HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Jaromir Jagr's powerplay production by season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-01-2014, 04:54 PM
  #1
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,601
vCash: 500
Jaromir Jagr's powerplay production by season

I was inspired to do a little research based on some claims made in the recent Jagr threads on this board, both by others and myself.

First post will be the data. Second post will be some observations based on the data. Others are free to make your own observations.

I'm using the "adjusted power play points per 82 games" stat from overpass's spreadsheet which you can find here: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1278617

Here is the explanation given for the stat

Quote:
$PPP Power play points, adjusted to a league scoring level of 70 PPG per team and a league-average number of power play opportunities.
And here it is by season:

Bolding years that were largely spent with Mario Lemieux on the PP

year$PPP
90-9110
91-927
92-9315
93-9423
94-9534
95-9641
96-9727
97-9837
98-9946
99-0031
00-0139
01-0232
02-0333
03-0420
05-0640
06-0734
07-0826
11-1221
12-1325


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-01-2014 at 05:02 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2014, 05:00 PM
  #2
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,601
vCash: 500
Observations:
  • Jagr had an unusually low amount of points on the PP in his first few seasons, indicating a low amount of PP time. It would seem that the claim that his stats as a young player were hurt by joining a stacked team and given a lesser role is probably correct.
  • A more in-depth analysis might find something there, but glancing at the data, there seems very little correlation between the presence of Mario Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr's PP production when Jagr was in his prime. There have been two competing claims on this forum - playing with Mario Lemieux, the greatest PP producer ever, inflated Jagr's PP stats; or playing with Mario Lemieux hurt Jagr's stats because the PP ran through Lemieux rather than Jagr when Lemieux was in the lineup. It would appear at first glance that both claims are false. Or my theory - there is likely some truth to both claims and they more or less balance each other out.
  • After returning from the KHL, Jagr's PP stats show a much lower decline than his overall stats. This is pretty common among aging superstars who lost their speed but still have their hands and vision.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 08:13 AM
  #3
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Observations:
  • Jagr had an unusually low amount of points on the PP in his first few seasons, indicating a low amount of PP time. It would seem that the claim that his stats as a young player were hurt by joining a stacked team and given a lesser role is probably correct.
  • A more in-depth analysis might find something there, but glancing at the data, there seems very little correlation between the presence of Mario Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr's PP production when Jagr was in his prime. There have been two competing claims on this forum - playing with Mario Lemieux, the greatest PP producer ever, inflated Jagr's PP stats; or playing with Mario Lemieux hurt Jagr's stats because the PP ran through Lemieux rather than Jagr when Lemieux was in the lineup. It would appear at first glance that both claims are false. Or my theory - there is likely some truth to both claims and they more or less balance each other out.
  • After returning from the KHL, Jagr's PP stats show a much lower decline than his overall stats. This is pretty common among aging superstars who lost their speed but still have their hands and vision.
Weren't Jagr's evenstrength numbers great relative to his PP numbers in 2013-14? I think he had only 4 powerplay goals and had 50 evenstrength points.

livewell68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 12:49 PM
  #4
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
A more in-depth analysis might find something there, but glancing at the data, there seems very little correlation between the presence of Mario Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr's PP production when Jagr was in his prime. There have been two competing claims on this forum - playing with Mario Lemieux, the greatest PP producer ever, inflated Jagr's PP stats; or playing with Mario Lemieux hurt Jagr's stats because the PP ran through Lemieux rather than Jagr when Lemieux was in the lineup. It would appear at first glance that both claims are false. Or my theory - there is likely some truth to both claims and they more or less balance each other out.
I think your intuition is correct that the two factors largely balance each other out.

I had the numbers on hand because I noticed this discrepancy some time ago, and there is no question that the power play ran through Lemieux when both were in the lineup. That's clear from looking at Jagr's power play points compared to how many power play goals he was on the ice for (some people have called this the individual points percentage or IPP). Jagr's IPP on the power play noticeably drops when Lemieux is playing full seasons. At the same time, Pittsburgh's team power play success rate is much better with Lemieux than when Jagr is running the show, which is where Jagr would have made up some points because of the higher overall team success.

YearJagr PPPJagr PGFJagr IPPAdj Tm PP%*
1990-91131587%20.4%
1991-9291850%19.4%
1992-93224351%21.0%
1993-94294171%17.3%
1994-95222976%18.4%
1995-96519057%24.8%
1996-97254161%22.9%
1997-98384683%18.8%
1998-99445580%19.5%
1999-00293876%16.7%
2000-01416563%21.0%

(*-Adj TM PP% here is adjusted to league average with a baseline of 17.1%)

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 03:32 PM
  #5
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
Interesting stuff, TDMM and TCG.

I'm not surprised Jagr's role changed with and without Lemieux, but I am surprised at the magnitude of those swings in IPP posted by TCG.

For comparison's sake, here's the IPP for forwards with substantial PP time between 1990-91 and 2003-04. I'm not listing the full list, just parts of the range.

You can see the range goes from around 75% (or higher for Gretzky and Lemieux) down to 50% (mostly guys who dug the puck out of the corner or stood in front of the net.) So Jagr went from the Gretzky/Lemieux range in IPP playing on the PP without Lemieux to near the very bottom of the range with Lemieux. Of course you would expect a change, but that's a massive difference.

Jagr's IPP dropped into the 65% range with Washington. Wasn't that something he struggled with in Washington? If memory serves he couldn't set up on the right half boards and run the PP as he had in Pittsburgh, because Peter Bondra was a fixture on the right point and liked to drift up to the top of the circle for a shot.

