Players with inflated goal totals due to PP

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by reckoning, Apr 24, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. reckoning

    reckoning Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,265
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    111
    All goals count the same, but it`s obviously easier to score on a power-play than at even-strength or shorthanded; so if two guys had the same goal totals, but one played often on the power play while the second one rarely did, you could argue that the second player was actually a better goal scorer. So, I decided to take the top 100 goal scoers in NHL history (minus defencemen and pre-expansion guys) and see who had the highest percentage of their goals on the power play.

    Players who most relied on the power play:

    1. Dave Andreychuk .426
    2. Brian Bellows .408
    3. Tim Kerr .405
    4. Dino Ciccarelli .382
    5. Luc Robitaille .374
    6. Keith Tkachuk .374
    7. Joe Nieuwendyk .373
    8. Pierre Turgeon .372
    9. Steve Larmer .367
    10. Phil Esposito .365

    I was sure Tim Kerr would finish first before I started this. Figured Andreychuk would be near the top but didn`t think Bellows would be so high. I always felt Ciccarelli and Tkachuk were overrated so I`m not surprised to see them here but I`m shocked to see Steve Larmer on the list. Anyways look at those players and what do most of them have in common?

    Lack of playoff success. Those guys account for over 150 NHL seasons yet only have 9 Cup rings (and that`s counting Nieuwendyk`s in `03 even though he didn`t play in the Final). No one player wins or loses a series himself, but you have to wonder when a pattern emerges over a career:

    Andrechuk- 17 playoff years- 10 first round eliminations
    Tkachuk- 11 playoff years- 9 first round eliminations
    Turgeon- 14 playoff years- 10 first round eliminations

    Not exactly team clutch. Maybe at playoff pool time, it might be good to avoid taking forwards who have most of their success on the power play. Anyways on the flip side.

    Players who least relied on the power play:

    1. Butch Goring .189
    2. Jean Pronovost .217
    3. Stephane Richer .221
    4. Steve Shutt .224
    5. Peter McNab .226
    6. Wayne Gretzky .228
    7. Reggie Leach .231
    8. Gary Roberts .242
    9. Jacques Lemaire .243
    10. Bill Barber .248

    Goring was incredible. 375 goals while playing most of his career on a second line/checking line; didn`t get a lot of PP time due to being behind Dionne in L.A. and Trottier in Long Island. In contrast to the first list, these players (except Pronovost) had great success in the playoffs: 26 Stanley Cups.

    There`s two players each from Montreal and Philadelphia`s great 70s teams, as well as an 80s Edmonton player( Kurri was #11). Those teams were lethal on the power play, but always ranked near the bottom of the league in power play opportunities. It could`ve been that referees were giving their opponents a break when the score got out of hand.

    Finally about Gretzky; he`s the only guy on that list who was among the top 50 scorers. If being the top scorer of all-time wasn`t enough, he did it with less reliance on the power play than any other top 50 guys. If you took away all his power play goals, he`d still have more than 650 goals.

    Comments, complaints, questions?
     
  2. Habsfan 32

    Habsfan 32 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    6,316
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Way up north...
    Nice work!!
     
  3. signalIInoise

    signalIInoise killed by signal 2

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,857
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    Latveria
    Interesting. For what it's worth, I'm not trying to crap on your data, but I'm of the opinion that a goal is a goal is a goal.

    Sure, it may be a little easier to score on the PP, but at the same time, it's a lot easier to score on some goalies than others, too. A goal against Hasek or Roy doesn't count for more than a goal against Raycroft or DiPietro.

    In a way, discounting PP goals reminds me of hold-em players that complain about losing on the river card. The river is part of hold-em, and PP is part of hockey.
     
  4. reckoning

    reckoning Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,265
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    111
    I understand what you`re saying, a goal counts the same no matter how it`s scored and I agree. It`s just that someone who`s getting a lot of points without playing on the power play much probably deserves more credit.

    Also a lot of the guys who are great on the power play but ordinary at even strength lose some of their value at playoff time when the referees don`t give out as many power plays
     
  5. silver_made*

    silver_made* Guest

    Being able to finish when it is expected of you is what makes good players. i've seen some teams play better defensive hockey down a man than at even strength.
     
  6. signalIInoise

    signalIInoise killed by signal 2

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,857
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    Latveria
    I understand your concept, and it may be correct. I'm not sure whether I buy into the concept that PP goals are necessarily easier to get than even strength, though. It could be that it is, or, on the other hand, since the opposing players are working almost exclusively on defense, it might actually be a bit more difficult. Having never played in the NHL, I don't know what it's like at that level.

