Thrashers: With Or Without You
In the 1980s the rock band U2 had a mega hit titled "With or Without You" in which the singer lamented his romantic troubles. This post is not about romance, but it is about how the Thrashers perform with or without certain guys in their lineup.
It is a pretty simple idea really. What is the team winning percentage when _____ is in the lineup and what is the winning percentage when they are out of the line up (winning % = points earned per game). I'll save the caveats until later, for now let's look at the numbers. In the table below "+ Bogosian" means Bogosian in the line up and "- Bogosian" means Bogosian not in the line up.
Atlanta Thrashers Defensemen
| Player | Games | Point Wining % |
TeamPoints Pace |
| + Bogosian | 28 | .411 | 67 |
| - Bogosian | 31 | .406 | 66 |
| + Schneider | 46 | .402 | 66 |
| - Schneider | 13 | .423 | 69 |
| + Valabik |
33 |
.424 | 70 |
| - Valabik | 26 | .385 | 63 |
| + Exelby | 36 | .431 | 71 |
| - Exelby | 23 | .370 | 61 |
| + Oystrick | 39 | .410 | 67 |
| - Oystrick | 20 | .400 | 66 |
Comments: The Thrashers winning percentage is basically unchanged regardless of whether Bogosian and Oystrick dress. The biggest gains come when the two physical defensemen Valabik and Exelby dress.
People sometimes say to me that "stats can't measure everything" which is true in a limited sense. However, if physical play IMPROVES a team they it will show up in at least one stat-winning percentage. However, the Thrashers improved winning percentage with Valabik and Exelby in the lineup is rather puzzling in this respect. I do believe that physical play defensive defenseman can have an impact on the game--but I expect that impact to show upon the defensive stats.
But if you look at the table below, you'll see that the Thrashers have an IMPROVED record when Valabik and Exelby dress because the OFFENSE is better. When those two guys dress the offense averages over 3 goals per game and when they are not dressed the offense falls to 2.65 GFA. In fact, when Exelby dresses the team GAA is actually worse and the PK is MUCH worse. At least in the case of Valabik the GAA and PK% are slightly improved.
| Players Status | GFA | GAA | PP% | PK% | ST% | SV% |
| + Valabik | 3.09 | 3.48 | 22.3 | 75.6 | 11.0 | 88.8 |
| - Valabik | 2.65 | 3.54 | 17.9 | 74.8 | 9.6 | 89.6 |
| + Exelby | 3.06 | 3.56 | 21.7 | 72.1 | 11.2 | 89.5 |
| - Exelby | 2.65 | 3.43 | 17.9 | 80.2 | 9.2 | 89.6 |
So what explains the Thrashers improved performance? Better offensive execution. The Shooting % is higher and the Power Play % is much better. Considering that neither Valabik or Exelby shoot much or play on the PP units, I have a hard time drawing a firm causal arrow between their presence and the team's improved performance. While the team has won more when they have dressed this season, their influence does not show up in the expected categories and therefore I'm more inclined to give credit to the offensive players than these two guys.
Atlanta Thrashers Forwards
Thankfully the Thrashers best offensive forwards (Kovalchuk, Little, Kozlov, White) have essentially missed zero games so they do not show up in the table below. Instead we see mostly checking line forwards and offensive players who have failed to live up to that label (Christensen, J. Williams)
| Player Status | Games Played | Point Win % | Team Points Pace |
| + Peverley | 16 | .469 | 77 |
| - Peverley | 43 | .384 | 63 |
| + J.Williams | 41 | .390 | 64 |
| - J.Williams | 18 | .444 | 73 |
| + Christensen | 42 | .429 | 70 |
| - Christensen | 17 | .353 | 58 |
| + Slater | 46 | .424 | 70 |
| - Slater | 13 | .346 | 57 |
| + C. Stuart | 10 | .450 | 74 |
| - C. Stuart | 49 | .398 | 65 |
| + Crabb | 26 | .288 | 47 |
| - Crabb | 33 | .500 | 82 |
Comments: Rich Peverley and Jason Williams are essentially opposites so far this year. One guy departed just as another guy left. The Thrashers have been a much better team in the 16 games since Peverley has replaced Williams. The Thrashers are playing at 77 point pace with Peverley which is a big improvement--but even a 77 game pace puts the Thrashers just one point ahead of 26th ranked Toronto. Even with Rich Peverley this team is not even close to being a playoff club.
The team is also significantly better with Christensen and Slater in the line up. Honestly, this comes as a major surprise to me. In fact, this pattern causes me to question the very utility of using winning percentage. Christensen has contributed almost nothing offensively all year and yet when he dresses the team's offense is better? Is he the cause or is this a coincidence? I think it is the latter. Likewise when Slater dresses the PK is MUCH worse and the offense is much better--given the fact that Slater's line rarely scores and he is PKer--I'm not sure how much credit he deserves.
Finally, in the AHL call up battle between Crabb and Stuart, Colin Stuart is the run away winner, but his sample size is just 10 games so take it with a huge grain of salt. The team was simply dreadful during Crabb's 26 NHL games but I have a hard time putting all the blame on a guy who averaged just 12 minutes of ice time per night.
Atlanta Thrashers Goalies
Fundamentally the goalies only control 1/2 of the game--preventing goals. And they control less than half since the skaters largely determine shot prevention for the most part. Goalies must do their best to stop those shots.
| Players Status | Games Played | Point Win % | Team Points Pace |
| + Lehtonen | 32 | .375 | 62 |
| - Lehtonen | 27 | .444 | 73 |
| + Hedberg | 24 | .417 | 68 |
| - Heberg | 35 | .400 | 66 |
| + Pavelec | 11 | .273 | 45 |
| - Pavelec | 48 | .438 | 72 |
Comments: The team has a better SV% when Lehtonen plays in a game, but they simply don't score for Lehtonen. That's the story here. Consider the average offense for these three goalies: Hedberg 3.46 GFA, Lehtonen 2.63, Pavelec 2.55. Hedberg has had the benefit of nearly a full goal more of offense to work with. If Lehtonen got that level of offensive support his winning percentage would be much better.
Conclusion: I started doing this I had hopes that it might prove insightful, but now that I've calculated the "with or without" numbers I'm less enthusiastic. My guess is that the sample size is too small for most of these guys and there are confounding factors (like the power play being more productive when defensive guys are dressed) which make it very difficult to sort out cause and effect. I almost chose not to publish this, but I figured some readers might find it interesting.
0 recs |
7 comments
|
Comments
I tend to agree, the sample size is on the smallish side (which isin’t really too bad in itself) but you also have the fact that certain players may have been in or out during tough or easy parts of our schedule. You could account for that if you wanted to by scaling each game by the rank of each team we faced, so that losing to a tough team doesn’t hurt someone’s stats as bad as it does losing to an easy team. But, that would be a lot of work.
by ThrashersRecaps on Feb 22, 2009 5:29 PM EST reply actions
Strength of Schedule
The average Thrashers opponent has a points-per-game of 1.10 so I’ve ranked the players from most difficult opponents faced to easiest.
1.15 C. Stuart
1.13 Exelby
1.12 J. Williams
1.12 Bogosian
1.12 Lehtonen
1.11 Hedberg
1.11 Christensen
1.10 Schneider
1.10 Slater
1.09 Pavelec
1.08 Oystrick
1.07 Peverley
1.06 Valabik
1.05 Crabb
Strange that when Crabb was with the team they played weaker opposition and yet had a lousy record.
These numbers are just wierd. On the one hand I like that they reflect positively on Stuart. I liked what he added last season and thought it was odd that we hadn’t given him a shot this year until now—though he may be a player that performs best just aftera promotion and then levels off. The flip side is that the numbers make Exelby look less like the liability I usually believe him to be.
To me it’d be interesting to see if when Valabik and/or Exelby are dressed what the effect is on penalties for / against. Could their physical play be causing the opposition to take more penalties, giving us more PP opportunities which in turn could explain the raise in PP % and shooting %. The more time you play a game with the man advantage you do typically see higher success percentages since certain players will get a disproportionate amount of time on ice, etc. Just a thought/theory…
There are so many different variables in each game, that I doubt that one player in/out of the guys listed above will really affect things. I’m sure you could skew the stats to however you want kind of like Uecker’s commentary in Major League where some guy has a .800 batting average with a runner in scoring position, in the 3rd inning of the second game of a double header on overcast days or something to that effect.
The missing links??
Ahh those “intangible” things. Here’s where some of these guys may be having an impact that isn’t readily apparent. In general terms -
- TOI distribution … XLB may be allowed to chew up more (or less) minutes on a third pair than say Oystrick was. If XLB plays less and Havelid plays more, as an example, then a better d-man is on the ice more, thus better results. Same could be said for forwards, in either direction.
- Resulting changes in line combinations … depending on who gets benched simultaneously or who gets bumped up or down could make a major impact. Some combos may be more effective than others, plus the change in the line combos can relate back to the last point by pushing people up or down the line chart and changing TOI
- Sometimes it’s the intangibles that motivate the entire team…think about the rush Kovy or Little might get from seeing XLB or Valabik flatten someone. When Slater’s on the 4th line, they often generate really good prolonged forechecking shifts in the opposition’s zone that gets the bench and the crowd hollering. While they may not do anything directly to score a goal or kill a penalty, they may well have the ability to just motivate by example and action and get other more productive members of the team going. It’s essentially the same principle behind why guys will start a fight when their team is down by a few goals and/or playing flat. I also think it’s the #1 explanation for why the team plays better in front of Moose versus Kari (or Pavs). They talk a LOT about how much they respect Moose – I think they tend to feel guiltier when they let him down.
That’s what I’m getting from this. I wouldn’t say with certainty any or all of those are true – I have no idea how much the TOI distribution or line combos may or may not have changed in reaction to the roster changes – but it’s a thought nonetheless. Intangibles like chemistry can count for way more than I’ve found a lot of fans realize. Lots of people thought/think Jason Williams sucks – yet his career numbers prior to arriving in Atlanta and certainly since departing from Atlanta tell a completely different story. shrug who knows. :)

by 






















