Shooting Percentage by Game State
by Hawerchuk on Oct 29, 2009 8:00 AM EDT
7 comments
Yesterday, I discussed how expected shooting percentage (aka shot quality) varies when teams have the lead. Today I want to look at how even-strength shooting characteristics vary both when teams are leading and trailing. First, raw shot totals since the lockout:
| Margin | Leading | Trailing | Trail/Lead |
| 1 | 51080 | 58110 | +13.8% |
| 2 | 21950 | 26980 | +22.9% |
| 3 | 8914 | 11307 | +26.8% |
We can see that the further a team gets behind, the more they out-shoot their opponents. This shouldn't be surprising - there's limited downside to giving up an additional goal when you're already down, so you can go all out on the attack. A team with the lead is content to sit on it.
Actual shooting percentage:
| Shot % | Actual | Relative to Tied |
| +3 | 7.07 | +28.2% |
| +2 | 7.80 | +41.4% |
| +1 | 6.71 | +21.8% |
| Tied | 5.51 | |
| -1 | 6.11 | +10.9% |
| -2 | 6.22 | +12.9% |
| -3 | 6.33 | +14.9% |
This version of shooting percentage includes goals, shots on goal and missed shots. We can see that shooting percentage increases as teams have bigger and bigger leads, but doesn't change much as they fall further behind - no amount of offensive pressing can really generate that many more scoring chances.
In terms of shot quality, we see roughly the same effect - expected shooting percentage increases as a team gets in the lead, but stays essentially constant as it falls further behind:
| Expected Shot % | Expected | Relative to Tied |
| +3 | 6.25 | +13.3% |
| +2 | 6.17 | +12.0% |
| +1 | 6.08 | +10.2% |
| Tied | 5.84 | |
| -1 | 5.96 | +8.2% |
| -2 | 5.97 | +8.3% |
| -3 | 5.95 | +7.9% |
After a lot of database machinations, I'm convinced I have these numbers right. If anyone has any conflicting data, please let me know!
0 recs |
7 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
awesome
The second chart – that’s ES only, right? Is it all games post-lockout? Does it include empty netters?
by sunnymehta.com on Oct 29, 2009 12:38 PM EDT reply actions
Again, great work here.
However, in your first chart, I believe that the values in the column titled ‘Margin’ are reversed. It seems that it should read ‘1-2-3’ rather than ‘3-2-1’ (as it would make sense if more shots were taken with a goal margin of 1 compared to goal margins of 2 or 3).
Also, I find it interesting that the trailing team also experiences an increase in shooting percentage, albeit less than the increase experienced by the leading team. This suggests that teams play more conservatively when the score is tied.
Good catch on the table. Fixed now.
I agree that teams probably play more conservatively at even-strength when the game is tied. But I imagine if I included PP shooting in this, we’d see a different effect. Or am I wrong in thinking that a trailing team is less likely to get a PP?
I would expect that more penalties would be called on both a leading and a trailing team than when teams are tied. If the number of chances are increasing on both sides, it seems to me that the number of times a player will decide it’s worth taking a penalty to stop a chance would also increase.
by Scott Reynolds on Oct 30, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah that second chart is awesome. i’m not sure what to make about the fact that everyone’s shooting percentage is lowest when the game is tied. i wonder how much the OT/SO bs is wrapped up in there. i.e. – i wonder if a ton of that suppressed Sh% when game is tied is due to teams being content (at some point in the third period) to let a tie game go to overtime.
by sunnymehta.com on Oct 29, 2009 10:51 PM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
