Markus Naslund's Pearson Award in 2003? Worth?

[plusandminus]

3rd assist could be valueable to but they all should be in context of what really happened. My point was that (besides down playing secondary assists) Forsberg was an excellent playmaker and those secondary assists were most likely all very important part of the play. However I dont remember them all or even one from a specific season.

To carry it even further... Instead of having 3rd assists, one might as well just focus on all the guys on the ice and then make GF (goals forward) a more official stat. To take Holmstrom for example, he probably have contributed to lots of goals, without getting an assist, by standing in front of the net. But I think if one should draw the line somewhere, a maximum of two assists is ideal. But anyway, this discussion would be better in a seperate thread. And yes, Forsberg was a great playmaker.

To continue on Forsberg vs Naslund, here are some additional stats:

PP
Hejduk 354.05 min, +45 (46-1), 34 pts, 7.87 min/GD, 10.41 min/point, 71.91 % (Pts/GF)
Forsberg 342.35 min, +41 (43-2), 32 pts, 8.35min/GD, 10.70 min/point, 74.42 % (Pts/GF)
Naslund 444.38 min, +62 (67-5), 54 pts, 7.17 min/GD, 8.23 min/point, 80.69 % (Pts/GF)
Bertuzzi 450.97 min, +63 (69-5), 42 pts, 7.16 min/GD, 10.74 min/point, 61.77 % (Pts/GF)
GD=goal difference. Forsberg played 8.35 min between each "+1" in PP (342.35/41). He had to play 10.70 min between each point he scored. He had a point in 74.42 of the goals scored by his team when he was on the ice on PP.

Perhaps Bertuzzi often had a role of being in front of opponents net? That may explain why he didn't score as many points as Naslund, who perhaps took more shots and made more plays?

ES Simply just total Forsberg domination over Naslund and the other players in the league (except for linemate Hejduk).

SH: Forsberg 15.50 min 0-0, Naslund 11.53 min 0-0, Hejduk 53.02 min 0-5, Bertuzzi 12.25 min 0-1. No empty netters involved.

(Slightly off topic, I once I gain want to point out that the usual official stats are pretty limited. For example, PP team rankings should always include GF-GA. I also would want them to look at actual time played rather than "opportunities". I also find it strange to look at PP percent when few games are played, for example in international tournaments or in Stanley Cup. "They are only 18 % during PP. ...Oh, now they scored. Now they have an impressive 26 %!", sort of. Regarding this thread, another 5-6 more PP goals forward from Forsberg would have made his stat equal to Naslunds in that matter. No that huge of a difference, while still being a difference.)

 

[plusandminus]

I compiled it myself using data from the Hockey Summary Project. See this thread:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=821020

Thank you. Good and interesting work that I will look more into later. Also nice to see that my impressions were right, and also the Gretzky ("who didn't even have to be on the ice" according to some) stats. I actually don't know about the Hockey Summary Project, but I'll try to find out more.

This section of the forum is great and surely is populated by some great posters.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

This is Orr's:

Season | Primary Assists | Secondary assists | Primary Share
1966/67 | 13 | 15 | 46.4 %
1967/68 | 10 | 10 | 50.0 %
1968/69 | 19 | 24 | 44.2 %
1969/70 | 46 | 40 | 53.5 %
1970/71 | 47 | 55 | 46.1 %
1971/72 | 40 | 40 | 50.0 %
1972/73 | 41 | 31 | 56.9 %
1973/74 | 48 | 40 | 54.5 %
1974/75 | 49 | 37 | 57.0 %
1975/76 | 6 | 7 | 46.2 %
1976/77 | 12 | 7 | 63.2 %

thanks.

i had suspected that, of guys who had led the league in assists multiple times, only orr (because he's a defenseman) and henrik sedin (because he and his brother cycle and cycle until one of them finds the open man) would be near 50/50.

 

[plusandminus]

Here are some more info on Forsberg's assists during 2002/03...

