Originally Posted by Aarongavey
Neal's regression is outside the normal regression but not necessarily unexpected. I ran the numbers for 20 NHL players who averaged over 20 goals per 82 games from the age of 21-30 (Brown, Pavelski, Thornton, Carter, Nash, Callahan, Pominville, Marleau, Backes, Bergeron, Plekanec, Vanek, Parise, Staal, Spezza, Steen, Kesler, Getzlaf, Eriksson, Ovechkin)
Of that list of 20 players, only two averaged more goals per 82 games after turning 31 than they did before (Pavelski and Bergeron). The other 18 were worse in terms of goals per 82 games.
Of that list only two players averaged more shots per game after 31 than before (Bergeron and Marleau)
Of that list only four had a higher shooting percentage after turning 31 than before (Pavelski, Staal, Steen and Ovechkin)
On average those players scored 22.5% fewer goals per 82 games played after 31 than they did before they turned 31.
On average those players had 14.4% fewer shots per game after 31 than before 31. And on average those players had a 11.8% lower shooting percentage after 31 than before 31.
Neal averaged 254 shots per 82 games before 31 with a 12.1% shooting percentage.
If Neal was the average player after the age of 31, based on his pre-31 numbers he would take approximately 217 shots this year, he would score on approximately 10.6% of them for 23 goals (all averaged over 82 games)
Unfortunately for us, Neal's current numbers are off the charts, shooting percentage down 67%, shots on goal down 28.7% and goals down 77.4%. Even I think those numbers are unsustainable.
My worry is that his numbers are closer to the bottom 5 players on that list, who had a 33.4% drop in their shooting percentage and a 30.3% drop in their number of shots. If that is the James Neal we have his numbers over 82 games would be
Shots - 177
Shooting Percentage - 8%
Goals - 15
That is the player over 82 games that I suspect we have. But comparing what he did before 31 and assuming he will continue it is unlikely based on what other similar players have accomplished in their 30's in the NHL. The good news is that he will be better, the bad news is that he is likely never going to be a consistent 20 goal man again (both because of regression and his inability to stay healthy historically).
But any NHL GM would pay a forward in his 30's with an expectation that they will score less goals, take less shots and have a lower shooting percentage than they did in their 20's. If they didn't they were not looking at the historical averages. For most forwards over the age of 31 it is the perfect storm of a lower shooting percentage and much fewer shots on goal which leads to a significant drop in the number of goals they score.
|