After the break, you will find far too many geeked out stats on the Faceoff's
When I am keeping stat for Root sports, I track faceoff's by player and location of faceoff.
Player numbers are easy to understand.
Location is slightly different. On a screen, graphically, it is easy to follow, describing it on paper, not so easy.
But basically, in the WHL, there are 9 locations for faceoffs.
So here goes, I will start at the top of the stats, and work my way down.
Overall
Seattle was 33 out of 58, for a win percent of 57%.Portland was 25 out of 58, for a win percent of 43%
By period
| Seattle | Portland | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Period | Won | Out Of | Percent | Won | Out Of | Percent | ||
| 1st | 11 | 16 | 69% | 5 | 16 | 31% | ||
| 2nd | 7 | 17 | 41% | 10 | 17 | 59% | ||
| 3rd | 14 | 22 | 64% | 8 | 22 | 36% | ||
| OT | 1 | 3 | 33% | 2 | 3 | 66% | ||
What is odd if that the 2nd period was probably Seattle's best played period, but their worst in Faceoff's.
Player stats
| Seattle | Portland | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Won | Out Of | Percent | Won | Out Of | Percent | |||
| Barzal | 11 | 20 | 55% | Petan | 7 | 20 | 35% | |
| Delnov | 8 | 15 | 53% | De Leo | 8 | 14 | 57% | |
| Eansor | 9 | 15 | 60% | Turgeon | 5 | 12 | 42% | |
| Elliot | 3 | 4 | 75% | De Champlain | 2 | 7 | 29% | |
| McKechnie | 1 | 1 | 100% | Leier | 1 | 2 | 50% | |
| Swenson | 0 | 1 | 0% | Bjorkstrand | 1 | 1 | 100% | |
| Troock | 0 | 1 | 0% | Schoenborn | 1 | 1 | 100% | |
| Yakubowski | 1 | 1 | 100% | Bittner | 0 | 1 | 0% | |
So you can tell that Seattle basically uses three players, with Elliot mixed in. Portland uses 4. The players with 1 or two faceoffs usually are guys that take them after the primary player is tossed out.
Individual Player against player
| Barzal | 6 | vs | De Leo | 5 | De Leo | 5 | vs | Barzal | 6 | |
| Barzal | 3 | vs | Petan | 1 | De Leo | 2 | vs | Delnov | 0 | |
| Barzal | 1 | vs | De Champlain | 0 | De Leo | 1 | vs | Eansor | 0 | |
| Barzal | 1 | vs | Leier | 0 | ||||||
| Barzal | 0 | vs | Turgeon | 2 | Petan | 4 | vs | Eansor | 8 | |
| Barzal | 0 | vs | Bjorkstrand | 1 | Petan | 1 | vs | Barzal | 3 | |
| Petan | 1 | vs | Delnov | 1 | ||||||
| Delnov | 6 | vs | Turgeon | 3 | Petan | 1 | vs | Swenson | 0 | |
| Delnov | 1 | vs | De Champlain | 1 | Petan | 0 | vs | Yakubowski | 1 | |
| Delnov | 1 | vs | Petan | 1 | ||||||
| Delnov | 0 | vs | De Leo | 2 | De Champlain | 1 | vs | Elliot | 3 | |
| De Champlain | 1 | vs | Delnov | 1 | ||||||
| Eansor | 8 | vs | Petan | 4 | De Champlain | 0 | vs | Barzal | 1 | |
| Eansor | 1 | vs | Turgeon | 0 | ||||||
| Eansor | 0 | vs | De Leo | 1 | Turgeon | 3 | vs | Delnov | 6 | |
| Eansor | 0 | vs | Leier | 1 | Turgeon | 2 | vs | Barzal | 0 | |
| Turgeon | 0 | vs | Eansor | 1 | ||||||
| Elliot | 3 | vs | De Champlain | 1 | ||||||
| Leier | 1 | vs | Eansor | 0 | ||||||
| Yakubowski | 1 | vs | Petan | 0 | Leier | 0 | vs | Barzal | 1 | |
| McKechnie | 1 | vs | Bittner | 0 | Bjorkstrand | 1 | vs | Barzal | 0 | |
| Swenson | 0 | vs | Petan | 1 | Bittner | 0 | vs | McKechnie | 1 | |
| Troock | 0 | vs | Schoenborn | 1 | Schoenborn | 1 | vs | Troock | 0 | |
I love this one, because it shows head to head. The home team always has the advantage in last change, so they can set the match up almost every time.
