RE 17-18 ANTON SLEPYSHEV: BREAKOUT

The most interesting situation on the Edmonton Oilers roster for the coming season might be Anton Slepyshev’s future. His combination of size, speed and skill could be on a collision course with opportunity, the result being a quality scoring winger for an organization badly in need of one this very minute. (Breakout)

ANTON SLEPYSHEV 2016-17

  • 5×5 points per 60: 1.34 (7th among regular forwards)
  • 5×4 points per 60: 0.00
  • Corsi for 5×5 %: 46.0
  • Corsi Rel 5×5 %: -4.1
  • DFF Elite 5×5 %: 44.4
  • DFF Elite Rel 5×5 %: -10.3 (24 percent of TOI v. elites)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 55 shots/7.3%
  • Boxcars: 41gp, 4-6-10
  • (All numbers via Puck IQStats.HockeyAnalysis.com and hockey-reference)

RE 17-18: 70GP, 12-13-25 (.357)

  1. This is a terrible prediction. It’s a reasonable one based on his possible usage during the season.
  2. How good was his 2016-17 season? Combined with his playoffs, it was a very important 12 months. Anton Slepyshev is on the verge of becoming an NHL regular. I projected him to play one game in August 2016, he ended up (including postseason) playing 53. Flew up the depth chart.
  3. And yet you believe 12 goals in reasonable. If I were more certain of his getting a full season on the 2line, then the goal-scoring total would reflect that belief. We’re not there with this player.
  4. He’ll play on a line with Leon! I’m sure he will, but Slepyshev may also play fourth line, sit in the pressbox and it isn’t out of the realm of possibility he spends some more time in Bakersfield.
  5. I don’t understand why you are hesitant on Slepyshev. If you look at history, then it’s easy to see not every handy option fills the current need. Matt Benning’s arrival last season—right on time—was extremely unusual. Surely you see this is true. Slepyshev would be a grand solution and a player who was chosen in the third round who made it (rare as an Edith Piaf bootleg), but he’s not there yet. At least one more step to go, and that will be this season.
  6. He looked damn good in the spring. Yes he did, scored three playoff goals and played very well in a feature role in the biggest games this franchise has seen in a decade. I think he played well enough to get the first shot among the young RWers in a tougher minutes role.
  7. As in 2line with Lucic and Draisaitl? Yes. I think he is more capable of filling that role than Drake Caggiula, and older, bigger and more established than Jesse Puljujarvi. For those reasons, I think he’ll get some 2line time with Milan Lucic and Leon Draisait.
  8. But he won’t stay there? I don’t think he’ll start there, as my model has McDavid and Leon playing together a lot. Meaning he’ll be in the mix for 2RW on a line with RNH.
  9. To hell with your model! Even if Leon plays center on a 2line, there’s still some reasonable doubt about Slepyshev taking the job. Jussi Jokinen, Drake Caggiula, even Jesse Puljujarvi could arrive in a hurry. This isn’t a slam dunk for Slepyshev.
  10. You are underestimating him! I think this is reasonable. If you look at RW depth chart, it’s Leon/Strome, Slepyshev, Puljujarvi and Kassian. Jokinen and Caggiula could join in as well.
  11. Wide open opportunity. For everyone. That’s the issue.
  12. Let’s go back to what he is as a player. What does he bring? Slepyshev has a nice range of skills, this gives him a real edge. He has size, skill and speed, plus he boasts a heavy shot. I’m not convinced he’ll be a 20-goal man annually but there are elements in his game that suggest he has a chance to become one.
  13. So you agree he can get there but don’t believe it will happen this season? I’m saying he could score 20 goals this season but that’s not a reasonable thing to project. We are trying to find reasonable.
  14. You’ll look silly when he scores 20. I would suggest Slepyshev would look brilliant if he scored 20 goals, as it would mean he passed reasonable in mid-season and solidified his status as an emerging NHL winger.
  15. What does he need to work on? If Slepyshev is going to be one of the six wingers working with McDavid, Draisaitl and Nugent-Hopkins, he’s going to need to shoot more.
  16. What were his shot numbers in 16-17? He delivered 7.37 shots per 60 at 5×5, same as Patrick Maroon. Edmonton needs wingers who are going to shoot the puck a lot.
  17. Is that a good number? For a rookie, it’s pretty good. Nail Yakupov was 5.56/60 as a rookie, Jordan Eberle 7.75, Taylor Hall 9.24 as a freshman.
  18. What about rookies this season in the same range as Slepyshev? Slepy was 7.37, Matt Tkachuk was 7.42, Ondrej Kase 7.50.
  19. Where is he on your depth chart? If Leon is at center, my RW depth chart is Strome, Slepyshev, Puljujarvi, Kassian, Pakarinen, Rattie, Russell, Chase. It’s also possible Jussi Jokinen slides in somewhere, and Drake Caggiula is hovering.
  20. One more thing: You keep estimating he has a 90 percent chance of making the team. Why? I think there’s a chance we see a signing, PTO or even trade before training camp. Slepyshev can be sent down, and I do think the Oilers are committed to Puljujarvi on a higher level than Slepyshev.
  21. Wrong! Well that’s the bet here. We’ll see. Either way I see him playing in the NHL most or all of the season.
  22. Who are his comparables? There are some very interesting rookies (age 22) in his general area. Hockey-reference comparables are here.
  23. Who looks like a good match? There are some fine players here. I’ll list Ryan Callahan, Chris Neil, Joel Armia, Val Filppula. There are also players who didn’t emerge as actual NHL players, so that gets back to reasonable and what we should be projecting for this player.
  24. Why this song? Lots of Foo Fighters songs are perfect fits, this is a nice one for the emerging Slepyshev. It also fits as a reminder of the inconsistency of youth.

