Wendelstache
Registered User
- May 5, 2010
- 9,846
- 3,758
They do when an agenda is trying to be pushed.
Someone posted this the other day:
At first glance it looks pretty impressive but what do things look like if we don't count the power play?
To make a long story short of the top 50 scorers in the league Nylander is 3rd in power play scoring per minute but 42nd in even strength scoring per minute.
If we divide the pp rate by the even strength rate Nylander is the 3rd best power play specialist in the league which isn't really a good thing.
Nylander October-January:
48 games
10 goals - 5 on the PP
22 assists - 10 on the PP
31 points - 15 of on the PP (48%)
0.64 points per game (53 / 82 games)
Nylander February-April + playoffs
39 games
13 goals - 4 on the PP
20 assists - 7 on the PP
34 points - 11 on the PP (35%)
0.87 points per game (71.4 / 82 games)
So the chart showed Willie had more PP points than Crosby despite Crosby had played more than 100PP mind. That's pretty good
Can I turn this into a Kessel thread?
Just 4 less points in 100 less minutes. He easily replaces Kessel.
As to the question, not basing this on anything but my old eye test, but yes I think he will be our power play specialist in that I think his game changing abilities benefit with more room. Not selling his Even strength play short, but his shot is deadly from anywhere and his play making, skating explode with the extra room.
Give him more ice time on the PP. but who do you take it away from?
They count the same, but 5v5 production is more reliable, because PP time/opportunities are not consistent and depend on Refs.
There are 60 minutes of 5v5 in a game except for specialty time (penalties called) but that is not consistent nor reliable. What happens if a Ref doesn't call any penalties in a game, and thus impact PP points by players that are most productive when a man up?
So while PP points are great, even strength points are more dependable in that regard and therefore ideally ES > PP.
Matthews scoring 32 ES goals (only 8 PP) makes him a more effective than a player that relies more heavily on PP time to be productive. Naz scored 12 of his 32 goals on the PP last year so that leaves 20 at ES.
The reality is that Nylander scores at a RATE of 4.3 times on the PP vs even strength, that's not a good thing. Here are some other notables (unfortunately we need numbers).
I try to stay away from numbers as it confuses a lot of people around here but Mess gets it.
The **** is with this guy and his blind hatred of Nylander? He doesn't even get that he's presenting stats that harm his own pathetic agenda.
Can't wait for his next thread, "Why Nylander belongs in the AHL".
Nylander is the 3rd best power play specialist in the league which isn't really a good thing.
What the hell am I reading?!