Primary Thoughts on Secondary Assists
by J.P. on Aug 11, 2009 10:30 AM EDT
112 comments
Ah, the secondary assist. No other ostensibly positive statistic in hockey receives such derision.
Sidney Crosby wins a scoring title, and it must be because of all the cheap secondary helpers he picked up along the way. Nicklas Backstrom racks up more than 25% more helpers in his first two seasons than his Calder classmates, and the credit goes to a trio of big guns. And so on.
To be sure, playing with talented teammates has its benefits - being able to dish the puck to a teammate who might in turn set up a goal is certainly going to result in higher point totals than skating with linemates who either don't or can't pass. But let's get one thing straight - the League's best playmakers aren't getting fat on secondary assists... or are they?
Evgeni Malkin led the NHL in assists in 2008-09, and only 28% of his 51 even strength helpers (also a League best) were secondary assists. Marc Savard and Mike Ribeiro (tied for second in assists), had 65% and 62% primaries, respectively. But while the top thirty-one assisting forwards averaged 63% primary assists at 5-on-5, that number drops way down to 51% at 5-on-4. (Data after the jump.)
It's a fairly safe assumption that there are more two-assist goals on the power-play than at even strength, so a high percentage of secondaries is to be expected, and there are some pretty remarkable ratios here. Only 36% of Evgeni Malkin's power-play assists, for example, were primaries. Joe Thornton and Savard were at 37%. Ryan Getzlaf (who finished tied for third in power-play assists) was at 35% primaries. But perhaps most impressive of all, Crosby - who led the League in power-play helpers - notched 75% of those as primaries.
So what's the point? I'm not sure. There's nothing inherently "better" about a primary assist - they can be every bit as ugly and cheap as any secondary helper. But if you're looking to knock a player for free-loading on someone else's hard work, get the facts straight... and look at the power-play.
Below are two charts, each of which contain the League's top thirty-one forwards in terms of assists and each of which shows their primary and secondary assists per sixty minutes of ice time. The first chart ranks the players by primary assists per sixty minutes of 5-on-5 ice time, while the second ranks them by primary assists per sixty minutes of 5-on-4 ice time.
5 recs |
112 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Interesting stuff. I’m not quite sure what it all means, but I am pretty impressed that Crosby has such a high percentage of primary assists on the PP. If I’m reading the fancy charts right, looks like Semin has an extremely high “primary rate” at 5-on-5.
Yeah Semin is right up top for ES and PP… if only he could play 80 games a year.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
And there it is! The first Semin knock. Now someone needs to mention of how he takes dumb penalties…
It’s not a knock. He has great numbers but plays few games. It’s reality. Are you telling me you don’t look at Semin’s per-game production and wish he had more games played?
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
“Fewer” games, maybe “few” was the wrong word choice.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
It may be reality, but it’s still a knock and it’s one of the main complaint about him when discussing whether or not he should be traded.
And sure I’ld like to see him play more often, but I think he’s good enough to make up for it. For instance, in the past 3 seasons Semin has averaged 2 games played less than Sidney Crosby, but you don’t hear any Penguins fans talking about trading him. Now I’m not saying Semin is Crosby, but even in his this last season (where he only played 62 games) he had one less point than Mike Richards and Martin St. Louis and he had as many or more points than Rick Nash, Jonathan Toews, Phil Kessel and a few of other guys who I don’t see thrown on the fan trading block so easily.
I realize I’m probably just over reacting to the anti-Seminism in Capsland, but I think my reaction is, at the very least, somewhat warranted.
by superjuan on Aug 11, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I don’t follow how it is anti-Seminism. It’s a valid complaint about his game…I don’t see anywhere in F&B’s statement that says the team needs to dump him just how nice it would be to see a full season out of him.
by Yoshietree on Aug 11, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That said, “anti-Seminism” is a winner.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Aug 11, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I’m not anti-Seminic but I do support a two-[line] solution whereby AO and AS can peacefully coexist with limited shared access to their prized mutual asset, [Nick Backstrom].
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Just thought I should restate that I’m not calling you “anti-Seminic”, I’m just obviously way sensitive to any comment that points out his “injury proneness.”
I got ya. I’m just a sucker for a bad joke.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
For instance, in the past 3 seasons Semin has averaged 2 games played less than Sidney Crosby, but you don’t hear any Penguins fans talking about trading him.
