Islanders shot differential, defense, goaltending and playoffs.

[Rehabguy]

Hey guys, I don't typically post new threads in this forum but since I took the time to answer a post by a Flyer fan I thought I might post bits of it here for discussion and why I as an Islander fan am optimistic about next year.

I happen to agree with Hamonic who stated last year that the Islanders defense was not a problem and I don't understand why some Islander fans have it as a question mark going into next year.

Look at the following chart: http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/stats/team-shot-differential-per-game/2013/

This chart represents the difference between shots for and shots against and creates a differential. As the author correctly points out. A team with a negative differential would have to rely more on their goaltender to win games throughout the course of a season.

If you look at the Islanders, looking beyond the fact that they were last in their division in the wins/loss column, the statistics tell a different story.

Last year the Islanders were ranked 5th in the entire Eastern Conference in shot differentials- only behind the Rangers, Bruins, Devils, and Penguins respectively. (to understand how important this stat is see this article: http://www.sportingcharts.com/artic...ial-the-statistic-of-stanley-cup-winners.aspx). In total shots against the Islanders were ranked 6th in the entire Eastern Conference only .6 of a point differentiating them from the Rangers.

The fact that the Islanders were able to produce the 5th best shot differential even without JT, Okposo, Visnovsky for long stretches of the season gives you hint of the Islander's player depth.

So what gives? How does a team with such strong offensive/defensive capabilities still end up last in their division? You guessed it- goaltending! The Islanders, last year had the lowest save percentage (.894) in the entire league. Again, that's in the ENTIRE league. For large stretches of the season Nabakov was hobbled by a groin injury that limited his games to 40 (The lowest of his career). The Islanders didn't have a back-up goaltender with legitimate NHL experience and relied on two AHL goaltenders instead who amassed a 19-23 record. The results speak for themselves- you can't win hockey games no matter how potent your offense or defense is if your goaltenders can't stop pucks. This is why it was important for Garth Snow to acquire two solid goaltenders in Halak and Johnson. The statisticians pointed out that if this duo just pulled out a .915 save percentage by the end of the year- all things being equal, the Islanders would have had 40 less goals against last year.

The Islanders positive shot differential shows that they don't over- rely on goaltending to win games. They just need goal tenders who can put up decent numbers and stop the pucks they should be able to stop.

The Islanders only further strengthened their offensive core capabilities subtracting the mediocre players in Regin and Bouchard and adding an improved second line offense in Grabovsky and Kulemin, have JT for more than half a season, and add a JT mini-me in Strome while adding a potential future star prospect in 6'4 Griffith Reinhart to their above average defense. The Islanders only needed solid goaltending to become a legitimate playoff contender as the statistics clearly show- and they got it.

Click to read more...

 

[Sparksrus3]

Well done
I just responded with 2 paragraphs then deleted it.
The short version for me is if the other team is shooting lay-ups ( basketball fans)
And we shoot jump shots and 3 pointers the stats may be misleading.
Anyone going to the Labor Day Parade in New York City today?
I.B.E.W Local 3- "The Right Choice" .

This parade is one that gets almost no coverage from the media. If you see a news clip on the 6 o'clock news it will be brief .

 

[bigd]

I agree whole heartedly! Is our defense Stanley Cup quality, no? But it's not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. That being said, we need everyone to stay healthy and I think we have more depth than we had last season. We had two D go down for a long period last season and we had to rely on Mess, Carkner, and Matinek to fill in. I still would like to see a top 4 D-man brought in but I'm not sure that's going to happen unless we fall on our faces early in the season. The biggest question mark is Vis, can he stay healthy? Also, why did we bring a guy into run our defense that ran the worst defense in the league last season? Am I missing something here?

 

[ScaredStreit]

I agree whole heartedly! Is our defense Stanley Cup quality, no? But it's not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. That being said, we need everyone to stay healthy and I think we have more depth than we had last season. We had two D go down for a long period last season and we had to rely on Mess, Carkner, and Matinek to fill in. I still would like to see a top 4 D-man brought in but I'm not sure that's going to happen unless we fall on our faces early in the season. The biggest question mark is Vis, can he stay healthy? Also, why did we bring a guy into run our defense that ran the worst defense in the league last season? Am I missing something here?

