Pavel Bure's ice time in 2000-01 season

[jigglysquishy]

Nicely researched and presented argument.
Why is the ice time important? Bure is in the HHOF and considered one of the most electrifying players ever regardless. Does his ice time affect his legacy in some way?

Correcting incorrect data should always be seen as a valuable exercise.

 

[Fatass]

Correcting incorrect data should always be seen as a valuable exercise.

Okay, if that’s your thing. But Bure was one of the greatest regardless of this gremlin. So really it appears to serve no purpose. There’s a mistake in Pavel’s TOI at one point in his career. But that in no way impacts his legacy of greatness, does it? I certainly appreciate the smarts of the op in regards to data analysis. Clearly he’s one super smart guy. But there is no hypothesis. Yes, there is clearly a mistake in the data, but where is the connection to Bure’s greatness. Is he somehow less great because of this? Is he more great?

 

[pabst blue ribbon]

Okay, if that’s your thing. But Bure was one of the greatest regardless of this gremlin. So really it appears to serve no purpose. There’s a mistake in Pavel’s TOI at one point in his career. But that in no way impacts his legacy of greatness, does it? I certainly appreciate the smarts of the op in regards to data analysis. Clearly he’s one super smart guy. But there is no hypothesis. Yes, there is clearly a mistake in the data, but where is the connection to Bure’s greatness. Is he somehow less great because of this? Is he more great?

Why does this bother you so much? Trying to correct incorrect data for an important context stat like time on ice should be applauded, not questioned with pointless musings like this.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Complaining about someone making data more accurate is a weird point of view generally, but especially in this subforum.

 

[overpass]

Nicely researched and presented argument.
Why is the ice time important? Bure is in the HHOF and considered one of the most electrifying players ever regardless. Does his ice time affect his legacy in some way?

This post is in the By the Numbers forum. Having correct statistics for hockey history is important in itself. And the way the NHL has changed these TOI numbers is just so stupid, it insults my intelligence as a user of these stats.

From a narrative perspective, something has been lost. It's interesting to know that in the 2000-01 season, the Florida Panthers got off to a terrible start, fired Terry Murray and hired Duane Sutter, and then saw their forward ranks depleted by injuries and trade. And that, as a result, Duane Sutter sent Pavel Bure out for 30+ minutes on a regular basis, and Bure scored 40 goals in those last 46 games of the season under Sutter.

Similarly, it's interesting to know that Ray Bourque played 40 minutes for the Bruins in a particular late 90s game. There's a story behind all the highest game TOI totals of the last 25 years. Now those TOI stats have been cut in two and the story is hidden. Imagine if NHL records now showed Darryl Sittler with 5 points in a game instead of 10. Or Sam Gagner with 4 instead of 8.

With regard to Bure's ice time in particular, if you're trying to place his 99-00 and 00-01 seasons among the great goal scoring seasons, having accurate TOI matters. We know Bure played under the disadvantage of having little high end talent among his teammates. We should also know that he had the advantage of huge amounts of ice time. To take one example, I realized the ice time stats had changed because of a discussion about Mike Bossy and Pavel Bure as goal scorers on the HOH board. I think both Bossy and Bure were first class goal scorers, but when you start talking about adjusting their stats, it's relevant that Bure probably played 5-7 minutes more per game than Bossy did in his top goal scoring seasons.

 

[Fatass]

This post is in the By the Numbers forum. Having correct statistics for hockey history is important in itself. And the way the NHL has changed these TOI numbers is just so stupid, it insults my intelligence as a user of these stats.

From a narrative perspective, something has been lost. It's interesting to know that in the 2000-01 season, the Florida Panthers got off to a terrible start, fired Terry Murray and hired Duane Sutter, and then saw their forward ranks depleted by injuries and trade. And that, as a result, Duane Sutter sent Pavel Bure out for 30+ minutes on a regular basis, and Bure scored 40 goals in those last 46 games of the season under Sutter.

Similarly, it's interesting to know that Ray Bourque played 40 minutes for the Bruins in a particular late 90s game. There's a story behind all the highest game TOI totals of the last 25 years. Now those TOI stats have been cut in two and the story is hidden. Imagine if NHL records now showed Darryl Sittler with 5 points in a game instead of 10. Or Sam Gagner with 4 instead of 8.

With regard to Bure's ice time in particular, if you're trying to place his 99-00 and 00-01 seasons among the great goal scoring seasons, having accurate TOI matters. We know Bure played under the disadvantage of having little high end talent among his teammates. We should also know that he had the advantage of huge amounts of ice time. To take one example, I realized the ice time stats had changed because of a discussion about Mike Bossy and Pavel Bure as goal scorers on the HOH board. I think both Bossy and Bure were first class goal scorers, but when you start talking about adjusting their stats, it's relevant that Bure probably played 5-7 minutes more per game than Bossy did in his top goal scoring seasons.

