Rank These Centers Defensively

decma

Registered User
Feb 6, 2013
742
375
I think there's some value in the goals against data, but there's a fair amount of context that needs to be considered.

I agree completely. That's why I said the raw GA data were a start.

Let's look at Modano and Turgeon. ... So their personal GAA's were 1.51 for Modano, and 1.72 for Turgeon.

Yes, for 98 on it should be per ES minute rather than per game, which is what I introduced in a thread last year. I didn't have the time today to run the ice time numbers for all 11 players listed in the OP, but I suspect that with ice time taken into account, Oates will still be at or near the bottom, Modano will still be near the top, and Turgeon will still be above average (or at least far from the bottom, which is where everyone else in this thread has him).

and we haven't even talked about matchups yet.

Yes, let's please talk about matchups.

If Dal has a vested interest in matching Modano up against the other team's top line then, all else equal, the other team has a vested interest in avoiding that matchup (and, instead, putting their top line against Turgeon's line). So when Dal is at home we would expect Modano to have a disporportionate share of his ES ice time come against better offensive players, and when Dal is at home we would expect the opposite.

This is, of course, purely theoretical. But I have not seen any evidence to the contrary (that is, I have not seen any evidence that Modano had a higher share of his ice time against more offensively gifted players than did other top line Cs).
 

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,034
13,860
I agree completely. That's why I said the raw GA data were a start.



Yes, for 98 on it should be per ES minute rather than per game, which is what I introduced in a thread last year. I didn't have the time today to run the ice time numbers for all 11 players listed in the OP, but I suspect that with ice time taken into account, Oates will still be at or near the bottom, Modano will still be near the top, and Turgeon will still be above average (or at least far from the bottom, which is where everyone else in this thread has him).



Yes, let's please talk about matchups.

If Dal has a vested interest in matching Modano up against the other team's top line then, all else equal, the other team has a vested interest in avoiding that matchup (and, instead, putting their top line against Turgeon's line). So when Dal is at home we would expect Modano to have a disporportionate share of his ES ice time come against better offensive players, and when Dal is at home we would expect the opposite.

This is, of course, purely theoretical. But I have not seen any evidence to the contrary (that is, I have not seen any evidence that Modano had a higher share of his ice time against more offensively gifted players than did other top line Cs).

Sounds good, we can dig into further details over the next few days.

One thing that surprised me was Oates' numbers. I wouldn't say he was great defensively (he benefited from the perception that a centre who's good at face-offs must be good defensively - as did Joe Nieuwendyk). But my impression is he was usually above average. I wonder if additional context (amount of icetime and/or quality of team) would shed some light on it.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,237
2,666
Yes, let's please talk about matchups.

If Dal has a vested interest in matching Modano up against the other team's top line then, all else equal, the other team has a vested interest in avoiding that matchup (and, instead, putting their top line against Turgeon's line). So when Dal is at home we would expect Modano to have a disporportionate share of his ES ice time come against better offensive players, and when Dal is at home we would expect the opposite.

This is, of course, purely theoretical. But I have not seen any evidence to the contrary (that is, I have not seen any evidence that Modano had a higher share of his ice time against more offensively gifted players than did other top line Cs).

I think it’s pretty well documented that Ken Hitchcock used Modano as a matchup centre against top lines. From Craig Custance’s book about coaches, the section on Ken Hitchcock:

Before the 1996–97 season, the Stars coaching staff decided they were going to start playing Modano exclusively against the other team’s best players, rather than trying to get him favorable matchups against second or third lines.

Their thought process was simple: they liked their star player better than the other star players in the league at that time. They thought he could win that battle or at least play to a draw. The rest of the lineup in Dallas was so deep, they reasoned, the Stars could grind their opponents down.

“We were going to bite the bullet and he was going to play Mark Messier, Wayne Gretzky, whoever Mike had to play against,” Hitchcock says.

Modano had to improve defensively to play that role.