CURRENT RE 2016-17

 

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

50 Responses to "RE 17-18 ANTON SLEPYSHEV: BREAKOUT"

  1. supernova says:

    Will Slepy get PP time ?

    If so how much ?

  2. OriginalPouzar says:

    One nit – you mention 2015/16 but I think you mean 2016/17 season.

    I don’t know how the heck we predict any of these secondary wingers as who the heck knows where they’ll play and for how long at each spot.

    As you state, could see some press-box, could see some first, could see some second line, could see fourth line.

    I like what I see from Anton – fast, good shot and will shoot from everywhere – with that said, I’m guarded as he’s never really scored that well at any level (except his short AHL stint last year).

  3. OriginalPouzar says:

    There has been zero dialogue on this (that I’ve seen) but what do you think about him being in the mix for the right side shot in 1PP?

    We’ve seen Letestu, JP and Strome all mentioned but Anton has a strong shot and some puck skills as well.

    I think Anton could be a PP asset.

  4. jtblack says:

    When did you come up with the “ask myself questions” routine. Love it. Love the Humor.

    Lucic Drai Sleppy = A Load to Handle. Hope they get lots of time together

  5. Lowetide says:

    jtblack:
    When did you come up with the “ask myself questions” routine.Love it. Love the Humor.

    Lucic Drai Sleppy = A Load to Handle.Hope they get lots of time together

    Lifted from a Bill James article entitled “Rain Delay” from one of his abstracts.

  6. Munny says:

    Lol… Does a bootleg of Jeff Buckley doing Edith Piaf count?

    12 goals seems like optimistic reasonable to me. Considering his sheltered usage and lack of PP time, I’m not sure how committed the coaching staff is to an offensive role for Born Sleppy.

  7. Munny says:

    Munny:
    Lol… Does a bootleg of Jeff Buckley doing Edith Piaf count?

    12 goals seems like optimistic reasonable to me.Considering his sheltered usage and lack of PP time, I’m not sure how committed the coaching staff is to an offensive role for Born Sleppy.

    Although now I notice this is counterbalanced by a low shooting percentage last year, so whaddoIknow.

  8. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    – Great post LT! I hope I’m 2 for 2 on Sheppy.

    – Last year I kept touting him. Don’t think you did a RE on him, and didn’t project him in the line-up.

