There I was, idly clicking my way around the hockey blogosphere, when, like the Bat Signal cast against the cloudy skies of Gotham, I spied a call for help. At the end of a post covering the All-Star Game and how perhaps it might be improved, Ritch from American Hockey Fan had a question...
Fear not, good netizen - I'm always in need of topical inspiration, so let's take a look...
The NHL stat in this area merely covers percentage of opportunities converted. On that front, San Jose has the top power play (25.8%), and Vancouver the top penalty kill (88.4%). There, we have our answer, right? If we did, this would be an awfully short piece, that's for sure.
A great source of special teams statistics can be found over at mc79hockey.com, where you can find a breakdown of teams on a 60-minute basis (note: mc79hockey's stats are currently updated through Game 472, which is a few weeks old). In other words, given 60 minutes of power play time, it shows how many shots and goals are being racked up (for and against) by the various teams. Looking at power play numbers as an example, if you take Goals For/60 Minutes, and subtract Goals Against/60 Minutes (due to shorthanded goals allowed), you get a Goal Differential/60 Minutes. This gets us past the two major flaws in the NHL's basic power play figures, which only reflect percentage of opportunities converted. First, due to penalties being called at different times, you can have a PP lasting only a few seconds, but it counts in the NHL figure just as if it was a full five-minute major. Therefore, normalizing the power play output against a standard time period gives a better picture of actual production. Secondly, there is no consideration for a sloppy power play that gives up shorthanded goals, or an opportunistic PK that scores some of their own. I took the liberty of updating the Goal Differential/60 Minutes figure, which is indicated in the table below:
Indeed, San Jose is way out in front with the man advantage, followed by Montreal, Anaheim, and then the bulk of the NHL grouped in a range from just under 5.00 to 6.33 Goals per 60 Minutes. You really see the Goal Differential factor come into play towards the bottom of these standings, where a team like Edmonton jumps several places compared to their typical NHL Power Play ranking, because the other teams around them give up so many more shorthanded goals. Similarly, those young Pittsburgh Penguins have given up seven shorthanded scores against, which drops them behind four other teams with fewer PP Goals For.
On the PK side, we see Montreal on top (1st in PK, 2nd in PP, no wonder they're doing so well), followed by Minnesota and Vancouver as the only teams with a Goal Differential/60 Minutes better than -4.00. According to the typical Penalty Killing percentage, the Canadiens would only be third, but on the strength of 10* shorthanded goals, they, along with the Wild (with 8 SH goals) pull ahead of the Canucks, who only have two such scores.
So, Ritch, in your dream matchup of top power play vs. top penalty kill, I'd indeed recommend pitting San Jose against Montreal. A possible extension of this analysis could look into the Shot Quality produced during these situations, to help separate the performance of the goaltender from that of the forwards and defense. For example, even though the Nashville Predators are fifth in this PK Ranking, I'd suspect much of the credit should go to Tomas Vokoun and Chris Mason, who have been spectacular all season long. On the opposite end of that scale, we may find that there are skaters on teams at the bottom of these rankings that are giving up relatively few scoring opportunities, but goaltending (hello, L.A.) is letting them down - and a savvy GM might want to look for that kind of player to help complement a team that hopes to make a run in the playoffs this spring.
*remember, I tend not to count empty-net scores in my analysis.
Why not have the best Powerplay in the league face off against the best PK? Who would that be, I wonder? San Jose vs. Montreal, maybe? Perhaps the Forechecker will come to my aid again.
The NHL stat in this area merely covers percentage of opportunities converted. On that front, San Jose has the top power play (25.8%), and Vancouver the top penalty kill (88.4%). There, we have our answer, right? If we did, this would be an awfully short piece, that's for sure.
A great source of special teams statistics can be found over at mc79hockey.com, where you can find a breakdown of teams on a 60-minute basis (note: mc79hockey's stats are currently updated through Game 472, which is a few weeks old). In other words, given 60 minutes of power play time, it shows how many shots and goals are being racked up (for and against) by the various teams. Looking at power play numbers as an example, if you take Goals For/60 Minutes, and subtract Goals Against/60 Minutes (due to shorthanded goals allowed), you get a Goal Differential/60 Minutes. This gets us past the two major flaws in the NHL's basic power play figures, which only reflect percentage of opportunities converted. First, due to penalties being called at different times, you can have a PP lasting only a few seconds, but it counts in the NHL figure just as if it was a full five-minute major. Therefore, normalizing the power play output against a standard time period gives a better picture of actual production. Secondly, there is no consideration for a sloppy power play that gives up shorthanded goals, or an opportunistic PK that scores some of their own. I took the liberty of updating the Goal Differential/60 Minutes figure, which is indicated in the table below:
| Team | PP Goals For | PP Goals Against | PP Time | PP Diff/ 60 Min |
| San Jose Sharks | 63 | 2 | 391:54 | 9.34 |
| Montreal Canadiens | 51 | 3 | 347:04 | 8.30 |
| Anaheim Ducks | 55 | 1 | 407:24 | 7.95 |
| New York Rangers | 44 | 1 | 407:23 | 6.33 |
| Florida Panthers | 41 | 3 | 360:23 | 6.33 |
| Toronto Maple Leafs | 50 | 5 | 431:11 | 6.26 |
| Dallas Stars | 47 | 4 | 429:43 | 6.00 |
| Pittsburgh Penguins | 53 | 7 | 462:12 | 5.97 |
| Boston Bruins | 45 | 8 | 372:29 | 5.96 |
| Colorado Avalanche | 44 | 6 | 391:19 | 5.83 |
| Nashville Predators | 45 | 2 | 444:30 | 5.80 |
| Los Angeles Kings | 47 | 4 | 444:35 | 5.80 |
| Washington Capitals | 45 | 5 | 430:23 | 5.58 |
| Tampa Bay Lightning | 47 | 7 | 436:29 | 5.50 |
| Detroit Red Wings | 42 | 5 | 404:20 | 5.49 |
| Vancouver Canucks | 45 | 6 | 431:35 | 5.42 |
| New York Islanders | 35 | 4 | 344:47 | 5.39 |
| New Jersey Devils | 42 | 7 | 390:12 | 5.38 |
| Carolina Hurricanes | 46 | 5 | 471:08 | 5.22 |
| Edmonton Oilers | 38 | 3 | 418:18 | 5.02 |
| Columbus Blue Jackets | 45 | 6 | 466:22 | 5.02 |
| Ottawa Senators | 45 | 10 | 422:37 | 4.97 |
| Atlanta Thrashers | 42 | 7 | 437:54 | 4.80 |
| Minnesota Wild | 41 | 7 | 427:18 | 4.77 |
| Calgary Flames | 36 | 4 | 413:47 | 4.64 |
| Buffalo Sabres | 42 | 7 | 457:26 | 4.59 |
| St. Louis Blues | 31 | 3 | 373:55 | 4.49 |
| Phoenix Coyotes | 38 | 8 | 415:45 | 4.33 |
| Philadelphia Flyers | 33 | 7 | 390:19 | 4.00 |
| Chicago Blackhawks | 23 | 3 | 395:59 | 3.03 |
Indeed, San Jose is way out in front with the man advantage, followed by Montreal, Anaheim, and then the bulk of the NHL grouped in a range from just under 5.00 to 6.33 Goals per 60 Minutes. You really see the Goal Differential factor come into play towards the bottom of these standings, where a team like Edmonton jumps several places compared to their typical NHL Power Play ranking, because the other teams around them give up so many more shorthanded goals. Similarly, those young Pittsburgh Penguins have given up seven shorthanded scores against, which drops them behind four other teams with fewer PP Goals For.
On the PK side, we see Montreal on top (1st in PK, 2nd in PP, no wonder they're doing so well), followed by Minnesota and Vancouver as the only teams with a Goal Differential/60 Minutes better than -4.00. According to the typical Penalty Killing percentage, the Canadiens would only be third, but on the strength of 10* shorthanded goals, they, along with the Wild (with 8 SH goals) pull ahead of the Canucks, who only have two such scores.
| Team | PK Goals Against | PK Goals For | PK Time | Goal Diff/ 60 Min |
| Montreal Canadiens | 35 | 10 | 444:26 | -3.38 |
| Minnesota Wild | 31 | 8 | 386:43 | -3.57 |
| Vancouver Canucks | 32 | 2 | 466:25 | -3.86 |
| Edmonton Oilers | 30 | 3 | 399:29 | -4.06 |
| Nashville Predators | 35 | 7 | 413:03 | -4.07 |
| New Jersey Devils | 22 | 1 | 287:06 | -4.39 |
| Anaheim Ducks | 36 | 3 | 425:16 | -4.66 |
| Philadelphia Flyers | 39 | 6 | 417:57 | -4.74 |
| Carolina Hurricanes | 40 | 6 | 429:17 | -4.75 |
| Chicago Blackhawks | 45 | 7 | 459:30 | -4.96 |
| Ottawa Senators | 39 | 6 | 392:08 | -5.05 |
| Detroit Red Wings | 46 | 8 | 429:13 | -5.31 |
| Florida Panthers | 46 | 4 | 472:36 | -5.33 |
| San Jose Sharks | 33 | 3 | 330:14 | -5.45 |
| New York Rangers | 44 | 5 | 425:14 | -5.50 |
| St. Louis Blues | 46 | 4 | 450:33 | -5.59 |
| Calgary Flames | 50 | 11 | 416:00 | -5.63 |
| Columbus Blue Jackets | 46 | 4 | 447:11 | -5.64 |
| Washington Capitals | 47 | 8 | 413:09 | -5.66 |
| Dallas Stars | 42 | 2 | 417:36 | -5.75 |
| Pittsburgh Penguins | 51 | 8 | 413:57 | -6.23 |
| Boston Bruins | 47 | 5 | 394:24 | -6.39 |
| Buffalo Sabres | 46 | 2 | 403:04 | -6.55 |
| Atlanta Thrashers | 54 | 6 | 438:03 | -6.57 |
| Colorado Avalanche | 44 | 3 | 368:36 | -6.67 |
| New York Islanders | 54 | 2 | 454:10 | -6.87 |
| Phoenix Coyotes | 56 | 3 | 446:57 | -7.11 |
| Toronto Maple Leafs | 58 | 3 | 447:39 | -7.37 |
| Tampa Bay Lightning | 47 | 6 | 316:28 | -7.77 |
| Los Angeles Kings | 60 | 4 | 412:17 | -8.15 |
So, Ritch, in your dream matchup of top power play vs. top penalty kill, I'd indeed recommend pitting San Jose against Montreal. A possible extension of this analysis could look into the Shot Quality produced during these situations, to help separate the performance of the goaltender from that of the forwards and defense. For example, even though the Nashville Predators are fifth in this PK Ranking, I'd suspect much of the credit should go to Tomas Vokoun and Chris Mason, who have been spectacular all season long. On the opposite end of that scale, we may find that there are skaters on teams at the bottom of these rankings that are giving up relatively few scoring opportunities, but goaltending (hello, L.A.) is letting them down - and a savvy GM might want to look for that kind of player to help complement a team that hopes to make a run in the playoffs this spring.
*remember, I tend not to count empty-net scores in my analysis.
Technorati Tags: