Hemsky Actually Made the Oilers a Worst Team Last Year

by Oilnutz on Aug 7, 2011 11:56 PM MDT

There have been a number of blogs written about Hemsky over the years and very few them have been negative. There’s a reason for that. Ales Hemsky is a good Hockey player. He’s obviously a great talent and his most well known fault is that he is injury prone. How many times have Oilers fans said "If Hemsky was healthy last year he would have scored so many more points and the Oilers would have been a much better team because of it". Well...after last year...that is no longer true.

Last year the Oilers made the made some big steps in actually turning the corner. They brought in some new (younger) player, a new systems and a new attitude. The finished a disappointing last place, for the second season in a row, but there were some really good things that came from the new crop of players.

Taylor Hall proved that he was worth the Hype. Jordan Eberle and Magnus Paajarvi had pretty decent rookie seasons, especially considering they weren’t really playing behind veterans. Linus Omark showed that he was indeed a YouTube sensation but also showed he had a defensive game too. Jeff Petry and Theo Peckham stepped up on Defense. Yep they sucked....but at least they left us looking forward to next season.

While I was watching the games last season one thing stood out to me. The Oilers didn’t seem to be as good of team when Hemsky played. I eventually got of my a** and decided to warm up my old Ti-83 and see if I could find some stats to prove this. What do you know...I did.

I’m not a Stats guy but was able to figure out a few simple things....Like Hemsky played in 57% of the Oilers games last year. I also was able to figure out that Hemsky played in 56% of the games that the Oilers won. This number didn’t seem right. Your top offensive player should have more of an impact on the teams wins....Shouldn’t he????

I decided to check it out and did the same calculations with a couple other players. Again This is what I found....

Hall - 79% GP / 88% Wins

Horcoff - 57% GP / 76% Wins

Horcoff blew my mind. Guess he’s not such a bad captain after all. And Hall...guess he really was the real deal.

Well the Oilers were a complete yard sale on the power play last year and maybe this is is directly related to Hemsky not being on the ice. Wrong Again.

To Repeat, Hemsky played in 57% of the Oilers games. Of the games where the Oilers scored at least one power play goal, Hemsky only played in 43% of them. The Oilers were far worst on the power play when Hemsky played.

So what does that leave us. Well I sure expected that Hemsky would have really helped the Oilers win more games. I also thought that He would have had a more positive impact on the power play, after all...he’s almost a point per game player. I can’t believe that he was actually a hindered both. Who would have guessed.

So lets end like this...Ales Hemsky is a great offensive player and if he was on the right team then he might be able to help them, but with the changing of systems and changing of the guards, unless he changes he’s game it would be a good idea (For both team and the Player) to move him for parts that will eventually (I hope) make the Oilers a winning team again.

Good luck Mr. Hemsky.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I also was able to figure out that Hemsky played in 56% of the games that the Oilers won

For a team that won only 30% of their games on the season, how is that number a bad thing?

Hemsky scores almost a point per game. I like that in a player. Unless you’re getting the Taj Mahal in return, you’d usually like to keep your PPG players around.

Lead Writer for Oil On Whyte - An Edmonton Oilers Blog

by chappy35 on Aug 8, 2011 12:03 AM MDT reply actions

Not if they can’t stay healthy.

by gcw_rocks on Aug 8, 2011 7:01 AM MDT up reply actions

Chappy35

You might want to read that again. I’m thinking you didn’t get it.

Also the PPG player argument is Nulled. Alex Yashin was PPG player a times too. Is he someone you would want on your team? Even if he didn’t come with the baggage? I hears he’s available???

Hemsky is almost a point per game player, but Hockey is a team sport and the teams with the best chemistry usually come out ahead. I won’t disregard Hemsky’s talent what I will say though is that this is no longer his team and he doesn’t fit in the new system playing his current style of game.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 9:11 AM MDT up reply actions

Andrew Cogliano

Played in %100 of the Oilers losses last year. He also played in %100 of the Oilers wins. Therefore, he was simultaneously both the best and the worst player on the team.

by Matt.N on Aug 8, 2011 5:38 AM MDT reply actions

Oilnutz methodology may not work for players who played full seasons, but it is interesting to see the impact of players who play partial seasons 9as the Oilers seem to have LOTS of those).

by gcw_rocks on Aug 8, 2011 6:58 AM MDT up reply actions

It doesn’t work period.

For instance, when you factor in goaltenders:

With Khabibulin Hemsky was 8-22-1

With Dubnyk Hemsky was 6-6-4

Wins are a terrible stat to attribute to a single player.

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

by dawgbone98 on Aug 8, 2011 7:40 AM MDT up reply actions

Actually it does

Just to be a smart a**

Cogliano 100% GP/ 100% of Games Won / 100% of PPG

Those numbers are are much more rounded then Hemsky’s

Hemsky being injured actually help my theory because it gave me a comparison to his impact on the team with and with out him.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 8:52 AM MDT up reply actions

No, seriously, it doesn't

I totally respect that you’re thinking about the game, Oilnutz, and I’m not trying to shut you down or shut you up. But when you say ’you’re not a stats guy,’ you should then be open the possibility that the measurement tool you’ve created is mathematically flawed. I happen to be a ‘stats guy’ professionally. I don’t do a lot of hockey statistics, but I do design quantitative research every day. So when I tell you that what you’ve designed has no meaningful causality within it, I know what I’m talking about.

I agree that Hemsky’s injury offers an opportunity for an analysis that Copper and Blue writers call ‘With or Without You.’ That can be a fascinating way to see what’s called correlation (the rate at which things co-occur and the conditions under which that rate is effected). I’d be very interested to read such a study regarding team performance with and without Hemsky, although other changes to the team (other injuries, line changes, quality of opponents etc) would make it a very challenging study to carry out. Unfortunately, the details you’ve presented simply do not contain that type of analysis. Your study is without context or controls and so relies on your assumption that Hemsky is to blame (the stat below about who was in net for wins shows that it’s possible Hemsky had no effect whatsoever – we just don’t know from your study). Further, it is inductive in nature.

A simplified corollary to what you’ve presented would go like this:
75% of apples purchased are red in colour. Thus, people prefer red apples.

But what % of apples available for purchase were red? What % of apple species are red? What % of fruits purchased were apples? What climate are we in!? The questions are endless to the point of making this type of study spurious and misleading. I’m afraid that’s the territory you’ve wandered into.

Again, I don’t want to shut you down. I think this community can be overly critical of people, particularly when they make strong assertions. At the same time, it has a lot of smart people in it that can be a resource when considering this kind of undertaking. My best advice would be to listen for the constructive feedback, ignore the haters, and try it again.

by Ice Rink Eschatologists on Aug 8, 2011 3:40 PM MDT up reply actions

LOL Sorry Bud I think you Took my last comment a little too seriously. I was actually trying to be sarcastic. Big fail there.

Your right I am not a stats guy. Won’t pretend to be, not interested in learning, natta.

What i did is notice a much better team game being played when Hemsky wasn’t on the roster and tried to find a way to prove it. Personally i think I did a decent job…from a general, non in-depth way.

Here’s a question for you…as a stats guy….is there a way to measure a players impact on the attitude of a team??? Also again how would you have done these stats to prove different. I kept it quite simple and agree there are many factors that I didn’t take into consideration. Be interested in hearing what you come up with.

Thanks for the input and hope you enjoyed the read.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 5:55 PM MDT up reply actions

Dawgbone

Hockey is a team game. I’m not saying that Hemsky is directly responsible for the loses. What I am saying is that I expect the Oilers to have more wins and a better PP when Hemesky played. As I showed that is a false statement.

In my opinion the chemistry of the team has changed and Hemsky might not fit that Chemistry anymore.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 8:56 AM MDT reply actions

You can expect certain things all you want but it doesn’t make it justified.

In terms of the PP, there’s no doubt the Oilers PP was awful for a long stretch and Hemsky was part of it being bad (he personally had a bad year on the PP). The flipside however is that Hemsky has been very good on the PP for a long time and it’s important to realize that even good players struggle at things they are good at from time to time.

In terms of wins, Hemsky can make an impact on any game, but he’ll have a bigger impact on turning a close game into a win than he will turning a 4-1 game into a win. The Oilers lost a league leading 28 games by 2 or more goals. That is very hard for 1 player to turn around.

The fact of the matter is the Oilers were a lousy team and Hemsky being in or out of the lineup wasn’t going to change that. The Oilers were a lousy PP team and Hemsky had an off year when it comes to PP production.

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

by dawgbone98 on Aug 8, 2011 11:16 AM MDT up reply actions

Hmmm Sounds like on one hand you’re discrediting the ability of one player to impact a games out come and on the other hand your saying Hemsky is capable of do just that. Interesting!!!