We were 28th last year in goals against. We signed a #6 defenseman, have a couple of young prospects, having a new average/good starting goaltenders (who has only played 50+ games in a season twice in his career, and has NEVER played in 60+), and a pretty good backup.

Will we be better defensively? I'd say so. Will it be enough? To be blunt: no way!

 

[Isles5513]

Thank you for this proof. While our defense is out weak point, it's not that bad. I though this all of last year ad was pretty much laughed at. Thanks for this stat that proves it.

Also, I think our defense has improved a lot since last year. If not by addition, than by having a year of experience under their belt. Our defense was young playing in front of average at best AHL goalies for the majority of the year. Young defense tend to make mistakes and our goalies didn't cover up these mistakes. Now that our goaltenders are light years ahead of last years goaltending and our young defense are more experienced, I don't thing our goals against will be as big of a problem this year as it was last year.

 

[Rehabguy]

We were 28th last year in goals against. We signed a #6 defenseman, have a couple of young prospects, having a new average/good starting goaltenders (who has only played 50+ games in a season twice in his career, and has NEVER played in 60+), and a pretty good backup.

Will we be better defensively? I'd say so. Will it be enough? To be blunt: no way!

You have to take their goals against in context. As the stats show, the Isles were quite stingy in shots against their goaltenders and pretty good at generating scoring chances. All things being equal, over an 82 game season the quality of those shots against should be pretty even amongst all teams in the NHL. I don't particularly remember the Islanders giving up too many breakaways or consistently demonstrating poor zone coverage. I do remember the goaltenders however, giving up plenty of soft goals. If your goaltenders have the worse save percentage in the league over 82 games, it's pretty certain that your team will have one of the worse goals against average.

 

[charlie1]

Last year the Islanders were ranked 5th in the entire Eastern Conference in shot differentials- only behind the Rangers, Bruins, Devils, and Penguins respectively. (to understand how important this stat is see this article: http://www.sportingcharts.com/artic...ial-the-statistic-of-stanley-cup-winners.aspx). In total shots against the Islanders were ranked 6th in the entire Eastern Conference only .6 of a point differentiating them from the Rangers.

The fact that the Islanders were able to produce the 5th best shot differential even without JT, Okposo, Visnovsky for long stretches of the season gives you hint of the Islander's player depth.

So what gives? How does a team with such strong offensive/defensive capabilities still end up last in their division? You guessed it- goaltending!

Interesting post, thanks!

This can basically be summed up with two stats: Fenwick% (Shots + Blocked shots differential), and GF% (Goals differential).

It's best to use 5v5 close situations to measure shot differential, and for the Islanders we have:

Fenwick%: 49.19 (10th worst in the league)
GF%: 43.98 (5th worst in the league)

So if Fenwick is a good predictor of Goals (which it is), then we should have had the 10th worst GF%, not the 5th worst. So what gives?

First off, you're definitely correct regarding our weak goaltending. But another important factor is shot LOCATION. As was said by Sparksrus3, not all shots are equal. Shot location is the "next big thing" in advanced stats, and here is how it contributed to our terrible GF%:



What does this show? It shows the shots-against rate for NYI relative to the rest of the league. Dark red means there were more shots against NYI from that location than on average for the rest of the league.

So our goalies were getting pounded on the left side (shot rate >20% higher than league average), as well as directly in front of the next (shot rate 11% higher than league average). Notice that the left side is the side Hamonic does not play on LOL.

So while Halak and Johnson will definitely help, I'm hoping that the defense can shore up that slot area and that left side ASAP.

source: war-on-ice.com

 

[charlie1]

And just for giggles, here is the same plot for LA:

 

[Rehabguy]

Interesting post, thanks!

