A similar post focusing on even-strength events in ALL 3 ZONES can be found here.
A similar post focusing on even-strength events in the offensive-zone can be found here.
A similar post focusing on even-strength events in the defensive-zone can be found here.
Coaches talk about scoring-chances as the determining factor when judging how their teams are performing. This post will compare the Montreal Canadiens team numbers in the neutral-zone that occur during games where they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength, with the numbers they produced when they were out-chanced. The results not only help us determine which neutral-zone events are impacting the game, they also help us determine which events are most important, as well as which events are worth tracking. No correlation between the games' results and the specific n-zone event tracked could indicate that the event is not being tracked correctly, or that the event is not impacting the game.
The team results indicated within this post are simply the accumulated results of all the players involved in the game. All 2013-14 regular-season games were used in this post. An average of 1200 events were tracked per-game.
A list of all the events tracked within my system can be found here.
Why use scoring-chances?
Scoring-chances are tracked independent of anything else that occurs on the ice. Whether they occur as the result of a turnover, a stretch pass, or a successful pass to the slot is not taken into account. As such, we can use scoring-chances as the determining factor when comparing games where a team enjoys even-strength success or failure.
Why not use wins and losses?
Comparing wins and losses would produce too much noise. Save-percentage and powerplay opportunities have a huge impact on a team's ability to win. Whereas a team's ability to out-chance the opposition at even-strength is controlled solely by the skaters on the ice. (goalies' pass and dump-out attempts are also included in the team totals)
NEUTRAL-ZONE RATINGS AND RATIOS AT EVEN-STRENGTH
A team's neutral-zone ratio is a reflection of how many successful puck-possession plays a team contributed in the n-zone for every 1 unsuccessful play. Logically, the higher the ratio the better a team performed. In games were the Habs were able to out-chance the opposition at ES they produced an neutral-zone ratio of 2.74 successful plays for every 1 FAILED play; compared to a ratio of 2.36 when they were out-chanced. The Habs neutral-zone ratio was 14% better during games where they out-chanced the opposition. Their defensive-zone ratio was only 2% better when they out-chanced the other team, while the offensive-zone ratio was 8% better; indicating a strong relationship between n-zone ratios and scoring-chance numbers.
In games where the Canadiens were able to out-chance the opposition at even-strength they engaged in 15.6 more neutral-zone events per-60 than they did when they were out-chanced. In terms of successful and unsuccessful neutral-zone events, the Habs averaged 18 more successful plays, and only 3 fewer unsuccessful plays in the neutral-zone per-60 during games where they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength; indicating that failed neutral-zone events are not impacting scoring-chances as much as successful events.
ES SC+ES SC-
NEUTRAL-ZONE RATIO2.742.36NEUTRAL-ZONE RATIO
ES SC+ES SC-
SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE EVENTS / MP3.022.72SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE EVENTS / MP
UNSUCCESSFUL N-ZONE EVENTS / MP1.101.15UNSUCCESSFUL N-ZONE EVENTS / MP
ES SC+ES SC-
N-ZONE EVENTS / MP4.133.87N-ZONE EVENTS / MP
NEUTRAL-ZONE RATING1.921.57NEUTRAL-ZONE RATING
ES SC+ES SC-
N-ZONE TAKEAWAY TO TURNOVER RATIO2.2481.848N-ZONE TAKEAWAY TO TURNOVER RATIO
A team's neutral-zone rating is a reflection of how many more successful neutral-zone events than unsuccessful plays a team contributed per-minute played . A team's rating is impacted not just by how many more successful events were contributed, it is also impacted by how active a team is per-minute played; the more neutral-zone events, the higher the n-zone rating. Montreal's rating (1.92) was substantially higher in games where they out-chanced the opposition at ES than it was when they were out-chanced (1.57).
As mentioned, ratings combine both how successful a team is in specific zone with how active they are. This logic shows up in the Habs ratings in each of the 3 zones. Their rating in the offensive-zone is 38% higher in games when they out-chance the opposition, while their neutral-zone rating was 18% higher, and their defensive-zone rating is 8% lower when they out-chance the opposition at even-strength. In other words the more "time" (or events) spent in the offensive-zone the more scoring-chances. This applies at a lower rate in the neutral-zone, while having the complete opposite impact in the defensive-zone. This makes sense, and speaks to both the accuracy, and the direct impact of the events being tracked.
Takeaway to turnover ratio reflects how many takeaways a team produced for every 1 turnover. A takeaway is earned whenever a player successfully removes puck-possession from the opposition by way of a stick-check, body-check, or blocked pass. A turnover is earned whenever a player failed to successfully complete a play with possession; these events include passes, dekes, and dump-ins.
The Habs had a substantially higher neutral-zone takeaway to turnover ratio in games where they out-chanced the opposition (2.248) than they did when they were out-chanced (1.848). This indicates that a team's neutral-zone T-to-T ratio is a strong indicator of good or bad play in the neutral-zone. In fact, there is a much larger separation in the Habs neutral-zone takeaway to turnover ratio in relation to scoring-chances for and against than there is in any other zone. Showing us just how important neutral-zone takeaways are in the team's ability to create scoring-chances.
EVEN-STRENGTH PUCK-POSSESSION PLAYS IN THE NEUTRAL-ZONE
A neutral-zone puck-possession event (o-touch) is defined as any attempted play while in possession of the puck in the neutral-zone. These events include passes, dekes, and dump-ins.
In games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition at even-strength their neutral-zone puck-possession success-rate was only 2.7 percentage-points better than it was during games where they were out-chanced. The data indicates that Montreal actually averaged 7.1 more successful puck-possession plays in the neutral-zone per-60 in games where they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength. Interestingly, they also averaged only 5.3 more n-zone attempts with possession. This is an indication that the Habs ability to make successful plays with possession of the puck in the neutral-zone was far more important to creating scoring-chances than the act of just having possession.
Expressed simply, the data indicates that puck-possession success-rate in the neutral-zone is a stronger indication of successful play in the neutral-zone than just the number of events. This fits any logical conclusion, as it shows that neither team is helped by increasing the number of neutral-zone events, while the act of being successful in the neutral-zone will directly lead to more offensive-zone events, and fewer defensive-zone events.
ES SC+ES SC-
SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE O-TOUCHES PER-6091.184.0SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE O-TOUCHES PER-60
ATTEMPTED N-ZONE O-TOUCHES PER-60134.7129.4ATTEMPTED N-ZONE O-TOUCHES PER-60
N-ZONE OTOUCH SUCCESS-RATE67.6%64.9%N-ZONE OTOUCH SUCCESS-RATE
ES SC+ES SC-
EVEN-STRENGTH DEFENSIVE-PLAYS IN THE NEUTRAL-ZONE
A neutral-play is defined as any attempt to remove puck-possession from the opposition in the NEUTRAL-zone. These events included blocked passes, stick-checks, and body-checks.
In games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition at even-strength their neutral-zone defensive success-rate (or trapping success-rate) was actually 6.1 percentage-points higher than it was during games where they were out-chanced.
The data indicates that Montreal averaged 4.6 more successful defensive plays per-60 in games they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength. They also averaged 3.7 more attempted defensive-events.
Expressed simply, the data indicates ( as it did with possession-events) that defensive success-rate in the neutral-zone is a stronger indication of successful play in the neutral-zone than just the number of events. This fits any logical conclusion, as it shows that neither team is helped by increasing the number of neutral-zone events, while the act of being successful defensively in the neutral-zone will directly lead to fewer defensive-zone events.
ES SC+ES SC-
SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE D-TOUCHES PER-6025.420.8SUCCESSFUL N-ZONE D-TOUCHES PER-60
ATTEMPTED N-ZONE D-TOUCHES PER-6038.334.6ATTEMPTED N-ZONE D-TOUCHES PER-60
N-ZONE DTOUCH SUCCESS-RATE66.3%60.2%N-ZONE DTOUCH SUCCESS-RATE
ES SC+ES SC-
SCORING-CHANCES
I communicated this data on scoring-chances in a previous posts, but I though I would include it here for reference purposes.
A scoring-chance occurs anytime a player attempts a shot, or deflects a puck toward the net while positioned in the slot. During games where the Habs were able to produce more even-strength scoring-chances than their opposition they actually produced 18.84 scoring-chances per-60, while giving up 12.15 scoring-chances per-60. In games where they were out-chanced, they had 13.15 chances per-60, while allowing 19.24.
ES SC+ES SC-
SCORING CHANCES FOR PER-6018.813.2SCORING CHANCES FOR PER-60
SCORING CHANCES AGAINST PER-6012.119.2SCORING CHANCES AGAINSTP ER-60
ES SC+ES SC-
In upcoming posts, I will break down the numbers in each event tracked; allowing us to compare the number of d-to-d passes, offensive-zone loose-puck recoveries, dump-ins, etc. that the Habs produced when they were out-chanced with those produced when they out-chanced the opposition. As with my most recent posts, each one will focus on one specific zone.
A list of all the events tracked within my system can be found here.
