Don't Panic!
I just wanted to expand a bit on Jonathan Willis' post about how early-season shooting percentage (both for and against) is not very meaningful. Jonathan notes in another post that if we took the Leafs' performance thus far and replaced their shooting percentage and save percentage with that of the horrendous 1999-00 Atlanta Thrashers, the Leafs' goal differential would be a mere -5 instead of -13. And we know (come on, we do) that the 2009-10 Leafs are better than the worst expansion team that came into the league since players were required to wear helmets. So they're bound to get better.
I wanted to put a slightly more quantitative touch on the claim that shooting percentage and save percentage don't matter over short time frames. My plot shows what's called "regression to the mean" for four variables: shooting percentage over the next 40 games and over a full season, and shots per game over the same time frames. "Regression to the mean" basically tells how much you expect a quantity to bounce back towards average - the higher the value, the more likely it is to go to the average. I've used the last four seasons to determine how strongly each of these variables is related to shooting percentage and shots per game at various points in the season.
The first thing to notice is that past shooting percentage is not a good predictor of shooting percentage over the next 40 games. That's the solid green line. If you play 40 games and shoot 10% below average, that says basically nothing about how you'll shoot as a team over the next 40 games. Bottom line: there's a tremendous amount of luck in shooting percentage. Shots per game (the dotted green line), on the other hand, are a real team characteristic not significantly influenced by luck. If we watch a team for 40 games and they're a good shooting team, odds are very high that they'll remain one.
But that's not to say that bouncing back will help you recover a bad start to the season. We reach 30% regression to the mean in future shooting percentage after 40 games - but that ignores what's happened so far. We reach that same level in full-season shooting percentage (solid blue line) after about 30 games, and, for shots per game, just 13 games into the season. The good news is that Toronto has actually outshot their opponents at even-strength so far this season, which says they've played well but have been extremely unlucky in terms of what's gone into the net. They've also given their opponents 30% more PP time than they've had themselves, which is, even with Brian Burke running the show, unsustainable - the worst figures last season were Anaheim at 22% and Philadelphia at 23%.
So buck up, Leafs fans! Don't start worrying for another seven games!
0 recs |
6 comments
|
Comments
Yes, but...
1) The Leafs’ shots tend to be more perimeter-oriented than those of their opponents (not quantified, just observation based)
2) Doesn’t this assume moderately talented net-minding? Hope is still held out that Gustavsson can provide that (if not better), but Toskala has shown over and again that he cannot with any level of consistency.
by ofsticksandbats on Oct 15, 2009 4:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Leafs shots this year? Or over a period of years?
It makes no assumptions about net-minding. As Jonathan pointed out, even the worst NHL goaltender on the worst team in years was much, much better than this.
by Hawerchuk on Oct 15, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joey MacDonald posted a .905 SV% for the Islanders last year. He’s the Leafs’ #3 goaltender, and that number is miles better than the one I used from the Thrashers.
A posse ad esse.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and OilersNation.
by Jonathan Willis on Oct 16, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you do this for
Save percentage and GAA?
A lot of Hawks fans are really getting on Huet for his poor start. If there was some statistical analysis to show them, it’d talk a lot of people off the ledge if there was a chance that he’d regress to the mean.
twitter.com/kaner88
by Original Six on Oct 15, 2009 4:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Over a large number of teams, save percentage behaves the same way as shooting percentage. So you can read the chart as SPCT or SVPCT.
I’ll try to run GAA when I get a chance – it is somewhat luck-driven – it falls in between SVPCT and Shots/60.
by Hawerchuk on Oct 15, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I ran the numbers. GAA is much closer to SPCT in terms of its luck component. If we look at the next 40 games, it regresses 70% to the mean after 10 games vs 80% for SPCT. And for full year results, it tracks SPCT very closely.
If you want to know how good a goalie is, look at his performance over the last 2-4 seasons. Unless you know something about him (ie – injury), his save percentage will regress back to his multi-year average. And goals-against-average will do the same. Chicago has outshot opponents 37-20 at 5-on-5 – second-best in the league. That means they’re a good team and they’ll outscore their opponents going forward.
by Hawerchuk on Oct 16, 2009 2:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 








