What Hockey Habits and Indicators Correlate to Future Success?
What Hockey Habits and Indicators Correlate to Future Success?
Two ice hockey talent evaluators on which traits actually translate to the highest levels
Today, we’re learning from two public NHL draft scouts as they reflect on their work and what they’ve learned over the years.
Both are past Hockey IQ Podcast guests as well:
Will Scouch’s Lessons Learned
Read the full piece at Scouching.Ca (Free)
Takeaway #1 - Defensive results are noise except for preventing zone exits and entries
The impact of defensive metrics on overall shot attempt differentials is basically noise with very little correlation.
There is one area that is a decent correlate, and that’s allowing control of the puck across bluelines if you’re a defenseman. It doesn’t matter what blueline we’re looking at; the worse you are at preventing zone transitions, the worse the numbers seem to be in your own end. The battle is always made more difficult when getting into that situation in the first place.
Takeaway #2 - Offense is more important than Defense
When projecting to the future, offensive output drives overall results more consistently and reliably than defensive suppression does.
Positive correlations are strong for forwards in attempted slot passes, completed slot passes, total completed passes, shot assists, and offensive zone turnovers generated.
Transition success is a much weaker correlate. For forwards, the balance of the game is so heavily weighted toward the offensive zone that the rest is essentially a secondary concern.
For defensemen, things are mixed. See takeaway #1 for further evidence that defense is about heavily about transition, preventing & initiating.
Involvement in the offensive zone is paramount, and individual low-danger attempts from the perimeter are a poor correlate when compared to slot passing and stepping up from the offensive blueline to make plays.
Takeaway #3 - Stop Shooting From Nowheresville! Hope is not the method/answer.
The data connects volume shooters to questionable offensive results and difficult projection. It’s best to avoid peppering the net from the perimeter and hoping for chaos to reign supreme in front of the net. How much a player shoots from the perimeter is basically a non-factor. What's More Important, Shot Quantity or Shot Quality?
Which also reminds us that ‘Point Shots Suck.’
Takeaway #4 - Offensive Zone Forechecking Matters
No matter how you slice it, forwards who create turnovers in the offensive zone lead to better shot differentials. Sitting back on a forecheck is a recipe for limiting your offense.
Combining the results that favor generating turnovers in the offensive zone and defensemen being aggressive at the offensive blueline, we start to see a picture that more aggressive teams and players at all positions not only drive better offensive results, while likely not affecting defensive results on paper, and have a positive impact on shot differentials. Combined with the correlations for aggressive offensive blueline defenders makes the case for increased risk for greater reward.
Takeaway #5 - Good Differentials ≠ Good Player
This one is a little more anecdotal and dips more into the traditional hockey world, but over the years you absolutely pick up on details and facets of the game in the NHL that changes your philosophy on players outside of the NHL. There have been players who drive great results but struggle to project to higher levels, let alone the NHL. Yes, in the data some little details and quirks can raise questions, but some players drive great results, even in good leagues, but the confidence that that trend continues may not be there for a variety of reasons. The same can be said about the opposite case. Having a firm grasp of the NHL’s speed, physicality, and intensity and seeing how the best of the best are that way at the highest levels is paramount to avoiding errors and relying on your data too much.
Will’s Final Thoughts
It’s funny to say, but being good doesn’t always mean you’re good, let alone in the NHL. The more I watch the NHL, the more I worry about raw pace, intensity, forechecking pressure, and quick thinking. That’s become a prime area of interest for me, with the data being an informative backbone to that strategy.
Mitch Brown’s Lessons Learned
Read the full piece at EP Rinkside (Paywalled)
Mitch does a regular Draft Retrospective series where he looks back into specific players. He then looked at what he had learned by looking at all those players. As Mitch puts it:
There’s nothing quite like spending hours upon hours on something and then realizing everything you thought you knew was wrong.
Since his pieces are paywalled, I’ll give less detail away, but the lessons ring true. I’m a happy paid subscriber to the work Mitch and others do at EP Rinkside.
Takeaway #1 - Decision-making and play selection are the most common areas of improvement.
Decision-making is the element most likely to improve. Poor play selection shouldn’t be considered a sign of poor hockey sense. Players generally reshape their play selection as the level demands it.
Instead, the player's ability to create favorable situations was more predictive of future success than their actual decisions from those positions.
Takeaway #2 - Players rarely develop brand-new ways to create post-draft, but they do repurpose and adapt.
Players either have high-level skills – like manipulation – or they don’t. It’s uncommon for players to suddenly start manipulating opponents after having not flashed that ability previously.
Instead of finding brand-new ways to create, most players repurpose skills from one area of the ice to the other. Eg. Makar’s NZ manipulation ended up being used to the point manipulation we see in the NHL today.
Takeaway #3 - Understanding the environment is part of understanding the player.
Decisions, reads, and even skills don’t exist in isolation. They exist within the structure of the team, the demands of the coaching staff, and the quality of teammates afforded.
Takeaway #4 - Edges are more predictive of future skating growth than mechanics.
Edges seem to be more predictive of future skating ability than stride mechanics.
There are many different strides in the NHL; there aren’t many different ways players use their edges. Those who can’t access their outside edges rarely escape along the boards, no matter their physical advantages.
Takeaway #5 - Individual skill alone is rarely enough, but neither is an NHL style of play.
While standout traits are great to possess or an NHL-style game is too, there are finer details and elements that blend together to make players successful.
Takeaway #6 - Project for where the game’s headed, not where it is.
A decade ago, teams often drafted prioritizing size and physicality. A few years later, they emphasized speed above all else. The pendulum is always in motion.
Of course, there are physical limits regarding just how fast the game can be played. Such emphasis on speed means there was always going to be an opportunity for players to operate at lower speeds (faking the fast play to make the slow one).
Similarly, as the game becomes more focused on activation and full-team offense, it’s creating opportunities for skilled, proactive defenders to activate more and more.
Further Reading