Short-handed goals against and power play efficiency
The Tampa Bay Lightning had one of the stronger power play units in the National Hockey League during the 2010-11 season, and best overall in the Eastern Conference to boot. People feared Steven Stamkos and his booming snap shot. 11 players on the roster all had goals with the man advantage. When the unit was doing as it should, it was outright menacing.
And when it turned the puck over during a power play, it could be an inept monstrosity.
The Bolts power play allowed 16 short-handed goals to opponents last season, the most in the NHL. Part of the blame might be attributed to lackluster goaltending for the first half of the season, but any time you repeatedly hang a goalie out to dry in that situation - be it Mike Smith, Dan Ellis, Dwayne Roloson, or even a Tim Thomas, Ryan Miller, Pekka Rinne or other noteworthy netminders from around the league -- they're not always going to stop a breakaway or an odd-man rush. It's just the law of averages.
Yet, with these 16 goals allowed on the power play, the Bolts were still ranked sixth in the NHL, and #1 overall in their Conference, with a 20.5% power play conversion rate.
Does that seem odd to anyone else? The fact the Lightning went 69 for 336 - and yet they allowed 16 goals-against on that otherwise potent unit? There's an unfairness to the fact that rankings were not effected by such a grand inefficiency of allowing so many short-handed goals against (SHGA). In comparison, the Montreal Canadiens - the #2 power play in the East last season - went 57-for-290 on the power play (a 19.7% conversion rate). They allowed 6 short-handed goals, however. If you subtract SHGA from both teams total power play goals, the Canadiens unit trumps Tampa with a 17.6% efficiency to 15.8%.
That's just one team to compare to. Here's how all 30 NHL teams would stack up if SHGA were factored against the base power play conversion rate. Note, it'd be possible to factor in shots-allowed during the power play, but I opted to keep it simple in adjusting power-play percentage by just subtracting power play goals for every SHGA allowed:
|
PP% |
ADJ PPG |
ADJ PP% |
ADJ RANK |
POS CHANGE |
||||||||||||||||||
|
1-30 of 30 results. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1 |
Vancouver |
82 |
296 |
72 |
24.3 |
2 |
70 |
23.6 |
1 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
2 |
San Jose |
82 |
289 |
68 |
23.5 |
7 |
61 |
21.8 |
2 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
3 |
Anaheim |
82 |
285 |
67 |
23.5 |
7 |
60 |
21.1 |
4 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
4 |
Chicago |
82 |
277 |
64 |
23.1 |
4 |
60 |
21.7 |
3 |
1 |
||||||||||||
|
5 |
Detroit |
82 |
301 |
67 |
22.3 |
7 |
60 |
19.9 |
5 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
6 |
Tampa Bay |
82 |
336 |
69 |
20.5 |
16 |
53 |
15.8 |
9 |
-3 |
||||||||||||
|
7 |
Montreal |
82 |
290 |
57 |
19.7 |
6 |
51 |
17.6 |
7 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
8 |
Calgary |
82 |
318 |
62 |
19.5 |
9 |
53 |
16.6 |
8 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
9 |
Buffalo |
82 |
279 |
54 |
19.4 |
13 |
41 |
14.7 |
16 |
-7 |
||||||||||||
|
10 |
St. Louis |
82 |
279 |
52 |
18.6 |
1 |
51 |
18.3 |
6 |
4 |
||||||||||||
|
11 |
Colorado |
82 |
265 |
49 |
18.5 |
11 |
38 |
14.3 |
18 |
-7 |
||||||||||||
|
12 |
Atlanta* |
82 |
289 |
53 |
18.3 |
10 |
43 |
14.9 |
13 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
13 |
Minnesota |
82 |
292 |
53 |
18.2 |
7 |
46 |
15.8 |
10 |
3 |
||||||||||||
|
14 |
Dallas |
82 |
306 |
55 |
18 |
15 |
40 |
13.1 |
27 |
-13 |
||||||||||||
|
15 |
Ottawa |
82 |
257 |
45 |
17.5 |
4 |
41 |
16 |
9 |
6 |
||||||||||||
|
16 |
Washington |
82 |
263 |
46 |
17.5 |
5 |
41 |
15.6 |
11 |
5 |
||||||||||||
|
17 |
NY Islanders |
82 |
302 |
52 |
17.2 |
7 |
45 |
14.9 |
14 |
3 |
||||||||||||
|
18 |
NY Rangers |
82 |
290 |
49 |
16.9 |
5 |
44 |
15.2 |
12 |
7 |
||||||||||||
|
19 |
Philadelphia |
82 |
295 |
49 |
16.6 |
5 |
44 |
14.9 |
15 |
4 |
||||||||||||
|
20 |
Boston |
82 |
265 |
43 |
16.2 |
5 |
38 |
14.3 |
19 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
21 |
Los Angeles |
82 |
292 |
47 |
16.1 |
6 |
41 |
14 |
21 |
0 |
||||||||||||
|
22 |
Toronto |
82 |
326 |
52 |
16 |
8 |
44 |
13.5 |
26 |
-4 |
||||||||||||
|
23 |
Phoenix |
82 |
289 |
46 |
15.9 |
6 |
40 |
13.8 |
22 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
24 |
Carolina |
82 |
346 |
55 |
15.9 |
6 |
49 |
14.2 |
20 |
4 |
||||||||||||
|
25 |
Pittsburgh |
82 |
311 |
49 |
15.8 |
6 |
43 |
13.8 |
23 |
2 |
||||||||||||
|
26 |
Nashville |
82 |
269 |
41 |
15.2 |
2 |
39 |
14.5 |
17 |
9 |
||||||||||||
|
27 |
Edmonton |
82 |
304 |
44 |
14.5 |
2 |
42 |
13.8 |
24 |
3 |
||||||||||||
|
28 |
New Jersey |
82 |
237 |
34 |
14.4 |
8 |
26 |
11 |
29 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
29 |
Columbus |
82 |
301 |
42 |
14 |
11 |
31 |
10.1 |
30 |
-1 |
||||||||||||
|
30 |
Florida |
82 |
267 |
35 |
13.1 |
5 |
30 |
11.2 |
28 |
2 |
||||||||||||
For the most part, the league rankings stayed rather similar with some noteworthy exceptions. Vancouver's efficient power play remained #1 overall, and while the Florida Panthers improved it's ranking, it wasn't so much that you'd change perception of their underwhelming man advantage play.
