Hockeymetrics in the Offseason: Analyzing the Corsi Numbers of the Stars Defensemen
And in case you're new to the topic of Corsi numbers, allow me to refer you to Behind the Net for a brief explanation, chock full of links that delve into what information you can glean from a Corsi number as well as what other metrics a Corsi number can be related to
In a nutshell, the Corsi Number is the shot differential while a player was on the ice. This includes not just goals and shots on goal, but also shots that miss the net, and in some formulations, blocked shots. In other words, it's the differential in the total number of shots directed at the net.
And in a nutshell, Corsi Numbers attempt to do what traditional plus/minus does not. Paint a more detailed picture of how effective a player is when he's on the ice.
Now when it comes to any statistic, we must remember the words of one Darryl "Razor" Reaugh who once said:
Statistics are like bikinis. They reveal a lot, but not everything.
For instance, would anyone like to take a guess on which Dallas Stars' defenseman had the highest Corsi Number amongst the guys who played 10 games or more?
After the jump, I'll reveal the answer. Along with the Corsi Numbers for all Stars' defensemen who got into double digits in games played.
It was this guy, with a 5.38 Corsi Number.
And here are the others:
|
CORSI
|
SHOTS ON-ICE
|
||||||||||||||
| NAME | NUM | GP | TOI/60 | RATING | QUALCOMP | QUALTEAM | CORSI ON | CORSI OFF | DIFF | GFON/60 | GAON/60 | DIFF | SFON/60 | SAON/60 | DIFF |
| Matt Niskanen | 5 | 74 | 14.48 | -0.37 | -0.071 | 0.112 | 5.38 | -7.11 | -1.49 | 1.74 | 2.18 | -0.44 | 26.9 | 24.1 | 2.8 |
| Mark Fistric | 28 | 67 | 13.91 | 2.64 | -0.085 | -0.082 | 1.42 | -4.61 | -3.19 | 2.7 | 1.03 | 1.67 | 26.9 | 26.8 | 0.1 |
| Stephane Robidas | 3 | 82 | 17.34 | -0.34 | 0.077 | -0.011 | -1.81 | -4.7 | -6.51 | 2.78 | 3.12 | -0.341 | 26.9 | 26.5 | 0.4 |
| Jeff Woywitka | 44 | 36 | 13.08 | -1.38 | -0.074 | -0.08 | -3.7 | -7.84 | -11.54 | 1.66 | 2.55 | -0.89 | 27.4 | 30.5 | -3.1 |
| Nicklas Grossman | 2 | 71 | 16.27 | -0.26 | 0.066 | -0.091 | -7.22 | -1.81 | -9.03 | 2.65 | 2.91 | -0.26 | 25.6 | 26.9 | -1.3 |
| Trevor Daley | 6 | 77 | 17.16 | 0.08 | 0.002 | 0.004 | -9.03 | -1.46 | -10.49 | 2.5 | 2.54 | -0.04 | 27.1 | 30.9 | -3.8 |
| Karlis Skrastins | 37 | 79 | 15.74 | -0.41 | 0.004 | -0.026 | -10.66 | 0.29 | -10.37 | 2.22 | 2.6 | -0.38 | 25.3 | 28.9 | -3.6 |
Technically, Philip Larsen led the Stars with a Corsi rating of 11.19 per 60 minutes while Ivan Vishnevskiy had the worst Corsi rating with a -25.17 per 60 minutes. Of course, both of those players only played two games so their stats will be skewed. For the purposes of this post, I chose to throw their stats out because of the low sample size. Ditto for Max Fortunus.
Now as for Niskanen leading the team amongst all the other blue liners? Yeah, I'm a little shocked.
If there's one guy who was the official whipping boy in all the GDT's last season, it was Niskanen.
So why the high number? Well, there's one theory I'll postulate.
Keep in mind that when a team gets hemmed into their own zone for an entire shift but doesn't surrender any goals on the shift or surrenders one at the very end, their Corsi Number is probably going to suffer a bit, unless they block a ton of shots.
This scenario more closely resembled your typical Mark Fistric shift.
Conversely, if you're controlling the puck in your own zone and your linemates get off a number of shots but don't score on them, your Corsi Number will go up.
Even if the opposition goes back down the ice and scores off the rush. This last scenario, unfortunately, represented quite a few of Niskanen's shifts last season.
Fistric led the Stars with a +27 in traditional plus/minus while Niskanen finished with a -15. Furthermore, look at the differentials in 5-on-5 goals for and against and shots for and against.
Now that all explains Niskanen's high number. As for Daley's -9.03?
Ruminate amongst yourselves.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What's really eye opening to me
Are the Woywitka numbers….GFON/60 – GAON/60…that’s pretty brutal plus his CORSI number…. Yuck
I think
I’m going to spend a couple days absorbing the stats at BehindTheNet. These kinds of hockey stats are gibberish to me…..it’s the same with baseball’s sabermetrics. I’m a big fan of the traditional stats. But now I’m intrigued.
I just wanna say...
For all the times I stuck up for my boy in the GDT, I feel somewhat vindicated today with this post.
As for Daley though, in the last few days in doing all kinds of research and such.. well lets just say if the Stars traded him for a bag of pucks, I wouldn’t be too heart broken about it.
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
@GameTimeArt: Offending and/or boring sports fans one tweet at a time!
Without devling deeply into the metric
Daley’s big negative Corsi seems to be in the differential of Shots for to Shots against. He was 2nd on the team in toi/60 and 2nd behind only Fistric in goal differential but was playing against much more skilled forwards. They are getting more shots off with him on the ice … but not scoring more.
Exactly....
Where as Nisky was letting anyone he face get by and get the only shot they needed to score a goal
I've never liked
Stats to tell you how well a player is playing. They’re just too inexact. If you have a good defensive forward in front of you, your numbers are probably going to be better than they should be. But if you’re playing D behind a guy who focuses only on offense or is sloppy in his passes, your numbers will look worse than they ought to.
In other words, the line lives and dies together if you’re looking at stats. If your coach is totally inept and constantly juggling lines (Crawford) looking for chemistry, you’re even more likely to look bad.
I would much rather use my eyes to see the game than look at a sheet of numbers. I think Nisky is probably better than we give him credit for and it seems like confidence affects his game tremendously, both positively and negatively. Hence when he played with Zubov he looked good and now he looks bad.
Add a bad defensive system and it gets even worse- your goaltender isn’t comfortable with the system or how YOU play and you’re no longer comfortable with him. What did anyone expect?
I’m sure if we could bring in a veteren defenseman to shore up things Nisky would be fine. But as it stands, we’ve got to make due with what we have now. That means the system probably needs to be more cautious, not more offensive. IMO, you play with the players you have, not coach the system hoping the players will figure it out.
So yeah, I’m sticking with the “It’s all the coaches fault” line…which I normally hate.

by 














