Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: This Week In GIFs

Jordan Eberle Scoring Chances 2010-2011

Standing 5'10" 180 lbs, he was never a prototypical hockey player.  He posted hall-of-fame statistics, but never looked like a hall-of-famer on the ice.  His game was one of anticipation, understanding, intelligence and movement.  He moved quickly and stealthily to open space just prior to the puck arriving in that open space.  He scored goals with a quick release and an uncanny premonition of the play.  Joe Mullen was never a guy that looked like an all-star, he just played like one.

Chance % Team Rank:  4/23
Chance % Fwd Rank:  3/15

Diff/60 Team Rank: 4/23
Diff/60 Fwd Rank: 3/15

Star-divide

Scoring Chances by Season Segment

TCF = season total even strength chances for; TCA = season total even strength chances against; SCF = segment even strength chances for; SCA = segment even strength chances against; Segment % = player scoring chance percentage during the season segment; Team Seg % = Oilers team scoring chance percentage during the season segment.

 

Game # TCF TCA SCF SCA Segment % Team Seg %
1-10 40 34 40 34 0.541 0.453
11-20 78 89 38 55 0.409 0.401
21-30 134 140 56 51 0.523 0.449
31-40 175 180 41 40 0.506 0.467
41-50




0.531
51-60 233 228 58 48 0.547 0.470
61-70 270 265 37 37 0.500 0.454
71-82 309 303 39 38 0.506 0.486

 

 

Scoring Chances Line Graph by Season Segment

*click to enlarge

Eberleseasonsegment_medium
 

Above 50% as a rookie, no matter the qualcomp, isn't a bad thing.  Jordan Eberle had an impressive rookie season.

 

Scoring Chances WOWY


With Eberle
Without Eberle
Eberle Without
# CF CA %
CF CA %
CF CA %
4 216 193 0.528
133 128 0.510
93 110 0.458
10 100 90 0.526
99 96 0.508
209 213 0.495
13 96 95 0.503
194 234 0.453
213 208 0.506
27 15 6 0.714
233 242 0.491
294 297 0.497
28 22 17 0.564
141 247 0.363
287 286 0.501
89 78 85 0.479
193 232 0.454
231 218 0.514
91 32 44 0.421
233 278 0.456
277 259 0.517












2 82 80 0.506
164 219 0.428
227 223 0.504
5 98 96 0.505
234 281 0.454
211 207 0.505
6 56 66 0.459
112 127 0.469
253 237 0.516
26 75 82 0.478
164 219 0.428
234 221 0.514
43 43 43 0.500
97 117 0.453
266 260 0.506
49 106 93 0.533
172 267 0.392
203 210 0.492
58 22 22 0.500
140 121 0.536
287 281 0.505
77 122 99 0.552
249 293 0.459
187 204 0.478

 

Color me stunned - Ryan Jones didn't drag Eberle down.

Comment 21 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Your chart has Eberle with and without #14.
Personality disorder?

by Woodguy on Apr 24, 2011 8:02 AM MDT reply actions  

Personality disorder?

Easter wine.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Apr 24, 2011 1:14 PM MDT up reply actions  

Haha!

Crazy that a rookie makes most of team mates better and runs north of .500, espcially given jis QC.

  1. and #4 are pretty special players.

Like the Mullen comp. I like Shutt too.

by Woodguy on Apr 24, 2011 2:03 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

Not drunk, put posted on a Blackberry.

Should read:

“Crazy that a rookie makes most of his team mates better and runs north of .500, especially given his QC.

  #14 and #4 are pretty special players."

by Woodguy on Apr 24, 2011 2:10 PM MDT up reply actions  

Nice to see you buying into my Joe Mullen comp that you pooh-poohed last year. :)

Eberle had a fine rookie season.

Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Apr 24, 2011 3:52 PM MDT reply actions  

Nice to see you buying into my Joe Mullen comp that you pooh-poohed last year. :)

Just for you, Bruce.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Apr 24, 2011 7:33 PM MDT up reply actions  

Assuming Renney realizes Gagner is not a real NHL centre and instead is a winger (it’s the whole face offs thing), and you have Eberle, Hemsky, Omark and Gagner for two RW spots on your top 2 lines, who stays and who goes and why?

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 8:08 AM MDT reply actions  

I don’t really think it’s helpful to think in terms of “top six” and “bottom six” since teams often rely on three lines. I’m also not sure the FO thing is that important. Players generally improve with time too, so I wouldn’t give up on Gagner at center if faceoff ability is the catalyst. Basically, I’d want to keep all four of those guys at this point.

