Individual Point Percentage and/or Points Per Goal
In my recent article on Sam Gagner I mentioned his "individual point percentage" as one of the reasons to see him as progressing rather than stagnating over his first three seasons. So what isindividual point percentage? Well, it's a calculation of the number of times an individual player gets a point (either a goal or an assist) compared to the number of total goals scored while he's on the ice. So, for example, if a player is on the ice for fifty goals-for at even strength over the course of the season and he gets a point on forty of them, his individual point percentage would be 80%. The first time that I'd ever heard seen this was when Tyler Dellow used it and he called it points per goal. I probably should have just followed that convention but I didn't find the article until recently and I'd already made up my fun charts. So yeah, individual point percentage or points per goal. Same thing. Let me know which term you find clearer in the comments.
In this article, I've calculated the individual point percentage for all of the forwards who played at least 50 games in the NHL in each of the last three seasons. After the jump I'll present the data and talk a little bit about what it means in some specific instances.
Before I present the chart I'll just talk a little bit about what to expect. You'll notice right off the top that a lot of the really good offensive players find a home near the top of the chart. This makes sense. These players tend to have the offence run through them when they're on the ice. If there's a goal to be scored these guys are probably going to be in on it. In Tyler's article (this is the same one I linked to above and it really is one to read) he mentions that, other than the guys at the very top and very bottom, he doesn't see a lot of repeatability in this stat. Depending on what he means, I may be inclined to disagree. It looks to me like there are actually a lot of players who stay within a pretty comfortable range where their best season is within 15 points of their worst season. This strikes me as being very similar to something like shooting percentage. There's real talent in there but over a short period of time it's soaked in luck so that an individual player might have one or two seasons that stray far from his actual talent. And, as such, just like with shooting percentage, we really ought to take those "lucky/unlucky" seasons into consideration in player evaluation.
The other thing I wanted to note is that the average for a forward over the last three years is right around 70%. Any time a player deviated substantially from his three-year average it's marked in either red (down year) or green (up year). I should also mention that all of the data is at EV. So here it is:
So, a few things I wanted to talk about here as it pertains to the Oilers. Dustin Penner is having a tremendous season by this metric, far better than anything he's done in his career as an Oiler so far. He's also having his best shooting percentage season as an Oiler, though it's not ridiculous, at 14.2%. If I were in charge of the Oilers this would be an awfully tempting time to sell high on Penner if he's regarded as being valuable in other places around the league, not just because of the "lucky" (it may not be luck; it could have something to do with more of the offence going through Penner at EV since he has played a lot less with Hemsky this season) but also because of the direction of the team. He's a good player so you don't sell him for a 2nd round pick or something similarly silly but if there's a team out there willing to give up a good/elite player between the age of 18 and 22, I really hope they pull the trigger.
Another Oiler worth talking about is Andrew Cogliano. Tyler mentioned is his piece that both Shawn Horcoff and Robert Nilsson were signed to their rather large stipends after tremendous percentage seasons. Unsurprisingly, they haven't lived up to expectations. With Cogliano, it's the exact opposite. He's just awful by this metric, his personal shooting percentage is 4.8% and his on-ice shooting percentage is down around 7% at EV (his first two seasons were 11.4% and 8.6%). If the Oilers still believe in Cogliano as an NHL player (and my goodness let it be as a winger) this could be a nice place to take a chance on a long-term deal if Cogliano is open to it. Something like 6 years at 1.75M could actually end up being a remarkable value deal going forward (and it really does need to be that long-term if a winning Oilers team is going to benefit).
Gilbert Brule isn't on the chart but he's in the exact opposite situation. His on-ice shooting percentage is up over 9%, his personal shooting percentage is at 13.4% and he's got points on 25 of the 29 goals scored while he's been on the ice at even strength. That's 86.2% or higher than anyone's average on the chart if you prefer. Personally, I don't see Brule as an elite offensive player. If they sign this guy long-term it's likely going to be an overpay and it's probably going to hurt. I really (REALLY!) hope they decide to trade him instead.
There are some interesting things to note from other teams on here as well. The Flames are betting that Rene Bourque's two-year flourish as an elite EV player works out. Rick Nash has way fewer points than he normally given the number of goals scored with him on the ice. Colby Armstrong picked a really bad year to not get any points. It will be interesting to see if that impacts his ability to get a long-term big-money deal in the summer (if he's available at five years 2.5M per you need to go for it). I'll take a look at defenders over the last three years in the next few days.
0 recs |
18 comments
|
Comments
Good work, and another interesting stat to add to the growing list. I think I like “points per goal” for this metric, but that’s because the two names suggests different things to me.
Is it possible to find out how many assists were handed out for all of the goals a player was on the ice for? Then you could calculate the “points percentage” including assists and have a slightly different measure. I’m thinking of the criticism against Tom Gilbert and others where they collect a large number of second assists. It would also give more weight to a guy doing all of the work himself to score an unassisted goal.
A significant difference between Pts/G and Pts% would suggest that a player may be riding the coattails of teammates driving the offence, or is being brought down by a guy with stone hands.
Also, am I going blind or is Hemsky not on that list? I looked three times and couldn’t spot him. Not enough games played in all of the seasons, perhaps?
Yeah, Hemsky didn’t have enough games to qualify this season but he was at 77.4% last year and 87.1% the year before that. In 22 games this season he was at 82.4% so he’d have a spot amongst the league leaders in terms of his average. Right up there with a lot of the league’s elite players.
As for the assists question, I don’t have an easy way of finding out how many assists were given on each goal. I collected the stats for the charts up there by mathing it out from some of the things Gabe is tracking at behindthenet. He does break things up in to goals, first assists and second assists though if you’re interested in looking through it.
A significant difference between Pts/G and Pts% would suggest that a player may be riding the coattails of teammates driving the offence, or is being brought down by a guy with stone hands.
I’m not sure I really follow this particular point. Firstly, is the Pts/G points per goal? And which stat/name do you think suggests someone might be riding coattails etc.?
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 6, 2010 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
Sorry for the poor description. My quick/lazy notation was Pts% for a percentage of points earned by a particular player out of all points awarded while he’s on the ice, including assists. Pts/G is the stat you’re talking about, the number of points earned by a player per goal scored while he is on the ice.
If you think about the extreme cases the difference might be clearer – if a guy never earns anything but a second assist but gets that for ever goal scored when he’s out, then his Pts/G would be 100% (and looks extremely good) but his Pts% would only be 33%, and not look nearly as impressive. He’s earning a lot of points but it’s driven largely by his teammates.
At the other end, if a player is fantastic offensively but has pylons for teammates and scores nothing but unassisted goals, both the Pts/G and Pts% would be 100%.
For real players the difference would be somewhere in between the 3:1 and 1:1 ratios. That could potentially show how much a player relies on his teammates for points, although if getting the assists data isn’t straightforward I’m not sure if it’s worth the effort to calculate. I see the first/second assist information on BTH but nothing about assists earned by other players while a guy is on the ice.
Anyways, that was just my mind wandering on a weekend, I don’t want to sidetrack the thread too much away from the work you did.
Thanks Euler, that first paragraph really helps to clarify things. I agree that it would be another interesting piece of information though I’d be pretty surprised if we saw different guys at the top of the two lists to be honest, though your proposed stat would obvoiusly bump up the numbers of the big goal-scorers. Unfortunately, I think the only way to know how many total assists were awarded when an individual was on the ice would be to go through the game sheets. Someone could probably scrape it, but sadly, I don’t have the programming chops to be that someone.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 6, 2010 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
Penner’s counting numbers are inflated by both his shooting percentage and Brule’s SP, yet his underlying numbers aren’t much different from previous seasons.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Yes sir. And that makes this the season to move him if there’s a good market for him. I’m certainly not trying to say that he’s a bad player, just that he won’t likely be as marketable in the future and that there’s a pretty good chance he won’t be here for more than two more seasons regradless. The same thing is largely true of Hemsky, though I can’t imagine Hemsky’s value is peaking while he’s in rehab.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 7, 2010 9:33 AM PST up reply actions
Yes sir. And that makes this the season to move him if there’s a good market for him. I’m certainly not trying to say that he’s a bad player, just that he won’t likely be as marketable in the future and that there’s a pretty good chance he won’t be here for more than two more seasons regradless.
I agree with you, though without some real players the kids that are coming in are going to get killed over and over again.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Of course they will. But if you just need someone taking the toughs you can do that with a cheap UFA signing and still cash in Penner for value. Dustin Penner will get better results than Dominic Moore but both if all you need is someone to play the toughs who’s over the age of 23, he works fine.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 7, 2010 3:21 PM PST up reply actions
But if you just need someone taking the toughs you can do that with a cheap UFA signing
I’m sorry, I’m not sure what you’re talking about, I’m an Edmonton Oilers fan.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Interesting that Ryan Malone’s big contract came after a 53% year and he immediately turned that into a 78% year on a terrible team.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Two more quick comments – that Colorado trade of Wolski was very bad and this reinforces that notion. He drives offense.
Ales Kotalik is bad no matter how you slice his stats.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Good work Scott. Lots of interesting stuff in there.
Personally, I don’t see Brule as an elite offensive player. If they sign this guy long-term it’s likely going to be an overpay and it’s probably going to hurt. I really (REALLY!) hope they decide to trade him instead.
I don’t know that anybody would look at 52 GP, 13-16-29 and see an “elite” offensive player. Given all his health issues he hasn’t really had much chance to pile up the numbers despite his “good luck” on P/G. They might well be able to get him cheaper this off-season than next.
While I’m surprised his P/G is quite that high, I have noticed that if anything good happens while he’s on the ice, he tends to be in the middle of it. Besides the plus shot, he’s a real underrated playmaker IMO, especially in tight to the net where he does most of his damage.
My guess is that both sides will be unlikely to commit long term after such an unsettled year, and he’ll get re-upped to 1 or 2 years max.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
I was certainly being facetious with the “elite” tag. But there really aren’t a lot of players in the 80% range that aren’t big-time players. It is possible that Brule is another Daniel Paille and he can sustain the bigger numbers but it wouldn’t be a bet I’d want to take. Personally, I think we’re seeing Brule with his peak offensive numbers right now (or three months ago if you prefer). If I were his agent I’d be trying to cash in for three years or more. If the Oilers decide that he’s still young and could still improve (and they seem to believe in him), a one or even two year deal would be fine.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 7, 2010 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
I think we’re seeing Brule with his peak offensive numbers right now (or three months ago if you prefer).
He just turned 23. What do you see that makes you think he’s peaked? I see lots of room for further growth for this young man.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
To be clear, I don’t think he’s peaked as a player, I just think his numbers have peaked. I think he’ll continue to improve but that his percentages will decline. He’ll probably end the season with something between 30 and 35 EV points. In subsequent seasons, even though he’ll be improving, I don’t think he’ll ever get over that 35-point hump. If the Oilers, however, project his 35-point season as a base on which to improve statistically (he’s young, he’ll get better!), they’ll likely end up overpaying substantially.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 8, 2010 11:01 AM PST up reply actions
Let me rephrase the question: why do you think his numbers have peaked?
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Mar 10, 2010 8:26 PM PST up reply actions
Well, his IPP is higher than what’s sustainable for almost all players of his talent level, his shooting percentage is higher than his career average by a few points, his on-ice shooting is also pretty high and he doesn’t have the offence in the AHL in his previous seasons to support what he’s done this year. Even his big offensive totals in junior aren’t that impressive (they are good but they’re not overwhelming or anything). 30 ES points in the NHL is quite a lot, top 150 in the NHL for EV offence, 35 points would likely be top 100. I don’t think he’s at that level on talent even with measured imrpovements over the next few seasons.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 10, 2010 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
I love this article, Scott.
A posse ad esse.
The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!
Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by 





























