Are even strength points underrated in hockey ?

[North Cole]

I mean Dallas just lost a series in part because their net special teams was 64% vs 136% for the other team.

Even strength is worth more but when the margins are so thin, a team scoring 4 PP goals and going 100% on their PK against you, is a very large deficit to make up over six games.

 

[Pavels Dog]

It just allows certain players to pad their stats and put up gaudier stat lines. RNH's recent 100 point season for example.

The conclusion to draw from that isn't "PP points are overrated" but "context matters". Do you for example consider Zach Hyman one of the best Even-strength goalscorers in the NHL, or do you apply context that playing with McDavid helps a ton?

Overall, PP points are underrated imo.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

I used to think ES points were everything, but the more you look into playoff scoring the more you realize more often then not ES scoring ends up basically a wash and who wins and loses a series is basically determined on special teams. I still think ES scoring is important but I actually think PP scoring is under rated right now.

 

[byrath]

I think some players that get 30-40 points with no/minimal PP time get overlooked, especially by neutral fans, so maybe you could say ES points are underrated in that sense, but I dont think PPP are overrated or anything

 

[TageGod]

They are not underrated to me. You can't win relying on the PP unless it's EDM. They will always go cold. That's why Peterka (he has 25) is so valuable to me, he produces 5v5 not PP.

That is not to say PP is not important, a goal is a goal in the end. It's easier to find someone who can produce on the PP than it is to produce 5v5.

 

[Reality Czech]

The conclusion to draw from that isn't "PP points are overrated" but "context matters". Do you for example consider Zach Hyman one of the best Even-strength goalscorers in the NHL, or do you apply context that playing with McDavid helps a ton?

Overall, PP points are underrated imo.

I'm looking at it from the perspective that it's way easier to score on the power play than it is 5 on 5. So many PP goals are just tap ins or one timers when the goalie has no chance. If two players have 80 points but one guy had 45% of his points on the power play and the other guy had 25% then I'm much more impressed the the second guy than the first.

But yeah, of course context always matters. I can't see how PP points are underrated but you're entitled to your opinion. The PP allows guys to pad their point totals a lot more these days than in the past.

 

[bobholly39]

They are overrated, by a lot.

A point is a point. It's worth the same at ES or PP or SH.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I'm looking at it from the perspective that it's way easier to score on the power play than it is 5 on 5. So many PP goals are just tap ins or one timers when the goalie has no chance. If two players have 80 points but one guy had 45% of his points on the power play and the other guy had 25% then I'm much more impressed the the second guy than the first.

What if the guy is scoring 75% at ES but 50% of that are secondary assists? What if he's also a defensive liability at ES, while the other guy is a +30 at ES who crushes it on the PP?

At the end of the day context is needed to judge players no matter what, just saying as a rule that PP points are easier or overrated is missing the big picture imo.

 

[Toby91ca]

I used to think ES points were everything, but the more you look into playoff scoring the more you realize more often then not ES scoring ends up basically a wash and who wins and loses a series is basically determined on special teams. I still think ES scoring is important but I actually think PP scoring is under rated right now.

That could be considered a flawed view though and the exact reason why ES scoring is underrated. I agree with you that special teams are often the difference makers when it comes to a playoff series. But that's because it is easier to score on the PP than it is at ES. If you have a really good PK and are able to shutdown a team on the PP in the playoffs, it will really help your chances....combined with being efficient on the PP. The reason for this is scoring at ES is hard....probably even harder come playoff time.....that's why you may see it as a wash....it's hard for both teams to do....so it's underrated because you don't see the impact, but if someone could score quite a bit at ES, there would be a differentiating impact that you don't currently see because of the difficulty.

 

[Reality Czech]

What if the guy is scoring 75% at ES but 50% of that are secondary assists? What if he's also a defensive liability at ES, while the other guy is a +30 at ES who crushes it on the PP?

At the end of the day context is needed to judge players no matter what, just saying as a rule that PP points are easier or overrated is missing the big picture imo.

I already agreed context always matters but it doesn't mean we can't generalize as well. I'll never be that impressed by guys who pad their stats on the PP as opposed to guys who excel at even strength. Guys who feast on the PP probably have a boatload of secondary assists as well because of how PP systems work.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

That could be considered a flawed view though and the exact reason why ES scoring is underrated. I agree with you that special teams are often the difference makers when it comes to a playoff series. But that's because it is easier to score on the PP than it is at ES. If you have a really good PK and are able to shutdown a team on the PP in the playoffs, it will really help your chances....combined with being efficient on the PP. The reason for this is scoring at ES is hard....probably even harder come playoff time.....that's why you may see it as a wash....it's hard for both teams to do....so it's underrated because you don't see the impact, but if someone could score quite a bit at ES, there would be a differentiating impact that you don't currently see because of the difficulty.

I would agree. I guess my view point would be ES scoring is more important on an individual level while special teams are more important at a team level. Like if I am trying to decide who is a better player I will go to the player that produces at even strength more.

