D-partners of the greats

[overpass]

Using the game-by-game plus-minus correlation method I outlined here, I'm going to go through the careers of some of the great defencemen from 1960 to 2000 and identify who their defence partners were. Starting with the great Bobby Orr.

I'm bolding anything about 0.7 as more-or-less a full season partner. If there were other regular partners on the team, I'll put them in parentheses.

1966-67: Gilles Marotte 0.61, Dallas Smith 0.44, Bob Woytowich 0.42, Joe Watson 0.35, Ted Green 0.35
1967-68: Dallas Smith 0.30, Ted Green 0.23 (Awrey-Green 0.80)
1968-69: Dallas Smith 0.84 (Awrey-Green 0.81)
1969-70: Don Awrey 0.72, Gary Doak 0.41
1970-71: Dallas Smith 0.78 (Awrey-Green 0.77)
1971-72: Rick Smith 0.74, Don Awrey 0.44 (D. Smith - Green 0.84)
1972-73: Don Awrey 0.54, Dallas Smith 0.27 (Awrey-Vadnais 0.61)
1973-74: Al Sims 0.75, Daryl Edstrand 0.57 (D. Smith - Vadnais 0.74)
1974-75: Dallas Smith 0.56, Al Sims 0.51, Carol Vadnais 0.38

Comments:

• Orr's first two seasons were all over the place and it's hard to find a regular partner.
• Oddly enough, 1966-67 points to Gilles Marotte as Orr's most frequent partner. But Marotte finished the season a -41 and Orr a +1, so this doesn't make sense on the face of it. Why the high correlation? Well, in the games they both played, the plus-minus difference was "only" 33 (+3 and -30). They had the same plus-minus in 24 of 58 games, and were within 1 of each other in 46 of 58 games. In those 46 games Orr was -6 and Marotte was -16. 15 of the 33 point difference came from 3 games - Feb 16 against Montreal, Feb 25 against Chicago, and Mar 15 against Montreal, where Orr was a combined +7 and Marotte a combined -8. So maybe it's possible that Marotte played with Orr for some of the year and just happened to have a terrible plus-minus when he didn't. I don't know, it's a weird season.
• 1968-69 is probably Orr's closest season to having a full-time partner. After that, he was probably playing enough minutes that he would play with multiple partners on D even if he had a primary partner - which he usually did.
• In 1972-73, Orr appears to have mostly played with Dallas Smith in the first half of the season, and with Don Awrey in the secon half of the season. IN 1974-75, it looks like he started off with Al Sims and finished with Dallas Smith.

Now I'll take a look at maybe a more interesting question, which is how much did Orr's plus-minus correlate with Phil Esposito's? This should help give some insight into how much the two of them played together and relied on each other. For this part, I'll post the Esposito-Orr correlation first, and then the average correlation of Esposito with the other D-men next. If the Espo-Orr correlation was substantially higher than the average Espo-other D man correlation, we can conclude that Esposito and Orr played together and influenced each others results more than we would expect if ice time for forwards and defence were unrelated.

1967-68: Esposito-Orr 0.21, with others 0.43
1968-69: Esposito-Orr 0.52, with others 0.47
1969-70: Esposito-Orr 0.48, with others 0.47
1970-71: Esposito-Orr 0.53, with others 0.31
1971-72: Esposito-Orr 0.36, with others 0.37
1972-73: Esposito-Orr 0.63, with others 0.48
1973-74: Esposito-Orr 0.66, with others 0.32
1974-75: Esposito-Orr 0.70, with others 0.42

Here's how I interpret the numbers above. While Harry Sinden was coaching the Bruins (through 69-70), Orr and Esposito did not play any more together than you would expect from a #1 D and a #1 C who played the minutes they did. Esposito's plus-minus was not any more related to Orr's than it was to the other defencemen.

In 1970-71, Tom Johnson's first season coaching the team, he may have relied on the Orr-Esposito combination a bit more. This was the season when the Bruins blew the league away, statistically speaking, in the regular season, but were upset in the playoffs. The next season, 71-72, Johnson went back to the Sinden coaching pattern where Orr and Esposito were largely independent and didn't play together any unusual amount.

In 1972-73, things start to change. Suddenly in the final 3 seasons of the Orr-Espo combination, you start seeing correlations that are what you might see from semi-regular partners or linemates. And in fact, the 1972-73 season can be broken down further. In the first 52 games that Tom Johnson coached, the Espo-Orr correlation was 0.52 (0.59). In the last 26 games coached by Bep Guidolin, the correlation shot up to 0.76 (-0.08). Guidolin was also the coach for 73-74, and Don Cherry was the coach for 74-75. So it looks like Guidolin and Cherry relied on putting Esposito and Orr out together as much as possible, unlike Sinden and Johnson.

What does this mean? Well, it suggests that Orr and Esposito's individual numbers from 72-73 through 74-75 may have been a little inflated relative to their earlier seasons, because they relied on playing together more often to post those statistics.

Click to read more...

 

[overpass]

Brad Park

1968-69: Jim Neilson 0.77, Harry Howell 0.39
1969-70: Arnie Brown 0.57, Jim Neilson 0.21 (Neilson-Seiling 0.72)
1970-71: Arnie Brown 0.56, Tim Horton 0.49, Larry Brown 0.68 in 31 games (Neilson-Seiling 0.80)
1971-72: Dale Rolfe 0.82, Gary Doak 0.59 (Neilson-Seiling 0.80)
1972-73: Dale Rolfe 0.84 (Neilson-Seiling 0.68)
1973-74: Dale Rolfe 0.80 in 48 games, Gilles Marotte 0.67 in 46 games (Neilson-Seiling 0.51)
1974-75: Nick Beverley 0.55, Gilles Marotte 0.32, Dale Rolfe 0.30 (Marotte-Greschner 0.76)
1975-76 (Boston only): Dallas Smith 0.62, Gary Doak 0.23 (Edestrand-Doak 0.79)
1976-77: Dallas Smith 0.49, Mike Milbury 0.41 (R. Smith - Doak 0.64)
1977-78 Mike Milbury 0.73, Al Sims 0.40 (R. Smith - Doak 0.70)
1978-79: Mike Milbury 0.50, Al Sims 0.39 (R. Smith - Doak 0.66)
1979-80: Mike Milbury 0.58, Ray Bourque 0.39 (Redmond-Bourque 0.53)
1980-81: Mike Milbury 0.68, Ray Bourque 0.35 (Redmond-O'Connell 0.71, Bourque-McCrimmon 0.55)
1981-82: Mike Milbury 0.70, Larry Melnyk 0.48 (O'Connell-McCrimmon 0.53)
1982-83: Marty Howe 0.58, Mike Milbury 0.21 (Bourque-Hiller 0.76)
1983-84: Gary Smith 0.58, Bob Manno 0.29, Reed Larson 0.28
1984-85: Gary Smith 0.59, Larry Trader 0.59 (Ladouceur-Larson 0.72)

Comments:

• Park usually had more of a primary partner than a full-time partner, probably because he was playing superstar minutes and would always play a bit more than his partner. The closest thing he had to a full-time partner was Dale Rolfe in the early 70s, with Neilson-Seiling a consistent pairing behind them.
• His primary partners are usually pretty clear. One season with Jim Neilson, two with Arnie Brown, three with Dale Rolfe, one with Nick Beverley, 1.5 with Dallas Smith, 5.5 with Mike Milbury, one with Marty Howe, two with Gary Smith.
• Ray Bourque wasn't his primary partner but it does look like they had some minutes together at ES in the early 80s.