Maybe teams had more good players before the league expanded so much so ice times were more spread out? Then we saw ice time numbers go up for the top players as the league expanded more because they were fewer On each club?
It’s for certain interesting but imo increased ice time doesn’t impact a players legacy of greatness.

 

[Michael Farkas]

increased ice time doesn’t impact a players legacy of greatness.

I'm sorry, you keep this saying this...but is this the claim of the thread?

It reads to me like this is a data issue and op is surfacing it to a group of people that might be interested in such data issues. Maybe I'm missing it, but is there a claim that Bure's greatness - whatever that means - should be affected?

 

[overpass]

Maybe teams had more good players before the league expanded so much so ice times were more spread out? Then we saw ice time numbers go up for the top players as the league expanded more because they were fewer On each club?
It’s for certain interesting but imo increased ice time doesn’t impact a players legacy of greatness.

My assessment is that, overall, ice times for top scorers increased from the 80s to the 90s. Teams used more checkers on their third lines and more goons on their fourth lines, and shortened their shifts. This may have been because talent was stretched thin due to expansion. I would also point to the increased professionalisation of coaching causing teams to manage shifts more closely from the bench. Longer TV timeouts starting in 92-93 allowed teams to skip their fourth line and get their top line back out more quickly.

Some players and coaches were ahead of this trend. For example, Wayne Gretzky regularly played through multiple sets of wingers before Messier switched to centre in January 1984. Phil Esposito did at times as well. Scotty Bowman knew all the tricks when it came to bench and shift management, and I'm sure he got Guy Lafleur out as much as he wanted to, depending on the situation. But overall, there was a clear change from the 80s to the 90s where coaches actively managed to get their top line out more instead of rolling lines.

All of this matters when talking about adjusting stats for era, especially among top scorers. Which is an interest of mine, even if it's not universal to all hockey fans. I think there is a segment of NHL fans that understands scoring levels have varied and looks to the adjusted totals on sites like hockey-reference, and I don't think they realize that other things are not included in those adjustments, like changes in ice time for top scorers. Mike Bossy, who played in Al Arbour's egalitarian system where all four lines were expected to contribute, was in a very different ice time environment than Pavel Bure's Florida teams.

 

[overpass]

I've presented the information that Bure and others had high single game TOI totals cut in half. Now, I've watched a Bure game and tracked his ice time. The Bure TOI I got was very close to the original high totals, suggesting that the original numbers were correct, and it was a bad decision to cut these those numbers in half.

March 17, 2001. Toronto beat Florida 5-3, and Bure scored all three Florida goals. Currently, the box score shows Bure with a TOI of 16:15. On February 18, 2017, the box score showed Bure with a TOI of 32:30.

Here's the video of the game.



I came up with a total of 32:47 for Bure. I usually had to guess at the exact time for the start and end of his shifts, because the camera doesn't show most line changes. 32:47 is only 17 seconds off from the old total of 32:30, supporting my argument that the old TOI totals were correct.

Player​	Period​	Shifts​	TOI​
Pavel Bure	1​	8​	8:42​
Pavel Bure	2​	9​	11:17​
Pavel Bure	3​	8​	12:48​
Pavel Bure	Total​	25​	32:47​

Player​	Period​	Start of shift​	End of shift​	Shift length​	State​
Pavel Bure	1​	20:00​	19:10​	0:50​	EV
Pavel Bure	1​	18:00​	16:30​	1:30​	PP
Pavel Bure	1​	14:45​	14:38​	0:07​	EV
Pavel Bure	1​	12:20​	9:55​	2:25​	EV/PP
Pavel Bure	1​	7:00​	5:20​	1:40​	SH/EV
Pavel Bure	1​	4:25​	3:45​	0:40​	EV
Pavel Bure	1​	2:40​	1:58​	0:42​	EV
Pavel Bure	1​	0:48​	0:00​	0:48​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	20:00​	19:00​	1:00​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	17:50​	16:40​	1:10​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	15:30​	14:03​	1:27​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	13:17​	11:33​	1:44​	PP
Pavel Bure	2​	10:10​	8:05​	2:05​	EV/PP
Pavel Bure	2​	6:40​	5:23​	1:17​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	5:10​	4:40​	0:30​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	3:04​	2:05​	0:59​	EV
Pavel Bure	2​	1:05​	0:00​	1:05​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	20:00​	18:55​	1:05​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	18:24​	15:34​	2:50​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	14:52​	14:20​	0:32​	SH
Pavel Bure	3​	13:05​	11:23​	1:42​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	10:10​	8:45​	1:25​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	8:00​	6:55​	1:05​	EV
Pavel Bure	3​	5:41​	2:50​	2:51​	PP/EV
Pavel Bure	3​	1:25​	0:07​	1:18​	EV

There are also a couple of times where the commentators reference Bure's ice time.

