Cost of defensemen: Jack Johnson effect

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 16, 2011 2:41 PM EST

I thought this item at Puck Prospectus would be of interest because it questions whether Jack Johnson is worth his big new contract. The cap hit for Johnson is $4.4 M despite his having the worst goals against rate per 60 minutes of any Kings' defenseman this season or last.

Whether Johnson deserves his new contract seems relevant to pricing a new contract for Pitkanen or a Pitkanen replacement as well as valuing Tim Gleason. Also, Johnson and Gleason provide interesting reference points for figuring out the mystery of Pitkanen's value as a high-risk, high-reward player. As you'll see below, Johnson is the very definition of that type of player. I think the numbers below also say something about whether Gleason has really had a subpar season, as a lot of us have suggested.

If I'm interpreting this chart correctly at behindthenet.ca, Tim Gleason's GA per 60 at ES is 2.16. Jack Johnson's is 3.24 and Pitkanen's GA/60 is 3.02. Gleason looks like a bargain at $2.75 M. The + / - per 60 minutes when on the ice at ES numbers look better for both Gleason and Pitkanen than for Johnson. Gleason is +.17, Pitkanen -0.27 and Johnson -0.44.

The huge difference in Johnson's favor is of course in scoring on the power play, where he generates 6.03 points per 60 minutes. Gleason doesn't figure on the PP at all. Pitkanen generates 2.26 points per 60 minutes on the PP. (Corvo generates 5.45 points and McBain 3.25. For the curious, Babchuk generates 4.55.)

Even strength, Johnson has been on the ice for 38 goals for and 44 against. Drew Doughty's corresponding numbers are 42 and 28. Gleason's numbers are 28 goals for and 26 against, best on the Canes and two goals better than Doughty on goals against. Pitkanen's numbers are 30 GF on the ice ES and 33 against ES.

The numbers on Pitkanen in different situations make an interesting study. On the power play, he's been on for 13 goals for and 0 goals against. On the penalty kill, he's been on for 4 goals for and 10 against, besides the even strength numbers of 30 goals for and 33 against. On the power play, Johnson has been on the ice for 22 goals for and 3 goals against. Penalty kill, 1 goal for and 2 goals against. For the whole season so far, Johnson has averaged only 1:06 TOI shorthanded. Gleason has averaged 2:58 and Pitkanen 1:48. Pitkanen has had 3:59 TOI per game on the power play, Johnson 3;56, Gleason 0:32.

So at this stage, Johnson is the worst of the 3 defensemen at even strength. The Kings don't send him out that much on the PK. He generates a staggering 22 PP goals but also allows 3 shorthanded coming back. When you look just at goals against in all situations, Johnson brings up the rear with 46, Pitkanen has 43 and Gleason 37. When you add up the goals for and against in all situations, Johnson comes out best at -7, while Pitkanen and Gleason are both -9. But Gleason plays far more in shorthanded situations than Pitkanen, who plays more shorthanded than Johnson. Down a man, you're expected to operate at a deficit. (BTW, there is a chink in Drew Doughty's armor. On the PK, his +/- per 60 is -9.56. Pitkanen's is -6.02 and Gleason's -5.43.)

So who's a more valuable defenseman? Gleason, the guy who plays most in tough situations and has a 9 goal deficit on the season? Pitkanen, the guy who plays in all situations, though less shorthanded than Gleason, and has a 9 goal deficit? Or Johnson, who plays hardly at all in the toughest situations and has a 7 goal deficit for the season?

For people who can't stand the risks that come with Pitkanen, consider how you'd feel if he'd allowed 3 goals against when the Canes had the power play and 2 goals against when on the PK despite playing very little shorthanded, plus allowing 11 more goals at even strength than he has. That would be Jack Johnson, the $4.4 M defenseman whose team is +0.66 per 60 when he's OFF THE ICE and -0.44 when HE'S ON THE ICE. You've got to ask just how much of a risk Pitkanen really is when most of his deficit in goals against comes on the PK.

Johnson is a spectacular offensive player but still does considerably more harm than good even though he's shielded from the risks of PK time. By comparison, Pitkanen is a more versatile player and remarkably low in risk, if you consider that in all situations, he's been on the ice for 4 goals more for the Canes than against. Gleason is low risk/low reward, if by reward you mean goals scored while he's on the ice. But if you take your reward in the form of +/-, the rewards Gleason offers are the highest of the 3.

It would be great if the Canes had Drew Doughty, but they'd never be able to afford him. Can they afford a replacement for Pitkanen or win if they have to accept a downgrade?

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good work with the stats. Jack Johnson might be an excellent PP qb but that’s about it. This contract seemingly puts the Kings in a bit of a pickle when Doughty comes due for his first big deal in a couple years. Doughty is probably twice the player Johnson is and has all the right to expect to be paid commensuratley according to his abilities and the going rate for good young defenseman.

Regarding Pitkanen: We all know he logs a ton of ice time, plays in all situations, and can skate like the wind. That by itself makes him a valuable player, but I’m not sure if he is worth any kind of raise over his current salary ($4.5M) which I’m sure his people will be looking for this summer.

by Sluv on Jan 16, 2011 3:34 PM EST reply actions

The scary thing is that based on the Johnson contract, Pitkanen and every other defenseman in the league will be looking for a huge raise. In the abstract, I agree that Pitkanen shouldn’t get paid more than he currently does. However, I’m also worried about what the Canes will be able to get for $5 M if it’s not Pitkanen. If only Dumoulin, Faulk or Alt were closer at hand.

Speaking of which, from Gopher Sports

No Negatives Here: Freshman defenseman Mark Alt did not play in the Gophers first game of the season, but he has played in every game since. Alt has been a minus player in only four of 19 games this year and has gone nine straight games without a minus rating. Alt is +4 during the span and the Gophers are 3-4-2 in their last nine games.

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 16, 2011 4:06 PM EST up reply actions

I agree with the Pitkanen salary. I think he is getting paid exactly what he is worth. But the problem is that stupid GMs are willing to spend excessive amounts of money to get players like Pitkanen (like what the King’s GM did with Johnson). We can pay for Pitkanen at his current rate, or even a $500k increase or so, but we can’t win a bidding war with other GMs.

by hurricane9 on Jan 16, 2011 5:18 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

If the Jack Johnson contract sets a precedent value for defensemen, then teams will likely be willing to pay a guy like Pits somewhere in the $6 mil range which is probably too much for the Canes’ blood.

by Sluv on Jan 16, 2011 7:53 PM EST up reply actions

Outstanding Post, thanks for taking the time to put this together.

It took JR quite a long time to land and sign a player like Joni, have the feeling he will want to keep him around.
Gleason, while not considered an elite d-man, is the kind of player and organization has to have to be successful. Gleason and Ruutu, for my money, represent the heart and soul of the current Canes lineup.

"He has all the virtues I dislike, and none of the vices I admire." -Sir Winston Churchill

by SouthernHockeyFan on Jan 16, 2011 4:23 PM EST reply actions

Certainly Ward and Staal are part of the foundation, but you’re right that Gleason and Ruutu belong in the discussion to, Swenksta. Looking at the numbers on Gleason made me want to look first at a single statistic on every defenseman: the sum of goals allowed while on the ice ES and goals allowed while on the PP. The first is the measure of solid defensive play. The second is the measure of recklessness. And on Ruutu, there needs to be some combined number for goals, assists and hits. Ruutu must be leading the league on that measure. He’s an underappreciated elite player and he and Skinner bring out the best in each other.

I’d reiterate the importance (to my inexpert mind) of goals against for defensemen in situations other than the PK. Goals against per 60 min ES for the Canes’ D:

Gleason 2.16
Corvo 2.39
White 2.69
Harrison 2.71
Pitkanen 3.02
McBain 3.28

Goals against on the PP per 60

All zeroes except for White, 0.53, and Corvo, 0.40. Jack Johnson gives up 1.06 goals per 60 on the PP. Drew Doughty gives up 0.75. So we see our defense’s deficiencies, but it doesn’t look as though recklessness figures high on the list.

I think it’s more about getting physically overpowered around the net than about recklessness, though unwise pinches do sometimes play a role. McBain is inexperienced, gets overpowered and sometimes pinches unwisely. He’ll gain experience, get stronger and develop better judgment about when to pinch. That said, McBain and Pitkanen do lead the way on GF per 60 min on the ice. So their pinches do sometimes pay off.

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 16, 2011 7:37 PM EST up reply actions

With the PP GAON/60, careful with the small samples. One goal here or there is a huge swing.

My blog and Twitter, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
If you don't know how to use Timeonice, read this.
Behindthenet quick link to QoC/QoT/Corsi/PDO/Zonestarts
"Numbers don't lie, they just don't agree with you"--George E. Ays

by red army line on Jan 17, 2011 1:11 PM EST up reply actions

Very Good Posting...

many things to consider…but and unless #25 starts to do a wee bit more on the offensive side…as well s his stats improve over all…I don’t see JR resigning him IF Joni uses Johnsons contract as a “template” as it were…but hey…one never knows huh ??

The moment you write off the Hurricanes,
they make you look bad !!

by CaniacSteve on Jan 16, 2011 10:50 PM EST reply actions

right

I love Gleason, but if we could trade Gleason for JJ straight across right now, and JJ’s attitude towards Raleigh was not a factor, then you must make the trade. Gleason is a good d-man. Johnson is a star. Any argument to the contrary is wishful thinking.

by prplmnkydw on Jan 17, 2011 3:25 AM EST reply actions

+1

figures lie and liars figure…you can twist stats around any way you want, but I’d take JJ in a heartbeat, nothing against Gleason. Also, DO NOT try to put Pits up against JJ using stats, it’s ridiculous. Pits plays a ton of minutes, but they are mediocre minutes at best. He is starting to become a liability on the ice.

"Mo Must STAY! He's the best coach EVER!!!"

by Capt. Stinky on Jan 17, 2011 7:00 AM EST up reply actions

Faith-based player evaluation? Beauty contest?

It’s fun watching Johnson skate around and shoot, and figures can sometimes be deceptive. But Johnson is on the ice for an incredible number of goals against—he’s worst on his team the last two years. That is not without meaning. Compare him to Doughty even strength. He’s been on the ice for 44 goals against to 28 for Doughty. Surely defense figures somewhere into determining a defenseman’s value.

Also, look at goals against your team per 60 minutes even strength for the whole NHL. Jack Johnson is the 8th worst defenseman in the NHL on that measure among defensemen who have played 30 games or more. There are some very good defensive defensemen at the top of that list, starting with Brian Campbell, who is on the ice for 1.25 goals against per 60 even strength. Johnson is out there for 3.24 against. Jamie McBain, rookie, is out there for about the same, 3.28 against. McBain is very poor on that measure. So is Johnson. McBain is a rookie. This is Johnson’s 4th year in the NHL.

So does Johnson make up for being a disaster defensively at even strength by scoring like gangbusters at even strength? He ranks 46th in the league at 2.8 GF per 60 ES, which is pretty good, but nowhere close to Brian Rafalski’s 4.24 or Drew Doughty’s 3.63 GF per 60. Jamie McBain ranks 18th in the league at 3.28, which is exactly what is scored against the Canes when McBain is out there at even strength. There are a bunch of very good offensive defensemen at the top of the list for team scoring at even strength. Johnson, whose strength is offense, isn’t even close.

Even strength, JJ is – 0.44 +/- per 60. The best in the league, Meszaros and Campbell, are over +2. Jack Johnson ranks 120th in the league. Gleason is 50 spots higher, which isn’t great, but it’s a hell of a lot better than JJ. On the Canes, JJ’s even strength per 60 +/- would rank 5th, just a hair above Jay Harrison’s -0.47. There seem to be an awful lot of numbers conspiring to tell nasty lies about Jack Johnson.

Johnson is excellent offensively on the power play at + 6.74 per 60. Best in the league? Actually, no. There are a lot of guys better than him, including Joe Corvo and Jamie McBain at +7.04 and +6.88. McBain ranks 28th in the league in +/- per 60 on the power play. Among defensemen with a lot of power play time, Christina Ehrhoff looks awfully good at +10.71. Johnson’s terrific offensive performance on the power play is in fact, as described in my initial post, partially offset by allowing shorthanded goals against. He’s 10th worst in the league at that.

