How much weight do you give 5 on 5 for how good a scorer a player is?

[LightningStorm]

When comparing players as scorers, how much weight do you give to how good of an EV scorer a player is? With all other things being equal. Do you consider the better EV scorer to be the better overall scorer no matter what, in a tier defining sense? If not that much, do you think it determines rankings within a tier? Basically as a tiebreaker between 2 scorers who score a similar amount of points. Or do you think EV vs PP points are completely irrelevant, and a point is a point either way?

My opinion is the middle one. I think it's fair to have it affect rankings within a tier, but having it be tier defining is taking it too far. Often times I see it used as justification for why one player is actually not far off offensively from another player who's clearly a tier above him. I think it's also a case of valuing quantity over quality too much when people say most of the game is played 5 on 5. It is, but goals are scored at a higher rate on the PP. Then there's the frequently repeated myth of there being less PP's in the playoffs,

How do you guys view EV vs PP scoring?

 

[norrisnick]

Point is a point. Players don't control opportunities, deployment, or coaching strategies.

 

[koyvoo]

Highlighting 5v5 production is very relevant as the majority of the game is played at 5v5 and it shows a picture of production during the most common circumstances.

What weir to me is that on these forums, or recently, PP production, specifically players who produce at a much higher clip on the PP are downplayed.

The power play is one specific aspect of the game. Your team gets more scoring chances. If certain players really excel in that situation, excel with the extra space, to the point where it becomes an anomaly to his 5v5 production, it doesn’t make the PP specialist any less valuable. If a player is tearing up the league on the PP…that’s exactly west he’s doing. Tearing up the league, and his team likely greatly benefits for it.

 

[ijuka]

Well, a point is a point. Of course, if you play on PP, you are expected to score more. Then again, you playing on PP probably tells something about your ability as well.

 

[Nathaniel]

Ev points are the hardest points to come by. A point is a point but ev points are superior obviously

 

[JaegerDice]

5v5 is vastly more representative of player impact and quality than PP scoring.

 

[Three On Zero]

Even strength ability outweighs special teams ability when it comes to points

 

[wetcoast]

I didn't vote as I didn't like the options as there is more nuance to this as overall game and context matter over a career and too often the 5 on 5 scoring in a single season argument is overblown and seems to be subjectively driven depending on the player.

 

[LightningStorm]

5v5 is vastly more representative of player impact and quality than PP scoring.

Even strength ability outweighs special teams ability when it comes to points

So are you guys saying that the player who scores more EV (all things being equal) is automatically the better scorer no matter what? Or that for 2 players who's overall scoring is within a similar range/tier, EV is a good tiebreak? I think each of these is 2 very different things.

 

[Three On Zero]

So are you guys saying that the player who scores more EV (all things being equal) is automatically the better scorer no matter what? Or that for 2 players who's overall scoring is within a similar range/tier, EV is a good tiebreak? I think each of these is 2 very different things.

If you had two players, both scored 80 points

Player A scored 60 points @ ev
Player B scored 50 points on special teams

Player A would be by far the more desirable player

 

[Diglett]

They all count the same on the scoresheet.

 

[JaegerDice]

So are you guys saying that the player who scores more EV (all things being equal) is automatically the better scorer no matter what? Or that for 2 players who's overall scoring is within a similar range/tier, EV is a good tiebreak? I think each of these is 2 very different things.

If I had a player that scored 60 points at EV and 0 pts on the PP, I would take him over a player that scored 45 points at EV and 30 pts on PP.

Not only does scoring on the PP require a ref to make a call to put you in that game state (which is, at best, inconsistent), the game in that state is much more rigidly systems driven. If I take that same 60pts ev player with 0 pts on the PP and put him into a different role on a pp or a different pp system, his point totals could significantly change. Much less likely the 45pt ev guy suddenly becomes better at driving play at 5v5.

 

[LightningStorm]

If you had two players, both scored 80 points

Player A scored 60 points @ ev
Player B scored 50 points on special teams

Player A would be by far the more desirable player

While I don't think this is a realistic scenario to occur in conjunction with each other (due to the different number of penalties that would need to be called for both scenarios to realistically happen), this is what I voted for in the middle option. With the same number of points, I do think EV is a good tiebreak.

 

[LightningStorm]

If I had a player that scored 60 points at EV and 0 pts on the PP, I would take him over a player that scored 45 points at EV and 30 pts on PP.

Not only does scoring on the PP require a ref to make a call to put you in that game state (which is, at best, inconsistent), the game in that state is much more rigidly systems driven. If I take that same 60pts ev player with 0 pts on the PP and put him into a different role on a pp or a different pp system, his point totals could significantly change. Much less likely the 45pt ev guy suddenly becomes better at driving play at 5v5.

I do agree that the 45 pt EV player is less likely to improve, but if a player good enough to score 60 EV is completely inept on the PP, he must have some deficit in his offensive skill. Whether that be not having the vision/passing ability to run a PP or a good shot to be a finisher on it. Needless to say I'd be suspicious of both of these players for widely different reasons.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Games are won via the special teams battles. I'd weigh them pretty close.

 

[Madap]

Anyone who thinks a powerplay point is the same as an even strength point in terms of determining a players ability either knows zero about hockey or has zero rational thinking.

To what extent an even strength point is more telling can certainly be up for debate.

 

[dirtydanglez]

a pp goal is worth the same as an even strength goal. i dont get why people put even strength points on a pedestal.

 

[daver]

At the very top tier, irrelevant.

McDavid went from ES scoring machine thru his first 4 years to a PP scoring machine the last couple. Does it matter?

Crosby won his first Art Ross on the strength of his PP scoring then was an ES scoring machine during his peak.

 

[Nathaniel]

a pp goal is worth the same as an even strength goal. i dont get why people put even strength points on a pedestal.

I'm guessing you've never played hockey?

 

[dirtydanglez]

I'm guessing you've never played hockey?

i have. not at a very high level.

 

[MAB1]

I do agree that the 45 pt EV player is less likely to improve, but if a player good enough to score 60 EV is completely inept on the PP, he must have some deficit in his offensive skill. Whether that be not having the vision/passing ability to run a PP or a good shot to be a finisher on it. Needless to say I'd be suspicious of both of these players for widely different reasons.

This is ignoring the fact that NHL reffing actively game manages.

A great ES player playing on a "clean" team will get less powerplay opportunities than a comparative player on a "dirty" team. The more penalties a team gets called for, the more powerplays that team will get as well. This benefits a player who thrives on the powerplay while punishing the great ES player who won't get as many chances on the powerplay since his team plays a clean game.

 

[LightningStorm]

At the very top tier, irrelevant.

McDavid went from ES scoring machine thru his first 4 years to a PP scoring machine the last couple. Does it matter?

Crosby won his first Art Ross on the strength of his PP scoring then was an ES scoring machine during his peak.

Yeah, I do think there's a difference between people dismissing a player who racks up secondary assists on the PP and those who have often dismissed Stamkos, who's shot is a major reason Tampa's PP has been deadly over the years. Being a key reason for a PP being deadly, whether having a great shot like Stamkos or being able to run a PP (like Kucherov) isn't something you can simply dismiss, which is at least the implication I get from people at times who obsess too much over 5 on 5. Having a great PP is a key reason to our success since 2015.

 

[biturbo19]

Highlighting 5v5 production is very relevant as the majority of the game is played at 5v5 and it shows a picture of production during the most common circumstances.

What weir to me is that on these forums, or recently, PP production, specifically players who produce at a much higher clip on the PP are downplayed.

The power play is one specific aspect of the game. Your team gets more scoring chances. If certain players really excel in that situation, excel with the extra space, to the point where it becomes an anomaly to his 5v5 production, it doesn’t make the PP specialist any less valuable. If a player is tearing up the league on the PP…that’s exactly west he’s doing. Tearing up the league, and his team likely greatly benefits for it.

Yeah. This is kind of the crux of it. Context is king. It's where you have to consider team composition in a broader sense. You need a mix of all types.

Great 5v5 production is obviously very useful and valuable to me. Especially if we're talking about players who can play with lesser linemates, lesser offensive opportunities, and still generate good points (typically goals in that sense). That "Bottom-6" guy who can produce 15G+ reliably without a lot of help or minutes, and basically no PP time. Vs a guy who takes "1st Line Minutes" and only produces 15G at even strength with way more minutes...They're going to have to make up a lot on the powerplay or something.

But you do still need those guys who are real weapons on the Powerplay and pile up those points at a higher rate. Special Teams can be an absolutely decisive advantage in games. You have to have guys who excel at both ends of that (PP+PK) along with niche roles like Faceoffs, guys who bring a Physical Element, etc.


There are also players that pile up flattering point totals because they're in a situation where they're on a top PP unit. Despite not being great at it. Even if they're in a minor role, or it's not a great unit...scoring rates are going to produce more points on the man advantage. That's where i don't really value that so highly.

But you have to always consider production in context, if you want a really nuanced picture of what a player is and where they're valuable or not.

 

[ole ole]

When comparing players as scorers, how much weight do you give to how good of an EV scorer a player is? With all other things being equal. Do you consider the better EV scorer to be the better overall scorer no matter what, in a tier defining sense? If not that much, do you think it determines rankings within a tier? Basically as a tiebreaker between 2 scorers who score a similar amount of points. Or do you think EV vs PP points are completely irrelevant, and a point is a point either way?

My opinion is the middle one. I think it's fair to have it affect rankings within a tier, but having it be tier defining is taking it too far. Often times I see it used as justification for why one player is actually not far off offensively from another player who's clearly a tier above him. I think it's also a case of valuing quantity over quality too much when people say most of the game is played 5 on 5. It is, but goals are scored at a higher rate on the PP. Then there's the frequently repeated myth of there being less PP's in the playoffs,

How do you guys view EV vs PP scoring?

Well Ov has almost 100 more PP goals than Gretzky already. I guess 5on 5 Gretzky is untouchable as the best goal scorer of all time.

 

[Bouboumaster]

When comparing players as scorers, how much weight do you give to how good of an EV scorer a player is?