    – I get your sum of the parts evaluation: in reality he’s either going to stick in top-9 and pot at least Eberle pace for the first 80 (16!: see what I did there!), or not hit your projection at all IMO

  9. stush18 says:

    LT we never pencil him in on LW, is it just because he’s a right shot? He mentioned hi likes playing there.

    I was thinking. Cuz I’ve apparently got nothing better to do in July.

    Maroon-mcdavid-cags
    Slepy-nuge-drai
    Lucic-strome-jokinen
    JJ-letestu-kass

    Seems like a balanced road lineup to me

  10. stush18 says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    There has been zero dialogue on this (that I’ve seen) but what do you think about him being in the mix for the right side shot in 1PP?

    We’ve seen Letestu, JP and Strome all mentioned but Anton has a strong shot and some puck skills as well.

    I think Anton could be a PP asset.

    I think the issue is that no one can win a draw on the right side unless letestu is on the ice.

    Maybe strome can start taking those faceoffs on his strong side, which puts him in th convo.

    Someone will replace ebs on the far side. I think our Russian gets the first crack once strome is moved to the top PP

  11. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    stush18: I think the issue is that no one can win a draw on the right side unless letestu is on the ice.

    Maybe strome can start taking those faceoffs on his strong side, which puts him in th convo.

    Someone will replace ebs on the far side. I think our Russian gets the first crack once strome is moved to the top PP

    – Faceoffs don’t matter over a season: Pitts had the 3rd worst , 47.6%, Chi the 2nd worse, 47.5%. They were pretty good in the regular season. We were the worst the team in FO% last year

    – Col won 326 more FO than we did: 4 more a game. They were elite in FO: 2nd in league

    – This gets rehashed every once in awhile: faceoff ability has no correlation with team winning or standings, and it is not repeatable or predictable YoY

  12. stush18 says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux: – Faceoffs don’t matter over a season: Pitts had the 3rd worst , 47.6%, Chi the 2nd worse, 47.5%.They were pretty good in the regular season.We were the worst the team in FO% last year

    – Col won 326 more FO than we did: 4 more a game.They were elite in FO: 2nd in league

    – This gets rehashed every once in awhile: faceoff ability has no correlation with team winning or standings, and it is not repeatable or predictable YoY

    YOud be correct, possibly, except that a faceoff on a PP is extremely crucial.

    You lose the draw, and you’ve killed 45 seconds and wasted a shift with your best players on the ice.

    Faceoffs have extreme importance on the extra man situations

  13. stush18 says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    I’d also argue that the reason for the oilers success was mostly due to letestu being moved up onto the power play. He finishes, but he also wins the majority of his draws from that side. Drai takes them from the other side

  14. Richard S.S. says:

    The more Draisaitl plays on McDavid’s line, the less he can be trusted as a #2 Center. This year is supposed to be about Draisaitl becoming a dominant #2 Center. Any competent player should do well with McDavid. Finding another top Center is important. The Oilers can only keep one of Draisaitl or Nugent-Hopkins. They will keep the best Center and trade the other.

  15. OmJo says:

    And yet you believe 12 goals in reasonable. If I were more certain of his getting a full season on the 2line, then the goal-scoring total would reflect that belief. We’re not there with this player.

    —–

    Just curious, hypothetically speaking, let’s say he really impressed TMac during the playoffs and was given 2RW duties all season, what would be a reasonable projection for him in that case? Does around 35-40 points, 20 goals sound reasonable (if Leon proves he can be a driver at 2C ofc)? That would be a massive jump from last year’s totals but he’d also be in a much better position offensively than he was last season as 2RW.

  16. Lowetide says:

    OmJo:
    And yet you believe 12 goals in reasonable. If I were more certain of his getting a full season on the 2line, then the goal-scoring total would reflect that belief. We’re not there with this player.

    —–

    Just curious, hypothetically speaking, let’s say he really impressed TMac during the playoffs and was given 2RW duties all season, what would be a reasonable projection for him in that case? Does around 35-40 points, 20 goals sound reasonable (if Leon proves he can be a driver at 2C ofc)? That would be a massive jump from last year’s totals but he’d also be in a much better position offensively than he was last season as 2RW.

