The top two lines of the Capitals and Canucks were indeed by all measures neck and neck the best two in the league and well ahead of the pack. They had the
top 5 players and 7 of the top 9 overall in even strength plus minus so it was obvious from that alone that they would be up there. The average of all three players 5 on 5 ES +/- for both teams is almost the same at 33.7 to 34.0 this includes numbers
only from the games that all three played together; 61 for the Capitals, 63 for the Canucks. The Capitals do prorate a little higher in 82 games; 45.3 to 44.3 but this is more or less an insignificant difference.
Another thing the numbers show is how much of a difference having Daniel playing made to the Canucks and their top line - in the games he didn't play Henrik and Burrows had an even number of ES goals scored for and against and Henrik's offensive numbers took a big hit;
| Gm | G | A | Pt | PPG | +/- |
With | 63 | 19 | 74 | 93 | 1.48 | 36 |
Without | 19 | 10 | 9 | 19 | 1.00 | -1 |
As for the Sharks top line while there were still very good relative to others in the league, they were clearly far behind the top two above. Not only that but they performed horribly in the playoffs while the Caps and Nuck's lines more or less performed equally well in the playoffs as they did in the regular season, they've been removed altogether from consideration for this year.
I've also listed all players total even strength ice time but did not use that for any measure other than perhaps providing some clarification - If the ES TOI is significantly different between the three players than would likely indicate that they were playing a greater portion of ES ice time NOT together as a line compared to linemates whos ES TOI's are closer. Likewise same applies if the total number of goals on ice for or against is dramatically different between linemates, The lines "
final score"
is in bold under the points with linemates at even strength. This just the average of all three players even strength plus minus prorated to 82 games.
Capitals | Gm | ES TOI | ES GF | ES GA | ES +/- | Pts with others at ES | Playoffs |
Ovechkin | 61 | 16:41 | 78 | 33 | 45 | 43 Back, 21 Knuble, 13 Semin | 12/8 +4 |
Backstrom | 61 | 15:44 | 70 | 38 | 32 | 43 Ovi, 17 Knuble, 14 Semin | 13/6 +7 |
Knuble | 61 | 13:49 | 50 | 26 | 24 | 21 Ovi, 17 Back, 0 Semin | 8/8 =0 |
Avg | ^ | 15:27 | 198 | 97 | 33.7 | 45.3 w/playoffs 45.0 | +11 in 7gm |
| | | | | | | |
Semin | 61 | 14:46 | 65 | 35 | 30 | 14 Back, 13 Ovi, 0 Knuble | 3/2 +1 |
Canucks | Gm | ES TOI | ES GF | ES GA | ES +/- | Pts with others at ES | Playoffs |
Burrows | 63 | 14:24 | 65 | 37 | 28 | 36 Henrik, 32 Daniel | 13/9 +4 |
H.Sedin | 63 | 15:54 | 83 | 46 | 37 | 52 with brother, 36 Burrows | 12/9 +3 |
D.Sedin | 63 | 15:26 | 81 | 44 | 37 | 52 with brother, 32 Burrows | 13/9 +4 |
Avg | ^ | 15:15 | 229 | 127 | 34.0 | 44.3 w/playoffs 41.4 | +11 in 12gm |
Sharks | Gm | ES TOI | ES GF | ES GA | ES +/- | Pts with others at ES | Playoffs |
Marleau | 82 | 15:22 | 71 | 50 | 21 | 24 Thornton, 19 Heatley | 10/14 -4 |
Heatley | 82 | 16:00 | 73 | 53 | 20 | 33 Thornton, 19 Marleau | 11/17 -6 |
Thornton | 79 | 15:23 | 69 | 51 | 18 | 33 Heatley, 24 Marleau | 11/19 -8 |
Avg | 81 | 15:35 | 213 | 154 | 19.7 | 19.9 in 82 | -18 in 15gm |
But the accuracy of the Capital's numbers are hindered by the fact that Semin clearly played a fair amount of time on a line with Ovechkin and Backstrom as well as seen by the number of ES points they scored together with him most of which
did not come in the games Knuble missed. Plus the fact that Knuble's ES goals for(50) was way less than Ovechkin's(78) and Backstrom's(70). Considering this I think it's fair to consider both lines equally as good.