Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Jay Beagle shows there is room for players like Brandon Sutter on great teams

The Capitals are on the verge of winning the Stanley Cup with Beagle playing a key role.
Jay Beagle of the Washington Capitals.

Apparently there is plenty of interest around the NHL in Brandon Sutter, with several teams approaching the Canucks to see if Jim Benning is willing to trade the player he once called a “foundational piece.”

There are many reasons why teams would be interested in Sutter, but one possible reason for the uptick in interest is that a player much like him has been a key player for the Washington Capitals in their run to the Stanley Cup Final: Jay Beagle.

Sutter spent a lot of time in the defensive zone this season, mostly by design. Sutter’s role under head coach Travis Green skewed heavily towards the defensive side of the ice, akin to the type of minutes Manny Malhotra once played under Alain Vigneault. That usage actually makes it difficult to find comparable players for Sutter. Not many teams around the NHL used a centre the way Green used Sutter.

Just two forwards this season started a higher percentage of their shifts in the defensive zone than Brandon Sutter and they were both frequent linemates of his: Brendan Gaunce and Darren Archibald. But Jay Beagle came close. In fact, Beagle started a higher rate of his shifts in the defensive zone than Sutter did.

Essentially, Beagle is the closest possible comparison to Sutter in terms of usage this past season. The biggest difference is that Sutter faced tougher competition: he was used more often against first lines than Beagle, who still faced tough competition more than the average fourth-liner.

Beagle has continued his skewed usage in the postseason, absorbing defensive zone faceoffs like a sponge. He leads all players in the playoffs in defensive zone starts at 5-on-5, with 142 shifts that started in the defensive zone. Next best is his teammate, T.J. Oshie, with 121. In fact, only one player started a higher rate of his shifts in the defensive zone in the playoffs: Nick Bonino, the player the Canucks traded to acquire Sutter in the first place.

When you include the penalty kill, Beagle’s defensive zone starts climb even higher: 217, 60 more than the forward in second, Vegas’s William Karlsson.

(Side note: That highlights a key difference in players usage between the Capitals and Golden Knights in the playoffs. The Capitals hand Beagle as many defensive zone starts as possible, freeing up offensive zone starts for their top line. The Golden Knights, on the other hand, simply get their top line of Karlsson, Reilly Smith, and Jonathan Marchessault on the ice as much as possible, no matter where the faceoff is.)

Much like Sutter’s defensive usage (and Malhotra’s before him) freed up the Sedins to take more offensive zone faceoffs, Beagle’s usage has allowed Alex Ovechkin and Evgeny Kuznetsov more time in the offensive zone. Those two Capitals lead the playoffs in offensive zone starts.

While some in the hockey analytics community suggest the impact of zone starts is minimal, the Capitals clearly believe in getting their stars as many offensive zone faceoffs as possible, and have sacrificed Beagle on the altar of the defensive zone faceoff dot in order to do it. Beagle is certainly not responsible for the incredible playoffs from Ovechkin and Kuznetsov, but he’s contributed as much as he can.

We can compare Sutter and Beagle side-by-side from this past season, focussing mainly on their defensive numbers. For those confused by all the abbreviations, I’ve included a glossary at the bottom of the article to help you out.

  Brandon Sutter Jay Beagle
Boxcars
TOI/GP 17.32 12.45
GP 61 79
G 11 7
A 15 15
Pts 26 22
FO% 51.7% 58.5%
5-on-5
TOI/GP 13.28 9.53
CA/60 59.46 63.00
CF% 43.26 39.15
GA/60 1.63 2.15
GF% 52.17 44.90
xGA/60 2.14 2.54
xGF% 43.59 40.02
DZS/60 31.06 36.08
OZS% 22.65% 25.74%
Penalty Kill
TOI/GP 3.08 2.52
FA/60 68.87 90.26
SA/60 50.15 65.29
GA/60 8.25 8.73


For the most part, Sutter comes out ahead of Beagle in most categories, but it’s worth taking a closer look.

Let’s start with the traditional “boxcar” statistics: goals, assists, and points. Their offensive production was similar this season, though Beagle admittedly played 18 more games than Sutter. That difference is negligible, however, as Sutter actually played more minutes this season than Beagle.

When you look at their scoring rates, which are not included above, the gap narrows even more: Sutter scored 1.48 points per 60 minutes, while Beagle had 1.34. When you look at just 5-on-5 scoring, Beagle actually comes out ahead: 1.35 points per 60 compared to 1.26 for Sutter.

Beagle did have a better season in the faceoff circle, but that’s to be expected: Beagle is one of the top faceoff men in the league, with a career 56.4% faceoff percentage.

Their 5-on-5 numbers are intriguing. Since Sutter’s usage was fairly unique this season, it’s hard to really know how well he performed. Judging his season against Beagle’s, however, suggests he did fairly well with the minutes he was given. Sutter was on the ice for fewer shot attempts and goals against and comes out ahead in terms of corsi percentage and goal differential.

The two centres also played a comparable amount of time on the penalty kill. Sutter led all NHL forwards in short-handed ice time per game, averaging 3:05 per game. Beagle was not too far behind: he had the eighth most minutes short-handed, at 2:31 per game.

Sutter did significantly better in those minutes, allowing far fewer unblocked shot attempts and shots on goal, though the number of goals given up with them on the ice isn’t far apart. Beagle is actually near the bottom of the NHL in shots given up on the penalty kill. This is particularly interesting given Beagle’s penchant for winning faceoffs; apparently winning faceoffs doesn’t matter as much on the penalty kill as you might expect.

With all of these similarities, there is one huge difference: ice time. Sutter played significantly more than Beagle this past season.

At 5-on-5, Sutter’s ice time was on the high end of what you would expect from a second-line forward, even he was used more like a third-line checker. On the Canucks, only Bo Horvat and Brock Boeser averaged more 5-on-5 ice time per game than Sutter this past season.

While Sutter’s usage was ostensibly to shelter young players like Boeser and Goldobin, as well as offensive veterans like the Sedins and Thomas Vanek, you could argue that he actually took a lot of ice time away from those players. While Sutter limited goals against when he was on the ice, players with more offensive upside were given less opportunity to score goals.

To be fair, the Canucks clearly don’t have the offensive firepower of a team like the Capitals. Beagle played clear fourth-line minutes with the Capitals — only Alex Chiasson averaged fewer minutes at 5-on-5 — while the team’s top-six forwards were given plenty of ice time to score. That pattern has continued in the playoffs, where Beagle is averaging under 10 minutes of ice time at 5-on-5.

While I hesitate to draw too broad a conclusion from looking at just two players, it does suggest that there is room for a player like Sutter on a championship (knock on wood) team, as long as it’s in a smaller role than Sutter has played for the Canucks.

 

Glossary

(All statistics via NaturalStatTrick.com and Corsica.hockey)

Boxcars  
TOI/GP Average ice time per game.
GP Games played.
G Goals.
A Assists.
Pts Points.
FO% Faceoff winning percentage.
5-on-5  
TOI/GP Average 5-on-5 ice time per game.
CA/60 Corsi Against Per 60: Shot attempts by the opposition when the player is on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time.
CF% Corsi For Percentage: Percentage of total shot attempts taken by his team when the player is on the ice.
GA/60 Goals Against Per 60: Goals scored by the opposition when the player is on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time.
GF% Goals For Percentage: Percentage of total goals scored by his team when the player is on the ice.
xGA/60 Expected Goals Against Per 60: The number of goals we would expect to see scored by the opposition per 60 minutes of ice time, given the quality of the unblocked shot attempts when the player is on the ice. Via Corsica.hockey.
xGF% Expected Goals For Percentage: The percentage of total goals we would expect his team to score given the quality of unblocked shot attempts when the player is on the ice.
DZS/60 Defensive Zone Starts Per 60: The average number of a player's shifts that start with a defensive zone faceoff per 60 minutes of ice time.
OZS% Offensive Zone Start Percentage: The percentage of a player's shifts that start in the offensive zone as compared to the defensive zone.
Penalty Kill  
TOI/GP Average short-handed ice time per game.
FA/60 Fenwick Against Per 60: Unblocked shot attempts by the opposition when the player is on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time.
SA/60 Shots Against Per 60: Shots on goal by the opposition when the player is on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time.
GA/60 Goals Against Per 60: Goals scored by the opposition when the player is on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time.