    I have Slepyshev getting no power play time, so 20 might be a stretch (two Oilers, 97 and Maroon, scored 20 at evens this past season).

  17. OmJo says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux: – Faceoffs don’t matter over a season: Pitts had the 3rd worst , 47.6%, Chi the 2nd worse, 47.5%.They were pretty good in the regular season.We were the worst the team in FO% last year

    – Col won 326 more FO than we did: 4 more a game.They were elite in FO: 2nd in league

    – This gets rehashed every once in awhile: faceoff ability has no correlation with team winning or standings, and it is not repeatable or predictable YoY

    Total faceoffs might not be as important to winning, but I think having a player who can reliably take (and win) faceoffs in certain important situations in games is crucial. Letestu is that guy, especially for the right side.

    Our C FO% last season was
    Player FO% W/L

    Lander 56.0% (79/62) [Sigh…]
    Letestu 50.4% (452/444)
    Draisaitl 49.0% (476/496)
    Nugent-Hopkins 43.8% (556/712)
    McDavid 43.2% (348/458)

    Nuge actually took more faceoffs than anybody else (1268) next closes was Drasiaitl (972) and Letestu (896). NHL.com doesn’t break it down into which zones the faceoffs were taken but that’s still a lot of missed opportunities to start the play with the puck… Most of the players with 1000+ faceoffs last season were at or over 50%.

  18. dustrock says:

    20 goals without PP time isn’t super easy in today’s NHL.

    Hopefully he keeps the confidence from the playoffs, because though he usually didn’t have outright poor games, he wasn’t a factor in a whole bunch of games.

  19. PDO says:

    Extend Sleppy and give him the Letestu spot on the PP and shotgun on 97’s line.

    Enjoy success.

  20. OmJo says:

    Lowetide,

    Fair point, I included PP time in that hypothetical situation as well.

    I’m assuming PP1 will be

    Lucic-McDavid-Drai
    Letestu-Klefbom

    (Can’t remember, but Letestu and Drai might have switched spots on the PP from last year, correct me if I’m wrong…)

    So I’d guess PP2 would be

    Maroon-Nuge-[Free-for-all]
    Slepyshev-Benning or Nurse

    Could Slepyshev not fit somewhere on PP2? He needs to shoot more, and he has a good shot, I think he could find a spot there this season, especially with Sekera out to start the season. I suppose he could also just learn to shoot more in the AHL but with him being an RFA next year, that might frustrate him a bit.

  21. OmJo says:

    PDO,

    You might need a RH shot to replace Letestu on the PP for it to work how it did. Or maybe I’m underestimating Letestu’s shot.

    So one of JP, Strome, or eventually Yamamoto.

  22. jtblack says:

    Lowetide,

    Love it LT!

  23. PunjabiOil says:

    When did you come up with the “ask myself questions” routine.Love it. Love the Humor.

    Best line a few years ago was:

    What about Jason Strudwick? What about Jason Strudwick?

  24. Acumen says:

    So, the player Slepy reminds me of falls outside your ’99 forward model, but he did have his first couple seasons in a similarly dead puckish era and tracks pretty similarly in points. Brian Rolston’s the man. He had a similar combination of plus size, speed, shot and roster versatility. He obviously busted out later on in the Boston years and probably had Anton beat in terms of defensive play later in his career as well, but even in his early years as a Devil he was one of my favorites as more of a straight up role player than an offensive weapon. That’s my blue sky for the young Russian.

    I like Slepyshev a lot, he fits our roster and our system to a tee and had great chemistry with the big lads in the playoffs. I think he has a great building year, I am guessing he beats Puljujarvi clean for his spot behind Stromesaitl and provides calm play that endears him to the fans this year. I’m gonna guess somewhere closer to 30-35 points, knowing full well how overly optimistic that sounds.

    Still hoping for a late Jagr signing, which would make things tougher for him–or simply bump Puljujarvi down to dominate the AHL and get some prime development in.

  25. JJS says:

    stush18: YOud be correct, possibly, except that a faceoff on a PP is extremely crucial.

