P/60 stats: How useful and reliable are they? Does production increase linearly with ice time?

[Pierce Hawthorne]

wow, this sure is a whole lot of not understanding the stat

1) People can and do take QoC and QoT into account
2) People can and do break p/60 down by situation. it's people who look at raw point totals who tend not to actually
3) Zone starts don't really have an impact, but you can take that into account too if you really want

the irony is of course the people who cry for more context are dismissing a stat like P/60 that applies context to production. It's literally nothing like +/-, nor is it meant to be used to forecast future production. Weren't you just complaining about people doing that?

no, that's a whole lot of understanding the stat far more then you possibly could apparently. Like I said, it gets used on HF boards terribly and you are just further helping to solidify that.

 

[zeke]

P/60 does nothing to account for either A) The difficulty of minutes players are getting, B) The type of minutes a player is getting(In the form of PP, ES, or PK minutes), or C) The type of minutes a player is getting(In the form of extra minutes while trailing or less minutes with a lead, etc).

a) every time I use it and see it used, quality of competition is also used or mentioned.
b) p60 is most always used by game situation - 5v5, ES , PP, etc. I never see it used for overall ice time.
c) true. but team's actually attack more when trailing and play it safer when leading, so I'm not sure that effects the numbers like you want it to.

 

[McFlyingV]

But Matthews and mcdavid have extremely similar roles, both being elite quality of competition #1 centers. Mcadavid has probably even had better linemates overall but close enough that I don't care.

the difference in their roles is purely ice time related, not toughness of minutes - in other words, this is the PERFECT CONTEXT in which to use p60. there couldn't be a more appropriate time to use it. that doesn't mean it's a perfect solution, but it is exactly the right time to use the stat.

Playing almost 20% more minutes per game is not similar usage whether you want to act like it is or not.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

a) every time I use it and see it used, quality of competition is also used or mentioned.
b) p60 is most always used by game situation - 5v5, ES , PP, etc. I never see it used for overall ice time.
c) true. but team's actually attack more when trailing and play it safer when leading, so I'm not sure that effects the numbers like you want it to.

What? What do you mean effect the numbers like I want it to? There's literally not a single agenda that I am trying to push in this thread.



As for the other two... Like I said, 90% of the time I see anyone use it in an argument they do not use any other context. They just play the P/60 card and that's it, without adding anything else to back up the argument. If you're in different conversations(Which I find very hard to believe as other posters have pointed out in this thread already) then congratulations.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

no, that's a whole lot of understanding the stat far more then you possibly could apparently. Like I said, it gets used on HF boards terribly and you are just further helping to solidify that.

if you want to portray yourself as some sort of authority, maybe you shouldn't make a lengthy post demonstrating how little you understand about how people use it

 

[zeke]

What? What do you mean effect the numbers like I want it to? There's literally not a single agenda that I am trying to push in this thread.

hmm, I was hoping it was an agenda, because the only other explanation is that you just don't understand.

 

[SupremeNachos]

i find p/60 to be useful

Is it as good as P90?

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

if you want to portray yourself as some sort of authority, maybe you shouldn't make a lengthy post demonstrating how little you understand about how people use it

Never mind, not even worth the time to try and explain things anymore. Sometimes forget who it is I'm talking to. Carry on in your bubble.

 

[biotk]

That is simply not true. I've seen you make posts comparing P/60 of players with different roles, i.e. McDavid vs. Matthews threads. There's nothing wrong with P/60 as long as you recognize a player playing 21 minutes a night vs one playing 16 or 17 minutes can hardly be compared in a logical way.

For example, lets say player x has a 3.5P/60 playing 21 minutes a night while player y has a 3.4P/60 playing 16 minutes a night. You could say player y produced similarly in a lesser role, but you could not conclude that player y would produce similarly in player x's role, nor could you conclude that player y is close in calibre to player x.

At 5v5, Matthews and McDavid are pretty decent to compare. Their ice-time is fairly similar (McDavid's is much higher for their non-5v5 ice time). Their QoC and QoT are pretty similar. Matthews' oiSH is high (however, his 5v5 p1/60 the previous year was still high with a low oiSH). It seems your real problem is that you don't like the results.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

At 5v5, Matthews and McDavid are pretty decent to compare. Their ice-time is fairly similar (McDavid's is much higher for their non-5v5 ice time). Their QoC and QoT are pretty similar. Matthews' oiSH is high (however, his 5v5 p1/60 the previous year was still high with a low oiSH). It seems your real problem is that you don't like the results.

The results? that show that McDavid is better than Matthews?

 

[McFlyingV]

At 5v5, Matthews and McDavid are pretty decent to compare. Their ice-time is fairly similar (McDavid's is much higher for their non-5v5 ice time). Their QoC and QoT are pretty similar. Matthews' oiSH is high (however, his 5v5 p1/60 the previous year was still high with a low oiSH). It seems your real problem is that you don't like the results.