 

[LiseL]

I think they are. Powerplays are political in nature. The game is stopped based on a judgment call and one player leaves the ice. 5 on 5 is hockey in its purest form. Who could argue that even strength points are not harder to get than PP points. And players who get them are not recognized enough.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1831489209888317574

Shorties are even harder to get. Need the speed as well as the skill.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

EV Points have never been underrated, it's been one of the most often used stat to display how good a player really is without the man advantage, weird to consider it underrated all of sudden because maybe some don't use it the way they should in an argument.

I'd say to score 5v5 is hugely important, as a niche stat that is also a very good one is shorthanded - where you're literally down a man and still produce during it, the level of difficulty for that speaks for itself.

Power play points are more or less "nice to have" but there's so many random ass players that excel in that area because of usage while being on the man advantage.

 

[dgibb10]

EV Points have never been underrated, it's been one of the most often used stat to display how good a player really is without the man advantage, weird to consider it underrated all of sudden because maybe some don't use it the way they should in an argument.

I'd say to score 5v5 is hugely important, as a niche stat that is also a very good one is shorthanded - where you're literally down a man and still produce during it, the level of difficulty for that speaks for itself.

Power play points are more or less "nice to have" but there's so many random ass players that excel in that area because of usage while being on the man advantage.

I disagree vehemently about the shorthanded goals mark.

A lot of teams with high shorthanded goal totals for also give all those goals back with atrocious PKs.

A guy/line who's on the ice for (as a very simplified example) 50 PP goals against and 8 shorties isn't helping the team win more than a guy/line who's on for 40 PP goals against and 3 shorties.

What matters for PKing is how much you limit the damage of the average penalty

 

[Zalos]

With the amount of armchair experts who constantly complain about how certain players aren't that good because they get too many points on the PP... I think ESPs are overrated. A point is a point.

 

[K1984]

I used to think ES points were everything, but the more you look into playoff scoring the more you realize more often then not ES scoring ends up basically a wash and who wins and loses a series is basically determined on special teams. I still think ES scoring is important but I actually think PP scoring is under rated right now.

This is bang on. In addition to misplaced obsessions about EV scoring, "depth" is another red herring as it pertains to relevance. Generally, three things determine winners and losers of playoff series:

- Who has the better special teams on both sides of the puck
- Who has the better goaltending (this is probably the biggest of the 3)
- Which team's elite players win the inevitable matchup against the other team's elite players

The quality of player's on a teams' bottom pair or bottom line (depth!) or who scores more 5v5 goals is irrelevant almost every time over the course of a playoff series. When I look at my team (Oilers) playoff history since 2021, they won on at least 2/3 of these points in each series they won, and lost on 2/3 of these points (or just the goaltending) in each series they lost. At no point did 5v5 scoring or "depth" play a major role in any of them, even after getting lectured by fans on this site that the Kings (annually), Flames, Stars, Nucks, etc. were all going to win going away because of "depth" and not being "power play merchants."

 

[dgibb10]

This is bang on. In addition to misplaced obsessions about EV scoring, "depth" is another red herring as it pertains to relevance. Generally, three things determine winners and losers of playoff series:

- Who has the better special teams on both sides of the puck
- Who has the better goaltending (this is probably the biggest of the 3)
- Which team's elite players win the inevitable matchup against the other team's elite players

The quality of player's on a teams' bottom pair or bottom line (depth!) or who scores more 5v5 goals is irrelevant almost every time over the course of a playoff series. When I look at my team (Oilers) playoff history since 2021, they won on at least 2/3 of these points in each series they won, and lost on 2/3 of these points (or just the goaltending) in each series they lost. At no point did 5v5 scoring or "depth" play a major role in any of them, even after getting lectured by fans on this site that the Kings (annually), Flames, Stars, Nucks, etc. were all going to win going away because of "depth" and not being "power play merchants."

Using the most top heavy, special teams dependent team in the NHL as proof of why depth players and 5v5 doesn't matter is certainly one way of looking at things.

This is the last 7 years of playoffs sorted by 5v5 goal share. Teams highlighted won the cup. The panthers from this past year are 22nd at 54.63%, but were 1st among this years playoff teams.

In fact, each the last 4 stanley cup winners finished 1st in 5v5 goal share in the playoffs.

I used to think ES points were everything, but the more you look into playoff scoring the more you realize more often then not ES scoring ends up basically a wash and who wins and loses a series is basically determined on special teams. I still think ES scoring is important but I actually think PP scoring is under rated right now.

Each of the last 4 stanley cup winners had the best 5v5 goal share in the playoffs.

 

[K1984]

Using the most top heavy, special teams dependent team in the NHL as proof of why depth players and 5v5 doesn't matter is certainly one way of looking at things.

This is the last 7 years of playoffs sorted by 5v5 goal share. Teams highlighted won the cup. The panthers from this past year are 22nd at 54.63%, but were 1st among this years playoff teams.