That’s picking and choosing data to make it fit the conclusion. The mean may be similar but the median for Semin is 63; for Crosby it’s 77. Of the 37 games Crosby has missed in that time span, 28 were due to one specific injury, whereas Semin has missed time with a half dozen different ailments and has missed significant time each of the last two seasons.
That’s picking and choosing data to make it fit the conclusion.
DMG, you would know about that wouldn’t you! Kidding, kidding…
Like I said, I’m not saying Semin is Crosby but my point still highlights the fact that even in his most injured season, Semin is pretty darn productive.
my point still highlights the fact that even in his most injured season, Semin is pretty darn productive.
I don’t think that was your initial point at all….your point was that anti-Seminism runs rampant through-out Capsland. But even if that was your initial point, I can’t think of a single person who has ever disputed Semin’s talent or production when healthy…the recent rankings here prove that. Who would you have ranked him before on that list?
I don’t think that was your initial point at all…. your point was that anti-Seminism runs rampant through-out Capsland.
Not only was that not my initial point, but I never said it was rampant.
I just said that it existed. I definitely wouldn’t call it “rampant” but, judging by the poll in the “trade Semin?” fanpost, it is stronger than I expected. That’s why I felt I could overreact to any statement (like F&B’s) that is used by those who are in favor of trading him.
(Also note that I’m not accusing F&B of “anti-Seminism”, I’m just saying his statement is a favorite of those who are “anti-Seminic”.)
by superjuan on Aug 11, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Very high. Not sure why. Maybe it’s a shoot-first mentality (though AO’s not nearly that high and is obviously much more of a shooter). Maybe it’s that when he’s not with AO and Nick, he either has to score himself or he has to be the one setting up the goal (i.e. a dish to Flash is unlikely to result in Flash then feeding a goal-scorer).
Most likely, though, it’s just a small sample with an outlier of a result.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’m not sure if I’m right but it looks like the top of the PP list are all guys that play down low, except for AO and Richards. Maybe just being down closer to the net increases primary assists because there are fewer passes left to get a quality shot. Moving the puck from the point is going to require more than one pass to get a great chance off a lot of the time. Richards has a ton of primary As but also has a ton of secondary As. He loves that fake-slapshot-backdoor-pass so that could be a big reason he has so many primary As, but I don’t watch enough PHI hockey to know for sure.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Maybe just being down closer to the net increases primary assists because there are fewer passes left to get a quality shot.
Also probably a better chance that these guys are getting primaries on shots that are stopped and rebounds put in.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I thought about that but that theory applies to the big bombs from the point as well. You would think if the rebounds were a huge cause of the primary assists you’d see guys like Pronger, Getzlaf, McCabe, Souray, etc. (although some of those big bombs may just be on teams with crappy PPs but Hemsky and Weiss are both on the list so at least McCabe and Souray are valid).
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
Don’t forget, these lists are just Fs (for apples-to-apples sake).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
That makes so much more sense. My bad.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s a fairly safe assumption that there are more two-assist goals on the power-play than at even strength, so a high percentage of secondaries is to be expected
What is this assumption based on? There is more puck control on the PP so it’s likely that more people will touch the puck, thus leading to a lot of secondary assists; but I don’t see why it would be a higher percentage than ES. At ES a puck needs to be broken out, moved through the neutral zone, and then usually requires at least one offensive-zone pass before a goal is scored. That’s going to yield 2 assists as well. It’s pretty rare in the NHL for one guy to lead a rush up ice and score, AO notwithstanding. The main situations where unassisted or one-assisted goals happen are on offensive (defensive for the team that turns it over)/neutral zone turnovers and I don’t immediately see why that number would be higher at ES than PP.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:41 AM EDT reply actions
Yeah, that’s the assumption – it’s more likely that a settled offensive possession will result in two assists than a five-on-five goal that might be the result of a turnover or what not. I haven’t done the research, but I’d bet on it being a higher rate of two-assist goals on the PP.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
And I think that the fact that there are so many outrageously high 2nd assist rates on the PP (as opposed to 5-on-5, which more or less tracks to overall assists and has almost no 50-50 splits) indicates that the opportunity for 2nd assists on the PP is greater.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah that’s what I thought, I was just trying to pin down the theory. The way they give out secondary assists I would think almost every goal would have two. (The give-and-go secondary assist still makes no sense to me)
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
I read recently that the average is about 1.7 assists per goal, which means roughly 58.8% of assists overall should be primaries (though, of course, you could come up with a scenario where that isn’t the case – 17 goals with two helpers and three unassisted, for example).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah I’ve seen that 1.7 number as well. I’m no math whiz but doesn’t 1.7 assists per goal indicate that about 70% of goals have secondary assists (plus/minus the correction for unassisted goals)?
