(Image permission: Duncan Speirs)
BILLINGHAM, UK – This week we take a look at a new stat for the blog as well as the old tried and tested ones. The new stat is PDO.
It isn’t actually an acronym for anything and just comes from the online handle of a gentleman by the name of Brian King who was the first person to propose it.
In the NHL the official acronym for PDO is SPSV% which stands for Shooting Percentage + Save Percentage which tells you everything you need to know.
Usually PDO is only measured at even strength, but due to not keeping separate shot counts for even strength, powerplay and penalty kill, we will just have to go with overall PDO.
A general rule of thumb with PDO in the NHL is that anyone with a PDO over 102 probably isn’t as good as they appear, while anyone under 98 is probably better than they appear.
However, given the nature of our league it would probably be worthwhile not including Hull Pirates, Sheffield Steeldogs and Telford Tigers in this, as they are clearly as good as their PDO would suggest in comparison to the rest of the league.
We have been showing the shooting percentage statistic since the start of the blog. As we can see, Telford are far and away the most deadly team in front of goal, followed by Hull and Sheffield.
Nottingham Lions are, perhaps unsurprisingly, bottom of the pile while Whitley Warriors, despite having leading goalscorer, Ben Campbell, are sitting in 9th.
In terms of team save percentage the top six from shooting percentage remain as top six again. Sutton Sting’s team save percentage is bottom of the pile with Nottingham in 9th. Surprisingly, outside of the old EPL teams, no-one has a save % of 89% or higher.
The new stat is the final column. Telford are far and away the best PDO team in the league. The top six again stay the same with Solway Sharks, Solihull Barons and Billingham Stars sitting in that 98 to 102 range that says they are pretty performing at the level they are.
Blackburn Hawks, Whitley, Sutton and Nottingham could all stand to improve on their current PDO.
| Shooting % | Save % | PDO | |||||
| Telford | 16.62% | Telford | 92.55% | Telford | 109.17 | ||
| Hull | 14.95% | Hull | 92.13% | Hull | 107.08 | ||
| Sheffield | 13.17% | Sheffield | 92.07% | Sheffield | 105.24 | ||
| Solway | 12.89% | Solway | 88.62% | Solway | 101.51 | ||
| Solihull | 12.76% | Solihull | 87.59% | Solihull | 100.35 | ||
| Billingham | 11.09% | Billingham | 87.58% | Billingham | 98.34 | ||
| Blackburn | 10.76% | Whitley | 87.47% | Blackburn | 97.08 | ||
| Sutton | 10.08% | Blackburn | 86.32% | Whitley | 96.79 | ||
| Whitley | 9.32% | Nottingham | 86.12% | Sutton | 95.57 | ||
| Nottingham | 8.62% | Sutton | 85.49% | Nottingham | 94.74 | ||
Team Stats
From a special team perspective Sutton and Billingham, despite the Teessiders not playing a league game, took a positional drop of one position each.
Sutton dropped one place in powerplay percentage and two on the penalty kill after conceding two goals on five kills. Solway moved into 5th for special team effectiveness overtaking Sting, while Solihull jumped Billingham.
| Powerplay % | Penalty Kill % | Special Teams | |||||
| Telford | 39.53% | Sheffield | 89.80% | Hull | 122.39% | ||
| Hull | 32.73% | Hull | 89.66% | Telford | 124.98% | ||
| Sheffield | 27.08% | Telford | 85.45% | Sheffield | 116.88% | ||
| Solway | 23.81% | Whitley | 83.53% | Whitley | 104.64% | ||
| Sutton | 22.22% | Blackburn | 77.78% | Solway | 100.73% | ||
| Whitley | 21.11% | Solway | 76.92% | Sutton | 98.93% | ||
| Solihull | 20.69% | Sutton | 76.71% | Blackburn | 92.87% | ||
| Billingham | 19.72% | Billingham | 70.49% | Solihull | 90.80% | ||
| Blackburn | 15.09% | Solihull | 70.11% | Billingham | 90.21% | ||
| Nottingham | 9.21% | Nottingham | 64.71% | Nottingham | 73.92% |
Looking at shots on goal Hull continue to lead the way, despite dropping 1.31%. Telford gained major ground on them however with a gain of 4.54%. No one moved up or down in this category. The Tigers moved above the Pirates in terms of shots against, but still couldn’t oust the East Yorkshire outfit from top spot in shot differential.
| Shots For Per Game | Shots Against Per Game | Shot Differential | |||||
| Hull | 56.86 | Sheffield | 25.21 | Hull | 29.65 | ||
| Telford | 53.29 | Telford | 26.86 | Telford | 26.43 | ||
| Sheffield | 45.57 | Hull | 27.21 | Sheffield | 20.36 | ||
| Solway | 41.39 | Solway | 32.44 | Solway | 8.95 | ||
| Whitley | 40.95 | Blackburn | 37.07 | Whitley | 2.13 | ||
| Solihull | 36.45 | Whitley | 38.82 | Blackburn | -1.21 | ||
| Blackburn | 35.86 | Sutton | 40.63 | Solihull | -5.05 | ||
| Billingham | 34.27 | Solihull | 41.50 | Sutton | -7.74 | ||
| Sutton | 32.89 | Billingham | 42.40 | Billingham | -8.13 | ||
| Nottingham | 19.15 | Nottingham | 67.70 | Nottingham | -48.55 |
At even strength it remained as the status quo overall. Telford jumped from 3rd to 1st in even strength goals against with Hull and Sheffield dropping at their expense. Solihull dropped below the fixtureless Stars in terms of even strength goals against into 6th place.
| Even Strength For | Even Strength Against | Even Strength Diff | |||||
| Telford | 7.21 | Telford | 1.36 | Telford | 5.86 | ||
| Hull | 6.64 | Hull | 1.50 | Hull | 5.14 | ||
| Sheffield | 4.79 | Sheffield | 1.57 | Sheffield | 3.21 | ||
| Solway | 3.89 | Solway | 2.50 | Solway | 1.39 | ||
| Solihull | 3.45 | Billingham | 3.60 | Solihull | -0.20 | ||
| Sutton | 2.89 | Solihull | 3.65 | Billingham | -0.93 | ||
| Blackburn | 2.86 | Blackburn | 3.79 | Blackburn | -0.93 | ||
| Billingham | 2.67 | Whitley | 3.82 | Sutton | -1.26 | ||
| Whitley | 2.55 | Sutton | 4.16 | Whitley | -1.27 | ||
| Nottingham | 1.15 | Nottingham | 7.25 | Nottingham | -6.10 |
Individual Stats
Jason Hewitt recorded 5+3 over two games to be the first player to reach the 50 point plateau. Hewitt is joined by teammates Lee Bonner (3rd), Matty Davies and Bobby Chamberlain (=10th). Chamberlain doesn’t show on the list due to more games played than Davies.
On top of Hewitt reaching the 50-point mark, Whitley star Ben Campbell (2nd) became the first player to hit 30 goals.
Solihull still have Niklas Ottosson (4th) and Luke Brittle (=6th), while Telford are the final team represented with four players, a league high, in the top 10. Andrew McKinney (5th) leads the team whilst Doug Clarkson, Scott McKenzie and Jason Silverthorn all share 6th position with Brittle.
Not showing on the table due to playing more games than Davies and Chamberlain is Sheffield’s Milan Kolena who shares 10th position. Solway are led by Ric Bentham (29 points in 18 games, =15th).
Stan Lascek 28 points in 19 games, (=17th) leads Sutton, while Billingham’s Chris Sykes (26 points in 15 games, =19th) heads up the Stars. In =32nd position are the remaining team leaders, Blackburn import Peta Valusiak (19 points in 13 games) and Nottingham’s Ruskin Hughes (19 points in 20 games).
| Name | Team | GP | G | A | P | PPG |
| J Hewitt | Hull | 14 | 27 | 23 | 50 | 3.57 |
| B Campbell | Whitley | 21 | 30 | 18 | 48 | 2.29 |
| L Bonner | Hull | 14 | 20 | 21 | 41 | 2.93 |
| N Ottosson | Solihull | 20 | 11 | 28 | 39 | 1.95 |
| A McKinney | Telford | 14 | 9 | 26 | 35 | 2.50 |
| D Clarkson | Telford | 9 | 21 | 13 | 34 | 3.78 |
| S McKenzie | Telford | 11 | 13 | 21 | 34 | 3.09 |
| J Silverthorn | Telford | 12 | 21 | 13 | 34 | 2.83 |
| L Brittle | Solihull | 18 | 21 | 13 | 34 | 1.89 |
| M Davies | Hull | 8 | 6 | 26 | 32 | 4.00 |
Top 5 Netminders
Fucik hangs onto top spot for what is almost certainly the final time as his 133 shots will no longer meet the minimum threshold this coming weekend. Brad Day’s save percentage dropped below that of the currently injured Denis Bell who comes back into the top 5 whilst the remainder table stays the same.
| Name | Team | SAG | GA | SAVE % |
| T Fucik | Hull | 133 | 5 | 96.24% |
| D Zimozdra | Sheffield | 185 | 13 | 92.97% |
| T Hovell | Telford | 150 | 11 | 92.67% |
| B Stones | Sheffield | 147 | 12 | 91.84% |
| D Bell | Telford | 149 | 14 | 90.60% |
| Min 100 shots |
The Lowe Down
With the league seemingly handing out more suspensions than last season the question must be asked where they are taking the information for these bans from?
All games in Moralee D1 are recorded for league officials to have access to and yet it would appear that this footage is not fully taken into consideration and the word of the official is taken as gospel.
James Flavell was given a four-game ban for fighting (as he apparently caused a fight) yet Bobby Chamberlain received nothing further for a cross-check, with force, from behind, into the boards which actually started the fight despite video evidence.
Move onto Whitley versus Solway and we see Lewis Baldwin pick up a six-game ban for fighting and, the bit that hasn’t been mentioned, for delivering blows to the head of an unsuspecting opponent.
This ban is despite video evidence that Whitley’s Ross Connolly dropped his gloves and even got the first punch in!
Several questions come to mind with what is currently happening.
- Why it that bans of fewer than 10 games cannot be appealed? This means that any ban can account for up to 27% of a season before it can be appealed.
- How can it be right that it costs a minimum of £500 plus travelling expenses to appeal a ban that is non-refundable no matter what the outcome? Surely if an appeal is successful a team or player should not be liable for costs as it means they are not in the wrong.
- Finally, and most annoyingly to many, why are bans not fully explained, including why bans have not been imposed? A detailed report of each incident is surely created for each suspendable incident so why not release this?
While game footage may not be appropriate to be shared or of quality to make sharing worthwhile, an in depth description of incidents would surely remove some of the irritation with the league.
Take the Baldwin/Connolly incident. If the league came out and explained Baldwin was banned because of (BLANK) and Connolly wasn’t because of (BLANK) then, even if people disagreed they would not be free to let their minds wander to thoughts of favouritism.
You must be logged in to post a comment.