Modano had to change the way he played. Until that point, he liked to constantly be on the move. When he played on the move against the best players, the puck often ended up in the net—either the Stars’ or their opponents’.

Hitchcock tried to convince Modano that he’d get more scoring chances playing the right way against the best players.


“That’s the part he didn’t believe,” Hitchcock says. “When you play against offensive players, you get odd-man rushes. When you play against top players, you get odd-man rushes. He didn’t believe that. Then it started to happen. All of a sudden, he’s got the same point total and he’s a plus-30 playing against the other top players. Not bottom feeders.”

The change took discipline. Modano had to fight through bodies to get to the areas of the ice Hitchcock wanted him patrolling. He had to be more of a traffic player rather than a perimeter player.


It was being more of a hunter than the hunted out there,” Modano said. “I always felt I needed to keep my speed to give me separation from the defender. Hitch was like, ‘Have you ever watched when you stop and start? You can still get going pretty good.’ That took a lot of time to beat into me.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:

GMR

Registered User
Jul 27, 2013
6,002
4,966
Parts Unknown
I wonder what exactly there is to Sundin being ranked so lowly by some? From my recollections, mostly having seen him on Team Sweden, he was definitely a reassuring presence on the ice in most situations, including high pressure defensive ones. I also wonder if players like Sedin and Thornton are benefiting in people’s minds from having adapted their game in more recent memory?

I also recognize that there is some obvious difficulty and loads of subjectivity in ranking awesome offensive/possession players within these boundaries.
Likely because he was a big guy who came off as lumbering. It looks different when there's a more athletic skater who is dogging the opposing team when he doesn't have the puck. How often did Sundin appear to be hustling on defense?
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,201
17,552
Connecticut
Damphousse has the oddest Selke record.

In 1995-96 he finished 4th, actually had a first place vote. 55 votes totaled.

Yet in an 18 year career, it appears that he never received a single vote in any other season.
 

Trap Jesus

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
28,686
13,456
Damphousse has the oddest Selke record.

In 1995-96 he finished 4th, actually had a first place vote. 55 votes totaled.

Yet in an 18 year career, it appears that he never received a single vote in any other season.
Yeah I wonder how often you see that happen. It was a two-horse race that year, but he was JUST short of finishing 3rd and being a finalist, with that spot going to Yzerman instead. I wonder if he earned a nomination that year if something would have changed in terms of reputation.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,100
6,420
I've been all-time drafting sine '04. I am confident about mostnof these placements based on all the awesome ATD bios that have been assembled by GMs and defended on the board:

1. Oates
1A. Messier

3. Damphousse (If only he had the offensive talent of others on this list)

4. Modano
5. Crosby
6. Sundin

7. Roenick (Better than Joe because mote willing to play dirty: trip, elbow, sucker punch to stop someone)
8. Nieuwendyk

You've got to be kidding:

Turgeon
H. Sedin
 
  • Like
Reactions: quoipourquoi

Staniowski

Registered User
Jan 13, 2018
3,507
3,055
The Maritimes
Damphousse has the oddest Selke record.

In 1995-96 he finished 4th, actually had a first place vote. 55 votes totaled.

Yet in an 18 year career, it appears that he never received a single vote in any other season.
That was his first season playing centre, I think. He had played the large majority of the first half of his career at LW (and a bit at centre). Mario Tremblay moved him to C that season, and he played the rest of his career as a centre.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,070
7,120
Regina, SK
I've been all-time drafting sine '04. I am confident about mostnof these placements based on all the awesome ATD bios that have been assembled by GMs and defended on the board:

1. Oates
1A. Messier

3. Damphousse (If only he had the offensive talent of others on this list)

4. Modano
5. Crosby
6. Sundin

7. Roenick (Better than Joe because mote willing to play dirty: trip, elbow, sucker punch to stop someone)
8. Nieuwendyk

You've got to be kidding:

Turgeon
H. Sedin

I think this is really solid, I could even agree on the exact order, except I think it's massively out of whack on Oates.
 