Did Park tend to play with the top forward on his team? (Which was Jean Ratelle for over a decade, on two different teams).

1968-69: Park-Ratelle 0.55, with others 0.53.
1969-70: Park-Ratelle 0.35, with others 0.31.
1970-71: Park-Ratelle 0.62, with others 0.40.
1971-72: Park-Ratelle 0.57, with others 0.53.
1972-73: Park-Ratelle 0.35, with others 0.43.
1973-74: Park-Ratelle 0.53, 0.35 with others.
1974-75: Park-Ratelle 0.33, 0.46 with others.
1975-76 (BOS only): Park-Ratelle 0.35, 0.31 with others.
1976-77: Park-Ratelle 0.47, 0.34 with others.
1977-78: Park-Ratelle 0.37, 0.28 with others.
1978-79: Park-Ratelle 0.48, 0.38 with others.
1979-80: Park-Middleton 0.56, 0.43 with others.
1980-81: Park-Middleton 0.40, 0.30 with others.
1981-82: Park-Middleton 0.53, 0.39 with others
1982-83: Park-Pederson 0.21, 0.33 with others.
1983-84: Park-Yzerman 0.45, 0.27 with others (Larson-Yzerman was 0.59)
1984-85: Park-Yzerman 0.42, 0.22 with others.

So this isn't the easiest to interpret. Park's correlation with the top forward is usually a little higher than the other d-men, but not a ton. From 1968-69 through 1974-75, even though he had a couple of individual seasons that look suggestive of more time with Ratelle, I would consider the fact Emile Francis was the coach the whole time and take the results from the majority of the seasons to indicate that Park did not play an unusual amount with Ratelle.

In Boston, under Don Cherry from 75-76 through 78-79, his correlations with Ratelle were a little higher than the other D-men, but not high in an absolute sense. I would say that he didn't play an unusual amount with Ratelle in these seasons either.

In 1979-80, Cherry left, Ray Bourque arrived, and I would say Park started getting a bit more ice time than average with Rick Middleton for the next 3 years, but that appears to have stopped in 82-83. In Detroit, Park appears to have been getting more ice time than average with Yzerman, although the correlations aren't that high.

Overall I would say this indicates that Park was used in more of an offensive role than a defensive role toward the end of his career, when he was no longer a Norris-level d-man. This change could also be related to the change in ice time management from the 60s to the 80s. In the 1960s, there was only one coach behind the bench and players largely managed their 2 minute shifts against their assigned matchups. In the 1970s, teams started adding assistant coaches and head coaches like Scotty Bowman and Fred Shero scrambled lines, pioneered short shifts, and started focusing on gaining advantages through shift management. So we might expect to see the top offensive defencemen getting more shifts with the top forwards in the 1980s as part of a general trend. Something to watch!

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

when you make it to the early 90s, i believe david shaw went from being leetch’s partner in ny to bourque’s partner in boston

 

[seventieslord]

Interesting. It's been over ten years since I asked the question about how much Orr and Esposito played together. Knowing each of their estimated ESTOI for each season, and their GF:GA ratios, I believe that the answer can be found mathematically, even if via trial and error. However, I got frustrated with it and never took it further. You appear to have found a bit of a backroad to getting to this answer.

 

[overpass]

Denis Potvin

1973-74: 0.64 Gerry Hart, 0.45 Jean Potvin (Lewis-Marshall 0.90)
1974-75: Dave Fortier 0.70, Gerry Hart 0.62, Jean Potvin 0.44 (Lewis-Marshall 0.86)
1975-76: Dave Lewis 0.51, Gerry Hart 0.50, Bert Marshall 0.36
1976-77: Dave Lewis 0.62, Gerry Hart 0.54, Pat Price 0.40, Jean Potvin 0.33
1977-78: Jean Potvin 0.59 in only 34 GP, Dave Lewis 0.57, Stefan Persson 0.32
1978-79: Bob Lorimer 0.64, Bert Marshall 0.41, Dave Lewis 0.32 (Persson-Hart 0.58)
1979-80 (only 31 GP): Ken Morrow 0.52, Jean Potvin 0.47, Bob Lorimer 0.32 (Lorimer-Lewis 0.86, Persson-Langevin 0.60)
1980-81: Bob Lorimer 0.77, Ken Morrow 0.40 (Persson-Langevin 0.84, Lane-Morrow 0.89)
1981-82: Gord Lane 0.37, Tomas Jonsson 0.29 (Persson-Langevin 0.76)
1982-83: Tomas Jonsson 0.74, Ken Morrow 0.35 (Persson-Langevin 0.84)
1983-84: Gord Dineen 0.79 (only 43 GP), Gord Lane 0.47 (Persson-Langevin 0.50)
1984-85: Gerald Diduck 0.57, Gord Dineen 0.51, Stefan Persson 0.39
1985-86: Gord Dineen 0.85 (57 GP), Stefan Persson 0.43, Tomas Jonsson 0.25
1986-87: Tomas Jonsson 0.33, Gord Dineen 0.30 (Curran-Morrow 0.78)
1987-88: Gerald Diduck 0.74, Morrow 0.40 (Jonsson-Konroyd 0.59)

Comments:

• This is interesting because Potvin only played for one coach, Al Arbour, through his whole career.
• Potvin rarely had a full-time partner. It looks like he tended to play superstar minutes, probably playing with multiple partners during a game because he was playing a high % of the minutes available.
• In his first two seasons, it's pretty clear that Dave Lewis-Bert Marshall was a regular pairing and then Potvin played with everyone else.
• Al Arbour liked to have a strong regular second pairing behind Potvin. See Lewis-Marshall who were already mentioned, and see also Stefan Persson - Dave Langevin in the dynasty years. Then Potvin played with the #4, #5, or #6 defenceman.
• It's actually in the five consecutive finals seasons when Potvin was most likely to have a primary partner, possibly because the team was deepest then. Not in his injury-shortened 79-80 season, and not in the 80-81 season, but in the other 3 he primarily played with Bob Lorimer, Tomas Jonsson, and then the 21 year old Gord Dineen (in the half season that Dineen played with the team).
• Taking everything into account, Arbour gave Potvin quite a heavy load. In addition to playing almost all the power play minutes and the majority of shorthanded minutes, Potvin also usually played big EV minutes with multiple defence partners, often with depth defencemen. Also, Arbour almost never kept a consistent partner for Potvin from year to year. It looks like there's a good reason I never associated Potvin with any particular partner.

Did Potvin tend to play with the top forward on his team? Let's check the numbers with Bryan Trottier.

