GDT: Ottawa @ Carolina: Spooky Halloween was only a week ago edition

[RodTheBawd]

More than half of our d-men have a shots for relative % of over 16%?

Oh, thanks for mentioning SF%, that is very helpful in this very serious debate. He mentioned Karlsson's shot differential as being crazy. I mentioned the impact his zone starts have on that differential, making it not so crazy. When looking at those 2 factors, JML, Pesce, and to a lesser extent Murphy and Jordan are in the mix. Of course, that's me taking liberties with the whole "relative to team" aspect, but isn't that how it's done? Ignore the factors that might be counter to my point?

 

[Sens1Canes2]

Oh, thanks for mentioning SF%, that is very helpful in this very serious debate. He mentioned Karlsson's shot differential as being crazy. I mentioned the impact his zone starts have on that differential, making it not so crazy. When looking at those 2 factors, JML, Pesce, and to a lesser extent Murphy and Jordan are in the mix. Of course, that's me taking liberties with the whole "relative to team" aspect, but isn't that how it's done? Ignore the factors that might be counter to my point?

My point was, in a game that the Hurricanes dominated in shot attempts differential (54-32), Karlsson was 16-16 in almost 28 minutes. That's all.

 

[RodTheBawd]

My point was, in a game that the Hurricanes dominated in shot attempts differential (54-32), Karlsson was 16-16 in almost 28 minutes. That's all.

I gotcha, I was just trying to throw some shade on your stud

 

[caniac247]

My point was, in a game that the Hurricanes dominated in shot attempts differential (54-32), Karlsson was 16-16 in almost 28 minutes. That's all.

I think their shot attempts get inflated. More than half their shots are right at the goalies chest. This team has a thing for shooting the puck right at the goalies logo, not hard to save nor does it translate into a good shot. I'd like to see how many of those 54 were actually good quality shots and not at the goalies chest.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

thats true, to an extent, the canes are an exception to just pure corsi analysis because of their lack of finishing ability

brind'amour even brought that up in a recent press thing, he basically said "we're not the most talented team, so we need more shots to make up the difference."

there will be no "progress to the mean" as far as our shots go. maybe a little, but not all the way. we simply cannot throw all of this offensive inability into the "unlucky" bucket, it's a combo of a shot-heavy system and a bunch of players that have trouble finishing the play, with (perhaps) a little bit of unluck mixed in

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think their shot attempts get inflated. More than half their shots are right at the goalies chest. This team has a thing for shooting the puck right at the goalies logo, not hard to save nor does it translate into a good shot. I'd like to see how many of those 54 were actually good quality shots and not at the goalies chest.

True, even so S1C2's point is still valid. Whether it was good shots or shots at the goalies chest, there were a lot less of them when Karlsson was on the ice.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

True, even so S1C2's point is still valid. Whether it was good shots or shots at the goalies chest, there were a lot less of them when Karlsson was on the ice.

Correct. It basically means his team has the puck way more when he's on the ice compared to when he's not (unless he is some sort of defensive magician who prevents shot attempts by the other team).

And I'm not really trying to pump his tires. I simply thought it was a fascinating stat within a game we all watched, so I shared it about the current Norris Trophy winner and all around wonderful guy. (Ok now I'm pumping tires)