Changing forward roles between 2010 and 2012

Cam Charron
December 13 2012 02:55PM

Part of what I think contributes to the success of offensive starts like Jonathan Toews and the Sedin twins is the fact that they've had very dependable third lines behind them in recent years. I recently went to Behind the Net, parsed through ice time data for offensive zone start rate and quality of competition to see if there was a league-wide trend towards adopting a system where the third liners were given a higher level of importance.

Turns out, yes, actually, even over the last three years, it's very noticeable. In the 2009-2010 season, third and fourth liners were pretty interchangeable, playing against middling competition, usually in offensive zone situations. What's happened since then is that replacement-level players and fourth liners have seen less ice time, while first liners and third liners have picked up the bulk of the difference.

Methodology

I went to Behind the Net and sorted forwards by total even strength ice time (you can find it on these pages). I also downloaded their Corsi Rel QoC and zone start numbers, as well as time on ice per game into a spreadsheet, and totalled up players by hypothetical "line" they're on. First liners, for instance, were 1-through-90 in ice-time, second liners were 91-through-180, third liners were 181-through-270 and fourth liners 271-through-360. Every player below that was considered "replacement".

Of course, injuries throw a wrench into the situation, but injuries do factor into a player's usability by a coach over the course of the season. By totalling up offensive zone start and quality of competition rates, as well as averaging per-game ice-time, I looked to see what the major difference in player roles was over the last three seasons.

Here's the first chart. This is simply ice-time per game. You'll note a greater disparity between first liners and fourth liners between 2010 and 2012:

I'll assume the overall ice times don't add up to 60 due to the differing number of "replacement" players through the years. The important thing to consider is that players on lines 1, 2 and 3 have seen their ice time grow, while the 4th liners and replacements have seen it drop. This is consistent with a specific case, the Toronto Maple Leafs, who saw about two minutes of less ice-time between 2010 and 2012.

As for usage, this next graph is the average Relative Corsi of those line's opponents. Again, the first three lines have seen more difficult minutes at the expense of fourth liners and replacement players:

Offensive zone start rate is something else however:

NHL first liners have seen a lot more offensive zone minutes in recent years. Offensive zone rate is the percentage of overall starts in the offensive zone to the total number of starts in either the offensive or defensive zone (contributor Rob Pettapiece showed this does impact goal totals). First line players started 51.4% of those shifts in the offensive zone in 2010, up to 53.3% in 2012. Who has suffered the most? Third line players, who have dipped from 48.9% to 47.6%.

The fourth line was sheltered more in 2011 than 2010 or 2012, and the reverse effect was found for the second line, but the clear trend is the first liners getting offensive zone starts that third line players have been giving up.

Conclusions

My major takeaway is that the decrease of ice-time and overall roles of importance to fourth line and replacement players shows that NHL coaches are becoming better at dividing up the labour. Two-way talent is of greater importance than it was.

If there is a competitive advantage to exploit, I may look at that fourth line. I see those players as having little importance, but if a team has the second line personnel to drive play, (I think of Vancouver's Chris Higgins-Ryan Kesler-David Booth as an example) perhaps it's worthwhile to piece together a sheltered fourth line of young scoring talent rather than goons who will knock heads.

Fourth liners are playing less, in less critical situations, presumably because of the systematic reduction of the fighting specialist's minutes. NHL teams have yet to find a suitable replacement for that role, although perhaps the real lesson here is that the NHL is 90 players too large, and should cut itself down by four teams to ensure every player is useful...

63811cbf517d2d685ea09e103488ea3a
Cam Charron is a BC hockey fan that writes about hockey on many different websites including this one.
Avatar
#1 Brent Morris
December 13 2012, 03:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

A theory: 2010 was an Olympic year, meaning the schedule was slightly compressed - coaches were likely less disposed to ride their top lines knowing that many of those guys also had to fly to Vancouver and play several games.

Second theory: I happened to be looking at the 2000 Devils team ice time distribution - no one on that team played less than 10 minutes a game in the playoffs. It's remarkable. I imagine part of what drove this is the free agency age being 31 - teams loaded with talent can't sit on it for years like they could under the old system. That means good 4th liners become someone else's 3rd liners unless that team is willing to pay for a good 4th liner (and most teams are not).

Avatar
#2 Ben Wendorf
December 13 2012, 03:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

It's a complex dilemma, how teams choose to develop their young talent. It has a lot to do with how you'd like to use those entry-level contract years. I don't think teams have ever completely decided whether it's better to have your young players develop 10m/game in the NHL or to get greater ice time on ELC time in juniors or burn some ELC time in the AHL. Most teams are reluctant to use up ELC years in the AHL unless juniors aren't an option or there's a depth chart logjam. They likewise seem to be reluctant to use up ELC years on 10m/game, particularly where there's a drastic difference between their NHL salary and AHL salary. So a lot of teams use those fringe AHL/NHL guys who are nearing their end of upside (22-27 years old), which seems the most economic choice. But I think you're right to suggest that the goons are becoming a little less popular.

Avatar
#3 Bruce Peter
December 13 2012, 04:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Does that TOI metric include 5 on 3 or 4 on 4 situations? BTN doesn't do a breakdown of those numbers so that could be why they don't all add up to 60 minutes or more.

Are goons becoming less popular? I think it'd be easier to justify playing a goon if you gave him very limited minutes with little responsibilities. If you were rolling four lines it'd be much harder to justify playing a goon.

Avatar
#4 Brent Morris
December 13 2012, 07:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Bruce Peter

The quality of goons has also gone down, I think. Guys like Brashear and Laraque could take a regular shift without killing your team. The best guy I can think of in this regard is Shawn Thornton, maybe?

I'm not fully convinced there are fewer goons either even as fights and (especially) penalty minutes are on the decline.

Avatar
#5 Ben Wendorf
December 13 2012, 08:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Brent Morris

It really depends on how you define goons. I'm inclined to believe no-hockey, all-fight goons are a bit on the outs for the moment. They'll stay on the outs if teams are listening to their analytics crews. I mean, especially in a cap/internal cap league, what's the point in paying league minimum for a guy you can't turn to as a replacement on the 3rd line? Or a guy you have to bench in the playoffs?

Avatar
#6 Oilfan69
December 14 2012, 07:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

This seems pretty interesting I kind of expected that there would be an article in here about the oilers hackathon 2.0

http://video.oilers.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=4&id=190877&cmpid=embed-share-video

Seems like the opportunity that numbers guys love.

Avatar
#7 stevezie
December 17 2012, 01:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Between tv timeouts and the dramatic improvements in general conditioning this makes perfect sense. I wonder if 4th lines being used less drives fighting down, rather than the other way around.

Comments are closed for this article.