1975-76: Potvin-Trottier 0.47, others 0.42
1976-77: Potvin-Trottier 0.66, others 0.42
1977-78: Potvin-Trottier 0.62, others 0.26
1978-79: Potvin-Trottier 0.43, others 0.37
1979-80: too few GP played
1980-81: Potvin-Trottier 0.56, others 0.34
1981-82: Potvin-Trottier 0.45, others 0.24
1982-83: Potvin-Trottier 0.55, others 0.39
1983-84: Potvin-Trottier 0.58, 0.25
1984-85: Potvin-Trottier 0.47, 0.35. (Persson-Trottier 0.60, Langevin-Trottier 0.61)
1984-85: Potvin-Bossy 0.55, 0.21
1985-86: Potvin-Trottier 0.41, 0.34
1986-87: Potvin-Trottier 0.52, 0.23
1987-88: Potvin-Trottier 0.47, 0.32

I would say yes, it looks like Potvin tended to play more with Trottier than the other defencemen did. Ice time would account for some of that, but maybe not for all. Maybe some seasons like 75-76, 78-79, and 85-86 were exceptions, or maybe it's just year to year variation within an overall trend.

1984-85 is interesting because Trottier dropped to the second line C role that season, and Brent Sutter centred Mike Bossy. Bossy would be the clear #1 forward that season, and in fact Potvin-Bossy did have a relatively high correlation of 0.55. Trottier had a higher correlation with the second pairing of Stefan Persson and Dave Langevin. The 84-85 numbers support the theory that Potvin tended to play more with the top line, and the second pairing played more with the second line.

 

[popo]

More by memory that data analysis, in chronological order:

Ray Bourque
-Brad McCrimmon
-Gord Kluzak
-Don Sweeney
-Hall Gill
-Rob Blake

Paul Coffey
-Gary Lariviere
-Charlie Huddy
-Peter Taglianetti
-Charlie Huddy
-Niklas Lidstrom

Chris Pronger
-Brad McCrimmon
-Igor Kravchuck
-Jeff Finlay
-Jason Smith
-Sean O'Donnell

Steve Smith (not a Great, but a pretty good)
-Randy Gregg
-Jeff Beukeboom
-Chris Chelios

 

[overpass]

Ray Bourque

1979-80: Dick Redmond 0.53, Brad Park 0.39 (Milbury-Park 0.58)
1980-81: Brad McCrimmon 0.55, Brad Park 0.35 (O'Connell-Redmond 0.71, Milbury-Park 0.68)
1981-82: Randy Hiller 0.66 in 20 GP, Brad McCrimmon 0.30, Mike O'Connell 0.29 (Milbury-Park 0.70, O'Connell-McCrimmon 0.53)
1982-83: Randy Hillier 0.76, Mike O'Connell 0.26 (Park-Marty Howe 0.58, Milbury-O'Connell 0.54)
1983-84: Jim Schoenfeld 0.55 in 39 GP, Randy Hillier 0.45 (O'Connell-Milbury 0.76, Kluzak-Lapointe 0.76)
1984-85: John Blum 0.48, Mats Thelin 0.38 (Blum-Thelin 0.54)
1985-86: Mike O'Connell 0.42, Mats Thelin 0.46 in 31 GP, Alain Cote 0.47 in 32 GP
1986-87: Mike Milbury 0.68 (Pedersen-Larson 0.74)
1987-88: Gord Kluzak 0.75, Reed Larson 0.34 (Wesley-Larson 0.58)
1988-89: Alain Cote 0.57 in 31 GP, Don Sweeney 0.47 in 36 GP, Glen Wesley 0.38 (Sweeney-Hawgood 0.66)
1989-90: Jim Wiemer 0.38, Glen Wesley 0.36
1990-91: Jim Wiemer 0.40, Don Sweeney 0.30, Allen Pedersen 0.30
1991-92: Don Sweeney 0.41, Stephane Quintal 0.32
1992-93: Gordie Roberts 0.49, Don Sweeney 0.41, Glen Wesley 0.35
1993-94: Don Sweeney 0.65, Gordie Roberts 0.32, David Shaw 0.27
1994-95: Don Sweeney 0.80 (Rohloff-Shaw 0.62, Kasatonov-Gruden 0.57)
1995-96: Kyle MacLaren 0.64
1996-97: Kyle MacLaren 0.43, Barry Richter 0.42, Don Sweeney 0.30
1997-98: Hal Gill 0.71, Dave Ellet 0.38 (Sweeney-MacLaren 0.83)
1998-99: Hal Gill 0.86, Don Sweeney 0.27
1999-00 (Boston): Hal Gill 0.70
1999-00 (14 GP in COL): Adam Foote 0.92
2000-01: Adam Foote 0.90 in 35 GP, Rob Blake 0.79 in 13 GP, Aaron Miller 0.34

Comments:

• Bourque rarely had a primary partner for his first 14 years in the league. Especially from the 88-89 season through the 92-93 season, during his peak. His 89-90 season where he almost won the Hart was especially notable for not having a primary partner at all. He was probably playing superstar minutes with multiple partners for much of this time.
• Without going through and checking each season, it looks like he was often playing with the #4, #5, or #6 defenceman. He didn't get the benefit of strong partners for most of his career.
• By the late 90s when he was past his prime, he was playing pretty regularly with Hal Gill, and then with Adam Foote in Colorado.

Did Bourque tend to play with the top forward on his team?

1979-80: Bourque-Middleton 0.36, others 0.39
1980-81: Bourque-Middleton 0.35, others 0.31
1981-82: Bourque-Middleton 0.42, others 0.41
1982-83: Bourque-Pederson 0.40, others 0.29
1983-84: Bourque-Pederson 0.39, others 0.35
1984-85: Bourque-Middleton 0.44, others 0.34
1985-86: Bourque-Pederson 0.48, others 0.36
1986-87: Bourque-Neely 0.32, others 0.25
1987-88: Bourque-Neely 0.54, others 0.35
1988-89: Bourque-Neely 0.57, others 0.38
1989-90: Bourque-Neely 0.52, others 0.18
1990-91: Bourque-Neely 0.47, others 0.43
1991-92: Bourque-Janney 0.36, others 0.36. Post Janney-Oates trade (26 GP), Bourque-Oates 0.76, others 0.22
1992-93: Bourque-Oates 0.63, others 0.32
1993-94: Bourque-Oates 0.55, others 0.49
1994-95: Bourque-Oates 0.58, others 0.24
1995-96: Bourque-Oates 0.42, others 0.31
1996-97: Bourque-Oates 0.61, others 0.41
1997-98: Bourque-Allison 0.58, others 0.42
1998-99: Bourque-Allison 0.50, others 0.39
1999-00 (Boston): Bourque-Thornton 0.53, others 0.37
1999-00 (14 GP in COL): Sakic 0.82, others 0.29
2000-01: Bourque-Sakic 0.64, others 0.39

I would say Bourque did not get any extra time with the best forward for his first few seasons in the league, at least through 86-87. From 87-88 through 89-90, it looks like he may have played a bigger role with Cam Neely. And there was definitely something with Adam Oates, it looks to me as if Bourque played more time with Oates than you would otherwise expect. Finally, he played more with Joe Sakic in his year-plus in Colorado. Overall Bourque spend most of the latter half of his career in a more offensive role, playing more with the best scoring forwards on his team.

