Byfuglien

[petegreg21]

I think the 60 min measure can be valuable in fantasy too - for a player ( esp a young guy) getting low TOI and yet producing good numbers, it's a sign that they might get more TOI soon or shows you what their production will look like with high end TOI

In theory yes, but not everything is linear like that unfortunately. I don't really have info at my finger tips to support this but some players are just better with 14-15 minutes of ice time.

It depends on the pedigree I think. Obviously if you look at a guy like Stamkos, if he's playing 15 minutes and you say "wow imagine how good he's be if he was on the ice for an extra 3 minutes a game" then it totally makes sense. But if you're looking at, i don't know, Reilly Smith or Tomas Tatar, or some middle range prospect, there's no guaranteeing they can handle that extra 3 minutes a night.

Eh I'm probably just rambling now

[vitun-tyhmä]

I think the 60 min measure can be valuable in fantasy too - for a player ( esp a young guy) getting low TOI and yet producing good numbers, it's a sign that they might get more TOI soon or shows you what their production will look like with high end TOI

That's how I often use it. I also thought it was useful here because it was focused on a single player (not comparing different players) and in the case of Byfuglien I find that he plays a similar game regardless of what position he is playing

[horrorfan]

I'm sure many people know this, and the article mentioned it, but if he retains D eligibility and if you have blocked shots in your league then his value takes a big hit (assuming he remains at forward). If he doesn't retain D eligibility then obviously his value plummets.

[ross10019]

In theory yes, but not everything is linear like that unfortunately. I don't really have info at my finger tips to support this but some players are just better with 14-15 minutes of ice time.

It depends on the pedigree I think. Obviously if you look at a guy like Stamkos, if he's playing 15 minutes and you say "wow imagine how good he's be if he was on the ice for an extra 3 minutes a game" then it totally makes sense. But if you're looking at, i don't know, Reilly Smith or Tomas Tatar, or some middle range prospect, there's no guaranteeing they can handle that extra 3 minutes a night.

Eh I'm probably just rambling now

Agree that nothing is linear, whether it's that the player will produce at the same level going from 13 mins to 18 mins, or whether the player's ice time will increase to those amounts. This even applies to the future stars, although most end up getting the mnutes eventually. Also agreed that some players really are better suited to playing 13, 14, 15 per night.

But I'd be willing to bet that a statistical analysis would show that a young player (say a forward) who produces at a high rate per 60 mins with low ice time will likely produce similar numbers with increased ice time. Say a young forward produces 3 points per 60 minutes with 13 minutes of ice time (assuming an 82-game stretch, that's a 53-pt season) and maintains this for a few seasons - if and when that kid gets 18-mins per night, there's a good chance you'll see a 65-70 point forward emerge. Admittedly that's pure speculation, I haven't analyzed any players to see if this holds up, just a gut feel.

[chuckcouples]

But I'd be willing to bet that a statistical analysis would show that a young player (say a forward) who produces at a high rate per 60 mins with low ice time will likely produce similar numbers with increased ice time. Say a young forward produces 3 points per 60 minutes with 13 minutes of ice time (assuming an 82-game stretch, that's a 53-pt season) and maintains this for a few seasons - if and when that kid gets 18-mins per night, there's a good chance you'll see a 65-70 point forward emerge. Admittedly that's pure speculation, I haven't analyzed any players to see if this holds up, just a gut feel.

I would be willing to take this bet. I have no numbers to back it up but I would predict that when a young player starts playing more ice time he tends to be playing against better competition. This would decrease his ability to increase his points per minute. An offensive player playing 13 minutes a night on the 4th line is likely spending the majority of that time against the other team's 4th line and their 3rd d pairing. When that player starts playing 18 minutes per game, he will likely be facing 1st or 2nd line forwards and dmen.

[ross10019]

I would be willing to take this bet. I have no numbers to back it up but I would predict that when a young player starts playing more ice time he tends to be playing against better competition. This would decrease his ability to increase his points per minute. An offensive player playing 13 minutes a night on the 4th line is likely spending the majority of that time against the other team's 4th line and their 3rd d pairing. When that player starts playing 18 minutes per game, he will likely be facing 1st or 2nd line forwards and dmen.

It's a good point about the weaker competition, probably balances out in the end. Perhaps one of our illustrious stat-cruncher fellow forum members will take up the challenge and do an analysis of a few players to see! I did a quick analysis of Hudler thinking he might be a good example of my theory at work, but his numbers probably point more to yours.

[jcairns]

It's a good point about the weaker competition, probably balances out in the end. Perhaps one of our illustrious stat-cruncher fellow forum members will take up the challenge and do an analysis of a few players to see! I did a quick analysis of Hudler thinking he might be a good example of my theory at work, but his numbers probably point more to yours.

I think a big thing is usually as ice time increases, a proportion of that goes to PP as well. So I would argue that yes, as ice time increases a talented player will put up more points - even if he is facing harder competition.