Leafs on the Dot: How Important is Winning Faceoffs, Anyway?

[TLeafsFan]

How important are winning faceoffs in the context of winning hockey games?

Figure this one out...

12-25-7: Leafs record when winning more faceoffs
14-10-4: Leafs record when losing more faceoffs
1-1-0: Record when faceoffs even

Click to read more...

 

[TLeafsFan]

Maybe Babs won't be motivated to bump Stammer to the wing, after all when he Signs here...

 

[Purity*]

Incredibly overrated stat.

Faceoffs are without a doubt useful but they are not nearly the be-all and end-all that some around here make them out to be. I won't deny that it's a very nice asset to have is a very good faceoff man for those 1-goal situations in the last minute of the game.

In context to winning hockey games? I can't say I've read too many studies in this regard. It would be incredibly hard to gather the data necessary to draw up a reasonable theory as there are so many factors in a hockey game.

 

[ACC1224]

It's more important when you're a good Team.

 

[deletethis]

It's nice to start with the puck but roundly half of the time you don't whether you're good at faceoffs or not. Teams have to have schemes for either situation regardless. Although I wouldn't say to ignore details, there doesn't seem to be a pattern between being good at faceoffs and being a winning team. Here is the top 10 teams for faceoff wins this season:

1. Arizona
2. Carolina
3. Minnesota
4. Anaheim
5. St. Louis
6. Toronto
7. Montreal
8. Pittsburgh
9. Philadelphia
10. Ottawa

 

[Lifeisnice]

It's interesting to see how good face off teams aren't necessarily the better teams. I would have thought more face off wins = greater possession. Just on the basis that your team is more likely to start off with the puck

And isn't possession the new all important stat for wins?

 

[ACC1224]

It's interesting to see how good face off teams aren't necessarily the better teams. I would have thought more face off wins = greater possession. Just on the basis that your team is more likely to start off with the puck

And isn't possession the new all important stat for wins?

Bad teams will be bad teams whether they start with the puck or not. It's an advantage for good Teams though.

 

[Leafidelity]

The PK that wins more faceoffs is the PK that defends for less time in their own end. Its still a pretty important special teams stat.

 

[ShaneFalco]

It's more important when you're a good Team.

And in the playoffs

 

[BIitz]

I'd rather win the faceoff than win the participation ribbon.

 

[TLeafsFan]

[NHL][/NHL]

Bad teams will be bad teams whether they start with the puck or not. It's an advantage for good Teams though.

At the same rate, isn't their just three team in that top ten faceoff list that are also league top tens?

I think I'd argue that overall player quality in the center position is far more valuable than faceoff win rate.

 

[Mess]

When you win the faceoff, you have the puck and your opponent doesn't.

That means you can score goals and your opponent can't.

The object at the end of the game is the team with the most goals wins.

 

[ACC1224]

[NHL][/NHL]

At the same rate, isn't their just three team in that top ten faceoff list that are also league top tens?

I think I'd argue that overall player quality in the center position is far more valuable than faceoff win rate.

My point was if two good teams are playing each other, the one with the better face off percentage will have an advantage over the other.

 

[TLeafsFan]

When you win the faceoff, you have the puck and your opponent doesn't.

That means you can score goals and your opponent can't.

The object at the end of the game is the team with the most goals wins.

I'd say faceoff wins are more important at center ice and the defensive zone.

You can lose the draw in the offensive zone and still end up with the puck before it clears the zone.

Winning at center ice allows you to set up a good rush and zone entry.

Winning in the defensive zone prevents a potential goal off the draw.

 

[Gary Nylund]

My point was if two good teams are playing each other, the one with the better face off percentage will have an advantage over the other.

It seems obvious that winning faceoffs is an advantage (and not only if it's two good teams playing). The question is, is it a significant advantage or is it such a small advantage that it's barely worth mentioning? I suspect the latter is closer to the truth.

 

[Gary Nylund]

When you win the faceoff, you have the puck and your opponent doesn't.

That means you can score goals and your opponent can't.

The object at the end of the game is the team with the most goals wins.

That's awesome, reminds me of Sesame Street.

 

[ACC1224]

It seems obvious that winning faceoffs is an advantage (and not only if it's two good teams playing). The question is, is it a significant advantage or is it such a small advantage that it's barely worth mentioning? I suspect the latter is closer to the truth.

Probably more important at certain times of the game than over the whole 60 minutes.

 

[BackHandShelf22]

It's better to have the puck then not. Teams can get beat out on alot of stats and still end up with wins. There's too many other variables that go along with it. A better sample size would be to take the winning% over 10 years of teams with good faceoff%.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Probably more important at certain times of the game than over the whole 60 minutes.

It does seem intuitively correct that importance increases during special teams play.

 

[Pookie]

It seems obvious that winning faceoffs is an advantage (and not only if it's two good teams playing). The question is, is it a significant advantage or is it such a small advantage that it's barely worth mentioning? I suspect the latter is closer to the truth.

If it's "such a small advantage" that it's moot then how can it be "obvious that winning faceoffs is an advantage"?

 

[Gary Nylund]

If it's "such a small advantage" that it's moot then how can it be "obvious that winning faceoffs is an advantage"?

It's pretty obvious Pookie, I'm sure you'll figure it out eventually.

 

[Menzinger]

It's marginal at best - what happens immediately after is much more important (especially from a possession POV). Though I'd still say it's better to win one than to not.

 

[Jeypic]

When you win the faceoff, you have the puck and your opponent doesn't.

That means you can score goals and your opponent can't.

The object at the end of the game is the team with the most goals wins.

lol reminds me of that player in March madness explaining how his team got out rebounded.

 

[Guided by Veseys]

Only was important when Kadri was doing poorly at them, now that he is doing average enough it doesn't seem to get mentioned.

 

[Semantics]

It's been proven that faceoff wins have a relatively minor effect in aggregate.

That said, situationally they can be important. In OT of a game 7 it's a significant disadvantage if you don't have at least one good faceoff guy.