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, but that means that 58.5% of assists are primary (1/1.7).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
But shouldn’t there also be a fair amount of goals off a face-off win on the PP that wouldn’t have a secondary assist.? At least I think these types of goals are more likely on a PP than 5-5.
/no stats to back this up
by Scott in Shaw on Aug 11, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
The power play data tell me what teams run their power play through forwards and not “quarterbacks” on the blue line. Crosby in Pittsburgh, Whitney in Carolina, for example. A forward with a better than 2:1 ratio of primary to secondary assists is seeing an awful lot of the puck. Makes me scrtach my head at the Havlat number. Didn’t they sign a guy to quarterback their power play for a go-zillion dollars?
If you've read this far...seek help.
Offensive Dman <> PP QB. See also Mike Green. Just because you can skate and play with the puck doesn’t make you an ideal PP QB. I have a feeling Campbell is largely responsible for getting the puck up ice and in the zone, but doesn’t do all the puck handling once they are set up.
Also, I wonder if Crosby’s numbers would look different if Gooch were healthy for the full year since the PIT PP runs through Gooch when he’s healthy.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, in 2007-08, Sid’s ratio was 2.28:1/60 – less primary-heavy, but still better than 50/50.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yup. I wasn’t trying to knock Sid, just trying to apply what I know about the Pens offense to Peerless’ hypothesis.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Also, I wonder if Crosby’s numbers would look different if Gooch were healthy for the full year since the PIT PP runs through Gooch when he’s healthy.
Pittsburgh does run stuff through Gonchar, but I’d still say it operates through Crosby. He’s the guy Gonchar looks to feed once everyone gets setup in the zone.
Where Pittsburgh really relies on Gonch is lugging the puck through neutral. Malkin can do it, but isn’t as good (doesn’t pass it enough, can become predictable). When Gonchar was out that was one of the biggest areas they missed him, his skill and decision making, relying on young defenseman like Letang and Goligoski.
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
by Hooks Orpik on Aug 11, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks. That makes sense. So you’re saying Gooch’s role is more like the role I suggested Campbell plays in CHI.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
more like a kick returner fielding punt and getting his team good field position….
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Aug 11, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Great analysis, JP.
It’s all dependant on a situation — it’s more impressive to get a secondary assist on a tic-tac-toe goal on a power play than it is to get the primary assist on an empty netter that you just passed it up through the zone….But they all count just the same, I suppose.
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
I feel a little dirty defending your guys, but I feel worse seeing ill-informed comments all over the place.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah well the secondary-assist knock has blown back on our own guy lately so you can feel a little less dirty.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t get that. I mean, if you think assists are less valuable than goals, that’s fair and valid. If you think AO makes Backstrom, that’s your thing. But why make a distinction between primary and secondary assists? It’s moronic.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
You know I agree completely. It’s a stat that recognizes value. You can’t start parsing the numbers to try to degrade someone. Some primary assists are earned by the guy that really makes the play happen, sometimes the secondary assist guy made the play. Should we start looking at goals that bang in off shin pads or are incidental deflections (off either team) to determine who is really a good goal scorer? Tough guys get credit based on their PIM totals but there are usually a ton of bad PIMs in there that you wish they didn’t take. You can’t parse that out. The second-assist mantra is just a way to dismiss a playmaker’s game, and it’s stupid.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have no problem with the secondary assist. In fact, in a lot of cases the secondary assist can require more skill than the primary. What I personally object to is the secondary and, for that matter, primary assist that is totally inadvertant and comes off a guy’s butt or skate blade. If I were making the rules, I’d eliminate any assist where the puck doesn’t at some point touch the player’s stick. If we’re rewarding skilled play, then I say eliminate the luck factor when it comes to awarding points. How many times have you seen a play where a guy is just skating through the zone and the puck will mistakenly glance of his boot without him even realizing it and then it results in a goal. Now, I know someone will say what about all those goals that deflect in off a player’s leg or skate? In theory, many of those are lucky as well, but the player is at least putting himself in position for those pucks to hit him. And the reality is, someone has to get credit for a goal, but not every goal has to have two assists. Secondary assists are here to stay and, as we’ve seen, play an important role in winning scoring titles. So let’s make it all about skill and not chance.