 

[GMR]

More by memory that data analysis, in chronological order:

Ray Bourque
-Brad McCrimmon
-Gord Kluzak
-Don Sweeney
-Hall Gill
-Rob Blake

Paul Coffey
-Gary Lariviere
-Charlie Huddy
-Peter Taglianetti
-Charlie Huddy
-Niklas Lidstrom

Chris Pronger
-Brad McCrimmon
-Igor Kravchuck
-Jeff Finlay
-Jason Smith
-Sean O'Donnell

Steve Smith (not a Great, but a pretty good)
-Randy Gregg
-Jeff Beukeboom
-Chris Chelios

Was Brad McCrimmon the first defensive partner for Bourque, Lidstrom, and Pronger? How strange a coincidence.

 

[JackSlater]

Was Brad McCrimmon the first defensive partner for Bourque, Lidstrom, and Pronger? How strange a coincidence.

Both Lidstrom and Pronger have cited McCrimmon as an important mentor who taught them a lot early in their careers. I had never considered the Bourque connection. Hell, he even paired with Howe at his peak and then played with MacInnis when he was in his early prime.

 

[seventieslord]

Question - when it comes to these superstar, super-high TOI players, what we usually see is that their regular partner ends up with lower minutes than they had. Usually by a good deal, when that partner is not typical #2 D caliber. The superstar #1 gets more shifts with defensemen other than that guy. So in the end you never end up seeing Bourque, for example, having a 0.9+ correlation with a guy like Sweeney. But logically, and just based on experience, the general practice is that even though the Bourque gets a lot of shifts without the Sweeney, the sweeney doesn't see a lot of shifts without the Bourque. Is there any way that these results can be looked at "in reverse" to see how effective they are?

For example, look at 1996-97. Bourque and McLaren have a 0.43 correlation, which we think means McLaren was his most frequent partner, but there are two others who really are not very far behind. For us to be more confident McLaren was indeed Bourque's most frequent partner, we would want to see an even stronger correlation for McLaren-Bourque than for Mclaren-anyone else. Right?

 

[norrisnick]

Both Lidstrom and Pronger have cited McCrimmon as an important mentor who taught them a lot early in their careers. I had never considered the Bourque connection. Hell, he even paired with Howe at his peak and then played with MacInnis when he was in his early prime.

Sounds like a good enough reason to enshrine him as a Builder. Not that his playing doesn't exceed the level of some defenseman that played on dynasties and got in on the back of that. Bring his family in and honor him.

 

[Hobnobs]

Both Lidstrom and Pronger have cited McCrimmon as an important mentor who taught them a lot early in their careers. I had never considered the Bourque connection. Hell, he even paired with Howe at his peak and then played with MacInnis when he was in his early prime.

I think Konstantinov and Suter said something similar about him. Probably one of the best defense mentors/leaders all time.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Question - when it comes to these superstar, super-high TOI players, what we usually see is that their regular partner ends up with lower minutes than they had. Usually by a good deal, when that partner is not typical #2 D caliber. The superstar #1 gets more shifts with defensemen other than that guy. So in the end you never end up seeing Bourque, for example, having a 0.9+ correlation with a guy like Sweeney. But logically, and just based on experience, the general practice is that even though the Bourque gets a lot of shifts without the Sweeney, the sweeney doesn't see a lot of shifts without the Bourque. Is there any way that these results can be looked at "in reverse" to see how effective they are?

For example, look at 1996-97. Bourque and McLaren have a 0.43 correlation, which we think means McLaren was his most frequent partner, but there are two others who really are not very far behind. For us to be more confident McLaren was indeed Bourque's most frequent partner, we would want to see an even stronger correlation for McLaren-Bourque than for Mclaren-anyone else. Right?

It makes sense when you think about it. Have to figure the partner isn't out there on the power play while the star is, and usually in the case of defensemen on the penalty kill as well.

Then with a guy like Bourque he was out there at the end of games no matter what protecting leads, gotta wonder if double shifting played into some of the minute differences.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This is awesome research. Well done @overpass

 

[overpass]

Question - when it comes to these superstar, super-high TOI players, what we usually see is that their regular partner ends up with lower minutes than they had. Usually by a good deal, when that partner is not typical #2 D caliber. The superstar #1 gets more shifts with defensemen other than that guy. So in the end you never end up seeing Bourque, for example, having a 0.9+ correlation with a guy like Sweeney. But logically, and just based on experience, the general practice is that even though the Bourque gets a lot of shifts without the Sweeney, the sweeney doesn't see a lot of shifts without the Bourque. Is there any way that these results can be looked at "in reverse" to see how effective they are?

For example, look at 1996-97. Bourque and McLaren have a 0.43 correlation, which we think means McLaren was his most frequent partner, but there are two others who really are not very far behind. For us to be more confident McLaren was indeed Bourque's most frequent partner, we would want to see an even stronger correlation for McLaren-Bourque than for Mclaren-anyone else. Right?

Yeah that would make sense, I can take a look at the partner's results. Although I'm not sure how useful I expect it to be, because I'm not confident that there's a meaningful difference when you get down to the 0 - 0.3 range. But let's try some of Bourque's partners.

1982-83: Randy Hillier - Bourque 0.76, Milbury 0.29, Kluzak 0.19
1983-84: Randy Hillier - Bourque 0.45, Lapointe 0.44 (45 GP), Kluzak 0.34
1984-85: John Blum - Thelin 0.54, Bourque 0.48, Curran 0.26
1985-86: Mike O'Connell - Bourque 0.42, Kluzak 0.38, Thelin 0.56 (31 GP)
1986-87: Mike Milbury - Bourque 0.68, Simonetti 0.60 (25 GP)
1987-88: Gord Kluzak - Bourque 0.75, Thelven 0.26, Larson 0.12
1988-89: Glen Wesley - Cote 0.54 (31 GP), Thelven 0.44 (40 GP), Bourque 0.38, Hawgood 0.19
1989-90: Jim Wiemer - Bourque 0.38, Hawgood 0.25, Sweeney 0.19
1990-91: Jim Wiemer - Bourque 0.40, Wesley 0.29, Sweeney 0.14
1991-92: Don Sweeney - Bourque 0.41, Murphy 0.32 (42 GP), Galley 0.29 (38 GP), Quintal 0.23 (49 GP)
1992-93: Gordie Roberts - Bourque 0.49, Featherstone 0.20 (34 GP)
1993-94: Don Sweeney - Bourque 0.65, Shaw 0.45, Roberts 0.19
1994-95: Don Sweeney - Bourque 0.80, Kasatonov 0.01
1995-96: Kyle MacLaren - Bourque 0.64, Zombo -0.09
1996-97: Kyle MacLaren - Bourque 0.43, Chynoweth 0.53, Sweeney 0.34
1997-98: Hal Gill - Bourque 0.71, Ellett 0.33, MacLaren 0.23

For the most part it appears to have been reciprocal, these guys were playing with someone else other than Bourque at times. Maybe 1994-95 and 1995-96 are the examples you’re looking for where Sweeney and then MacLaren played almost exclusively with Bourque, but I would hesitate to put weight on the difference between 0 and 0.2.

