Noon Number (October 9th): 1982

Now I'm not saying: "Hey look, I've analysed the goals and Scandella and Spurgeon clearly weren't at fault for any of them". I looked at the goals and this is just my opinion on what was going on. Both players certainly could've defended better on all those goals, whether it be in the build-up to the goal or during the actual decisive play. What I am trying to point-out is that the easy narrative about guys being on the ice when goals go in automatically having awful games is a lazy crutch and doesn't amount to any kind of valuable analysis. It's like when people say things like "Nate Prosser was only on the ice for 1 goal against last year", it's not actually telling you anything about his play, other than that he was very lucky.

After reviewing the film, the next step is to look at the underlying numbers. The following numbers are for the 5v5 play in regulation time. I couldn't find a way to factor-in OT, but, as it is only 5 minutes, it shouldn't make a huge difference.

-Here are the on-ice, even-strength puck possession numbers for Scandella and Spurgeon from that game, as well as their On-Ice Shooting and Save Percentages and PDO:

Both players drove possession really well, posting Corsi For and Fenwick For percentages of well over 50. The Ducks have been a good possession team this year so this is no mean feat. Both players, unsurprisingly, had awful On-Ice Save Percentages as they were both on the ice for 2 goals against in regulation. If you look at the Shots For and Against, you can get an insight into how luck factors into On-Ice statistics. The Wild had 8 shots on goal while each of Scandella and Spurgeon were on the ice, and not one of these resulted in a goal. The Ducks managed 7 shots on goal while Scandella was on the ice and 6 while Spurgeon was on the ice, and 2 of these resulted in goals. So Spurgeon only allowed 6 shots, but 1/3 of these went into the net.

A good defenceman limits shot attempts by the other team while he is on the ice, and increases shot attempts for his own team by helping to control puck possession and keep it in the opposition's zone. Both guys did this reasonably well.

-Here's the usage data for both players from that game:

Interestingly, throughout all the talk about how the 2nd pairing was struggling, they still played extremely tough minutes, seeing a very high percentage of defensive zone starts. You can see from the numbers above that Mike Yeo trusted them with a high percentage of the team's total TOI and was comfortable putting them into tough situations such as defensive zone draws right up until the end of the game.

This is just my take on things, and I welcome* criticism in the comments section. Oh, and by the way, the "1982" that this article is based on, is the number of words in it. Yes, I know, very lame.

Drop me a line on Twitter for more hockey ramblings.

*All critics will be banned immedietely.