The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.

by Scott Reynolds on Apr 25, 2011 8:57 AM MDT up reply actions  

I agree they rely on three lines, but the role of the third line and profile of the player is often different, hence the Frolik vs Brouwer discussion on another post here. On my third line I look for Colby Armstrong, Brouwer, John Madden types who can pot a few goals but are strong shutdown guys. I don’t see any of those 4 as strong shutdown guys, so as much as I may WANT to keep them all, I am not sure its the right thing to do.

I respectfully and completely disagree on the face off thing. Its huge and this was really hit home to me during the Peca – Stoll – Horcoff year when they really set the pace off the dot. Gagner may continue to get better, but after 4 years should the team bank on that?

But over and above face offs, I think Gagner will struggle if asked to check the big centres like Thornton, Hanzal, getzlaf, Staal, Lecavelier, Toews, Carter, etc. He doesn’t appear to have the size or the footspeed, nor the Esa Tikkanen/Kenny Linseman pest type personality required to thrive in the role.

He’s a square peg being shoved into a round hole, mate. Sure, he may get hammered into shape, but more often than not the square peg – round hole scenario turns out badly.

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 10:15 AM MDT up reply actions  

On FO’s: How many is Gagner really going to take? 15 per game would seem like a lot to me if he stays bad at it, and the difference between a 40% guy and a 50% guy is then just one or two per game. It’s not nothing, but it’s not going to be very costly either. So long as not everyone on the team is a 40% guy, I don’t think it’s a big deal.

On Competition: A lot of the guys you mentioned are the top centers in the league. The problem isn’t that they’re big, it’s that they’re really good. If Gagner can’t handle them consistently, there are two other lines for him to play on. I’m also not sure how a move to the wing solves the “big (and good)” problem. There are big wingers and defensemen too. What strengths do you think he has that he can exploit more easily on the wing than at center?

The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.

by Scott Reynolds on Apr 25, 2011 11:08 AM MDT up reply actions  

To be clear, I am not sold on Gagner overall, but when I look around the league at the successful little guys, they generally play on the wing. St. Louis, Samsonov, Gionta, Sullivan, Cammalleri, Roy, Kane, Whitney, etc. The number of successful little centres seems much shorter.

Freed from the defensive requirements of centre, I would hope we would see a little more Eberle from him on the wing. Maybe a little Whitney would be nice. The Oilers didn’t know how to use him either and look how he turned out. Gagner is a smart player with good hands and some touch around the net. With someone else stiring the pot, I could see him becoming a closer, potting 30 goals maybe. And, with less ice to cover, I would hope he would have more success defensively.

A year ago my perspective was “trade Hemsky and move Gagner to the wing”. Then Eberle and Omark came along and hemsky got hurt again. More small, skilled forwards on a team lacking balance. So… frankly, I would trade Gagner because I think its 50-50 he’s a bust in the sense of what one would hope from from a 6th overall pick, and his skill set is becoming redundent on the Oilers, especially if the Oilers draft RNH or Courturier 1st overall this year. And the Oilers need to hook up on a “Stewart/Shattenkirk for Johnson/McClement” type hockey trade if they are gonna start plugging some holes. Can’t keep players because we like them or they might get good maybe later even though we got 2 more of the same guy.

But if we are gonna keep him, I want to see him in a role where he has the best chance to succeed. For me, that’s the wing.

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 1:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

You might be right that there are a few more good small guys on the wing, but there effective centers who happen to be small too (Savard, Langkow, Bouchard, Drury, Koivu, and I’m pretty sure Roy is actually a center). It seems to me that most guys are bigger in both positions. I’m not sold on the idea of Gagner moving to the wing to be a shooter. He’s never scored a lot of goals (Eberle has of course), and my recollection is that his shot isn’t one of his strengths. No sin in not being sold on the player, but it don’t really see how moving him from C to W helps him. My biggest concern right now is whether or not he can recover well from the hand injury. In terms of trade, you’d need to consider trading any of those guys depending on what was offered, but I’d be in no hurry to move someone.

The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.

by Scott Reynolds on Apr 25, 2011 3:19 PM MDT up reply actions  

Hey, if I thought Gagner could be Savard, sign me up. But man, I just don’t see it after 4 years. Don’t see Koivu or Drury either. Maybe the move to the wing is wishful thinking on my part. But I can’t see any future where Gagner is on the same line as Eberle or Omark and the Oilers being successful in the playoffs. There are too many teams with too much size (and skill) to send out a Gagner – Eberle/Omark pairing and not think the line is going to get creamed.