Ok, but are we going to act like McDavid just doesn't play those other minutes? Are we going to continue to act like fatigue and recovery time are not a thing?

I like the results just fine. McDavid produces more points in a more difficult role on a per 60 basis, and has 2 art ross trophies. There's no debate who is noticeably better.

 

[biotk]

The results? that show that McDavid is better than Matthews?

The results that show that at 5v5 they are close:

McDavid P/60 3.20
Matthews P/60 2.93

Matthews P1/60 2.60
McDavid P1/60 2.3o

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

The results? that show that McDavid is better than Matthews?

Right now sure, but the P/60 certainly paints a picture that would suggest the results will/should be much closer if Matthews ever starts getting the increased minutes McDavid gets. They have very comparable stats in all the categories that are important. Except Matthews doesn't get as many opportunities as McDavid because he doesn't get as many minutes right now.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Never mind, not even worth the time to try and explain things anymore. Sometimes forget who it is I'm talking to. Carry on in your bubble.

you didn't really explain things so much as expressed pointless concerns that were easily dismissed, but if you feel that giving up would be best then I agree

 

[Snippit]

Right now sure, but the P/60 certainly paints a picture that would suggest the results will/should be much closer if Matthews ever starts getting the increased minutes McDavid gets. They have very comparable stats in all the categories that are important. Except Matthews doesn't get as many opportunities as McDavid because he doesn't get as many minutes right now.

Which brings us back to...the second question in the title of the thread.

I was hoping for more discussion on that than anything.

 

[McFlyingV]

The results that show that at 5v5 they are close:

McDavid P/60 3.20
Matthews P/60 2.93

Matthews P1/60 2.60
McDavid P1/60 2.3o

So McDavid produces 10% more at 5v5 per 60 in a harder role. Got it.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

The results that show that at 5v5 they are close:

McDavid P/60 3.20
Matthews P/60 2.93

Matthews P1/60 2.60
McDavid P1/60 2.3o

It took matthews riding a 107 PDO to even come close, with a 12.7 oISH%.

They aren't close.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Right now sure, but the P/60 certainly paints a picture that would suggest the results will/should be much closer if Matthews ever starts getting the increased minutes McDavid gets. They have very comparable stats in all the categories that are important. Except Matthews doesn't get as many opportunities as McDavid because he doesn't get as many minutes right now.

And do you have any evidence supporting playing more minutes will just increase his point totals linearly?

Does fatigue not exist?

 

[Snippit]

it's good for adding context, but it isn't outright perfect. it's pretty dumb to neglect stats for not being completely perfect though. For me, looking at raw numbers and ignoring everything else is stupid

it's also funny that you think p/g is linear and worthwhile but p/60 isn't. it's the exact same idea

Didn’t see this edit the first time.

It’s not the same idea because p/gp doesn’t address the idea of fatigue. From the sample size point yes.

But I don’t remember saying p/g is far superior to p/60. I use both. You literally saw me 2 days ago use p/60

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Which brings us back to...the second question in the title of the thread.

I was hoping for more discussion on that than anything.

I dont think it would be a straight line no. But I also think it stands a reasonable possibility that Matthews' P/60 could actually increase with more minutes.

I haven't actually looked up the QoC or QoT stats for Matthews to be able to predict confidently either way. But that would be the number one factor in the direction his P/60 would go in, IMO. If getting more minutes for Matthews next season were to mean he gets 2-3 extra minutes against other teams 3rd pairings instead of Top pairings, then yeah I think Matthews P/60 probably improves with more minutes.



As for fatigue.... I really dont think that's a factor almost at all. Not in the context of going from 16 minutes of ES ice time a night to say 18 minutes. These guys are professional athletes who train literally every day. If it's a factor it should have minimal impact on the stat line. To me there's far more significant factors that would have an effect.

 

[biotk]

It took matthews riding a 107 PDO to even come close, with a 12.7 oISH%.

They aren't close.

When you combine their last two years:
McDavid P1/60 2.30 with an oiSH% of 10.27
Matthews P1/60 2.22 with an oiSH% of 9.87

 

[snipes]

The results that show that at 5v5 they are close:

McDavid P/60 3.20
Matthews P/60 2.93

Matthews P1/60 2.60
McDavid P1/60 2.3o

The results also show that McDavid has in consecutive seasons had more assists than Matthews has points.

 

[biotk]

The results also show that McDavid has in consecutive seasons had more assists than Matthews has points.

What the F does this have to do with anything being discussed?

 

[McFlyingV]

When you combine their last two years:
McDavid P1/60 2.30 with an oiSH% of 10.27
Matthews P1/60 2.22 with an oiSH% of 9.87

Smart to move on from P/60 to P1/60 in any McDavid-Matthews discussion.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Smart to move on from P/60 to P1/60 in any McDavid-Matthews discussion.

secondary assists aren't super meaningful, so it's smart to do that in most discussions in my opinion