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,034
13,860
I've been all-time drafting sine '04. I am confident about mostnof these placements based on all the awesome ATD bios that have been assembled by GMs and defended on the board:

1. Oates
1A. Messier

3. Damphousse (If only he had the offensive talent of others on this list)

4. Modano
5. Crosby
6. Sundin

7. Roenick (Better than Joe because mote willing to play dirty: trip, elbow, sucker punch to stop someone)
8. Nieuwendyk

You've got to be kidding:

Turgeon
H. Sedin

I think if you flip Modano and Oates you have a very accurate list.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,100
6,420
Oates won more faceoffs than Modano, Oates positioned himself more surprisingly perfect than Modano.

Early Modano sucked defensively; Modano-Lehtinen was such an enjoyable duo thanks to Hitch.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,100
6,420
Oates as a 38- and 39-year old led the NHL in assists. No, not because of his wingers but because Gretz and Lemieux were FINALLY gone!

He was ten times top 5 in assists. He is 5th all time in assists but is CLEARLY more talented than Thornton, so I'd rank him 4th as a passing pivot.

Anybody who thinks Messier - a myopic warrior of elite rank - sees more and converts more elite passes than Oates is out to lunch!

That said, Oates checks vigorously while Joe lollygags, gets angry and drops his gloves! Messier cheapshots, bodychecks and manhandles but Oates positions himself for MORE intercepted passes and more defensive zone clearance passes, not to mention more defensive face-off wins! Check the stats out.

There are few underappreciated players in the history of the game more so than Adam Oates. (****'n never high in all-time drafts).
 
Last edited:

Staniowski

Registered User
Jan 13, 2018
3,507
3,055
The Maritimes
My list is in no particular order. We're rating these centers on defensive abilities only. Either in their own zone or neutral zone.


Oates
Lindros
Thornton
Messier
H. Sedin
Roenick
Damphousse
Sundin
Modano
Crosby
Turgeon
Nieuwendyk
You can't really rank these players unless you explain what it is you are ranking.

For some of these guys - Messier, Modano, etc. - there is a very wide variance between different parts of their careers.

Modano, for example, was naturally a very bad defensive player, wasn't very good at it for a large part of his career, then concentrated on improving later in his career. His strong skating was a big help in his improvement.

Messier was too inconsistent.
 

GMR

Registered User
Jul 27, 2013
6,002
4,966
Parts Unknown
You can't really rank these players unless you explain what it is you are ranking.

For some of these guys - Messier, Modano, etc. - there is a very wide variance between different parts of their careers.

Modano, for example, was naturally a very bad defensive player, wasn't very good at it for a large part of his career, then concentrated on improving later in his career. His strong skating was a big help in his improvement.

Messier was too inconsistent.
Fair point. I suppose you can rank their peaks to simplify things. Two-way play, like faceoffs, is presumably something that only improves with age. The difference is that an aging center will not worsen at faceoffs, whereas their defensive play can worsen as they become slower.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,237
2,666
Starting with career goals allowed (exc PPGA) per 80 games.

Sedin 45
Nieuwendyk 51
Thornton 53
Modano 53
Turgeon 56
Lindros 60
Damphousse 61
Sundin 63
Crosby 66
Messier 68
Oates 71

Obviously this is unfair to Messier as he played such a significant chunk of his career in a high-scoring era relative to the others (especially Crosby and Sedin).

So limiting it to the 12 seasons when nine of the 11 played a significant part of their careers and were established as first liners (1993 to 2004):

Nieuwendyk 48
Modano 54
Turgeon 54
Damphousse 55
Thornton 59
Sundin 62
Messier 62
Lindros 62
Oates 68

Ice time and quality of goalies and other teammates likely explain part of this, but I think the data create at least a preliminary case that Oates was not that good defensively, and that Nieuwendyk, Modano, Turgeon, and Damphousse were.