    You lose the draw, and you’ve killed 45 seconds and wasted a shift with your best players on the ice.

    Faceoffs have extreme importance on the extra man situations

    Yet the Oil had the 5th best PP last year versus Colorado at 30th. Still doesn’t wash out.

  26. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    JJS: Yet the Oil had the 5th best PP last year versus Colorado at 30th.Still doesn’t wash out.

    – We have this back and forth collectively every once in ahwile. The data over long sample sets doesn’t show a correlation between faceoffs and actual winning.

    – Then someone chimes in “yeah but i’ts important in so and so situation”

    _ Then they site Dellow, and other stuff.

    – Then someone points out the regression shows no correlation between FO and wins

    – Its a great narrative, but except for a given situation, over time it doesn’t mean anything

    – Pitts had 3rd worst FO%, and 3rd best PP: do they load up all their FO wins for the PP?

  27. Pescador says:

    it is easy for me to be high on Slepyshev as an emerging talent.
    I love watching any player that runs his motor in top gear every play of every shift, especially one with good hands & hockey IQ. He has good size & isn’t afraid to use it, Slepyshev will take that hit to make a play.
    Correct or not Oilers fans (including myself) value Gritensity. So do coaches, GM’s & teammates.
    Grit, skill & speed? Be still my beating heart.

  28. GMB3 says:

    It’s a four horse race (really 3) for right handed forwards on the PP imo. Letestu is basically guaranteed PP1. Strome is the next choice. It would be nice if they let Slepy try and take some draws on his strong side, same with JP.

  29. JDî says:

    stush18: You lose the draw, and you’ve killed 45 seconds and wasted a shift with your best players on the ice.

    I think you’re vastly over estimating the time it takes for the PK team to ice the puck, and the PP team to get it back across the blue line.

  30. stush18 says:

    Actually Pitt had a faceoff % of 57.3 on the PP last yr according to puckbase dot com.

    The oilers were 47% last yr using there too four guys, but remove letestu and the PP percentage drops to 43%.

    So I would say yes, faceoffs are very important on the PP.

    JDî: I think you’re vastly over estimating the time it takes for the PK team to ice the puck, and the PP team to get it back across the blue line.

    I don’t think so?

    5 sec for scramble draw. 10 sec to regroup back in end. Another ten to come up the ice as a group.

    25 sec and we’re assuming we entered the zone cleanly. We haven’t set up yet.

    45 might be the upper limit, but if you can’t get a clean entry I really don’t think it’s far off. Faceoffs are important on the PP.

  31. VOR says:

    Kinger_Oil.Redux,

    Face-offs are actually a rather complicated phenomenon. Every analysis I have ever seen fails to capture the complexity. In statistical analysis and mathematical modelling we say there is a failure to describe the event space.

    To begin with players aren’t always trying to win a draw, There are any number of reasons for this. The top one is that great face off guys like to show their opponents (and remember some of these guys meet dozens of times a year in the face off circle or more) many different moves. They don’t like anyone having a book on them. In other words they might deliberately lose a draw here or there just to confuse their opponent and also scouts in the audience. Yanic Perreault once admitted to doing exactly that and his teammates claim Patrice Bergeron does it.

    Any number of players have talked about how there are different strategies in different situations (and some players are better at executing one strategy than another). Sometimes they are simply trying not to lose a draw badly. Being able to scramble a draw is seen as a real talent. As is being gifted at interfering with your opponent so that while you lose the draw on the dot your teammates gain possession of the puck. Then there is forcing your opponent to win the draw in a way that has an advantage to your team. Most centers try to win the draws in the offensive end cleanly but are much more interested in making sure they don’t lose a draw cleanly in their own end.

    One of my personal favorites (and this one comes from Todd Marchant) is the story about how Mike Modano would deliberately lose a face off but prevent his opponent from getting good wood on the puck. So now it is slowly trickling back towards the defenceman. Modano and Lehtinen would slip free and charge at the dman. The poor guy gets the puck and has two of the best checkers in hockey right on top of him. Result being a face off the Oilers won and a dangerous scoring chance for Dallas.

