Analysis of Davos vs. Riga playoff series

[DMaximus 1,046]

Sometimes data is beautiful, painting a perfect picture of clarity. Other times it is messy, a jumble of numbers that make no sense. My goal at the start of this was to find a reason why Davos just swept Riga in the EU Conference Semi-finals. Davos lost the regular season series to Riga 1-7. There were no expectations that would change during their playoff matchup, yet Davos ended up winning 4 straight playoff games, the 4^th of which was a dominating performance. I hoped that the numbers would jump out at me and say, here is the reason, unfortunately there’s nothing I can point to as the silver bullet for why Davos won.

 

Here’s the advanced metrics from all 4 playoff games. Stats are from the Davos perspective, Corsi For is the number of shot attempts Davos had, Corsi Against are the shot attempts Riga had.

 

Game #	Davos Score	Riga Score	Corsi For	Corsi Against	Corsi	Corsi %	Fenwick For	Fenwick Against	Fenwick	Fernwick %	PDO
1	3	1	71	55	16	56.35	58	44	14	56.86	103.493
2	4	1	57	60	-3	48.72	48	54	-6	47.06	110.208
3	3	2	98	79	19	55.37	84	59	25	58.74	100.827
4	2	0	94	37	57	71.76	78	29	49	72.9	104.444
Average	3	1	80	57.75	22.3	58.05	67	46.5	20.5	58.89	104.743

 

The general takeaway is that Davos created more opportunities in 3 of the 4 games. Game 2 was very close in opportunities, that in addition to the PDO of 110 indicates that Davos was pretty lucky to win game 2. But the rest of the games, Davos deserved to win.

 

We can compare the playoff metrics to the regular season average for Davos vs. Riga

 

Davos Score Riga Score Corsi For Corsi Against Corsi Corsi % Fenwick For Fenwick Against Fenwick Fernwick % PDO Playoff Average 3 1 80 57.75 22.25 58.05 67 46.5 20.5 58.89 104.743                         Regular Season Average 2.25 3.125 62.25 65.375 -3.125 49.14125 53.625 56.375 -2.75 49.20875 99.86625

Basically this tells us what we already know. Davos played created more chances and played much better in the playoffs than they did in the regular season against Riga.

 

What led to the increase in chances Davos saw in the playoffs? One of the first places to look is turnover numbers.

	Riga Giveaways	Davos Giveaways	Total
Game 1	123	122	Davos +1
Game 2	137	141	Riga +4
Game 3	178	156	Davos +22
Game 4	128	110	Davos +18

 

Games 1 and 2 were very close in total turnovers, while Davos had the clear lead in games 3 and 4.

Another factor could be time of possession, especially in the offensive zone. Davos saw a small increase in offensive zone time and total puck control time.

 

Davos vs. Riga	% of total time in Offensive Zone	% of total time with puck control
Regular Season	38.27	48.56
Playoffs	41.73	50.79

 

The % change in time is fairly small, but the combination of winning the turnover battle and the possession battle helped Davos win the series.

Another difference is the Special Teams performance of Davos.

 

	Powerplay	Powerplay %	Penalty Kill	Penalty Kill %
Regular Season	3 of 37	8.11	34 of 39	87.18
Playoffs	3 of 24	12.5	16 of 17	94.12

 

Davos performed better on both the power play and penalty kill against Riga than they did in the regular season. And Riga spent more time killing penalties, which makes creating opportunities much more difficult.

 

The final item to look at is probably more important than all the previous ones combined, goaltending.

Finn Davidson has an amazing series with a 0.94 GAA and .961 SV%. His regular seasons stats were much more pedestrian at 3.125 GAA and .917 SV%. It’s tough to win against any goalie throwing up a .961 SV%.

 

I don’t really have a summary statement other than Davos played better in the playoffs than they did in the regular season against Riga. That improved performance displayed itself in almost every metric available.