Is there a stat that reflects the value of defensive defencemen?

[CaptainChef]

Forwards have stats that reflect their offensive prowess. Goalies have save %.

Not so much interested in offensive defencemen as goals/assists reflects part of their value. What I was wondering is whether there is any stat that reveals how good a defensive defenceman is playing?

Click to read more...

 

[HanSolo]

Basic ones are TOI, blocked shots, and takeaways.+/- relative to team +/-

 

[Bee Sheriff]

Relating a defenseman's +/- to his teammates and checking his possession metrics. Takeaways are good, blocked shots.

Basic ones are TOI, blocked shots, and takeaways.+/- relative to team +/-

TOI is another great one, forgot about that. It doesn't exactly show his "defensive prowess" but it shows how much his team relies on him, which can link to the former.

 

[HanSolo]

Exactly my point. A high TOI on a **** team won't be as impressive but it at least shows reliability.

Relating a defenseman's +/- to his teammates and checking his possession metrics. Takeaways are good, blocked shots.

Possession won't say everything. You could have a defender be adept at stripping forwards of the puck and quickly clearing the zone

Or you could have a Karlsson who tries to hold onto the puck forever

 

[Bee Sheriff]

Possession won't say everything. You could have a defender be adept at stripping forwards of the puck and quickly clearing the zone

Or you could have a Karlsson who tries to hold onto the puck forever

Well "possession stats" is a weird term because it usually refers to stats like Corsi/Fenwick but those don't measure how long a team holds onto a puck, more just how many less shots the other team gets in a game. I think Takeaways hold the most value of anything.

 

[thom]

Block shots are a myth-LA kINGS won a cup despite having least amount of shot blocks

 

[castle]

zone entry stats could be an interesting one to use.

 

[TOML]

Coaches already deploy their guys in the situations they are best at, so just look at minutes played to figure out who the best ones in the league are.

TOI/GP and SH TOI/GP

Suter
Doughty
Weber
Josi
OEL
Keith
AP

If you want 'defense only', just note low pp times.

Marc Staal
Willie Mitchell
Chris Phillips
Denis Seidenberg
Brooks Orpik
Niklas Hjalmarsson
Alexei Emelin
Jan Hejda

Voilà! Your who's-who of who the best 'defensive' d-men are in the NHL.

Then pick your individual stats to suit whatever you think makes them deployed this way. Hits? Block-shots? Takeaways? 'Advanced' stats? Whatever.

 

[Bee Sheriff]

zone entry stats could be an interesting one to use.

Not for a defenseman. You don't really want the guy who's supposed to be behind the play being the one who is the first to enter. Measuring how many breakout passes they make can be good though.

 

[TOML]

Block shots are a myth-LA kINGS won a cup despite having least amount of shot blocks

Wut? In the last playoffs they blocked the 2nd-most and the Rangers blocked the most.

They also hit the most and were 300+ hits above the Rangers at 2nd-most.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

GA/60 would be my criteria, because it avoid the offensive side of the equation with +/-. It also avoid putting guys who log big offensive roles (aka - Karlsson, Green) and evaluating them based on TOI.

Obviously - it's not a perfect stat because pretty much all defense related stats are impacted by team defensive structure and the quality of the goalie.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Basic ones are TOI, blocked shots, and takeaways.+/- relative to team +/-

Why are high blocked shot totals good?

 

[castle]

Not for a defenseman. You don't really want the guy who's supposed to be behind the play being the one who is the first to enter. Measuring how many breakout passes they make can be good though.

these are also calculated for opposition zone entry success against particular defenders. in this case, the defenseman is playing defense, in that they don't have possession, and are attempting to deny the other team entry.

 

[Hammer Time]

Assuming the coach knows what he is doing, you can also look at ES and PK ice time, and quality of competition. (That technically doesn't measure defensive ability, just how good your coach thinks you are at defence)

On-ice goals against and shots against per minute would be the most direct, but you have to take teammates and role into account.

If you have access to zone entry stats (they're not publicly tracked, as far as I know), then dump-in percentage against (i.e. how often you get the opposing forward to dump the puck instead of being able to carry it in) would be an even better stat. Forcing more dump-ins is good because it means you're not allowing a lot of players to come in off the rush when you can normally get a good scoring chance.

You can also look at team defence stats. If you play a ton of minutes for a team that gives up very few goals or shots against (e.g. Ryan Suter), you're probably great defensively.

