News Article: Why Phil Kessel is One of the NHL’s Most Consistent Players

[con310*]

But when Kessel disappears, he really disappears. Far more than most other players that put up similar numbers over 82 games.

He does not. Kessel was consistently a threat even when he was in a cold streak and it's not far more than most players at all did you watch Kessel this season?

 

[clawfirst]

You're saying Kessel PP+ES GF > ES GA + PK GA

Only because he records PP points and because of his defense weaknesses doesn't kill penalties and gets 0 PK time.

Last year he was on the ice for 77 ES GF and 82 ES GA. (-5)

If the Leafs played Kessel in SH situations then their advantage would lessened by each PK goal against.

No no no no.

the formula would be :
PP+ES+SH>PK+ES+PP.

Attention to detail is important when discussing issues of great importance.

I apologise for the three redundant no's. Delete them from my post if you deem them excessive.

 

[Bomber0104]

The onus is on you to provide them.

I'll help explain the "stat" he just provided, and how he's being deceptive.

Kessel was on the ice for 105 goals for (based on even strength, powerplay, and penalty kill time all blended together)

Kessel was on the ice for 82 goals against (based on even strength, powerplay, and penalty kill time all blended together)

Thus EazyB97's assertion that Kessel was on the ice for 20+ (23 to be exact) more goals this season..

Now this stat is obviously meaningless since Kessel plays 3+ minutes a night of powerplay time and literally zero minutes on the penalty kill.

So trying to make valuations on players' worth to a team by this metric is absolutely bonkers since a player who logs heavy time on the penalty kill will suffer an inflated amount of goals against...and a player who logs heavy minutes on the powerplay will have a disproportionately higher amount of goals for.

But EazyB97 knows it means nothing.

He's just trying to trick people and hope no one calls him on it.

 

[clawfirst]

Turn about is fair play.

 

[Gallagbi]

The onus is on you to provide them.

2013-2014 --> 105 GF, 82 GA
2012-2013 --> 64 GF, 43 GA
2011-2012 --> 107 GF, 84 GA

Would you like me to add them up for you as well?

You're saying Kessel PP GF +ES GF > ES GA + PK GA

That is only because he records PP points and because of his defense weaknesses doesn't kill penalties and gets 0 PK time.

Last year he was on the ice for 77 ES GF and 82 ES GA. (-5)

If the Leafs played Kessel in SH situations then their advantage would be lessened by each PK goal against.

...and if the Leafs don't pull their goalie when they're down he's a plus player. Looks like claw gave you a little help with what I'm saying.

Personally I think all of those type of stats need be part of a larger picture, but some Moderator decided to cherry-pick, so I thought we'd run with similar numbers to what he is using.

GA, GF, etc.. can be good useful when they have some explanation behind them. It's not a surprise the best player was on for a lot of GA when you consider the teams lack of structure, poor systems, high shot totals, and high EN GA.

Unfortunately some people don't seem to see the value in a PPG, first-line, all-star forward.

PS - Doesn't look like those ES numbers are correct.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Also like to point out again that being about even against top opposition is an asset in itself. It basically makes success a question of depth beating depth, something that is easier to achieve.

 

[Bomber0104]

2013-2014 --> 105 GF, 82 GA
2012-2013 --> 64 GF, 43 GA
2011-2012 --> 107 GF, 84 GA

And here is what actually matters...



2013-2014 --> 77 GF (even strength), 82 GA (even strength)

Net effect ---> Kessel's line harmed the team more than they helped



2012-2013 --> 40 GF (even strength), 43 GA (even strength)

Net effect ---> Kessel's line harmed the team more than they helped



2011-2012 --> 74 GF (even strength) , 84 GA (even strength)

Net effect ---> Kessel's line harmed the team more than they helped

Would you like me to add them up for you as well?

Serious question.

If Kessel is an $8 million dollar a year player because he of his 20+ extra goals...

Then what does that make David Desharnais?

A $10 million dollar a year player?

Because David Desharnais has contributed 30+ more goals than he's seen against when he's on the ice..

...and if the Leafs don't pull their goalie when they're down he's a plus player. Looks like claw gave you a little help with what I'm saying.

So that must make David Desharnais even more valuable!

$11 million a year?

What a player!

Personally I think all of those type of stats need be part of a larger picture, but some Moderator decided to cherry-pick, so I thought we'd run with similar numbers to what he is using.

It's all quite clear when you actually use numbers correctly.

Kessel is a minus player. He harms his line more than he helps at even strength (the bulk of his playing time).

The only real benefit Kessel has to a team is on the man advantage.

Other than that he really doesn't have much value.

GA, GF, etc.. can be good useful when they have some explanation behind them. It's not a surprise the best player was on for a lot of GA when you consider the teams lack of structure, poor systems, high shot totals, and high EN GA.

