Zone Shift
Last off-season I posted an analysis of the Leafs individual players based on Zone Shift. The concept draws on the information from Gabe Desjardins' behindthenet.ca site, specifically Zone Start and Zone Finish locations, with a couple of modifications.
The way that Gabe tabulates Zone Starts is self explanatory - the zone in which a shift starting face-off is located. This is obviously indicative of what the coaching staff thinks of the player in question. If a player tends to start a shift in the defensive zone more than the offensive zone, odds are the coaches think he's defensively capable, and if a player tends to start in the offensive zone more often, than the reverse would be true.
Zone Finish is tabulated by Gabe using the location of faceoffs subsequent to any whistle. Unfortunately all face-offs following a goal for or against are located in the neutral zone. This introduces a level of discrepancy into the numbers, which I attempt to filter out by adding goals for to the Offensive Zone Finish and goals against to the Defensive Zone Finish numbers. The sum of goals for and against is then subtracted from the Neutral Zone Finish numbers. There are also situations regarding stoppages in play due to penalties or caused by the attacking team in the offensive zone where the face-off takes place outside the zone of attack, but for all intents and purposes I consider that a rare enough event that I'll ignore it for the sake of this analysis.
So without further ado, let's take a look at the Leafs numbers from this past season shall we?
| Name | POS | GP | QualDIF | CORSI Rel SUM | Z. Shift |
| Luke Schenn |
D | 79 | -0.033 |
0.116 | 37 |
| Phil Kessel | LW | 70 |
0.044 | 1.921 | 34 |
| Tyler Bozak |
C | 37 | -0.038 | 1.712 | 14 |
| John Mitchell | C | 60 | -0.034 | 0.338 | 10 |
| Nikolai Kulemin |
RW | 78 | -0.019 | 1.162 | 3 |
| Luca Caputi |
LW | 23 | -0.131 | -0.057 | 2 |
| Frederik Sjostrom |
RW | 65 | 0.009 | -1.199 | 2 |
| Garnet Exelby |
D | 51 | 0.121 | -2.571 | -1 |
| Jeff Finger |
D | 39 | 0.039 | 0.04 | -3 |
| Francois Beauchemin |
D | 82 | -0.021 | 1.327 | -8 |
| Jamie Lundmark |
LW | 36 | -0.059 | -0.667 | -13 |
| Carl Gunnarsson |
D | 43 | -0.206 | 0.106 | -14 |
| Rickard Wallin |
C | 60 | -0.034 | -2.034 | -17 |
| Dion Phaneuf |
D | 81 | -0.172 | 0.97 | -18 |
| Christian Hanson |
C | 31 | -0.105 | -0.484 | -18 |
| Mikhail Grabovski |
C | 59 | 0.02 | 1.81 | -19 |
| Jay Rosehill |
RW | 15 | 0.081 | -8.529 | -19 |
| Wayne Primeau |
C | 59 | 0 | -0.891 | -24 |
| Mike Komisarek |
D | 34 | 0.042 | 2.845 | -29 |
| Viktor Stalberg |
LW | 40 | -0.057 | 0.012 | -39 |
| Colton Orr |
RW | 82 | -0.087 | -5.663 | -43 |
| Tomas Kaberle | D | 82 | 0.078 | 0.127 | -114 |
And for the Leafs that left through trades during the season we have the following:
| Name | POS | GP | Qual DIF | CORSI Rel SUM | Zone Shift |
| Matt Stajan | C | 82 | -0.046 | 1.938 | 12 |
| Alexei Ponikarovsky | LW | 77 | -0.007 | 1.516 | -21 |
| Jamal Mayers | RW | 71 | 0.036 | -4.066 | -30 |
| Niklas Hagman |
LW | 82 | 0.006 | 1.894 | -45 |
| Lee Stempniak |
LW | 80 | 0.044 | 0.424 | -65 |
| Jason Blake |
LW | 82 | 0.104 | 2.186 | -67 |
| Ian White | D | 83 | -0.107 | 1.623 | -78 |
The stats I've listed for Qual DIF and CORSI Rel SUM are explained as follows. The Qual DIF is the difference between the quality of a player's teammates and their opponents over the course of a season. A negative Qual DIF would imply the team was consistently at a disadvantage with respect to the players he shared the ice with, while a positive would mean the ice was tilted in his favour. The CORSI Rel SUM is the combined total of CORSI stats relative to teammates and opposition, so a higher combined value indicates better all around players. The logic being that if you're putting up higher CORSI numbers than expected with respect to your teammates and with respect to the opposition, you're doing something right.