As for trades, I am looking for the Oilers to be more proactive. Figuring out where they have holes and where they have depth (or lack diversity) after this draft and then going out and making 1 or 2 trades happen. Right now that would seem to mean using small forwards (Gagner, Eberle, Omark, Cogliano, Brule), offensive RWs (Hemsky, Eberle, Omark) and skilled defensemen who don’t hit (Gilbert, Foster, Chorney) as trade bait and seeing what you can get in terms of filling some holes, of which there are many.

The “Stewart/Shattenkirk for Johnson/McClement” trade really stoked the fires for me on this topic. I am not sure who won that trade, and we might not know for sure for 2 or 3 years, but I commend both GMs for trying. The trade was risky for both GMs given Stewart’s play last season and Johnson’s draft pedigree, but St’ Louis was deep in d-men and lacked scoring and Colorado lacked a premier d-man with size and had some depth in scoring. Ta da, a trade is born. Tambi needs to go forth and find other teams with mix issues and find a match.

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 3:59 PM MDT up reply actions  

One question I have is that if the Oilers are trying to return to uptempo fast skilled hockey, can we have players with skating issues? i think it is what keeps Gagner from being a better player and why I also can’t see him playing top centres effectively, especially being smaller. Or wingers.

Smaller players that can’t create space with skating are forced to play the body more, which means playing to a weakness. Poor mobility affects stickhandling – you can’t beat them if you can’t get around or away from them.

Watching the speed and mobility of the Hawks and Canucks, it really is evident to me what a difference good skating means to success in a tough playoff series. And we will have to beat the Hawks and Canucks someday.

There are a few current players that have significant skating issues, and some of the prospects. Good mobility should be the prerequisite for becoming an Oiler, barring some truly exceptional qualities.

by FastOil on Apr 25, 2011 12:59 PM MDT reply actions  

Who, besides gagner, are you concerned about from a skating point of view?

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 1:03 PM MDT up reply actions  

I don’t get why anyone would be concerned with Gagner’s skating.

He’s not fast but he’s a good skater. He’s got excellent balance and he changes direction (with the puck) at a very high level.

I think people confuse speed with skating ability and they are not the same thing.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Apr 25, 2011 2:35 PM MDT up reply actions  

I think FastOil is including speed as a key component of skating ability, having watched what it has meant in the Canucks-hawks series. Not sure why you would include balance and lateral movement and exclude speed?

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 3:20 PM MDT up reply actions  

I read a post on the other blog which surprisingly mentioned Cogliano. The poster seemed really informed, and mentioned his straight ahead skating is blazing, but he turns really poorly. They felt it’s why he doesn’t PK like he should be able to, or beat people one on one like he should be able to.

Struds, Foster, Vandemeer, Vandevelde, Smac, Brule, Harti. Harti seems mobile, but one backcheck I saw it was shocking how bad his stride is. When the chips are down, what a huge disadvantage if you struggle to keep up or win foot races to the puck. It’s less critical for a 4th liner, but I think still important. Harti is looking promising, but I am always thinking of not just being decent reg season, but being a play off contributor, especially as the rounds get tougher.

Some question Peckham. Effective skating puts enormous pressure on the opponents systems, causes breakdowns. Some players make up for it positionally, but those are usually vets, not rookies. And they likely caused a lot of negative chances as they learned where to be and when.

I think all players should fit the mold, even support players. We like to think of the Oilers as fast, but really there are good or weak skaters on the team. It mirrors the other imbalances.

If we are rebuilding, mobile well rounded players should be the ideal. Lets move away from one and two dimensional players that have big drawbacks or disadvantages like poor skating or small without wheels, or just plain not that good at hockey.

by FastOil on Apr 25, 2011 1:34 PM MDT reply actions  

I watched Harti against the Bulldogs live, and the thing I noticed was on the breakout, he kept up just fine. But… when he came back down the ice he looked like he had run a marathon whereas Omark hadn’t broken a sweat. I mean, you should have seen the look on his face. He couldn’t wait to get off the ice. The dude’s stride is not economical.

