zeke's Official Top-20 Center Rankings

[Marshy]

the funny thing is that there isn't a stat of any kind, anywhere, that says Kadri is anything less than a #1C.

not one.

Not good enough. Keep crunching the numbers until Kadri is 40th.

 

[Frank Drebin]

The issues is you are looking at this with a very black and white eye. Primary and advanced stats are both very useful in context.

Advanced stats are predictors, while primary stats tell us what you have done. Together they paint a better picture of what you are likely to do going forward.

I HATE the corsi > all group, but am a big proponent of p1/60 as an indicator of what a player brings to the game. But I do understand both are useful when used in context.

And i don't mean to be completely dismissive of advanced stats either - i do believe they can help to tell a story when used with other statistics and proper context.

But i don't think they carry anywhere near the same weight as primary statistics when evaluating players.

How many other players besides Malkin could score 170 points and 75G in their last 140 games with his usage? Yet he's below Matthews for offense in Zekes rankings because of qoc and toi?

Does anybody think that matthews would have paced better than 44G 99pts/82 games if he would have been utilized exactly the same way malkin was?

Yet that's exactly what these adjustments tell us - over the past 2 years Matthews has been better offensively than Malkin.

 

[ricky0034]

Here's a list.

Here are the top goals for percentage centers in hockey, all situations, over the last 2yrs (min 1000minutes), because only goals are 'real', and because goals against are every bit as real as goals for, and are the only things that directly impact wins and losses:

1.Malkin
2.Stamkos
3.Crosby
4.Backstrom
5.Bergeron
6.Wennberg
7.Dubois
8.Kuznetsov
9.Matthews
10.Thornton
11.Bozak
12.Turris
13.Scheifele
14.Zetterberg
15.McDavid
16.Barzal
17.Schenn
18.Barkov
19.Kadri
20.Johansen

good list? these are the centers who outscored the other team by the most while on the ice over the last 2yrs. The only thing that actually directly links to winning games.

(and lmao at Kadri making the top-20 again. trust me that wasn't planned.)

so the Leafs got significantly worse this offseason losing Bozak to add Tavares correct?

 

[BlackFrancis]

What numbers tell you anything of value? Most people will jump towards POINTS because it links to goals scored, which is of course great until you factor in things like goals against you were involved in or accounting for things like whether your "assist" was actually an assist or played a direct role in the goal being scored versus something someone else did at the time but did not receive any statistical reward for.

Right, but until you have something that can definitively say, "This assist was key to a goal while this other assist was a 4 meter pass that hit a teammate by accident," taking all assists equally and leaving the value noisy probably has as much predictive power as having an intern assigned by the home team making those kinds of judgments.

 

[Auston Marlander]

And i don't mean to be completely dismissive of advanced stats either - i do believe they can help to tell a story when used with other statistics and proper context.

But i don't think they carry anywhere near the same weight as primary statistics when evaluating players.

How many other players besides Malkin could score 170 points and 75G in their last 140 games with his usage? Yet he's below Matthews for offense in Zekes rankings because of qoc and toi?

Does anybody think that matthews would have paced better than 44G 99pts/82 games if he would have been utilized exactly the same way malkin was?

Yet that's exactly what these adjustments tell us - over the past 2 years Matthews has been better offensively than Malkin.

That's the thing, there is no way to know, but we do have predictors. It's pretty crazy to say a top player getting more TOI isn't helpful. It is also crazy to say putting a top player against weaker competition isn't beneficial. It seems your issue here is Matthews, which is crazy to me, he is praised across the league for his skill.

 

[Auston Marlander]

so the Leafs got significantly worse this offseason losing Bozak to add Tavares correct?

Correct, we will be a lottery team this year. Thanks Dubas.

 

[zeke]

How many other players besides Malkin could score 170 points and 75G in their last 140 games with his usage?

not many. Matthews is one of the few.

 

[zeke]

Advanced stats are predictors, while primary stats tell us what you have done. Together they paint a better picture of what you are likely to do going forward.

this is not exactly true, actually.

both goals and shot attempts are things players have already done. the question is which stat is a better evaluator of a player's true talent level.

part of the answer to that question lies in the fact that the shot metrics overall do a better job of predicting immediate future scoring, which seems to indicate that they are a better evaluator of true talent (which isn't surprising, given how rare and small sample goals are, and how much fluke and chance can effect them).

