Springfield Falcons Scoring Numbers

minard

I recently received an Excel file from Gabriel Desjardins (of Behind the Net). He’d run my quality of competition method for the entire AHL, and was sending me the results. He also included the 5-on-5 and 5-on-4 scoring breakdowns for all of the players; what follows is the even-strength and powerplay scoring for the Springfield Falcons forwards.

Also included are new Falcons Chris Minard and Kip Brennan.

5-on-5 Scoring

  • Jordan Eberle: 1G – 4A – 5PTS (.556 pts/gm)
  • Ryan Potulny: 18G – 16A – 34PTS (.486 pts/gm)
  • Ryan Stone: 10G – 25A – 35PTS (.455 pts/gm)
  • Chris Minard: 11G – 11A – 22PTS (.407 pts/gm)
  • Liam Reddox: 2G – 3A – 5PTS (.357 pts/gm)
  • Slava Trukhno: 4G – 12A – 16PTS (.286 pts/gm)
  • Bryan Lerg: 6G – 5A – 11PTS (.262 pts/gm)
  • Rob Schremp: 2G – 16A – 18PTS (.261 pts/gm)
  • Charles Linglet: 5G – 10A – 15PTS (.259 pts/gm)
  • Gilbert Brule: 4G – 6A – 10PTS (.256 pts/gm)
  • Carl Corazzini: 10G – 10A – 20PTS (.250 pts/gm)
  • Colin McDonald: 7G – 10A – 17PTS (.221 pts/gm)
  • Derek Bekar: 4G – 4A – 8PTS (.200 pts/gm)
  • Shane Willis: 1G – 5A – 6PTS (.188 pts/gm)
  • Guillaume Lefebvre: 4G – 9A – 13PTS (.186 pts/gm)
  • Tyler Spurgeon: 4G – 9A – 13PTS (.178 pts/gm)
  • Geoff Paukovich: 4G – 3A – 7PTS (.152 pts/gm)
  • Tim Sestito: 4G – 2A – 6PTS (.118 pts/gm)
  • Ryan O’Marra: 1G – 6A – 7PTS (.113 pts/gm)
  • Kip Brennan: 1G – 1A – 2PTS (.091 pts/gm)

What I See:

First off, the caveats with Jordan Eberle. He was playing decidedly weak opposition, and he played in only nine games. That said, his AHL debut was very, very impressive and while he’s still a dark horse he could force his way on to the Oilers. For a number of reasons, I hope he doesn’t (age, injury risk, CBA implications, too many small, offensive forwards as it is) but he might.

Potulny, Stone and Minard are all going to make serious pushes for a roster spot. It’s important to remember that Minard played 20 games for the Stanley Cup champion Pittsburgh Penguins a year ago – and I don’t think anyone will argue that their forward corps was a weak one. All three guys should be in contention for NHL games.

As much as defensive issues hold Rob Schremp back, he just doesn’t score at even-strength. He isn’t close to guys like Potulny, or even guys like Reddox; instead he’s lumped in with disappointing forwards like Bryan Lerg and Slava Trukhno. He needs to bring offense in all situations, not just with the man advantage.

Gilbert Brule fairs badly by this measure, and that leads me to think that if he cracks the roster next year he’ll put up similar results to what he did in Columbus.

In all likelihood, Guillaume Lefebvre remains a better hockey player – if not a better fighter – than Kip Brennan.

I’ll acknowledge that Ryan O’Marra probably didn’t get much ice-time, but bringing less offense than Tim Sestito is never a good thing.

5-on-4 Scoring

  • Chris Minard: 19G – 8A – 27PTS (.500 pts/gm)
  • Jordan Eberle: 2G – 2A – 4PTS (.444 pts/gm)
  • Ryan Potulny: 13G – 11A – 24PTS (.343 pts/gm)
  • Rob Schremp: 3G – 16A – 19PTS (.275 pts/gm)
  • Gilbert Brule: 6G – 3A – 9PTS (.231 pts/gm)
  • Shane Willis: 4G – 3A – 7PTS (.219 pts/gm)
  • Liam Reddox: 2G – 1A – 3PTS (.214 pts/gm)
  • Ryan Stone: 6G – 6A – 12PTS (.156 pts/gm)
  • Slava Trukhno: 3G – 4A – 7PTS (.125 pts/gm)
  • Carl Corazzini: 1G – 9A – 10PTS (.125 pts/gm)
  • Bryan Lerg: 6G – 5A – 11PTS (.119 pts/gm)
  • Derek Bekar: 3G – 1A – 4PTS (.100 pts/gm)

On this list, players with less than .100 pts/gm were assumed to have received minimal time and thus excluded.

What I See:

Chris Minard, a very effective even-strength scorer, is also a beast on the powerplay. The goal total in particular is eye-catching; Minard scored more powerplay goals per game (.351) than most players had points. Minard’s numbers stand out so much, at least in part, because he was on a much better powerplay unit in Wilkes-Barre than existed in Springfield.

The sample-size caveat continues to apply to Jordan Eberle, but whatever this kid’s weaknesses I do believe he will bring scoring to the professional game.

Rob Schremp’s bad year extended to the powerplay; at a guess, the biggest reason for the drop in his overall numbers was because the powerplay was so poor. Of regulars, only Ryan Potulny outperformed Schremp on this rather tepid unit.

Ryan Stone’s AHL numbers probably don’t reflect his overall value: like most AHL’ers, he isn’t a powerplay guy at the NHL level so these numbers are almost irrelevant.

  • Hippy

    Jonathan Willis wrote:

    RE: Prendergast’s comments on Minard.
    Minard was good enough to play 20 games with the Penguins. I’d be surprised if he isn’t good enough to challenge for a spot with the Oilers.
    Keep in mind that Prendergast also expected Schremp to score 30 and Trukhno to score 20 in Springfield this season.

    I thought KP's MO was to overrate guys. Not underrate them and highlight their weaknesses. But promises were made the Falcons fans and management at the end of last season. They appear to have been told that Minard is part of that promise.

    Minard with the Pens was that not during a rash of injuries with the big club? They had also recently dealt away Ryan Stone. Before that trade appears to have been one of their top call up options playing a couple games for the big club.

    Alongside Stone other farm team forwards like: Janne Pesonen (7 NHL games), Jeff Taffe (8 games), Connor James (1 NHL game), Luca Caputi (5 NHL games), Dustin Jeffrey (14 NHL games), Tim Wallace (16 NHL games) & Bill Thomas (16 NHL games as well) were all called up last season by the Penguins.

    So it would appear the Pens relied heavily on forward call ups and had them in the line on a regular basis. Either their forward group were not as deep on the bottom end as some think or injuries took a bite out of them pretty badly last season. Possibly a combination of the two? But Minard's number would not seem all that uncommon last season for that organization.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    @ Ogden Brother:
    ~right, after removing the 2nd best faceoff guy and a 20+ goal scorer, Pat Quinn taking essentially the same team to the playoffs would totally redeem MacT. right.~.

    You border on delusional.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    The Penguins top end talent was obviously all world, but they really aren’t/weren’t that deep up front.
    Yeah, I mean they only had 4 20 goal scorers not named Crosby or Malkin, although they would have had 6 if Fedotenko or Satan had played 82 games. Not deep in the least.

    Minard played with them before Kunitz/Guerin go their.

  • Hippy

    Ogden Brother wrote:

    Archaeologuy wrote:
    The Penguins top end talent was obviously all world, but they really aren’t/weren’t that deep up front.
    Yeah, I mean they only had 4 20 goal scorers not named Crosby or Malkin, although they would have had 6 if Fedotenko or Satan had played 82 games. Not deep in the least.
    Minard played with them before Kunitz/Guerin go their.

    *got there"

  • Hippy

    @ Ogden Brother:
    How so? I would be happy to hear you make a sensical argument about this but to date I havent. Just make a logical conclusion and I'd be happy to concede whatever it is that you have issue with.

    If coach X takes the same team as coach y to a better place, it DOES NOT redeem coach y in any way. Yet here you are saying it magically redeems MacT if Quinn does better than him with the same team. I am having trouble connecting the dots on that one.

  • Hippy

    @ Ogden Brother:
    I think claiming the Penguins are/were not that deep up front is false. If you want to be more specific about the statement now, then go ahead and refine it, but the real delusion is thinking the Cup champions werent that deep up front.

  • Hippy

    Did you guys read the Schremp interview? Guy's got a bit of a potty mouth, wouldn't you say?

    Also, he listed Dan Cleary as one of the players he looks up to, because Cleary just stuck with his game and believed in himself, and eventually it worked out. What is he talking about?

    Is it just me, or didn't Cleary have to A) Learn a well-rounded game, and B) Clean up his off-ice practices before he became the solid contributor he is today? I think both of these points, especially the first, have been lost on Robbie. I still don't like his odds very much. It just doesn't sound like he really understands what it means to be an NHL player. He's like the college quarterback that never makes the pros because he assumes it will always be as easy as it was in college, and blames everyone else when it doesn't work out.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    @ Ogden Brother:
    How so? I would be happy to hear you make a sensical argument about this but to date I havent. Just make a logical conclusion and I’d be happy to concede whatever it is that you have issue with.
    If coach X takes the same team as coach y to a better place, it DOES NOT redeem coach y in any way. Yet here you are saying it magically redeems MacT if Quinn does better than him with the same team. I am having trouble connecting the dots on that one.

    Wait so you are talking about logic, yet you aren't piecing together that if a coach that is widly regarded (Y)as one of the best in the business takes a very similar team to a very similar record as his predecessor (X), that you should then conclude that either Y ISN't a top coach, or X isn't a bottom end coach.

    My point is the difference between one of the top coaches in the league and "the worst coach in the league" sure as heck better be wider then 4 – 6 points.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    @ Ogden Brother:
    I think claiming the Penguins are/were not that deep up front is false. If you want to be more specific about the statement now, then go ahead and refine it, but the real delusion is thinking the Cup champions werent that deep up front.

    Their top 6 was all world, Minard wasn't competing with those guys though, so the quality of the top 6 is really irrelavant when looking at their "depth". The guys Minard was competing with for bottom of the roster minutes were names like; Goddard/Kennedy/Zigomanis, hardly impressive.

  • Hippy

    Every time I read one of these breaking down the #'s articles it always feels like I have just read it. I am wondering how many ways you can write your opinion that Rob Schremp is not much of a player and never will be. I am assuming the next article will be about #'s that support that JDD is a 5 th rate goaltender and how Labarbera would have been the answer.

  • Hippy

    TIM S wrote:

    Every time I read one of these breaking down the #’s articles it always feels like I have just read it. I am wondering how many ways you can write your opinion that Rob Schremp is not much of a player and never will be. I am assuming the next article will be about #’s that support that JDD is a 5 th rate goaltender and how Labarbera would have been the answer.

    Maybe when people stop crying about Schremp not getting a good shot, despite not EARNING a good shot, JW won't have to pile on the statistical evidence. Personally, I prefer to know things like statistical reality.

    Because other than that, when it comes to prospects, I, and probably many others, only go off draft day potential combined with occasional vague subjective player updates from guys like KP, who are biased beyond believability.

    Hockey's not ALL about numbers, but numbers can tell you an awful lot, compared to rhetoric, guess work, and YouTube.

  • Hippy

    CurtisS wrote:

    @ Jonathan Willis:
    If you use a 20 year old pro rookie season to prove your 2 of 3 years theory your starting to really grasp at straws.

    Make your case as to why we should ignore Schremp's year as a rookie pro. I can't think of a good reason to, myself.