By Location
| Seattle | Portland | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | Won | Out Of | Percent | Won | Out Of | Percent | ||
| 1 | 1 | 4 | 25% | 7 | 12 | 58% | ||
| 2 | 4 | 11 | 36% | 3 | 12 | 25% | ||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 100% | 1 | 3 | 66% | ||
| 4 | 1 | 2 | 50% | 0 | 0 | 0% | ||
| 5 | 9 | 13 | 69% | 4 | 13 | 21% | ||
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 0% | 1 | 2 | 50% | ||
| 7 | 2 | 3 | 33% | 0 | 1 | 0% | ||
| 8 | 9 | 12 | 75% | 7 | 11 | 64% | ||
| 9 | 5 | 12 | 42% | 3 | 4 | 75% | ||
So a faceoff location for one team is the opposite for the other. So a faceoff location of Left defensive zone(location 1) for Seattle is a Right offensive zone (location 9) for Portland.
So it looks like from the table that if a team could choose it's best location, they both would want an offensive zone faceoff on the left side (location 8).
Conclusion
For this one game, both teams were very close to each other in faceoffs, with Seattle slightly better. And amazingly enough, the scoreboard was the same.
10 comments :
Good stuff. Why don't you do this every game!? :) And while you're at it, can you start tracking Corsi and Fenwick ratings for each player...that would be cool to see. (btw...in case it wasn't obvious, just kidding, did really like seeing the faceoff stats though)
Clearly shows the matchups well in the chart showing individual stats. Eansor is the one Coach K is counting on to both win the faceoff against the top line and also shut them down if he doesn't.
He has certainly been rising to that opportunity.
When I do the ROOT sports stats, I can almost get the Corsi and Fenwick ratings. Not on a player basis, but a team basis, since I dont keep track of what each player does.
I will be doing Faceoffs again, and will have them for sure for a ROOT game.
I will have a post tomorrow with another interesting stat I kept. Plug, Plug
But, how did they do in faceoff's during the losing streak.
You, may have proved my point. They won the majority of faceoff's in a game they won.
Obviously I cant answer the stats during the losing streak. But I would guess you are right about losing a lot during the streak.
Its very interesting, but in my opinion, one very important level of data is mnissing. The in game situation of the faceoff. (5 on 5, PP, PK , 4 on 4)
Let me explain: (note....I was not at the game, so its purely from scoresheet and game summary info)
Barzal took 5 more faceoffs than Delnov and Easnor, which is the number of PP the tbirds had. Barzal being on the 1st PP unit most likely took a majority of the first faceoffs of the PP.
(same thinking is valid for the PK where Easnor is playing a lot)
also it would explain a lot of the matchups in faceoffs. (DeLeo Vs Barzal on a tbird pp and Easnor vs Petan on a Pot PP)
In all I think it goes a bit against your previous post that Easnor was matched up to the Petan line. I think it might seem that way because Portland might roll the 2 top line more often (especially losing ) than the tbirds.
I think the coaches said at one point in a previous year that they try to match up the defense more and just roll their forward line.
The faceoff data does not show that they avoided Barzal vs Petan and the stats showing who is on the ice for each goal does not show that.
That said, Easnor has been a very, very good two way player and the lastest trades will only benefit him in the scoresheet.
Wow we are really geeking it up. Love it! But I seriously doubt, except goals scored off a face off or within a few minutes of a faceoff, without any changeovers really matters.
Love it! We are geeking it up! However, how does one explain the face offs lost or won when a goal is not scored in the ensuing play? If a goal is scored after a face off then I understand the stat, until then it's just a stat that really doesn't matter. I do appreciate the stats but it really doesn't matter unless a goal is scored.
You can prevent the opponent from scoring a goal by winning faceoffs as well, especially on the PK.
Post a Comment