Best Lines/Player Ranks - Even Strength Points per 60 Minutes - 13+ GP Minimum

insomniac

High on Hockey
Jul 31, 2009
1,217
288
Ottawa
forum.highonhockey.com
So I just finished a mini project I was working on. I wanted to rank players in terms of 1-2-3-4 (1-2-3 for defensemen) line potential, based on production numbers. Games played threshold was set at 13 games (15% of season), all numbers were even-strength, and production was determined not as points alone, but points-per-60-minutes of ice-time. I took the top 120 left wings, top 120 centers, top 120 right wings, and top 180 defensemen. 30 teams * 4 forward lines = 120. 30 teams * 3 defensive pairs = 180. I then divided all the forward groups into four groups of 30 (lines 1, 2, 3, and 4) and the defensemen groups into three groups of 60 (pairs 1, 2, and 3). I was pleasantly surprised at where the Sens ranked:

Forwards:

Alex Chiasson RW3
Erik Condra RW4
Colin Greening LW4
Mike Hoffman NR
David Legwand C3
Clarke MacArthur LW1
Milan Michalek LW2
Chris Neil RW4
Bobby Ryan RW1
Zack Smith NR
Mark Stone RW2
Kyle Turris C2
Mika Zibanejad C3

*NR = Not Ranked. Player does not produce among the top 120 forwards at his position and is an ideal candidate to be replaced.
**Condra and Neil were both ranked between 91 and 120 at RW. Condra was higher, at 95, while Neil ranked at 109.
*** Zibanejad and Legwand both ranked between 61 and 90 at C. Zibanejad was higher, at 61, while Legwand ranked at 81.

This would give the following lineup, with holes:

MacArthur - XXX - Ryan
Michalek - Turris - Stone
XXX - Zibanejad/Legwand - Chiasson
Greening - XXX - Condra/Neil

If you were to go with that and replace the positions where indicated, Hoffman and Smith would come out of the lineup, Legwand would drop to being a top-of-the-line C4, Neil would become the extra forward, and the Sens would need to add a C1 and LW3.

However, everyone knows that almost every single Senator had a bad year, and probably can’t perform any worse than they did. The only real “unrealistic†expectations we have, according to this system, as follows:

Turris must go from C2 to C1 capable - Turris had a career year last season in goals, assists, and points. There’s every reason to think he’ll get even better, especially if the team around him does too.
Zibanejad must go from C3 to C2 capable – Zibanejad had a career year last season in goals, assists, and points. There’s every reason to think he’ll get even better, especially if the team around him does too.
Hoffman, Prince, Puempel, or Guptill must go from NR to LW3 capable – 24, 21, 21, and 22 years old. Every single one of them had a career year last season in the AHL - goals, assists, and points. Something has to give. To be accurate, Guptill only played 5 AHL games and it was Puempel’s first full season, but they are still excellent candidates.
Smith, Pageau, or Lazar must go from NR to C4 capable – Smith doesn’t seem like he’s got any more upside. Pageau should get another shot and Lazar should finish things out in the WHL.

Defense:

Cody Ceci D2
Jared Cowen D3
Eric Gryba D3
Erik Karlsson D1
Marc Methot D2
Chris Phillips NR
Patrick Wiercioch D1

*NR = Not Ranked. Player does not produce among the top 180 defensemen at his position and is an ideal candidate to be replaced.
**All of the Senators who paired in the same group, shoot on opposing sides. This makes for ideal combinations of:

Wiercioch - Karlsson
Methot - Ceci
Cowen - Gryba

Things that surprised me:

Turris as a C2 (thought he'd qualify as a C1)
Michalek as a LW2 (thought he'd be a LW3)
Stone as a RW2 (thought he'd be RW3 or RW4)
Wiercioch as a D1 (thought he'd be a D2 or D3)

So, to sum it all up, if we meet our four pretty reasonable assumptions, we've got a competitive team:

1 - Turris from C2 to C1
2 - ZBAd from C3 to C2
3 - Hoffman, Prince, Puempel, or Guptill from NR to LW3
4 - Smith, Pageau, or Lazar from NR to C4

If the above four happen, the ideal lineup, especially under P-Mac:

MacArthur - Turris - Ryan
Michalek - Zibanejad - Stone
Hoffman - Legwand - Chiasson
Greening - Pageau - Condra

Wiercioch - Karlsson
Methot - Ceci
Cowen - Gryba

Anderson
Lehner​
 

insomniac

High on Hockey
Jul 31, 2009
1,217
288
Ottawa
forum.highonhockey.com
Before everyone tells me how badly the Wiercioch - Karlsson tandem would be torn up, remember that the Sens now have much better two-way support on all above lines, and that the idea of their pair is obviously to gain and hold possession. Both the other pairs have some mobility while being true shutdown pairings as well, so the Wiercioch - Karlsson pair is used to drive offense and possession, and overload the opponent.
 

