Do Bigger Skaters Translate Better in the Playoffs?

Question

The playoff-size cliché is familiar: heavier teams supposedly survive the grind, win the walls, and keep scoring when space disappears. But that claim hides two different questions:

This article uses skater_playoff_statistics(), skater_statistics(), and players() to compare career regular-season scoring, career playoff scoring, and the gap between the two.

Build Player Table

We keep salary-cap-era skaters with meaningful regular-season and playoff samples. The unit is one player, not one season.

# Pull scoring and bio tables.
playoff_stats <- nhlscraper::skater_playoff_statistics()
career_stats <- nhlscraper::skater_statistics()[, c(
  'playerId',
  'rsGamesPlayed',
  'rsPoints',
  'positionCode'
)]
player_bios <- nhlscraper::players()[, c(
  'playerId',
  'playerFullName',
  'height',
  'weight'
)]

# Join player-level sources.
analysis_tbl <- merge(
  playoff_stats,
  career_stats,
  by = c('playerId', 'positionCode'),
  all.x = TRUE
)
analysis_tbl <- merge(
  analysis_tbl,
  player_bios,
  by = 'playerId',
  all.x = TRUE
)

# Keep modern skaters with stable samples.
analysis_tbl <- analysis_tbl[
  !is.na(analysis_tbl[['height']]) &
    !is.na(analysis_tbl[['weight']]) &
    analysis_tbl[['firstSeasonForGameType']] >= 20052006 &
    analysis_tbl[['gamesPlayed']] >= 20 &
    analysis_tbl[['rsGamesPlayed']] >= 200,
  ,
  drop = FALSE
]

# Fill names and compute rates.
analysis_tbl[['playerFullName']] <- ifelse(
  is.na(analysis_tbl[['playerFullName']]) |
    analysis_tbl[['playerFullName']] == '',
  paste(
    analysis_tbl[['skaterFirstName']],
    analysis_tbl[['skaterLastName']]
  ),
  analysis_tbl[['playerFullName']]
)
analysis_tbl[['regularPPG']] <-
  analysis_tbl[['rsPoints']] / analysis_tbl[['rsGamesPlayed']]
analysis_tbl[['playoffPPG']] <-
  analysis_tbl[['points']] / analysis_tbl[['gamesPlayed']]
analysis_tbl[['playoffLift']] <-
  analysis_tbl[['playoffPPG']] - analysis_tbl[['regularPPG']]
analysis_tbl[['positionBucket']] <- ifelse(
  analysis_tbl[['positionCode']] == 'D',
  'Defense',
  'Forward'
)

# Assign equal-count weight quartiles.
weight_rank <- rank(
  analysis_tbl[['weight']],
  ties.method = 'first'
) / nrow(analysis_tbl)
analysis_tbl[['weightQuartile']] <- cut(
  weight_rank,
  breaks = c(0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1),
  include.lowest = TRUE,
  labels = c('Lightest', 'Second', 'Third', 'Heaviest')
)
nrow(analysis_tbl)
#> [1] 1732

The sample has 1732 skaters. That filters out one-series mirages while still leaving enough players to compare body types.

Level Versus Translation

First, compare regular-season scoring, playoff scoring, and playoff lift by weight quartile.

# Summarize scoring by weight quartile.
quartile_summary <- aggregate(
  cbind(regularPPG, playoffPPG, playoffLift) ~ weightQuartile,
  data = analysis_tbl,
  FUN = mean
)
quartile_counts <- as.data.frame(table(analysis_tbl[['weightQuartile']]))
names(quartile_counts) <- c('weightQuartile', 'n')
quartile_summary <- merge(
  quartile_summary,
  quartile_counts,
  by = 'weightQuartile'
)
quartile_summary <- quartile_summary[
  match(levels(analysis_tbl[['weightQuartile']]), quartile_summary[['weightQuartile']]),
  c('weightQuartile', 'n', 'regularPPG', 'playoffPPG', 'playoffLift')
]
make_table(
  quartile_summary,
  caption = 'Regular-season scoring, playoff scoring, and playoff lift by weight quartile.',
  digits = 3
)
Regular-season scoring, playoff scoring, and playoff lift by weight quartile.
weightQuartile n regularPPG playoffPPG playoffLift
2 Lightest 433 0.507 0.458 -0.048
3 Second 433 0.479 0.421 -0.058
4 Third 433 0.436 0.379 -0.057
1 Heaviest 433 0.419 0.378 -0.041

The most important distinction is level versus translation. Lighter skaters can still post higher raw scoring rates. Bigger skaters can still translate a bit better relative to their own regular-season baseline. Those are different claims, and mixing them together is how playoff clichés become sloppy.