Every other player on the Leafs plays with the same system and goaltender.

Every other player on the Leafs, however, put in an effort on the defensive side of the game...which affects their +/- and the team accordingly.

Unfortunately some people don't seem to see the value in a PPG, first-line, all-star forward.

If that's what Kessel is, I can only imagine how you feel about David Desharnais.

Generational talent?

 

[Menzinger]

Guys plus minus is a horribly OUTDATED means of analyzing an individual player's contributions to a team, just stop using it.

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/6/5/5602668/why-plus-minus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey

http://islanderspointblank.com/news/the-farce-that-is-plusminusthe-most-thankless-stat-in-hockey/

http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/2/1/5367724/alex-ovechkin-and-the-problem-with-plus-minus

I suppose many of you are just FURIOUS that Dave Nonis sent Mark Fraser packing. I mean, he was a PLUS 19 afterall! He must be a number 1 defencman!!!!!

 

[VL]

Guys plus minus is a horribly OUTDATED means of analyzing an individual player's contributions to a team, just stop using it.

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/6/5/5602668/why-plus-minus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey

http://islanderspointblank.com/news/the-farce-that-is-plusminusthe-most-thankless-stat-in-hockey/

http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/2/1/5367724/alex-ovechkin-and-the-problem-with-plus-minus

I suppose many of you are just FURIOUS that Dave Nonis sent Mark Fraser packing. I mean, he was a PLUS 19 afterall! He must be a number 1 defencman!!!!!

No kidding, unless the same contrarians want to assert that Alexander Karpovtsev is one of the greatest defencemen to ever wear the blue and white.

 

[King85Kong]

Guys plus minus is a horribly OUTDATED means of analyzing an individual player's contributions to a team, just stop using it.

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/6/5/5602668/why-plus-minus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey

http://islanderspointblank.com/news/the-farce-that-is-plusminusthe-most-thankless-stat-in-hockey/

http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/2/1/5367724/alex-ovechkin-and-the-problem-with-plus-minus

I suppose many of you are just FURIOUS that Dave Nonis sent Mark Fraser packing. I mean, he was a PLUS 19 afterall! He must be a number 1 defencman!!!!!

Yup, highly overrated to use +/- to judge a player defensively.

Another example:
Bozak 49 P GA 63 +/- 2
Kadri 50 P GA 62 +/- -12

So a player can have more points, be on the ice for less goals against and still have lower +/- . +/- has a lot to do with who your linemates are and how much they produce. Take it with a grain of salt.

 

[Menzinger]

Yup, highly overrated to use +/- to judge a player defensively.

Another example:
Bozak 49 P GA 63 +/- 2
Kadri 50 P GA 62 +/- -12

So a player can have more points, be on the ice for less goals against and still have lower +/- . +/- has a lot to do with who your linemates are and how much they produce. Take it with a grain of salt.

+/- Also is influenced by a realm of factors beyond the control of an individual player - such as the coaching systems being used by that team.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Kessel is a model of consistency offensive and defensively.

2011-12 .. 82 games & 82 points & 84 ES goals against.
2012-13 ...48 games & 52 points & 45 ES goals against.
2013-14 ...82 games & 80 points & 82 ES goals against.

Toals .... 212 games & 214 points & 211 ES goals against. (-17 +/-)

Every NHL game Kessel plays he (on average) provides 1 point for, and 1 even-strength goal against.

Big difference being you can guarantee his contribution to one of those stats.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

It's all quite clear when you actually use numbers correctly.

Kessel is a minus player. He harms his line more than he helps at even strength (the bulk of his playing time).

The only way to prove this is to watch all the goals against he is on the ice for and assess HIS role. Said task has been presented to you before but you refuse to engage in intelligent discourse on the subject.

You use this stat like a drunkard uses a light pole: for support rather than illumination.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Its stats like that which make me wish we could find a Bergeron or Toews to center him

But that's fantasyland. Don't go there.
The Leafs have no #1 Centre.
It is very hard to do well without a #1 Centre.

 

[diceman934]

Consistent:

unchanging in achievement or effect over a period of time.

(of an argument or set of ideas) not containing any logical contradictions.

Kessel is a consistent goal scorer and point producer over the course of the season.....but looking at 10 game blocks he is not.

The biggest issue is that despite his line mates having career, seasons his points and goals did not change. It is time for a change of line mates. Kessel needs a center who can help him get better and that is not happening currently....his stats are consistent where his line mates have not.

 

[Mess]

The only way to prove this is to watch all the goals against he is on the ice for and assess HIS role. Said task has been presented to you before but you refuse to engage in intelligent discourse on the subject..

Leafs gave up 166 ES goals against last year as a team and Kessel\JVR were on the ice for 82 of them. No NHL line gives up more ES goals against then Leafs top line with Kessel.

That's 49.4% = analyzing about 1/2 of all even-strength goals against.