The Point of the blog was to make the point that Hemsky might not fit into the new systems and identity of the team EG…The powerplay. Hemesky on the half boards has not worked for years. It hasn’t just been one season. Take away the passing lane and you kill the penalty. Having a the guys moving and shooting…they started having some success…Still not great…but definitely better.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 2:28 PM MDT up reply actions

Hmmm sounds like you didn’t read a fucking thing I wrote.

The Oilers are a terrible team that lost a lot of games by 2 or more goals. It is very hard for a single good player to change the tide of a game enough to compensate for that. I meant exactly that… when you are a bad team a good player is going to have a harder time making an impact on wins and losses because there will be less available games to make an actual impact in.

In terms of the PP, Hemsky’s personal rates have always been very good. Just because the overall team% hasn’t been great isn’t just Hemsky’s fault, there are generally 8 or 9 other guys who also play regularly on the PP. If the first unit is clicking at 18% and the second unit clicks at 9% the team PP rate is going to suck (even if the breakdown is 1:20 & 0:40).

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

by dawgbone98 on Aug 8, 2011 8:52 PM MDT up reply actions

LOL…Again. Really.

First….take a pill. Potty language needs not be used.

Second off…Yes…the Oilers sucked. Everyone noticed that already. It’s not Hemsky’s fault and I never said that. What I said is I think that Hemsky had a hard time playing in the system and with the new cast of the Oilers. The Oilers game changed drastically last year and it will be interesting to see if Hemsky can make that adjustment. After all he’s played the same way his whole career. If he’s suppose to be a top guy on this team and is having problems changing his game….well…then. I was also curious about the mental impact he had on the team. Waiting to hear from Ice Rink Eschatologists if there a stat on that one. He’s a stats guy did you know. It’s been seen numerous times that when the star player goes out, the team comes together and plays better because it gives other player a chance to step up. Want to debate that one…see Penguins Last year.

Third off….yep there are other people on the power play…and they played better last year when Hemsky wasn’t in the game. I didn’t need numbers to tell me that either. It was very clear watching the games. The other 8-9 guys on the PP worked better on the PP because the moved around more and tried different things. Not just work the half boards and wait for something to open up.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 10:41 PM MDT up reply actions

Wait, your evidence is the Penguins last year who blew a 3-1 series lead and got outscored 13-4 in the 3 final games of their series?

Yeah, they didn’t need Crosby.

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

by dawgbone98 on Aug 9, 2011 9:02 AM MDT up reply actions

Hey

We will take him over in Newark, what do you guys want?

Bleed Black & Red

by Goblechuk on Aug 8, 2011 9:26 AM MDT reply actions

Larsson

by gcw_rocks on Aug 8, 2011 12:01 PM MDT up reply actions

Or Zajac. Take your pick.

by gcw_rocks on Aug 8, 2011 12:05 PM MDT up reply actions

There some holes to fill. I’d love to see first pairing Dman like Cowen or Hamilton come back. Giving up Hemsky instead of Omark, Hall, Eberle or Paajarvi at this point would seem to be a much better trade in time.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 2:30 PM MDT up reply actions

How about we just give you a couple of defensive prospects not named Larsson and call it a deal?

Bleed Black & Red

by Goblechuk on Aug 8, 2011 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions

No we got defensive prospect. I want to see someone that will be able to impact in a year time minimum. With NJ…I’d have to say Larsson+ for hemsky….other wise no thanx.

by Oilnutz on Aug 8, 2011 5:57 PM MDT up reply actions

haha, classic. hemsky doesn’t help the worst team in hockey, but we need larsson+ for him.

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - the blog with three first lines

by Triumph44 on Aug 8, 2011 10:11 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs

Ok. Merrill and Urbom. I would also take Merrill and Josefson

by gcw_rocks on Aug 9, 2011 12:16 PM MDT up reply actions

Clarkson and….Green

Bleed Black & Red

by Goblechuk on Aug 9, 2011 9:43 PM MDT up reply actions

Not gonna happen. Merrill is included or no sale

by gcw_rocks on Aug 10, 2011 6:34 AM MDT up reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Oilers Schedule

Last 5 Games

@ Vancouver Nucks Misconduct	Sat 04/07	L 0 - 3
Anaheim Anaheim Calling	Thu 04/05	OT - L 2 - 3
@ Los Angeles Jewels From The Crown	Mon 04/02	L 0 - 2
@ Anaheim Anaheim Calling	Sun 04/01	W 2 - 1
Los Angeles Jewels From The Crown	Fri 03/30	L 1 - 4