The Fourth Line Matters More Than You Think
Whenever you watch an intermission report for an NHL game or read an article online, the analysis is often centered around the top players on a team. You’re much more likely to read an article about how Sidney Crosby is contributing to the Penguins’ success than Eric Fehr. Alex Ovechkin has received a lot of criticism during his career for the Capitals’ playoff disappointments despite his nearly point-per-game production in the postseason. The reason why this focus exists is that a team’s best players make the biggest difference — they receive the most ice time and have special skills that are rare in the league.
Oftentimes, personnel decisions made by teams toward the bottom of their lineups receive much less scrutiny than those affecting the top players. The player selected to be the fourth line left winger isn’t considered nearly as critical to the team’s success as the first line left winger. While that is certainly true, the gap between the two is widely exaggerated. Consider the fact that during the 2016–2017 season, the top 90 forwards in terms of average time on ice (our “first liners”) range from 21:52 to 17:50. Numbers 271–360 (our “fourth liners”) range from 13:32 to 11:32. This roughly translates to 20 minutes of ice time for the average first liner and 12:30 for the average fourth line forward.
Those numbers, then, would indicate that a first line player plays 60% more than a fourth liner and is therefore not even twice as important to the success of the team. Teams often look to solve their problems by upgrading to acquire an expensive, flashy player when the numbers dictate that the easiest solution may also be the most effective.
To put this theory into practice I’ve isolated a pair of players on two different teams. One player in each pair is a current fourth liner while the other is a healthy scratch. We’ll observe the difference in points extrapolated over the course of a season and how that compares to upgrading a more prominent player.
The first team we’ll look at is the Carolina Hurricanes. Despite a great shot differential, the Hurricanes have struggled to put together wins this year, largely due to goaltending and shooting. As a result, putting another player in the lineup who can score points would be helpful. Andrej Nestrasil is a player who fits this bill, shooting at 8.0% over his NHL career and scoring 1.76 points per 60 minutes this season at 5v5. He was recently sent down to the AHL after spending time as a healthy scratch. In the meantime, Joakim Nordstrom continues to play fourth line minutes for Carolina despite having a worse impact on his team’s shot differential, shooting a career 6.5% and only producing 0.75 points per 60 minutes this year. Looking at these numbers, it’s pretty evident that Nestrasil would score more points, but exactly how much more? Assuming the fourth line average of 12:30 minutes per game, Nestrasil would produce 17.3 more points over an 82 game season than Nordstrom. To put that into context, a first line increase of 17.3 points over a season with 20 minutes of ice time would be akin to replacing Jordan Staal’s production with that of Henrik Sedin. From a pure talent perspective (disregarding age or contract), that’s a pretty considerable gap that would require a slew of assets on Carolina’s end to recover. However, by making this simple switch to a less noticeable part of the lineup, the team can achieve the same effect.
Let’s look at another example, this time using the Edmonton Oilers. Matt Hendricks is currently playing on the fourth line while Anton Lander, much like Nestrasil, has been sent down to the minors after minimal usage. This is despite the fact that Lander has the third best P/60 out of any Oiler this season and a better impact on shot differential than Hendricks. The difference between their scoring rates (a gap of 0.74 P/60) equates to 12.6 points over the course of a regular season. A similar increase could be expected by trading Jordan Eberle and acquiring either Joe Thornton or Alex Ovechkin.
Those names just listed are certainly not insignificant, and I can’t imagine any NHL GM would trade Alex Ovechkin for Jordan Eberle, even with the age and salary difference. So why do organizations choose to pass up on readily available production? Is a physical or veteran presence worth the loss of double digit points? The next time your team is struggling to win, take a look not only at what the stars are doing but also at the depth players. The solution to the team’s issues may be solved more easily than you might think.
