Latest news with #PlayerTiers
New York Times
28-04-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
NHL playoffs vibe check: Jets' defense, Kings' third periods, Landeskog's surprising play
Two things can be true in Winnipeg: the Jets need to give their goaltender more defensive support, and Connor Hellebuyck has to be better. Hellebuyck's playoff performance has been a topic of conversation for some time. Despite sparkling regular seasons, rising to the occasion in high-pressure situations is an essential piece of the puzzle; it's what held him out of the top spot among the position in this year's Player Tiers. And now, through four games against the Blues, this narrative is back at the forefront. Advertisement On Sunday afternoon, Hellebuyck allowed five goals on 18 shots against. When accounting for the quality of the Blues' 25 unblocked shots, he allowed 3.12 goals above expected. That brings him down to a GSAx of minus-7.23 in four games this series; if he stays in the negatives, that will be three straight postseasons below average. Hellebuyck's last three years add up to 15.2 goals allowed above expected in 14 games, the worst in the league over that span. The last time Hellebuyck earned a positive GSAx in the playoffs was 2021, when he saved almost nine goals above expected in eight games. Playing fewer regular season games that year (in a condensed 56-game season) may have kept him fresher for the playoffs, compared to 63 appearances this year. But fatigue isn't the only consideration to keep him in mind; team defense also plays a big role. The Jets were a defensive powerhouse this season, giving Hellebuyck more support than he has had in years. But the Blues have challenged their stout defense through four games. St. Louis is getting right to the net-front area to create traffic in front of Hellebuyck to take away his sightlines. And clustered in the net-front area, the Blues have sticks in front to deflect and tip shots from further out. But that isn't the only defensive shortcoming. Sometimes Hellebuyck has a clear view of a shot, but is still left completely exposed by his defense. Robert Thomas' rush goal on Sunday was a prime example of that, as he managed to skate right to the high-danger areas with Jets defenders around him. Brayden Schenn also managed to find space right in the middle, too. Gaining home ice advantage likely won't be enough of a boost for the Jets in Game 5. It's not like Thomas' line was feasting on the Jets' third pair in St. Louis — they still saw a lot of Josh Morrissey and Dylan Samberg on home ice. So if the Jets are going to rebound in this series, matchups alone aren't the answer. The defense has to tighten up to give Hellebuyck a chance, because he isn't at his usual game-breaking regular-season levels right now. Guentzel has made a name for himself with difference-making playoff performances. Go back to his rookie season, when he scored 13 goals and 21 points on his way to a Stanley Cup win in 2016-17. The next year, he scored the same number of points in 13 fewer playoff games. Fast forward to 2025, and he is once again making an impact when it matters most. After scoring in Game 1, he was held off the scoresheet in Game 2. Then, when the series shifted to Sunrise, he elevated his game with his team down 2-0 with three primary points in a 5-1 win. Advertisement The Lightning made a bold decision to replace franchise icon Steven Stamkos with Guentzel. But the winger has shown what a difference-maker he can be in Tampa Bay, between his 41 goals and 80 points in the regular season, and his clutch postseason play. Guentzel's three-point Game 4 elevated him to 3.08 points per 60 in 72 playoff games — the 11th best mark in the league since he debuted in 2017. That is important for a Lightning team that has been ousted in Round 1 in each of the last two seasons. If Tampa Bay is going to battle back against Florida in Round 1 — and extend their window of contention — Guentzel will play a key role in that. After almost three years sidelined, Gabriel Landeskog made his grand return to NHL action. And he has been a lot more effective than anticipated. There is no questioning what an effective player Landeskog was in his prime. But returning to the best league in the world after that long of a gap (and now that he is almost three years