This can basically be summed up with two stats: Fenwick% (Shots + Blocked shots differential), and GF% (Goals differential).

It's best to use 5v5 close situations to measure shot differential, and for the Islanders we have:

Fenwick%: 49.19 (10th worst in the league)
GF%: 43.98 (5th worst in the league)

So if Fenwick is a good predictor of Goals (which it is), then we should have had the 10th worst GF%, not the 5th worst. So what gives?

First off, you're definitely correct regarding our weak goaltending. But another important factor is shot LOCATION. As was said by Sparksrus3, not all shots are equal. Shot location is the "next big thing" in advanced stats, and here is how it contributed to our terrible GF%:



What does this show? It shows the shots-against rate for NYI relative to the rest of the league. Dark red means there were more shots against NYI from that location than on average for the rest of the league.

So our goalies were getting pounded on the left side (shot rate >20% higher than league average), as well as directly in front of the next (shot rate 11% higher than league average). Notice that the left side is the side Hamonic does not play on LOL.

So while Halak and Johnson will definitely help, I'm hoping that the defense can shore up that slot area and that left side ASAP.

source: war-on-ice.com

Excellent analysis, something I was hoping was out there. Remember however, shots are one thing, a more useful stat would be from where the actual goals are scored. The plot could be nothing more than how the Islanders play defense ie. their defensive style. If their goaltenders were better at handling shots from that side, the Islanders might have been coached into covering all other angles as a priority and let their goaltenders see the shot from that angle.

Then again, I don't know if Cappy's that smart

 

[charlie1]

Excellent analysis, something I was hoping was out there. Other than LA how do we compare to some of the other teams in the league?

Click around on war-on-ice.com, Hextally plots. Fascinating stuff.

 

[Jester9881]

Interesting post, thanks!

This can basically be summed up with two stats: Fenwick% (Shots + Blocked shots differential), and GF% (Goals differential).

It's best to use 5v5 close situations to measure shot differential, and for the Islanders we have:

Fenwick%: 49.19 (10th worst in the league)
GF%: 43.98 (5th worst in the league)

So if Fenwick is a good predictor of Goals (which it is), then we should have had the 10th worst GF%, not the 5th worst. So what gives?

First off, you're definitely correct regarding our weak goaltending. But another important factor is shot LOCATION. As was said by Sparksrus3, not all shots are equal. Shot location is the "next big thing" in advanced stats, and here is how it contributed to our terrible GF%:



What does this show? It shows the shots-against rate for NYI relative to the rest of the league. Dark red means there were more shots against NYI from that location than on average for the rest of the league.

So our goalies were getting pounded on the left side (shot rate >20% higher than league average), as well as directly in front of the next (shot rate 11% higher than league average). Notice that the left side is the side Hamonic does not play on LOL.

So while Halak and Johnson will definitely help, I'm hoping that the defense can shore up that slot area and that left side ASAP.

source: war-on-ice.com

Good stuff, and a great point concerning Hamonic. To expand on that, AMac does defend on that side, and he was out there the most among our defenders.

Go to youtube and search "Islanders highlights". Watch the ones from last season and a few things pop out...

1. AMac was God Awful..... he killed us so bad it isn't even funny.
2. We got no help from our goaltending whatsoever
3. The diamond did nothing but compound both these problems

 

[Cavonnier]

Click around on war-on-ice.com, Hextally plots. Fascinating stuff.

Wow, this stuff is great. It was interesting comparing de Haan and MacDonald on shots against. Nelson REALLY stands out for his defensive ability, and he was a rookie who should only get better.

Kulemin's shots against chart doesn't look very good at first, but if you look at the Leafs' chart without him you can see that the team was flat out atrocious when it came to shot suppression and that Kulemin was so much better relative to his teammates.

 

[Rehabguy]

This is very interesting stuff indeed. The Isles were not too bad at clearing the net it appears. Compare their graphs to EDM or BUF and its pretty interesting. Comparing their 2012 to 2013 seasons is pretty interesting as well. What does it all mean.... hmmmm.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

Interesting post, thanks!