    Then there is the fact that face offs are really a team statistic. Most draws are to some extent a scramble for the puck. Some teams are better at winning those scrambles than others. Some lines are better at it than others. Then just to complicate things even further some teams don’t work very hard (deliberately) at winning those scrambles. They use the time to fall back on defense and on making sure there is no open man.

    Most teams and most centers mix and match these techniques and strategies (and a lot more I haven’t mentioned here).

    Most centers have a preferred option for the face-off. That is most players but not all prefer the forehand. Some like the backhand. Presumably this is the face-off style that gives them the best result.

    Then there are guys who are working mostly on lifting the other player’s stick. Or the converse, preventing the other guy from being able to lift their stick at all. Additionally, handedness matters. For some players it matters a lot. Others it barely makes any difference. A few odd balls (mainly stick lifters who have wicked backhand draws and like to step into their opponent at the same time they are taking the draw) actually do better on the wrong side of the ice.

    Linesmen also have a role to play in creating complex outcomes. No two linesmen drop the puck in exactly the same way. Some make it nearly impossible to win the draw cleanly. Others telegraph their drop. Players go to school on these tells.

    There is actually something of consensus among the better face off men that anybody can learn to be good at it (Mark Letestu for example has said something like this and Michael Peca and Adam Oates have rather conclusively shown that they can teach how to win face-offs).

    Face-off excellence is a way for older players to extend their careers and role players to get a foot hold in the NHL. Younger players just don’t put in the necessary practice time and effort to get really good because it is almost never part of contract negotiations. So focusing on face-offs can extend your career but it won’t get you a bigger payday (just more of them).

    Finally, not all face-offs are equal. Any thing in the neutral zone has much less chance of effecting the game than if the draw is in the offensive/defensive end. Game state (score, time remaining, power play, penalty kill) creates face-offs of varying degrees of importance.

    Yet all this complexity is summarized into a simple percentage and then we argue about whether that percentage is correlated with win/loss records. We never seem to get around to asking questions such as does the sort of strategy the team is playing make face-off wins more or less valuable? Do goalie tendencies? And I could go on and on.

    All I am trying to say, is the next time somebody wants to go through all the old arguments you might try asking them exactly how much they know about what is actually happening in the face-off circle.

  32. Ryan says:

    VOR,

    Agreed. I vaguely remember reading a blog post two or three years ago where someone performed a crude analysis showing no correlation between raw team faceoff win percentage and standing points. Iirc these posts did not look at zone, game state or even try to adjust for confounding factors in their model.

    After that, It was bandied about that faceoffs don’t matter nor lead to winning hockey games.

    Intuitively, we know that these conclusions are foolish for a variety of reasons some of which you’re mentioned.

    Obviously some teams can be flat-out terrible at the hockey, but great at winning draws. This doesn’t prove that winning draws isn’t important.

    First, the spread from best team (Ducks 54.7) and worst (Oilers 47) is fairly small (7.7%). The error rate for recording faceoffs is often estimated around 5%.

    Second, we know as you’ve mentioned that neutral zone faceoffs particularly at even strength don’t matter very much.

    So the question remains is how much do face offs matter and when does winning faceoffs matter the most?

    These gentlemen performed a more rigorous analysis as part of their honors thesis.

    http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/FaceoffAnalysis12-12.pdf

  33. VOR says:

    Stush18,

    I am not unsympathetic to your point but I have to say, isn’t it something like 7 of the top 10 PP face off teams had power plays in the bottom half of the league?

    Buffalo at 5 in PP FO% was #1 in PP%, Boston at 7 in PP FO% was also 7th in PP%, and Minnesota at 9 in PP FO% was 9 in PP%. However, Anaheim at number 1 in PP FO% was 17 in PP%, Carolina at 2 in PP FO% was 21st in PP%, Colorado at 3 in PP FO% was 30th in PP%, Vancouver at 4th in PP FO% was 29th in PP%, Detroit at 6th in PP FO% were 27th in PP%, The New York Islanders at 8th in PP FO% were 28th in PP%, and Nashville at 10 in PP FO% were 16th in PP%.

