The problem with disappointing seasons is figuring out what went wrong. This is especially tricky because it's the team's job to investigate any/every contributing factor to their demise, and not every number signifies something that's amiss.
For example, I wrote a few days ago that, if I was Bryan Murray or Paul MacLean, I'd take a close look at hisorically low shot-blocking percentages for this year's team. To me, it's impossible to know whether or not this strategy -- assuming it was a strategy -- contributed adversely to the team's position in the standings. I figured that, had your league-average team blocked a league-average number of shot-attempts this year, Ottawa would gain ten goals against in the standings.
But, there's another side of that coin. Perhaps the aversion to shot blocking was a strategy to create more rush opportunities, and consequently more goals. This has a net effect. Perhaps the aversion to shot blocking was to avoid injury. Blocking all of those extra shot-attempts may have deterred ten additional goals on the season, but what if one of those blocks injured a player like Kyle Turris? This is going to have a crippling effect on the team.
All of this to say, none of this stuff is easy to figure out. It's a lot of math and a lot of video. And, the trickiest part is trying to fix what's actually broken, and avoid 'fixing' things that aren't broken, but may appear so on the surface.
Here's another one of those things. Ottawa plays at an insanely high pace. I've heard a lot of people call the Senators a lot of different things, but I emphatically object to anyone suggesting the team is 'boring'. The problem is, they're not the San Jose Sharks of fast-pace hockey. They're the Ottawa Senators. What I mean by that: they aren't winning 55% of the possession battle. They're breaking even. And it's risky, especially so when you're not capitalizing on your chances.
As a general rule, I always emphasize the importance of margins. It doesn't matter if you're a low event or high event team -- if you're winning the possession battle decisively, you're winning the margins. Scoring chances will be favorable long-term, and goals will, too.
But, bringing this back to 'investigating things that may not be working' -- well, this graph (sorted low-high) is sort of telling. This is all of the shot-attempts generated in all game states -- I note that the even-strength graph looks quite similar, just knocked down a notch.
I'm not sure calling them the fastest pace team in the National Hockey League is meritless. They generate a ton of chances and they give up just as many. It's not really a good thing or a bad thing -- last year's team, for example, played a pretty similar game. But they won the margins.
So, should Ottawa dial down the pace next year? I'm not entirely sure. I've seen people suggest that playing such high-event hockey isn't successful long-term, but if Ottawa were able to mitigate some of the damage they endure on the back-end, I really don't see it as an issue.
I think it all comes back to the team's defensive zone woes. The more time they spend in their own zone, they less they spend in the offensive zone. What's nutty is how much they still generated up top even with the nightmarish defensive play. What's terrible is that, because of that defensive play, they're missing the playoffs.
Well, that and goaltending. Everyone knew regression was coming in a big way. But this hit hard.
Thanks for reading!