Only way I can think of is distance from net. Closer shots are more likely to be dangerous shots.

It's not accurate on a case by case basis, but over the course of hundreds/thousands of shots, it paints a picture.
- Schenn-Sational!

Let's just say I've heard coaches insist "put the puck on net, good things will happen", more than "hey, you should have made that extra pass to get the tap-in chance."

We've seen shots from center ice can turn a PO series, backhand flips by guys with their backs turned 30-ft out go in high cheese (Giroux), and thousands of point shots/off-angle shots create second chance opps.

Pouring shots on net ain't easy, even from distance, and volume creates more quality chances. It's not a coincidence that the list of most shots on net also coincides with the most talented/productive players.

- BiggE

It's been beaten to death 3 ways from Sunday. I'm not a fan of the signing at all, but last year was somewhat of a small sample. Let's see how he does this year.
With no Timonen most likely, he's going to have to take on a bigger role.

Let's just say I've heard coaches insist "put the puck on net, good things will happen", more than "hey, you should have made that extra pass to get the tap-in chance."

We've seen shots from center ice can turn a PO series, shots by guys with their backs turned 30-ft out go in high cheese (Giroux), and thousands of point shots/off-angle shots create second chance opps.

Pouring shots on net ain't easy, even from distance, and volume creates more quality chances. It's not a coincidence that the list of most shots on net also coincides with the most talented/productive players.
- Tomahawk

You generally need some skills just to get good opportunities . . . or at least play on a line with someone who has them.

Nothing in hockey makes me more nuts than skill players looking for the perfect play, dallying on the perimeter and then not even making a play at the net let alone a shot on goal before giving up the puck.

Let's just say I've heard coaches insist "put the puck on net, good things will happen", more than "hey, you should have made that extra pass to get the tap-in chance."

We've seen shots from center ice can turn a PO series, shots by guys with their backs turned 30-ft out go in high cheese (Giroux), and thousands of point shots/off-angle shots create second chance opps.

Pouring shots on net ain't easy, even from distance, and volume creates more quality chances. It's not a coincidence that the list of most shots on net also coincides with the most talented/productive players.
- Tomahawk

Yea, I'm not saying you should only shoot from up close... I'm just saying up-close shots tend to be more dangerous, because the goalie has less time to react, and they often come off rebounds, which means the goalie may not be in the ideal position to stop another puck.

If you've got a reasonable opportunity, you shoot.

And while you've got guys like Giroux and Kessel who are dangerous no matter where they're shooting from, most NHLers aren't anywhere near that skill level.

Sirius XM NHL Network Radio replayed Ron Hextall's interview from yesterday again this morning. Here are some notes from the interview:

On the salary cap situation- "We do have a bit of a salary cap dilemma, but we also have a good team."

On Ghost and where he will play this year- "He (meaning Ghost) will dictate that." Hextall when on to reiterate that he doesn't believe in rushing young players, especially on defense.

On the Hartnell trade- He indicated their were several "little pieces" to this. 1) The term on Hartnell's contract. Voracek, Schenn, and Couturier will all need to be extended before Hartnell's deal is up and he would like the financial flexibility to keep the young guys long term, 2) Umberger has a little more skating speed than does Hartnell, and 3) Umberger is versatile and can play all three forward positions. He indicated that he was not looking to move Hartnell, but Columbus expressed serious interest and he felt like it was a good move for the Flyers team.

I think there are players you take the picks and players you do not. Do you think Buffalo wished they had taken the picks when Edmonton offer sheeted Vanek?

Generally, stud D-men and PPG centers you keep. Wingers can be replaced the easiest.
- mickel25

Aside from Shea Weber, I don't believe any player has ever been offer sheeted where the 4 1st rounders are not preferable.

Of course, the NHL today is much more of a young players' game than it was even 10 years ago. More and more 18-20 year olds are becoming superstars, where before it was the mid-20s guys who got all of the top line minutes. Also, drafting is a much more inexact art (yet still inexact, on the whole) than it was, and you have more kids NHL-ready now. So I can understand the mindset to match back then.

You generally need some skills just to get good opportunities . . . or at least play on a line with someone who has them.

Nothing in hockey makes me more nuts than skill players looking for the perfect play, dallying on the perimeter and then not even making a play at the net let alone a shot on goal before giving up the puck.
- fls13

Yeah, just getting a shot through these days is tough as hell, especially from distance the way teams layer up and play the lanes. One of the few tactics to beat that is to let the puck do the work by finding a way to get shots through, and hope for a rebound and pounce w/ numbers.

We're really going to miss Kimmo for that reason:
http://www.extraskater.co...os=D&sort=on_pct&team=phi

Next topic: Andrew MacDonald.
- PLindbergh31

Shot volume vs shot quality is an issue in dealing with save %. Even delving into ES save% and other numbers don't fully cover the issue.
- Jsaquella

I wonder if a scoring chance resulting in a shot on goal sv% could be calculated. That would be an interesting stat to see. But that stat would neglect to include "leaky goals".

- eichiefs9

(SOG for + Blocked Shots + Missed Shots + Shots Blocked + TOI + Hits + Takeaways) - (SOG against + Missed Shots Against + Turnovers) + (Zone Entries - Failed Zone Entries) + (Number of Letters in last name - number of letters in first name)*500.

The jmatchett383 relative rating.

Yea, I'm not saying you should only shoot from up close... I'm just saying up-close shots tend to be more dangerous, because the goalie has less time to react, and they often come off rebounds, which means the goalie may not be in the ideal position to stop another puck.

If you've got a reasonable opportunity, you shoot.

And while you've got guys like Giroux and Kessel who are dangerous no matter where they're shooting from, most NHLers aren't anywhere near that skill level.
- Schenn-Sational!

Shooting from in close also means less angle and more sticks/bodies to fight through. It's a perpetual trade-off.

You've gotta take the shot you're given, and hope your shot manufactures a chance. That's why it's funny to hear shot quality used as a argument against shot metrics... while traditionalist coaches are begging their teams to shoot the damned puck from everywhere to begin with, because it works.

(SOG for + Blocked Shots + Missed Shots + Shots Blocked + TOI + Hits + Takeaways) - (SOG against + Missed Shots Against + Turnovers) + (Zone Entries - Failed Zone Entries) + (Number of Letters in last name - number of letters in first name)*500.

The jmatchett383 relative rating.
- jmatchett383

Just figured out Amac's jmatchett383 rel. It's not pretty. Though it could be due to the fact that the quantity of letters in his last name is greater than his first name.

- eichiefs9

It's a great thing his one elite measurable shot blocking will probably lead to some sort of broken bone.

It's a great thing his one elite measurable shot blocking will probably lead to some sort of broken bone.
- PLindbergh31

He actually blocks most of his shots with his stick.

Just figured out Amac's jmatchett383 rel. It's not pretty. Though it could be due to the fact that the quantity of letters in his last name is greater than his first name.
- TobyFlenderson

That would be a positive, as those are added to the rating.

Prediction time: how many total ways from Sunday will we beat the AMac thing before the season starts?

Powe will, hopefully, also be a good mentor for some of the kids. The Phantoms' version of Crash Davis.

Really enjoyed the meat of the blog, too. I would imagine that facing more shots, routine or not, would help keep a goalie's head in the game. I'm curious to hear Hammarby's thoughts on this (after blowing a gasket due to CSP's inclusion, of course).
- tangent_man

no gasket blown. i agree with the general idea - more shots; more in the game. definitely true for me. BUT it can work against you though. you can get a ton of shots - of the very difficult variety because your team just (frank)ing sucks defensively and you get scored on because you have zero chance to make the save and then you get angry at your team, doubt your own ability, etc...it's a very quick downward shame spiral. it's at that point you can give up a softy because you're head is not in the game. it's everywhere else.

goalie stats are unreliable because they don't paint the full picture, as it's been noted AND for the other reason that boucher mentioned - shot count. it's happened to me and every other goalie who's ever played. i KNOW i've made X number of saves and the sheet after the game doesn't even come close. the numbers get recorded and that's it. tough poop.

That would be a positive, as those are added to the rating.
- jmatchett383

Advanced stats are hard

Prediction time: how many total ways from Sunday will we beat the AMac thing before the season starts?
- BulliesPhan87

47

Yeah, I'll take a for sure superstar over picks. If those 4 picks all fall between 20-30, odds are you will end up with 1 journeyman, 2 average NHL players and one very good, but not Superstar level player. I'd rather have the Crosby, Toews, Giroux, Doughty, etc...
- BiggE

Plus, if a team is gaining Crosby, they will likely be getting to the playoffs every year, so the likelihood of all picks being in the 20-30 range is high.

You can definitely find studs in that area, but it's not easy. Your description of the return on those 4 picks is fairly accurate.

Advanced stats are hard
- TobyFlenderson

Blue + Red = 7.

47
- jmatchett383

Hmm, there's probably a lot of noise in that data. How about 5v5 WaySunday Rel%?

Plus, if a team is gaining Crosby, they will likely be getting to the playoffs every year, so the likelihood of all picks being in the 20-30 range is high.

You can definitely find studs in that area, but it's not easy. Your description of the return on those 4 picks is fairly accurate.
- PhillySportsGuy

I don't know if I'd do it for Giroux even, to be honest. I'd be on the fence. He's on the next level, a tier II superstar, if you know what I mean (guys like Ovechkin, Pietrangelo, and Benn fall in here). One things is for certain: you'll be definitely be saving cap space in the near term by taking the 4 picks.

Blue + Red = 7.
- jmatchett383

Shooting from in close also means less angle and more sticks/bodies to fight through. It's a perpetual trade-off.

You've gotta take the shot you're given, and hope your shot manufactures a chance. That's why it's funny to hear shot quality used as a argument against shot metrics... while traditionalist coaches are begging their teams to shoot the damned puck from everywhere to begin with, because it works.
- Tomahawk

not necessarily. i face a very high number of shots from inside the bottom of the circle with nobody else inside of my zip code. granted, i'm not in the nhl. just sayin'.