StefanW

Registered User
Mar 13, 2013
6,286
0
Ottawa
www.storiesnumberstell.com
Good stuff.

According to this we actually have 4 top four D. The eye test disagrees.

The only ranking I would quibble with is Smith, because I think he is actually pretty effective if only he would be kept to 4th line minutes. Increasing his minutes to play against higher QoC hurt him in this ranking IMO. (by the way, not standardizing for QoC is another smaller quibble)
 

BigRig4

Registered User
Feb 22, 2014
3,058
1,084
I really like the work you did, appreciate you posting it. My one small criticism would be that I'm not sure how well points per 60 translates to a good defensive pairings, but all in all good work!
 

Karlsson2Turris*

Guest
I really like that lineup...but Coach Mac will NEVER take out the Big Rig
 

Vesa Awesaka

#KeepTheSenate
Jul 4, 2013
18,236
25
Smith had a very bad year. I'm all for replacing him with a more responsible left handed center that can pk. I use to like smith alot but his performance was inexcusable and i believe that if him and neil simply took less penalties we would have made the playoffs. Pageau is not the type of forward that can replace smith. As was mentioned before QOC is also very important. Wiercioch would get eaten alive by a teams top lines
 

CanadianGuest

Registered User
Jul 14, 2012
286
0
Ontario
So I just finished a mini project I was working on. I wanted to rank players in terms of 1-2-3-4 (1-2-3 for defensemen) line potential, based on production numbers. Games played threshold was set at 13 games (15% of season), all numbers were even-strength, and production was determined not as points alone, but points-per-60-minutes of ice-time. I took the top 120 left wings, top 120 centers, top 120 right wings, and top 180 defensemen. 30 teams * 4 forward lines = 120. 30 teams * 3 defensive pairs = 180. I then divided all the forward groups into four groups of 30 (lines 1, 2, 3, and 4) and the defensemen groups into three groups of 60 (pairs 1, 2, and 3). I was pleasantly surprised at where the Sens ranked:

Forwards:

Alex Chiasson RW3
Erik Condra RW4
Colin Greening LW4
Mike Hoffman NR
David Legwand C3
Clarke MacArthur LW1
Milan Michalek LW2
Chris Neil RW4
Bobby Ryan RW1
Zack Smith NR
Mark Stone RW2
Kyle Turris C2
Mika Zibanejad C3

*NR = Not Ranked. Player does not produce among the top 120 forwards at his position and is an ideal candidate to be replaced.
**Condra and Neil were both ranked between 91 and 120 at RW. Condra was higher, at 95, while Neil ranked at 109.
*** Zibanejad and Legwand both ranked between 61 and 90 at C. Zibanejad was higher, at 61, while Legwand ranked at 81.

This would give the following lineup, with holes:

MacArthur - XXX - Ryan
Michalek - Turris - Stone
XXX - Zibanejad/Legwand - Chiasson
Greening - XXX - Condra/Neil

If you were to go with that and replace the positions where indicated, Hoffman and Smith would come out of the lineup, Legwand would drop to being a top-of-the-line C4, Neil would become the extra forward, and the Sens would need to add a C1 and LW3.

However, everyone knows that almost every single Senator had a bad year, and probably can’t perform any worse than they did. The only real “unrealistic†expectations we have, according to this system, as follows:

Turris must go from C2 to C1 capable - Turris had a career year last season in goals, assists, and points. There’s every reason to think he’ll get even better, especially if the team around him does too.
Zibanejad must go from C3 to C2 capable – Zibanejad had a career year last season in goals, assists, and points. There’s every reason to think he’ll get even better, especially if the team around him does too.
Hoffman, Prince, Puempel, or Guptill must go from NR to LW3 capable – 24, 21, 21, and 22 years old. Every single one of them had a career year last season in the AHL - goals, assists, and points. Something has to give. To be accurate, Guptill only played 5 AHL games and it was Puempel’s first full season, but they are still excellent candidates.
Smith, Pageau, or Lazar must go from NR to C4 capable – Smith doesn’t seem like he’s got any more upside. Pageau should get another shot and Lazar should finish things out in the WHL.