Looking at all forwards with at least 900 GP, I have Adam Oates among the top (bottom?) 10 in scoring-level adjusted ESGA per game. Along with Gretzky and Lemieux (who were in a class of their own as scorers and in goals against), four one-way Southeast division scoring stars of the 00s, Patrick Kane, Norm Ullman, and Joe Sakic. Kane and Sakic had more success than Oates at outscoring their high goals against totals. Norm Ullman may be the most comparable case -- a strong defensive reputation, but high goals against numbers. Possibly neither one was supported as well by their wingers and defenders as they should have been.

All the other players in the list below were much stronger goal scorers than Oates.

PlayerPosGP$ESGF/82$ESGA/82$ESG/82$ESP/82R-ONR-OFF
Wayne GretzkyC14871048329861.261.04
Mario LemieuxC915987934801.230.84
Ilya KovalchukL926677429530.910.85
Eric StaalC1240686920490.990.94
Vincent LecavalierC1212616822470.890.83
Martin St. LouisC1134716821551.050.86
Adam OatesC1337726714531.070.99
Patrick KaneR973786725621.161.09
Norm UllmanC1142696722541.031.00
Joe SakicC1378766624611.151.00
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Oates was on the ice for the most ESGA during his time in Boston, with Gretzky/Lemieux-esque goals against numbers. He was actually on the ice for more goals against per game than Ray Bourque during this time, which is hard to understand. Boston didn't really have any notable defensive centres other than Oates, so maybe he was being asked to do too much at both ends without much support.

YearsTeamPlayerGP$ESG/82$ESP/82$ESGF/82$ESGA/82R-ONR-OFF
86-89DETAdam Oates246124253531.010.94
89-91STLAdam Oates141187089661.351.06
91-97BOSAdam Oates368176385801.060.96
97-02WASAdam Oates387135373711.031.00
02-04PHI/ANA/EDMAdam Oates14162745431.041.07
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,201
17,552
Connecticut
That was his first season playing centre, I think. He had played the large majority of the first half of his career at LW (and a bit at centre). Mario Tremblay moved him to C that season, and he played the rest of his career as a centre.

That makes sense for that season.

But still, he didn't get any votes for the next 8 seasons.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,201
17,552
Connecticut
I've been all-time drafting sine '04. I am confident about mostnof these placements based on all the awesome ATD bios that have been assembled by GMs and defended on the board:

1. Oates
1A. Messier

3. Damphousse (If only he had the offensive talent of others on this list)

4. Modano
5. Crosby
6. Sundin

7. Roenick (Better than Joe because mote willing to play dirty: trip, elbow, sucker punch to stop someone)
8. Nieuwendyk

You've got to be kidding:

Turgeon
H. Sedin

I think Messier and Damphousse are being overrated.

H Sedin managed to be +165 for a career of 17 years in Vancouver. Bettter than his brother's +147.

If not for a combined -49 in his last two seasons, he'd have been at +214, better than Messier.

He had to be better than you've got to be kidding.
 

decma

Registered User
Feb 6, 2013
742
375
I think it’s pretty well documented that Ken Hitchcock used Modano as a matchup centre against top lines. From Craig Custance’s book about coaches, the section on Ken Hitchcock:

Before the 1996–97 season, the Stars coaching staff decided they were going to start playing Modano exclusively against the other team’s best players, rather than trying to get him favorable matchups against second or third lines.
...

It may be well documented that Dal tried to use Modano against top lines but its a two-way street.

The point I was trying to get across is that a team only has partial control over what matchup it gets.

If Dal has an interest in getting Modano out against the other team's top line, then the other team likely has an interest in avoiding that matchup. And given that Dal only has 50% control over matchups (more at home, less on the road, 50% overall), then I wouldn't expect their desired matchups to occur more frequently than their opposition's desired matchups.