The way that I've calculated Zone Shift was to take the Zone Start numbers and subtract the defensive zone face-offs from the offensive zone face-offs, and use that for a net Zone Start value (positive means the majority were in the offensive zone, negative means the majority were defensive). I performed the same operation on the adjusted Zone Finish numbers (including goals for and against as offensive and defensive zone finishes), in order to determine the net Zone Finish value. I then subtracted the Zone Start values from the Zone Finish values in order to determine the Zone Shift. A positive value indicates that a player is generally moving the puck up the ice, as their combination of Zone Finish and Zone Start results generally indicates they're finishing in the offensive zone more than one would expect based on their Zone Start locations. A negative value indicates the player is generally losing ground as they are finishing in the defensive zone more than one would expect based on their Zone Start locations.
As Gabe has discussed in his blog on the subject, generally speaking the flow of play is towards the neutral zone, as play for most players will end up finishing there far more often than it will start there based on their coaches decisions.
There is also lost data in the set, as there is no easy way to account for a flow of play without whistles. If a player joins the game on the fly, it will generally occur while play is moving into the offensive zone. Similarly, if a player leaves the ice on the fly, it will again, generally occur while the play is moving up ice from the defensive to the offensive zone. This has the dual effect of penalizing defensive players and ignoring the efforts of a player whose offensive skill allows them to play entire shifts in the offensive zone without a resulting whistle. Defensive zone players will often begin their shift in their end as a result of their coaches decision, and then leave the ice as the play progresses to the attacking zone. If the play is finished in the neutral zone or offensive zone, they get no credit for the Zone Shift in the net result we are recording.
Regardless, the stat is still a decent general indicator for all intents and purposes based on the sizable number of results for all players who play regular shifts. So what can we pull from this data set?
1. Matt Stajan was actually having a pretty solid season for the Leafs prior to his departure. He may not be top line centre material on a winning club, but he was proving to do a decent job as a top 6 forward.
2. Despite the fact that Lee Stempniak was on the ice for 14 more goals for than against when he went to Phoenix, his Zone Shift number is still an atrocious -60. His time with the Leafs was unfortunate.
3. Despite the fact that Ian White's Zone Shift looks really bad, if you look at his Qual DIF and CORSI Rel SUM numbers, you begin to realize he may have suffered from tougher competition and a lack of support from his team-mates. In comparison to Tomas Kaberle's numbers from this season, he was actually doing a decent job this season. Which brings me to point 4.
4. Tomas Kaberle and Mike Komisarek were horrible as a defensive pairing for the Leafs last season. Both of them had positive Qual DIF values indicating they were playing with superior players on the Leafs. Komisarek's CORSI Rel SUM value is respectable, but his lack of point contributions definitely hurts the Leafs. In the end, their Zone Shift numbers indicate a greater problem than we may at first realize. Kaberle's value may have been hurt at the end of the year, but in this light, it's hard to see how any team can expect an adequate level of defensive play out of him.
5. Phil Kessel, Tyler Bozak, Luke Schenn, and Nikolai Kulemin are all solid contributors for the Leafs. Despite playing on a weaker Leafs side, often outclassed by the competition, all four performed admirably for players that are 24 or younger.
6. Luca Caputi may have more to his game than I first thought. If he can put the puck in the net with more regularity I may be happy to see him play more top 6 minutes this coming year than I first thought.
7. Mikhail Grabovski had a bit of an off year this year. His numbers weren't horrible, but his level of production should have been higher given his CORSI and QUAL numbers.
8. Comparing Francois Beauchemin and Carl Gunnarsson, you begin to realize just how stellar the young Swede was defensively for the Leafs. He faced the stiffest competition level of any of the Leafs blue liners on a consistent basis, and he still managed to put up a lower Zone Shift value as an NHL rookie. Comparing Gunnarsson to Komiasarek or Kaberle makes you wonder how hard he'll have to work to remain in the top 4 for Ron Wilson's team going into next season.
9. Garnet Exelby's sheltering was ridiculous. Looking at his QUAL Dif and CORSI Rel SUM values is freaking scary. The fact that he had a Zone Shift of only -8 is mildly reassuring, but considering who he was on the ice with and his negative impacts all around I can't say how glad I am he won't be returning next season.
