We won’t be covering the NHL playoffs blow by blow in this column, though we will touch on teams a bit as they get knocked out in each round. For this week, and for several upcoming weeks, we will be taking a look back over full season data and find out which players provided the most, and best value at each position.
‘Most Valuable’ is a tricky term that is going to be completely dependent on the league specific context. For the purposes of this article, we are going to use standard Yahoo point scoring to calculate fantasy points for each player. This year the stats include goals, assists, power-play points, shots, blocks and (unfortunately) plus/minus. This means there might be some general deviations to your league, based on your settings, but it is at least a good starting point. In order to grab all this data I am exporting the Multi-Category and Big Board Reports for the full season, and doing a bit of rearranging so I can have only the pertinent fields.
The table below contains the top five fantasy producers at the center position for the 24-25 season, including both basic player information and season stats (games played and Yahoo fantasy points per game). The fantasy points column is using points per game to contextualize players who had big changes in value because they missed time.
It is nice to see Jack Eichel in the top five as he had his first 100-point pace season to date. Outside of the order though there isn’t really anything unusual here. These were the top four projected in drafts and here they are. So, In addition to fantasy points I have also pulled average draft position data (ADP). These ADPs are based on preseason drafts so don’t take into account leagues and drafts that started part way through the season. The idea here is that if we compare the draft position to the end-of-year fantasy points for all players, we can get an equation that lets us say, ‘on average a player with X draft position would be expected to get Y fantasy points’. Once we have that we can compare that expected number to the player’s actual number and see who performed the best based on their draft position. The ADP data below is compiled (averaged) from Yahoo, and Fantrax ADPs for the 2024-25 season.
Our next table contains the players who provided the most value once we account for where they were drafted. I have included their ADP data, the fantasy points that were expected given that ADP and then the difference between those numbers.
Like above we have a few of the elite names. Leon Draisaitl, Nathan Mackinnon, and Auston Matthews all still provided more value than expected even given their elite draft position. A lot of their value came from goal scoring and again is not very surprising.
Sean Monahan on the hand is not usually in their company. There is an obvious caveat here that he only played 54 games so if we were organizing by total points, we would have a different list. He finished the season on an 87 point pace, the highest of his career. He was a big part of Columbus’ surprise offensive surge and did it getting almost career high total time on ice and power-play time. There is a lot to like in Monohan’s numbers though Columbus as a whole was an incredibly effective shooting team, and while Monahan was on the ice the team shot over 12 percent. Given that, a chunk of his production (and his team’s) likely isn’t entirely repeatable but what a great story line it was this year.
Sean Couturier makes the list here mostly because of the lateness of his ADP. In most leagues he probably wasn’t even drafted. He had a couple of interesting runs, but for the most part he really didn’t do much even when he was getting good deployment. Overall, his 47-point pace and declining shot rates are still a far cry from his 70- to 80-point pace seasons several years ago.
Now we move on to the least valuable. These guys all underperformed their draft slot by significant margins.
Honestly, I’m not sure what to make of Trent Frederic here. He tops the list but was a depth piece in Boston in 23-24 and he had a 40-point pace. An ADP of 181 puts in him the range of being drafted in most standard size leagues, but maybe this is deeper multi-cat leagues drafting a guy who hits? Overall, though, that is his strongest category which isn’t used in this scoring format. He didn’t shoot much, saw a decrease in his point pace and shot rate, all of which leads to the disappointing finish, but this must be a misalignment of league types here.
Steven Stamkos on the other hand is most certainly in the right place. After his rookie season, Stamkos has three 70-ish-point-pace seasons, but the remaining 12 range from 84 to 107 with the vast majority being in the mid-90s. His first season in Nashville, then, was a definite disappointment with a 52-point pace. It wasn’t just him, though, as Nashville’s entire offense went dormant for most of the season. For Stamkos it wasn’t a deployment issue because his overall time on ice and power-play time was relatively constant between Tampa and Nashville, but basically everything else tanked: His shot rates, his expected goal numbers, his points participation, and team shooting percentages all fell. Interestingly, his personal shooting percentages and expected goal numbers didn’t though. Some of that could certainly bounce back in the future, but the drop in shot rates is definitely concerning.
Kirby Dach has played fewer than 60 games in four of his last five seasons. On the plus side he played more than two games, but all that time injured seems to have cost him that 18.5 minutes of total ice time and 3.5 minutes on the power-play he saw in his first season in Montreal. He bounced around the lineup a bit seeing some top line time, but also time with Alex Newhook and Patrick Laine who were incredibly unproductive at even strength. He basically tied his career-low point paces and didn’t shoot much. Team shooting percentages and his point participation numbers are all low so those could bounce back in the future, but he needs to stay healthy, which thus far has been a real challenge.
Elias Pettersson had a rough season; in fact, his worst point pace to date. There were some better streaks (like 10 points in his final nine games), but everything was essentially down: His time on ice, his shot rates, his expected goals, team shooting percentage, and points participation all declined. Some of that could rebound next season, but there are a bunch of things that just don’t look great.
Finally, I will wrap the column with a couple of players who provided the most value but generally weren’t drafted outside of deeper formats.
Anthony Cirelli had a career high point pace of 60, buoyed by some very solid strings of production. That production often aligned with increases in ice time (some instances of well over 20 minutes) and deployment on the top power play. Overall, he saw highs in shot rates, expected goal numbers, points, and had some favorable underlying numbers with team and personal shooting percentages, as well as points participation.
Like Cirelli, Anton Lundell has been more of a depth center who saw some stronger numbers this season. His 47-point pace is an increase from his recent past and along with that increased time on ice, team shooting percentages, and points participation numbers.
That is all for this week.
Do your part to support organizations working to make hockey for everyone.
