• Defencemen Assists/5v5GF, Part I

    by  • March 3, 2013 • Uncategorized • 17 Comments

    I’ve had an idea rolling around in my head for a few years now that I’ve kind of alluded to here from time to time but never taken the time to flesh out. It’s to do with assists. This kind of ties into my post in which I looked at how many of Erik Karlsson’s assists were assists on which he wasn’t trying to make any sort of an offensive play last year – in some ways this is kind of the second part of that, which I was bugged for by various people at various points in time.

    I have a problem with assists. The problem is basically this: two assists get handed out for every goal that’s scored, regardless of whether the player getting the assist made any sort of an offensive play. If you watched last week’s Oiler game in Dallas, Justin Schultz got an assist on Ales Hemsky’s PP goal after he sort of rolled the back around the boards with his back to the play, Jordie Benn tried to clear it, it bounced off Ryan Smyth’s foot into the slot, Smyth missed with a swing at it and then Jordan Eberle grabbed control and flipped it to Hemsky for the goal. Assists: Jordan Eberle and Justin Schultz. (If you read back, you’ll see I mentioned Schultz about 100 words ago as having touched the puck.)

    That was a PP goal but the same sort of thing holds true of ES goals, I think. There’s like a base level of offensive credit you will receive as a defenceman even if you do nothing more than roll the puck into the corners, simply by dint of the fact that hockey awards an assist if you were one of the last two guys to make a play on the puck.

    This makes looking at assists as a measure of playmaking ability somewhat problematic. Now add this: Imagine that Jeff Petry played on an NHL team made up entirely of 19 copies of me. Now imagine that he played on an NHL team made up of 19 Wayne Gretzkys. Exact same Jeff Petry, but he’s going to have vastly different assist numbers, depending on which team he’s on. If you were to look at the assist numbers of Jeff Petry on Team MC79 and the assist numbers of Jeff Petry on Team Gretzky as a gauge of his playmaking effectiveness, you’d come to wildly different conclusions about his effectiveness as a playmaker.

    Fortunately for Jeff Petry, he faces no risk of ending up on Team MC79 at the NHL level (sadly, no hope of Team Gretzky either). The range of talent from best team in the league to worst team in the league is much, much smaller. There’s still a problem though, with some guys playing in more goal rich environments than others – those guys are necessarily going to pile up more of the “had a touch on the puck and then some actual offensive players did something” assists.

    Let’s take Caps’ defenceman Jeff Schultz and Devils’ defenceman Andy Greene to illustrate my point. Between 2007 and 2012, Schultz played 5128.97 at 5v5. He had 49 assists in that time, a rate of 0.57 5v5A/60. Greene played 5434.62 at ES and piled up 54 assists, a rate of 0.59 5v5A/60. They sound basically identical, right? Slightly more TOI for Greene, slightly more assists and an assist rate that’s a hair higher.

    Except the Capitals scored scored 251 goals with Jeff Schultz on the ice and the Devils scored 181 with Andy Greene. The gap would be even bigger if Schultz had played as much as Greene. The conclusion is obvious: Jeff Schultz is an offensive wizard, whose contributions aren’t being properly captured by assists.

    OR…I suppose, maybe it’s partly “The Caps were more fortunate with Schultz on the ice than the Devils were with Andy Greene” and “The Capitals were a better offensive team than the Devils during the period in question.” To the former point, the Caps shot 9.9% at 5v5 with Schultz on the ice to the Devils 7.1% with Greene. That is a massive difference (and unlikely to be one which either guy had anything to do with). To the latter, the Devils scored 2.27 5v5 G/60 when Greene wasn’t on the ice; the Caps scored 2.65 5v5 G/60 without Schultz. It seems reasonable to conclude that there’s an element of “Washington is better at scoring goals” going on here – the Team MC79 versus Team Gretzky problem that I referenced above, if on a somewhat lesser scale.

    That information changes things a little bit, no? All of a sudden Greene’s assist rate looks a lot more impressive. It kind of suggests that there might be a better denominator to use when dealing with defencemen assists or, if not in place of A/60, at least in addition to it: A/GFON. Andy Greene got assists on 29.8% of the goals that New Jersey scored with him on the ice. Schultz got assists on 19.4% of the goals that Washington scored with him on the ice.

    There are 174 defencemen who’ve played at least 3000 minutes at 5v5 between 2007-12. I’ve assembled the data on them from Behind The Net and then sorted the list of them by the percentage of goals scored at 5v5 with them on the ice on which they got assists. I’ve then created ten groups of players, alternating between groups of 17 and 18, with two groups of 17 at the end.

    There’s something going on there that’s interesting. First of all, I’ve got serious doubts that defencemen have much of an impact on shooting percentage with their playmaking – you’ll notice that the group that gets the most assists per goal actually has a pretty shoddy shooting percentage (eighth of the ten groups).

    The thing that I find really interesting (and, sort of surprising) is that the defencemen who accrue assists at a higher rate of goals tend to be on the ice for more goals for than defencemen who don’t accrue assists on such a rate of goals. On one level, this seems sort of unsurprising. Defencemen who are more likely to get assists on goals that are scored are probably more able to do offensive things, which should, all other things being equal, lead to more goals.

    On the other hand, I’ve never seen anything that sort of suggests something about the size of the gap between offensive defencemen and non-offensive defencemen. This hints that there might be an answer we can suss out. From that perspective, this is very interesting stuff. I’ve re-organized the information presented in that table above, splitting my group into two groups of 87, based on the rate at which they are credited with assists on 5v5 goals.

    You’ll note that there’s a pretty significant goal rate difference between the two groups. Even if you allow for the lower on-ice S% of the second group (I’ve got my doubts that it means anything), you’re still left with about a 0.15 G/60 difference between the group that gets assists on goals and the group that doesn’t. Obviously, this comes from the shot rate difference, which is kind of intriguing – it seems reasonable to assume that defencemen who do good things with the puck lead to more shots on goal and, by extension, more goals. If you’re talking about a fifteen 5v5 minute a night defenceman, it’s a difference of three goals for between each group. That doesn’t seem like a lot but it’s not nothing. It is, of course, more significant around the edges. There may also be a defensive benefit to the puck not being in the defensive zone as much, although that remains to be seen.

    I’m not sure that I’d be willing to draw conclusions from this yet – there are some possible explanations for this that I’d be interested in checking. I’ve included the ZoneStart data, although I don’t think it’s enough a difference to explain the discrepancy. In the case of top four defencemen, who tend to play with top six forwards but not with one exclusive line, I doubt that quality of teammates would be the explanation. Quality of competition is another potential explanation although, again, with top four defencemen it’s hard to attribute this to that.

    The irritating thing about points as a measure of offensive production is that they don’t really tell us anything about the contribution that the individual player made to the goal. As in the case of the Justin Schultz assist that I mentioned at the opening of this piece, players are going to get credited with a certain number of assists simply by virtue of being on an NHL hockey rink. What makes this interesting is that it hints at a measure of offensive skill of a defenceman that strips away credit for that which the player probably doesn’t deserve credit.

    I’m going to write some more posts about this – there’s a lot of stuff to cover but I thought it’s worth mentioning that this does seem to pass the old Bill James smell test about stats that surprise you too often being worthless. The top ten names in terms of A/GFON: Rob Blake, Mark Streit, James Wisniewski, Brian Campbell, Brian Rafalski, Marek Zidlicky, Keith Yandle, Erik Karlsson, Dmitry Kulikov and Andrei Markov. At the other end: Francis Bouillon, Greg Zanon, Mark Fistric, Aaron Ward, Mark Eaton, Eric Brewer (if you got tired of hearing him referred to as a puck mover by ignorant national media while he was an OIler, you can smile at that), Mark Stuart, Rostislav Klesla and Shaone Morrisonn.

    That being said, there are some surprises too: Dion Phaneuf (21.7%) and Jay Bouwmeester (21.6%). Both slot in right below Marc Staal (21.8%) who doesn’t really have any sort of a reputation for shot blocking. Oilers’ fans will be unsurprised by Ladislav Smid’s abysmal rating – in that five year span, he got an assist on just 20.4% of the 191 5v5 goals scored while he was on the ice. Tom Gilbert checks in at a hair under 27.9% of the 279 5v5 goals scored while he was on the ice. There are no prizes for guessing that the Oilers generated shots at a higher rate with Gilbert on the ice.

    About

    17 Responses to Defencemen Assists/5v5GF, Part I

    1. Brad
      March 3, 2013 at

      There are tonnes of cases where defencemen get credit for making no offensively beneficial/critical play for a goal scored, but I wonder how often they don’t get credit. Would it be close to balancing out? While Karlsson may get more assists where he wasn’t threatening for a goal for, he probably gets shafted a lot for goals where he had a major contribution.

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        Brad -

        I sort of agree with this. I would suspect that puckhandlers are more likely to be the guys who make a contribution that isn’t then recorded in an assist. I’m thinking like a great pass, that leads to a sequence, that leads to a goal. Puckhandlers are more likely to be making that pass and, therefore, more likely to get stiffed.

    2. March 4, 2013 at

      Ever tought of crossing these data points with PP data? That is, how much guys from each group played on the PP and what happened there?

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        It’s on my list of things to do.

    3. speeds
      March 4, 2013 at

      Does your preliminary work here leave with any thoughts as to how relatively over/underpaid the two groups of D are in comparison to one another, if they aren’t accurately priced?

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        It suggests to me that puckhandlers are probably worth somewhere between half a win and a win more at ES alone, all other things being equal, which they may not be. Off the top of my head, that’s worth an extra $750K to $1.5MM on one way of figuring it. It does provide some support for the idea of paying themmore.

    4. March 4, 2013 at

      As I recall, wasn’t part of your thing on the Karlsson series a reputation thing, that some players are given A’s more based on their reputation as an offensive defenseman or a playmaker, than actually doing something with the puck to prompt a goal? I’m guessing that we’re heading that way with this.

      I can’t remember who the player was, but I remember Jeff Marek talking on the Marek vs Wyshynski podcast about a defenseman who used to deliberately go back behind his net and touch the puck, before letting his star go end-to-end with it (Orr? Gretzky? I don’t remember) and getting a massive kick out of racking up second assists without doing a damn thing to deserve them.

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        I don’t know that I’ve ever written anything more misinterpreted than the Karlsson thing (other than once pointing out that Conklin had a similar ES save percentage to Brodeur). My suspicion with that was that Karlsson was having a bit of a lucky year ES assist wise. I’ve come to change that position somewhat. I do think that defencemen can have years when they get a pile of assists they don’t deserve; I don’t think Karlsson was having one of those years.

        One of the things I’m going to get into with this is the relationship between REL Corsi and A/G ratio. There seems to be one and Karlsson’s was excellent. I’m more interested in this as an identifier of defencemen who drive the play the right way, which it seems to me that it might be.

    5. Szach
      March 4, 2013 at

      Super site – love the work. Re. team Gretzky vs. Mc79 if I understood correctly the argument is that on a better team Petry will get more assists while on Mc79 he will get less. For me the argument is also based on opportunity – on team Gretzky petry would play a different role (defense orientated if not HS) due to better options on offense where on team mc79 he would see a lot more ice in all zones and certainly more ice time overall (30 min/game). How do you take into account this effect? Really interested in how does one adjust for the differences in opportunity on a better vs. worse team…..

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        It’s not really an issue, or at least as much of an issue at the NHL level. If you’re good enough to be a top four D, you’ll be one somewhere pretty quickly. It’s a question of the kind of team you’ll end up on.

    6. Jay
      March 5, 2013 at

      How does Gilbert compare to Nick Schultz–the obvious question?

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        I will get to this. It’s as hilarious as you’d guess.

      • Isa
        May 7, 2014 at

        Best Non-Professional Tax Software Available I have been using Turbotax prior to Intuit’s purchase of Chipsoft, more than twtney years ago. I have all my disks, either floppy or optical for more than twtney years. Living in San Diego, Turbotax’s headquarters since its inception, I know personally CPAs or Enrolled Agents (IRS specialists)who review every form or page of instructions provided in the software every year. Prior to Turbotax, I used Howardsoft’s Tax Product and for a time MacInTax and one year I attempted to use TaxCut without success. But for me, its been Turbotax’s drive to constantly improve and add more value in their products that sets it apart. I admit that I was annoyed a couple of years ago when I was forced to upgrade online to the Premier version from the Deluxe to successfully complete my Schedule D. I waited to the last minute to file. My girlfriend at the time, used Turbotax to discover that her longtime tax preparer had miscalculated her return which resulted in an $1100 error. Showing the preparer the Turbotax return, the tax preparer submitted a 1040X to correct the error but it took more six months to get the money back. I admit that Turbotax is and primarily a Windows based product and that most the problems complained about here were Mac issues. As I stated in my review title, Turbotax is the best Non-Professional Tax software available today without exception.

    7. Woodguy
      March 5, 2013 at

      Tyler said:

      ” In the case of top four defencemen, who tend to play with top six forwards but not with one exclusive line, I doubt that quality of teammates would be the explanation.”

      Why is that?

      Intuitively it makes a difference whether your first pass is to Taylor Hall or Sam Gagner.

      By eye Hall is much more likely to gain the ozone on his own and create a 1st or 2nd assist for the Dman, whereas Gagner is more likely to make a pass before gaining the ozone.

      Do you have your spreadsheet broken down into 1st assists and 2nd assists as well?

      That’s a pretty massive difference in assist rates, would be interesting to see the break down.

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        1st/2nd assists is worht getting into down the road. My point with that comment was more that teams don’t run out five man units like the Russians used to. I’ve taken a look at Smid, for example. He had a little bit more TOI than you’d expect last year with Horc/Smyth/Jones but otherwise was pretty much bang on with the proportion of TOI you’d expect with all other players, given how much they played. I’ve never proven this but I’ve spent a lot of time looking at TOI charts over the years and I’d be surprised if this isn’t an almost universal truth.

    8. Ryan V
      March 5, 2013 at

      Like you, I imagine whatever increase in GF/60 that defence assists are resonsible for comes from possession (breaking out of the D-zone, keeping the puck in or gaining the O-zone) than in generating higher quality shots.

      In the past, I’ve toyed around with the idea of trying to use defencemen second assists per on-ice goal to try and measure the ability to make breakout passes. So I’d be curious how this analysis would look with only first assists or only second assists.

      • Tyler Dellow
        March 6, 2013 at

        On the list.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *