Skip to content
Ice Lab

Centre · #11

Martin Hanzal

Phoenix Coyotes Arizona Coyotes Minnesota Wild Dallas Stars(traded during the season)
Age
39
Shoots
Left
Height
198 cm
Weight
104 kg
Born
Pisek, CZE
Draft
2005, round 1, #17 (PHX)

Career · 2009–10 to 2018–19

Games
45
Goals
6
Points
12
TOI per game
13:55
xGF% (5v5)
46.2%
Goals above expected
−3.8
ShowAll teamsPhoenix CoyotesArizona CoyotesMinnesota WildDallas Stars

Season by season

The regular-season line for each season, with the total, by team for traded players.

2009–10PHX81112233018:291477.5%614.2–
2010–11PHX61161026+419:3014910.7%617.951.7%
2011–12PHX6482634+1218:271455.5%1115.951.1%
2012–13PHX39111223+218:329311.8%711.448.7%
2013–14PHX65152540−918:411698.9%1319.747.8%
2014–15ARI3781624−117:44859.4%410.948.1%
2015–16ARI64132841−517:481419.2%1318.448.5%
2016–17ARI51161026−1518:3512612.7%815.741.2%
2016–17MIN204913−215:31439.3%13.461.6%
2016–17All teams71201939−1717:4316911.8%919.145.8%
2017–18DAL385510−1414:07628.1%38.247.6%
2018–19DAL7112−412:52147.1%11.640.2%
Total4 teams527108164272−3218:001,1749.2%73137.348.7%

Form

Rolling averages smooth out single games so the trend shows.

Form, ten-game rolling

Points and individual expected goals per game (left scale), averaged over the previous ten games. Ice time is on the second chart.

Points per gameixG per gameTOI per game (minutes)
0.10.20.30.41015202530354045
12m13m14m15m1015202530354045Game

Player card

Model-based

How 2009–10 to 2018–19 compares with everyone else at the position over the same seasons, and the players with the most similar profile.

Overall rating

2nd line

64th percentile among qualified forwards, blending scoring 40%, play-driving 40%, usage 20%.

  1. 1st line
  2. 2nd line
  3. 3rd line
  4. 4th line
  5. Extra / AHL

Scoring

3rd line
  • Goals /600.6854th pct
  • Assists /601.0466th pct
  • ixG /600.8779th pct
  • Goals above expected−29.30th pct

Play-driving

3rd line
  • xGF% (5v5)48.7%45th pct
  • CF% (5v5)51.3%72nd pct
  • Relative xGF%+0.867th pct
  • Penalty diff /60-0.2218th pct

Usage

1st line
  • TOI per game18:0091st pct
  • PP time share49.1%87th pct
  • Offensive zone starts52.5%39th pct
  • Quality of competition25.4%95th pct

Percentiles among forwards with 200+ minutes at 5-on-5 and 20+ games. Ratings rank each column's average percentile among the same players and read it as a role on a depth chart (how).

Most similar players this season

  1. Shane DoanPHX/ARI0.89
  2. Ryan KeslerVAN/ANA0.86
  3. Gabriel LandeskogCOL0.86
  4. David BackesSTL/BOS0.85
  5. Vincent TrocheckFLA0.84
  6. Andrew LaddCHI/ATL/WPG/NYI0.84

Faceoffs

How often Hanzal wins the draw over 2009–10 to 2018–19, against whom and where, and what a win leads to. Ranked among players with 1944+ draws over the same seasons.

Win rate

53.3%

4528–3968 · #37 of 191 regulars, 81st percentile

Against an average centre

53.6%

Opponents won 50.3% of their draws; an average centre would have won 49.7% against them.

Wins above average

+309

Draws won beyond what an average centre facing the same opponents would have won.

Draws per game

16.2

8,496 draws in all.

By dot, attacking to the right

55%1511 · +0.559%1620 · +1.847%1232 · +1.859%393 · +0.446%325 · +0.960%367 · +1.642%308 · +0.855%1548 · +1.849%1192 · +1.6Attacking zone →← Defending zone

Win rate at each dot; the small numbers are draws and the xG swing (×100) of winning rather than losing there.

By zone

  • Offensive zone53.6% 1524–1320
  • Neutral zone53.8% 1562–1341
  • Defensive zone52.5% 1442–1307

By strength

  • Even strength53.5% 3426–2972
  • Power play56.8% 728–553
  • Shorthanded46.0% 360–423

What a win leads to

Shot attempts in the next 20 seconds, for minus against, per 100 draws: +16 after a win, −11 after a loss. Each win was worth 1.4 expected goals per 100 draws more than a loss.

Most-faced opponents

Season by season

SeasonDrawsWin rateAgainst average
2009–10110550.6%51.3%
2010–11102950.3%51.0%
2011–12109752.1%52.4%
2012–1363746.8%47.7%
2013–14109954.5%54.9%
2014–1561256.5%56.3%
2015–16104756.0%56.1%
2016–17136056.4%56.4%
2017–1843455.1%55.1%
2018–197659.2%59.1%

Finishing

Model-based

Did the goals match the chances?

Goals against expected goals

Cumulative goals (solid) and individual xG (dashed) through the season. The gap is finishing: above the dashed line, the player scored more than an average shooter would from the same chances.

−3.8 goals above expected

024681010203040Game

Goals above expected, everyone at the same position with 20+ games

−500+50+100+150