 

[quietbruinfan]

Using the game-by-game plus-minus correlation method I outlined here, I'm going to go through the careers of some of the great defencemen from 1960 to 2000 and identify who their defence partners were. Starting with the great Bobby Orr.

I'm bolding anything about 0.7 as more-or-less a full season partner. If there were other regular partners on the team, I'll put them in parentheses.

1966-67: Gilles Marotte 0.61, Dallas Smith 0.44, Bob Woytowich 0.42, Joe Watson 0.35, Ted Green 0.35
1967-68: Dallas Smith 0.30, Ted Green 0.23 (Awrey-Green 0.80)
1968-69: Dallas Smith 0.84 (Awrey-Green 0.81)
1969-70: Don Awrey 0.72, Gary Doak 0.41
1970-71: Dallas Smith 0.78 (Awrey-Green 0.77)
1971-72: Rick Smith 0.74, Don Awrey 0.44 (D. Smith - Green 0.84)
1972-73: Don Awrey 0.54, Dallas Smith 0.27 (Awrey-Vadnais 0.61)
1973-74: Al Sims 0.75, Daryl Edstrand 0.57 (D. Smith - Vadnais 0.74)
1974-75: Dallas Smith 0.56, Al Sims 0.51, Carol Vadnais 0.38

Comments:

• Orr's first two seasons were all over the place and it's hard to find a regular partner.
• Oddly enough, 1966-67 points to Gilles Marotte as Orr's most frequent partner. But Marotte finished the season a -41 and Orr a +1, so this doesn't make sense on the face of it. Why the high correlation? Well, in the games they both played, the plus-minus difference was "only" 33 (+3 and -30). They had the same plus-minus in 24 of 58 games, and were within 1 of each other in 46 of 58 games. In those 46 games Orr was -6 and Marotte was -16. 15 of the 33 point difference came from 3 games - Feb 16 against Montreal, Feb 25 against Chicago, and Mar 15 against Montreal, where Orr was a combined +7 and Marotte a combined -8. So maybe it's possible that Marotte played with Orr for some of the year and just happened to have a terrible plus-minus when he didn't. I don't know, it's a weird season.
• 1968-69 is probably Orr's closest season to having a full-time partner. After that, he was probably playing enough minutes that he would play with multiple partners on D even if he had a primary partner - which he usually did.
• In 1972-73, Orr appears to have mostly played with Dallas Smith in the first half of the season, and with Don Awrey in the secon half of the season. IN 1974-75, it looks like he started off with Al Sims and finished with Dallas Smith.

Now I'll take a look at maybe a more interesting question, which is how much did Orr's plus-minus correlate with Phil Esposito's? This should help give some insight into how much the two of them played together and relied on each other. For this part, I'll post the Esposito-Orr correlation first, and then the average correlation of Esposito with the other D-men next. If the Espo-Orr correlation was substantially higher than the average Espo-other D man correlation, we can conclude that Esposito and Orr played together and influenced each others results more than we would expect if ice time for forwards and defence were unrelated.

1967-68: Esposito-Orr 0.21, with others 0.43
1968-69: Esposito-Orr 0.52, with others 0.47
1969-70: Esposito-Orr 0.48, with others 0.47
1970-71: Esposito-Orr 0.53, with others 0.31
1971-72: Esposito-Orr 0.36, with others 0.37
1972-73: Esposito-Orr 0.63, with others 0.48
1973-74: Esposito-Orr 0.66, with others 0.32
1974-75: Esposito-Orr 0.70, with others 0.42

Here's how I interpret the numbers above. While Harry Sinden was coaching the Bruins (through 69-70), Orr and Esposito did not play any more together than you would expect from a #1 D and a #1 C who played the minutes they did. Esposito's plus-minus was not any more related to Orr's than it was to the other defencemen.

In 1970-71, Tom Johnson's first season coaching the team, he may have relied on the Orr-Esposito combination a bit more. This was the season when the Bruins blew the league away, statistically speaking, in the regular season, but were upset in the playoffs. The next season, 71-72, Johnson went back to the Sinden coaching pattern where Orr and Esposito were largely independent and didn't play together any unusual amount.

In 1972-73, things start to change. Suddenly in the final 3 seasons of the Orr-Espo combination, you start seeing correlations that are what you might see from semi-regular partners or linemates. And in fact, the 1972-73 season can be broken down further. In the first 52 games that Tom Johnson coached, the Espo-Orr correlation was 0.52 (0.59). In the last 26 games coached by Bep Guidolin, the correlation shot up to 0.76 (-0.08). Guidolin was also the coach for 73-74, and Don Cherry was the coach for 74-75. So it looks like Guidolin and Cherry relied on putting Esposito and Orr out together as much as possible, unlike Sinden and Johnson.

What does this mean? Well, it suggests that Orr and Esposito's individual numbers from 72-73 through 74-75 may have been a little inflated relative to their earlier seasons, because they relied on playing together more often to post those statistics.

Great work. I was just a little too young to have seen Orr live with the Bruins but have seen almost every available Youtube game and highlight. Your model is pretty accurate. Certain things stand out: Orr, like Bourque after him, played with a few people, breaking in rookies and newcomers like Sims, Smith and Ederstrand.
Know that I know next to nothing about statistics, so I cannot speak to your logic or methodology beyond what I have seen in said games and highlights. (I am sure your methodology is very rigorous and good, however.)
One thing though, being stars pp, and even pk would have a major impact on this. That may contradict your model a bit. For example, Vadnais played on the pp with Orr enough where there was a phrase to remember the d pairs. It's "Bob and Carol and Ted and Dallas" This was a paraphrase of a controversial movie of the time called "Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice." I do find your model more accurate. lol

As for Park's Bruin career, he did play a lot with Ratelle and even more with Middleton. (Here Park's propensity to play well more than half the game and most power plays with Ratelle, and Middleton, may skew things.) They were by far the three most skilled players on those Cherry lunch pail teams, so it stood out. Cherry got a lot of mileage out of playing those three together. ...
Another thought, Al Sims, was one seriously lucky player, as he played a considerable amount with both Park and Orr.

 

[overpass]

Larry Robinson

1973-74: Jacques Laperriere 0.45, Pierre Bouchard 0.43, Serge Savard 0.34 (Laperriere-Lapointe 0.74)
1974-75: Serge Savard 0.47, Pierre Bouchard 0.30, Don Awrey 0.29 (Bouchard-Lapointe 0.54)
1975-76: Pierre Bouchard 0.29, Serge Savard 0.27, Don Awrey 0.10 (Bouchard-Lapointe 0.56)
1976-77: Serge Savard 0.63, Pierre Bouchard 0.27, Guy Lapointe 0.25 (Bouchard-Lapointe 0.61)
1977-78: Bill Nyrop 0.47, Serge Savard 0.42, Guy Lapointe 0.36 (Nyrop-Lapointe 0.63, Bouchard-Lapointe 0.54)
1978-79: Serge Savard 0.66, Guy Lapointe 0,27 (Langway-Lapointe 0.57)
1979-80: Rod Langway 0.41, Guy Lapointe 0.41, Gilles Lupien 0.24
1980-81: Guy Lapointe 0.52 (33 GP), Serge Savard 0.51, Brian Engblom 0.46 (Langway-Engblom 0.58)
1981-82: Gilbert Delorme 0.69, Gaston Gingras 0.58 (34 GP), Guy Lapointe 0.40 (47 GP) (Langway-Engblom 0.89)
1982-83: Robert Picard 0.56, Ric Nattress 0.35 (40 GP), Craig Ludwig 0.32 (Ludwig-Green 0.51)
1983-84: Craig Ludwig 0.60, Kent Carlson 0.55 (Root-Hamel 0.78)
1984-85: Petr Svoboda 0.63, Craig Ludwig 0.28 (Kurvers-Chelios 0.81)
1985-86: Petr Svoboda 0.65, Gaston Gingras 0.53 in 34 GP, Chris Chelios 0.38 in 41 GP (Ludwig-Green 0.89, Kurvers-Chelios 0.76)
1986-87: Petr Svoboda 0.58, Gaston Gingras 0.28 (Chelios-Ludwig 0.55, Lalor-Green 0.54)
1987-88: Rick Green 0.51, Petr Svoboda 0.38, Mike Lalor 0.36
1988-89: Jyrki Lumme 0.63 in 21 GP, Petr Svoboda 0.40, Eric Desjardins 0.38 in 36 GP (Ludwig-Chelios 0.85)
1989-90: Brian Benning 0.78 in 48 GP, Tim Watters 0.35 (Laidlaw-Duchesne 0.57, Beck-McSorley 0.65)
1990-91: Marty McSorley 0.63, Steve Duchesne 0.29
1991-92: Darryl Sydor 0.60 (14 GP), Jeff Chychrun 0.53 (18 GP), Peter Ahola 0.24


Comments:

• Robinson never really had a full-time partner in any given season, he always played with multiple partners to some degree.
• Early in his career he got the benefit of playing with Serge Savard quite a bit, although he played with others too.
• In the early 80s, after Savard was gone and Lapointe was aging, Robinson tended to play with younger defencemen who were breaking into the league. I also read in his autobiography Robinson For the Defence that he played more right defence in this time, where he had previously played left defence.
• Robinson's late 80s resurgence corresponded with him getting a somewhat regular partner in the young Petr Svoboda

Did Robinson tend to play with the top forward on his team?

1973-74: Robinson-Mahovlich 0.45, others 0.53
1974-75: Robinson-Lafleur 0.67, others 0.47
1975-76: Robinson-Lafleur 0.38, others 0.27
1976-77: Robinson-Lafleur 0.55, others 0.46
1977-78: Robinson-Lafleur 0.45, others 0.23
1978-79: Robinson-Lafleur 0.50, others 0.48
1979-80: Robinson-Lafleur 0.57, others 0.44
1980-81: Robinson-Lafleur 0.58, others 0.41
1981-82: Robinson-Lafleur 0.33, others 0.32 (Langway-Lafleur was 0.51 and Engblom-Lafleur 0.45)
1982-83: Robinson-Lafleur 0.34, others 0.28
1983-84: Robinson-Lafleur 0.46, others 0.42
1984-85: Robinson-Naslund 0.40, others 0.30
1985-86: Robinson-Naslund 0.58, others 0.31
1986-87: Robinson-Naslund 0.53, others 0.17
1987-88: Robinson-B. Smith 0.42, others 0.31
1988-89: Robinson-Naslund 0.33, others 0.35
1989-90: Robinson-Gretzky 0.36, others 0.40 (Duchesne-Gretzky was 0.55)
1990-91: Robinson-Gretzky 0.32, others 0.38 (Duchesne-Gretzky was 0.53)
1991-92: Robinson-Gretzky 0.21, others 0.48 (Blake-Gretzky was 0.64)

And what about the top defensive forward, because Robinson played with a couple of the greats in Gainey and Carbonneau.

1973-74: Robinson-Gainey 0.30, others 0.39 (Laperriere-Gainey was 0.64)
1974-75: Robinson-Gainey 0.47, others 0.36 (Awrey-Gainey was 0.63)
1975-76: Robinson-Gainey 0.17, others 0.28
1976-77: Robinson-Gainey 0.46, others 0.44
1977-78: Robinson-Gainey 0.36, others 0.48 (Lapointe-Gainey was 0.66)
1978-79: Robinson-Gainey 0.37, others 0.38 (Lapointe-Gainey was 0.59)
1979-80: Robinson-Gainey 0.54, others 0.35 (Lapointe-Gainey was 0.51)
1980-81: Robinson-Gainey 0.55, others 0.34 (Savard-Gainey was 0.50)
1981-82: Robinson-Gainey 0.48, others 0.33
1982-83: Robinson-Gainey 0.44, others 0.33 (Ludwig-Gainey was 0.53)
1983-84: Robinson-Gainey 0.38, others 0.32 (Ludwig-Gainey was 0.46)
1984-85: Robinson-Gainey 0.34, others 0.22 (Chelios-Gainey was 0.45)
1985-86: Robinson-Gainey 0.32, others 0.32 (Chelios-Gainey was 0.47)
1986-87: Robinson-Carbonneau 0.19, others 0.27 (Lalor-Carbonneau was 0.57 and Green-Carbonneau was 0.47)
1987-88: Robinson-Carbonneau 0,23, others 0.31 (Ludwig-Carbonneau was 0.48)
1988-89: Robinson-Carbonneau 0.37, others 0.32 (Chelios-Carbonneau and Ludwig-Carbonneau were 0.42)
1989-90: Robinson-Kasper 0.26, others 0.32
1990-91: Robinson-Kasper 0.33, others 0.19


Let's say that playing more with top forwards like Lafleur and Naslund indicates more of an offensive role, and playing more with top checkers like Gainey and Carbonneau indicates a defensive role. In that case, Robinson started off in more of an offensive role. First Laperriere, then Awrey, then the Lapointe-Bouchard duo played more of a defensive role. Even in 1979-80, you would think a pairing of Robinson and Langway would be defensively focused, but they appear to have played more of an offensive role with Lafleur.

Through the early-mid 80s, Robinson played a bit less of an offensive role. Remember he was often babysitting young defencemen at this point. But he was also rarely playing the most defensive role on the team. Craig Ludwig, Chris Chelios, and/or Rick Green usually took that on.

When Robinson paired with Petr Svoboda starting in the mid 80s, they definitely had the most offensive role of the Montreal pairings. Robinson's stats probably bounced back in 85-86 in part because he got more of an offensive role at EV, in addition to more PP time.

And then Robinson was definitely in a defensive role with the Kings at the end of his career, not playing a lot with Gretzky.