 

[zeke]

In my opinion Kadri is right in the lower end of 1cs. 28-31 range with Toews Backlund and Horvat

how dare you compare 30gl/60pt center Kadri with 20gl/50pt centers.

 

[zeke]

all this hoopla over advanced stats is missing the point.

the Leafs centers don't need any advanced stats to make them look good.

 

[zeke]

Again, here are the top-20 Center Point Getters over the last 2 seasons (and I mean guys who have been centers the whole time, not just half the time):

1.McDavid 208
2.Crosby 178
3.Malkin 170
4.Backstrom 157
5.Tavares 150
7.MacKinnon 150
8.Seguin 150
9.Kopitar 144
10.Scheifele 142
11.Kuznetsov 142
12.Staal 141
13.Getzlaf 134
14.Matthews 132
15.Barkov 130
16.Trocheck 129
17.Zetterberg 124
18.Monahan 122
19.Eichel 121
20.Kadri 116
20.Bergeron 116
20.O'Reilly 116

So three leafs in the top 20 based on pure, unadjusted "primary stats".

now we know that some of these centers played more games, some less.

some played more minutes, some less.

some played tougher minutes, some easier.

some had better all-around non-scoring stats, some worse.

we even have ways to measure all of these factors.

we can ignore them all, and the leafs will still have 3 top-20 centers based on the last 2 seasons.

we can factor all of them in, and the leafs will still have 3 top-20 centers based on the last 2 seasons.

 

[Auston Marlander]

Again, here are the top-20 Center Point Getters over the last 2 seasons (and I mean guys who have been centers the whole time, not just half the time):

1.McDavid 208
2.Crosby 178
3.Malkin 170
4.Backstrom 157
5.Tavares 150
7.MacKinnon 150
8.Seguin 150
9.Kopitar 144
10.Scheifele 142
11.Kuznetsov 142
12.Staal 141
13.Getzlaf 134
14.Matthews 132
15.Barkov 130
16.Trocheck 129
17.Zetterberg 124
18.Monahan 122
19.Eichel 121
20.Kadri 116
20.Bergeron 116
20.O'Reilly 116

So three leafs in the top 20 based on pure, unadjusted "primary stats".

now we know that some of these centers played more games, some less.

some played more minutes, some less.

some played tougher minutes, some easier.

some had better all-around non-scoring stats, some worse.

we even have ways to measure all of these factors.

we can ignore them all, and the leafs will still have 3 top-20 centers based on the last 2 seasons.

we can factor all of them in, and the leafs will still have 3 top-20 centers based on the last 2 seasons.

F-. Your job is the get Kadri out for the top 20 and Matthews at the bottom end. Please redo your work and submit again.

 

[hockeyguy1967]

And by official, I mean mine, of course.

So after all the fighting on the other threads, i tried to crank out a stats-based Center ranking, but nothing too fancy. At the same time it's both complicated and simple.


NOTE: IF YOU HATE STATS JUST SKIP TO THE BOTTOM FOR THE FINAL RANKINGS

Here's how I approached it.

I looked at the last 2 seasons. This imo is the best combo of "recent" and "good sample size" to judge a player's current value. But it's not perfect, of course, especially when it comes to very young or old players. But it's a good place to start. Second, I put an absolute cutoff at a minimum of 14 ES minutes played per game.

So firstly, I used "Offense" as my most basic criteria for the list of "top centers". i.e. to be a top center, you have to score like one, and if you can't score, you're not a top center no matter how good you are defensively. To judge offense, I used the even strength p/60 and p1/60 stats - basically I ranked the top-30 centers in p/60, and the top-30 centers in p1/60, and then combined the ranks. I know some people might complain about ignoring PP production, but imo PP production is way too noisy and small sample and any offensive ability the players have should show up at even strength anyways. But that wasn't enough - I wanted to adjust this offense for quality of competition as well - so that guys with easier matchups didn't get extra credit. I used opponents' ice time (TOIqoc) to judge quality of competition, and combined it with the scoring ranks. Note that this used their league-wide TOIqoc ranks, of all centers who played minimum 14es mpg. Here's the list of Top Offensive Centers I came up with:

