Next up in our series of Advanced Stats for Dummies (last was Corsi For Percentage) we are taking on a stat that helps to understand what a player does best. It’s called “Zone Starts” and it measures the number of faceoffs a player is on the ice for in the offensive or defensive zone.
Zone Starts are calculated using a very simple procedure. Any time a player is on the ice for a faceoff in the offensive or defensive zone he is scored with a Zone Start. (Neutral zone faceoffs are ignored). If the player is on the ice for a faceoff in the offensive zone, it goes for an offensive Zone Start, if his team is in the defensive zone, he gets a defensive zone start. Zone Starts are then measured by percentage.
Offensive Zone Start Percentage (oZS%) = Offensive Zone Starts / Total Zone Starts
Defensive Zone Start Percentage (dZS%) = Defensive Zone Starts / Total Zone Starts
Example time! Let’s use David Perron because he tweeted at us one time and it made us blush. Perron starts the game on the ice, the opening faceoff is taken (no Zone Start scored). The puck is iced and the Golden Knights get a faceoff in the offensive zone (+1 oZS). Shot goes into the netting, another offensive zone faceoff (+1 oZS). Play continues, the puck goes out of play in the Golden Knights zone, Perron stays on the ice for the faceoff in the defensive zone (+1 dZS).
Offensive Zone Starts (oZS) – 2
Defensive Zone Starts (dZS) – 1
Offensive Zone Start Percentage (oZS%) – 2/(2+1) = 2/3 = 66.6%
Defensive Zone Start Percentage (dZS%) – 1/(2+1) = 1/3 = 33.3%
Perron had an oZS% of 43.9% last season and a dZS% of 56.1. The two years he played in Pittsburgh though, his oZS% was 60% and his dZS% was 40%.
As you can see, you really only need to focus on one side or the other as oZS% and dZS% offset. (43.9+56.1=100 / 60+40=100)
Here’s a look at the Golden Knights top oZS% players. First forwards.
| Player | Offensive Zone Start Percentage (oZS%) |
|---|---|
| James Neal | 59.6% |
| Jonathan Marchessault | 53.1% |
| David Perron | 53.1% |
| Oscar Lindberg | 52.3% |
| William Carrier | 51.5% |
Now defensemen.
| Player | Offensive Zone Start Percentage (oZS%) |
|---|---|
| Colin Miller | 65.0% |
| Brayden McNabb | 57.3% |
| Nate Schmidt | 57.1% |
| Shea Theodore | 53.1% |
| Griffin Reinhart | 51.2% |
And the Golden Knights top dZS% players. Forwards…
| Player | Defensive Zone Start Percentage (dZS%) |
|---|---|
| Erik Haula | 55.5% |
| William Karlsson | 53.4% |
| Pierre-Eduoard Bellemare | 52.0% |
| Cody Eakin | 51.5% |
Defensemen
| Player | Defensive Zone Start Percentage (dZS%) |
|---|---|
| Clayton Stoner | 54.7% |
| Deryk Engelland | 52.3% |
| Jason Garrison | 51.6% |
| Jon Merrill | 50.5% |
| Luca Sbisa | 49.7% |
But why does it matter?
Well, There’s one simple answer why zone starts are important, player deployment. ZS% reflects how the player is being used on the ice. A player with a high oZS% will likely be on the ice for offensive situations. Players with a higher dZS% would be more likely to jump over the boards for defensive-zone faceoffs. Pretty simple, but it can mean a lot more than that.
Zone Starts also should allow fans to learn about Gerard Gallant’s coaching style. Based off oZS% numbers alone, fans can expect James Neal and Colin Miller on the ice generating offense. On the contrary, Gallant will have checking/shutdown lines he’ll deploy in high-risk situations. Cody Eakin‘s 51.5 dZS% and William Karlsson‘s 53.4 dZS% are good examples of their ability to handle defensive-zone faceoffs.
Erik Haula, Eakin, Karlsson and Deryk Engelland were four players with noticeably higher dZS% stats. Haula’s 55.5 dZS% is a major indication of strong back-checking and take-away/giveaway ratio. Add Karlsson’s 53.4 dZS% or Eakin’s 51.5 dZS% and Bellemare’s 52.0 dZS% and you might have Vegas’s first checking line. This stat also may solve the “is Deryk Engelland actually valuable” conundrum. 52.3 dZS% isn’t overwhelming, but it does indicate he’s a hell of a shot blocker, something Gallant may value.
Then there’s Vadim Shipachyov, who has yet to play a game in the NHL, but is expected to have a major impact on the Golden Knights. His oZS% is going to be a great indicator of what they are expecting of Shippy out of the gate. Is he a two-way player? Is he an offensive powerhouse? Is he out there when the team is up a goal? What about down a goal? Zone Starts is the key.
One last reason Zone Starts can be such an interesting stat is context. When a player like Miller, McNabb, or Neal have oZS% above 59% it’s no wonder they have high Corsi For Percentage, +/- ratings, and even points. Zone Starts go a long way in giving the “why” behind certain surprising numbers. If a guy has a oZS% in the 40’s, and a CF% above many others on the team, he’s clearly doing something really right. On the flip side, there’s no reason to freak out about a low CF% if a guy starts 60% of his shifts in the defensive zone. Think of Zone Starts like the “more you know” rainbow.
Cause, you know, knowledge is power.
Alright, enough with the stupid saying, Zone Starts is over. We’ll see ya next time on Advanced Stats for VGK Dummies when we take on PDO.
***
As we were going through the numbers, a few of the younger guys numbers really jumped off the page at us. You understand Zone Start Percentage now, so I’m just going to post the numbers and let you jump to conclusions.
| Player | Offensive Zone Start Percentage (oZS%) | Defensive Zone Start Percentage (dZS%) |
|---|---|---|
| Alex Tuch | 54.3% | 45.7% |
| Teemu Pulkkinen | 65.5% | 34.5% |
| Tomas Nosek | 42.7% | 57.3% |
JV
Just wanted to say thanks for doing these. Even as a long time hockey fan, these fancy stats can still be confusing at times. You break them down in an easy to understand way.
James
@Jason Pothier
Your best work yet.
Regarding Alex Tuch, perhaps he’s a player that passes the eye test but not the numbers test. The American Hockey League numbers don’t exactly jump off the page.
RJ
Tuch is a nice prospect, but he was the #4 or #5 forward prospect in the Wild organization. His numbers will be skewed since there were other players in development getting put into the get the opportunities that we would have liked him to have gotten.
Now that he is the #1 forward prospect in the Knights organization Tuch will always get the top looks and in the most crucial situations. That’s all assuming he does not start the season on the NHL roster, which he very well might.
James
@RJ
According to nhl.com, Tuch was the #1 prospect in the Wild organization
Tuch’s stock must have dropped
https://www.nhl.com/news/minnesota-wild-top-five-prospects/c-281317104
RJ
For the record, I am NOT down on Tuch. He is a nice prospect and will develop into a valuable NHL player. I’m just saying there is a reason Minnesota was willing to let him go.
The article you linked was in Aug of 2016 where he was the top forward in the Wild org.
By November 2016, he was #2:
http://mynhltraderumors.com/2016-17-top-10-minnesota-wild-prospects/2016/11/18/
Jan 2017 he is #4:
http://www.dobberprospects.com/Table/minnesota-wild-top-prospects/
Mar 2017 3 Wild Forwards are among he top 10 in the NHL, not Tuch:
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/future-watch-2017-the-nhl-s-top-10-rising-prospects
And in the Hockey News Prospects issue (I dont have a link, but I have the paper copy) he was the #5 forward in the organization.
CLEARLY his stock dropped last year. It may just be other guys developed faster or the Wild scouts evaluate him wrong, etc. But I am expecting Tuch to be a nice 2/3 line winger when he is done developing. Nice player.
Heffay702
I’m already starting to see another piece of the big picture. Zone starts gives you some context as to what kind of opportunities the player has had and either helps bolster or debunk other advanced stats like CF%
Thanks for continuing to drop the knowledge.
James
@Jason Pothier
You have definitely found your niche! May I suggest touching upon the following subjects in the future:
How WOWY shows an individual’s statistics with or without certain players on the ice.
How quality of competition can also play a role in possession numbers.
Fenwick-close and how it’s better than Fenwick because it mitigates score effects.
Points per 60 minutes and the value of that number.