up, do some coaching, but that's not his bag.  Step 1: what's the best way to use this roster?  Step 2: implement best way to use the roster.  He adjusts when the initial scheme is proven incorrect, and he sometimes struggles to adjust when circumstance takes "best" off the board, but Julien is not a micromanager. 

    Ditto Chiarelli.  And it's one of the characteristics that makes me sceptical of MacTavish in Edmonton. 

     

Share