Top Offensive Centers Last 2yrs

1.McDavid 7
2.MacKinnon 22
3.Scheifele 25
4.Crosby 27
5.Matthews 31
6.Barkov 33
7.Malkin 34
8.Stamkos 37
9.Tavares 40
10.Getzlaf 41
11.Backstrom 46
11.Couturier 46
13.Kopitar 48
13.Barzal 48
15.Toews 49
15.Monahan 49
17.Kuznetsov 52
18.Seguin 54
19.Kadri 56
20.Staal 58
21.Bergeron 60
22.Eichel 60
23.Point 68
24.Duchene 72
25.Stastny 72
26.Zetterberg 73
27.Krejci 89
28.Horvat 92

Some surprises on this list when QOC is factored in - namely, that a guy like Toews is still quite good offensively, while guys like Malkin and Kuz really get hammered for going up against much easier competition than most of the others.


Secondly, I wanted to factor in Possession. This was a bit more complicated, but basically I averaged out zone/score adjusted CF% and xGF% and ranked them, and then averaged out zone/score adjusted CFrel and xGFrel and ranked them......and then combined their ranks. Now key here is that I kind of cheated - because I was using OFFENSE as the main determinant of "top center", I didn't look at league-wide possession, but I only looked at the 28 centers who made the Offense list and ranked their possession against each other. I think the basic principal makes sense, though of course my execution of it is pretty hacktastic. And then, again, I needed to adjust for Quality of Competition, so once again I combined the averaged possession ranks with the TOIqoc ranks, and ranked these 28 centers' possession against each other:

Last 2yrs best offensive centers in order of Possession:

1.Bergeron 10
2.McDavid 12
3.Crosby 18
4.Couturier 21
5.Kopitar 28
6.Toews 29
7.Barkov 30
8.Scheifele 32
9.Tavares 39
10.Backstrom 39
11.MacKinnon 41
12.Getzlaf 44
13.Stastny 49
14.Staal 51
15.Kadri 54
16.Stamkos 55
17.Matthews 57
18.Point 59
19.Zetterberg 60
20.Seguin 61
21.Barzal 61
22.Malkin 70
23.Monahan 71
24.Duchene 72
25.Eichel 74
26.Kuznetsov 82
27.Krejci 83
28.Horvat 87

this seems to pass the smell test to me. all the guys with the great defensive reputations are right at the top, while the guys at the bottom are the guys you expect.

So now with these two lists, I just combined the qoc-adjusted offense and the qoc-adjusted possession, and it spat out this list:

ZEKE'S PERFECT TOP-20 CENTER RANKINGS

1.McDavid 19
2.Crosby 45
3.Scheifele 57
4.Barkov 63
5.MacKinnon 63
6.Couturier 67
7.Bergeron 70
8.Kopitar 76
9.Toews 78
10.Tavares 79
11.Getzlaf 85
12.Backstrom 85
13.Matthews 88
14.Stamkos 92
15.Malkin 104
16.Staal 109
17.Barzal 109
18.Kadri 110
19.Seguin 115
20.Monahan 120
​

Some guys stick out in surprising ways here - Couturier comes out looking really, really good, while a guy like Malkin drops way down. Guys like Kuznetsov and Eichel don't even make the list at all. Thing is, I don't have any problem with any of those results. In the end, I love how the list rewards guys like Barkov and Bergeron while also acknowledging the question marks on guys like Malkin and Barzal.

Note, though, that this isn't a prediction of which centers are necessarily the best RIGHT NOW, heading into THIS SEASON. To do that I would want to add in some kind of Age adjustment, which would favor which would bump up kids like Eichel, Barzal, Matthews while knocking down guys like Backstrom and Staal a bit.



So what do you think? does my list beat the NHL's? or the famous Hockey Guy's?

or is it poop?

Why didn't you add Drai to the list as a center? Using your stats he would be in your list.

 

[zeke]

Why didn't you add Drai to the list as a center? Using your stats he would be in your list.

Drai/Giroux are disqualified because they've spent half their time on the wing (and done much better on the wing to boot).

 

[BlackFrancis]

we can factor all of them in, and the leafs will still have 3 top-20 centers based on the last 2 seasons.

I'm not even disagreeing with the premise that there's no logical way available of getting those Maple Leaf centers off your/any list. But I would ask, does their presence in the rankings correlate more closely with their value as players or the fact the Maple Leafs were the 5th and the 2nd highest scoring team for those seasons? Did the Leafs score more because of those players excellence or are other factors not being taken into account?

