Canucks Vancouver
Sharks San Jose
Flames Calgary
Avalanche Colorado
Coyotes Arizona
Golden Knights Vegas
Wild Minnesota
Red Wings Detroit
Blues St. Louis
Blackhawks Chicago
Blue Jackets Columbus
Hurricanes Carolina
Jets Winnipeg
Predators Nashville
Ducks Anaheim
Oilers Edmonton
Sabres Buffalo
Rangers New York
Bruins Boston
Panthers Florida
Senators Ottawa
Lightning Tampa Bay
Capitals Washington
Islanders New York
Devils New Jersey
Maple Leafs Toronto
Flyers Philadelphia
Penguins Pittsburgh
Stars Dallas
Kraken Seattle
Kings Los Angeles
Dobber Hockey
Dobber Sports
59
Reads
0
Comments
July 17, 2015
Looking as some numbers that will help or hurt the fantasy stock of guys like Chris Kunitz and T.J. Oshie.
****
Anyone that has followed my writing for any length of time, even if it’s just the few months I have been with Dobber, knows that a lot of my methodology is using numbers. There is one big reason for this.
To put it bluntly, it’s just impossible to keep up with all the hockey games. Just think about it. Every season features 82 games from 30 teams. That’s a total of 1230 regular season games. A 60 minute hockey game with the included stoppages, not including intermissions and commercials, takes about 90 minutes (a 150 minute game is with all intermissions/commercials, less 36 minutes for two intermissions, less about 22 minutes for in-period commercials is actually more than 90 minutes, but let’s work with round numbers here). That works out to 1845 hours, or about 11 weeks. If you wanted to watch every NHL game at a very good efficiency rate, it would take you more than two months straight to watch them all.
So we can’t watch every game. Not only that, it’s impossible to remember everything that occurs during a game. We remember the memorable moments: nice dangles, great saves, clutch goals. We may even remember things if we’re looking for them specifically (i.e. tracking a game for zone exits). But overall, we only remember a small fraction of every game, and even then, we might not remember those moments for long.
It’s crucial to use the numbers to fill in the gaps, to challenge conventional wisdom, and to figure out where our eyes may be deceiving us. It doesn’t detract from the games, in fact, finding out things you did not know before is a part of growing as a person in every facet of life.
With that in mind, I’m going to use the rest of today’s Ramblings to look forward to next year with some numbers that may surprise some, or may just cement what is already known.
The former St. Louis Blues forward, now with the Washington Capitals, had a late start to his career. He finished out his NCAA years, which mean his first NHL season was his Age 22 season. That’s a very delayed start.
It is important to point that out because typically a player will peak in production in their early-to-mid-twenties. Before Eric Tulsky was hired to work in the NHL, he was a fantastic analytics writer. He found that a player likely peaks in production before the age of 25. This is not the case for Oshie:
For Oshie’s three-year span covering his Age 23, 24, and 25 seasons, his points per 60 minutes rate at five-on-five was 1.87.
For Oshie’s two-year span covering his Age 27 and 28 seasons, his points per 60 rate was 2.19.
Oshie has been more productive in his late twenties, and I’d wager it’s because his learning curve was delayed. Add in the fact he’s going to a team that should have an elite power play again – he had just 28 power play points over the last two seasons – and it’s not a stretch to think Oshie’s “career” year will come next season, or the one after. Something to keep in mind for drafts.
He’s also something of an American hero, which reminded me of the greatest video promo an NHL team has ever produced:
One thing that can be seen as weakness is admitting that a prior analysis was wrong. For a few years, I really thought that Corey Crawford wasn’t a very good goalie. Not Ondrej Pavelec bad, but maybe Marc-André Fleury bad. This hasn’t been the case for a while now.
The best measurement we have of future performance for right now (though I think Steve Burtch of Sportsnet is working on something more) is five-on-five save percentage. Early on in his career, it was true that Crawford wasn’t very good: his .922 save percentage at 5v5 ranked in the bottom-third among regular NHL goalies. Since then? Crawford has a .930 save percentage at 5v5 since the start of the lockout-shortened season. The same mark as Braden Holtby, Cory Schneider, and Steve Mason (yes, that Steve Mason). It ranks in the top-third of the NHL among regular goalies.
I think the “demise” of the Blackhawks is a bit overblown. What did they lose? A second line centre who wasn’t a huge factor for them (Richards), a scoring winger (Sharp), and a second pairing defenceman (Oduya). Brandon Saad is a big loss, I won’t doubt that, but they still have loads of talent on that team, and guys like Teuvo Teravainen and Marko Dano are ready to take a step forward.
Crawford could come at a discount next year because of the public perception of the “gutting” of the Blackhawks. I’m not buying it. He’s still a fringe top-10 goalie for me in roto leagues, and I don’t think he bombs out like Semyon Varlamov did last year.
The secret may be out after his 53 point season last year, but Tyson Barrie is pretty good. First and second in points per 60 minutes at 5v5 over the last two years among d-men are Brent Burns and Victor Hedman. Third is, you guessed it, Tyson Barrie.
There are a few problems here, though. He’s being protected by coach Patrick Roy: Erik Johnson, Nick Holden, Nate Guenin, and Brad Stuart were all given tougher minutes to play than Barrie last year. Playing against easy competition is good for production (see: 53 point season), but bad for accumulation because it limits minutes. You won’t see a defenceman playing 25 minutes a game against soft competition, there just is not enough minutes to go around.
That is something to remember for Barrie because he was insanely productive in his minutes last year. His on-ice shooting percentage (or Colorado’s shooting percentage with him on the ice) last year was 11.2-percent, good for third in the NHL. What we know about shooting percentages is that outliers often regress. Consider this:
Matt Niskanen’s 2013-2014 on-ice shooting rate was 10.2-percent, the highest for him in the regular season since 2008-2009. He put up a career high 46 points. Last year, that came back down to 7.3-percent, and managed just 31 points. He scored five fewer power play points, but also 11 fewer 5v5 points.
There should be concern that without a bump in ice time of two or three minutes a game that Barrie comes down to the 40-45 point range, rather than maintain or progress from 53 points. With the addition of François Beauchemin, and nearly the same defensive corps, I’m not sure he gets that ice time bump.
In yesterday’s Ramblings, I talked about Individual Points Percentage (IPP). For a brief primer, check that out.
I look at the Pittsburgh Penguins roster, and I see four top-six wingers: Phil Kessel, Patric Hornqvist, David Perron, and Chris Kunitz. I have to think Kunitz, at least to start, will be with either Crosby or Malkin.
That’s important because out of 121 forwards with at least 1000 minutes played at 5v5 last year, Kunitz ranked 120th in IPP. His mark of 51.2-percent was by far the worst of his career, and nearly 14-percent lower than the 2013-2014 season. He also had a 5-year personal low in shooting percentage. I doubt he repeats that in that top-six mix.
I’m not saying Kunitz gets back to the 65-ish point mark, but I think he rebounds from 40. Don’t be surprised if he puts up 20 goals and 50 points next year.
Popular Articles