Rk Name GP PPP PPGF IPP
1 Wayne Gretzky 640 358 453 79%
2 Mario Lemieux 462 341 444 77%
3 Alexei Yashin 710 252 339 74%
4 Markus Naslund 790 222 299 74%
5 John Cullen 470 167 226 74%
6 Jason Allison 486 175 239 73%
7 Andrew Brunette 542 144 198 73%
8 Owen Nolan 915 261 363 72%
9 Ray Whitney 700 205 289 71%
10 Yanic Perreault 671 111 157 71%
31 Bernie Nicholls 493 160 240 67%
32 Jaromir Jagr 1027 404 608 66%
33 Doug Weight 912 348 524 66%
34 Teemu Selanne 879 356 537 66%
35 Brian Bradley 457 145 219 66%
36 Donald Audette 735 193 292 66%
37 Petr Nedved 889 191 289 66%
38 Alexander Mogilny 891 327 495 66%
39 Joe Sakic 1005 463 701 66%
40 Miroslav Satan 704 169 256 66%
70 Ray Ferraro 831 150 239 63%
71 Keith Tkachuk 856 288 459 63%
72 Pavel Bure 702 236 377 63%
73 Brendan Shanahan 1062 381 610 62%
74 Theoren Fleury 968 327 524 62%
75 Mariusz Czerkawski 710 126 202 62%
76 Glen Murray 823 107 172 62%
77 Anson Carter 529 110 177 62%
78 Robert Lang 646 151 243 62%
79 Michael Nylander 648 121 195 62%
100 Gary Roberts 774 172 289 60%
101 Brian Rolston 736 122 205 60%
102 Stu Barnes 897 164 276 59%
103 Greg Adams 664 134 226 59%
104 Eric Daze 600 110 186 59%
105 Martin Rucinsky 817 136 230 59%
106 Valeri Kamensky 637 158 268 59%
107 Nelson Emerson 771 191 324 59%
108 Vincent Lecavalier 467 103 175 59%
109 Wendel Clark 566 123 209 59%
110 Kevin Stevens 758 226 387 58%
130 John Leclair 873 196 360 54%
131 Tomas Sandstrom 548 131 243 54%
132 Mike Gartner 582 151 281 54%
133 Esa Tikkanen 540 113 211 54%
134 Chris Gratton 851 129 242 53%
135 Steve Rucchin 616 142 267 53%
136 Shawn Mceachern 883 131 247 53%
137 Rob Niedermayer 696 106 201 53%
138 Dmitri Khristich 811 180 343 52%
139 Shayne Corson 871 160 308 52%
140 Adam Graves 1011 175 342 51%

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 05:14 PM
  #6
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,620
vCash: 500
Do you have the PPO numbers that correspond with those too? It's striking that Mario's teams have only 9 fewer PPGF than Wayne's in 178 fewer games. Mind-boggling how many power plays those Pens teams used to get.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 06:44 PM
  #7
Fred Taylor
The Cyclone
 
Fred Taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Do you have the PPO numbers that correspond with those too? It's striking that Mario's teams have only 9 fewer PPGF than Wayne's in 178 fewer games. Mind-boggling how many power plays those Pens teams used to get.
I could be wrong, but it was likely due to how good Lemieux and Jagr were at drawing penalties.

Fred Taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 07:08 PM
  #8
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Taylor View Post
I could be wrong, but it was likely due to how good Lemieux and Jagr were at drawing penalties.
No numbers to back it up, but Jagr was horrible at drawing penalties. Qualitatively, he was akin to Shaquille O'Neal constantly getting constantly hacked under the basket but the refs strangely letting it slide.

Lemieux would have been better at drawing calls, but there's no evidence that he had that big an effect. When Lemieux was gone, Pittsburgh got a lot of PPO. When Lemieux was there, Pittsburgh got a lot of PPO.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 07:12 PM
  #9
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Taylor View Post
I could be wrong, but it was likely due to how good Lemieux and Jagr were at drawing penalties.
One would think so, right?

And the Pens weren't exactly a physical bunch, so you wouldn't figure they committed an especially large number of penalties.

Yet:

In '96, league avg. was 414 PPO.
Pens had 420 PPO... their opponents 467

In '97, league avg. was 336 PPO.
Pens had 339 PPO... their opponents 338

In '01, league avg. was 377 PPO.
Pens had 375 PPO... their opponents 405

How much of that was due to Jagr not diving and the "different set of rules for Jagr" as Shanahan put it?... how much due to the Pens' atrocious defense?... and how much due to other refereeing anomalies or other factors?... hard to say, but it definitely seems counter-intuitive.

The discrepancy between Gretzky & Lemieux's PPO has to do with Gretzky's era having an extremely low number of PPOs, not with Lemieux receiving an extraordinarily high number of PPOs for the era.

Back to Jagr's PP production. This is one reason that I think Jagr doesn't get just credit for his '96 season. Remember, first of all, that Jagr was closer to Lemieux in goals and points than anyone else was to Jagr. People tend to give Lemieux credit to some extent for Jagr's great season. Yet Jagr not only had 19 more ES points than anyone else in the league, but a higher ES PPG than Lemieux as well. It was Lemieux who benefited by far the most from the large number of PPOs that season, and from the Pens' talented PP crew. Jagr's PP production wasn't substantially affected. In fact, he would have done better, comparatively, if the season had a more typical number of PPOs.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2014, 07:55 PM
  #10
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
 
SmellOfVictory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,860
vCash: 50
Regarding the PPIPP chart there: I like the way it shows just how good Andrew Brunette was as a PP specialist.

SmellOfVictory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2014, 06:48 PM
  #11
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Taylor View Post
I could be wrong, but it was likely due to how good Lemieux and Jagr were at drawing penalties.
And partly during an era where you only got a penalty if you actually hauled a player down via the hook, hold, whathaveyou. Those two were so strong on their skates. Imagine them playing in today's era

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.