I think the statement, "Going into next season, the Maple Leafs have 3 of the top 20 point producing centers of the past two seasons, " shouldn't be even mildly provocative. But I think you would have some bigger problems with your ranking next summer if Tavares had stayed on LI and Weight were still the coach. Namely, a top 5 goal producing center tandem on an abject loser due to system.

I know you are trying to incorporate various measures reflecting Goals Allowed's impact, but all they appear to do is move the top 20 around a little. I'm unsure there's anything out there to help balance things out, and there probably won't be until the existing metrics or new metrics are tied back to Pythag.

 

[Carlzner]

HFBoards bend the knee to your Leaf Center Gods. 3 #1C's unprecedented in NHL history.

4 cups already and at least another 4 now that Tavares is in the mix. The most unbelievable feat in sports history.

 

[zeke]

I'm not even disagreeing with the premise that there's no logical way available of getting those Maple Leaf centers off your/any list. But I would ask, does their presence in the rankings correlate more closely with their value as players or the fact the Maple Leafs were the 5th and the 2nd highest scoring team for those seasons? Did the Leafs score more because of those players excellence or are other factors not being taken into account?

I think the statement, "Going into next season, the Maple Leafs have 3 of the top 20 point producing centers of the past two seasons, " shouldn't be even mildly provocative. But I think you would have some bigger problems with your ranking next summer if Tavares had stayed on LI and Weight were still the coach. Namely, a top 5 goal producing center tandem on an abject loser due to system.

I know you are trying to incorporate various measures reflecting Goals Allowed's impact, but all they appear to do is move the top 20 around a little. I'm unsure there's anything out there to help balance things out, and there probably won't be until the existing metrics or new metrics are tied back to Pythag.

I think i've been working my butt off here trying to remove team factors from the equation.

but sometimes it's healthy to take a step back and look at the big picture.

The Leafs have done much better the past couple of years than most "objective" observers predicted. This was their opinion based on their assessment of the quality of the players on the roster.

Yet here we are, after 2yrs of this, and still all these "objective" observers refuse to move the needle for any leafs player, and admit they may be better than they thought. Neither team success nor individual stats seem to have any impact on people's perception of the leafs players. No matter what happens, Matthews is not a franchise player, marner and nylander are good but not great one dimensional wingers, kadri is a 2/3 center, and morgan rielly is not even a top pair dman. it's weird, no?

I mean, why are we even talking about the leafs here, really? this thread isn't about the leafs.

 

[zeke]

HFBoards bend the knee to your Leaf Center Gods. 3 #1C's unprecedented in NHL history.

4 cups already and at least another 4 now that Tavares is in the mix. The most unbelievable feat in sports history.

The Preds have had 4 #1 dmen for a few years now, no?

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

HFBoards bend the knee to your Leaf Center Gods. 3 #1C's unprecedented in NHL history.

4 cups already and at least another 4 now that Tavares is in the mix. The most unbelievable feat in sports history.

Non leafs fans are making a bigger deal out of the ranking than leafs fans for some reason

 

[Marshy]

Is it greedy of me to want 4 top 20 centers on the Leafs?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Right, but until you have something that can definitively say, "This assist was key to a goal while this other assist was a 4 meter pass that hit a teammate by accident," taking all assists equally and leaving the value noisy probably has as much predictive power as having an intern assigned by the home team making those kinds of judgments.

...so all stats are worthless.

 

[Andrei79]

This is a good effort.

I was honestly expecting Tavares and Matthews in the top 5, and thought Matthews was actually a bit low there.

There are some outliers, in the sense their advanced stats are either favorably or unfavorably hit by circumstances and usage. Here I'm thinking of Malkin, Couturier, Monahan and Kadri, among others.

I'm not too surprised by Kuznetsov being out of the top 20, as consistency is reward here and where his value lies is in being able to take his game to a top 5 level moreso than staying there for 80 games.

In any case, good work.

 

[hockeyguy1967]

Drai/Giroux are disqualified because they've spent half their time on the wing (and done much better on the wing to boot).

Add them in they are centers. Or does it not help your screwed results?

 

[Machinehead]

Add them in they are centers. Or does it not help your screwed results?

Giroux didn't play a lick of center last year.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

how dare you compare 30gl/60pt center Kadri with 20gl/50pt centers.

I may have underrated Kadri in that post. I will continue to think about it