 

[Connor McJesus]

Wins.

 

[Hockey Monkey]

Blocked shots and hits correlate with being a worse hockey player, not a better one.

Useful useage stats are TOI and zone starts; competition quality to a lesser extent. Possession stats and zone movement really tell how good at defending a player is: the more you contribute to your team having the puck the more you're preventing the other team from scoring. Similarly, if most of your zone starts are in your zone and most of your shifts end with your team in the other end, you're probably a pretty excellent defender.

 

[Paul4587]

Why are high blocked shot totals good?

On the PK and in the defensive zone blocking shots is a good thing even if it means you don't have the puck. Even the best possession players/ teams don't have the puck 40% of the time.

Blocked shots and hits correlate with being a worse hockey player, not a better one.

Ryan Getzlaf disagrees with that - he has a ton of blocked shots and is generally up there in hits (he's not hitting as much in recent years though). Again even the best players spend time in the defensive zone and when they're there blocking shots is a good thing.

 

[eklunds source]

Basic ones are TOI, blocked shots, and takeaways.+/- relative to team +/-

Blocked Shots is not a good metric. There is a negative correlation between blocked shots and winning - good teams don't block many shots, because they don't give up many shots in the first place. Don't get me started on how useless +/- is. It is atrocious and not only doesn't provide USEFUL information, it actually sometimes provides incorrect information.

Well "possession stats" is a weird term because it usually refers to stats like Corsi/Fenwick but those don't measure how long a team holds onto a puck, more just how many less shots the other team gets in a game. I think Takeaways hold the most value of anything.

JP Nikota at PensionPlanPuppets used a wristwatch and tracked how often the Maple Leafs had the puck in the offensive zone, and he tracked how often the other team had the puck in the Leafs' zone. This is how "time with puck possession" and "corsi" line up:

When people say "corsi", yes, it means shot attempts for/against, but we use it because it correlates very strongly with actually having the puck. If your team has a Corsi of 45%, they almost assuredly controlled the puck roughly 45% of the time.

Also, I would like takeaways to be useful, but the way the NHL tracks real time stats, it's just not worthwhile.

Wut? In the last playoffs they blocked the 2nd-most and the Rangers blocked the most.

They also hit the most and were 300+ hits above the Rangers at 2nd-most.

Well, they played 6+ games more than any other team, so I'm not surprised both teams were 1st and 2nd in counting. I mean, Los Angeles and the Rangers were both dead last in goals against! How on Earth did they make the cup finals?!

When you average it out per game, though, LA was 12th of 16 playoff teams.

On the PK and in the defensive zone blocking shots is a good thing even if it means you don't have the puck. Even the best possession players/ teams don't have the puck 40% of the time.

Perhaps the best measure, then, is "what percentage of shots opponents took were blocked" - players who have a metric **** ton of shots against (Gorges) would be penalized, and players with very few shots against (but still relatively high blocked shots) would benefit.

 

[The Macho King]

I'd look at zone starts relative to Corsi. If someone has a 48% Corsi/Fenwick but starts 55% of their shifts in the Dzone, that's not bad at all.

 

[Menzinger]

When a player blocks a lot of shots - it means the other team tends to possess the puck more when they're on the ice

 

[The Macho King]

When a player blocks a lot of shots - it means the other team tends to possess the puck more when they're on the ice

Shot blocking is a skill, though. Hence Fenwick.

 

[zeke]

defensive dmen are kinda useless.

good defense comes from good team systems.

 

[PenguinMario]

Shot blocking is a skill, though. Hence Fenwick.

It's a skill that can only be extensively showcased if you are worse at playing hockey than your opponents. Not useful.

See also, takeaways.

 

[HanSolo]

Silly me. I didn't realize blocking a shot isn't a good individual defensive play. I thought we were discussing individual level traits here not defensive systems.

One defenseman having to put up with many shots against because the overall system isn't strong does not make the individual defenseman any less adept at defense. Discrediting the act of stopping a shot before it can reach the goalie because of what it means in the context of the way a team is playing, is frankly asinine. It's like blaming one employee for a corporation's illegal activities.

 

[The Macho King]

It's a skill that can only be extensively showcased if you are worse at playing hockey than your opponents. Not useful.

See also, takeaways.

Unless you expect a player to have 100% Corsi, there is going to be a time when the puck is in the defensive zone. A blocked shot does not end in the net - preventing shots from going in the net is important to being a good defensive player.