I don't feel like working, and so I figured I would write down some things that I noticed while I was perusing the stats on players with at least a point per game. I'm don't really plan on drawing any conclusions, and I expect to ramble a good deal, but I will share some of my observations with you guys / ladies anyway.
The Avalanche have three point per game players at this time: Stewart (1.23 P/G), Hejduk (1.07 P/G), and Stastny (1 P/G). They have two others hovering just below the mark in Liles and Duchene, who each have .85 P/G. Below that is a fairly decent dropoff, down to the good Docta Jones with .46 P/G.
There are 9 other teams with multiple P/G scorers: The Ducks (3), The Stars (3), The Winged Wheel (3), The Rangers (2), The Sharks (3), The Lightning (2), The Canucks (2), and the Caps (2).
Actually, the Ducks look most like the top Avalanche scorers, with the same type of point distribution across the top 5. A couple of other things that caught my eye were that Crosby is the only P/G player on the Penguins with a rating almost the same as Stewie (as well as the creepy Sedin twins). Also, I have no idea what is going on in New Jersey, but the Devils seem to be choking on someone else's undustable vomit. Stamkos is on friggin fire with a 1.69 average. Wow.
Ok, back to the main point of this post. Of the multiple P/G players listed above, I wanted to check and see what percentage of the team-accumulated points were generated by the top guys. For those only two P/G players, I will go ahead and include the next highest average so all the teams will have their top 3 guys averaged together. I will also add up the points of the top 6 guys to see what they have to show us.
I wasn't sure what I was going to find, but I was hoping for a defined pattern of "one top line doing all the work won't get the job done" vs "everyone contributes is better". However, it turns out that it doesnt matter who scores, just so long as there is enough talent to get the job done. This exercise was best for looking at how different teams are built. You can see that the Ducks and the Sharks, in particular, have a lot of firepower up front, but are a little thin on the back two lines. The Blackhawks, Rangers, and Avs are all built along the same lines, with a fairly potent top line, decent second, and contributing lower lines.
One of the things that I found interesting was that the Caps, Canucks, Wings, and Lightning all have very similar stats. They are all very close to 60 or 61% for their top two lines, showing me that while the lower lines CAN contribute, the top two are very hard to contain. I would like to do this again in the spring to work with a bigger sample size and see if the highest ranking teams are about at the 60% range.
Anyway. Like I said, no conclusions drawn, and some rambling, but still sorta interesting.
MileHighHockey.com is a fan community, allowing members to post their own thoughts and opinions on the Colorado Avalanche and hockey in general. These views and thoughts may not be shared by the editors of MileHighHockey.com.