Is Team Shooting% A Bigger Problem Than Team Save %?

[Aavco Cup]

Jets SH % 7.11 26th
NHL SH % 8.91 AVG

Jets SV % .913 13tH
NHL SV % .909 AVG

These are raw numbers including empty net goals. If we factored in missed shots we would probably fall even lower than 26th. Maybe the real problem for this team is it's inability to finish their chances?

Click to read more...

 

[theamazingchris]

Frankly, no. S% is pretty volatile, and unless all our shooters suddenly got terrible over the summer, we don't have to worry too much about it. Sv% however has been consistently low for several years. It's the bigger problem.

That's not to say that our low shot percentage hasn't factored into our losses so far, but going forward it's not something we should be concerned with, because historically it hasn't been a problem for this team.

 

[Analyst365]

Ah but it is just so impressive to hear Beyak was nostalgically about Kane is one the league leaders in shots on goal, I mean who cares about scoring or winning games when we have that in our arsenal.

More 40 ft. wristers into the goalie's chest, please. Everyone. Not just Kane. We got this one.

 

[truck]

Is it a bigger issue that SV%? Maybe, but there isn't much that the Jets can do to fix it.

Shooting percentage numbers vary wildly from year to year. Scoring on the PP would help the overall numbers. Not asking your D men to be your primary shooters wouldn't hurt either, but that is the Jets system.

 

[truck]

Ah but it is just so impressive to hear Beyak was nostalgically about Kane is one the league leaders in shots on goal, I mean who cares about scoring or winning games when we have that in our arsenal.

More 40 ft. wristers into the goalie's chest, please. Everyone. Not just Kane. We got this one.

If you wanna name names:
Dustin Byfuglien
Zach Bogosian
Michael Frolik

They are 3 the of the Jets top 5 most frequent shooters and they have a combined 2 goals (both Michael Frolik) on 106 shots and all three are converting on a lower percentage than they have over their careers.

I wouldn't bet on Bogo and Buff sustaining a 0% shooting %. If you give that trio goals based on their career percentages the team would have another 5 goals.



Another issue is special teams.

The Jets are shooting at 7.4% on the powerplay. The worst PP shooting % in the league last year was 9.5% - Jets shot 10.6%. This would account for another goal or two.

Find one more goal in the bottom 6 and the Jets are league average.


It is early. A bounce here or there goes a long way. The SH% is low, but I don't know that it will be a long term problem.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Shooting percentage numbers vary wildly from year to year.

The Jets finished 15th in SH% two years in a row. 9.07% last year and 8.94% in year one.

 

[White Out 403*]

Small sample size to draw any conclusions. In just one game Pavs went from 901 to 909 save %. This kind of stat analysis needs at least 40 games for a meaningful sample size

 

[truck]

The Jets finished 15th in SH% two years in a row. 9.07% last year and 8.94% in year one.

...and many teams went from the top to the bottom or vice versa. Happens every year. Near league average should be expected unless a team is horrigood or horribad.

 

[garret9]

The Jets finished 15th in SH% two years in a row. 9.07% last year and 8.94% in year one.

Is it possible that you can roll a thirty side die and get the same number twice? Yup.

There is talent involved with shooting percentage. There is also team system (how much your D shoot) and how hot/cold your PP is going (since PP sh% is much higher on average and far more volatile than ES).

There is also straight up luck. Goalies flub softies all the time. Goalies make huge saves you don't expect all the time. Whether that goalie did it on you instead of someone else isn't controlled by you.

 

[Aavco Cup]

There is talent involved with shooting percentage. There is also team system (how much your D shoot) and how hot/cold your PP is going (since PP sh% is much higher on average and far more volatile than ES).

We've had thread after thread about our goaltending and our D zone play in this forum. Not much discussion about the underperformance of our team at the other end of the ice. I know the sample is small but 2 extra goals every 3 games would do wonders for our record. Hopefully there's a correction towards the middle for our shooters.

 

[garret9]

We've had thread after thread about our goaltending and our D zone play in this forum. Not much discussion about the underperformance of our team at the other end of the ice. I know the sample is small but 2 extra goals every 3 games would do wonders for our record. Hopefully there's a correction towards the middle for our shooters.

Well the amount of input each has towards wins has been roughly estimated by those far, far, far (x1000) smarter than I...

It's roughly:

~50% player talent in creating/reducing chances for/against
~30% variance (some look at this as "luck")
~rest is largely goalie talent and small sliver shot quality talent...

The split on the third bit isn't very defined because variance muddies the water, but we know that goalie talent is much larger than shot quality talent when it comes to winning.



So you are correct that it would have an impact, potentially large impact, when it comes to rising that percentage. Since the sh% shows up in both in part of the 30% variance and the (my estimate) 5% shot quality.

The thing that Truck and I are mentioning is that the player/system control of that is much smaller part of that pie.

While I wouldn't be surprised that the Jets' are not as good finishing team as league average, I also wouldn't be surprised if they were. In the end the Jets largest issue IMO lies in that big 50% hunk of chances and that (my estimate) 15% of goaltending.

 

[BigZ65]

It's like we have a team full of Allen Iverson's and no one who can finish at the rim. All volume shooters, no one who gets down and dirty, and no one who can create those chances at the goal, probably why our PP is so awful too.

 

[Gotmilt*]

Jets SH % 7.11 26th
NHL SH % 8.91 AVG

Jets SV % .913 13tH
NHL SV % .909 AVG

These are raw numbers including empty net goals. If we factored in missed shots we would probably fall even lower than 26th. Maybe the real problem for this team is it's inability to finish their chances?

I was going to post this exact thing while arguing with resurrection, but I knew he wouldn't understand the concept so I didn't bother, I see I was right lol

 

[White Out 403*]

I was going to post this exact thing while arguing with resurrection, but I knew he wouldn't understand the concept so I didn't bother, I see I was right lol

I understand the concept just fine but the sample size is woefully small. Is that difficult for you to understand?

 

[pucka lucka]

Jets SH % 7.11 26th
NHL SH % 8.91 AVG

Jets SV % .913 13tH
NHL SV % .909 AVG

These are raw numbers including empty net goals. If we factored in missed shots we would probably fall even lower than 26th. Maybe the real problem for this team is it's inability to finish their chances?

So we have good goaltending now? Shooting percentage varies a lot, between players, between teams. I would think a single players shooting percentage is only predictive over a huge sample(like a careers worth of shots), even then I'd bet it's not very accurate.

 

[garret9]

Misconceptions in Hockey Analytics

I wrote a section on shooting percentage and another on regression in this article about multiple subjects.
Both sections have links to really good, important and relevant articles on this.

If you want the TL;DR version, current sh% is not very predictive of future sh% even at a full season level...

 

[Gotmilt*]

I understand the concept just fine but the sample size is woefully small. Is that difficult for you to understand?

So you're saying that since we've only played a handful of games it doesn't matter that we shoot more than almost anyone in the league yet we score the least goals? To me that says we lack talent and we take poor shots.

On another note, somehow it has been a large enough sample size to blame every loss on pavelec and call for his head after every loss even if his save percentage is above average and has put us in position to win every game, sure he hasn't stolen games but in no way has he lost us a game this year.

 

[Gotmilt*]

Misconceptions in Hockey Analytics

I wrote a section on shooting percentage and another on regression in this article about multiple subjects.
Both sections have links to really good, important and relevant articles on this.

If you want the TL;DR version, current sh% is not very predictive of future sh% even at a full season level...

Did anybody ask what the future sh% is going to be? No because we are talking about real life, not some computer program with made up numbers. We lack offensive talent in a big way, our most talented guy takes the stupidest shots from past the ringette line, and the only guy with enough brain power;bryan little isn't quite skilled enough to score regularly enough to win us games

 

[pucka lucka]

Did anybody ask what the future sh% is going to be? No because we are talking about real life, not some computer program with made up numbers. We lack offensive talent in a big way, our most talented guy takes the stupidest shots from past the ringette line, and the only guy with enough brain power;bryan little isn't quite skilled enough to score regularly enough to win us games

Holy, whoosh.

 

[garret9]

Did anybody ask what the future sh% is going to be? No because we are talking about real life, not some computer program with made up numbers. We lack offensive talent in a big way, our most talented guy takes the stupidest shots from past the ringette line, and the only guy with enough brain power;bryan little isn't quite skilled enough to score regularly enough to win us games

Uh... the point being is that:

1) getting more skilled guys may not affect the tam's shooting percentage

2) not getting more skilled guys could still have the shooting percentage jump up in the future

3) the Jets' shooting percentage is not a measurement of the players offensive talents


If something is not repeatable or indicative of the future then you can't use it to measure how good a team is in talent. If the top 10 scoring forwards of last year were all equally likely to be bottom 10 the next year, you wouldn't really think much of being on the top. You know it's a skill because they do it all the time. Crosby and Stamkos... it's not a surprise these guys are up near the top.

It's like when you play trick shot hoops with your friends. If your buddy pulls of some crazy **** you think is a total fluke, you say try to pull that off again.

Has nothing to do with computer programming. This is real life, yo.


You want want to see the Jets' offensive problems it can bee seen in the numbers and the eyes but not in the shooting percentage.


Shooting percentage is normally more an indication of luck or over/under performance.


EDIT:

PS This is completely independent and separate from the Pavelec complex.

Pav's is currently 21st in goalie 5v5 sv% looking only at starters (guys with 200+ mins).
Jets are 13th for creating scoring chances and 28th for disallowing them.

So I'd say Jets offense > goaltending > defense thus far this year...
Historically (the last two seasons) it has gone Jets offense > defense > goaltending

Although The Jets offense and defense numbers have been on the uprise (although I still have some doubts it will end up above average like the last two seasons)

 

[KCjetsfan]

So you're saying that since we've only played a handful of games it doesn't matter that we shoot more than almost anyone in the league yet we score the least goals? To me that says we lack talent and we take poor shots.

On another note, somehow it has been a large enough sample size to blame every loss on pavelec and call for his head after every loss even if his save percentage is above average and has put us in position to win every game, sure he hasn't stolen games but in no way has he lost us a game this year.

the fact that pavs is posting a very low SV % over an extended period of time, i.e. his whole career, holds more weight than a dozen games in one year.

 

[Gotmilt*]

Uh... the point being is that:

1) getting more skilled guys may not affect the tam's shooting percentage

2) not getting more skilled guys could still have the shooting percentage jump up in the future

3) the Jets' shooting percentage is not a measurement of the players offensive talents


If something is not repeatable or indicative of the future then you can't use it to measure how good a team is in talent. If the top 10 scoring forwards of last year were all equally likely to be bottom 10 the next year, you wouldn't really think much of being on the top. You know it's a skill because they do it all the time. Crosby and Stamkos... it's not a surprise these guys are up near the top.

It's like when you play trick shot hoops with your friends. If your buddy pulls of some crazy **** you think is a total fluke, you say try to pull that off again.

Has nothing to do with computer programming. This is real life, yo.


You want want to see the Jets' offensive problems it can bee seen in the numbers and the eyes but not in the shooting percentage.


Shooting percentage is normally more an indication of luck or over/under performance.

...And in our case it mostly measures quality of shots, sure we have guys that can take the puck to the net. My question is do we have guys like Patrick Kane, Phil kessel, Crosby, Malkin, or toews? The answer is no, my point is that it seems nobody I willing on the rush to take that extra second with the puck and make a smart play, whether that's making a good pass, or holding the puck for that extra second to take a good shot on net rather than some weak wrister from the blue line right in the logo.

Sure I agree with you Garrett, sometimes sh% does measure luck and whatnot but I don't think that's really what it shows here. Guys with unrealistically high % (kadri) are unlikely to keep it up their whole career, but when you're talking about a whole team with low shooting percentage over an extended period of time, something isn't right. Wether it's coaching or just bad play I don't know but I do know something has to change.

 

[Gotmilt*]

the fact that pavs is posting a very low SV % over an extended period of time, i.e. his whole career, holds more weight than a dozen games in one year.

Kind of funny because I've never seen a team turn over the puck like the jets do and somehow we are always in position to win. I don't really even see how people can blame Pav for anything happening with the jets right now,
I'd argue he's been our best play this year along with bryan little, he has stood on his head at times and has stolen games for us.

 

[White Out 403*]

Kind of funny because I've never seen a team turn over the puck like the jets do and somehow we are always in position to win. I don't really even see how people can blame Pav for anything happening with the jets right now,
I'd argue he's been our best play this year along with bryan little, he has stood on his head at times and has stolen games for us.

He has been outclassed by the opposing teams goaltender in all but 2 or 3 of his starts, and you want to anoint him our 2nd best player?

Again, you kinda glossed over the important fact that up until the last game his save % was 901. The sample size is so low that 1 game jumped it by 8%. It's too early for save %, or shooting %.

 

[Gotmilt*]

Have you watched a single game this year?