On the other hand, how many times have we seen a board battle where a guy kicks it to a teammate and creates a scoring chance?
It’s funny, as soon as I posted that I thought about the scenario you described and I agree, a player who makes that kind of play should be rewarded. What I’m suggesting is getting rid of the garbage assists. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I would be in favor of hockey following how baseball does it where the official scorer gets to decide if it’s a hit or an error.
That would just make the stats meaningless because they are so subjective. I basically ignore giveaways, takeaways, and hits because of the variation among arenas. And no, I do not think adjusting the stats sufficiently cures the defect that I place any stock in their value. For something like points, which is a major factor in several award races, not to mention HoF, I’d rather it stay as consistent and objective as possible.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
it already is subjective though. sometimes you get an assist by virtue of being the third to last guy to touch the puck. sometimes you even get that assist if the opposing team touches it in between when you do and the goal is scored. there is nothing objective about that.
and to add, i think things should stay the way they are for exactly the same reasons you listed. we have a tough enough time comparing goal scorers from 20-30 years ago to those from the dead puck era, i dont want to have rule changes taken in to account. for the same reason, i object to things like larger goals (who’s idea was that anyway, I want to kick them in the shins).
It is subjective but not like letting each arena do the scoring. At least it is centrally subjective so it has a common statistical dictator. What do you think would have happened to Malkin and Crosby’s assist totals down the stretch if the Mellon Arena scorekeeper got to assign the assists? (Note: I am only using the Pens as an example because they were the 2 players involved in the scoring/Hart race with AO so thus the players most likely to see their stats buoyed by hometown scorekeepers)
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I was under the assumption that the official scorer was changed on a game by game basis like the referees are. At least that would seem fair. Do you know if that is how it is done now?
Teams have the same official scorer all season. Those guys do giveaways, takeaways, hits, etc. The league keeps the official stats (points and PIM). I’m not sure who does the +/- stuff.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
What do you think would have happened to Malkin and Crosby’s assist totals down the stretch if the Mellon Arena scorekeeper got to assign the assists?
Well, the Mellon Arena scorekeeper(s) does assign the assists (and the goals). Off-ice officials may be employed by the league, but they permanently work at their home rink, whether it be Mellon or MSG or Verizon. They don’t rotate like the refs and linesman. And to imply they’d be stuffing assists for the hometown player is not reality since the league reviews all those goals. Ironically, nhl.com did a lengthy story on the off-ice officals at Mellon who have been together for decades.
The league reviews points. Exactly. The league doesn’t review hits, giveaways, or takeaways so those stats are completely at the whim of the hometown scorekeeper.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ve never seen anything that implies that the scorekeeper has biases in favor of the home team, just that they have biases in general towards scoring plays a certain way.
I know we have those adjusted stats, I’d be curious if there was a different statistical distribution based on if it is the home team or away team. It would make some sense, given that the scorer sees the home team 41 times a year and can (unintentionally) score players differently because he (unintentionally) expects differently from them.
That would just make the stats meaningless because they are so subjective.
Well, aren’t penalty calls subjective? And the resulting power plays and the goals and assists that come out of them are also the result of subjective calls. And as far as not wanting to affect the way points are accumulated, you could make the argument that eliminating the two-line pass has allowed for a lot more goals and assists that Gordie Howe and Wayne Gretzky never had a chance to accumulate. The point I’m trying to make is that the league makes a lot of changes that affect scoring. Adjusting the way a sub-segment of assists are handed out would just follow in that line.
Whether something is a PIM is subjective, whether the guy got the PIM is not. Whether a goal was scored 5 on 5 or 5 on 4 is not subjective. Once the PIM is called the die are cast. Fans can, and will, Bitch about the call but it’s subjective in a statistical sense.
Changing the rules that dictate how the game is played will affect scoring, but not in the same direct sense as changing how scores are awarded or counted.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d like to see some way of weeding out junk assists from the point totals. Primaries can be junk, and secondaries can be junk.
When, say, Tom Poti shovels the puck to Ovechkin in the defensive zone and AO makes 3 guys miss and buries a 30-foot ripper, what has Poti contributed to the play that is worthy of a point?
Anyway, everyone here knows this song, so I’ll cut it short. But I’d like to see some method of accounting for cheap points. And I definitely think goals count for more than assists, in general. But not always.
When, say, Tom Poti shovels the puck to Ovechkin in the defensive zone and AO makes 3 guys miss and buries a 30-foot ripper, what has Poti contributed to the play that is worthy of a point?
A) Gained possession of the puck. B) Moved the puck to a teammate. Neither of which should be underestimated; that is the entire essence of a breakout. It’s not Poti’s fault AO did the rest, but he did his job and should be rewarded the same way everyone else is.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
"moronic" seems a touch strong, no?
In 1983/84, Grant Fuhr had 14 assists. I suspect they were almost entirely secondary assists. (Data is currently not available.)
Doesn’t it seem entirely plausible that, in general, secondary assists contribute less with the creation of a goal than primary?
If not, then why aren’t there tertiary assists? Wouldn’t that link in the chain be just as important as the others?
by bilspacecadet on Aug 11, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn’t it seem entirely plausible that, in general, secondary assists contribute less with the creation of a goal than primary?
In general, yes. So if you want to take something away from the guys who are piling up more secondary assists than primaries, by all means go for it.
My point was more that if a guy like Backstrom is a product of AO – if his stats are padded thanks to AO’s scoring prowess – why differentiate between primaries and secondaries? Was Backstrom really getting fat (heh) on AO-to-Kozlov or Kozlov-to-AO goals after he made the initial pass? Doubtful.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I know you value knowledge and truth but even at the expense of casting light on Crosby?!?! Wouldn’t have counted on that.
It’s a good topic to have though, and good data to discuss.
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
by Hooks Orpik on Aug 11, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Begrudgingly, that shirt/avatar is kinda epic.
http://wewintrophies.com/ - 12 major trophies in national and international competitions. Be a part of the next one.
by Bald Pollack on Aug 11, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks, BP.
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
by Hooks Orpik on Aug 11, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
My favorite example personally is the one-timer. If Crosby feeds Gonchar perfectly at the point and Gonchar rips the puck home, it’s a great play by Crosby, but if the exact same thing happens and it nicks Chris Kunitz on the way in, suddenly it’s invalid? Makes no sense.
Or Backstrom makes a nice pass back to Ovechkin on the point, Ovechkin shoots just wide, the puck takes a bounce out to the front and Semin buries it. Is that any less impressive from NB’s standpoint if Ovechkin doesn’t miss by a quarter of an inch and Backstrom gets the primary?
Maybe the inherent nature of assists (they rely on the actions of others) make them just naturally open for a lot of debate and skepticism. No doubt there’s a bunch of goals that award an assist (or two) that may not have contributed much to the play….But the reason they credit two assists is they mostly do have something to do with why the puck ended up in the net.
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
by Hooks Orpik on Aug 11, 2009 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Somewhat related – you should be able to assist on your own goals. In the scenario above, if Crosby feeds Gonch and then tips in the Gonch shot, is his initial pass any less impressive just because he’s the one that finished the play? Of course not.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
another example where a player deserved the goal and the assist:
by Natty Bumppo on Aug 11, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
when I first saw that, I thought it was Nylander scoring a goal in Varlamov’s debut.
I need new glasses.
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Aug 11, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
90 percent of life is showing up. If a guy gets assist after assist — primary or secondary — then he’s showing up for a lot of good stuff. Personally, I don’t care if the assists are the result of the puck hitting the odd body part, the referee, or the mascot (ok, so that’s against the rules). If a guy gets an assist, his team scored a goal, which is the object of the exercise, whatever the method employed to obtain it.
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Aug 11, 2009 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
That argument seems highly analogous to the argument you could make in favor of Mike Green’s defensive prowess.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Schultz has his own rules.