First, at 19:20 of the video: "He does come back into his own end. Domi knocks the stick out of Kidd's hand, and Bure's behind his own icing line! He picks the stick up and gives it back to his goalie. He played over 40 minutes two weeks ago against San Jose."

The current box score for March 7, 2001 FLA vs SJS shows Bure with TOI of 20:06. In 2017, Bure's TOI was listed as 40:12 for this game. The commentator's statement is more reason to believe the old, higher TOI totals were accurate.

Second, at 44:22 of the video: "Duane Sutter said today, talking about Bure, and his speed and all the rest of it, 'Yes, and look for him tonight. He'll have plenty of chances. I'm going to play him a lot.'"

(Also, not relevant to the discussion of TOI, but here are Bure's three goals. First, second, third.)

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Very interesting work - and concerning.

16:15 just sounds wrong for any Bure Florida game where he didn't leave mid-game for something.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Devil's advocate: when the commentator said "He played over 40 minutes two weeks ago against San Jose," could they have been referencing a variant of the original data (which was either correct or was incorrect)?

 

[overpass]

Devil's advocate: when the commentator said "He played over 40 minutes two weeks ago against San Jose," could they have been referencing a variant of the original data (which was either correct or was incorrect)?

Yes, they could well have been referencing the data. So the reference is not completely independent confirmation.

What it does show is that people were aware of the data and engaging with the data while these games were being played. There was a conversation going on. And you would expect red flags to be raised if the TOI data was off by a factor of 2.

First, Harry Neale says Bure played over 40 minutes vs San Jose. So he's aware Bure's recorded TOI is very high. Second, Bob Cole says Duane Sutter told them Bure would get a lot of ice time tonight. So they're having this conversation with Bure's coach as well. And it never came up that Bure actually only played 15-20 minutes, when the data says he played 30-40 minutes?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Agreed - if 40:00 was wrong, surely someone doing play by play would have called bullshit at the time.

 

[overpass]

While it's not numbers-related, I'll post a few thoughts on that Florida-Toronto game, since I watched it.

I don't remember ever watching a Florida regular season game from this Bure era. I remember hearing or reading that Bure circled at centre ice and didn't backcheck. That wasn't exactly what I saw in this game. When Bure was the F1 or F2 on the backcheck, he picked up his man, skated hard if needed, and went right back to the front of his own net or behind the net a few times to clear the puck. I didn't see any "controller disconnected" backchecks.

Some examples: one, two, three

Where Bure conserved his energy was in the neutral and offensive zone. He didn't forecheck if his team didn't have the puck. He didn't make any efforts at puck retrieval. He often stood still with his back to the boards, or coasted in circles. He only skated with purpose when there was a chance for him to receive a pass with speed. Which wasn't often. And yet, all three of his goals were scored in these situations, where he turned on the jets and his team got him the puck with speed.

Here's a clip showing his effort level at times in the neutral/offensive zone.

Here's a clip showing how he takes off when his team wins a defensive zone faceoff.

I would expect Duane Sutter and Bure had an understanding that Bure could play as much as he wanted, do whatever he wanted in the neutral zone or offensive zone, as long as he backchecked and protected his net when needed. And after watching the other Florida forwards, I can understand why. It's really something to see a team with Marcus Nilson and Kevyn Adams as first liners and go-to forwards in all situations. (Although Nilson was pretty good for a fourth liner pressed into first line duty.) With young Olli Jokinen as a top penalty killer at forward. With old Greg Adams playing almost all the RW minutes when Bure was off the ice. There was nobody else to create any offence.

Bure scored his second goal on the power play. Florida gave the puck away twice trying to get the puck to Bure with speed through the neutral zone, as Toronto anticipated the play both times. And then the third time was the charm, late in the power play. Bure flew through the neutral zone with the puck and scored from just inside the blueline. On the subsequent power play, Darcy Tucker stuck like glue to Bure in transition and forced the other Panthers to carry the puck.

 

[morehockeystats]

You should sum both tallies for the TOI and see if either gives a total expected TOI (which is not difficult to deduct).

BTW, the ES report still shows 32:30:

NHL On-line ReportViewer