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 games where they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength, with the numbers they produced during games where they were out-chanced. The results not only help us determine which on-ice 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 event tracked would 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 are 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)
SCORING-CHANCES
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-6018.8413.15SCORING CHANCES FOR PER-60
SCORING CHANCES AGAINST PER-6012.1519.24SCORING CHANCES AGAINST PER-60
ES SC+ES SC-
RATINGS AND RATIOS AT EVEN-STRENGTH (ALL 3 ZONES)
A team's ratio is a reflection of how many successful puck-possession plays a team contributed 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 a ratio of 2.39, compared to a ratio of 2.28 when they were out-chanced.
Looking at the breakdown of how many successful events the Habs produced when they out-chanced the opposition and how many they produced when they were out-chanced, we see that the number of unsuccessful (or failed) events is similar regardless of the outcome; it is the number of successful events that increased when the Habs out-chanced the opposition. This aspect is also reflected in the total number of events, as the Habs were more active (events-wise) during games where they out-chanced the opposition.
ES SC+ES SC-
RATIO2.392.28RATIO
ES SC+ES SC-
SUCCESSFUL EVENTS /MIN14.7714.22SUCCESSFUL EVENTS /MIN
UNSUCCESSFUL EVENTS /MIN6.186.24UNSUCCESSFUL EVENTS /MIN
ES SC+ES SC-
TOTAL EVENTS/ MIN20.9520.46TOTAL EVENTS/ MIN
RATING 8.587.98RATING
OVERALL TAKEAWAY TO TURNOVER RATIO1.9812.069OVERALL TAKEAWAY TO TURNOVER RATIO
A team's rating is a reflection of how many more successful events a team contributed per-minute played than unsuccessful plays. A team's rating is impacted not just by how many more successful events contributed, it is also impacted by how active a team is per-minute played; the more events, the higher the rating. Montreal's rating (8.58) was substantially higher in games where they out-chanced the opposition at ES than it was when they were out-chanced (7.98).
Expressed more simply, in games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition they averaged 514.8 more successful plays than failed plays per-60. When they were out-chanced they averaged 478.8 more successful plays per-60; a difference of 36 successful events over 60 minutes.
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, blocked pass, or blocked shot. A turnover is earned whenever a player failed to successfully complete a play with possession; these events include passes, dekes, shots, dump-outs, and dump-ins.
The Habs actually had a higher takeaway to turnover ratio in games when they were out-chanced by the opposition (2.069) than they did when they out-chanced the other team (1.981). This is simply the result of having possession more often during games when they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength than they did in games where they were out-chanced. Having the puck more often meant there were less opportunities to create turnovers; impacting the ratio directly.
Another contributing factor is where the events took place. In games where the Habs had more ES scoring-chances than the opposition, Montreal averaged nearly one more offensive-zone event per-minute than they did when they were out-chanced. Similarly, they averaged 1 fewer defensive-zone events per-minute. In addition, the Habs averaged 1 more attempted defensive-play (attempt to remove-possession) in the defensive-zone per-minute than they did in the offensive-zone. Maintaining the logic that team's are forced to attempt far fewer takeaways in the offensive-zone than they are in the defensive-zone, we can see why the T-to-T ratio is lower in games when the Habs enjoyed scoring-chance success.
In other words, when the Habs created more scoring chances, they had possession more often; when the Habs had possession more often, they spent more time in the offensive-zone; when the Habs spent more time in the offensive-zone, there were less opportunities to create takeaways.
EVEN-STRENGTH PUCK-POSSESSION PLAYS (O-TOUCHES IN ALL 3 ZONES)
A puck-possession, event (o-touch) is defined as any attempted play while in possession of the puck. These events include passes, dekes, dump-ins, dump-outs, and shots.
In games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition at even-strength their puck-possession success-rate was only marginally-better than it was during games where they were out-chanced. It was actually the event totals that increased in games where the Habs enjoyed more scoring-chances. The data indicates that Montreal averaged 32.5 more successful puck-possession plays per-60 in games they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength. They also averaged 43.3 more attempts with possession. This is a logical indication that the Habs had possession more often during games where they out-chanced the opposition than they did when they were out-chanced. It is also a clear nod to the importance of possession, and by extension the impact of loose-puck recoveries; which will be touched upon in a future post.
ES SC+ES SC-
ES SUCCESSFUL O-TOUCHES PER-60430.6398.1ES SUCCESSFUL O-TOUCHES PER-60
ES ATTEMPTED O-TOUCHES PER-60663.9620.6ES ATTEMPTED O-TOUCHES PER-60
ES O-TOUCH SUCCESS-RATE64.9%64.2%ES O-TOUCH SUCCESS-RATE
ES SC+ES SC-
EVEN-STRENGTH DEFENSIVE-PLAYS (D-TOUCHES IN ALL 3 ZONES)
A defensive-play is defined as any attempt to remove puck-possession from the opposition. These events included blocked shots, blocked passes, stick-checks, and body-checks.
In games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition at even-strength their defensive success-rate was 1.5 percentage-points better than it was during games where they were out-chanced. Similarly to, but in contrast of puck-possession plays, it was actually the event totals that decreased in games where the Habs enjoyed more scoring-chances. The data indicates that Montreal averaged 9 fewer successful defensive plays per-60 in games they out-chanced the opposition at even-strength. They also averaged 20.6 fewer attempted defensive-events. This is a logical indication that the Habs had possession more often during games where they out-chanced the opposition than they did when they were out-chanced; allowing them simply to defend less-often.
ES SC+ES SC-
ES SUCCESSFUL D-TOUCHES PER-60137.3146.3ES SUCCESSFUL D-TOUCHES PER-60
ES ATTEMPTED D-TOUCHES PER-60219.0239.6ES ATTEMPTED D-TOUCHES PR-60
ES D-TOUCH SUCCESS-RATE62.7%61.1%OVERALL D-TOUCH SUCCESS-RATE
ES SC+ES SC-
UPCOMING POSTS
In upcoming posts I will break down the rating, ratios o-touches and d-touches by zone (offensive/defensive/neutral). Comparing those numbers in games where the Habs out-chanced the opposition with those produced when they were out-chanced. Following those 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.
A list of all the events tracked within my system can be found here.