ES: 26 secondary assists from Forsberg.
Forsberg-->Defenseman-->Defenseman 0
Forsberg-->Defenseman-->Forward 11 (Tanguay 5g, Hejduk 4g, Sakic 2g)
Forsberg-->Forward-->Defenseman 5 (hejduk 3a1, Tanguay 2a1)
Forsberg-->Forward-->Forward 10 (fo>he>ta 4 fo>ta>he 2 He>Sa Vr>Ne Vr>Re Sa>Vr)
(In the beginning of the season, Forsberg seem to have played sometimes/often with Vrbata/Sakic/Reinprecht.)

PP: 10 secondary assists from Forsberg.
F->Blake-Sakic 2, F->D.Morris->Hejduk 2, F->Tanguay->Hejduk, F->Hejduk->D.Morris/Tanguay/Blake, F->Reinp->D.Morris
What do you make out of this?
4-5 times, F->Defenseman->Forward.

Team |Pos |LastName |PPGF |G+A1+A2 |Pts
COL |C |Forsberg |10 |0+0+10 |10
COL |R |Hejduk |9 |4+3+0 |7
COL |D |Blake |8 |1+2+0 |3
COL |D |Morris |6 |2+2+0 |4
COL |L |Tanguay |6 |0+2+0 |2
COL |C |Sakic |4 |3+0+0 |3
COL |D |Skoula |3 |0+0+0 |0
COL |D |Foote |2 |0+0+0 |0
COL |C |Reinprecht |1 |0+1+0 |1
COL |R |Vrbata |1 |0+0+0 |0

PP: 14 or 15 primary assists from Forsberg.
(Something seems wrong, as I sometimes gets 14 and sometimes 15. It's 10 years old data, created by much effort, which has gone through a couple of disk crashes and viruses.)
someone->Forsberg->Hejduk 8 !!! (someone: Tang 3, Sak 2, D.Morris 2, Blake)
Hejduk->Forsberg->someone 4-5 !!! (someone: Sak, Blake, Reinp, Tang, D.Morris)
Vrbata->Forsberg->Sakic 1
Blake->Forsberg->Skoula 1

Forsberg seem to have had a chemistry with Hejduk on the PP.

Team |Pos |LastName |PPGF |G+a1+a2 |Pts
COL |C |Forsberg | 14 |0+14+0 |14
COL |R |Hejduk | 13 |8+0+4 |12
COL |D |Blake | 12 |0+0+2 | 2
COL |L |Tanguay | 10 |1+0+3 | 4
COL |D |D.Morris | 7 | 1+0+2 | 3
COL |C |Sakic | 5 | 2+0+2 | 4
COL |D |Skoula | 3 | 1+0+0 | 1
COL |D |Foote | 2 | 0+0+0 | 0
COL |C |Reinprecht | 1 | 0+0+0 | 1
COL |R |Vrbata | 1 | 0+0+1 | 1
COL |D |Muir | 1 | 0+0+0 | 0
COL |D |DeVries | 1 | 0+0+0 | 0

(There may be some error, but probably not one affecting the whole picture.)

 

[plusandminus]

Colorado when Forsberg was on the ice:

Team|LastName|ES+/-|ESF|ESA|ESg|ESa1|ESa2|ESpts||PP+/-|PPF|PPA|PPg|PPa1|PPa2|PPpts||Goals|Ass1|Ass2|Pts
COL |FORSBERG |55|87|32|20|24|25|69||41|43|2|8|14|10|32||29|41|36|106
COL |HEJDUK |46|68|22|24|10|10|44||36|37|1|14|8|6|28||41|19|18|78
COL |DE VRIES |34|49|15|4|7|6|17||1|1|0|0|0|0|0||4|7|6|17
COL |TANGUAY |36|46|10|15|14|4|33||24|24|0|2|3|5|10||18|17|9|44
COL |BLAKE |22|34|12|4|6|3|13||35|37|2|4|7|5|16||9|13|8|30
COL |FOOTE |19|34|15|5|1|3|9||6|6|0|1|1|0|2||6|3|3|12
COL |MORRIS |20|29|9|1|4|2|7||28|30|2|5|7|7|19||6|11|10|27
COL |SAKIC |9|17|8|6|3|4|13||14|16|2|7|0|5|12||14|3|10|27
COL |SKOULA |5|17|12|1|3|2|6||7|7|0|1|0|1|2||2|3|3|8
COL |VRBATA |9|12|3|2|3|1|6||4|5|1|0|2|1|3||2|6|2|10
COL |REINPRECHT |-2|8|10|2|3|1|6||8|8|0|1|1|2|4||4|4|3|11
COL |NEDOROST |6|7|1|1|0|2|3||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|2|3
COL |MCALLISTER |4|5|1|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|1|1
COL |MARCHMENT |3|3|0|0|2|0|2||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|2|0|2
COL |MCAMMOND |2|2|0|1|0|1|2||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|1|2
COL |PARKER |2|2|0|0|0|1|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|1|1
COL |SMITH |2|2|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
COL |AUBIN |1|1|0|1|0|0|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|0|1
COL |MESSIER |1|1|0|0|1|0|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|1|0|1
COL |KEANE |1|1|0|0|0|1|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|1|1
COL |MUIR |1|1|0|0|0|0|0||1|1|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
COL |SHANTZ |-2|0|2|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
COL |HINOTE |-2|0|2|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0

Vancouver when Naslund was on the ice:

Team|LastName|ES+/-|ESF|ESA|ESg|ESa1|ESa2|ESpts||PP+/-|PPF|PPA|PPg|PPa1|PPa2|PPpts||Goals|Ass1|Ass2|Pts
VAN |NASLUND |15|63|48|23|20|6|49||62|67|5|24|14|16|54||48|34|22|104
VAN |BERTUZZI |16|57|41|16|21|10|47||62|67|5|25|8|9|42||41|29|19|89
VAN |MORRISON |15|51|36|14|12|6|32||52|56|4|5|12|9|26||19|24|15|58
VAN |SALO |11|26|15|3|1|5|9||12|12|0|1|3|2|6||4|4|7|15
VAN |JOVANOVSKI |7|23|16|2|0|5|7||40|44|4|2|7|14|23||4|7|19|30
VAN |MALIK |12|23|11|1|1|2|4||1|1|0|1|0|0|1||2|1|2|5
VAN |SOPEL |-7|15|22|0|0|3|3||27|30|3|4|7|5|16||4|7|8|19
VAN |OHLUND |-2|15|17|1|0|2|3||19|21|2|0|7|5|12||1|8|7|16
VAN |BARON |4|15|11|1|0|0|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|0|1
VAN |ALLEN |5|9|4|1|0|1|2||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|1|2
VAN |SEDIN |3|7|4|0|0|2|2||21|23|2|3|6|3|12||3|6|5|14
VAN |LINDEN |-1|3|4|0|1|1|2||7|7|0|2|2|1|5||2|3|3|8
VAN |KLATT |1|3|2|0|1|0|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|1|0|1
VAN |CHUBAROV |0|2|2|1|0|0|1||1|1|0|0|0|0|0||1|0|0|1
VAN |COOKE |1|1|0|0|1|0|1||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|1|0|1
VAN |LINDGREN |-2|1|3|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
VAN |LETOWSKI |-1|0|1|0|0|0|0||1|1|0|0|1|0|1||0|1|0|1
VAN |DRUKEN |-1|0|1|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
VAN |HLAVAC |0|0|0|0|0|0|0||1|1|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
VAN |KING |-1|0|1|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0
VAN |SEDIN |0|0|0|0|0|0|0||3|3|0|0|0|0|0||0|0|0|0

Naslund-Bertuzzi-Morrison seems to have played together very much on ES, while Forsberg seem to have had a bigger variation of linemates.

