Post-Game Talk: Cole's Plus/Minus: POWERPLAY GOALS, ZAR, EMPTY NETTERS

[ChaosAgent]

How is it not 2 against 3? When the line has success it's Malkin and Kapanen making a play. Zucker doesn't support the play, he doesn't know where to go, he doesn't know when to pass and when to shoot, he doesn't forecheck at the right times, he plays too far apart. It's 2 against 3 in the NHL. You can't afford to have a non-entity with a 34 year old Malkin.

Well for one, Zucker's the best defensive player of the 3 (Geno, Kappy, Zucker) by a large margin.

Which matters as it's, you know, half the game.

 

[Pittsburgh1776]

Zucker - Malkin looks a whole lot like Malkin - Kessel.

But without Kessel's moments of straight line speed and his hammer of a shot. In terms of the support he gives Malkin, yes it resembles 2018-19 Kessel.

 

[BHD]

@SEALBound

Matheson and Ceci had good games by their standards.

 

[Pittsburgh1776]

Well for one, Zucker's the best defensive player of the 3 (Geno, Kappy, Zucker) by a large margin.

Which matters as it's, you know, half the game.

In a vacuum yes. But in the actual games Zucker doesn't support well defensively. It's Malkin digging it out of corners and coming out with the puck. As centers do but it's not like Zucker is some defensive conscience for that line. I'd love to see the clips of Zucker supporting defensively in any zone.

 

[vikingGoalie]

as much as i wanted to see KK and Zucker with crosby and Rust and Guentz with Malkin. there is no freakin way we should mess with our top line, its down right dominant

matheson looks pretty darn good right now, The team is starting to get healthy now, and we are starting to see what JR put together.
Everything is coming together except the goal tending. BUT Jarry after a rocky start did play better as the game went on, and he finished about 90% so progress anyway...

 

[DesertedPenguin]

I so hate the way advanced stats are used. You're literally going to sit here and tell me that what I see with my own eyes (an unproductive player who is out of sorts all over the ice and bumbles nearly every play he has with Malkin) is some kind of average to good player who plays better with Malkin than he does with Crosby. Ignoring the other factors at play and HOW THEY PLAY ON THE ICE. Come on man.

Yes. You only see what the camera sees. You don't see positioning, the little things that may help a play develop (or break apart).

Advanced stats aren't perfect. But they're often a more accurate portrayal of a player's performance, because humans are ultimately biased.

 

[OnMyOwn]

@SEALBound

Matheson and Ceci had good games by their standards.

By anyone’s standards, really. Analytically they were very good today.

 

[Pittsburgh1776]

Yes. You only see what the camera sees. You don't see positioning, the little things that may help a play develop (or break apart).

Advanced stats aren't perfect. But they're often a more accurate portrayal of a player's performance, because humans are ultimately biased.

No, they aren't often a more accurate portrayal. You have no way of gauging that. More accurate than what? Your assessment? Mine? The coach's? The GM's? There are several camera views you can watch and the main one is hardly a scope on the puck, you can see well over half the ice. You can also see the games in person. The assessment of any player depends on a host of things, not least of which is the person making the assessment. Some people have watched the game a long time and some haven't, some understand the game well and some don't. Advanced stats are fine, but stats should never be anything more than a component of a larger assessment. Ones and zeroes cannot define a fluid game of emotion and creativity. The advanced stats junkies rely too much on what numbers tell them and not enough on what a practiced and experienced eye, combined with human judgement and knowledge, can see and know. Tired of seeing stats posted as if they are anything more than a potential indicator.

 

[Andy99]

All of these stats re Zucker are just showing what anyone could tell you by watching him: he’s not working out here...who cares what the possession stats show. He’s not a playmaker and doesn’t make much happen on his line. Therefore, the best use of him is a line where he’s going to score more goals closer to the net, as he’s not a sniper....this is why I think the best use of him is with Sid...because except for the occasional breakaway, Geno’s line spends a lot less time in the O zone and close to the goalie...Zucker was more productive with Sid is my recollection...G needs a second playmaker at this point on his line...why I favor Jake there

if Zucker isn’t playing on Sid’s line, we might as well look to trade him in all seriousness...what a waste of potentially an unprotected first round pick...but I wasn’t enamored with obtaining him like some of you were, also for the length of his contract and the price we paid

 

[ChaosAgent]

No, they aren't often a more accurate portrayal. You have no way of gauging that. More accurate than what? Your assessment? Mine? The coach's? The GM's? There are several camera views you can watch and the main one is hardly a scope on the puck, you can see well over half the ice. You can also see the games in person. The assessment of any player depends on a host of things, not least of which is the person making the assessment. Some people have watched the game a long time and some haven't, some understand the game well and some don't. Advanced stats are fine, but stats should never be anything more than a component of a larger assessment. Ones and zeroes cannot define a fluid game of emotion and creativity. The advanced stats junkies rely too much on what numbers tell them and not enough on what a practiced and experienced eye, combined with human judgement and knowledge, can see and know. Tired of seeing stats posted as if they are anything more than a potential indicator.