Ok so that's it for now, feel free to post your own comments and let me know what you think of where the Leafs are heading.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
thank fucking christ Exelby won’t be back
My Fan Base Can Beat Up Your Fan Base
by JaredFromLondon on Jun 6, 2010 9:26 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
A question
How does a team that was as Corsi-dominant as the Leafs wind up with the vast majority of players with negative zone shifts? Is it all the goals against?
I believe it’s because Steve is adding in goals against.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
by Chemmy on Jun 6, 2010 10:19 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Also, I’m quite impressed that in spite of starting the majority of his shifts in the offensive zone, Kessel was still able to have a positive zone shift. Steve, you might consider including the zone start numbers for each player because zone shift numbers alone heavily favour players who tend to start in the defensive zone (because of the tendency you noted that “the flow of play is towards the neutral zone”. IIRC, some of the best offensive players in the league nonetheless have negative zone shifts because they start so much in the offensive zone. Maybe this effect would be muted/reversed if, as you have done, they included goals for/against.
by The '67 Sound on Jun 6, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Interestingly
when I adjusted the goals, the tendency of play to flow to the neutral zone actually seems to dissipate.
Almost none of the players on the Leafs had ANZF values that were higher than their AOZF or ADZF values. In fact, Luca Caputi is the ONLY Leaf from this past season that had a higher ANZF than EITHER of his AOZF, or ADZF (It was higher than his ADZF).
I think the tendency that Gabe mentions in his blog on the subject is a generally a result of the goals all being credited as NZF values because the subsequent face-off is at centre ice.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
If you consider the fact that CORSI
is only measuring shot attempts, and Zone Shift is measuring stoppages in play, the link between the two is not that tight.
Stoppages happen for numerous reasons, not all of which involve a shot attempt, and shot attempts often do not result in a stoppage in play. Because they aren’t connected directly, it’s easy to see how the separation can arise.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Steve, I am having trouble re-creating your zone shift numbers. Can you give a breakdown of how Kaberle’s numbers are calculated so I can check my work and find the error. For example, what are your zone start and zone finish numbers after adjusting for GF and GA?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HockeyAnalysis.com - Taking a Deeper Look at the World of Hockey
Kaberle Breakdown
Here are the numbers I used for the Zone Shift for Kaberle:
Raw Zone Start Totals from BehindTheNet.ca:
OZS = 462
NZS = 557
DZS = 330
Subtracting DZS from OZS gives the Zone Start value of 132
Raw Zone Finish Totals from BehindTheNet.ca:
OZF = 453
NZF = 448
DZF = 428
Then adjusting for Kaberle’s being on the ice for 97 goals (OZF) for and 79 goals against (DZF) gives the adjusted values of:
AOZF = 550
ANZF = 272
ADZF = 507
So again subtracting ADZF from AOZF gives an Adjusted Zone Finish value of 43.
To get the Zone Shift I then subtract the Zone Start from the Zone Finish, giving me 43 – 132 = -89.
I have the full spreadsheet for all the Leafs with the same calculations if you want the data, I just haven’t posted it anywhere online. If you have any other questions let me know.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Another thing to think about is
this ignores PP vs. PK time… so it again punishes defensive players for all their PK time, and rewards all the offensive players for their PP time. Inevitably PP time will predominantly end up in the offensive zone, and PK time will predominantly end up in the defensive zone.
In that light, Kaberle’s numbers look even worse as he played virtually no significant PK time, and played quite a bit on the PP. 37 of the 97 goals he was out for came on the PP, and only 3 of the goals against came while he was on the PK. If you recognize the advantage he gets by playing roughly 20% of his ice time on the PP, you begin to think about how bad he is at keeping the puck in the offensive zone when the team DOESN’T have a man advantage.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
For the same reason
it’s interesting to see how good Schenn’s numbers are when you consider he played 10% of his ice time on the PK, and only 1.4% of his ice time on the PP.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Aren’t the ZoneStarts and ZoneFinishes at BtN supposed to be taken from 5-on-5 play only?
by Slava Duris #24 on Jun 6, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
If that is the case
I will have to fix my numbers…. which apparently I don’t need to do since the corrections are listed below.
This is what I get for rushing through it before going to a wedding. Give me a few minutes and I’ll post the fixed values.
My bad… etc.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Ok, I see where we got different results. The behindthenet.ca numbers are 5 on 5 numbers but then you mix in overall GF/GA numbers. 5 on 5 Kaberle was on the ice for 58GF and 65GA. Plugging in these numbers you get Zone Start of 132 and Zone Finish of 18 for a difference of -114.
Using 5 on 5 GF/GA numbers for all Leafs we get the following Z.Shifts:
TOMAS KABERLE -114
COLTON ORR -43
VIKTOR STALBERG -39
MICHAEL KOMISAREK -29
WAYNE PRIMEAU -24
MIKHAIL GRABOVSKI -19
DION PHANEUF -18
CHRISTIAN HANSON -18
RICKARD WALLIN -17
CARL GUNNARSSON -14
JAMIE LUNDMARK -13
FRANCOIS BEAUCHEMIN -8
JEFF FINGER -3
GARNET EXELBY -1
LUCA CAPUTI 2
FREDRIK SJOSTROM 2
NIKOLAI KULEMIN 3
JOHN MITCHELL 10
TYLER BOZAK 14
PHIL KESSEL 34
LUKE SCHENN 37
The Leaf’s PK last year was pretty dreadful (and that is probably being generous for most of the year), which is why guys who played a lot on the PK saw their numbers improve a lot (Schenn, Komisarek, etc.) Conversely, a guy like Kessel who was on the ice for a lot of PP goals saw his number drop a lot, though still pretty reasonable.
All that said, while this is interesting, I am not sure what to make of it all. It is probably meaningful, but not sure to what extent without considering how many opportunities a player is given to reverse ends in each direction. For example, Kaberle is a -114, but he also started in the offensive zone 132 more times than he did in the defensive zone. That is 132 more opportunities to go from offense to defense than from defense to offense. -114 is still probably not very good, but probably not as bad as what one might first think, especially considering no on on the Leafs is remotely close to that 132 differential (next highest are Phaneuf at 76, mostly with Calgary and Stalberg at 61).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HockeyAnalysis.com - Taking a Deeper Look at the World of Hockey
by HockeyAnalysis on Jun 6, 2010 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
There
phew… fixed everything… I wanted it to be ordered properly so I had to muddle through rearranging all the stats into the right order on the chart.
THat was an extra half hour of effort I didn’t need to spend on this today (but procrastination is fun).
Thanks David for pointing out the mistake (w/ glovetap to Slava).
I hope the values make more sense now… Schenn is a beast… I hope he keeps improving.
Kaberle’s numbers still bother me.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
hahaha
You read my mind. I liked this post but I need to re-read it!
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Like reading thoughts confined to 140 characters? I'm on Twitter too.
by PPP on Jun 6, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Some of my conclusions
now have incorrect numbers (i.e. Exelby, Stempniak, etc.), but the general premise still holds. I want less of those two (thank god they’re gone) and more of Schenn, Bozak, Kulemin, and Kessel.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Maybe this is a better way of looking at things. Instead of doing a subtraction between start/end values, why not look at this.
(OffEnd/DefEnd) – (OffStart/DefStart)
Doing this eliminates the issues related to counting stats (i.e. opportunities to produce). This allows us to better compare players. The result is the following:
LUKE SCHENN 0.105
PHIL KESSEL 0.070
GARNET EXELBY 0.043
TYLER BOZAK 0.019
NIKOLAI KULEMIN 0.004
JOHN MITCHELL 0.002
FREDRIKSJOSTROM -0.006
JEFF FINGER -0.031
FRANCOIS BEAUCHEMIN -0.043
LUCA CAPUTI -0.045
CARL GUNNARSSON -0.075
WAYNE PRIMEAU -0.077
RICKARD WALLIN -0.097
DION PHANEUF -0.107
JAMIE LUNDMARK -0.133
MIKHAIL GRABOVSKI -0.146
MICHAEL KOMISAREK -0.184
CHRISTIAN HANSON -0.272
TOMAS KABERLE -0.363
COLTON ORR -0.376
VIKTOR STALBERG -0.508
I am still not 100% certain what to make of these numbers but I think we are getting closer to something somewhat useful/informative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HockeyAnalysis.com - Taking a Deeper Look at the World of Hockey
I think you should change it
to (OF-END/TOT) – (OFF-START/TOT) so it’s just a function of percentages of the offensive zone start and finish… rather than dividing by the def zone… since that negates out all the neutral zone data also (which I suppose I was doing anyway).
I do see the value in removing the issue of opportunities to perform. I’m busy prepping a lesson right now, but I’ll get to it in a bit.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
While Gabe Desjardins has noted that OPct for ZoneFinishes trend closer to 50 % than OPct for ZoneStarts (OPcts throws out Neutral Zone Faceoffs), I’ve noticed that there generally is a lower percentage of Neutral Zone Finishes than Neutral Zone Starts. For example, Francois Beauchemin has started 60.2 % of faceoffs in the Offensive or Defensive zones and then finished 74.4 % in those same zones. This is true for just about every player in the league who has taken a substantial amount of faceoffs.
I went to Behind-the-Net and copied every player who has played in 50+ games and averaged 10+ minutes. Among those 469 players, Evander Kane has the highest differential between OZ+DZ Finishes % and OZ+DZ Starts % at 22.8, while Chris Drury had the lowest in the league, starting in the OD zones 67.2 % of the time and finishing beyond the neutral zone 74.6 % of the time for a +7.4 differential.
I'm still thinking
about a way in which you can use the finishes vs. start totals to determine an approximation of some sort of face-off vs. shifting on the fly ratio.
I’m not sure how relevant it is to anything, but I’m still curious to see what the totals are like.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Jun 6, 2010 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Kaberle’s value may have been hurt at the end of the year, but in this light, it’s hard to see how any team can expect an adequate level of defensive play out of him.
This year was particularly bad for Kabby, so it’s not unreasonable to assume that his numbers bounce back at least a little next year. He’ll probably never have great defensive numbers again, but his career +/- is 22, and I wouldn’t be surprised to finish next year a more palatable -3 with a different team. So he’s not a defensive specialist – big deal. As a side note, “regress to the mean” seems to be a recurring theme around here.
"Defense! Defense! Common! Do you call that blowing!?"
ZoneShift flawed
I took a sample of 295 forwards who played 50+ games in 2009-10, averaging 10 minutes of 5v5 play per game, and looked at their Zone numbers. The top nine ZoneShifts (raw differential) belonged to
Marcel Goc +171
Sami Pahlsson +150
John Madden +122
Nate Thompson +110
Jay McClement +107
Richard Park +85
Chris Drury +79
Todd Marchant +78
Jerred Smithson +78
What do these players all have in common? Enormously negative Zone Starts! Drury’s -146 among these players is the best, and Pahlsson’s -212 differential is the lowest. In other words, these players were on for a lot more faceoffs in the defensive zone in the offensive zone, and then ended up with higher Zone Finishes.
And, as you go down the list, you’d generally find that the lower the ZoneShift rating, the higher the Zone Start.
That is an example of the flaw with the ZoneShift stat that was mentioned previously. If the faceoff starts in the defensive zone, the player can only go either 0 or pick up a +1 ZoneShift on the play if he is still on the ice when the play stops again. Same thing for offensive zone faceoffs, but in the opposite direction. Therefore, ZoneShift heavily favours those players who are on the ice for defensive zone draws.
Pearson correlation between Zone Start Differential and ZoneShift = -0.70
This means there is a strong negative relationship between the two values… as ZoneStart (that is, the differential between Offensive Zone faceoffs and Defensive zone faceoffs) goes up, ZoneShift goes down, and vice-versa.
Here is a chart that demonstrates this relationship.

So I absolutely wouldn’t say Kaberle had a bad year based on his raw ZoneShift differential.
by Slava Duris #24 on Jun 8, 2010 10:12 PM EDT reply actions
Chart turned out smaller than I thought it would… anyway, the blue line on the chart is ZoneShift and the red is Zone Starts.
by Slava Duris #24 on Jun 8, 2010 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions
And
Maybe I should’ve made this into a FanPost instead, since this post will soon be bumped off the main-page. I have to thank you for posting this, Steve, you really re-sparked my interest in studying the zone start and finish statistics. If I can get the time to cobble together a half decent writeup, I will post my findings here at PPP.
Also, 10th best ZoneShift belonged to Alex Steen at +77 and he had a Zone Start of -44.
by Slava Duris #24 on Jun 8, 2010 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions

by 






