older) is no easy feat — especially not when jumping right into the intensity and speed of the NHL playoffs, against one of the best teams in the West. Two AHL primer games can only prepare someone so much for that after such a long layoff. Still, Landeskog made an instant impact in Game 3 in a limited capacity, primarily on the third line. In his 11:31 of five-on-five play, the Avalanche were up 19-8 in shot attempts with an 90 percent expected goal rate. After falling behind 2-1 in the series, the coaches made a few lineup adjustments for Game 4. Landeskog was bumped up to the top power play unit, which failed to convert in over 10 minutes of opportunity in Game 3, and moved to the second line with Brock Nelson and Valeri Nichushkin. The addition of Nelson solidified an area of weakness, but the Avs had yet to find the perfect combination on that second line around him. Enter Landeskog in Game 4. That new-look second line dominated play, with a 22-4 edge in shot attempts and 86 percent expected goal rate, while outscoring the Stars 2-0. With the second line excelling, Colorado's offense came in waves on Saturday night, creating problems for Dallas' short-handed defense. It could give the Avalanche an edge in a tight series if they can keep it up. If you watched the Maple Leafs last spring, it may be surprising to hear that their power play is clicking in the playoffs — even though it shouldn't be surprising, with their regular-season caliber in mind. The Maple Leafs' power play, led by a five-forward unit of Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner, William Nylander, Tavares and Matthew Knies, became one of the best in the league. It took time for the group to find its footing on both ends, but after an adjustment period, they took off. From the 4 Nations break on, Toronto's power play was top three in expected and actual goal generation. But last year's power play also ranked highly in the regular season and then fell completely flat in the postseason, with one goal on 21 opportunities on the way to a Round 1 exit. Advertisement In Game 1, the Leafs played to their strengths. The Senators' lack of discipline gave Toronto six chances, and the team converted on three of them. In Game 2, Tavares and the top unit notched another. In Game 3, it was Knies. In Game 4, Shane Pinto scored a short-handed goal and showed the risk of playing without a defenseman. But the team didn't score on a four-minute opportunity in overtime when Morgan Rielly was in place of Tavares, either. A five-forward power play unit may not work for everyone, but the risk-versus-reward has paid off for the Leafs — and it's a key reason why they have pushed the Senators to the brink of elimination. The Devils had one of the best power plays in the regular season, ranking in the top two in expected and actual goals. Even more impressive is how the team kept up the momentum after Jack Hughes was injured in early March, with a scoring rate of 12.1 goals per 60 in 22 games down the stretch. Through four games, the Devils are learning the harsh realities of how their power play fares against one of the most aggressive penalty kills in the league. New Jersey is the only team without a power play goal this postseason. And that isn't the only special teams battle the Devils are losing. In the regular season, the Hurricanes only mustered 6.71 goals per 60 on the power play, while the Devils' PK only gave up 5.89. In the playoffs, Carolina is generating quality looks through four postseason games and converting on them, which has put New Jersey at a real disadvantage. Down 3-1, the Devils need to find their scoring touch on the power play again and start finishing on their five-on-five chances. If Frederik Andersen is sidelined after leaving Game 4, New Jersey has an opening against Pyotr Kochetkov, whose play was erratic down the stretch. Otherwise, this series could end as soon as Tuesday night. Advertisement Sticking with special teams, the Capitals' power play has been surprisingly quiet against Montreal with only one goal in 10 opportunities, for a 10 percent efficiency rate that ranks 14th of 16. Five opportunities came in Game 4, in 9:14 minutes of power-play action. The Caps had their looks, with a series-high 1.11 expected goals on the advantage, but Jakub Dobes kept them off the