Defense:

Cody Ceci D2
Jared Cowen D3
Eric Gryba D3
Erik Karlsson D1
Marc Methot D2
Chris Phillips NR
Patrick Wiercioch D1

*NR = Not Ranked. Player does not produce among the top 180 defensemen at his position and is an ideal candidate to be replaced.
**All of the Senators who paired in the same group, shoot on opposing sides. This makes for ideal combinations of:

Wiercioch - Karlsson
Methot - Ceci
Cowen - Gryba

Things that surprised me:

Turris as a C2 (thought he'd qualify as a C1)
Michalek as a LW2 (thought he'd be a LW3)
Stone as a RW2 (thought he'd be RW3 or RW4)
Wiercioch as a D1 (thought he'd be a D2 or D3)

So, to sum it all up, if we meet our four pretty reasonable assumptions, we've got a competitive team:

1 - Turris from C2 to C1
2 - ZBAd from C3 to C2
3 - Hoffman, Prince, Puempel, or Guptill from NR to LW3
4 - Smith, Pageau, or Lazar from NR to C4

If the above four happen, the ideal lineup, especially under P-Mac:

MacArthur - Turris - Ryan
Michalek - Zibanejad - Stone
Hoffman - Legwand - Chiasson
Greening - Pageau - Condra

Wiercioch - Karlsson
Methot - Ceci
Cowen - Gryba

Anderson
Lehner​

I like this post, and right up until the end we were in almost perfect agreement. A few questions;

How close was Turris to 1C?
How close was Greening to 3LW?
How close was Smith to 4C?

I've been hesitant to place Wiercioch at D1, but I think it is worth a try. The rest of the D breaks down nicely. I see the D exactly as you set it up, if I have confidence in Wiercioch.

This is the lineup I've been posting;

MacArthur Turris Ryan
Michalek Zibanejad Stone
Greening Legwand Chiasson
Condra Smith Neil
Hoffman Pageau

Cowen Karlsson
Methot Gryba
Phillips Ceci
Wiercioch

Anderson
Lehner
 

TeamRenzo

Registered User
Jul 20, 2009
3,164
1,065
It looks good and I appreciate your efforts, the one point I would argue is your assumption that pretty much every Senator had a horrible season and it cant get worse.

The Turris line was solid all year and both he and MacArthur had good solid seasons. Ceci had a strong season for a rookie and could quite easily regress next year or "sophomore slump".
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
An interesting perspective, but it doesn't account for OFF and DEF zone starts, which is a big skew.

The Greening-Smith-Neil line has come under fire on these boards quite a bit, but they were basically tasked with an overwhelmingly large # of defensive zone starts, often as a checking line against the other team's top unit. This will obviously make their ES production look worse. They had a tough year regardless, but Smith is clearly a better than average 4th liner to me, and perhaps only a slightly below average 3rd liner.

And Wiercioch was also rarely used in a defensive situation, and was more often an offensive zone start. Which is why his production looks so good per minute. I do agree his production was solid regardless though, and his offensive abilities at the NHL level are pretty well established now IMO.

Good stuff either way.
 

insomniac

High on Hockey
Jul 31, 2009
1,217
288
Ottawa
forum.highonhockey.com
I like this post, and right up until the end we were in almost perfect agreement. A few questions;

How close was Turris to 1C?
How close was Greening to 3LW?
How close was Smith to 4C?

I've been hesitant to place Wiercioch at D1, but I think it is worth a try. The rest of the D breaks down nicely. I see the D exactly as you set it up, if I have confidence in Wiercioch.

This is the lineup I've been posting;

MacArthur Turris Ryan
Michalek Zibanejad Stone
Greening Legwand Chiasson
Condra Smith Neil
Hoffman Pageau

Cowen Karlsson
Methot Gryba
Phillips Ceci
Wiercioch

Anderson
Lehner

Turris was 36th at C, so actually very close to C1.
Greening was 104th at LW, so about midway through the pack of 4th line LWs.
Smith was not ranked and I only kept the ranked players so I don't remember how far outside the rankings he fell.

I really like your lineup save for two things: I'd rather see Hoffman in Condra's spot, and I think Wiercioch has a lot of potential and is a better option than Phillips.
 

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,167
9,909
I really like that line up at the end of OP's post

It's unfortunate for Smith but I do think Pageau fits the team's system more

If this rumoured trade go down I have a feeling it might include Z Smith (Chicago has been rumoured to be after him) so it could make sense if it happens
 

SenzZen

RIP, GOAT
Jan 31, 2011
16,920
6,014
Ottawa
I'm too simple to figure it out, but why does 30 teams give you 180 D and only 120 F? Since there's 12 F and 6 D on your average roster...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad