Game 45: Ottawa Senators vs Toronto Maple Leafs 7:00 SNET-O

[Kin]

Yep for those out there that are new to the game, its a real stat.  When I coached it was a stat we looked to see why we might not be scoring as many goals as we should be especially if we outshot teams and still lost.  As an example, if you took 10 shots and scored 10 goals, your scoring % would be 100%.  But what about shots that miss the net by three feet? Those aren't counted in the Shooting Percentage.  Check out the NHL website, this stat is in the summary for all team statistics.  Mmmmm, wonder why teams would want to track that stat?????

Leaving aside that none of that is true, I'm still waiting to hear why that is a more important measurement of a team's ability to score goals than the number of goals they've scored.

 

[bbt]

You might want to spend a little more time on the NHL site....logon, go to main page, go to STATS, click on Team and its the column labeled Sc 1%.  Leafs take a ton of shots, usually outshoot their opponents, usually have the edge in offensive zone play and for last 5 games have averaged 2 goals per game. One might want to try to figure out why their scoring percentage is so low.  Or just blame it on the goaltending for letting a bad goal in and on to the next game, opps another bad goal let in by the goaltender and we lose.   

 

[bustaheims]

You might want to spend a little more time on the NHL site....logon, go to main page, go to STATS, click on Team and its the column labeled Sc 1%.  Leafs take a ton of shots, usually outshoot their opponents, usually have the edge in offensive zone play and for last 5 games have averaged 2 goals per game. One might want to try to figure out why their scoring percentage is so low.  Or just blame it on the goaltending for letting a bad goal in and on to the next game, opps another bad goal let in by the goaltender and we lose. 

You might want to spend a little more time looking there, because Sc 1% represents "Winning percentage when scoring 1st."

 

[Kin]

You might want to spend a little more time on the NHL site....logon, go to main page, go to STATS, click on Team and its the column labeled Sc 1%.

That column is actually the respective teams' winning percentage after scoring first. It says as much if you hover over it. Also, the Leafs rank 23rd in that category, not 22nd.

I mean, think about it, the Rangers are at the head of that category at .913. If that stat was what you thought it was wouldn't it mean that the Rangers were scoring 91.3% of the time? Whenever they directed a puck towards the net? They'd be scoring 30 goals a game if that were true.

 

[bustaheims]

Basically, what we're getting at bbt, in the immortal words of Ross Gellar: You could not be more wrong. You could try, but you would not be successful.

 

[bustaheims]

That column is actually the respective teams' winning percentage after scoring first. It says as much if you hover over it. Also, the Leafs rank 23rd in that category, not 22nd.

I mean, think about it, the Rangers are at the head of that category at .913. If that stat was what you thought it was wouldn't it mean that the Rangers were scoring 91.3% of the time? Whenever they directed a puck towards the net? They'd be scoring 30 goals a game if that were true.

Or, he could believe that it actually represent 0.913%, in which case, the Rangers, with the best "scoring percentage" in the league, would be averaging less than one goal per 100 shots they direct towards the net.

 

[Kin]

Or, he could believe that it actually represent 0.913%, in which case, the Rangers, with the best "scoring percentage" in the league, would be averaging less than one goal per 100 shots they direct towards the net.

I guess. But for that to be true then the Rangers, who score 2.80 goals per game, would have to be taking roughly 300 shots a game.

 

[bustaheims]

I guess. But for that to be true then the Rangers, who score 2.80 goals per game, would have to be taking roughly 300 shots a game.

Oh, I'm not saying it's any less ridiculous. In fact, it may be even more ridiculous.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Leafs absolutely need a physical centre.... maybe not a Getzlaf, but one they can throw in between Kessel and Lupul for a few shifts to push back on some of the liberties being taken against
them.
 

As the season wears on, teams will eventually find that the way to stop the Leafs is to put as much pressure on their top forward line (Kessel & Lupul, namely), and thus provide an (im)proper distraction for them to get the job done (in stopping K & L). 

As long as the Leafs do not have a balanced attack, and have to keep depending on their two top scorers for the important goals, the opposition will soon stymie that with their own brand of play.

Let's hope we don't see an escalation of the above, but, the team definitely needs a top forward who can 'take care of things' and score as well.  No doubt this is on Burke's shopping list.  Whether it happens for this season,  or in the off-season, is the question. 

 

[Bullfrog]

As the season wears on, teams will eventually find that the way to stop the Leafs is to put as much pressure on their top forward line (Kessel & Lupul, namely), and thus provide an (im)proper distraction for them to get the job done (in stopping K & L). 

Huh?

 

[hockeyfan1]

As the season wears on, teams will eventually find that the way to stop the Leafs is to put as much pressure on their top forward line (Kessel & Lupul, namely), and thus provide an (im)proper distraction for them to get the job done (in stopping K & L). 

Huh?

Sorry, my bad.  What I meant is that teams will provide a distraction to Kessel & Lupul, if one wants to call it that (ex. what Ottawa did in the last game) in order for them (the opposition) to get the job ( of distracting K & L) done.