News Article: Dellow: Jets' record is great but long-term success requires better shot generation

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
I'm really enjoying reading Dellow on the Athletic. In this article he delves into the Jets #'s Here's a couple of snippets but The whole article is worth reading

Dellow: Jets' record is great but long-term success requires...


If you're a hockey team with problems, it's best to win games anyway possible, provided you aren't fooled by your success. Winning games buys you time to fix your problems without everyone around the team feeling pressure. The Winnipeg Jets have the first half of that equation down — they're 8-3-3. But are they fooled by their success?
That's harder to know. All we can do is outline the underlying problems and pay attention to whether or not they find a way to address them as the season goes along.
There's a lot of stuff to worry about. They've got a penalty kill that's getting torn apart. A power play that's producing without shooting the puck particularly often. Today though, I'm going to focus on 5-on-5.
It's no secret the Jets have been benefiting from shooting and save percentage at 5-on-5, although before I looked, I wasn't aware of just how acute the problem has been. Somehow, the Jets have the worst possession numbers in the NHL, with a Corsi% of just 45.4 percent. Sometimes early in the year you'll see big differences between Corsi% and, say, the percentage of shots that a team gets but Winnipeg's not getting that. They get outshot by about five shots per 60 minutes of play at 5-on-5. Only a 9.8 percent shooting percentage and a .927 save percentage is keeping them above water.

IMG_0061.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImGoingNucks

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
Oh yay. Another article using Corsi% with no score adjustment, shot quality or relation to sample size.

Did you actually read the article? It gives a lot of insight into why the Jets #'s look like they do. The Jets do not perform well when they win a faceoff and they are not very good immediately after a Dman changes. These are the areas they can and should be able to improve. Hopefully adding Perreault and Looks wry will be part of the equation but there's more going on than just those two missing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul Maurice

Dayofthedogs

Bettman's hammer
Feb 20, 2016
2,113
1,038
Winnipeg
Did you actually read the article? It gives a lot of insight into why the Jets #'s look like they do. The Jets do not perform well when they win a faceoff and they are not very good immediately after a Dman changes. These are the areas they can and should be able to improve. Hopefully adding Perreault and Looks wry will be part of the equation but there's more going on than just those two missing.

I admittedly did not. No subscription, maybe after Xmas.

Am I wrong in saying that the article was only speaking of corsi%?

Personally, I've found some of Dellows stuff (that im able to see) to be lazily written.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JetBlue420

Festinator

Registered User
Apr 6, 2016
3,689
2,849
Calgary
Did you actually read the article? It gives a lot of insight into why the Jets #'s look like they do. The Jets do not perform well when they win a faceoff and they are not very good immediately after a Dman changes. These are the areas they can and should be able to improve. Hopefully adding Perreault and Looks wry will be part of the equation but there's more going on than just those two missing.
I think you need to be subscribed to read these articles? But to me, it does just look like another article bashing the jets corsi without looking at things like shot quality. Pretty sure in most games, Jets have had the higher Expected Goals For than their opponent. But ya, I personally can't read that article.
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,728
69,083
Winnipeg
Did you actually read the article? It gives a lot of insight into why the Jets #'s look like they do. The Jets do not perform well when they win a faceoff and they are not very good immediately after a Dman changes. These are the areas they can and should be able to improve. Hopefully adding Perreault and Looks wry will be part of the equation but there's more going on than just those two missing.

It's nice and all but game situation still impacts those numbers. The Jets have lead a lot and for example if you are leading are you going to try to get shots on target or make the safe play and keep or put the puck in deep for example.

I like that he broke things down and there is most certainly substantial areas for improvement but it's a very incomplete article that doesn' take into account a very important variable. Comparing them to the average when they have been in the upper percentile when leading doesn' hold water to me.
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
It's nice and all but game situation still impacts those numbers. The Jets have lead a lot and for example if you are leading are you going to try to get shots on target or make the safe play and keep or put the puck in deep for example.

I like that he broke things down and there is most certainly substantial areas for improvement but it's a very incomplete article that doesn' take into account a very important variable. Comparing them to the average when they have been in the upper percentile when leading doesn' hold water to me.

He does say it's a small sample size. But a lot of his data is confirming my eye test. That a lot of the Jets troubles are self inflicted and are occurring in a part of the game where they actually have the puck. After winning a faceoff and when the D change on the fly (usually occur when the Jets have the puck deep.)

The sample sizes are so small that I'm not sure breaking the shots down like he does and further dividing by score is worth doing at this point
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gm0ney

Gm0ney

Unicorns salient
Oct 12, 2011
14,428
12,680
Winnipeg
The article is quite detailed and includes a lot of video to illustrate the problems being talked about at 5v5. The Jets raw Corsi numbers are really bad, so it's at least a good starting point to say "what's going on here?"

"They get outshot by about five shots per 60 minutes of play at 5-on-5. Only a 9.8 percent shooting percentage and a .927 save percentage is keeping them above water."

"The Jets are currently outscoring opponents 28-25 at 5-on-5. If they'd shot, say, eight per cent — still excellent — they'd have been outscored 25-23. If they're worried about what happens going forward rather than what happened in the past, which they should be, and eight percent is a more likely shooting percentage than 9.8 percent, then they've got a problem they need to fix. Shooting percentage is very unlikely to save you when the other team is getting five more shots per 60 minutes of 5-on-5 play."


"It's still fairly early in the season. And wins buy you time. Leading a lot will suppress your possession numbers (although the Jets aren't great regardless of whether they're leading, tied or trailing). We've seen enough that Winnipeg's inability to generate shot attempts is a concerning trend though. When the shooting percentage cools off — and it will — you need something else to keep you in the game at 5-on-5. Right now, Winnipeg doesn't seem able to generate enough shots to have that."
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,728
69,083
Winnipeg
He does say it's a small sample size. But a lot of his data is confirming my eye test. That a lot of the Jets troubles are self inflicted and are occurring in a part of the game where they actually have the puck. After winning a faceoff and when the D change on the fly (usually occur when the Jets have the puck deep.)

The sample sizes are so small that I'm not sure breaking the shots down like he does and further dividing by score is worth doing at this point

I' not disagreeing that they are guilty of passing shots up. I'e noted that quite a bit. My main issue is that the offensive zone one for instance is misleading as they lead an awful lot so they aren' going to try to force shots on won faceoffs nor should they be expected to.

I don' care to follow raw stuff given the situations we'e been in. The adjusted stiff tends to paint different picture and those numbers are continuing to trend in the right direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Festinator

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
I' not disagreeing that they are guilty of passing shots up. I'e noted that quite a bit. My main issue is that the offensive zone one for instance is misleading as they lead an awful lot so they aren' going to try to force shots on won faceoffs nor should they be expected to.

I don' care to follow raw stuff given the situations we'e been in. The adjusted stiff tends to paint different picture and those numbers are continuing to trend in the right direction.

I agree they are trending in the right direction. But it does make one wonder why we're so bad after we win a faceoff while we're pretty typical when we lose one does it not?

And apparently we're the worst D changing team in the league. Is that why our second periods suck?
 

10Ducky10

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 5, 2015
13,784
11,432
I've noticed that the goal differential is an important stat. Most teams with a plus will make the playoffs and most teams with a minus don't make the palyoffs......having said that, Pitt is a -14 and in the playoffs as of today.
It does hold close to true by the end of the season though.
 

Weezeric

Registered User
Jan 27, 2015
4,467
6,526
I wonder how the jets high shooting percentage affects their corsi. I mean if you skate into the zone and score off the rush you only count one corsi event, but if you cycle the puck a bunch and shoot from everywhere and are good at puck retrieval you can easily get 5-10 corsi events for on a shift. It seems more descriptive of style than anything to me. Especially when you're in the lead, I don't see how putting everything to the net would be a good strategy. I think it could lead to breakdowns with players out of position more easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Halberdier

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
I've noticed that the goal differential is an important stat. Most teams with a plus will make the playoffs and most teams with a minus don't make the palyoffs......having said that, Pitt is a -14 and in the playoffs as of today.
It does hold close to true by the end of the season though.

Absolutely but the trick is to keep it in positive territory. The question one has to ask is how likely will that be if this is what we'll see for the rest of the season? How likely are the Jets going to continue to shoot nearly 10% how likely is .925+ goaltending going to last?

And this article didn't even get into the PK which is giving up an astronomical 130 shots/60. How likely is this team going to maintain a positive ST goal differential if that continues?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mortimer Snerd

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,728
69,083
Winnipeg
I agree they are trending in the right direction. But it does make one wonder why we're so bad after we win a faceoff while we're pretty typical when we lose one does it not?

And apparently we're the worst D changing team in the league. Is that why our second periods suck?


I'd argue it's because we have played with the lead for a disproportionate amount of time compared to the average team. We win a draw it goes back to the d and they pass up the shot in order to dump it in deep. The forwards are more inclined to keep it deep then take a low probability shot.

That my biggest issue with the analysis. The Jets have been in position where they likely don' want to risk giving up the puck on a shot. They are something like 2nd in the league over the last 7 ish gamed in corsi when tied.

I' attribute most issues to a team not as willing to take shots while leading. Obviously this does need to change but I'd argue that is why we don't hold up with regards to shots for. I'd like to see those totals by situation and period. I'd wager they are average to above average for situations where they are tied.

Interesting comment with regards to the defense. That' a good question for Huddy. I'd wager that it most certainly does play into the second period struggles. I also think the issue is due to the fact that we have some dmen that like to ogerextend theor shifts and it hurts them on changed in the 2nd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dayofthedogs

ijuka

Registered User
May 14, 2016
22,162
14,650
Yep. I've pointed this out several times. If they keep this level of shot attempt generation/suppression up, they are going to plummet sooner or later.
 

10Ducky10

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 5, 2015
13,784
11,432
Is .925 too much to expect? Elite goaltending has been unheard of since the Jets came back...time we got some.
They have absolutely dominated parts of some games and maybe our shooting % is high because of our playmakers setting up the scorers with empty nets?
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
Dellow himself posted some videos on twitter so I'll post them here





 

Gm0ney

Unicorns salient
Oct 12, 2011
14,428
12,680
Winnipeg
I've noticed that the goal differential is an important stat. Most teams with a plus will make the playoffs and most teams with a minus don't make the palyoffs......having said that, Pitt is a -14 and in the playoffs as of today.
It does hold close to true by the end of the season though.
Pittsburgh's been blown out a few times so that kind of skews their goal diff. 10-1 loss to Chicago and two 7-1 losses (vs. TBL and the Jets). So -21 on those 3 games, and +7 in the other 14 games. Jets were -8 after their first two games and +14 in the 12 games since.
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,728
69,083
Winnipeg
Absolutely but the trick is to keep it in positive territory. The question one has to ask is how likely will that be if this is what we'll see for the rest of the season? How likely are the Jets going to continue to shoot nearly 10% how likely is .925+ goaltending going to last?

And this article didn't even get into the PK which is giving up an astronomical 130 shots/60. How likely is this team going to maintain a positive ST goal differential if that continues?

How likely will the Jets continue to trial roughly 10% of the time in games.

In the last 10 games the Jets have trailed roughly 66 minutes out of 610ish. They do well with regards to shot metrics while tied and are trending to be dominant there. The other area teams rack up shots is when trailing and the Jets have barely trailed this season. As their shooting percentage normalized they will trial or be tied more and as such their shots for will rise and their shot differentials will improve as they are trying to score. We are also seeing improvement with regards to them playing with the lead but naturally teams aren't going to try to score at all costs when defending and as such it depreciats shots for and the Jets stunk earlier in the year while trying to protect the lead which skews the numbers significantly. If we see more efforts like the Dallas and Pittsburgh games where we easily win the close score corsi battles we will have nothing to worry about imo.

Having said that yes the Jets need to stop passing up shots and can do a much better job putting it on net.
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
How likely will the Jets continue to trial roughly 10% of the time in games.

In the last 10 games the Jets have trailed roughly 66 minutes out of 610ish. They do well with regards to shot metrics while tied and are trending to be dominant there. The other area teams rack up shots is when trailing and the Jets have barely trailed this season. As their shooting percentage normalized they will trial or be tied more and as such their shots for will rise and their shot differentials will improve as they are trying to score. We are also seeing improvement with regards to them playing with the lead but naturally teams aren't going to try to score at all costs when defending and as such it depreciats shots for.

Having said that yes the Jets need to stop passing up shots and can do a much better job putting it on net.

And they should be able to breakout chaos free after a faceoff win

Glass half full: how good will this team be if they can fix those things?
 
  • Like
Reactions: YWGinYYZ and ps241

Jimby

Reformed Optimist
Nov 5, 2013
1,428
441
Winnipeg
Just because our shooting percentage seems high doesn't mean that it is unsustainable. Looking at the Jets shooting percentage in relation to the rest of the league puts us in 7th spot (5 on 5 adjusted). It is not like we are an outlier. Last year from February 1 to the end of the season we were third best in the league which indicates perhaps our shooting percentage is not something new and temporary.
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,728
69,083
Winnipeg
And they should be able to breakout chaos free after a faceoff win

Glass half full: how good will this team be if they can fix those things?

They will be very good. And yes they need to fix some issues mostly being more aggessive when leading. But these room and gloom articles are misleading that is all.
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
They will be very good. And yes they need to fix some issues mostly being more aggessive when leading. But these room and gloom articles are misleading that is all.

I don't think it is misleading.
9.8% 5 on 5 sh% is not likely to be sustained. The team #'s will need to look different for the success to carry forward. I don't think we can "Avalanche" the league for an entire season
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->