Schultz’ Roolz:
Rool 1: He sucks
Rool 2: See Rool 1
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Aug 11, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I thought the showing up part was accounted for by +/-. The assist is supposed to indicate that the player had a significant enough impact to lead to the goal.
That has always made me wonder why some things are scored the way they are. For instance, that own goal against Pittsburgh 2? seasons ago. Crosby got credit for the goal by virtue of the fact that he touched it last, even though the puck did not cross the line due to anything he did. Total horseshit, that should be credited as an own goal. I bring that up because it is one incident that comes to mind, not to pick on Crosby.
Similarly, how many times is an assist given to someone just because they touched the puck or had it deflect off a skate unintentionally, or the goalie gets one not because he sprung the forward, but because he moved the puck to the corner? There are always judgment calls, but I’m sure I’ve seen cases where a pass is made in the defensive end (not even a breakout pass) and the player on the receiving end skates up and scores in an amazing individual effort. Hypothetically, I think there is no assist, however, generally at least one is awarded. Of course I could be wrong and the official scorers are supposed to take the impact the individual player had into account.
Crosby got credit for the goal by virtue of the fact that he touched it last, even though the puck did not cross the line due to anything he did. Total horseshit, that should be credited as an own goal.
I can see virtue in the ‘last guy who touches it gets the goal’ rule because it removes subjectivity from the equation.
Somehow it is handled correctly in soccer though. You can take a shot, have it hit a defender and go in, and you get the credit. If the defender shoots it into his own net, it is an own goal. That’s pretty easy. Especially with replay.
The assists thing is more difficult, not as difficult as my most absurd idea, however. While writing that post I pondered whether one assist should be handed out per goal, but broken up into 50% or 25% chunks, like a sack or a tackle in football. Then I decided that is nearly completely not feasible.
Somehow it is handled correctly in soccer though. You can take a shot, have it hit a defender and go in, and you get the credit. If the defender shoots it into his own net, it is an own goal. That’s pretty easy. Especially with replay.
I don’t think that’s the case though. Take this play from the 2006 World Cup as an example. I don’t know that’s a clear example of an own goal or a non-own goal. The factor in hockey where the puck is much smallar than the ball, it’s harder to see what happens, it can hit three or four people on the way into the net, guys are falling, skates a sliding around…it’d be a nightmare to have to call it.
Not really, I’m really talking about eliminating the obvious ones. And that play was pretty clearly a goal, the defender didn’t change the direction of the ball, and if he had gotten a little more on it would have popped it up over the bar. Its not like he backpassed to the keeper who mishandled it.
And that play was pretty clearly a goal, the defender didn’t change the direction of the ball, and if he had gotten a little more on it would have popped it up over the bar.
Case in point: it was ruled an own goal.
Touche. I wouldn’t have called it an OG, but I’m not an official scorer am I ;)
But that was a judgment call anyway. there are plenty of examples where a retarded monkey couldn’t get it wrong.
Here is one I’ve always wondered about:
Player A dumps the puck at the goaltender and skates to the bench, and completes a line change. Then, the goaltender stops it and then mishandles it on a clearance or something, and it goes in the net. Now you have 5 guys on the ice who weren’t there for the “shot”. they get +1, the “shooter” on the bench gets the goal but no +1. How the hell is that scored?
It doesn’t happen a whole lot but there are situations where a guy can get the assists (even primary!) and not be on the ice when the goal is scored. I don’t see how that devalues the achievement. I think you scored your hypothetical correctly, G for the last guy to touch the puck and + for the 5 guys on the ice.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree wholeheartedly on the idea that owngoals should be counted as such. Not only does it prevent people (Like Crosby in this situation) from being awarded a goal for no reason, it establishes another stat that could be seen as negative, like an error in baseball or a penalty. I have no clue why they don’t do this already, anyway.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
I have no clue why they don’t do this already, anyway.
I think it’s a combination of it being so difficult to call in most cases where it goes in off the defending team and there being so few instances of clear own goals in hockey.