This can basically be summed up with two stats: Fenwick% (Shots + Blocked shots differential), and GF% (Goals differential).

It's best to use 5v5 close situations to measure shot differential, and for the Islanders we have:

Fenwick%: 49.19 (10th worst in the league)
GF%: 43.98 (5th worst in the league)

So if Fenwick is a good predictor of Goals (which it is), then we should have had the 10th worst GF%, not the 5th worst. So what gives?

First off, you're definitely correct regarding our weak goaltending. But another important factor is shot LOCATION. As was said by Sparksrus3, not all shots are equal. Shot location is the "next big thing" in advanced stats, and here is how it contributed to our terrible GF%:



What does this show? It shows the shots-against rate for NYI relative to the rest of the league. Dark red means there were more shots against NYI from that location than on average for the rest of the league.

So our goalies were getting pounded on the left side (shot rate >20% higher than league average), as well as directly in front of the next (shot rate 11% higher than league average). Notice that the left side is the side Hamonic does not play on LOL.

So while Halak and Johnson will definitely help, I'm hoping that the defense can shore up that slot area and that left side ASAP.

source: war-on-ice.com

You are my new best friend. I was going to quote your previous posts on this along with my similar thoughts on shot location (quality vs. quantity) but you beat me to it!

While many may disagree what was worse, defense or goaltending, I think we can all agree they both sucked, and both needed fixing. One got fixed this summer, so

But the other still needs help, and here is why:
1) too small still, but trending upwards
2) too many youngins' (CdH sophomore, Griff, Donovan...)

The good news is that it is self correcting considering the kids in the pipeline who are excellent prospects. The bad news is they are still kids. Set the kitchen timer, and go stew? I hope not. Many including myself think 1 more trade for the right guy would solve this problem this year without bankrupting our talent pool in exchange.

And just to keep it honest, I love Hamonic and would vote for him if he ran for Prez because he shoots from the right place in his heart, but he was absolutely wrong when he said the defense was good last year.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

This is very interesting stuff indeed. The Isles were not too bad at clearing the net it appears. Compare their graphs to EDM or BUF and its pretty interesting. Comparing their 2012 to 2013 seasons is pretty interesting as well. What does it all mean.... hmmmm.

If you watch Oiler games at all you know they are brutal in front of their net. If I was the Oilers GM I would be talking to Snow regularly about defense for offense.

 

[original islander]

Wow, this stuff is great. It was interesting comparing de Haan and MacDonald on shots against. Nelson REALLY stands out for his defensive ability, and he was a rookie who should only get better.

Kulemin's shots against chart doesn't look very good at first, but if you look at the Leafs' chart without him you can see that the team was flat out atrocious when it came to shot suppression and that Kulemin was so much better relative to his teammates.

I tried looking at the site but I have to admit it's over my head. You mentioned Kulemin's chart, can anyone analyze JT's shots against chart or some of the others? Thank you.

 

[charlie1]

Glad people find this useful, I think it's super interesting.

And I just want to expand on the AMac vs CdH comparison. Here are Hextally plots for both of them (first AMac, then Cdh). In these plots, the TOP is WITH the player on the ice, the BOTTOM is WITHOUT the player on the ice.

Here it is for MacDonald:




You can see that when AMac is on the ice (TOP) the Islanders are giving up an incredible amount of shots on the left side (his side). I mean it is just bleeding red over there. Not good at all.


Now compare that to our golden boy, CdH:



Again, TOP of the figure is with CdH, BOTTOM is without CdH.

I mean that is night & day better than AMac. Now granted CdH wasn't seeing top pairing minutes all season, but he was also a rookie, and that performance is damn impressive. Also notice how much worse we were when CdH was off the ice.

 

[First Blood]

Glad people find this useful, I think it's super interesting.

And I just want to expand on the AMac vs CdH comparison. Here are Hextally plots for both of them (first AMac, then Cdh). In these plots, the TOP is WITH the player on the ice, the BOTTOM is WITHOUT the player on the ice.

