Ekman-Larsson

[RizzeeDizzee]

So you went back however many years and looked at every single player, and there were no examples of players with similar OZ% and SH Ice Time who produced more than 45 points in NHL history?

For this season:

OEL - 45.3% OZ%, 192:16 minutes of SH Ice Time, 38pts, 74gp, 0.51ppg
Josi - 44.9% OZ%, 186:56 minutes of SH Ice Time, 52pts, 74gp, 0.7ppg
Weber - 45.3% OZ%, 184:22 minutes of SH Ice Time, 45pts, 75gp, 0.61ppg

I'm missing something with what you're saying, or you need to elaborate further. I'm seeing tons of examples of players with similar usage that have produced more than 45 points in recent history.

Tons? LOL. You pointed to two of the best D-men in the NHL, ignoring the dozens upon dozens who prove my point. And keep in mind that Weber had posted more points than OEL in their first four seasons despite playing for the offensively anemic Preds.

[RizzeeDizzee]

- In 2013-2014, Pietrangelo was getting 52.3% OZ% while playing 3:21 TOI-SH. He scored 51 points.
- This season, Carlson is getting 49% OZ% while playing 3:04 TOI-SH. He's on pace for 53 points.

So a little better OZ% but lots more PK time. Also, I don't think OEL going from 45-46% to 49-52% is impossible when the team improves. But the Coyotes do need more depth at 'D', everyone knows that. And I know both Pietrangelo and Carlson were lucky during those seasons. But skill-wise, OEL might even be better than Pietrangelo and Carlson. And I'm saying this even though Pietrangelo is my personal favorite. So 55 points is very much possible for OEL in a few years. Not next season, though. I don't think OEL has the skills to score 60+ points, only a few players in the world can actually do that.

I always prefer judging players based on their skill-level instead of their usage because usage can change quickly. If the player is traded, if the team acquires an important player, a coach is changed... These things happen, and at that point player's usage doesn't matter one bit, only his skill-level.

Ryan Suter gets 40-45 points because he plays half the game on a strong team. He is nowhere near OEL when comparing their offensive skills. If you put OEL in Suter's place, playing 30 minutes per game on the Wild, OEL would score 50+ points for sure.

In the Monahan discussion you were saying how his OZ% will definitely improve and he will score 80+ points, here you're saying there's no way for OEL's OZ% to improve and therefore his upside is limited. So in one case you are predicting the future but here you're saying you can't predict the future. Where's the consistency?

I understand player usage is important but it's only one part of the equation; player's personal skill-level is just as important. And player usage can vary from season to season, so it's best used mid-season to see if said player is likely to improve or regress during the rest of the season (assuming no major changes have happened). You cannot predict the future solely using player usage because player usage can change at any time.

I'm in a dynasty money league with 20 teams and 23+27 player rosters. This is its 4th year and I've been in the Top-4 every year. Does that mean my style of judging players based on their skills is better? No. It means I've been lucky for four years. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

Pietrangelo and Carlson - by your own admission - don't meet both criteria. And in each case it's not "a little better" OZ% - it's 10% better (10% of 45.2% being 4.53%) for one and nearly 20% for the other.

As for OEL's OZ% improving - not gonna happen. Look at Weber, who was just cited against me.

Judging on skill isn't possible for you or me - if it was, we'd be NHL scouts. And even then they misfire more than they hit. Objectivity is what wins leagues - it's a fact. Not objectivity with a blind eye to extrinsic data, but objectively in the face of hunches.

As for Monahan vs. OEL in OZ% I stand by the idea that a forward can see his improve far more easily than a #1 d-man.

One parting thought - I find your analysis and writing style to be outstanding, and I don't toss something like that around lightly. You should strongly consider becoming a writer on the site. If you're interested send me a PM and I'll liaise you to Dobber.

[Jouko-Pouko]

Pietrangelo and Carlson - by your own admission - don't meet both criteria. And in each case it's not "a little better" OZ% - it's 10% better (10% of 45.2% being 4.53%) for one and nearly 20% for the other.

