NLL Insider

 I read with interest Paul Tutka’s blog  on NLL ‘s Even-Strength Chart Toppers because and it was closely related to something I was looking at recently. Paul showed some stats about teams that got most of their goals while even strength, as well as some individual player stats on the same topic. For example, last year over 80% of Chicago’s goals were while even strength. At the other end of the spectrum the New York Titans, who were tied for the best win loss record in the NLL, only had 65% of their total goals while even strength.  What does it mean?  Judging by the fact that Chicago, Edmonton and Toronto led the league in percentage  of total goals scored while even strength, and those teams finished 11^th, 12^th and 9^th overall, I would say scoring most of your goals while even strength is a bad thing.

Lets look at specialty teams more closely. Last season the NLL champion Buffalo Bandits had a power play was at 51% and their short man was 64%. If you add the two percentages together for a sum total specialty team number you get 115%. Do that for every team and you will see that Buffalo had the best total in the league. Edmonton and Chicago were at the bottom of the league with totals of 79% and 81% and they were also at the bottom of the standing.  Is it a quirk?

Check out 2007. Rochester, the NLL champs, had the best total specialty team percentage at  121% and New York, the bottom team in the league that year, had the worst with 83 %. In 2006 the Colorado Mammoth was tops with 111% and the 1-15 Edmonton Rush was at the bottom with 77%.  In 2005 the Toronto Rock had the special teams with 112%. In each  the last 4 seasons (I didn’t check further back) the team with the best combined special team percentage were the NLL Champions.   I’m not making this up.

So the stats seem to say that if you have the best special teams you will win the championship. Although that was the case the last 4 seasons  it’s a stretch to suggest it will always happen. Its not unreasonable to say that you have little chance of contending without special teams near the top of the NLL.

With that in mind, if I’m coaching in the NLL I’m going to spend a lot more practice time on my special teams than I will on five on five.  If I’m a manager I make sure thatI make it a priority to select players who can play on the power play or short man team. I asked Derek Keenan what he thought about this and he agreed that wins and losses are dictated by specialty teams more than ever now but   he also believes that a good transition game is just as important . He says that defenses in the NLL are so good that teams rarely score goals on settled 5 on 5 play.

 Does that mean that you can take an average team, and make them a contender by drastically improving the specialty teams? Yes, if that were possible, a coach can not make chicken salad from chicken poop. An average team can do all the right things on a power play but without great finishers they will still be average. No amount of coaching could have given the 2006 Edmonton Rush a good power play. Buffalo has Tavares, Rochester had Grant, Colorado has Prout and the 2005 Toronto Rock had Colin Doyle and Josh Sanderson.

Eddie Comeau agreed with me that strong specialty teams is absolutely necessary to win it all but admitted that the 2007 Champion Rochester Knigthawks spent little time practicing the power play. I guess having talent like Grant, the Evans brothers and Shawn Williams on the power play is a great factor than practice time. So what does this all mean? You need great specialty teams to win it all but can you have great specialty teams without great players? We’ve seen lacrosse players become specialists over the last 10 years, maybe its time that the coaches do the same. Most teams have a coach in charge of offence, a coach in charge of defence and the head coach oversees it all. Is there a coaching genius who is just a power play expert? How about the short man unit? It would be worth it to hire him. It might get you a championship.

Rate This Story:

(+50 rating, 11 votes)

 Loading ...