    It sure looks to me like PP FO% is actually not correlated in any way with PP%.

  34. VOR says:

    Ryan,

    They certainly are more rigorous than most. My favorite take away was this:

    Off/Def and PP/SH 38053 35.4 – it takes 35.4 face-off wins on the power play or penalty kill in the offensive or defensive zone to lead to a one goal differential.
    Neutral and EV 62690 170.4 – it takes 170.4 face-off wins in the neutral zone at even strength to lead to one goal differential.

    Well that and the fact that the difference between the best face-off team in the NHL (San Jose) and the worst team (Edmonton) would only have accounted for a total of two wins difference between the teams. In other words over a season, once again we see that face-offs don’t matter.

    When they explore the space adequately some face-offs appear to matter a lot more than others yet the effect washes out when data is lumped together because no team is consistently good enough or bad enough to gain or lose a meaningful advantage.

  35. JDî says:

    stush18:
    Actually Pitt had a faceoff % of 57.3 on the PP last yr according to puckbase dot com.

    The oilers were 47% last yr using there too four guys, but remove letestu and the PP percentage drops to 43%.

    So I would say yes, faceoffs are very important on the PP.

    I don’t think so?

    5 sec for scramble draw. 10 sec to regroup back in end. Another ten to come up the ice as a group.

    25 sec and we’re assuming we entered the zone cleanly. We haven’t set up yet.

    45 might be the upper limit, but if you can’t get a clean entry I really don’t think it’s far off. Faceoffs are important on the PP.

    No, no and no. 10 seconds to come back up ice? Maybe in your rec league.

  36. Thinker says:

    VOR:
    Ryan,

    They certainly are more rigorous than most. My favorite take away was this:

    Off/Def and PP/SH 38053 35.4 – it takes 35.4 face-off wins on the power play or penalty kill in the offensive or defensive zone to lead to a one goal differential.
    Neutral and EV 62690 170.4 – it takes 170.4 face-off wins in the neutral zone at even strength to lead to one goal differential.

    Well that and the fact that the difference between the best face-off team in the NHL (San Jose) and the worst team (Edmonton) would only have accounted for a total of two wins difference between the teams. In other words over a season, once again we see that face-offs don’t matter.

    When they explore the space adequately some face-offs appear to matter a lot more than others yet the effect washes out when data is lumped together because no team is consistently good enough or bad enough to gain or lose a meaningful advantage.

    Is that an anomaly though? The Oiler burned roughly 10 seconds per powerplay draw against anaheim, and there was probably around 3 draws a pp, so that’s like 1/4 of the powerplay lost because of shitty draws. Extreme example, but I see no way that the opposite could be true. Might be a factor of more skilled players being worse on draws, but not sure if that is true.

  37. stush18 says:

    VOR:
    Stush18,

    I am not unsympathetic to your point but I have to say, isn’t it something like 7 of the top 10 PP face off teams had power plays in the bottom half of the league?

    Buffalo at 5 in PP FO% was #1 in PP%, Boston at 7 in PP FO% was also 7th in PP%, and Minnesota at 9 in PP FO% was 9 in PP%. However, Anaheim at number 1 in PP FO% was 17 in PP%, Carolina at 2 in PP FO% was 21st in PP%, Colorado at 3 in PP FO% was 30th in PP%, Vancouver at 4th in PP FO% was 29th in PP%, Detroit at 6th in PP FO% were 27th in PP%, The New York Islanders at 8th in PP FO% were 28th in PP%, and Nashville at 10 in PP FO% were 16th in PP%.

    It sure looks to me like PP FO% is actually not correlated in any way with PP%.

    I dunno how much they correlate. Your previous post does an extremely good job of going through the analysis.

    Just pulling stats about the teams we talked about. The teams you mentioned though are curious examples.

    I know the sedins are trending down, but they typically have a good PP. Was it would they have been more successful if they lost more faceoffs?

    COL makes zero sense to me. Would have to think their system is awful, because they have guns to play around with. Barrie, Mckinnon, duchene, landeskog?

    Even the islanders. How does a Tavares led PP do so poorly?