Johnson is making millions because he’s great at helping his team score on the power play. But the Kings suffer in a lot of other places to get that benefit. He ranks behind Jamie McBain in

Johnson wins at a sort of D-man’s beauty contest, not at being a valuable defenseman. In that category, he’s in the middle of the pack, and the team that is paying him $4.4 M a year has to be careful when it plays him. He’s not a D-man that the coach can send over the wall just any old time without holding his breath. Would you send Johnson out to kill a penalty in a playoff game? Would you be comfortable sending Anton Babchuk out to kill a penalty? Well, I’ll say this for Babchuk. Nobody scored a goal against his team this year when he was playing on the power play and his team scored 6.26 goals per 60. That trails Johnson’s 7.81 goals per 60 on the power play, but you don’t have to subtract the 1.06 goals per 60 that Johnson gives up on the power play. That leaves their +/- numbers close, with Johnson at 6.74 and Babchuk at 6.26. At even strength, close again. Babchuk’s +/- is – 0.42. Jack Johnson’s is – 0.44. Johnson ranks between the two Canes’ defensemen who’ve gotten dumped on the most this season – and what a relief it was when the Canes moved Babchuk to Calgary.

Summing up, Johnson edges Jay Harrison in +/- per 60 even strength. Johnson edges Anton Babchuk in +/- per 60 on the power play. Johnson trails Jamie McBain in GF per 60 even strength. Johnson is the 8th worst defenseman in the league at goals against per 60 at even strength. He’s been the worst defenseman on his team for two years running by the important measure of allowing goals. Exactly which of these stats is twisted to make Jack Johnson look bad?

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 17, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions

stats, stats stats

yep, jack johnson sucks. ask anyone in the nhl, fans owners players talking heads, yep, he’s a waste of space. you’re right, don’t bother watching him play or anything. geez…

"Mo Must STAY! He's the best coach EVER!!!"

by Capt. Stinky on Jan 17, 2011 12:28 PM EST reply actions

Johnson has great ability – far greater than Gleason’s. Johnson could mature into a great player. But he’s been in the NHL long enough now that he shouldn’t be a huge drag on his team, which he is. Ability isn’t everything. Intelligence and will figure into results on the ice as well. At this point, Gleason outclasses Johnson in those respects.

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 17, 2011 1:10 PM EST reply actions

Johnson it should be noted isn’t exactly being put out against only fourth lines and 3rd pairings. LA was playing him against top lines for a couple of years and since Doughty has come along he’s been 2nd tier competition (LA protects their third pair quite a bit and give anybody dangerous to Doughty-Scuderi-Johnson-Mitchell). His Corsi has been terrible for a few years, though it has improved. One thing to note is his age. While he’ll never be a worldbeater all-around defenseman (probably nowhere near Pitkanen), thinking at his top he’s a bit like Tomas Kaberle might not be a big stretch. He still has years to improve.

Mike Green was drafted one year earlier than JJ (Green is about 18 months older) and from 2007-2008 to 2008-2009 made a huge stride in his defensive game. From last year to this year he’s made another huge stride, to the point where his defensive game is top-competition-worthy. JJ made that first huge stride, from like -15 Corsi to -4. If he can make that next one, he’ll be okay at evens and very good on the PP. Probably not worth his contract, but not terrible.

Definitely makes me nervous, though. Capitals have Alzner, Carlson, and Green coming up as RFA, and JJ’s deal inflates their value. Same with Pitkanen.

by red army line on Jan 17, 2011 1:18 PM EST reply actions

Good observations, Red Army Line. JJ has a world of talent. It will be interesting to see where he ends up at maturity. Huge gamble for the Kings paying him based on current talent and future expectations rather than current performance. That will send agents’ demands through the roof for other D-men. Agents will push the statistical comparisons and it will be hard for GMs to ignore them altogether.

I don’t know, but JJ strikes me as one of those incredibly gifted athletes for whom things have always come easy—so easy that they may or may not be able to adjust as they reach higher levels of competition where hard work is required to perfect skills and stay at the top of your profession. This phenomenon is epidemic in other sports.

by curiouscanesfan on Jan 17, 2011 3:22 PM EST up reply actions

I feel a bit sorry for Johnson. I read somewhere that his junior team was terrible, so his coach asked him to think only about offense (like Green a bit, perhaps, whose Saskatoon team won only 8 games one year he was there). That probably hurt his development a lot.

He was terrific at the Olympics for USA, though, so I’ll still like him.

by red army line on Jan 18, 2011 9:16 AM EST up reply actions