Plekanec's Consistency Impressive

Trending Canadiens centres Tomas Plekanec, Lars Eller, Scott Gomez and David Desharnais through 24 games

Eller only player to produce a one-game risk/reward rating above 3.00 (he's done it twice!)

Graph and write-up for right-handed defensemen available here
Graph and write-up for one group left-handed defensemen available here
Graph and write-up for another group of left-handed defensemen available here

The below graph is a visual representation of the above players' overall risk/reward rating through the first 24 games of the 2011-2012 season. Each point on the data line is the player's rating from the game indicated at the bottom of the graph. The grey line is the entire team's average (not just the average from these players) from each game.

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Some of the events that used to determine a player's overall risk/reward include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins
• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

Tomas Plekanec has the top overall risk/reward rating among Canadiens forwards. In fact, Plekanec's 1.75 rating is 0.18 above any other forward. He has produced an above-average rating in 18 of 24 games, while his grade has been above 2.00 six separate times. That said, the ice-time, responsibility and a likely injury may be catching up to the Czech centre, as he's had below-average grades in 2 of the last 4 games.

Among forwards, Plekanec's has the sixth-best offensive-zone passing percentage, the fourth-best neutral-zone passing percentage, and a surprisingly low eleventh-best d-zone passing success-rate.

Scott Gomez has the second-best overall risk/reward rating among forwards (1.57). He has produced an above-average rating in 8 of the 12 games he's played. His rating has been above 2.00 on 3 occasions, while his rating has dropped below 1.00 only once. Gomez's overall rating is often carried by his team-leading neutral-zone risk/reward rating.

A possible explanation of why number 11 has a solid rating despite producing little offence can be found in his offensive-zone passing-percentage. Gomez has the eleventh-best offensive-zone passing success-rate among forwards. In contrast, he has the best defensive-zone passing-percentage, and the second-best neutral-zone passing percentage.

Among forwards, Desharnais has the fifth-best overall risk/reward rating (1.31).  He has produced an above-average risk/reward rating in 12 of 24 games. He, along with Lars Eller have been the least consistent of all centremen. His rating has been above 2.00 once, but below 0.50 four times. Desharnais rating is often carried by his second-ranked (among forwards) powerplay risk/reward rating.

Desharnais' rating is often linked to his passing-percentage. Among forwards, he has the third-best offensive-zone passing-percentage, the third-best defensive-zone passing-percentage, but only the eleventh-ranked neutral-zone passing-percentage.

Also among forwards, Lars Eller has the fourth-best overall risk/reward rating; behind only Plekanec, Max Pacioretty and Gomez. He has produced an above-average rating in 11 of 22 games. Consistency is still a factor in Eller's play. Incredibly, he is the only Canadiens player (including PK Subban) to produce an overall risk/reward rating above 3.00; a feat he's managed on 2 separate occasions. In contrast, he has also produced the 2 lowest ratings among this group of players.

Eller has the tenth-ranked offensive-zone passing-percentage, to go along with the thirteenth-best neutral-zone passing-percentage, and the eighth-best defensive-zone passing percentage. Eller's best asset remains his stick, as he his success-rate for both defensive and neutral-zone puck-battles is among the team leaders.

Spacek just hitting his stride before most recent injury

Trending the performances of left-handed defensemen Jaroslav Spacek and Frederic St. Denis

Spacek posted above-average grade in 3 straight games prior to injury

Graph and write-up for right-handed defensemen available here
Graph and write-up for other left-handed defensemen available here

The below graph is a visual representation of the above players' overall risk/reward rating through the first 24 games of the 2011-2012 season. Each point on the data line is the player's rating from the game indicated at the bottom of the graph. The white line is the entire team's average (not just the average from these players) from each game.

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Some of the events that used to determine a player's overall risk/reward include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins
• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

 Despite a large dip in his trend line at the beginning of the season, Jaroslav Spacek has actually been more consistent than many people give him credit for. The dip is actually from a game against the Winnipeg Jets where Spacek was hurt after playing only 2 minutes. His overall risk/reward for the season places him 6th out of 9 defensemen. He has posted an above-average risk/reward in 6 of the 12 games he's played, while posting a grade above 2.00 on one occasion.

Spacek has the top neutral-zone passing success-rate among Canadiens d-men, while his d-zone passing percentage places him fourth.

Frederic St. Denis started his NHL career strong with 2 straight overall risk/reward ratings above the team average. His most recent ratings are hurt by the fact that he has been playing few minutes, while also playing out of position. Through 6 games he has had an above-average rating 3 times. His top rating was 1.66, while his lowest occurred in the recent game against the Philadelphia Flyers; where he posted a -0.30. 

Among Habs defensemen, St. Denis has the third-best defensive-zone, and the fourth-best neutral-zone passing percentage.

Habs: Gorges Far-and-away Most Consistent Left-handed Defenseman

Trending the performances of left-handed defensemen Josh Gorges, Hal Gill and Alexei Emelin through 24 games

Gorges with an above-average risk/reward rating in 14 games

Graph and write-up for right-handed defensemen available here

The below graph is a visual representation of the above players' overall risk/reward rating through the first 24 games of the 2011-2012 season. Each point on the data line is the player's rating from the game indicated at the bottom of the graph. The white line is the entire team's average (not just the average from these players) from each game.