I think it’s because “own-goal” is too fuzzy. How obvious does it have to be? Does the guy have to actively be shooting it into his own net? How about Shamo in game 3 v. the Pens? That shot wasn’t even on net until he put it in. How about a cross-crease pass off the skate? That doesn’t “deserve” a goal for the guy that gets credit for it but it’s not an obvious own-goal. There’s no easy way to do it.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
ShaMo’s would be an own goal. I think skates are what makes this impossible in hockey. If it goes off the blade of the stick it is pretty obvious that he changed the direction and could have avoided it. Skates are a different beast, the soccer analogy is a shot that deflects off your back. I doubt that would be ruled an own goal unless you are running backward, and even then..
I like the way it is in hockey. Every goal should be accredited to the team that scores it, IMO.
Frankly it’s a little unfair if the other team botches it or the goal scorer has NOTHING to do with the play, but usually since he’s the last person to touch it, he does (like a deflection off an opponent, or a misplayed puck).
It would be cool if they deducted own goals from defensemen’s goal totals (can you tell I’m not a defenseman).
Pensburgh.com -- it's like the Max Talbot of blogs*
*not just because we only work for 12 minutes a night
It would be accredited to the team. It shows up on the score sheet, just like a regular goal. It just wouldn’t be accredited to a player who essentially did nothing.
I’m not saying things should change. This is one of those idiosyncrasies of hockey, it has always been that way and it probably should continue to be just for consistency.
Go look at Roenick’s 500th goal. Sometimes the goalie makes a mistake, sometimes it’s the D. The scoring system may not be perfect but I don’t see any adjustments that will make it easier, clearer, or more accurate.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
In soccer, it’s only an own goal if it’s a way the person who knocked it in knocked it in using a legal fashion that he could actually do. So, ideally, head, foot, knee, chest, all owngoals. In hockey, you can only legally score (without a deflection) with your stick. That’s how I feel you’d adjudicate it.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
Honestly, I don’t discount secondary assists at all. If you win an offensive zone draw, your d-man shoots and the rebound is hit home, you get rewarded. If you make a great outlet pass that leads to a two on one, you’re rewarded. There are some sports that don’t reward the work that leads to a point. I mean, no one looks at who has the most sacrifice bunts to put a guy on second to third. But the stat exists to see who helped lead up to the score. Secondary assists are equally important to the sac-bunt, and since I’m an NL guy, they mean almost as much as the RBI does itself.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on Aug 11, 2009 1:25 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I did not realize Joe Thornton got so many secondary assists. Like the post said, no wonder these guys win singing titles.
Proud member of the "Don't Trade Marleau" club.
by SharksFanEst.1994 on Aug 11, 2009 4:09 PM EDT reply actions
Not the singing, just that he could do it in English.
by Fehr and Balanced on Aug 11, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yes, there is certainly enough anti-seminism on the Caps Boards. Love that term.
It seems that any time that another team’s star is rumored to be available (Bouwmeester, Heatley, Pronger, Kovalchuk; etc.), fans on all our boards suggest trading Semin to get whoever it is. Trading Semin would essentially mess up our secondary (i.e. non-Ovy) scoring. Trading him for D-man would definitely be the case. Even trading him for someone “better” on offense would likely be a bigger Cap hit.
Most of Semin’s time missed to injury were from two basic injuries. In 2007-2008, most of the games off were due to a sprained ankle (the original injury and aggravating it). In 2008-2009, the games were primarily due to the back injury (pinched nerve) and the reinjury of his back thanks to the dirty, unpenalized cross-check by David Backis of the STL Blues. Crosby’s missed games were mostly due to the high ankle sprain in 2007-2008 and then the groin injury around All Star break this year. Semin had a few other ailments but the vast majority were from the sprained ankle and the back problems.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
82 | 54 | 15 | 13 | 121 |
|
Atlanta
|
82 | 35 | 34 | 13 | 83 |
|
Carolina
|
82 | 35 | 37 | 10 | 80 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
82 | 34 | 36 | 12 | 80 |
|
Florida
|
82 | 32 | 37 | 13 | 77 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Puck Headlines: Modano gets his Red Wings; Jason Smith arrested
- Jaroslav Halak arrives in St. Louis, greeted by expectations
- In which Canucks' Ryan Kesler annihilates us in NHL 2K11
- Tampa goalie Dan Ellis leaves Twitter, and it's for the better
- Video: Patrick Kane on Blackhawks' summer of change, trick-shots, 'Twilight' books and Jonathan Toews
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