Seems like a high volume % of excuses required to absolve Phil of his defensive shortcomings. Considering his 88 give-aways ranks him #6 most overall in the league, I'm guessing its his teammates asking for a checking of the game tape trying to absolve themselves of blame for the high goals against.

Bozak and JVR also kill penalties so they must have some defensive abilities to be used in that role. Wonder why its not Kessel out there on the PK?

 

[Gallagbi]

Leafs gave up 166 ES goals against last year as a team and Kessel\JVR were on the ice for 82 of them. No NHL line gives up more ES goals against then Leafs top line with Kessel.

That's 49.4% = analyzing about 1/2 of all even-strength goals against.

Seems like a high volume % of excuses required to absolve Phil of his defensive shortcomings. Considering his 88 give-aways ranks him #6 most overall in the league, I'm guessing its his teammates asking for a checking of the game tape trying to absolve themselves of blame for the high goals against.

Bozak and JVR also kill penalties so they must have some defensive abilities to be used in that role. Wonder why its not Kessel out there on the PK?

No, the Leafs gave up 166 5on5 goals against, not ES GA. Kessel was on for 82 GA, not all of those were 5on5, or even ES GA.

 

[diceman934]

No, the Leafs gave up 166 5on5 goals against, not ES GA. Kessel was on for 82 GA, not all of those were 5on5, or even ES GA.

Kessel was not on the ice for a PK goal against so they were all at even strength or worse while they were on the PP

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats....osition=S&country=&status=&viewName=plusMinus

 

[Gallagbi]

Kessel was not on the ice for a PK goal against so they were all at even strength or worse while they were on the PP

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats....osition=S&country=&status=&viewName=plusMinus

Correct, the 82 would include 5on5, 5on4, 4on4, 4on3 and EN. Total of 194 goals scored against there, not 166, which would change the %.

 

[diceman934]

Correct, the 82 would include 5on5, 5on4, 4on4, 4on3 and EN. Total of 194 goals scored against there, not 166, which would change the %.

You are saying then....that some of his goals against were when we held the man advantaged then....as we know 100% that he was not on the ice for any PP goal against.

That only makes his goals against stats worse and not better.

 

[Gallagbi]

You are saying then....that some of his goals against were when we held the man advantaged then....as we know 100% that he was not on the ice for any PP goal against.

That only makes his goals against stats worse and not better.

I'm saying the numbers he used are wrong, which they are. Claiming he was on for 49.4% of the ES GA is wrong. Claiming the Leafs allowed 166 ES GA is wrong. Saying all of Kessel's GA were ES and/or 5on5 is also wrong.

Saying Kessel was on for a lot of GA is correct, but the numbers are wrong and the breakdowns are wrong. The reason for his GA is debatable, but to debate it you should probably start off with an understanding of where the goals were actually coming from, how they relate to Kessel and how often they were occuring.

 

[King85Kong]

Leafs gave up 166 ES goals against last year as a team and Kessel\JVR were on the ice for 82 of them. No NHL line gives up more ES goals against then Leafs top line with Kessel.

That's 49.4% = analyzing about 1/2 of all even-strength goals against.

Seems like a high volume % of excuses required to absolve Phil of his defensive shortcomings. Considering his 88 give-aways ranks him #6 most overall in the league, I'm guessing its his teammates asking for a checking of the game tape trying to absolve themselves of blame for the high goals against.

Bozak and JVR also kill penalties so they must have some defensive abilities to be used in that role. Wonder why its not Kessel out there on the PK?

And people run around here saying there is nothing wrong with our first line, and it was all the other lines fault for our failures last season. The first line needs a change. To weak defensively.

 

[Menzinger]

And people run around here saying there is nothing wrong with our first line, and it was all the other lines fault for our failures last season. The first line needs a change. To weak defensively.

Start by getting them a new centre, reducing their minutes (they're less tired by the end of the game) and employ the right coaching systems that are actually workable (ie Carlyle's 'swarm' in our own end was a complete disaster).

 

[hockeyfanz*]

And people run around here saying there is nothing wrong with our first line, and it was all the other lines fault for our failures last season. The first line needs a change. To weak defensively.

Its what I mostly don't understand. How can a line be effective if they get scored upon as much as they score and the net result is ZERO. How is a line with a net result of ZERO helpful to a team in the grand scheme?

Is this really a topic of debate? Its pretty simple logic really. If I spent 500 dollars a year on lottery tickets and my winnings amounted to $500 at the end of the year...can I say that playing the lottery is a legitimate way to make money?

 

[rojac]

Start by getting them a new centre, reducing their minutes (they're less tired by the end of the game) and employ the right coaching systems that are actually workable (ie Carlyle's 'swarm' in our own end was a complete disaster).

The last two of those are likely to happen (or at least be attempted) this season. The first one less so.