Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Ryder Hesjedal Wins Giro d'Italia

How Important is the "Shots on Goal" Stat?

During the end of season evaluation for coach Paul Maurice, I mentioned that the Hurricanes needed to improve upon their "shots on goal against" stat.  Since this is a team related stat and it was rated the worst in the NHL last season, I placed this as a negative aspect regarding the coach's performance.

In the comments, one of our most  knowledgeable and respected community members made the valid point that "scoring chances" was a more important stat and that "shots against" was overrated.  While I agreed that the "scoring chances" stat was more valid, I disagreed that "shots against" was overrated or unimportant. 

We agreed that someday it would make for a good topic of discussion, so let's talk about it today.

Coincidentally, Carolyn and I noticed an article from a couple of weeks ago exploring that very topic.  It seems the Edmonton Oilers had a similar problem last season and one of the writers from the Edmonton Journal wrote a corresponding article entitled, "The Elephant in the Room."

Edmonton Journal - The Elephant in the Room

In the article, the writer does some extended research to see if the "shots against" stat correlates to winning or losing.  I thought that I would do some similar research to see how the results turned out for the Canes.

Star-divide

First up, let's look at average "shots for" per game along with average "shots against", and compare those numbers with total "goals scored" and "goals against" over the past six years. 

 

 

Average Average Diff Total Total Diff
Shots Shots Goals Goals
For Against For Against
2011 30.7 33.2 -2.5 236 239 -3
2010 29.3 31.4 -2.1 230 256 -26
2009 32.6 29.5 3.1 239 226 13
2008 32.5 28.9 3.6 252 249 3
2007 31.2 28.5 2.7 241 253 -12
2006 31.1 30.5 0.6 294 260 34



Of course, great or poor goaltending can skew these results, as we saw last season when Cam Ward made more saves than any other goalie in the league and had the best save percentage of his career.  But even then, the Canes still allowed more goals than they scored. Things could have been much worse if Ward was not at the top of his game.

In five of the six years tracked, the difference in the team's scoring results matched the difference in their shot totals.  Meaning, if they allowed more shots than they took, they usually allowed more goals than they scored.  The odd year out was in 2007 when John Grahame and Ward both posted .897 save percentages. 

Next up, let's look at how many games per year the team had more shots than their opponents versus how many times they were outshot, and compare that with their overall winning (point) percentages for each season.

 

 

Games  Games Team 
More Less Winning
Shots Shots %
2011 28 51 0.555
2010 36 44 0.488
2009 52 28 0.591 playoffs
2008 52 27 0.561
2007 49 29 0.537
2006 43 38 0.683 playoffs



Again, there seems to be a correlation here because in most cases, the more times that the Canes outshoot their opponents, the better record they have. 

While "shots on goal" is certainly not the most important stat all by itself, it is a stat which can be a telling symptom for other problems, like time of possession and faceoff percentages, both of which the Canes had trouble with last season.  It would also seem logical that the more shots a team allows, the more quality scoring chances would follow.  We can not tell for sure about that assumption though because the NHL does not officially track scoring chances.  (We will do that this season on Canes Country.)

Another thing that kind of stands out, that I'm sure some of you have already recognized, is that there is a noticeable change in shot differential after the coaching change.  When Laviolette coached here, the team had more shots for, than against, in every season tracked.  That stat would certainly match his apparent "attack first" coaching style.   

When Maurice took over mid stream in 2009, his team finished with more shots, but in the two years since he has had full control, the opposite is true.  While Maurice obviously does not want to purposely allow the opposition more shots on goal than his own team, perhaps his overall coaching philosophy leads to different results? 

It will be very interesting to see what happens this coming season regarding those stats.   

Getting back to the Edmonton Journal article, the Oilers have not been in the playoffs since their deep run in 2006.  They have been outshot in every year since then as well. 

There are exceptions to every rule, and rules for every exception.  Game by game, teams certainly have the ability to win, even though they might have fewer shots than their opponents.  But over a long period of time, it seems like the chances are better to have a successful season if you can consistently get more shots than your competition.

Last season alone, nine of the 12 teams who allowed the most shots in the league, failed to make the playoffs.

 

((Off topic:  The Hurricanes prospect team will be playing the "Junior Rangers" today at 3 at Traverse City and the game will be televised on the NHL Network.  Carolyn will be hosting an "Open Thread" here starting shortly before the game.  If you can make it, come join in the discussion!)

Comment 22 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Thank You Bob

like a political debate …i feel that this topic can be just as “rousing” …with that said…while i am in no way an expert..but I feel that the effort of shooting at the goal physically should carry the same weight…but remember i’m a fan…yada,yada,yada..Good stuff and again another “prespective” to consider!!!

9/11/01 - Never Forget !!
Long Live #63 The Condor
Go Canes & Checkers !!!

by CaniacSteve on Sep 13, 2011 8:15 AM EDT reply actions  

Nice write-up; I’ve always felt SOG is one of those stats that drives a bunch of other stats and is important stat – scoring chances, the score, time of possession, etc. Good things usually happen when you shoot the puck.

by Go_Shelf on Sep 13, 2011 9:04 AM EDT reply actions  

if you’re shooting the puck, it means the other team isn’t, which is a good thing

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Sep 13, 2011 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

Couldn’t agree more. Nice analysis and write-up and I agree that SOG drives other stats.

If you are giving up a lot of shots and are being consistently outshot it is a huge red flag and in my opinion that is the starting point for the coaching staff to dig deeper for root causes. How many of the shots are “quality scoring ops”; where precisely are they mostly coming from: left side/right side, high slot/low slot, etc. Where is the breakdown: bad D play or lack of support from forwards and/or both. And it goes to situational systems…. e.g. too much dump and chase giving up possession thereby allowing other team to control play; poor neutral zone play that allows odd man full steam rushes, etc.

I think Cam’s save percentage didn’t tell the whole story last year. Not only did he face a lot of shots but he faced a lot of quality shots. He had an even better year than the stats say. Also a reason why Peters struggled….. young goalie seeing long layoffs and then going in to face a high number of quality shots from the opposition.

An argument for another day but while I like what we have up front, unless the coaches adjust their use of those forwards so that our puck possession time increases and unless we improve our D play, our overall points production may not change much from last year. And if our goalies don’t again stand on their heads, we may go in the opposite direction .

by sittler27 on Sep 13, 2011 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

having any semblance of a cycle game would be absolutely wonderful. hopefully a couple bigger forwards here and there who are harder to move off the puck will help

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Sep 13, 2011 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions  

Good post

Your numbers are supported by many topics at Behind the Net that reach the same conclusion

"Though we do run the risk of one of the pucks generating human-like emotions, and yearning for a better life outside of its cold, violent existence…" -Ben

by ThrashersRecaps on Sep 13, 2011 10:27 AM EDT reply actions  

Thanks for getting this data for us Bob, its really interesting to think about it.
One point, if you plot both average shots against and average shots for against the winning % you see a much stronger correlation with shots for (albeit with only 6 data points for both)! Not sure how that works, maybe Cam is canceling that out the shots against!

by Whitless? on Sep 13, 2011 10:28 AM EDT reply actions  

Good stuff

The shots vs. scoring chances is always a dicey issue. Do more shots mean more scoring chances? It’s hard to prove correlation let alone causation. In light of any further evidence, it would seem there is a pretty direct correlation for the Canes on shots allowed and winning based on the article here.

Any thoughts on posting the data and the source info on to a google doc? It might be fun to see if I can extend this to the league as a whole. Maybe even add in missed shots as well to see if that does anything.

Also, good luck on trying to keep up with scoring chances this year. I tried that last season and quickly lost interest. I probably over complicated it by trying to be exactly equal all the time. It ended up detracting quite a bit from my enjoyment of the game.

When my opinions and reality don't coincide I re-evaluate my opinions, not reality.

by C-Leaguer on Sep 13, 2011 11:34 AM EDT reply actions  

I agree. As a fan you can pretty much “feel” when we are giving up a lot of quality scoring chances and that is probably about as deep as we should analyze. But definitely charting scoring chances is an important coaching tool. Hopefully they won’t need to make that their top negative post game analysis this year.

by sittler27 on Sep 13, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions  

Do more shots mean more scoring chances?

From watching and playing a lot of hockey, it usually does. If you’re badly outshooting your opponent, you have the have the puck a lot more than they do, which means your in their zone more which usually means your on the PP more which usually means better quality scoring chances. There’s a cascading effect, which is why I like coaches that preach shoot for the sake of shooting, good things come from it; if you dump and chase early you’ll create space later.

by Go_Shelf on Sep 13, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

C-Leaguer

I can put it on a Google doc later tonight. Would be very interesting to see how this worked on a league wide basis. I know it doesn’t hold true for Boston. They allowed almost as many shots per game as Carolina last season, but allowed fewer goals by far. Of course, having a Vezina winner in your net kind of helps.

Also agree, it will be tough to track scoring chances on a regular basis and the stat will need to be taken with a grain of salt. Maybe we can have folk take turns if it becomes too cumbersome for our volunteer.

Editing Manager of Canes Country.com

by Bob Wage on Sep 13, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

sure, what really constitutes a scoring chance – you have a chance to score everytime the puck goes to the net, so there’s always subjectivity to keeping this stat. Another interesting stat (league wide): shots per goal, I believe it’s currently about 11, which to me means you need to put up at least 30/game to give yourself a chance.

by Go_Shelf on Sep 14, 2011 9:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

I’ll volunteer for a few games for keeping up with scoring chances, especially some of the road games only on Center Ice.

That google doc would be very interesting. I think I’ve got a little time to focus on this.

When my opinions and reality don't coincide I re-evaluate my opinions, not reality.

by C-Leaguer on Sep 14, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Like the idea, not sure it goes far enough

First off, great topic for us armchair statisticians. Second, I followed up on your numbers. Your position is that games in which you shoot more statistically should yield more wins, which sounds like a good idea. However, if you go back and take a composite look at the games in which the Canes’ shot totals were higher than their opponents which also yielded a win, by your logic, it should be statistically significant. Unfortunately, that doesn’t really hold water. Here’s a quick snippet:

Year …GW…SF+…..GW & SF+
2011…40…..28…….11
2010…35…..36…….14
2009…45…..52…….27
2008…43…..52…….31
2007…40…..49…….24
2006…52…..43…….29

That’s Games Won, games where our Shot Differential was greater, and then Games Won in which our Shot Differential was greater. I do second the notion that the coaching styles do seem to correlate to the change in overall differentials.

I’ve posted a slightly larger spreadsheet at the following google doc https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai99g_yPk-6LdFdfbjFWOXU2NHp1bVIwYjA0ZEMxcUE&hl=en_US. It shows a few other statistics that are interesting to note for the past 6 seasons. One thing it highlights is that in the Stanley Cup year, the Canes’ shot percentage was significantly higher than in any other year. Their Shots For vs. Shots Against differential was only marginally higher, but was actually less than the three subsequent years.

It all definitely gets you thinking about what it is the team can collectively do better to make it to the post season. Thanks for all of the great articles & insights.

by Curt Rask on Sep 13, 2011 12:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Curt, welcome to the blog. Great first comment!

Agree that there are different ways to look at this that would show different results. Thanks for sharing the spreadsheet, interesting stuff.

Editing Manager of Canes Country.com

by Bob Wage on Sep 13, 2011 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Quick reply

I’ll post on the larger topic, but I want to address on problem with stats you’ve posted: Typically, what happens when you develop a good lead? You back off a bit, or the other team forces the issue (or both) and thows everything they can at the net to catch up. Their Shots go up, your SA goes up , and we could therefore be in a deficit in the shots category but win. That’s the problem you’re seeing with the correlation.

Again, often times all those shots thrown on net at the end of a game aren’t necessarily high quality, but they all count. These and other factors skew a lot of the meaning of the SOG stats. They can’t be taken in a vacuum, but as indicators.

by Squeaky83 on Sep 13, 2011 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good job. Its interesting to compare 2011 and 2007: Two 40 win seasons with very different SOG numbers. This is probably due to a stylistic difference between Laviolette and Maurice. But I think it shows that higher or lower SOG can be a product of playing style and strategy and, therefore, is not a good way to compare different teams at a given time, but could maybe be used to compare a team from season to season under the same coach or system.

by Sluv on Sep 13, 2011 5:35 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

great effort

and a hearty Welcome to this part of the Caniac Nation!! and we the fans..Thank You!!

9/11/01 - Never Forget !!
Long Live #63 The Condor
Go Canes & Checkers !!!

by CaniacSteve on Sep 14, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks for the comments all. The numbers are interesting to look at and think about, but of course they should be taken for what they are, just numbers on a sheet. A team with great chemistry, like in 2006, can win regardless of what you might think is the “norm” and can make a stat page look meaningless.

Editing Manager of Canes Country.com

by Bob Wage on Sep 13, 2011 5:39 PM EDT reply actions  

Maurice on Shots

Bob, I remember during the reign of Paul Maurice the 1st (especially in 2002), the Canes would routinely get outshot, and Mo would get beaten up on that. Your buddy Brian and I would watch the Canes pepper Brodeur/Theodore/CuJo with what appeared to be 4 or 5 shots, and yet the ESA counter would inch up maybe one of two.

Your point about scoring chances is true. Case in point was game 2 (I believe) against les Habitants in the 02 playoffs, after the Canes had won in OT. Carolina outshot the Canadiens like 44-15, yet were defeated. If all you do is fire shots that go like magnets into the goalie’s glove, it won’t help.

The real question on SOG is are they consistent. Is there a true definition of what a shot is? What happens at Verizon or Prudential or the ACC might be different than what the shot guy does here.

And remember, it only takes 1 shot to win a 1-0 game.

by jbwhite99 on Sep 13, 2011 8:20 PM EDT reply actions  

Great post

Thanks for tracking down the information and providing the analysis, Bob.

An interesting question that probably can’t be answered is whether teams that have players with wicked shots get more mileage per shot—more chances and more goals. There are some players who seem like threats every time they shoot because the shot is so quick, hard and accurate. Most players are putting the puck in the vicinity of the net and hoping for a rebound. If you had a couple of guys with wicked shots, you might be able to do well with fewer shots. I’m not sure the Canes have anybody that falls into that category. With their faults, Corvo and Babchuk had the most impressive shots on the Canes last year. Among the forwards, I think of Skinner and Staal as having good shots, but mostly as scoring more based on effort and smarts than the shot itself. Same with Ruutu and Jokinen and it was also true of Cole.

 

by curiouscanesfan on Sep 14, 2011 2:46 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Canes Country, a hockey blog, information hub, and community center for fans of the Carolina Hurricanes.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Spacek
Small
Zach Attack
Small
Jeremy Welsh has already made NHL history
Imported_photos_00002_small
David Booth over Erik "Binky" Cole
Small
If you can't see the puck, you aren't going to make the shot.
Wallpaper-carolina_hurricanes54_small
Jordan Staal a Cane?
C360_2010-08-21_06-51-18_small
THE HURRICANES 2012-2013 DRAFT; KEEPNG THE FORWARD MOMENTUM
Pictures_613_small
My Playoff Musings
Small
How would you spend $20 million?
169031_1308985529987_1391040303_31273096_8072617_n_small
Let's Go Checkers!

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Hurricanes on the Clock at Hockey Wilderness
TSN Hockey Play of the Year.  Opportunity to vote for Skinner and to see some amazing NHL plays.
Frederik Andersen will likely stay in Sweden one more year
Alex Semin Free Agent
Places to watch hockey in Charlotte
Highlights of the Carolina Hurricanes 4-1 loss to the Florida Panthers on Saturday, April...
Highlights of the Carolina Hurricanes 2-1 shootout win over the Montreal Canadiens on Thursday,...
Highlights of the Carolina Hurricanes 2-1 win over the Ottawa Senators on Tuesday, April...
Tom Rowe hired to coach Lokomotiv Yaroslavl
Sights and Sounds From the Carolina Hurricanes 2011-12 Season

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Hockey and Local Twitter

More great SB Nation Blogs

Tags


Managing Editor

Cc_shieldjpg_small Bob Wage

Editors

Cc_cory_small Cory Lavalette

95e2a02d-007c-4379-a43d-8331eb2e0d40_small Brian LeBlanc

Contributors

Tuomo_twitter_profile_small Jamie Kellner

Small C-Leaguer

Jeff-eric_small PackPride17

Shutdownline_small MyFriendCorey

Small TimDonelli