Is there any evidence that Modano actually ended up playing a higher share of his ES ice time against other teams' top lines?
 

decma

Registered User
Feb 6, 2013
742
375
Looking at all forwards with at least 900 GP, I have Adam Oates among the top (bottom?) 10 in scoring-level adjusted ESGA per game.
1.041.07
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Thanks for running the numbers and posting.

Do you have time to run the numbers for the other 10 Cs mentioned in the original post?

What ice time estimates did you use for pre 97/98? If its ice time extrapolated from events (GF and GA), doesn't it implictly assume that all players are on the ice for an equal number of events per minute?

What measure did you use to adjust for scoring level? League-wide scoring? League-wide ES scoring?
 

decma

Registered User
Feb 6, 2013
742
375
Looking at the seven pre-lockout seasons for which ice time data are available (97/98 through 03/04), here are the ESGA allowed per full season (12o0 minutes).

Modano 48 (312 ESGA allowed in 7,806 ES minutes)
Turgeon 48
Nieuwendyk 50
Lindros 51
Damphousse 52
Thornton 54
Oates 58
Sundin 60
Messier 68 (364 ESGA allowed in 6,432 ES minutes)
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,237
2,666
Thanks for running the numbers and posting.

Do you have time to run the numbers for the other 10 Cs mentioned in the original post?

What ice time estimates did you use for pre 97/98? If its ice time extrapolated from events (GF and GA), doesn't it implictly assume that all players are on the ice for an equal number of events per minute?

What measure did you use to adjust for scoring level? League-wide scoring? League-wide ES scoring?

Sure. Here you go. I already ran the numbers for the 10-11 year scoring prime for each of these players. I didn't post it because the numbers were pretty close to the unadjusted numbers you already posted.

I'm not using an ice time estimate at all for the numbers below. Just adjusting for scoring level based on league-wide ES scoring.

$ESG/82 = even strength goals scored per 82 games. Each season's total is adjusted to a league-wide scoring level of 180 ES goals per 82 team games.
$ESP/82 = even strength points scored per 82 games, same scoring level adjustment
$ESGF/82 = on-ice even strength goals for per 82 games, same scoring level adjustment
$ESGA/82 = on-ice even strength goals against per 82 games, same scoring level adjustment
R-ON = the goals for/goals against ratio at even strength while the player is on the ice
R-OFF - the goals for / goals against ratio at even strength for the player's team while they are off the ice
(because these numbers are ratios, no ice time estimate is required).

SeasonsPlayerGP$ESG/82$ESP/82$ESGF/82$ESGA/82R-ONR-OFF
89-99Joe Nieuwendyk751244864481.321.24
06-15Henrik Sedin774145871501.440.99
93-03Mike Modano790276072511.421.02
91-01Jeremy Roenick810225366541.231.03
03-12Joe Thornton722196780551.470.98
86-96Mark Messier771215875591.281.15
90-01Pierre Turgeon852256275601.261.02
90-00Vincent Damphousse852204966621.060.97
93-04Mats Sundin926275973631.151.01
08-19Sidney Crosby783297389641.401.03
93-02Eric Lindros5583580102641.580.97
90-01Adam Oates884156081741.091.00
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
 
Last edited:

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,034
13,860
Oates was on the ice for the most ESGA during his time in Boston, with Gretzky/Lemieux-esque goals against numbers. He was actually on the ice for more goals against per game than Ray Bourque during this time, which is hard to understand.

That's a crazy stat (and not in a good way for Oates). Hard to understand is right.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,100
6,420
Oates played against the very best.
Lemieux? Lindros? Gretzky?
The coach sent Oates out there.
No sheltered minutes.
 

ESH

Registered User
Jun 19, 2011
5,291
3,387
Henrik Sedin is an interesting case. He played in an era where two-way play is expected of centers. Despite that, he never stood out with his defensive play.

That’s why the Sedins had Burrows stapled to them for a few years. He was the one putting in the defensive work for them.

Really surprised to see people ranking Sedin ahead of Thornton, who was actually a very good defensive player the second half of his career
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->