    I am reasonably sure, though, that it's much more difficult to be scored against when you're on the power play. ;)
     
  7. Ogopogo*

    Ogopogo* Guest

    Good work but, I agree with signal.

    A goal is a goal. Powerplay, shorthanded, even strength, empty net - they all count for one on the scoreboard. In my eyes, they are all equal, you still have to put the puck in the net.

    Although, it is interesting to see these numbers, it doesn't make me think any less of Dino Ciccarelli or Tim Kerr.
     
  8. pei fan

    pei fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't have the stats but it's pretty obvious that teams score more goals per
    minute of icetime on the powerplay than they do at even strength.Sometimes
    you don't even see scoring unless it's on the powerplay.I think it's an objective fact that powerplay goals are easier to score.That's the whole idea of penalties isn't it?
     
  9. KariyaIsGod*

    KariyaIsGod* Guest

    Where are chooch and Kovalev10?

    Gretzky relied on PPs to score... He played with Messier on the PP which inflated his numbers?

    Yeah, OK guys... :shakehead
     
  10. signalIInoise

    signalIInoise killed by signal 2

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,857
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    Latveria
    I don't want to argue semantics, but I think that as much as penalties are for enhancing the other teams ability to score, it is as much about reducing your teams ability to score. It's a shift in the balance of power, true, but far from a gimme.

    I don't think that it's easier to score per-se -- but since your defensive responsibilities are reduced, you're given more opportunities to score.
     
  11. KOVALEV10*

    KOVALEV10* Guest

    So scoring over 230 goals on the powerplay isnt enough?
     
  12. Guest

    Guest Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Messages:
    5,564
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    141
    I think it's an interesting concept to consider. A goal is a goal, but not everything is cut and dry. If some players are great at scoring on the powerplay and contribute little elsewhere, you would consider them a powerplay specialist, not just an average player or a goal scorer for that matter if they don't score in even man situations. If a goal is a goal, then take out any considerations for what people call "clutch scorers", because after all a goal is a goal, it doesn't matter what time of the game it is scored based on that logic.

    I'm going to research a few numbers and come back with some contribution to this thread, because I find it interesting.
     
  13. Guest

    Guest Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Messages:
    5,564
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    141
    For the 2004 Stanley Cup Finals, if you take the top 6 goal scorers who made the final 4 and compare how they performed during the regular season:
    Code:
    			Regular Season			Playoffs	
    Player			Goals	PPG	% of PPG		Goals
    Jarome Iginla, CGY		41	8	0.20		13
    Brad Richards, TB		26	5	0.19		12
    Ruslan Fedotenko, TB	17	0	0.00		12
    Martin St. Louis, TB	38	8	0.21		9
    V. Lecavalier, TB		32	5	0.16		9
    Keith Primeau, PHI		7	0	0.00		9
    
    The top playoff goal scorers had little more than 20% of their regular season goal total inflated by powerplay goals.

    Further examination shows that most of the top playoff goal scorers who made the Conference finals rely on PP goals less overall. Mark Recchi being the major anomoly, and he's just a pure scorer in the regular season or playoffs.
    Code:
    			Regular Season			Playoffs	
    Player			Goals	PPG	% of PPG		Goals
    Jarome Iginla, CGY		41	8	0.20		13
    Brad Richards, TB		26	5	0.19		12
    Ruslan Fedotenko, TB	17	0	0.00		12
    Martin St. Louis, TB	38	8	0.21		9
    V. Lecavalier, TB		32	5	0.16		9
    Keith Primeau, PHI		7	0	0.00		9
    Patrick Marleau, SJ		28	9	0.32		8
    Fredrik Modin, TB		29	5	0.17		8
    Simon Gagne, PHI		24	6	0.25		5
    Mark Recchi, PHI		26	14	0.54		4
    J. Cheechoo, SJ		28	8	0.29		4
    Cory Stillman, TB		25	11	0.44		2
     
  14. KariyaIsGod*

    KariyaIsGod* Guest

    And yet, he relied on it to boost his totals less that Mario or Guy...
     
  15. KOVALEV10*

    KOVALEV10* Guest

    Perecentage yes but not total number of goals.
     
  16. sparr0w

    sparr0w Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    16,406
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    114
    Umm... percentages are the only things you can compare if the end totals are different.
     
  17. Snap Wilson

    Snap Wilson Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,838
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Take a look at your top and bottom lists again, and you'll see another correlation (besides playoff performance). The list of players is dramatically impacted by the time in which they played. The 90s was more reliant on power play goal scoring than the 70s and 80s.