Overall, I would say that Robinson tended to play offensive roles more than defensive roles during his career, which wasn't necessarily what I expected to find. He rarely played the most defensive role on his team (as estimated by the Lafleur-Gainey scale), usually that was someone else like Guy Lapointe, Craig Ludwig, or Chris Chelios.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

1993-94: Don Sweeney 0.65, Gordie Roberts 0.32, David Shaw 0.27
1994-95: Don Sweeney 0.80 (Rohloff-Shaw 0.62, Kasatonov-Gruden 0.57)

huh weird, i could have sworn i read an article after shaw landed in boston that shaw was partnered with bourque and was talked about as an ideal safe guy to pair with a puck rusher, having previously partnered with the young leetch. but maybe it was a short-lived partnership?

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm not a very emotive person...but man, I'm really into this...in almost an uncomfortable, irrational way haha

Just asking, not obligating, but is there any obvious way to do splits on this, overpass...? Home vs road, for instance? I believe there was a time where you could dress more players at home than on the road (the other way around?).

I wonder if we'll see more correlations after 1982 when we have the current game roster rules...

I also wonder a little bit about the variance of how teams dressed players...back in the 10+5 era, you had PK specialists more often than not. Back in the 70's, there were more "swing men" that played forward and defense. I wonder if using the existing TOI estimate spreadsheet, we could get a handle on who was dressing 10+5, or 9+6, 11+4 or whatever was going on, and that might strengthen some context here too...

 

[overpass]

Paul Coffey

1981-82: Garry Lariviere 0.81 (Lowe-Fogolin 0.83, Siltanen-Hicks 0.82, Siltanen-Huddy 0.73)
1982-83: Charlie Huddy 0.90 (Lowe-Fogolin 0.91, Gregg-Jackson 0.92)
1983-84: Charlie Huddy 0.89 (Lowe-Fogolin 0.89, Gregg-Jackson 0.87)
1984-85: Charlie Huddy 0.92 (Lowe-Fogolin 0.91, Gregg-Jackson 0.87)
1985-86: Charlie Huddy 0.82 (Lowe-Fogolin 0.81, Gregg-Jackson 0.66)
1986-87: Jeff Beukeboom 0.80 (26 GP together), Charlie Huddy 0.67 (Huddy-Beukeboom 0.80 in 25 GP, Smith-Fogolin 0.81 in 24 GP, Lowe-Muni 0.56)
1987-88: Ville Siren 0.75 in 39 GP, Randy Hillier 0.47 (Johnson-Buskas 0.67)
1988-89: Randy Hillier 0.83, Zarley Zalapski 0.38, Rod Buskas 0.36
1989-90: Randy Hillier 0.73, Jim Kyte 0.26 (Dahlquist-Dineen 0.60)
1990-91: Peter Taglianetti 0.76 (35 GP), Randy Hillier 0.54, Larry Murphy 0.33 (Stanton-Zalapski 0.68)
1991-92 (PIT): Paul Stanton 0.58, Ulf Samuelsson 0.52, Peter Taglianetti 0.44, Larry Murphy 0.36 (U. Samuelsson-Murphy 0.59)
1992-93 (LAK): Rob Blake 0.90 (Sydor-Huddy 0.74)
1993-94: Niklas Lidstrom 0.87 (Chiasson-Konstantinov 0.73, Howe-Carkner 0.91)
1994-95: Niklas Lidstrom 0.74 (Ramsey-Konstantinov 0.57)
1995-96: Marc Bergevin 0.74, Niklas Lidstrom 0.22 (Konstantinov-Fetisov 0.78, Lidstrom-Rouse 0.60, Ramsey-Rouse 0.52)
1996-97: Janne Niinimaa 0.60, Eric Desjardins 0.46
1997-98: Kjell Samuelsson 0.53, Janne Niinimaa 0.44, Petr Svoboda 0.40

Comments:

• Coffey did not have the Potvin, Bourque, Robinson type usage at all. He typically played with a full-time regular partner.
• I didn't realize this, but those Edmonton teams from 82-83 through 85-86 were historically stable and deep at defence, with the same 3 pairings playing consistently. It's not often mentioned about those teams but they really had a strong second and third pairing, especially when you look at the dreck on other team's third pairings in the 80s. It was very rare to have a stable third pairing at all, let alone one that wasn't a churn of short-career nobodies.
• I've hated on Paul Coffey for his awful defense for a long time in this section, going back to the top defencemen project over 10 years ago. I'm less impressed than ever after looking at this. The times in his career when he outperformed his teammates in plus-minus were: 1. 82-83 through 85-86, when he had a full-time HOVG partner in Huddy, Lowe-Fogolin taking the defensive duties, and even a rock-solid reliable third pairing in Gregg-Jackson, plus he got to play a lot with Wayne Gretzky, the greatest offensive player of all time. And 2. 1992-93 through 1994-95, when he was partnered with young future HHOFers in Rob Blake and Niklas Lidstrom.
• Pittsburgh had an absolutely putrid defence in the mid to late 80s. They brought Paul Coffey in to lift the whole unit, like Denis Potvin or Ray Bourque could do by elevating weaker players. Instead Coffey sank to their level and absolutely bled goals against without the strong partners and depth he had in Edmonton.
• In 1986-87, Coffey had to play with some other defencemen and didn't get as much time with Gretzky, and suddenly he dropped from +61 to +13. In 1995-96 he had to play with Marc Bergevin instead of Nicklas Lidstrom, and went from leading the team in +/- in his Norris-winning 1995 season to finishing a distant 4th among d-men in +/- on the dominant 1995-96 Detroit team. Again, it looks like Coffey's results really varied based on the quality of his defence partners.

Did Coffey tend to play with the top forward on his team? I admit these numbers are probably skewed by special teams SH goals because Coffey was probably on the ice for a lot of SH goals, especially SH goals for in Edmonton and SH goals against in Pittsburgh. Even so, I think it's reasonable to conclude he played an offensive role with more than his share of time with the top forwards, including the two greatest scorers of all time.

1981-82: Coffey-Gretzky 0.57, others-Gretzky 0.35
1982-83: Coffey-Gretzky 0.50, others-Gretzky 0.32
1983-84: Coffey-Gretzky 0.57, others-Gretzky 0.34
1984-85: Coffey-Gretzky 0.57, others-Gretzky 0.35
1985-86: Coffey-Gretzky 0.65, others-Gretzky 0.37 (Gretzky and Coffey combined for a lot of SH goals this year, so the EV only correlation would be a bit lower)
1986-87: Coffey-Gretzky 0.47, others-Gretzky 0.36 (Gregg-Gretzky was 0.63)
1987-88: Coffey-Lemieux 0.63, others 0.37
1988-89: Coffey-Lemieux 0.67, others 0.36
1989-90: Coffey-Lemieux 0.80, others 0.22
1990-91: Coffey-Lemieux 0.59 (only 26 GP), others 0.23. Coffey-Recchi 0.51, Zalapski-Recchi 0.59, others-Recchi 0.33
1991-92 (PIT): Coffey-Lemieux 0.53, others 0.44 (Murphy-Lemieux 0.55, Ulf Samuelsson-Lemieux 0.62)
1992-93 (LAK): Coffey-Gretzky 0.71, others 0.40
1993-94: Coffey-Fedorov 0.61, others 0.35. Coffey-Yzerman 0.61, others 0.33
1994-95: Coffey-Fedorov 0.46, others 0.19. Coffey-Yzerman 0.53, others 0.02.
1995-96: Coffey-Fedorov 0.24, others 0.38 (Konstantinov-Fedorov 0.55, Fetisov-Fedorov 0.66). Coffey-Yzerman 0.42, others 0.36 (Lidstrom-Yzerman 0.58, Rouse-Yzerman 0.52)
1996-97: Coffey-Lindros 0.84, others 0.32
1997-98: Coffey-Lindros 0.73, others 0.38

Comments:

• Yeah, Gretzky and Coffey played a lot together. Less so in Coffey's final season in Edmonton
• Coffey and Lemieux played a lot together as well. I really wish I could see the data with SH removed, but even so, look at 89-90. A correlation of 0.80 is what you would expect for regular defence partners or linemates! But in his last season in Pittsburgh, like his last season in Edmonton, it looks like Murphy-U. Samuelsson got more minutes with Lemieux and Coffey got less.
• Coffey also tended to get lots of time with Fedorov and Yzerman in his first two seasons in Detroit. In his 1995-96 season, he was paired with Marc Bergevin which looks like it was basically the third pairing behind Fetisov-Konstantinov and Lidstrom-Rouse. The Russian Five started to play together in this season, which you can see in the correlations of Fedorov with Konstantinov and Fetisov. Coffey appears to have played less with Fedorov and Yzerman, and probably more with the depth forwards in this season.
• Think about that - a reigning Norris trophy winner gets bumped to the third pairing to play with and against depth players. That was one deep Detroit team. And it continues the theme of Coffey getting less time with the stars in his final season before the team moves on from him.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

on Paul Coffey for his awful defense for a long time in this section, going back to the top defencemen project over 10 years ago. I'm less impressed than ever after looking at this. The times in his career when he outperformed his teammates in plus-minus were: 1. 82-83 through 85-86, when he had a full-time HOVG partner in Huddy, Lowe-Fogolin taking the defensive duties, and even a rock-solid reliable third pairing in Gregg-Jackson, plus he got to play a lot with Wayne Gretzky, the greatest offensive player of all time. And 2. 1992-93 through 1994-95, when he was partnered with young future HHOFers in Rob Blake and Niklas Lidstrom.

this is very interesting. although i don’t think being paired with young rob blake is doing coffey any favours defensively.

the other thing that stands out to me is coffey usually played the right side right? with huddy, and later with lidstrom. but in LA he pairs with blake and moves to the other side with no apparent effect, at least statistically.

also here’s a nice recounting of the huddy/coffey partnership, nested in an article about justin schultz—

Coffey and Huddy found each other a few years before the first Stanley Cup in 1984. It turned into a five-year marriage before it was broken up when Coffey was traded to Pittsburgh in 1987.

How did Huddy, who had to spent time in the minors as a free-agent signee when he was undrafted, wind up with the best skating D-man this side of Bobby 0rr, when he got to Edmonton?

“Gretz would say it was because nobody wanted to play with me,” laughed Coffey.

“I remember when Slats (coach Glen Sather) put us together, I walked into the dressing room and said ‘Charlie, I’ve got some good news and some bad news.’ The good news is you’re playing tonight, the bad news is you’re playing with me.’

“I do remember one day we were practising at Father Bonner Arena, freezing our butts off and Slats was there skating around in a fur coat,” said Coffey. “Charlie had just come up from Wichita and you could tell from the first practice that he belonged. Then the next day there was a picture of Charlie in the paper…he was sitting on top of a net and the headline said ‘Charlie Who?’ ’’ recalled Coffey, who won three Norris trophies and had 1,531 career points in 1,409 games.

“Took a few games with us and everybody knew who Charlie was. He was the perfect complement for me. Believe it or not, he used to sing to me when I’d carry the puck around the net. He’d sing, ‘you can dance if you want to…’ We had a lot of fun.’’.

“What Coff’s forgetting to tell you is when Charlie first came up he said ‘I’ll go stand in front of the net and you go work both corners,’ ’’ joked Mark Messier.

“I knew my role, I knew Coff’s game. I knew my spot to make Coff’s game better,” said Huddy, now an assistant coach in Winnipeg.

What was his role? To stay back?

“Yeah, pretty much,” chortled Huddy.

“Coff got a lot of knocks but you know what? He got back pretty quickly.”

That was because Huddy was yelling at Huddy, right?

“Exactly,” kidded Huddy.

“I pretty much took for granted that Coff was going up the right side of the ice. He’d go around the net (building up speed) and away he’d go. That was his strength and it helped us win a lot of games,” said Huddy.

Coffey, Huddy were a dream team for Edmonton Oilers during team's Stanley Cup glory years

Justin Schultz, who was wooed by Hall of Famer Paul Coffey before signing here as a college free-agent, is still looking for his battery mate — a new era Charlie Huddy to watch his back while he takes flight with the puck as Coffey did here. It’s one of the continuing stories with the current...

edmontonjournal.com

 

[overpass]

I'm not a very emotive person...but man, I'm really into this...in almost an uncomfortable, irrational way haha

Just asking, not obligating, but is there any obvious way to do splits on this, overpass...? Home vs road, for instance? I believe there was a time where you could dress more players at home than on the road (the other way around?).

I wonder if we'll see more correlations after 1982 when we have the current game roster rules...

I also wonder a little bit about the variance of how teams dressed players...back in the 10+5 era, you had PK specialists more often than not. Back in the 70's, there were more "swing men" that played forward and defense. I wonder if using the existing TOI estimate spreadsheet, we could get a handle on who was dressing 10+5, or 9+6, 11+4 or whatever was going on, and that might strengthen some context here too...

Yeah I could do home vs road. I was thinking the same thing today, that home/road would be interesting to check, but unfortunately I didn't keep the home/road marker when I was copying the data into Excel. I'll keep posting the data for some of the stars and then I'll come back and check home/road for some. Let me know who you would like to see home/road splits for first.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Guys that played for smart coaches, primarily. Blake guys, Bowman guys, Arbour guys, Lemaire guys, Nielsen guys...take your choice or others can. I wouldn't mind seeing anyone of note, in their prime, that played under those coaches...

 

[McGarnagle]

Randy Hillier is a guy who is pretty much forgotten, I never hear his name at all anywhere, but it's fascinating to see in data form that he was the primary partner for multiple seasons for both Bourque and Coffey in the 80s. Was he regarded as a reliable stay-at-home defenseman?

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

the other thing that stands out to me is coffey usually played the right side right?

No, he usually played the left, but typically in reality played all over the ice. When Jaroslav Pouzar skated with Gretzky and Kurri on the left side he spent most of his time hanging back covering for Coffey's o-zone rushes.