# Plot playoff scoring and playoff lift.
old_par <- graphics::par(no.readonly = TRUE)
graphics::par(mfrow = c(1, 2), mar = c(8, 4, 3, 1))
graphics::boxplot(
  playoffPPG ~ weightQuartile,
  data = analysis_tbl,
  col = c('#d8f3dc', '#b7e4c7', '#74c69d', '#2d6a4f'),
  border = '#1b4332',
  las = 2,
  xlab = '',
  ylab = 'Playoff Points Per Game'
)
graphics::barplot(
  quartile_summary[['playoffLift']],
  names.arg = quartile_summary[['weightQuartile']],
  col = c('#fcbf49', '#f77f00', '#d62828', '#6a4c93'),
  border = NA,
  las = 2,
  xlab = '',
  ylab = 'Playoff Lift'
)
graphics::abline(h = 0, lty = 2, col = '#495057')
Playoff scoring level and playoff lift by weight quartile.

Playoff scoring level and playoff lift by weight quartile.

graphics::par(old_par)

Every group loses scoring on average. The interesting question is how much.

Position Is Part of the Story

Weight and position are tangled. Defensemen are heavier, score less, and often play playoff minutes that are less offense-driven. Splitting forwards and defensemen helps keep the interpretation honest.

# Summarize rates by position and quartile.
position_summary <- aggregate(
  cbind(regularPPG, playoffPPG, playoffLift) ~ positionBucket + weightQuartile,
  data = analysis_tbl,
  FUN = mean
)
position_counts <- aggregate(
  playerId ~ positionBucket + weightQuartile,
  data = analysis_tbl,
  FUN = length
)
names(position_counts)[names(position_counts) == 'playerId'] <- 'n'
position_summary <- merge(
  position_summary,
  position_counts,
  by = c('positionBucket', 'weightQuartile')
)
make_table(
  position_summary,
  caption = 'Scoring translation by position family and weight quartile.',
  digits = 3
)
Scoring translation by position family and weight quartile.
positionBucket weightQuartile regularPPG playoffPPG playoffLift n
Defense Heaviest 0.307 0.285 -0.022 197
Defense Lightest 0.437 0.414 -0.023 82
Defense Second 0.384 0.336 -0.048 142
Defense Third 0.311 0.272 -0.039 158
Forward Heaviest 0.513 0.456 -0.057 236
Forward Lightest 0.523 0.468 -0.054 351
Forward Second 0.526 0.462 -0.064 291
Forward Third 0.507 0.440 -0.067 275

The split keeps the story from becoming too neat. Size alone is not the answer. Role, position, and baseline scoring level matter.

Which Players Actually Rise?

Population averages are useful, but the player list is where the question feels like hockey.

# Show largest positive playoff lifts.
risers_tbl <- analysis_tbl[
  analysis_tbl[['gamesPlayed']] >= 40,
  c(
    'playerFullName',
    'positionBucket',
    'weight',
    'regularPPG',
    'playoffPPG',
    'playoffLift',
    'gamesPlayed'
  )
]
risers_tbl <- risers_tbl[order(-risers_tbl[['playoffLift']]), ]
risers_tbl <- utils::head(risers_tbl, 10)
make_table(
  risers_tbl,
  caption = 'Largest playoff scoring lifts among skaters with at least 40 playoff games.',
  digits = 3
)
Largest playoff scoring lifts among skaters with at least 40 playoff games.
playerFullName positionBucket weight regularPPG playoffPPG playoffLift gamesPlayed
8218 Daniel Brière Forward 174 0.715 1.059 0.344 68
12706 Evan Bouchard Defense 192 0.776 1.086 0.310 81
12707 Evan Bouchard Defense 192 0.776 1.086 0.310 81
10827 Jakob Silfverberg Forward 207 0.455 0.719 0.264 57
11958 Sam Bennett Forward 193 0.514 0.766 0.253 77
11956 Leon Draisaitl Forward 209 1.232 1.480 0.249 102
11957 Leon Draisaitl Forward 209 1.232 1.480 0.249 102
12273 Evan Rodrigues Forward 182 0.438 0.672 0.234 61
10812 Ryan O’Reilly Forward 207 0.728 0.961 0.232 51
12274 Evan Rodrigues Forward 182 0.438 0.667 0.228 45
# Show largest negative playoff lifts.
fallers_tbl <- analysis_tbl[
  analysis_tbl[['gamesPlayed']] >= 40,
  c(
    'playerFullName',
    'positionBucket',
    'weight',
    'regularPPG',
    'playoffPPG',
    'playoffLift',
    'gamesPlayed'
  )
]
fallers_tbl <- fallers_tbl[order(fallers_tbl[['playoffLift']]), ]
fallers_tbl <- utils::head(fallers_tbl, 10)
make_table(
  fallers_tbl,
  caption = 'Largest playoff scoring drops among skaters with at least 40 playoff games.',
  digits = 3
)
Largest playoff scoring drops among skaters with at least 40 playoff games.
playerFullName positionBucket weight regularPPG playoffPPG playoffLift gamesPlayed
11439 J.T. Miller Forward 211 0.812 0.400 -0.412 40
8541 Martin St. Louis Forward 180 0.911 0.500 -0.411 44
12280 Artemi Panarin Forward 176 1.149 0.761 -0.389 46
11162 Tyler Seguin Forward 205 0.813 0.429 -0.384 42
12588 Robert Thomas Forward 207 0.868 0.500 -0.368 52
12589 Robert Thomas Forward 207 0.868 0.500 -0.368 52
12017 Ivan Barbashev Forward 203 0.526 0.180 -0.346 50
12748 Noah Dobson Defense 200 0.592 0.250 -0.342 44
10831 John Tavares Forward 217 0.936 0.608 -0.328 51
8675 Brad Richards Forward 199 0.828 0.509 -0.319 55

These tables are deliberately humbling. Playoff translation is not a body-type sorting machine. Some lighter players hold up beautifully. Some bigger players drop. The useful signal is a tendency, not a rule.

Model the Gap

A simple model lets us ask whether height or weight carries a standalone slope once position is included.

# Fit playoff-lift model.
lift_fit <- stats::lm(
  playoffLift ~ height + weight + I(positionCode == 'D'),
  data = analysis_tbl
)
lift_fit_tbl <- as.data.frame(summary(lift_fit)$coefficients)
lift_fit_tbl[['term']] <- rownames(lift_fit_tbl)
rownames(lift_fit_tbl) <- NULL
lift_fit_tbl[['term']] <- c(
  'Intercept',
  'Height',
  'Weight',
  'Defense indicator'
)
lift_fit_tbl <- lift_fit_tbl[, c(
  'term',
  'Estimate',
  'Std. Error',
  't value',
  'Pr(>|t|)'
)]
make_table(
  lift_fit_tbl,
  caption = 'Linear model of playoff scoring lift.',
  digits = 4
)
Linear model of playoff scoring lift.
term Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
Intercept 0.0088 0.1180 0.0742 0.9409
Height -0.0015 0.0020 -0.7414 0.4585
Weight 0.0002 0.0003 0.7464 0.4555
Defense indicator 0.0274 0.0066 4.1546 0.0000

The plain-language result is that size is not magic. Once position is in the model, the direct height/weight slopes are not the headline. The playoff translation cliché is closer to a role-and-usage story than a simple bigger-is-better story.

What We Learned

Bigger skaters do not automatically become better playoff scorers. The lighter groups can still lead in raw playoff points per game. But the heaviest group can look slightly sturdier relative to its own regular-season scoring baseline.

That split answer is the point. nhlscraper makes it easy to combine career stats and player bios, but the interpretation still has to respect the shape of the data. A good mini research question is not always one where the cliché is true or false. Sometimes the best answer is: true in one sense, false in another.