I haven’t seen enough of VV to comment (wasn’t watching him as closely in the Bulldogs game, for example) but I agree on Struds, SMac and Foster. If the organization likes Struds so much they should find him a job in coaching or player development. Brule surprises me a little bit. hadn’t noticed anything with him.

by gcw_rocks on Apr 25, 2011 3:17 PM MDT up reply actions  

There was talk about Brule moving to the wing during the season – something about moving his feet more. I assumed that he was quick, I guess because of his junior career. It may have to do with his health concerns.

As for Gagner, he isn’t ankling around the ice, but there is something lacking. Maybe explosiveness. I have always thought he isn’t going fast enough, and it limits his ability to use his stickhandling skills. You don’t often see him beat people like Kane or Briere, and he needs to be able to play as a 1-2 C, he needs to be dangerous. If you watch his old line mate Kane, he is so mobile, and gets on other players or into open ice so quickly. He can glide at speed and cover a lot of ice. Maybe he needs to be older? I don’t know if age affects style of play, more reads and positioning.

Maybe I’m confusing skating with Gagner’s style, not finding the right space to be in or go to enough, like Eberle does well. My fear with him is being forced to the perimeter in the play offs. Complementary scorers can really disappear when the going gets heavy and there is no space, even the Sedins seem to have trouble being consistent threats in a tough series.

 I would like to see all top 6 forwards, especially the small guys be drivers of offensive play. For me a line with decided playmakers and finishers can be disrupted more easily than a line with every player being a threat to score that can also pass well. Gretzky and Kurri do not count as an example of how I’m wrong – Semenko went on a goal streak with Gretzky.

 I don’t agree with small players being asked to “play big”. Small players have to be willing to play in the scoring zone, the 20 ft perimeter of the net, where it’s rough. Hitting is not what they should focus on, it’s a weakness. Timely hits and finishing checks yes, but they should have hopefully speed and definitely elusiveness, and play to their strengths. Create space from opposing players.

I was going to say maybe Gagner needs better players with him, but he has had the best for much of his career so far. I think Sam will be a good player, I am not convinced about him being a difference maker. We need the latter. If they draft RNH it will be interesting to see what happens with Sam.

by FastOil on Apr 26, 2011 11:29 AM MDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Ryan_2008_small
The Oilers Begin the Road to Rebuilding
Small
Oilers Next Head Coach
Small
Josh Anderson Scouting Report
Small
The 2012 NHL Draft and Combine - the Fanpost Almanac
Chambers-john_small
Risk Reward Radulov
Small
Joonas Korpisalo Scouting Report
2012-01-21-012338_small
Oilers Prospect Frans Tuohimaa Signs an Extension with Jokerit
Small
Ryan Murray - The Numbers
Chambers-john_small
Cody Hodgson, the game within the game, and inattention to detail
Small
Hong Kong Animators Draw NHL Violence

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

32 - 40 - 10

Lost 3

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (27-11, .711)
  2. St. Louis Blues (24-10, .706)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (22-10, .688)
  4. Los Angeles Kings (18-11, .621)
  5. San Jose Sharks (18-13, .581)
  6. Phoenix Coyotes (20-15, .571)
  7. Nashville Predators (18-14, .563)
  8. Chicago Blackhawks (21-19, .525)
  9. Colorado Avalanche (16-19, .457)
  10. Dallas Stars (18-22, .450)
  11. Anaheim Ducks (14-19, .424)
  12. Edmonton Oilers (18-25, .419)
  13. Calgary Flames (13-21, .382)
  14. Columbus Blue Jackets (14-31, .311)
  15. Minnesota Wild (8-22,.267)

Eastern Conference

  1. Pittsburgh Penguins (31-13, .711)
  2. Boston Bruins (27-11, .711)
  3. New York Rangers (25-16, .610)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (21-17, .553)
  5. New Jersey Devils (18-16, .529)
  6. Ottawa Senators (19-17, .528)
  7. Washington Capitals (20-19, .513)
  8. Montreal Canadiens (16-19, .457)
  9. Winnipeg Jets (15-19, .441)
  10. Buffalo Sabres (14-18, .438)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (13-17, .433)
  12. Florida Panthers (14-19, .424)
  13. Toronto Maple Leafs (17-24, .415)
  14. New York Islanders (8-23, .258)
  15. Tampa Bay Lightning (10-30, .250)

Division Standings

  1. Central (79-58, .577)
  2. Atlantic (68-50, .576)
  3. Pacific (62-54, .534)
  4. Northeast (69-65, .515)
  5. Northwest (49-69, .415)
  6. Southeast (51-81, .386)


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Small Alan Hull

Contributors

Newtwitter2_small Jonathan Willis

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL