From: rn1b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rohan Nageswaran)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Two assists per goal
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:49:38 GMT
	<1992Nov5.085941.25086@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Organization: Senior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


>>The idea of crediting a person who assists the assister is a little
>>ridiculous considering these arguments, since the second assister may be
>>almost completely removed from the play. As the stat currently exists,
>>however, he gains equal credit for the assist. This grants points (the
>>sum of goals, assists, and second assists) to someone who may not
>>deserve them entirely. I shudder to think how many fewer the leading
>>point scorers (Gretzky, Lemieux, etc.) would have if this stat were
>>removed, or more reasonably, placed in a second category.

>I am afraid that you have missed the point here. In hockey it is quite
>often so that the 'chain reaction' leading to a goal starts already one
>or two steps before the ultimate shot into the goal. It is not difficult
>to see that the genius or the mastermind of the goal is one or two passes
>away from the shot. Here is of course some leeway to the judgment and
>so far the Canadian hockey culture has been in this respect superior to
>the European, that there are more often credit given to the both persons
>involved in the playmaking.

>>Another option would be to credit the second assister with a fraction of
>>an assist. For instance, the first assister would be granted an assist
>>while the second assister would receive 1/2 of an assist. This would add
>>a little more relevance, in my eyes, to the statistic of the assist.

>This would make it complicated. Just for the case of argument I would
>say that it demands more brain to mastermind a two pass attack than
>to mastermind the one pass attack. The goal scorers get lots of credit,
>puplicity and hype. Sometimes the playmaker removes with a nifty move
>some defensemen and even the goalie from their positions and the scorer
>just pushes the puck into an empty net. Would in not be correct to give
>him credit only for half a goal?

>>I'm certain I'm not the only one who feels this way. Are there any
>>concurrent opinions? Any proponents?

>Anybody appreciating brains will support the credit given to the 
>playmakers. The scorers will anyway have an advantage, if the points
>are tied the goalscorer wins.

First of all, if the "second assists" were eliminated it is highly
likely that the relative differences between players would remain the
same.   For example, players such as Gretzky, Lemieux and Messier are
great at setting up both the assist leading to the goal as well as the
assist leading to the assist that sets up the goal.    Second of all,
these "second assists" are worthy of reward in their own right.  Anyone
who watches the likes of Gretzky, Lemiuex or Messier knows that even
though they sometimes contribute on only the "second assist" it is their
consistent genius with the puck that gains the offensive zone, disrupts
their opponents defense, pulls the goalie out of position, feeds open
teamates and so on.  There is no better way in existence of recording
these traits other than by giving them credit for the second assist.

In hockey, offensive drives (especially the ones that are the most fun
to watch), are composed of more than a goal and an assist. It would
therefore be a crime to disregard the second assist and not give credit
to the guys who create the entire goal scoring opportunity in the first
place.  

-----Rohan