  38. Thinker says:

    JDî: No, no and no. 10 seconds to come back up ice? Maybe in your rec league.

    Ten is about fair, since the draw is one, puck is sent all the way down. Half assed defense forces a dump and chase usually. Offensive team has to set up shop, which isn’t usually instantaneous. Of course, it’s 40 if Russel is on the PP.

  39. stush18 says:

    JDî: No, no and no. 10 seconds to come back up ice? Maybe in your rec league.

    Well mcdavid won the fastest skater comp at just under fourteen sec.

    So seven seconds down and back. No puck, which slows you down.

    So we have a difference of six seconds between the fastest player in the league skating less than a full lap around the rink, and a team of five guys to swing back together and bring the puck up.

    You think six seconds isn’t lost in there handling the puck, everyone coming back, drop passing to mcdavid, and then entering the zone?

    I’ll leave it here because counting is hard, but if you think it takes less than 25 sec min to get back into the offensive zone after a lost faceoff, we’ve got nothing much to talk about

  40. stush18 says:

    VOR,

    I guess the point of my reply would be the math doesn’t seem to add up to the eye test. These teams have some skilled PPs, it would be interesting to see the trends of how they do.

    For NYI for example, was there a change when Guerin took over? Who knows.

    I guess the point is I can’t see them being any better if they had lost more faceoffs. To me faceoffs have nothing to do with there failures because they WERE so awful, that the extra zone time doesn’t seem to help them convert chances, for whatever reason.

    Have you ever read anything about PP chances and the percentage that they likely (imo) decrease scoring after a lost draw? I’m assuming your PP percentage drops after a lost draw, but it might not affect it all. I can’t say I’ve ever seen any research done on it.

  41. dessert1111 says:

    One thing about Slepyshev that got a lot of play around his draft year but isn’t mentioned much anymore is that he fell due to signability concerns. It’s great a third round pick is looking good, but I think it was generally accepted he was a first round talent. The risk was getting him to come over, which he did, and pretty early on too.

    I don’t think oilers can send him to Bakersfield at this point though, unless they want him to head back east. I think he’s on the team the whole year or they’ve given up on him as an option.

  42. Woogie63 says:

    This guy needs a hockey number if he is going to have a long pro career.

  43. texmex says:

    For those suggesting faceoffs are not that important, I refer you to the final 5+ minutes of game 5 against the ducks. If we had a solid FO man, I suggest the oil win that game and the series.

  44. Jaxon says:

    Here’s to hoping he’s more Arvidsson, Filppula for comparables and less Goc, Korpikoski which would fit his verbal better as a player with some skill and speed.

  45. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    VOR,

    – Thanks for this. Good points your bring up

    -Its a good narrative, a “game within a game”, ability for role players to extend career, etc

  46. LMHF#1 says:

    One thing to keep in mind is that McLellan has kept him around for 2 straight season openers.

    I just hope they find their brains and put the guy on the powerplay with McDavid already.

  47. russ99 says:

    IMO, the goals have to come from someone.

    McDavid will likely be better but he’s not going to score at a Gretzky level anytime soon.

    We can expect regression from Maroon and also RNH, depending on your point of view if he should be pumped and dumped, I think he’s too valuable on a tough minutes third line, and thus offense will continue to regress.

    We can expect a bit more from Lucic with a full camp knowing players and systems, not on a line with floaters Eberle and RNH, and hopefully more strength/fitness – if that workout photo is a tell.

    So the rest has to come from somewhere. One or more of Strome, Slepyshev, Caggiula and Puljujarvi is going to score 20. May not be reasonable to think so, but the top 2 line icetime is there for the taking.

  48. M00se1978 says:

    jtblack,

    I imagine he is really arguing with himself over the decisions of the expectation.

  49. Bank Shot says:

    The secondary wingers are so hard to predict on this team. Slepyshev, Caggiula, Strome, and JP.

    So many moving parts and the question of how much center for Draisaitl really clouds the issue. So many moving parts!

    I personally think Caggiula will continue to get more of a push than Slepyshev, but its really a coin flip.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca