Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Marshall

NJ 5v5 scoring chances

20 posts in this topic

I've got my own little blog that no-one reads, but yesterday I found a site that tracks scoring chances from the official PBP data of the NHL. So anyways, I whipped up some ugly charts (I stink at Excel) but the findings were interesting. 

 

Full post here, I'll link to the most interesting images.

 

Basically Andy Greene is a boss with 60% of the scoring chances at 5v5. Chara, Doughty, Suter are all 53-55%. Keith is 61% but he gets 57% O/Dst% vs 47% for Greene. 

 

Jagr is also incredible and killing it with Zajac. Almost all of the regular forwards are positive. 

 

Notable that no D (except Gelinas) is a minus.

 

njfscoringchances.png?w=930&h=570

 

njddscoringchances.png?w=930&h=573

 

 

Here's where it gets real sh!tty. Marty and Cory get virtually the same chances (0.7 more for Marty). Marty has gotten around 15% shooting whilst Cory 8.9%. 

 

Thing is, the goals for/against listed are only on scoring chances. That means the softie routine-stop that went in isn't included. When you add those up, Marty has given up 28 goals on non-scoring chances and Cory has only given up 12. That is a softie every 0.8 games for Marty and one every three games for Cory. 

 

Those softies are the difference between being in the playoffs and not. 

njgoaliesscoringchances.png?w=930&h=459

Edited by Marshall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More of the same regarding Cory vs. Marty.  What're you going to do though - Pete only values wins.  

 

Unless Cory's winning.  Then it's who's been better as of late.  Unless Marty's winning.  Then it's who's winning.  Unless Cory's winn...

 

Double_facepalm.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Cory has generally played against better competition this season, the information in that graph seems about right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting charts and statistics.  Yup, I'm fully convinced that we cannot keep Marty here in this split-time role anymore.  Next season, it cannot happen, DeBoer needs to realize this sooner rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Cory has generally played against better competition this season, the information in that graph seems about right. 

 

Yep, that is my thought too. This stacks up quite well with Corsi% too. This is just the quality portion of the data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your effort on this!  Maybe I will print it out and send it as a paper plane down to Pete tonight. 

I've got my own little blog that no-one reads, but yesterday I found a site that tracks scoring chances from the official PBP data of the NHL. So anyways, I whipped up some ugly charts (I stink at Excel) but the findings were interesting. 

 

Full post here, I'll link to the most interesting images.

 

Basically Andy Greene is a boss with 60% of the scoring chances at 5v5. Chara, Doughty, Suter are all 53-55%. Keith is 61% but he gets 57% O/Dst% vs 47% for Greene. 

 

Jagr is also incredible and killing it with Zajac. Almost all of the regular forwards are positive. 

 

Notable that no D (except Gelinas) is a minus.

 

njfscoringchances.png?w=930&h=570

 

njddscoringchances.png?w=930&h=573

 

 

Here's where it gets real sh!tty. Marty and Cory get virtually the same chances (0.7 more for Marty). Marty has gotten around 15% shooting whilst Cory 8.9%. 

 

Thing is, the goals for/against listed are only on scoring chances. That means the softie routine-stop that went in isn't included. When you add those up, Marty has given up 28 goals on non-scoring chances and Cory has only given up 12. That is a softie every 0.8 games for Marty and one every three games for Cory. 

 

Those softies are the difference between being in the playoffs and not. 

njgoaliesscoringchances.png?w=930&h=459

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can tell, the analysis is a bit flawed in that it appears that a "scoring chance" is determined only by the distance from the net the shot takes place, on both the powerplay and at even stength.  In certain circumstances this makes sense, for instance a shot that goes in from outside of the blue line should not be a scoring chance.  But neither Marty nor Schneider has given up one like that according to the website.

 

However, for instance, any shot on the powerplay that is outside of the circles is not considered a "scoring chance".  Maybe some of them aren't, but even the biggest Marty hater can't say that categorically.  It also wouldn't seem to account for situations where a shot from larger distance gets deflected off a defender's skate or body (not clear where this says a shot takes place when it's deflected in from an attacking player).

 

By contrast, there are shots that this analysis would say are "scoring chances" that we would ordinarily consider a "soft goal", for example a very soft tip shot from close in that goes through a five hole (I think Corey gave up one of those against Pittsburgh) or a SHARP ANGLE SHOT from a short distance that goes in because the goalie isn't hugging the post as he should be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can tell, the analysis is a bit flawed in that it appears that a "scoring chance" is determined only by the distance from the net the shot takes place, on both the powerplay and at even stength.  In certain circumstances this makes sense, for instance a shot that goes in from outside of the blue line should not be a scoring chance.  But neither Marty nor Schneider has given up one like that according to the website.

 

However, for instance, any shot on the powerplay that is outside of the circles is not considered a "scoring chance".  Maybe some of them aren't, but even the biggest Marty hater can't say that categorically.  It also wouldn't seem to account for situations where a shot from larger distance gets deflected off a defender's skate or body (not clear where this says a shot takes place when it's deflected in from an attacking player).

 

By contrast, there are shots that this analysis would say are "scoring chances" that we would ordinarily consider a "soft goal", for example a very soft tip shot from close in that goes through a five hole (I think Corey gave up one of those against Pittsburgh) or a SHARP ANGLE SHOT from a short distance that goes in because the goalie isn't hugging the post as he should be. 

 

We've had this debate a million thousand times.  We're defining scoring chance in this way.  We are not saying that all of the 'chances to score' come from within this area, full stop.  It's just that is the scoring chance area.  Yes, some shots from outside that area are more difficult than others to stop.  That's just the way it has to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had this debate a million thousand times.  We're defining scoring chance in this way.  We are not saying that all of the 'chances to score' come from within this area, full stop.  It's just that is the scoring chance area.  Yes, some shots from outside that area are more difficult than others to stop.  That's just the way it has to be done.

 

Ok, but just because f it's the way it has to be done, doesn't mean it's particularly telling, except perhaps if we're talking about over a long stretches.  So to categorically say this chart proves that we'd be in the playoffs if not for Brodeur doesn't stand up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, but just because f it's the way it has to be done, doesn't mean it's particularly telling, except perhaps if we're talking about over a long stretches.  So to categorically say this chart proves that we'd be in the playoffs if not for Brodeur doesn't stand up. 

 

Once the NHL gets the SportsVU cams in their arenas like the NBA has, this will help a lot. For now this is the best it can do, and I bet the information isn't that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the NHL gets the SportsVU cams in their arenas like the NBA has, this will help a lot. For now this is the best it can do, and I bet the information isn't that bad.

 

I agree it's probably not bad.  And even if there were a metaphysically certain way to decipher what is a soft goal and what isn't, it's a virtual certainty that Schneider gives up fewer of them. 

 

It's the conclusion that one reaches that the Devils would be in the playoffs that I object to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it's probably not bad.  And even if there were a metaphysically certain way to decipher what is a soft goal and what isn't, it's a virtual certainty that Schneider gives up fewer of them. 

 

It's the conclusion that one reaches that the Devils would be in the playoffs that I object to.

 

Mayhaps. I of course come in with a backpack full of other things that occupy my mind. Knowledge about Marty's save percentage and such things relative to Cory, a lowlight reel full of terrible goals that Marty has given up this season. Would I be on board with the claim without that information? I don't know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for putting all of this data together Marshall! If my memory serves me correct, you are also tracking zone entries, right? I can't wait to see that data.

 

Once the NHL gets the SportsVU cams in their arenas like the NBA has, this will help a lot. For now this is the best it can do, and I bet the information isn't that bad.

I'm excited about this happening. The NBA has really embraced data like this and now MLB is. It seems natural for the NHL to follow suit - though I'm sure it will take some time since NHL front offices don't seem as receptive as their NBA and MLB counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for putting all of this data together Marshall! If my memory serves me correct, you are also tracking zone entries, right? I can't wait to see that data.

 

 

Yeah I've started but then I got caught up doing some SHL stuff + other things that took my fancy (like this).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm excited about this happening. The NBA has really embraced data like this and now MLB is. It seems natural for the NHL to follow suit - though I'm sure it will take some time since NHL front offices don't seem as receptive as their NBA and MLB counterparts.

There was talk of new ownership implementing it in the Custance article about the Devils hiring analytics person. It's apparently in every NBA arena now, which might have made it ready to go if the Nets still played at the Rock, although I don't know if you can use the same equipment and set up for hockey.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention that this is solid work - I am very surprised to see Salvador slightly positive.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention that this is solid work - I am very surprised to see Salvador slightly positive.  

 

Thanks and yeah, there were a few numbers that really surprised me (triple checked to be sure) and Salvador's certainly was one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went over the goalie numbers again and added in some notables from around the league. These are all 5v5 and on non-scoring chances, or shots from outside the scoring zone if you will. In most cases, they're softies.

 

Shots Against, Goals Against, Save Percentage, Average Goals Against Per Game (or Softie Per Game).

 

nonscoringchancegoalies.png?w=957

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went over the goalie numbers again and added in some notables from around the league. These are all 5v5 and on non-scoring chances, or shots from outside the scoring zone if you will. In most cases, they're softies.

 

Shots Against, Goals Against, Save Percentage, Average Goals Against Per Game (or Softie Per Game).

 

nonscoringchancegoalies.png?w=957

This is sort of depressing. He's even worse than guys like Pavelec and Mason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there is a miscalculation in SC +/- for Marty. +63 not +53.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0