We’ve written quite a bit about the importance of zone starts in the past (here and here, for example), and the topic continues to be a hot one among those pushing the envelope in the field of hockey statistics.
But one piece of the zone start equation that hasn’t been looked at much is icings. You’d think that the League would track individual icings (by offender)… but you’d be wrong. Nonetheless, by culling the play-by-play data that the League does put out, we can see who’s on the sheet when the puck is iced.
What would this data tell us? Theoretically, the players who are on the ice and forcing the opponents to ice the puck with greater frequency might be doing a better job of forechecking and creating pressure. And they’re giving their team an advantage by creating offensive-zone faceoffs which the opponents can’t bring on fresh troops to defend. On the flip side of that coin, the high-frequency icers may be having trouble clearing the defensive zone under control and/or getting hemmed in to the point that an icing is necessary, and they’re certainly doing the team no favors by setting up a defensive-zone draw for oft-tired skaters (sometimes causing their coach to burn his timeout).
The data below – which was provided by Neil Greenberg, to whom we’re quite grateful – doesn’t take into account quality of competition or teammates, zone starts or anything other than who’s on the ice when the puck is iced – for and against. It’s mildly interesting, and maybe a launching point for further investigation.
So here are the numbers through Thursday (click on a column to sort):
| Player | EV TOI |
IB | IB/60 | IA | IA/60 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Troy Brouwer | 296.4 | 5 | 1.01 | 21 | 4.25 | 3.24 |
| Alex Ovechkin | 346.8 | 13 | 2.25 | 21 | 3.63 | 1.38 |
| Jeff Schultz | 324.9 | 11 | 2.03 | 17 | 3.14 | 1.11 |
| Mike Green | 122.9 | 4 | 1.95 | 6 | 2.93 | 0.98 |
| Marcus Johansson | 277.2 | 16 | 3.46 | 19 | 4.11 | 0.65 |
| John Carlson | 407.0 | 23 | 3.39 | 26 | 3.83 | 0.44 |
| Mike Knuble | 284.9 | 14 | 2.95 | 16 | 3.37 | 0.42 |
| Nicklas Backstrom | 330.2 | 16 | 2.91 | 18 | 3.27 | 0.36 |
| Dennis Wideman | 405.8 | 19 | 2.81 | 20 | 2.96 | 0.15 |
| Jeff Halpern | 225.2 | 12 | 3.20 | 11 | 2.93 | -0.27 |
| Karl Alzner | 389.5 | 26 | 4.00 | 23 | 3.54 | -0.46 |
| John Erskine | 139.7 | 5 | 2.15 | 3 | 1.29 | -0.86 |
| Matt Hendricks | 219.8 | 13 | 3.55 | 9 | 2.46 | -1.09 |
| Joel Ward | 283.6 | 19 | 4.02 | 13 | 2.75 | -1.27 |
| Cody Eakin | 128.3 | 5 | 2.34 | 2 | 0.94 | -1.40 |
| Alexander Semin | 296.2 | 21 | 4.25 | 14 | 2.84 | -1.41 |
| Roman Hamrlik | 370.8 | 27 | 4.37 | 18 | 2.91 | -1.46 |
| Mathieu Perreault | 117.5 | 5 | 2.55 | 2 | 1.02 | -1.53 |
| Jason Chimera | 299.5 | 18 | 3.61 | 9 | 1.80 | -1.81 |
| Dmitri Orlov | 84.7 | 4 | 2.83 | 1 | 0.71 | -2.12 |
| Brooks Laich | 302.9 | 23 | 4.56 | 12 | 2.38 | -2.18 |
GP – Games Played; EV TOI – Even-Strength Time On Ice; IB – Icings By (i.e. unfavorable); IB/60 – Icings By Per Sixty Minutes of Ice Time; IA – Icings Against (i.e. favorable); IA/60 – Icings Against Per Sixty Minutes of Ice Time; Δ – Difference between IB and IA per sixty (positive is better)
Thoughts? Theories? Let’s hear ’em in the comments.