On Face(off) Value

When you're a fan of a losing team, you generally don't watch them expecting to win. Instead, you watch hoping you'll see something amazing. For example, even though the Mets were out of playoff contention in July, I still watched them most nights, just in case they finally pitched a no-hitter (yeah, I know) or did something particularly special. In hockey, there are no milestones that would compare to a no-hitter, so I hope for very memorable games, the kind that transcend a losing season. Last year, beating Detroit and Chicago on the road were such games, and Opening Night would have been such a game had the Islanders pulled it out.

Wednesday night's game against the Rangers would certainly qualify as what I'd call a memorable game. If the Islanders to produce a 2009-10 highlight video, highlights of Wednesday night would be heavily featured. The Islanders played their game, were intense throughout, and won their first regulation game by sheer will. The Islanders also won because of a growing trend in their play - their success in the faceoff circle.

Over the summer, I read Moneyball by Michael Lewis. Moneyball, for those who don't know, explains how the small-market Oakland A's of Major League Baseball were able to stay competitive with teams like the Yankees by building their team around undervalued assets like walks and on-base percentage. As I read Moneyball, I tried to figure out what statistics in hockey could be the basis for a winning team in today's NHL. One of these days, I'll post my thoughts. For now, though, perhaps the most important stat I'd build around would be faceoff percentage.

Think about it. There are approximately 60 faceoffs in a game. The average team, of course, wins 50 percent of those faceoffs, meaning that they begin play with the puck 30 times a game. A team that wins 60 percent of their faceoffs, on the other hand, begins with the puck 36 times. That's twelve times more than their opponent. So, not only do you have the edge twelve more times than your opponent, that's twelve times that your opponent can't score until you give up the puck.

As of right now, the Islanders sit at third in the NHL with a success rate of 54.1% in the faceoff circle, with the Isles dominating faceoffs in their past few games. And while this success hasn't resulted in wins just yet, there's plenty of reason for optimism - aside from the Islanders (.409), Minnesota (.250) and Nashville (.458), every team over 50% in faceoffs has earned more than half of the points it could have possibly earned so far this season. What's particularly telling about the Islanders' success is that it's been widespread. Every eligible Islander is over 50% in faceoffs this year, including John Tavares at 50.3%, Josh Bailey at 53.9%, and both Doug Weight and Nate Thompson at 58.8%.

What does all of this mean? Simply put, if the Islanders are better than their opponents at controlling the puck off the draw, they're that much more likely to control play and potentially generate good scoring chances. In addition, their opponents will have to make more plays on defense than usual in order to get the puck. And if the Islanders can get past their third period hiccups - as they did on Wednesday night - their faceoff skills can help them become a truly dangerous team.

Islanders Win Game 2

Well, that was unexpected.

I sort of expected the Islanders to crap out at some point. Maybe I was just preparing myself for the worst. You sort of learn to do that every now and again when you support this team. But it didn't happen. If anything, the Islanders got stronger as the game went on.

The first period was some pretty awful hockey. In fact, let's forget it ever happened. The second was a little better, but the Rangers pretty much dominated play. It wasn't until the third period that things got going... or, to put it more appropriately, for the Rangers to shoot themselves in the foot.

Two horrendous giveaways on the power play led the Islanders to score two shorthanded goals. And while I'm still not convinced that their standing as the team with the most shorthanded goals in the NHL means anything more than that they take a lot of stupid penalties, those two goals were huge. That they came from the likes of Nate Thompson and Richard Park is quite telling. Because these are the players the make the Islanders a tough team to play against. Nobody's under the illusion that the Islanders are an extremely talented team, but when you're going against guys like Thompson and Park, you have to work a lot harder to win.

After those two shorthanded goals, the Rangers were putty in the Islanders' hands. The Rangers immediately started pressing, trying to make the perfect play. That never works. The Rangers got frustrated, as evidenced by Nigel Dawes dropping the gloves with Jeff Tambellini with less than ten minutes left in the third period. The Rangers ended up getting one to make things interesting, but the game effectively ended after the Isles' secondhanded goal.

So, who to blame for tonight's poor performance by the Rangers? Pretty much everybody. Michal Rozsival is going to get the blame for much of this loss - Billy Jaffe said it best when he said Rozsival was "guilty of not being effective" - but you can also pin some of this on the offense for not scoring, on Dmitri Kalinin for being Dmitri Kalinin, and on Henrik Lundqvist for getting beat on the second goal, which he easily should have had.

For the Islanders? Much of the team played well, even if the supposed "scorers" continued what has pretty much been a season-long vacation. The star of the show would have to be Joey MacDonald, who probably played the best game of his career. Islander fans needed to see this kind of performance out of Joey MacDonald. Going into the building of your biggest rival and coming within 100 seconds of a shutout is pretty special. Plus, his performance led to this post-game exchange between C.J. Papa and Stan Fischler...

C.J.: So, Stan, what'd you see out there tonight?
Stan: I'll tell you what I saw, and it was Old MacDonald's Farm! "And a save-save here and a save-save there, here a save, there a save, everywhere a save-save!"

Had they heard this, I think even the Ranger fans among us would have to say it was all worth it. And as someone who hears these nursery rhymes dozens of times a day, it made me particularly happy. Every MSG Plus broadcast makes me a smarter hockey fan, but a dumber person. And for that, I'd like to thank everybody involved in making the magic happen, from Howie and Billy to C.J. and Stan. You all do a wonderful job.

Anyway.

Jaffe brought up the dreaded "Ranger hangover" in the same sentence as "Thursday's winnable game against Atlanta". Gulp. Make no mistake about it, the Islanders will be destroyed by an awful Thrashers team. The Islanders have been pretty awesome lately, but it can't last forever. At least not as long as guys like Mike Comrie and Doug Weight aren't scoring goals. The Rangers, on the other hand, are facing a Tampa Bay team on Thursday that has won three straight games and are finally living up to their pre-season hype. It's about time. To be honest, the Rangers-Lightning game will be a better one than Islanders-Thrashers. But like tonight, it'll be a good night for hockey in New York.

The Rivalry: Game 2

Leave it to the NHL to schedule one of the biggest draws of either local team on a night when nobody will be paying attention.

Tonight's Islanders-Rangers clash will take a back seat to another battle; of course, that would be the battle for the White House. And even though New York will be a blue state pretty much no matter what, focus on the Blueshirts might be limited, even at the Garden. And that's a shame. Because the Islanders are playing their best hockey of the season, which means they should give the Rangers a pretty good run for their money. The Rangers, in spite of blowing a two-goal lead in remarkable fashion on Saturday, still have the league's best record and the second-best penalty kill.

What to expect tonight? Hard to say. Both of these teams have experience in blowing leads lately, with the Islanders losing three-goal leads in each of their last two games. This may mean a decrease in the rough stuff, as neither Tom Renney nor Scott Gordon is going to want their players taking dumb penalties. That said, look for Mitch Fritz to dress for the Islanders and for him or Nate Thompson to be involved in at least one fight, probably with Colton Orr. It should be an exciting game, one that both teams will get up for.

And for my prediction? 5-2 Rangers. The Islanders will come out strong, but fade as the effect of playing on back-to-back nights starts to kick in. The Rangers, having learned their lesson from Saturday night, will stay all over the Islanders until the final buzzer. The score won't really do the game much justice, as the Islanders will put up their best fight in the third; however, they're just not good enough to compete with a well-rested Rangers team.

Enjoy the game.