scoresheet. Washington's power play was pretty average all season, and the team's five-on-five scoring generally made up for it. That has been the case here in Round 1, too, so it hasn't been a problem yet. Montreal's power play, on the other hand, is trending up. Down the stretch, the concern was whether the Canadiens had become too reliant on Patrik Laine on the power play. But the team has managed despite his current injury status. Ivan Demidov moved up to PP1 in his absence, on the right half-wall, and Cole Caufield has moved back to the left circle, where he can do some damage. After going one-for-four with Laine, the Canadiens have amped things up with Demidov on that top unit, going four-for-nine. In 8:02 of power-play time on Friday, the Habs generated 16 shot attempts worth 1.27 expected goals and scored twice. On Sunday, in 5:44, the team attempted eight shots worth 0.59 expected goals and converted with a Caufield power-play goal assisted by Demidov's first playoff point. That power play scoring is more important for Montreal, considering their even-strength scoring struggles. The Canadiens scored four five-on-five goals in their Game 3 victory, but have a combined two goals at even strength in their three losses. The return of Kirill Kaprizov and Matt Boldy's clutch scoring has garnered a lot of attention in Minnesota, but don't forget about another pivotal player. Joel Eriksson Ek's return can't be understated, either. Eriksson Ek is tough to match up against. He is a hard-nosed center who frustrates his opponents with his shutdown play and tends to draw penalties. Through four games, the Wild have been stingy in his minutes, only giving up 1.98 expected goals against per 60 at five-on-five, despite having to match up to the likes of Jack Eichel and Mark Stone — and neither Golden Knight has scored in this head-to-head matchup. Advertisement What has made him such an all-around threat is his offensive skills paired with his defensive acumen. Eriksson Ek forechecks hard and peppers goalies with scoring chances; it's a small sample, but he ranks in the top 10 in shot and expected goal generation at five-on-five this postseason. That has helped fuel a 58 percent expected goal rate in the playoffs and a 4-2 scoring edge in his minutes. Boldy and Kaprizov are game-breakers on the Wild's top line, but Eriksson Ek plays an important role down the middle. If Minnesota manages a Round 1 upset, his disruptive role on that top line will be a big reason why. A team with a 5-1 lead should be safe heading into the final frame, right? Not in the Kings' case. In Game 1, LA played too passively in the third period, which opened the door to an Oilers comeback. Edmonton tied the game 5-5 late in regulation and almost forced overtime. The Kings played spoiler with less than a minute left in regulation, and ultimately won, but it should have been a lesson about the Oilers' resilience. This section should be about how flawed the Oilers are as a contender. Instead, it's about one of the best stingy teams getting burned by a third-period defensive shell. It almost cost the Kings in Game 1. In Game 3, the Kings' ill-conceived coach's challenge in the third period changed the tide in the Oilers' favor, which cut LA's 2-0 series lead in half. Then it cost the Kings Game 4 and tied the series. Sometimes, a team is unintentionally forced into playing defense for the entire third period. The Oilers, down 3-1, put the pressure on with 27 five-on-five shot attempts and a 61 percent expected goal rate. But that was because Edmonton wasn't forced into playing much defense and could focus on the other end of the ice. The Kings went into the period with a primary focus of containing the Oilers, which can be considered the safe approach when leading. But safe is death, especially against a team with Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl. But apparently L.A. didn't learn that well enough in Game 1. Evan Bouchard's two power-play goals tied the game and Leon Draisaitl won it in the final minutes of overtime. With the matchup tied heading into Game 5, the Kings' third-period decisions could be the turning point in this series. Data via Evolving-Hockey, HockeyViz, HockeyStatCards, All Three Zones and Natural Stat Trick. This story relies on shot-based metrics; here is a primer on these numbers.