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Some of the events that used to determine a player's overall risk/reward include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins
• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

Josh Gorges' overall risk/reward rating has a huge impact on the team's overall rating. As we can see, a dip or jump in number 26's trend line is usually linked to a dip or jump in the team average.Gorges has had an above-average grade in 14 of 24 games.

The majority of his below-average games took place early on in the schedule, as he was below-average in 4 of the team's first 7 games. By comparison, he's posted below-average ratings in only 2 of the last 6 games. In fact, Gorges has posted a rating above 2.00 in two of the last 3 games.

Among defensemen, Gorges strong average (1.43) is behind only Yannick Weber and PK Subban. His grade has not suffered from huge dips and valleys thus far. His highest rating is 2.14, while his lowest is 0.56. His r/r rating has fallen below 1.00 only six times this season.

Like any rookie, Emelin suffers from huge inconsistencies. His rating jumps and drops significantly from game to game. He has played  16 games this season, and has produced an above-average grade only 4 times. His rating has been below 1.00 eight times and above 2.00 on one occasion. Among defensemen, Emelin has the second-lowest overall risk/reward rating (1.27). That said, he has improved his performance recently, and has produced a rating above 1.00 in each of the last 4 games.

Hal Gill has the lowest overall risk/reward rating among all Canadiens defensemen. That said, he has the team's best short-handed risk/reward rating. Gill has played  19 games this season, and has produced a below-average rating 12 times. His below-average games have been spread out over most of the season, as he had below-average ratings though the first 5 games of the season, and in 3 of the last 4 games he's played.

Gill's trend line produces the largest dip from top to bottom. He's had 2 ratings above 2.00 this season, and 8 ratings below 1.00. Gill's biggest struggles have come from his inability to complete passes at even-strength. Among defensemen, he has the lowest defensive and neutral-zone passing success-rates; to go along with the second-lowest offensive-zone passing percentage.

Gorges play has been second to only PK Subban this season, and has established him as a cornerstone of this franchise moving forward. Emelin has improved his play as the season moves along, and could force himself into a top 6 spot by mid-season; assuming the return of Spacek, Markov and Campoli. Gill has become, more than ever, a penalty-killing specialist. His even-strength play has suffered this season. If it doesn't improve soon, his leadership and short-handed play will be the only things keeping him in the lineup; particularly following the return of the injured players mentioned earlier.

Subban Consistently Above-Average

Trending right-handed defensemen PK Subban, Yannick Weber and Raphael Diaz through 24 games

Incredibly, Subban with an above-average rating in 22 of 24 games


The below graph is a visual representation of the above players' overall risk/reward rating through the first 24 games of the 2011-2012 season. Each point on the data line is the player's rating from the game indicated at the bottom of the graph. The white line is the entire team's average (not just the average from these players) from each game.

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Some of the events that used to determine a player's overall risk/reward include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins
• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

PK Subban has been consistently above-average all season. Number 76 had the top overall risk/reward rating in 5 games this season, and has produced an overall rating below the team average on only 2 occasions. He has never had a rating below 1.09, while his top rating to-date remains the 2.50 he posted during the first game of the season.

In terms of effect on the team average, Subban's substantial playing time ensures that his play alters the overall rating substantially. Number 76 has far-and-away the top overall risk/reward rating (1.95) on the Canadiens. His nearest rival is Tomas Plekanec's 1.75. His ability to carry the puck, make passes, and win puck-battles has allowed the Canadiens to remain in the playoff hunt. Only Carey Price's play has a larger impact on the Montreal Canadiens abilty to win games.


When Yannick Weber is at his best, his overall risk/reward rating compares well to Subban's. The problem with number 68's game remains its inconsistency. He has produced a below-average rating 7 times this season. Of the 3 defensemen tracked in this graph. Weber has the largest range between his best and worst ratings. That said, if we break the first 24 games into 3 parts, we see a solid improvement in Weber's consistency. Through the first 8 games, he had 2 ratings below 1.00, followed by two more through the second stretch of 8 games. But, during the most recent stretch of 8 games he has not produced a rating south of 1.00.

Raphael Diaz's overall risk/reward rating has a smaller range from best to worst than his countryman Weber. That said, it is also consistently lower than Weber's. Diaz's rating has been below average 12 times this season. His biggest struggles have occurred most recently, as he has had a below-average grade in each of the last 8 games. He has yet to produce a rating over 2.00; his highest being a 1.94 he earned in a game against the Calgary Flames. His lowest grade was a 0.68 he earned against the Boston Bruins.

Habs Powerplay Risk/Reward Ratings

The Montreal Canadiens powerplay is currently the 27th ranked powerplay in the NHL. The powerplay is running at an efficiency rate of 12.8%, and has produced only 9 goals this season. Sixty-two percent of the total events that occur while the Habs are on the powerplay occur in the offensive-zone, while only 15% occur in the defensive-zone.

Only 6 Habs have scored on the powerplay this season; Erik Cole and Yannick Weber have 3 PP goals each, while Tomas Plekanec and Brian Gionta have 2 PP goals each. David Desharnais and Andrei Kostitsyn have produced 1 PP goal apiece.

Max Pacioretty and Mike Cammalleri have yet to score on the powerplay this season, but have produced 3 and 4 assists, respectively.

Here we will focus on the players' powerplay risk/reward ratings. Risk/reward ratings do not take into account offensive-output, nor traditional plus/minus. Broken down into its simplest form, powerplay risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each powerplay minute of ice-time. The higher the number, the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession.

 Events that are used to determine a player's poweplay risk/reward include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins
• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

The above graph is a visual representation of each players powerplay risk/reward rating. Players with a higher rating will improve a team's chance of scoring on the powerplay, as they are more likely to maintain, rather than lose puck-possession.


Defensemen

Hal Gill's high PP risk/reward is a statistical anomaly, as Gill has only played 20 seconds of powerplay time this season. Josh Gorges, Jaroslav Spacek, Alexei Emelin and Chris Campoli also have played fewer than 4 minutes on the powerplay.

Among defensemen with substantial powerplay ice-time, PK Subban has the best PP risk/reward rating. Subban has won only 35% of his PP puck-battles, but his powerplay passing success-rate is an impressive 83%. Subban's main focus needs to be on improving his ability to get point shots through to the net, as his success-rate within this metric is a disappointing 48%. 

Raphael Diaz has the second-best PP risk/reward among d-men. Diaz's passing success-rate while on the powerplay is 85%, but like Subban, his inability to get shots on-net is hurting the powerplay. Diaz gets only 50% of his attempted shots on net.

Yannick Weber is on the first powerplay unit, but has the lowest PP risk/reward rating among the 3 defensemen used on the powerplay. Weber does have 3 PP goals, but like the other d-men, he struggles getting shots through to the net. Number 68 gets 51% of his attempted shots on goal. His passing success-rate is 84%, while he wins only 11% of his offensive-zone powerplay puck-battles.

For the purpose of this exercise we will include Plekanec among the defensemen. Compared to the 3 other players used on the back-end, number 14 actually has the best PP risk/reward. He completes 86% of his PP pass-attempts, while winning 75% of his offensive-zone puck-battles. Understandably, His puck-battle winning percentage takes a big drop in the defensive-zone, where he wins only 33% of his battles. Plekanec also struggles getting the puck through to the net, as he gets only 40% of his attempted shots through to the net.


Forwards

Max Pacioretty and David Desharnais lead the forward group in powerplay risk/reward. Desharnais completes 81% of his PP pass-attempts, while Pacioretty completes 80%. Both players struggles occur when they attempt to force the play by attempting to beat an opposing player 1on1 (deke). Pacioretty is successful with 50% of his attempted dekes, while Desharnais completes 53%.  Pacioretty has a much better success-rate for offensive-zone puck-battles. He wins 71% of his o-zone puck-battles, while Desharnais wins only 36% of his o-zone puck-battles.

Kostitsyn has the next-best powerplay risk/reward rating, but has played only 18 PP minutes; compared to 83 for Pacioretty. Kostitsyn's best powerplay asset is his ability to get the puck on net. He has gotten 71% of his attempted PP shots on net, while Pacioretty has gotten only 50% of his attempted PP shots on net. Kostitsyn's o-zone PP puck-battle success-rate is an abysmal 38%.

Cammalleri's strengths are similar to Kostitsyn, as number 13 gets 73% of his attempted shots on net. His struggles are also similar to Kostitsyn, as he has won only 48% of his PP puck-battles. Cole gets 72% of his shot-attempts on net, while winning 50% of his powerplay puck-battles, and Mathieu Darche gets 67% of his attempted shots on net, while winning 67% of his PP puck-battles.

Gomez has a low powerplay passing percentage at 72% (the team average is 81%), and has won only 44% of his powerplay puck-battles. Eller (60%) wins a higher percentage of puck-battles than Gomez, but completes only 68% of his powerplay pass-attempts. Gomez gets 67% of his attempted shots on net while on the powerplay. Eller, for his part,  has yet to attempt a shot on net through 13 minutes of powerplay ice-time.

The main focus of the Habs powerplay needs to be on their inablity to get shots from the point through to the net. Montreal's setup focuses on 1-timers from the point, yet the team's defensemen (including Plekanec) continue to struggle executing the plan. Didn't Johnny Cash sing a song about walking the line?

Habs: Success-rates for Acquiring or Maintaining Puck-possession

Subban and Gorges only players with success-rates above 70% in both metrics


By tracking every event within a game, we are able to accrue an incredible amount of data on each player. Here, we will focus on each Montreal Canadiens' player's ability to either maintain, or acquire puck-possession.The events included in this exercise occurred at even-strength, and were not broken down by zone. This calculation is done by dividing the successful-attempts within each metric by the total amount of events within each metric, and multiplying that result by 100.

In theory, a player with a higher percentage when attempting to maintain puck-possession could be defined as a better offensive player, while a player with a higher percentage when attempting to acquire puck-possession could be defined as a better defensive-player.

The above graph is a visual representation of each player's total success-rate for the combined metrics within each category. Expressed differently, a player with a high percentage on the "maintaining puck-possession" graph is more likely to make a successful play when he already has possession of the puck.


Events that are used to determine a player's success-rate for maintaining puck-possession include:

• Successful or unsuccessful passes
• Successfully or unsuccessfully beating an opponent 1on1 (deke)
• Successful or unsuccessful shot-attempts (puck on net)
• Successful or unsuccessful dump-ins

Quite surprisingly, Michael Blunden has the top success-rate when attempting to maintain puck-possession. This is due to Blunden's solid passing percentage. He has an overall passing success-rate of  70% to go along with 17 successful dump-ins. Other forwards with success-rates over 65% in this category include Scott Gomez, Tomas Plekanec, and Aaron Palushaj.

Defensemen with success-rates when attempting to maintain puck-possession over 70% include Josh Gorges, PK Subban, Chris Campoli, and Frederick St. Denis. Campoli and St. Denis have limited events within this metric, so their numbers remain skewed, while Subban and Gorges maintain the highest defensive-zone passing rate (73%) among the team's defensemen.

Travis Moen and Andrei Kostitsyn are the only two players with success-rates below 60% in this category. Both players offensive-zone passing percentages hover below 60%, while Moen's success-rate when attempting to beat opposing players 1on1 (deke) is an abysmal 33%.

-------------------------------

The above graph is a visual representation of each player's total success-rate for the combined metrics within each category. Expressed differently, a player with a high percentage on the "acquiring puck-possession" graph is more likely to make a successful play when attempting to get possession of either a loose-puck, or a puck already being controlled by the other team.

Events that are used to determine a player's success-rate for acquiring puck-possession include:

• Successful or unsuccessful puck-battles
• Successful or unsuccessful loose-puck recoveries
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked passes
• Successful or unsuccessful blocked shots
• Successful or unsuccessful stick-checks

Mathieu Darche has the top success-rate within this category. Darche's percentage is a product of his solid numbers in offensive-zone puck-battles, and his willingness to block shots. Other forwards with success-rates above 70% include Max Pacioretty, Brian Gionta and Petteri Nokelainen. Pacioretty recovers a high percentage of loose-pucks, while Gionta and Nokelainen both win a high percentage of their offensive-zone puck-battles.

Emelin has the highest percentage among defensemen, as his defensive-zone puck-battle winning percentage (58%) is among the team's best. Other d-men with a rating above 70% in this category include Subban, Gorges, and Weber. Gorges and Weber lead the team in defensive-zone puck-battle winning percentage, while Subban leads the team in d-zone loose-puck recoveries.

Blunden has the lowest percentage in this category, as he has an overall puck-battle winning-percentage of 13% (yes, 13%!). Other players with low percentages include Diaz, Moen and Kostitsyn. Diaz wins only 48%, while Moen wins only 38% of thier respective d-zone puck-battles.  Kostitsyn, for his part, wins only 45% of his offensive-zone puck-battles.

Still early in its development, this statistic produces some surprising results. That said, many of the leaders within the two categories are already perceived as either strong defensive and/or offensive-players.

Habs vs. Boston 1-0 Loss November 21, 2011

The Gap increases
Subban Habs best skater, while Plekanec uncharacteristically struggles




The Montreal Canadiens gave up only 16 even-strength shots to the visiting Boston Bruins. Eventually losing a well-played game by a score of 1-0.

The above charts are visual representations of the percentage of total events that take place in each zone. The top chart is the Habs season average, while the lower chart is from the 1-0 loss to the Boston Bruins. As we can see, the Habs had 5 % more offensive-zone events against the Bruins, four percent less defensive-zone events, and 1 % less neutral-zone events. The events used to calculate these percentages do no include those events that take place on the powerplay or while short-handed. In short, During this loss to the Bruins, the Habs produced more offensive pressure, while facing less defensive pressure than their season average.

-------------------------------

Overall grades can also be expressed as the percentage of positive-events a player produces. They are also different than risk/reward in the fact that they take into account traditional plus/minus, as well as shot and point totals.

Ten players had overall grades above their season average. Despite playing less than five minutes, Aaron Palushaj had the top grade; Palushaj produced only 2 negative events the entire game. Travis Moen and Lars Eller were the only players with grades below 60. Eller in fact, had one of his lowest grades of the season.

-----------------------------

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Thirteen players had overall risk/reward ratings above their season average. By extension, the fact that Carey Price faced only 18 shots could be explained in that five of the six defensemen had overall ratings above their season average.  PK Subban had the top overall risk/reward rating, followed by Scott Gomez and Aaron Palushaj.

Eller had the lowest overall rating. Other players with overall risk/reward ratings below 1.00 include Moen and Mike Cammalleri.

------------------------------

Even-strength risk/reward rating is identical to overall risk/reward rating, except in the fact that it only takes into account events that take place at even-strength.

Twelve players had EVEN-STRENGTH risk/reward ratings above their season average. Five of those player were defensemen. Subban had the top ES rating, followed closely by Mathieu Darche, Gomez, and Palushaj. Darche and Subban produced their best work in the defensive-zone, while Gomez and Palushaj's ratings wore the product of solid numbers in the offensive-zone.

Lars Eller had the lowest even-strength rating. Eller's rating was hurt by an inability to get shots on net, and a 33% defensive-zone passing percentage. The incredibly consistent Plekanec surprised, as he produced the second lowest even-strength rating.

------------------------

Offensive-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the offensive-zone.


Only six players had EVEN-STRENGTH offensive-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. None of these players were defensemen. David Desharnais had far-and-away the top o-zone rating (to the point where I had to check and re-check the data multiple times). Number 51 had an incredible 13 offensive-zone loose-puck recoveries, while also completing 12 of 16 offensive-zone passes.


Three players had o-zone ratings in the negative including Nokelainen, Emelin and St. Denis. A negative rating indicates that a player produced more events that lost or failed to gain puck-possession, than managed to retain or acquire puck-possession.

--------------------------------

Defensive-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the defensive-zone.

Eleven players had defensive-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. Five of those players were defensemen. Subban had the top d-zone rating, followed by Nokelainen and Darche. Subban completed 23 of 28 d-zone passes, while Darche had 5, and Nokelainen managed 4 loose-puck recoveries. 

For the first time ever, Plekanec had the lowest defensive-zone risk/reward rating. Number 14 completed only 2 of 4 defensive-zone pass-attempts, while winning only 50% of his d-zone puck-battles. In Plekanec's defense, 40 % of his total events took place in the offensive-zone, while only 32% took place in the d-zone.

---------------------------

Neutral-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the neutral-zone.

Nine players had neutral-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. Recent AHL call-ups Frederick St. Denis and Aaron Palushaj had the top n-zone ratings. Desharnais was the only player with a negative n-zone risk/reward rating. 

------------------------------

Short-handed risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account events that take place while the team is short-handed.

Five players had short-handed risk/reward ratings above their season average, while Nokelainen was the only player with a SH rating in the negative.

---------------------------------

Powerplay risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account events that take place while the team is on the powerplay.


Only 4 players had powerplay risk/reward ratings above their season average. Subban had the top powerplay rating, while Darche and Cole had PP ratings in the negative. Cole completed only 1 of 3 PP pass-attempts, while Darche lost his only powerplay puck-battle.

Habs: Loose-puck Recoveries Per-Minute of Ice-time

Subban and Pacioretty lead the pack


A loose puck is defined as any puck not currently being controlled by any player on the ice. This statistic also takes into account ice-time. Therefore the resulting number is based on how many puck-recoveries a player earns for every minute they are on the ice. Short-handed and powerplay recoveries are not taken into account, as this statistic is based solely on even-strength play. Players who do well in this category generally demonstrate good speed, the ability to support the puck-carrier in either zone, and hockey-sense. A player can earn a loose-puck recovery multiple ways. Here are a few examples:

• Puck support (recovering a loose puck after first player pins opposition against the boards)
• Grab control of a rebound following a shot on net
• Win a puck-race to a loose-puck

Offensive-zone

Max Pacioretty leads the team in offensive-zone puck-recoveries. Many of number 67's recoveries come off  face-offs. Pacioretty's speed and strong stick allow him to recover many loose-pucks off  "dead draws".  Other players with many loose-puck recoveries include Scott Gomez, Andrei Kostitsyn, Aaron Palushaj, Andreas Engqvist, Erik Cole, and Lars Eller.

Among forwards, Travis Moen and Michael Blunden have the fewest puck-recoveries.


Defensive-zone

PK Subban leads all players in defensive-zone puck-recoveries.  Like Pacioretty, many of Subban's recoveries come off faceoffs. The Habs set play on defensive-zone faceoffs sees the board-side d-man collapse into the faceoff circle and carry the puck behind the net. Subban is a favourite of Jacques Martin when this situation arises.

Newcomer Frederick St. Denis has played few games, so his results should be taken with a grain of salt. Among players with substantial ice-time, Raphael Diaz and Josh Gorges have the fewest d-zone recoveries. Diaz seems to lose many loose-puck races he engages in, sometimes hesitating to be the first man to the puck. Gorges strength is to stay on the defensive-side of opposition players, this often makes it difficult for number 26 to get to loose pucks along the boards.

Neutral-zone

Subban and Jaroslav Spacek lead the defense in neutral zone puck-recoveries, while Andreas Engqvist leads the forwards.

Still in its infancy, the loose-puck recovery stat is an interesting experiment. There is no doubt that a player's ability to recover loose-pucks is a valuable asset to any team. That said, at this point it creates some interesting questions as to why certain players produce more recoveries than their teammates.

Habs vs. Rangers 4-0 Win November 19, 2011

Plekanec the team-leader at even-strength and on the powerplay


Tomas Plekanec had either the top rating, or was among the top ratings in almost every category, as the Montreal Canadiens shutout the visiting New York Rangers by a score of 4-0 Saturday night.

click here to view OVERALL RAW DATA

The above charts are visual representations of the percentage of total events that take place in each zone. The top chart is the Habs season average, while the lower chart is from the 4-0 win over the New York Rangers. As we can see, the Habs had 4 % more offensive-zone events against the Rangers, Two percent less defensive-zone events, and 2 % less neutral-zone events. The events used to calculate these percentages do no include those events that take place on the powerplay or while short-handed.

----------------------------

Overall grades can also be expressed as the percentage of positive-events a player produces. They are also different than risk/reward in the fact that they take into account traditional plus/minus, as well as shot and point totals.

Nine players had overall grades above their season average. Seven of those nine players were forwards. Josh Gorges had the top overall grade. Other players with overall grades above 70 include Cammalleri, Plekanec, Gionta, Moen, Desharnais, and Cole.

Petteri Nokelainen showed loads of character during the game, but still produced the only grade below 60.

-----------------------------------

Broken down into its simplest form, Risk/reward is simply the difference between the number of "good plays" a player produces, and the "bad plays" a player produces for each minute they are on the ice. The higher the number the more a player helps their team maintain puck-possession throughout the game.

Ten players had overall risk/reward ratings above their season average. Tomas Plekanec had the top overall risk/reward, followed by Cammalleri, Gorges, Desharnais and Cole. The high ratings for Cammalleri, Plekanec, Desharnais and Cole are a product of solid work on the powerplay. Plekanec, as an example completed an incredible 28 of 31 powerplay pass-attempts.  Gorges, on the other hand produced his solid rating while at even-strength and short-handed.

Nokelainen had the lowest overall risk/reward rating. Palushaj was the only other player with a rating below 0.50.

-------------------------

Even-strength risk/reward rating is identical to overall risk/reward rating, except in the fact that it only takes into account events that take place at even-strength.

Eight players had ES ratings above their season average. Plekanec had the top rating, followed closely by Gorges and Cammalleri. Gorges mark is particularly impressive, as his offensive-zone rating is nearly equal to Plekanec and Cammalleri; a rare feat for number 26.

Nokelainen had the lowest EVEN-STRENGTH risk/reward rating. Nokelainen had  an impressive defensive-zone rating, but his o-zone and n-zone ratings were especially low.

---------------------------------

Offensive-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the offensive-zone.

Eight players had EVEN-STRENGTH offensive-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. Three of those players were defensemen. Erik Cole had far-and-away the best o-zone rating. Cole recouped 5 loose-pucks and completed 5 of 6 offensive-zone pass-attempts. Plekanec also had an impressive rating, as he completed 7 of 10 offensive-zone passes.

PK Subban and Petteri Nokelainen were the only two players with o-zone ratings in the negative. A negative o-zone rating shows that a player made more plays to lose puck-possession in that zone than he did to either maintain or acquire puck-possession in that zone. Subban's o-zone events were low, but he still failed with 2 attempts to pinch-in at the offensive blueline.

------------------------------

Defensive-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the defensive-zone.

Twelve players had EVEN-STRENGTH defensive-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. Nine of those players were forwards. Subban had the top d-zone rating, followed by Weber and newcomer Frederick St. Denis. Subban won 4 of 5 d-zone puck-battles, while also recouping 7 loose-pucks. Weber won 4 of 6 d-zone puck-battles, while St Denis completed 10 of 12 d-zone pass-attempts.

Max Pacioretty was the only player with a d-zone rating in the negative. Number 67 completed only 1 o 3 d-zone passes.

-------------------------------

Neutral-zone risk/reward ratings are identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account EVEN-STRENGTH events that take place in the neutral-zone.

Six players had EVEN-STRENGTH neutral-zone risk/reward ratings above their season average. Pacioretty made up for his d-zone rating, as he posted the top neutral-zone risk/reward. Other players with solid n-zone ratings include Gomez, Cammalleri, and Gorges.

Diaz, Nokelainen and Emelin were the only players with negative n-zone ratings. Diaz and Emelin were unable to complete any n-zone passes.

-----------------------------

Short-handed risk/reward ratings is identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account events that take place while the team is short-handed.

Four players had short-handed risk/reward ratings above their season average, while 3 other players had SH ratings in the negative. Despite playing less that a minute while short-handed, Cammalleri

----------------------------------

Powerplay risk/reward ratings is identical to even-strength risk/reward ratings, except in the fact that they only take into account events that take place while the team is on the powerplay.

Seven players had powerplay risk/reward ratings above their season average. Raphael Diaz had the top PP rating, followed by Plekanec. Diaz completed all 12 of his powerplay pass-attempts, while Plekanec completed 28 of 31 attempted PP passes.

Habs vs. New York Rangers (OVERALL RAW DATA)

	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
OZPBW	2	7	2	1	2	1	1	2	0	0	0	0	4	2	3	0	1	2	0	OZPBW	30
OZPBL	2	4	0	0	2	1	0	3	0	4	0	1	3	3	2	0	0	4	0	OZPBL	29
OZPRACW	7	5	6	1	3	1	2	5	2	3	3	2	4	8	9	0	3	3	0	OZPRACW	67
OZPRACL	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	OZPRACL	2
OZPASS+	13	12	30	0	4	5	3	14	3	4	12	2	11	20	20	0	4	1	0	OZPASS+	158
OZPASS-	5	7	4	1	3	1	0	0	2	1	3	2	6	7	4	0	0	3	0	OZPASS-	49
OZDEAK+	3	1	1	0	2	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	3	0	0	3	0	OZDEAK+	15
OZDEAK-	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	3	0	0	0	0	2	0	3	0	0	2	0	OZDEAK-	15
SKI +	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	SKI +	0
SKI-	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	SKI-	3
DI+	8	3	4	0	4	3	1	0	4	1	0	0	4	2	1	0	2	2	0	DI+	39
DI-	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	2	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	DI-	4
BL-PASS+	0	0	5	0	0	1	2	0	0	0	1	0	2	4	0	1	0	1	0	BL-PASS+	17
BL-PASS-	1	0	3	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	2	1	0	2	0	0	BL-PASS-	14
POKE CHECK	0	2	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	1	2	1	0	0	0	1	0	POKE CHECK	9
MISS PASS	3	1	2	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	0	MISS PASS	12
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
DZPBW	2	2	1	2	0	1	1	3	1	0	4	4	0	4	0	2	5	3	0	DZPBW	35
DZPBL	2	1	1	1	1	3	0	1	2	1	1	4	0	2	2	3	5	1	0	DZPBL	31
DZPRACW	2	3	7	1	6	6	2	5	1	3	6	5	3	3	5	6	9	5	2	DZPRACW	80
DZPRACL	0	1	2	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	2	1	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	DZPRACL	9
DZPASS+	1	6	9	3	4	11	1	4	0	1	9	10	2	9	4	3	16	4	10	DZPASS+	107
DZPASS-	2	2	3	0	0	3	0	4	1	1	7	2	2	5	1	5	11	3	2	DZPASS-	54
DZDEAK+	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	1	2	0	DZDEAK+	6
DZDEAK-	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	DZDEAK-	5
DUMP+	0	2	1	0	4	3	1	1	0	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	4	0	1	DUMP+	22
DUMP-	0	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	2	1	0	0	0	4	2	1	0	DUMP-	13
BL-SHOT+	0	0	0	0	0	4	2	0	1	0	2	0	0	2	0	4	4	0	0	BL-SHOT+	19
BL-SHOT-	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	0	BL-SHOT-	6
BL-PASS+	1	3	2	1	1	3	0	2	0	0	1	0	0	4	0	2	5	0	6	BL-PASS+	31
BL-PASS-	0	0	1	0	0	3	3	0	0	0	3	3	1	0	1	0	2	0	5	BL-PASS-	22
POKE CHECK	0	1	4	0	0	1	3	0	1	0	2	6	0	1	0	1	1	2	0	POKE CHECK	23
MISS PASS	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	MISS PASS	5
DZ COV -	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	DZ COV -	1
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
NZPBW	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	2	0	0	0	1	0	0	NZPBW	6
NZPBL	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	2	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	NZPBL	10
NZPRACW	3	2	1	0	1	0	1	2	1	0	1	0	2	0	2	0	0	3	0	NZPRACW	19
NZPRACL	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	NZPRACL	3
NZPASS+	3	2	3	0	0	3	2	2	0	2	0	4	2	1	2	0	2	1	0	NZPASS+	29
NZPASS-	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	3	1	0	2	0	1	1	2	0	NZPASS-	11
NZDEAK+	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	NZDEAK+	5
NZDEAK-	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	1	0	NZDEAK-	7
BL-PASS+	0	5	2	0	2	2	0	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	BL-PASS+	14
BL-PASS-	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	BL-PASS-	3
POKE CHECK	0	2	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	POKE CHECK	4
MISS PASS	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	MISS PASS	5
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
SHOT THRU	2	4	3	0	6	1	0	2	1	0	1	0	2	2	3	4	0	2	0	SHOT THRU	33
SHOT MISSED	6	3	2	0	4	0	2	1	1	0	1	1	5	9	1	1	1	0	0	SHOT MISSED	38
POINTS X2	4	2	4		4						2		2	2	4					POINTS X2	24
+/-	2	2			2	1					1					1	1			+/-	0
SHOTS	4	5	3		5	2		1			1		1	2	3	2		2		SHOTS	0
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
WINS	57	71	88	9	51	51	24	48	16	15	49	36	46	69	60	27	60	37	19	WINS	792
EVENTS	83	92	111	18	66	63	32	65	25	24	72	56	68	101	79	41	89	58	26	EVENTS	1138
GRADE	69	77	79	50	77	81	75	74	64	63	68	64	68	68	76	66	67	64	73	GRADE	70
PLAYER	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TEAM AVG
RISK/REWARD
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
POS	47	62	81	9	40	48	24	47	16	15	45	36	43	65	53	24	59	35	19	POS	768
NEG	26	21	23	9	15	12	8	17	9	9	23	20	22	32	19	14	29	21	7	NEG	336
RATIO	1.81	2.95	3.52	1.00	2.67	4.00	3.00	2.76	1.78	1.67	1.96	1.80	1.95	2.03	2.79	1.71	2.03	1.67	2.71	RATIO	2.29
MIN/G	14.72	19.71	22.77	9.41	19.25	18.68	14.46	17.89	8.22	16.72	17.43	17.1	18.35	21.23	17.93	16.23	22.42	11.75	0	MIN/G	304.27
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
MINUTES	15	20	23	9	19	19	14	18	8	17	17	17	18	21	18	16	22	12	0	MINUTES	304
POS/MIN	3.19	3.15	3.56	0.96	2.08	2.57	1.66	2.63	1.95	0.90	2.58	2.11	2.34	3.06	2.96	1.48	2.63	2.98	0.00	POS/MIN	2.52
NEG/MIN	1.77	1.07	1.01	0.96	0.78	0.64	0.55	0.95	1.09	0.54	1.32	1.17	1.20	1.51	1.06	0.86	1.29	1.79	0.00	NEG/MIN	1.10
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
EVENTS/ MIN	4.96	4.21	4.57	1.91	2.86	3.21	2.21	3.58	3.04	1.44	3.90	3.27	3.54	4.57	4.02	2.34	3.93	4.77	0.00	EVENTS/ MIN	3.63
RISK/REWARD	1.43	2.08	2.55	0.00	1.30	1.93	1.11	1.68	0.85	0.36	1.26	0.94	1.14	1.55	1.90	0.62	1.34	1.19	0.00	RISK/REWARD	1.42
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
OFFENSIVE ZONE
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
OZ POS	27	31	47	2	17	9	9	25	6	7	17	5	26	37	38	5	8	13	0	OZ POS	329
OZ NEG	18	16	12	3	13	2	4	7	3	5	5	5	17	22	12	1	4	10	0	OZ NEG	159
RATIO	1.50	1.94	3.92	0.67	1.31	4.50	2.25	3.57	2.00	1.40	3.40	1.00	1.53	1.68	3.17	5.00	2.00	1.30			#DIV/0!
MIN/G	14.72	19.71	22.77	9.41	19.25	18.68	14.46	17.89	8.22	16.72	17.43	17.1	18.35	21.23	17.93	16.23	22.42	11.75	0	MIN/G	304.27
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
MINUTES	15	20	23	9	19	19	14	18	8	17	17	17	18	21	18	16	22	12	0	MINUTES	304
POS/MIN	1.83	1.57	2.06	0.21	0.88	0.48	0.62	1.40	0.73	0.42	0.98	0.29	1.42	1.74	2.12	0.31	0.36	1.11	0.00	POS/MIN	1.08
NEG/MIN	1.22	0.81	0.53	0.32	0.68	0.11	0.28	0.39	0.36	0.30	0.29	0.29	0.93	1.04	0.67	0.06	0.18	0.85	0.00	NEG/MIN	0.52
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
EVENTS/ MIN	3.06	2.38	2.59	0.53	1.56	0.59	0.90	1.79	1.09	0.72	1.26	0.58	2.34	2.78	2.79	0.37	0.54	1.96	0.00	EVENTS/ MIN	1.60
RISK/REWARD	0.61	0.76	1.54	-0.11	0.21	0.37	0.35	1.01	0.36	0.12	0.69	0.00	0.49	0.71	1.45	0.25	0.18	0.26	0.00	RISK/REWARD	0.56
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
DEFENSIVE ZONE
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
DZ POS	6	17	24	7	16	29	10	15	4	5	25	26	5	25	10	19	45	16	19	DZ POS	323
DZ NEG	5	5	10	3	3	10	4	6	3	2	16	12	5	7	4	13	23	8	7	DZ NEG	146
	1.20	3.40	2.40	2.33	5.33	2.90	2.50	2.50	1.33	2.50	1.56	2.17	1.00	3.57	2.50	1.46	1.96	2.00			0
MIN/G	14.72	19.71	22.77	9.41	19.25	18.68	14.46	17.89	8.22	16.72	17.43	17.1	18.35	21.23	17.93	16.23	22.42	11.75	0	MIN/G	304.27
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
MINUTES	15	20	23	9	19	19	14	18	8	17	17	17	18	21	18	16	22	12	0	MINUTES	304
POS/MIN	0.41	0.86	1.05	0.74	0.83	1.55	0.69	0.84	0.49	0.30	1.43	1.52	0.27	1.18	0.56	1.17	2.01	1.36	0.00	POS/MIN	1.06
NEG/MIN	0.34	0.25	0.44	0.32	0.16	0.54	0.28	0.34	0.36	0.12	0.92	0.70	0.27	0.33	0.22	0.80	1.03	0.68	0.00	NEG/MIN	0.48
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
EVENTS/ MIN	0.75	1.12	1.49	1.06	0.99	2.09	0.97	1.17	0.85	0.42	2.35	2.22	0.54	1.51	0.78	1.97	3.03	2.04	0.00	EVENTS/ MIN	1.54
RISK/REWARD	0.07	0.61	0.61	0.43	0.68	1.02	0.41	0.50	0.12	0.18	0.52	0.82	0.00	0.85	0.33	0.37	0.98	0.68	0.00	RISK/REWARD	0.58
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
NEUTRAL ZONE
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
NZ POS	14	14	10	0	7	10	5	7	6	3	3	5	12	3	5	0	6	6	0	NZ POS	116
NZ NEG	5	4	1	3	1	1	0	4	6	2	3	3	0	3	3	1	3	3	0	NZ NEG	46
	2.80	3.50	10.00	0.00	7.00	10.00	0.00	1.75	1.00	1.50	1.00	1.67	0.00	1.00	1.67	0.00	2.00	2.00			0
MIN/G	14.72	19.71	22.77	9.41	19.25	18.68	14.46	17.89	8.22	16.72	17.43	17.1	18.35	21.23	17.93	16.23	22.42	11.75	0	MIN/G	304.27
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
MINUTES	15	20	23	9	19	19	14	18	8	17	17	17	18	21	18	16	22	12	0	MINUTES	304
POS/MIN	0.95	0.71	0.44	0.00	0.36	0.54	0.35	0.39	0.73	0.18	0.17	0.29	0.65	0.14	0.28	0.00	0.27	0.51	0.00	POS/MIN	0.38
NEG/MIN	0.34	0.20	0.04	0.32	0.05	0.05	0.00	0.22	0.73	0.12	0.17	0.18	0.00	0.14	0.17	0.06	0.13	0.26	0.00	NEG/MIN	0.15
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT
EV/ MIN	1.29	0.91	0.48	0.32	0.42	0.59	0.35	0.61	1.46	0.30	0.34	0.47	0.65	0.28	0.45	0.06	0.40	0.77	0.00	EV/ MIN	0.53
RISK/REWARD	0.61	0.51	0.40	-0.32	0.31	0.48	0.35	0.17	0.00	0.06	0.00	0.12	0.65	0.00	0.11	-0.06	0.13	0.26	0.00	RISK/REWARD	0.23
	11	13	14	15	21	26	32	51	52	60	61	62	67	68	72	74	76	81	31		TM TOT