October 26 2012 03:14PM
It's funny how a protracted labour dispute in the NHL will put a damper on an NHL blogging Network. Assuming you define "funny" as brainshatteringly annoying. Who wouldn't want to read an up tempo article like that right?!
October 26 2012 11:50AM
This new, regular feature on NHLNumbers will share interesting stats-related posts from around the web almost every day.
Welcome to edition number one of the rebooted Number Chains. In this space you will be able to find the best analytical hockey writing from around the internet on a close-to-daily basis. Subject matter will include statistical evaluation, financial analysis, contractual issues, and (sometimes) closely-related tangential works. If you have something you would like to submit for a future edition feel free to send it to me via Twitter @JoshL1220 or leave a comment.
We begin today with a look at Tyler Dellow's calculations aimed at defining the real financial gap between the NHL and NHLPA. He took the time to crunch the numbers of the NHLPA's three proposals from last week in an effort to pin down how big the financial gap between the two sides is at this point. Those of you looking for hope in the wasteland that is the Lockout should take a trip to the link and focus on this statement:
When you get right down to it, the difference between the parties sure seems to be getting awfully small: even at 5% growth, the worst possible, the PA has presented an offer that appears to be about $487.4MM away from what the NHL wants financially over a six year period. That’s $81.23MM per year (and it shrinks if growth is higher!) $2.71MM per team. Do the Oilers NEED to have Kevin Lowe AND Steve Tambellini AND Craig MacTavish? They used to get by with one GM. Now they’re probably paying three guys GM money.
Less depressing non-Lockout posts after the jump...
October 26 2012 07:14AM
Over the last few days I've looked at the individual point percentage (i.e. the number of times an individual player gets either a goal or an assist compared to the number of total goals-for scored while he's on the ice) for defensemen during five-on-five play, starting with their performance in 2011-12, and then looking at their performance over the last five seasons. Defensemen, however, see a disproportionate amount of their offense generated on the power play, and so today I'll be looking at the individual point percentages for defensemen at five-on-four.
October 25 2012 04:22PM
Photo by Michael Miller
The possibility of the Penguins trading Jordan Staal seemed remote leading up to the draft. Logically it made sense for the Penguins to explore the possibility given that they were likely to lose him for nothing after this coming season, but realistically the chances were slim that he would be on the move. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, Jordan was on his way to Carolina to play with big brother Eric.
The obstacles were considerable for both clubs involved. Yet, they managed to strike a deal (in less than three hours) that considerably changed the cosmetics of both teams. The Hurricanes got the best player in the deal, but does dealing Staal fundamentally change who the Penguins are?
October 25 2012 07:54AM
Earlier this week, I looked at the individual point percentage for defensemen in the NHL during five-on-five play for the 2011-12 season. Today, we'll look at how defensemen performed over the last five season (2007-08 to 2011-12). But first, a quick refresher on the concept:
Individual point percentage is a calculation of the number of times an individual player gets a point (either a goal or an assist) relative to the number of total goals scored while he's on the ice. So, for example, if a player is on the ice for fifty goals-for during five-on-five play over the course of the season and he gets a point on twenty of them, his individual point percentage would be 40%.