As for OEL's OZ% improving - not gonna happen. Look at Weber, who was just cited against me.

Judging on skill isn't possible for you or me - if it was, we'd be NHL scouts. And even then they misfire more than they hit. Objectivity is what wins leagues - it's a fact. Not objectivity with a blind eye to extrinsic data, but objectively in the face of hunches.

As for Monahan vs. OEL in OZ% I stand by the idea that a forward can see his improve far more easily than a #1 d-man.

One parting thought - I find your analysis and writing style to be outstanding, and I don't toss something like that around lightly. You should strongly consider becoming a writer on the site. If you're interested send me a PM and I'll liaise you to Dobber.

Carlson is also receiving 18% more SH time than OEL - I think that makes it pretty even if his OZ% is 10% better. I didn't feel like going through lots of data for this, so I just took two players who I knew had great seasons while playing tough minutes. Weber and Josi are actually great comparables for OEL. After what they've done, there's really nothing holding OEL from having 50-55 point upside - after a few years when the team improves first.

OEL's offensive skills are also better than Weber's. Weber is much stronger defensively, that's why he always gets low OZ%. I'm not so sure about OEL. If Pietrangelo can get ~50%, then I don't see any reason why OEL couldn't. Pietrangelo is really good defensively and they also have Shattenkirk... I'm not saying it will absolutely happen, just that I think it's very much possible and other players with similar skill-set do get better OZ%.

I don't usually have time to write to these forums but I've been healing a fractured ankle for 4 weeks now. Once it's healed, I probably disappear again. This is also a good way of improving my English because it is after all just my 2nd language (after Finnish). So no, I could never become a writer but thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I don't usually have time to write to these forums but I've been healing a fractured ankle for 4 weeks now. Once it's healed, I probably disappear again. This is also a good way of improving my English because it is after all just my 2nd language (after Finnish). So no, I could never become a writer but thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated.

I could only hope to grasp a second language like you have - wow! Major stick tap....

Don't sell yourself short on being able to write for a North American audience. But if that's not your preference then I can respect that. But let me again say that you have a gift for this, and not using your gift to write for some audience (be it in North America, Europe, or wherever) would be a loss for those who could benefit from it.

[fungchen3]

Another thread where I make my usual OEL public service announcement: http://hockey.dobbersports.com/Cage-...-vs-ryan-suter

And just to clarify again, this is not something I do to raise my profile or to slam OEL. I just feel that people think he walks on water when in truth he's poised to be Ryan Suter 2.0, which is fine in reality but likely would be seen as a disappointment in view of very lofty expectations.

OEL has 21 goals. Ryan Suter will never score 21 goals in the NHL. The only D-Man who "walks on water" is Erik Karlsson and nobody puts OEL in his class. But I think most people think OEL could end up a steady, 50-55 point defenseman who is capable of scoring 15 goals a year. I don't think that's far-fetched, and it will be a level above Suter.

[Chunkys_Choice]

There's already a stat like this - IPP (in-percentage points). If 100 goals are scored at 5x5 while a player is on the ice and he tallies either a goal or an assist on 50 of them, then his 5x5 IPP would be 50%. If IPP is abnormally high - either in general or as compared to other players at the same position - it's usually a sign of unsustainable good luck.

I think it's a different stat... Chunk Rate describes how important a player is to their team, because it looks at the team's total goals for, whether that player is on the ice or not - if a player scores or assists on 80% of his or her team's goals, then that player is super important to their team. IPP, on the other hand, only looks at goals scored when that player is on the ice. You could be a super unimportant player that plays only a few minutes in a couple games, and if you luck into a couple secondary assists during that limited ice time, your IPP will be high. As you say, it's a measure of luck.

[Chunkys_Choice]

Another thread where I make my usual OEL public service announcement: http://hockey.dobbersports.com/Cage-...-vs-ryan-suter

And just to clarify again, this is not something I do to raise my profile or to slam OEL. I just feel that people think he walks on water when in truth he's poised to be Ryan Suter 2.0, which is fine in reality but likely would be seen as a disappointment in view of very lofty expectations.

Suter isn't scoring or assisting on 45% of his team's goals, and that's what Ekman-Larsson has done since the trade deadline. Two more points tonight on four Coyotes goals.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I think it's a different stat... Chunk Rate describes how important a player is to their team, because it looks at the team's total goals for, whether that player is on the ice or not - if a player scores or assists on 80% of his or her team's goals, then that player is super important to their team. IPP, on the other hand, only looks at goals scored when that player is on the ice. You could be a super unimportant player that plays only a few minutes in a couple games, and if you luck into a couple secondary assists during that limited ice time, your IPP will be high. As you say, it's a measure of luck.

Note that I said "like this", FWIW. How you could argue chunk rate is any less a measure of luck is beyond me. At 5x5 there are four other skaters on the ice who can get a point as well, so although a hgh "chunk rate" will certainly factor in skill, it also has a luck component. And as for time on ice, that's why you filter IPP by total minutes.

[RizzeeDizzee]

Suter isn't scoring or assisting on 45% of his team's goals, and that's what Ekman-Larsson has done since the trade deadline. Two more points tonight on four Coyotes goals.

Cool - let me go back in time and grab Sheldon Souray based on his nearly 30% chunk rate for Edmonton in 2008-09, or Brian Campbell in view of his similar rate for Florida in 2011-12.

You pushing this "chunk rate" concept in the face of IPP reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pubd-spHN-0

[2014olympicgold]

Cool - let me go back in time and grab Sheldon Souray based on his nearly 30% chunk rate for Edmonton in 2008-09, or Brian Campbell in view of his similar rate for Florida in 2011-12.

You pushing this "chunk rate" concept in the face of IPP reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pubd-spHN-0

Oddly both those players were 32yrs old at the time you mentioned.

[RizzeeDizzee]

Oddly both those players were 32yrs old at the time you mentioned.

Fine - Marek Zidlick in 2003-04 (age 26, chunk rate of roughly 25% for the season) and Dion Phaneuf 2007-08 (age 22, chunk rate of nearly 27%), to mention just a few more spring chickens.

[TheWhale]

44 points last year, 40 this year with 7 games to go. Put some better offensive players on this team and he's a 50 point guy going forward.

[GretzkysMullet]

I think you just proved his point with that data.

EDIT - similar stats with better results from Josi and Weber, so OEL has the same opportunity to match their ppg avg but does not.

Actually I think he proved the opposite of RizzeeDizzee's point, that scoring more than 45 points under those circumstances is not possible. The numbers posted by Nikerato say it is. I don't think anyone is arguing that OEL didn't do that this year, the question is could he. I'm going to echo what others have been saying as well, situations are not static, things change from season to season, as they already have with Yandle gone. OEL is second among all D for SOG, first in goals, and is playing Weber-like minutes now that Yandle is gone, 28 to 30 minutes, with 5 to 6 of those (PP opportunities permitting) on the PP. As the team improves I see no reason these factors won't translate in to bigger point totals.

[cappy76]

I traded OEL at my deadline for Eberle, Nurse, and Kuznetsov so I'm hoping your right Rizz

I was on the fence about dealing OEL but after reading your cage match while I was flirting with the idea of moving him it kinda sealed the deal for me. Well that and the fact the trade that was tabled could morph into what I got I just didn't think I could walk away from it.

[audiopile]

Actually I think he proved the opposite of RizzeeDizzee's point, that scoring more than 45 points under those circumstances is not possible. The numbers posted by Nikerato say it is. I don't think anyone is arguing that OEL didn't do that this year, the question is could he. I'm going to echo what others have been saying as well, situations are not static, things change from season to season, as they already have with Yandle gone. OEL is second among all D for SOG, first in goals, and is playing Weber-like minutes now that Yandle is gone, 28 to 30 minutes, with 5 to 6 of those (PP opportunities permitting) on the PP. As the team improves I see no reason these factors won't translate in to bigger point totals.

OK I understand but Rizz is still right about OEL in the sense that he isn't as good as his hype (which I think is the overarching point) because he hasn't hit those numbers.