This week we are turning our collective attentions to a Dobber report that focuses a bit more on descriptive information than the data that informs our typical analysis. Usually we are looking at data points that can help us determine if a performance we are seeing from a player is sustainable or if we should be expecting something different from them in the future. Today we are solely going to focus on the descriptive stat of consistency. I call it solely description because it really can shed some light on what it feels like to roster a specific player, but since I haven't found it to be particularly repeatable it doesn't do much to tell us what is going to happen in the future. So welcome to Frozen Tool Forensics this week, the cathartic edition.

First up, let's take a look at the players who have been the most consistent thus far during the season. The following table contains some basic player information about a player's season to date (name, games played, points, and points per game) and then gives us a stat labeled consistency percentage. This number is simply what percentage of games does said player actually get a point. The report I pulled this from contains a lot more data like multi-point consistency, goal consistency, and assist consistency, but for the purposes of today we are going to focus just on point production.

Stats are up to and including Wednesday’s games.

So big shocker right off the bat here that all of the most consistent players have very high point-per-game numbers. This makes sense. Nikita Kucherov, who has a ton of points, is likely getting them across a lot of games and therefore has a high percentage of games with a point. Conversely, a player who only has a few points clearly has a lot of games without a point.

What makes this more interesting is when we attempt to account for point paces. Essentially, we can use the data we have to establish a trend line and an expected consistency rate for each point pace. For example, given the data this year we would expect someone with a 50-point pace (.61 points per game) to point in 47, or 48 percent of their games. Someone on a 100-point pace (1.22 points per game) would be expected to point in about 73 percent of their games. With this data we can then compare how often a player is pointing or how consistent they are, with how consistent we expect a player to be at their point production rate and see how those numbers differ.

Generally, players who are more consistent than expected are more likely to give you lesser production over more games, so fewer multi-point games, but more games with a point overall. When these players are on my roster, I feel like my emotional relationship with them is pretty stable, usually not over the moon, but usually not disappointed. On the other hand, players who are less consistent than their point paces suggest are going to be a bit more boom or bust. They have more games than expected with zero points, but more games than expected with multi-point games. They are the ones who can be absolutely infuriatingly silent one week, prompting you to question your faith in them, and then joyously explode the next.

To start we are going to visit our most consistent players. In the table below we have the same data as above with the addition of our expected consistency rate, and then the difference between the two.

I won't hit all of the players in each list here, but I did want to highlight a few names.

As a manager who has rostered Sam Bennett this year, I have to say I am happy with the production. He does have a few multi-point games, but generally speaking he is putting up a point at a time in most games. The stretch from December 10 to 14 was the first time this season he didn't point in three games straight. There is only one other time where he went two games without pointing. Overall, Bennett's point pace might not be entirely sustainable. Some of the production was when Aleksander Barkov was out of the lineup, so he had access to the top power play, plus some of his underlying numbers are a touch high. None of that takes away from the fact that he has had a strong season, and been an incredibly consistent producer thus far.

Jamie Benn has been reasonably productive this season. His 53-point pace isn't much to write about, but he only has one streak of pointless games and only one multi-point game. Outside of a four-game stretch in the middle of October, Benn has not gone two games without a point, and has been riding a five-game point streak since December 8. So even with not fantastic point production, he has at least been doing something more often than not.

On the flip side we also have players who have been less consistent than expected.

There isn't much to say about Jack Hughes really. You aren't making any drastic decisions based on this information. He has had eight 3-point nights, but quite a few more blank slates than we would have expected. There has even been one stretch of three games without a point at the end of November, which was certainly unexpected for someone who is producing at his level. Frustrating for sure give his overall point pace, but he is still Jack Hughes.

Condolences go out though to the managers who at any point have rostered Evgeni Malkin and Chandler Stephenson. Both of them have been incredibly infuriating. They will go three, four games without a point and then explode for three or four points before going cold for another three games.

Since October 16, Malkin has just one set of games where he pointed in consecutive games, but has four multi-point outings. Stephenson had his first run of three consecutive games since October with a point between December 8 and December 12 but also has two 3-point games, and a 4-point game in that stretch. Basically, these guys have been very much all or nothing depending on when you rostered them. You could have rostered them for a one-day stream and gotten four points or held them for two weeks and gotten absolutely nothing. And probably that four-point night was the game after you gave up and dropped them.

That is all for this week. Do your part to support organizations working to make hockey for everyone.

Professional Women's Hockey League

Hockey is For Everyone

Black Girl Hockey Club

Athletes for Hope