    Year Goals PPG PPG%
    1968 2476 491 19.8%
    1969 2718 550 20.2%
    1970 2649 663 25.0%
    1971 3409 752 22.1%
    1972 3348 731 21.8%
    1973 4088 780 19.1%
    1974 3989 786 19.7%
    1975 4932 1157 23.5%
    1976 4913 1186 24.1%
    1977 4783 971 20.3%
    1978 4747 971 20.5%
    1979 4757 1046 22.0%
    1980 5902 1286 21.8%
    1981 6457 1607 24.9%
    1982 6741 1537 22.8%
    1983 6493 1492 23.0%
    1984 6627 1547 23.3%
    1985 6530 1497 22.9%
    1986 6667 1715 25.7%
    1987 6165 1516 24.6%
    1988 6237 1861 29.8%
    1989 6286 1778 28.3%
    1990 6189 1599 25.8%
    1991 5805 1493 25.7%
    1992 6123 1700 27.8%
    1993 7311 2081 28.5%
    1994 7081 1975 27.9%
    1995 3727 964 25.9%
    1996 6701 1927 28.8%
    1997 6216 1422 22.9%
    1998 5624 1491 26.5%
    1999 5830 1533 26.3%
    2000 6306 1496 23.7%
    2001 6782 1877 27.7%
    2002 6442 1601 24.9%
    2003 6530 1787 27.4%
    2004 6318 1717 27.2%

    (Hope that winds up looking right)

    There has also been a change in philosophy over the years, with star players being conserved at even strength and playing a greater percentage of the time on the PP to maximise scoring opportunities.
     
  18. KariyaIsGod*

    KariyaIsGod* Guest

    Exactly....
     
  19. reckoning

    reckoning Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,265
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Gretzky (.228) and Lafleur (.273) didn`t really rely on the power play much; however Lemieux did towards his later years: `85-`93- .310, `94-`04- .413.

    In case anyone`s interested:

    Most Power Play Goals since 1967-68

    1. Dave Andreychuk 270
    2. Brett Hull 265
    3. Luc Robitaille 244
    4. Phil Esposito 235
    5. Marcel Dionne 234
    6. Mario Lemieux 233
    7. Dino Ciccarelli 232
    8. Mike Gartner 217
    9. Joe Nieuwendyk 206
    10. Wayne Gretzky 204

    Most Shorthanded Goals since 1967-68

    1. Wayne Gretzky 73
    2. Mark Messier 63
    3. Steve Yzerman 50
    4. Mario Lemieux 49
    5. Butch Goring 40
    6. Dave Poulin 39
    7. Jari Kurri 37
    8. Dirk Graham 35
    8. Theoren Fleury 35
    10. Derek Sanderson 34
    10. Pavel Bure 34

    Interesting mix of offensive and defensive minded forwards.

    Most Even Strength Goals since 1967-68

    1. Wayne Gretzky 617
    2. Marcel Dionne 478
    3. Mike Gartner 468
    4. Brett Hull 456
    5. Mark Messier 452
    6. Steve Yzerman 430
    7. Jari Kurri 414
    8. Luc Robitaille 406
    9. Guy Lafleur 404
    10. Mario Lemieux 401

    The gap between Gretzky and #2 is bigger than the gap between #2 and #10. Impressive.
     
  20. MS

    MS 1%er

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    25,475
    Likes Received:
    5,394
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    I don't really see the correlation that much. 6 of those 10 guys have won Cups, and Niewendyk, Larmer, and Esposito were huge clutch performers. Of the 4 guys who didn't win Cups, Ciccarelli and Kerr were also huge in the playoffs. Only Turgeon and Tkachuk have really been playoff flops, and Andreychuk early in his career.
     
  21. GB

    GB Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2002
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    UK
    I think you have to consider that generally a player is on the powerplay because he is a good scorer, so a player with less PP minutes could be considered not as good, because he wasn't relied on to score on the powerplay. I'm not saying it is so, but it's something to be considered. Interesting as the numbers are I will never believe that Stephane Richer was a better scorer than Phil Esposito, however, the stats for Goring are very interesting.
     
  22. reckoning

    reckoning Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,265
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Trust me, I`m not trying to imply that Richer was a better scorer than Esposito based on those charts, just that it`s a small factor to consider. For example, at first glance Bellows 485 goals looks much better than Goring`s 375, but remove PP and it`s Bellows- 287, Goring- 304. Not proof that Bellows wasn`t better, just that the gap might not be as big as it looks.

    And yes, the guys who are on the PP are there because they`re great scorers, but there`s other guys who are good too but not getting much PP time due to circumstances. Gary Roberts put up some good even-strength totals during his first five or six years with Calgary, but when you`ve got Mullen, Gilmour, Nieuwendyk, Loob, Fluery etc. on the team it`s hard to find a spot for him on the power play.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"