All the advanced stats that we have really tell you is whether end results (goals, shots, chances) and/or predicted end results (e.g., xGF) happened while a player was on the ice. It's +/- but more granular and better.

In of itself that is pretty good over a large enough sample size of data, if you compare those on-ice outcomes to other players on the team. However, though you can sorta infer causality it's nowhere near as clear-cut as, say, baseball which is down to the pitcher and the batter or even basketball where ultimately one guy either takes a shot or a turnover on each possession.

I understand stats pretty well and I also understand the limitations of statistics pretty well. The advanced stats are useful yes - more useful than you're giving them credit for - but the hockey analytics people would be wise to remember that all their numbers are just counting and simple arithmetic conversions for when players are on the ice or not. It's +/- but better.

 

[radapex]

All of these stats re Zucker are just showing what anyone could tell you by watching him: he’s not working out here...who cares what the possession stats show. He’s not a playmaker and doesn’t make much happen on his line. Therefore, the best use of him is a line where he’s going to score more goals closer to the net, as he’s not a sniper....this is why I think the best use of him is with Sid...because except for the occasional breakaway, Geno’s line spends a lot less time in the O zone and close to the goalie...Zucker was more productive with Sid is my recollection...G needs a second playmaker at this point on his line...why I favor Jake there

if Zucker isn’t playing on Sid’s line, we might as well look to trade him in all seriousness...what a waste of potentially an unprotected first round pick...but I wasn’t enamored with obtaining him like some of you were, also for the length of his contract and the price we paid

From an advanced stats perspective, Zucker-Crosby has a GF/60 of 2.92 and a GA/60 of 3.21; Zucker-Malkin has a GF/60 of 3.11 and a GA/60 of 2.42. So Zucker's line has been better both offensively and defensively with Malkin than with Crosby. I haven't been able to find a site that provides a point-based breakdown by linemate.

 

[radapex]

All the advanced stats that we have really tell you is whether end results (goals, shots, chances) and/or predicted end results (e.g., xGF) happened while a player was on the ice. It's +/- but more granular and better.

In of itself that is pretty good over a large enough sample size of data, if you compare those on-ice outcomes to other players on the team. However, though you can sorta infer causality it's nowhere near as clear-cut as, say, baseball which is down to the pitcher and the batter or even basketball where ultimately one guy either takes a shot or a turnover on each possession.

I understand stats pretty well and I also understand the limitations of statistics pretty well. The advanced stats are useful yes - more useful than you're giving them credit for - but the hockey analytics people would be wise to remember that all their numbers are just counting and simple arithmetic conversions for when players are on the ice or not. It's +/- but better.

They definitely aren't a an all-encompassing solution. They just tend to provide a better analogue to player performance. For example, the shot-based stats like Corsi and Fenwick related to puck possession based off the simple fact that you can't take shots if you don't have the puck.

For me, the big concern is what happens with Crosby's numbers when you remove Guentzel from his line -- Guentzel's take a small drop when you remove Crosby but are still very positive; however, Crosby's go from being very positive to negative. That's not a good sign... it's an indication that Crosby isn't driving the play like he used to. If you take a look at the WOWY for Crosby-Rust, you'll see the same thing which really backs up the Crosby-Guentzel numbers.

So, realistically, we've got two high-paid star players who are now in their mid-30s and are starting to slow down, but we don't have enough pieces available to give them the help they need to both be highly successful.

 

[Andy99]

From an advanced stats perspective, Zucker-Crosby has a GF/60 of 2.92 and a GA/60 of 3.21; Zucker-Malkin has a GF/60 of 3.11 and a GA/60 of 2.42. So Zucker's line has been better both offensively and defensively with Malkin than with Crosby. I haven't been able to find a site that provides a point-based breakdown by linemate.

i mean the second winger on that line playing with them may have something to do with the stats you’re citing...I do remember thinking that Zucker seemed to score either on the PP or with somebody other than Geno while on L2...but he seemed to be good last season when he got with Sid but specifically with Sid and Sheary...maybe it’s just that he appears snakebitten now but either way, he hasn’t been an answer to our search for another top six winger who can help our centers...trade him rather than force him into a round hole with Geno

 

[chethejet]

The second line has to pay together and Malkin has to be more engaged. I think the line can be a good second line and will give them playing time to see if that is the case. I also think as the D gets back, the forwards will benefit from better puck movement. One can already see the speed and pace is much better.