Edit:
Notice how Naslund is 8-9 without Bertuzzi and 12-12 without Morrison (by subtracting).
Forsberg was like 19-10 without Hejduk, and 41-22 without Tanguay.
But I do have to say Forsberg seems to be favoured as the names of the Colorado players (especially defencemen) sounds like names of better hockey players.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Perhaps Bertuzzi often had a role of being in front of opponents net? That may explain why he didn't score as many points as Naslund, who perhaps took more shots and made more plays?)

Yes, Bertuzzi was famously one of the best, if not the best, PP net presence in the league during his short prime. Naslund more or less QBed the PP from the halfboards. I'm surprised you didn't know this if you studied the season so thoroughly.

 

[plusandminus]

Yes, Bertuzzi was famously one of the best, if not the best, PP net presence in the league during his short prime. Naslund more or less QBed the PP from the halfboards. I'm surprised you didn't know this if you studied the season so thoroughly.

Well, actually I remember it that way, and I did mention it as a possible explaination. I haven't studied the goals, but assume I could have taken a less "humble" approach and write it more like statements rather than questions. I was expecting to having it confirmed, and hoped to get people thinking and feedbacking about it.

Hockey is very much about role playing.
For example, in PP Vanvouver had a great role player in front of net (Bertuzzi) to screen, put in rebounds, etc., and another guy that could stick handle, pass and shoot (Naslund). Both obviously benefitted by having each other, among otherwise perhaps not so impressive (? or?) powerplay players.

I was analyzing the stats and trying to find explainations to some things. The above may obviously be one factor explaining Naslund's dominance over Bertuzzi during powerplays. Still, Bertuzzi was as successful as Naslund when it came to being on the ice on powerplay goals forward (I haven't looked at when only one of them was on the ice). So, to trying to not take things for granted... just because Naslund scored more PP points than Bertuzzi, doesn't necessarily mean he was more important, or even the better player, of the two on PP.
Perhaps it would have been easier finding a guy who could do the Naslund things good (stick handle, pass/shoot) than finding someone doing Bertuzzi's role?


I still get the impression that Colorado had more weapons than Vancouver during PP. (Agree?) They had Forsberg, probably an even better stick handler and passer than Naslund, but according to most people not having as good a shot as Naslund. My and many others impression of Forsberg is that he may have been partly easier to read, since he was so much more of a passer than shooter.
Colorado also often had Sakic, who I think is fairly equal to Naslund, being a great stick handler, great passer, and having "arguably the league's best wrist shot". They also had Blake. On the other hand, Sakic don't seem to have played much with Forsberg on PP.

I think one of the most obvious things when comparing, is that Forsberg-Hejduk was far superior during ES, while Naslund-Bertuzzi was better during PP. But why was it so?

How do you guys explain that Forsberg and Colorado didn't score as many PP goals/points as Vancouver?

Edit: It seems that Bertuzzi was on the ice on all 67 PP goals that Naslund was on the ice for. Bertuzzi also was on the ice on a PP goal where Naslund wasn't (as it seems to me without getting a point on that goal).

 

[jkrx]

Well, actually I remember it that way, and I did mention it as a possible explaination. I haven't studied the goals, but assume I could have taken a less "humble" approach and write it more like statements rather than questions. I was expecting to having it confirmed, and hoped to get people thinking and feedbacking about it.

Hockey is very much about role playing.
For example, in PP Vanvouver had a great role player in front of net (Bertuzzi) to screen, put in rebounds, etc., and another guy that could stick handle, pass and shoot (Naslund). Both obviously benefitted by having each other, among otherwise perhaps not so impressive (? or?) powerplay players.

I was analyzing the stats and trying to find explainations to some things. The above may obviously be one factor explaining Naslund's dominance over Bertuzzi during powerplays. Still, Bertuzzi was as successful as Naslund when it came to being on the ice on powerplay goals forward (I haven't looked at when only one of them was on the ice). So, to trying to not take things for granted... just because Naslund scored more PP points than Bertuzzi, doesn't necessarily mean he was more important, or even the better player, of the two on PP.
Perhaps it would have been easier finding a guy who could do the Naslund things good (stick handle, pass/shoot) than finding someone doing Bertuzzi's role?


I still get the impression that Colorado had more weapons than Vancouver during PP. (Agree?) They had Forsberg, probably an even better stick handler and passer than Naslund, but according to most people not having as good a shot as Naslund. My and many others impression of Forsberg is that he may have been partly easier to read, since he was so much more of a passer than shooter.
Colorado also often had Sakic, who I think is fairly equal to Naslund, being a great stick handler, great passer, and having "arguably the league's best wrist shot". They also had Blake.

I think one of the most obvious things when comparing, is that Forsberg-Hejduk was far superior during ES, while Naslund-Bertuzzi was better during PP. But why was it so?

How do you guys explain that Forsberg and Colorado didn't score as many PP goals/points as Vancouver?

Because they didn't have that in front of the net presence of Bertuzzi. By the time of the 2003 season Colorado had lost Corbet and Jones, two guys who could do that job. Instead they had two of NHLs most dangerous duos in ES, Forsberg/Hejduk and Sakic/Tanguay.

 

[Dangler99*]

It is worth a lot. The best players in the World named you the most outstanding player in the world. Naslund should be very proud of such an award.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Yes, Bertuzzi was famously one of the best, if not the best, PP net presence in the league during his short prime. Naslund more or less QBed the PP from the halfboards. I'm surprised you didn't know this if you studied the season so thoroughly.

yep, bertuzzi was one of the best i've ever seen. until the league started calling him for interference every time he battled in front of the net (you think i'm joking...). having to change what he did best led to some kind of weird identity crisis and he became a complete p.o.s. of a player. a short lived run at the top, and i hated him 75% of the time he was in vancouver, but when he both wanted to and was allowed to play the way he could, he was breathtaking.

 

[plusandminus]

1st goals

Most people seem to think 1st goals are important, so I list some stats for them too. (Eventually my "obsession" with this thread will come to its end. )

Leading scorers when only counting 1st goal in games

Team|Pos|LastName|G|A1|A2|Pts|+/-|GF|GA
ANA |L |KARIYA |10|10|1|21|17|24|7
BOS |C |THORNTON |6|12|3|21|8|23|15
COL |C |FORSBERG |7|3|10|20|21|27|6
COL |R |HEJDUK |11|8|0|19|23|30|7
PIT |C |LEMIEUX |6|9|4|19|5|20|15
TOR |C |SUNDIN |12|4|2|18|12|22|10
LA |R |PALFFY |8|6|4|18|19|26|7
VAN |C |MORRISON |11|4|2|17|11|23|12
TB |C |RICHARDS |7|8|2|17|13|22|9
WAS |D |GONCHAR |7|5|5|17|18|33|15

(+/- counts every goal and don't distinguish between ES,PP,SH.)

Best (and worst) "+/-" when only counting 1st goal in games

Team|Pos|LastName|G|A1|A2|Pts|+/-|GF|GA
COL |R |HEJDUK |11|8|0|19|23|30|7
COL |C |FORSBERG |7|3|10|20|21|27|6
LA |R |PALFFY |8|6|4|18|19|26|7
WAS |D |GONCHAR |7|5|5|17|18|33|15
COL |L |TANGUAY |6|7|3|16|18|24|6
WAS |C |LANG |6|6|4|16|18|24|6
VAN |L |NASLUND |5|7|4|16|18|24|6
ANA |L |KARIYA |10|10|1|21|17|24|7
PIT |D |TARNSTROM |1|4|4|9|17|24|7
OTT |R |HAVLAT |5|10|1|16|16|22|6
TB |C |TAYLOR |2|2|0|4|-12|4|16
STL |D |SALVADOR |0|0|0|0|-13|4|17
CBJ |D |RICHARDSON |0|0|2|2|-14|7|21
TB |D |NECKAR |0|0|0|0|-14|2|16
ANA |D |SAUER |0|0|0|0|-15|5|20

Forsberg and Hejduk was really good at helping their team getting the 1st goal of games. (And yes, they had some good teammates too which made it easier.)


Leading goal scorers when only counting 1st goal in games

Team|Pos|LastName|G|A1|A2|Pts|+/-|GF|GA
TOR |C |SUNDIN |12|4|2|18|12|22|10
CBJ |L |SANDERSON |12|3|1|16|6|17|11
COL |R |HEJDUK |11|8|0|19|23|30|7
VAN |C |MORRISON |11|4|2|17|11|23|12
ANA |L |KARIYA |10|10|1|21|17|24|7
BOS |R |MURRAY |9|5|2|16|6|23|17
CGY |R |IGINLA |9|3|2|14|3|16|13
LA |R |PALFFY |8|6|4|18|19|26|7
ANA |R |SYKORA |8|6|1|15|11|21|10
OTT |R |HOSSA |8|4|3|15|9|16|7
NAS |R |ORSZAGH |8|6|0|14|11|18|7
SJ |C |DAMPHOUSSE |8|3|2|13|-3|18|21

Sundin, known for scoring lots of game winning goals, also seem to score many 1st goals (at least during 2002-03 season).


Edit: I include top teams too

Team|+/-|GF|GA|ES+/-|ESGF|ESGA|PP+/-|PPGF|PPGA|SH+/-|SHGF|SHGA
DET |20|51|31|7|33|26|15|15|0|-2|3|5
TOR |20|51|31|9|35|26|13|15|2|-2|1|3
OTT |20|50|30|6|26|20|22|23|1|-8|1|9
COL |16|48|32|11|33|22|14|15|1|-9|0|9
NJ |13|47|34|13|40|27|5|6|1|-5|1|6
CHI |6|43|37|10|36|26|6|7|1|-10|0|10
DAL |6|44|38|4|33|29|8|9|1|-6|2|8
VAN |4|43|39|9|34|25|8|8|0|-13|1|14
WAS |4|42|38|7|29|22|11|12|1|-14|1|15
EDM |4|43|39|6|30|24|7|10|3|-9|3|12

Van with Naslund +18 (24-6), without him -14 (19-33)
Col with Forsberg +21 (27-6), without him -5 (21-26)
Considering this, Naslund's statistics in this case may look better.

Edit2: More complete +/-

Team|Pos|LastName|G|A1|A2|Pts|+/-|GF|GA||ES+/-|ESGF|ESGA|PP+/-|PPGF|PPGA|SH+/-|SHGF|SHGA
COL |R |HEJDUK |11|8|0|19|23|30|7||13|18|5|11|12|1|-1|0|1
COL |C |FORSBERG |7|3|10|20|21|27|6||13|18|5|8|9|1|0|0|0
LA |R |PALFFY |8|6|4|18|19|26|7||10|14|4|11|11|0|-2|1|3
WAS |D |GONCHAR |7|5|5|17|18|33|15||9|20|11|11|12|1|-2|1|3
COL |L |TANGUAY |6|7|3|16|18|24|6||12|18|6|6|6|0|0|0|0
WAS |C |LANG |6|6|4|16|18|24|6||8|12|4|11|12|1|-1|0|1
VAN |L |NASLUND |5|7|4|16|18|24|6||11|17|6|7|7|0|0|0|0
ANA |L |KARIYA |10|10|1|21|17|24|7||12|18|6|6|6|0|-1|0|1
PIT |D |TARNSTROM |1|4|4|9|17|24|7||8|14|6|9|9|0|0|1|1
OTT |R |HAVLAT |5|10|1|16|16|22|6||7|12|5|9|10|1|0|0|0

(PPGA is GA when own team had PP. SHGF is GF when own team played SH.)