Here it is for MacDonald:




You can see that when AMac is on the ice (TOP) the Islanders are giving up an incredible amount of shots on the left side (his side). I mean it is just bleeding red over there. Not good at all.


Now compare that to our golden boy, CdH:



Again, TOP of the figure is with CdH, BOTTOM is without CdH.

I mean that is night & day better than AMac. Now granted CdH wasn't seeing top pairing minutes all season, but he was also a rookie, and that performance is damn impressive. Also notice how much worse we were when CdH was off the ice.

Let's see him argue with this. You can't. Stats don't lie and it's right there. Excellent posts.

 

[Cavonnier]

I tried looking at the site but I have to admit it's over my head. You mentioned Kulemin's chart, can anyone analyze JT's shots against chart or some of the others? Thank you.

Here is the Leafs' shot rate against with Kulemin on the ice. There's a lot of red, which would make it look like he's defensively weak.

However, take a look at the Leafs' shot rate against WITHOUT Kulemin on the ice:

These charts aren't flattering to Tavares. First, the positive: Tavares generates a lot of opportunities right in front of the net.

However, look at what opponents do when Tavares is on the ice. This strongly suggests we need to shelter him/give him heavy o-zone starts and NOT use him when we're trying to protect a lead. We can lean on Grabovski and Nielsen for d-zone and lead protection situations.

I'm going to post a few other graphs in a few minutes.

 

[Cavonnier]

Here is the Islanders' relative shots against rate with Tavares on the ice. It shows that Tavares is weak defensively right in front of the net.

See how much better the Islanders are at suppressing shots from right in front of the net without Tavares on the ice?

Let's compare Tavares with Nelson, who looks like a shot-suppression God. Here is the Islanders' relative shots against rate with Nelson on the ice. Nelson does a great job of preventing opponents from shooting in prime areas.

The Islanders' are worse at shot suppression without Nelson on the ice:

 

[original islander]

Here is the Leafs' shot rate against with Kulemin on the ice. There's a lot of red, which would make it look like he's defensively weak.

However, take a look at the Leafs' shot rate against WITHOUT Kulemin on the ice:

These charts aren't flattering to Tavares. First, the positive: Tavares generates a lot of opportunities right in front of the net.

However, look at what opponents do when Tavares is on the ice. This strongly suggests we need to shelter him/give him heavy o-zone starts and NOT use him when we're trying to protect a lead. We can lean on Grabovski and Nielsen for d-zone and lead protection situations.

I'm going to post a few other graphs in a few minutes.

Thank you. Am I right in thinking the top chart is when the player is in the offensive zone and the second chart is in the D zone?

My other question is: are the charts for the player against team average or league average?

Thank you in advance. Plus/minus is the most advanced stat that my mind can figure out at my advanced age.

 

[original islander]

Here is the Islanders' relative shots against rate with Tavares on the ice. It shows that Tavares is weak defensively right in front of the net.

See how much better the Islanders are at suppressing shots from right in front of the net without Tavares on the ice?

Let's compare Tavares with Nelson, who looks like a shot-suppression God. Here is the Islanders' relative shots against rate with Nelson on the ice. Nelson does a great job of preventing opponents from shooting in prime areas.

The Islanders' are worse at shot suppression without Nelson on the ice:

Great analysis. I really appreciate it.

 

[The Underboss]

Excellent stuff everyone!!

 

[Cavonnier]

Another thing that stands out is that Anders Lee (albeit in a small sample) was good at shot suppression. He was bad defensively in 2013, but in 2014 he was quite good. It's a reason why I'm strongly rooting for Lee to make the team out of training camp.

 

[Cavonnier]

Thank you. Am I right in thinking the top chart is when the player is in the offensive zone and the second chart is in the D zone?

My other question is: are the charts for the player against team average or league average?

Thank you in advance. Plus/minus is the most advanced stat that my mind can figure out at my advanced age.

I believe the shot differential rate figures compare players to the rest of the league.