In fact, each the last 4 stanley cup winners finished 1st in 5v5 goal share in the playoffs.
View attachment 907364


Each of the last 4 stanley cup winners had the best 5v5 goal share in the playoffs.

That's nice. What happened to all the teams with the amazing goal share there that got washed out in the first or second round? Could it be because they had shitty goaltending, poor special teams, lost the elite matchups, or a combo of the three?

 

[Stealth1616]

I would say context matters a bit. A guy that gets no PP time and still is putting up points is pretty valuable. I’d be curious to know the players who had the most even strength points with zero PP last year. All probably under rated players.

But comparing star players who both get ample PP time is a pretty silly comparison in my opinion. One guy gets credit for not being able to get it done when his team is up a man ?

 

[dgibb10]

That's nice. What happened to all the teams with the amazing goal share there that got washed out in the first or second round? Could it be because they had shitty goaltending, poor special teams, lost the elite matchups, or a combo of the three?

6/11 top teams won the cup and that isn't enough for you? The last 4 cup winners all being the best 5v5 performers in the playoffs not enough for you?

Vegas 17-18 got outscored 15-10 EV by Washington in the finals
Carolina got outscored 10-4 EV by Boston
The rags are an interesting one in that they actually got utterly dominated 5v5 in that series, and lost in SPITE of a dominant igor shesterkin series.
Vegas 18-19 outscored SJS overall, they lost 2 OT games in the end.
Colorado did get beat on the power play yes.

The playoffs are short anything can happen.

Here are the teams in PP ranking.

 

[K1984]

6/11 top teams won the cup and that isn't enough for you? The last 4 cup winners all being the best 5v5 performers in the playoffs not enough for you?

Vegas 17-18 got outscored 15-10 EV by Washington in the finals
Carolina got outscored 10-4 EV by Boston
The rags are an interesting one in that they actually got utterly dominated 5v5 in that series, and lost in SPITE of a dominant igor shesterkin series.
Vegas 18-19 outscored SJS overall, they lost 2 OT games in the end.
Colorado did get beat on the power play yes.

The playoffs are short anything can happen.

View attachment 907368
Here are the teams in PP ranking.

At the moment I don't have time to dissect the outcomes of each of those series, but I can guarantee that in each instance, the winner probably had 2/3 of better special teams (not just PP), goaltending, and won the elite matchups.

What you seem to be missing while arguing against yourself is that goaltending and elite matchups are 5v5 statistics. It is very much possible to win a series with elite goaltending and dominating the top line matchups despite losing on special teams and at no point have I said otherwise. In fact that's pretty much exactly how the Oilers lost to the Golden Knights in 2023.

GF% is also a bad stat for this analysis to begin with. There are many, many more factors that go into that result beyond "they're just better 5v5."

I will bet that a team with 90-100% or more combined special teams efficiency is going to beat the opposition in a playoff series 99 times out of 100 regardless of anything else. Same can't be said for elite GF%, as proven by your chart that highlights a bunch of early exits despite those results.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

I disagree vehemently about the shorthanded goals mark.

A lot of teams with high shorthanded goal totals for also give all those goals back with atrocious PKs.

A guy/line who's on the ice for (as a very simplified example) 50 PP goals against and 8 shorties isn't helping the team win more than a guy/line who's on for 40 PP goals against and 3 shorties.

What matters for PKing is how much you limit the damage of the average penalty

I'm guessing your team gives up a ton on the PK.

 

[dgibb10]

I'm guessing your team gives up a ton on the PK.

No not really, 7th in the league over the last 2 years in goals/60 allowed on the PK, and overall an above 80% pk in both years

 

[dgibb10]

At the moment I don't have time to dissect the outcomes of each of those series, but I can guarantee that in each instance, the winner probably had 2/3 of better special teams (not just PP), goaltending, and won the elite matchups.

What you seem to be missing while arguing against yourself is that goaltending and elite matchups are 5v5 statistics. It is very much possible to win a series with elite goaltending and dominating the top line matchups despite losing on special teams and at no point have I said otherwise. In fact that's pretty much exactly how the Oilers lost to the Golden Knights in 2023.

GF% is also a bad stat for this analysis to begin with. There are many, many more factors that go into that result beyond "they're just better 5v5."

I will bet that a team with 90-100% or more combined special teams efficiency is going to beat the opposition in a playoff series 99 times out of 100 regardless of anything else. Same can't be said for elite GF%, as proven by your chart that highlights a bunch of early exits despite those results.

If you think 6/11 top teams in 5v5 goal share winning the f***ing cup is somehow an argument against 5v5 goals being important you might just not understand statistics at all.

 

[HockeyWooot]

As others mentioned a point is a point, context matters.

Elite players at the top of the line up will put up PPP so EVP% read in that context.

Having depth players in your middle six that produce EVP at a high rate with minimal PP time suggests good depth, which is good to have.