 

[Andy99]

They definitely aren't a an all-encompassing solution. They just tend to provide a better analogue to player performance. For example, the shot-based stats like Corsi and Fenwick related to puck possession based off the simple fact that you can't take shots if you don't have the puck.

For me, the big concern is what happens with Crosby's numbers when you remove Guentzel from his line -- Guentzel's take a small drop when you remove Crosby but are still very positive; however, Crosby's go from being very positive to negative. That's not a good sign... it's an indication that Crosby isn't driving the play like he used to. If you take a look at the WOWY for Crosby-Rust, you'll see the same thing which really backs up the Crosby-Guentzel numbers.

So, realistically, we've got two high-paid star players who are now in their mid-30s and are starting to slow down, but we don't have enough pieces available to give them the help they need to both be highly successful.

you can look at Crosby-Rust all you like but the fact is that Sid hasn’t played with new and improved Rust much before right now...Rust version #2 played almost exclusively with Geno last year...he’s really improved his offensive game, including making subtle pass plays to generate offense...might be worth trying Zucker-Sid-Rust and see if Rust can play the version of Jake that worked with Sid in the past

 

[radapex]

you can look at Crosby-Rust all you like but the fact is that Sid hasn’t played with new and improved Rust much before right now...Rust version #2 played almost exclusively with Geno last year...he’s really improved his offensive game, including making subtle pass plays to generate offense...might be worth trying Zucker-Sid-Rust and see if Rust can play the version of Jake that worked with Sid in the past

That may be a better option, actually, because I really don't believe Kapanen has the hockey IQ necessary to be successful with Crosby.

All I mean by the Crosby-Rust WOWY chart is that it basically mirrors the Crosby-Guentzel one. Great numbers together, Rust still has great numbers w/o Crosby, but Crosby's numbers tank w/o Rust.

 

[DRAGO 18]

Speaking of Leaf fans: I distinctly remember in the Kap trade that their fans said, consistently, that even if he struggled 5v5 that he was great on the PK. Is Sullivan overthinking it?

Is it cold outside and going to snow tomorrow?

 

[ChaosAgent]

They definitely aren't a an all-encompassing solution. They just tend to provide a better analogue to player performance. For example, the shot-based stats like Corsi and Fenwick related to puck possession based off the simple fact that you can't take shots if you don't have the puck.

For me, the big concern is what happens with Crosby's numbers when you remove Guentzel from his line -- Guentzel's take a small drop when you remove Crosby but are still very positive; however, Crosby's go from being very positive to negative. That's not a good sign... it's an indication that Crosby isn't driving the play like he used to. If you take a look at the WOWY for Crosby-Rust, you'll see the same thing which really backs up the Crosby-Guentzel numbers.

So, realistically, we've got two high-paid star players who are now in their mid-30s and are starting to slow down, but we don't have enough pieces available to give them the help they need to both be highly successful.

Oh I get it with the stats and possession. If the team is less successful at possession and such when you're off the ice than when you're on it, chances are you're not actually a good player *ahem* Phil at the end *ahem*.

If the team intended to follow the Sharks model they would have looked to turn Crosby and Malkin into complimentary pieces a bit more. Meaning that they don't have to be the ones driving play all the time, they can play off the puck etc. I think that means they should have been hunting for more primary playmakers...frankly, another star or two. We've got Guentzel and that's terrific but everyone else is a complimentary player. I don't know if we were ever in on a Panarin or a Hall or whomever but I wish we'd start thinking that way. Thinking a little bit more about Zucker and Kapanen specifically, I don't think either has an especially high IQ for offensive hockey. Not dumb as rocks out there like Galchenyuk but you can see why their old teams consistently shuffled them between the 2nd and 3rd line.

Finally, one thing I'll say for Sid sans Guentzel is those bad stats are mostly based on his time with Zucker and Sheary. When in fairness the Penguins were a team in complete disarray and might have slip-slided their way out of the playoffs if COVID didn't happen.

 

[Pittsburgh1776]

All the advanced stats that we have really tell you is whether end results (goals, shots, chances) and/or predicted end results (e.g., xGF) happened while a player was on the ice. It's +/- but more granular and better.

In of itself that is pretty good over a large enough sample size of data, if you compare those on-ice outcomes to other players on the team. However, though you can sorta infer causality it's nowhere near as clear-cut as, say, baseball which is down to the pitcher and the batter or even basketball where ultimately one guy either takes a shot or a turnover on each possession.

I understand stats pretty well and I also understand the limitations of statistics pretty well. The advanced stats are useful yes - more useful than you're giving them credit for - but the hockey analytics people would be wise to remember that all their numbers are just counting and simple arithmetic conversions for when players are on the ice or not. It's +/- but better.