New York Times
14-04-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
NBA Player Tiers 2025: Tier 5 features some former champions and known veterans
This article is part of our Rankings & Tiers series, an evaluation across sport about the key players, front offices, teams, franchises and much more. With the 2024-25 NBA regular season complete, The Athletic presents its end-of-season NBA Player Tiers, a look at determining and slotting the top 125 players in the league. Seth Partnow shepherded this project for four seasons, making it clear these were not rankings but a hard look at the value of the league's best players and where they should be slotted. In October, I introduced Reliability Tiers, a five-part series on players the NBA considered to be stars. That was an intentionally objective exercise, while the Player Tiers project is inherently more subjective. I have a different way of evaluating players from my former colleague, and this is inspired by the foundation he built. Advertisement If we were to treat this like the scientific method, then Seth used a strong question to guide this player-evaluation process back in 2020: 'What do we have? What do we need? What do we have to do to get there?' When considering players, my question is simply: 'How close is this player helping you get to winning — especially a championship?' In our five-part series, we are keeping tiers and sub-tiers, but I have simplified what each tier represents: Putting players in tiers is an acknowledgment that similar players are generally a product of preference, fit and situation. Many factors go into how a player is valued. Is the team a contender, a pretender or in one of the various rebuilding stages? Is the player a guard, a wing or a big? Basketball is a team game with so many different skill sets and body types on rosters and in lineups — yet, we are here evaluating individuals. It is impossible to fully remove the factors around a player's environment to get to where that player's place in the league is in a vacuum. But my task is to try and do just that. The methodology that led me to create these tiers can be broken down into three parts. Part I: Impact in minutes played. I considered every player in the NBA who is playing at least 30 minutes per game, and I excluded all players who do not play 20 minutes per game this season. Of the players who played 10 games this season: I wanted to make this a 25-minute-only player exercise, so 20 minutes is generous. Roughly half of the players who played legitimate rotation minutes at some point in the season are on the list. From there, I wanted to look at how good players are as far as how much better they make their teams when they are on the floor compared to when those players are off the floor, and how good those teams are in general when those players are on the floor. Advertisement Part II: There is only one ball, and this game is about buckets. There is a great deal of responsibility in being a player through whom teams play. It is important to not only identify which players are used as primary playmakers and top scoring options the most, but also how effective those players are at scoring in the actions that feature stars the most: pick-and-roll ballhandling, isolations and post-ups. Are you the type of player who gets most of the touches in your team's offense? Are you the type of player who can be effective with your touches? In October 2020, Charles Barkley went on 'The Dan Patrick Show' and said there are bus drivers and bus riders. The context of Barkley's comments surrounding Kevin Durant's role and impact on back-to-back Golden State Warriors championship teams is not something I necessarily vibe with, but basketball is rarely a democracy, especially on the offensive end. Understanding the pecking order of how teams function, and who teams play through versus who are in secondary and tertiary roles, goes a long way toward determining who is valuable on the floor for a team. What Barkley doesn't discuss that I certainly will consider: There are some horrendous bus drivers and some great bus riders! Part III: I value players who are effective with the ball more than those who are inefficient with it or don't touch it often. I value players who positively contribute to winning teams in heavy-minute roles more than players who hurt their teams and/or play fewer minutes. But I am also heavy on what players actually do in a variety of roles. I'm a believer in five positions: point guard, shooting guard, small forward, power forward, center. But that doesn't mean players should be stuck in a box. I am more interested in determining where a player fits best, and then how many positions a player can reasonably play based on their size, skill set and ability to complement other players within a scheme. Defense validates lineups, and offenses require players who have the ability to dribble, pass and shoot. With that said, I look at these five skill sets for all players, regardless of position: There is no one-size-fits-all number I prefer. Players who are in strong lineups on teams prone to having awful lineups on the floor in the same games are prone to having skewed impact numbers. Offensive skill can be easier to determine, but defensive numbers are harder to trust. It is really important to watch what players are asked to do defensively and whom they are capable of guarding and see how well they fit into how a team defends consistently. Advertisement This wound up being the exclusion tier. Even getting to 125 is an act of inclusion. Some players are basically the 'best of the rest' outside of the top 100. Dejounte Murray and Chris Paul are the point guards in this group. Murray already had an injury-marred first season with the Pelicans before he ruptured his right Achilles tendon. Now, Murray has to come back from an Achilles injury and an ACL injury. He should probably be in a higher tier, but it is hard to imagine him being ready to play next fall. Paul is no longer a scorer, but he has been a helpful player and earned the right to choose how long he will play. The shooting guards in this group are Luguentz Dort and Brandon Miller. Dort is more 3-and-D than ever, and while effective, his free-throw rate and scoring have plummeted. Miller added more volume in his second season, but his efficiency as a scorer went in the wrong direction before season-ending wrist surgery. Rui Hachimura is a large small forward who has been a decent defender while continuing to be the only 40 percent 3-point shooter on the Lakers roster. The power forwards in this group are Miles Bridges, Al Horford and Khris Middleton. While Miller got more touches than Bridges with the Hornets, Bridges is better on the ball at this point. The issue for Bridges is that he's not very efficient either, and he's an underwhelming 3-point shooter. Horford is nearing the end, which shows up in his lack of interior scoring and rim protection, but he is still a helpful player on both ends. Middleton has shown he is a playoff riser, but his age and durability make it challenging for him to play the minutes that made him a star in Milwaukee. Nikola Vučević is the lone center in this group. While he has value for his rare offensive skill set at his size, Vučević is one of the worst rim protectors starting at center, making him a defensive liability who is in his mid-30s. The 5B group is a step below the 5A group in that it is harder to see these players in the top 100. Payton Pritchard is a Sixth Man of the Year candidate who has to make up for what was overall a rough 2024 postseason. Shooting guard Bradley Beal can still shoot and be efficient offensively, but he is one of the worst fits in the league with the other stars he shares the floor with. Beal's lack of durability, positional size and defense have made him a distressed asset. Advertisement This is a group heavy on small forwards between Tari Eason, Cameron Johnson, Derrick Jones Jr. and Devin Vassell. Eason is dynamic on both ends, but his leg has to be managed. Johnson was a hot trade target, and he is an excellent shooter, but he is a little stretched as a primary option. Jones found a team that lets him be a peak 3-and-D athlete, as more than 60 percent of his field goals are 3s or dunks. Vassell has on-ball chops and a good jumper, and he can make plays defensively. But Vassell's free-throw rate dropped off while the Spurs were at their worst with Vassell on the floor defensively. Dorian Finney-Smith and Toumani Camara are in this group at power forward. Finney-Smith has been very helpful to the Lakers as a 3-and-D forward, while Camara gets the toughest assignments for Portland defensively while hitting 38 percent of his 3s. Jakob Poeltl and Onyeka Okongwu are the two centers in this group. Both are helpful players who offer more skill than most centers but can disappoint in other areas. Poeltl is a decent passer who finishes and rebounds while graduating from awful to merely below average from the free-throw line. Okongwu offers a little more upside as a shooter but is not particularly difference-making as a defender. I felt like this last group of players needed to be on, but was absolutely at the chopping block. Russell Westbrook is one of the most polarizing players here. When things are going well, he is still able to do things few can do. But he is barely on this list because his limitations need to be accounted for by either playing him with the best players or giving him an outsized on-ball role that isn't sustainable throughout a regular season or postseason for a team that wants to win. Anfernee Simons has a lot of offensive responsibility and keeps his turnovers low, but he is a defensive liability who would be much more helpful to a team in a role where he isn't the primary scorer or ballhandler. In the same way Simons is a lower-tiered descendant of Damian Lillard in Portland, Jordan Poole is the descendant of Bradley Beal in Washington. We've seen Poole be helpful to a title team in the role that is most appropriate to him, but his effectiveness wanes as a primary option for a bad team. Bogdan Bogdanović likely wouldn't make this list if he were still in Atlanta. The fit became poor there, his ability to score looked like it had declined sharply, and his shooting looked like it was gone. But since he got to the Clippers, he has rediscovered his shot while going from the team that isolates the least to the team that isolates the most. LA has put the ball in his hands, and he has shown he can be a difference-maker as a secondary ballhandler. It helps that he has above-average positional size to go with the skill, allowing him to fit in powerful lineups with few rest stops. Kris Dunn is a guard-sized player whom I slot as a small forward because of his tertiary offensive responsibilities and elevated importance defensively. I have concerns about Dunn's lack of scoring and paltry 3-point shooting, but he is a valuable caretaker offensively while applying some of the most impactful perimeter defense in the league this season. Advertisement Apologies to players such as Mike Conley, Nickeil Alexander-Walker, Cam Thomas, Jonathan Kuminga, Brandin Podziemski, Jabari Smith Jr., Aaron Wiggins and Bennedict Mathurin. The 2025 postseason will be interesting for the players who are on teams that qualify, and their future outlooks will ride on that. The Rankings and Tiers series is sponsored by E*Trade from Morgan Stanley. The Athletic maintains full editorial independence. Sponsors have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review stories before publication. (Illustration: Demetrius Robinson / The Athletic; top photos: Patrick McDermott, Patrick Smith, Kelsey Grant / Getty Images)
