Sunday, March 05, 2006

Shots Directed At Net

This is a Lindy Ruff thing, though I suspect that his goaltending coach, Jim Corsi, is behind it. I keep meaning to buy and read Corsi's book, but I haven't yet.

Apparently in recent years there were about 100 shots in total directed at net in an NHL game. That includes saved shots, goals, blocked shots and missed shots. Obviously the better team usually gets the bigger share of those, and some teams play a lower event style ... but still, at a quick glance it looks like this is a pretty steady measure. And I think that's up to about 110 in MyNHL.

About three weeks ago, something 'mudcrutch' said on the OilFans board moved me to write a little script to grab the info off of the NHL.com play-by-play and time-on-ice sheets. So as to see who was on the ice for shots for and against, as well as the missed and blocked shots (for both teams). It's pretty cool stuff, and I'll get back to that another day when the mood strikes.

Anyhow, I forgot about it until now. Then just for the helluvit I thought I'd run these numbers for the last 3 Oilers games. Just on a goalie vs goalie basis, which should catch pretty much all of them. Here ya go:



TOTAL AT EVENS



EDM 75 47
NSH 43 32



EDM 58 50
S.J 41 31



EDM 71 47
STL 29 19


Personally, I think the even strength totals for each game pretty much reflect the puck possession at 5on5 in these games. That's pretty dominant. Though maybe the tint on my copper and blue sunglasses is a bit strong, I dunno.

As an aside: Even though he looked to be a half step behind this afternoon, it's good to see Rem Murray back.

3 Comments:

Blogger mudcrutch79 said...

A half step behind? I'm amazed you were able to pick that up; I think I noticed him on the ice once.

Cool blog by the way and post by the way. I don't have much to add to this particular post but the Oilers are looking pretty dominant these days.

3/06/2006 8:52 am  
Anonymous RiversQ said...

What's your take on the true value of this analysis Vic? It's easy to see that it is better than SF/SA, particularly thanks to the missed shots but surely scoring chances are still better. It looks like it correlates well with winning for these three games (2-1), but I think it was fairly obvious the Oilers dominated these three games, particularly the STL loss.

What happens if you process the data for these three games using "the house?"

3/06/2006 12:02 pm  
Blogger Vic Ferrari said...

What's your take on the true value of this analysis Vic? It's easy to see that it is better than SF/SA, particularly thanks to the missed shots but surely scoring chances are still better.

Ya, scoring chances are obviously better. But unless anyone is volunteering to count them, we're not going to get that here.

I don't know if you caught Gregor's interview with Jeff Ward the other week, but he says that they measure a player not so much by his goals-for and goals-against plus/minus, but by his scoring-chances-for and against plus/minus. He says that this gives them the best indication of a player's contribution to the team's success, be it positive or negative. Which makes perfect sense, but would require one helluva investment of time to gather that information for even one team and it's minor league affiliates ... much less the whole league. Then any sensible person is going to consider the quality of opposition and teammates as well. And of course you're adding in the noise than any subjective evaluation brings.

This is all aimed at getting the results that a guy Jeff Ward would be getting ... but with only the data as a source. I think we're getting closer to pegging some of this stuff down.

What happens if you process the data for these three games using "the house?"

The problem is that the NHL do not publish the location of where a shot was taken, only the distance from the backboards. Ryder, mudcrutch and others have done some good stuff working with this info to determine shot quality. Certainly enough to shatter a lot of popular myths. But still, you can only do so much when the data is incomplete.

3/06/2006 2:39 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home