I mean, I never said they were not useful. They can be. But they are potential indicators and shouldn't be divorced from the eye test. People post them here as if they are determinative and they are not in a game that is as fluid as hockey. Thank God.

 

[Pittsburgh1776]

All the advanced stats that we have really tell you is whether end results (goals, shots, chances) and/or predicted end results (e.g., xGF) happened while a player was on the ice. It's +/- but more granular and better.

In of itself that is pretty good over a large enough sample size of data, if you compare those on-ice outcomes to other players on the team. However, though you can sorta infer causality it's nowhere near as clear-cut as, say, baseball which is down to the pitcher and the batter or even basketball where ultimately one guy either takes a shot or a turnover on each possession.

I understand stats pretty well and I also understand the limitations of statistics pretty well. The advanced stats are useful yes - more useful than you're giving them credit for - but the hockey analytics people would be wise to remember that all their numbers are just counting and simple arithmetic conversions for when players are on the ice or not. It's +/- but better.

Yes. And this is my problem with it. Not really problem with the stats but with how people interpret the results. In the game of hockey positive things can happen while a player is on the ice but totally independent of him. It's why the love for ZAR the last two years was so infuriating. The junkies were hailing him as Patrice Bergeron but the eye test, to me, showed a player who mostly benefitted from the work of others and who often bumbled plays even though positive things happened while he was on the ice. He was good last game so I'm not complaining but the last two years...

Zucker is on the ice when things happen for Malkin and Kapanen. The stats suggest he is part of it but the eye test shows me he is not, and further that he is a detriment to Malkin. The eye test shows me that whatever success L2 has is because of the work of 2-4 players and that that cannot be sustained in the regular season let alone playoffs. Stats can be a check against human bias but they can also feed bias.

 

[Gurglesons]

Great. Stats are wrong crowd took over the thread.

 

[Gurglesons]

Yes. And this is my problem with it. Not really problem with the stats but with how people interpret the results. In the game of hockey positive things can happen while a player is on the ice but totally independent of him. It's why the love for ZAR the last two years was so infuriating. The junkies were hailing him as Patrice Bergeron but the eye test, to me, showed a player who mostly benefitted from the work of others and who often bumbled plays even though positive things happened while he was on the ice. He was good last game so I'm not complaining but the last two years...

Zucker is on the ice when things happen for Malkin and Kapanen. The stats suggest he is part of it but the eye test shows me he is not, and further that he is a detriment to Malkin. The eye test shows me that whatever success L2 has is because of the work of 2-4 players and that that cannot be sustained in the regular season let alone playoffs. Stats can be a check against human bias but they can also feed bias.

Nobody ever hailed ZAR as Bergeron.

ZAR is a very good defensive player on the PK and at 5v5. That's all the stats ever said. And you can watch his line today. Bleuger and Tanev were not performing how they are now with ZAR.

 

[DearDiary]

Kapanen is not a top 6 player. He has tunnel vision and doesn't know when to make a play, wait for a trailer or just hold onto the puck. I still can't believe the assets that JR dumped to get a 3rd line player.

Then you have Zucker who doesn't mesh well with Malkin, who doesn't support the ongoing play which is dangerous when there's a guy who doesn't know what's happening on the other wing. I don't trust his commitment either, this is a guy who more than anyone in the league was hurt by a trade due to the agreement with his kids. There's no way he's happy playing for Pittsburgh. I get the same feeling from him as I did from Brassard with his body language

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Jake with Sid or Malkin since 2018/19

Jake-Sid
GF/60 - 3.65
GA/60 - 2.1

Jake-Malkin
GF/60 - 3.86
GA/60 - 3.16


Zucker with Sid or Malkin since 2019/20

Zucker-Sid
GF/60 - 2.79
GA/60 - 2.79

Zucker-Malkin
GF/60 - 2.86
GA/60 - 2.5

So basically Jake should be with Sid and Zucker with Malkin. Either that or Hextall (almost typed JR) needs to acquire a different winger for Malkin and somehow move on from Zucker.

Because the above shows that the GF/GA differential with Sid/Jake is better than it is with Geno/Jake, and the GF/GA differential is better with Geno/Zucker than it is Sid/Zucker.

 

[DesertedPenguin]

So basically Jake should be with Sid and Zucker with Malkin. Either that or Hextall (almost typed JR) needs to acquire a different winger for Malkin and somehow move on from Zucker.

Because the above shows that the GF/GA differential with Sid/Jake is better than it is with Geno/Jake, and the GF/GA differential is better with Geno/Zucker than it is Sid/Zucker.

Yep. And people just need to be patient with Zucker and Geno. The underlying possession stats are there. As Malkin gets out of his slump, the production will increase.