Quote:
Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy
It doesn't matter if you disagree or not.
It isn't an opinion, it's a fact.
The league average for save percentage drops as shots move from low danger, to medium danger, to high danger.
Like I said, not all low danger shots are equal. Not all medium danger shots are equal. Not all high danger shots are equal.
But on average, the closer to the net the shot happens the better chance it's results in a goal.
2016/17
League average High danger sv% - 81.17%
League average Med danger sv% - 92.50%
League average Low danger sv% - 97.91%
...and it's like that every year.
|
The whole purpose of this thread is shot quality and a high quality one timer shot that makes it to the net through traffic in the low danger zone is going to have just as good of a chance of going in as a one timer in the high danger zone.
In addition, how many goals come from rebounds that originated outside of the high danger zone but then are clocked as a high danger zone goal when it was tapped in?
I understand what you are saying but I think the whole which zone you are in is completely useless as there are dozens of unaccounted for variables. I feel there were a ton of games where the flames had more high danger scoring chances than the team they lost to and using the save % within a scoring zone is not a true reflection on the entire play.