Pavel Buchnevich
"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
Why? Faceoffs are extremely unimportant.
The highest faceoff % in the league was 56.5%, so let's assume a great faceoff guy wins 55% of his faceoffs and a weak one 45%.
We can expect a good 1C to take around 18 faceoffs per game. Out of those 18, a great faceoff guy will win 10 and a weak faceoff guy will in 8.
So, over the course of a full game, that's a difference of 2 faceoff wins.
In the offensive zone, a faceoff win's expected to grant around 2 goals per 100 wins. And of course, a defensive zone faceoff win's expected to prevent that many goals per 100 wins. Neutral zone faceoffs have very minor impact so I'll ignore them here. Around 1/3 of faceoffs are neutral zone ones, but that varies widely from team to team. Close enough.
Essentially, what that means is that over the course of 82 games, a 55% faceoff guy will gain about 2 goals for his team and prevent 2 in comparison to a 45% faceoff guy. With the minor impact of faceoff types not accounted for(offense for defensive, neutral zone faceoff wins, defense for offensive, neutral zone faceoff wins), that'd be a total of 2.5 goal for, 2.5 against or so. Just about anything else the player does will have more importance.
If it doesn't matter, why do teams always make sure they have their best face-off men taking the face-offs in key situation late in a game. After all, it doesn't matter if they lose the face-off, according to you. You've computed that the numbers say it doesn't have an important effect on a game to lose face-offs at a high rate or to win them at a high rate. Why not have defensemen take more face-offs then?