Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I'll answer all three of you in one post.
I think it's possible to have good possession numbers and not be a great hockey team. But I'm not just pointing at shooting attempts and calling it a day.
Teams that have good shot metrics but bad scoring chance splits are doing exactly what you guys are talking about; they're running up totals.
Teams with terrible shot attempts but great scoring chance splits are not wasting their energy shooting but running up good chances.
The Flames are a team that have a great shot metrics but identically ranked scoring chance splits which says to me the stat = stat = the eye test. You guys don't have to agree with me ... all good.
Teams that have great shot metrics but don't back it up in scoring chances.
Chicago (3rd/21st)
Nashville (7th/18th)
Pittsburgh (5/15)
Los Angeles 16/25)
Boston (1/9)
Teams with splits the other way (great scoring chances poor shot attempts)
Minnesota (30th/3rd)
Rangers (31/16)
Montreal (15/2)
New Jersey (20/8)
Winnipeg (13/6)
Dallas (8/1)
Toronto (17/11)
Calgary is flat at (4/4)
|
I see two lists with little correlation to success.
And I go back to what I have said many times - because they let the D set up, the Flames' high danger chances tend to be more rushed and of a lower quality. Not always, of course. But the Ranger game was a good example. The Flames had tonnes of in close chances, but the Rangers chances were odd man rushes and guys in alone.
Maybe it's luck (shooting percentage), maybe it's style of play. In reality, it is probably both.
But the bottom line is results. And improving possession numbers does not lead to results.