There were a few big swings. Dallas, which gave up the second most short-handed goals last season, with 15, suffered most in these adjusted rankings. They fell 13 spots. The Nashville Predators, with an underwhelming power play but an effective and efficient defense, moved up 9 spots to 17th in the league.
With their SHGA subtracted from their conversion rate, the Lightning still were in a tie for 9th in the league. That is a testament of the potency the team had while playing a man-up last season. It also makes one wonder if Guy Boucher and company can find a cure for defensive woes while playing with the man advantage, and turn a rather good power play into something fantastic.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Question(s)
Which guys were on both the PP and the PK? There seems a bit of defensive irresponsibility there. How much of that was personnel issues and how much was the coaching system, I wonder? And did the SHGA situation get better after Roli got here? Boucher would have had to adjust his system to the strengths and weaknesses of the players he had, to some extent at least. What personnel changes do y’all think we’ll see on the PP unit this year and what effect might those have?
(Nashville’s jump doesn’t surprise me at all given the disparity between the Preds offense and defense. The Preds PK was ranked pretty high, if I recall correctly, and Ryan Suter anchors the power play.)
"I'm a firm believer that in life, if you're happy then happy things will happen for you."--Bernie Parent
Part Predator, part Lightning.
Tie for 9th still isn't terrible
but it’s not the strength we expect from the power play. Hopefully this is addressed in the offseason.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Aug 29, 2011 12:14 PM EDT reply actions
Top 10 is admirable
I would like to see the instances in which the Bolts gave up a SHG. My guess is it’s not systemic, like consistently bad positioning, given the coaching staff and their propencity to fix errors.
What’s interesting to me is to note the Bolts were second to last in SHGA/PP. Only Dallas (.0490 SHG/PP) gave up more than the Bolts (.0476 SHG/PP), and Buffalo was slightly better (.0465 SHG/PP). Only Colorado was the only team not already listed to have given up more than .035 SHG/PP (.0415 SHG/PP).
Could some of this be explained by Boucher’s addition of another forward on the blueline? Perhaps, but at the very least, I think this topic could be very interesting to examine.
"The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect"
- Smith in Orwell's 1984
That would be very difficult to do (SHG situations) without studying a lot of tape. Talk about time consuming. I think only a true stats head would delve into that kind of territory. :o)
Counting down the days until players report to training camp. Is it September yet?
Raw Charge, an SBN Tampa Bay Lightning community. Follow me on Twitter: @dagmar27.
by Cassie McClellan on Aug 30, 2011 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions
I know, I know...
…but it would be fun.
If I could have access to said tape, I’d even do it—but alas, I don’t. :-(
"The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect"
- Smith in Orwell's 1984
Isn’t that what NHL.com, YouTube, and Hulu are for? (Is Hulu still showing entire games? I don’t even know anymore.)
Counting down the days until players report to training camp. Is it September yet?
Raw Charge, an SBN Tampa Bay Lightning community. Follow me on Twitter: @dagmar27.
by Cassie McClellan on Aug 30, 2011 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I was hoping for the video products Nigel provides the team. Going from SHGA to SHGA quickly would be key in getting the analysis done.
I don’t watch Hulu—so I don’t know what their level of NHL access is.
Ultimately, I guess, I’m lazy; I want someone else to compile the video clips, I just want to watch. :-)
"The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect"
- Smith in Orwell's 1984
Hulu’s just rebroadcasting the local coverage. There is no other access. And all the intermission stuff is usually cut out.
As someone who does a lot of YouTube hockey watching, all I can say to whoever tries to do this is, “Bye. It’s been fun knowing ya. See you in a year or two.” (There’s no such thing as indexing on YouTube and everyone names their video whatever they want to. It can take hours to find ten minutes of relevant footage. You’re better off just watching full games and rewinding when you have to.)
"I'm a firm believer that in life, if you're happy then happy things will happen for you."--Bernie Parent
Part Predator, part Lightning.
This adjustment is very apt
And yes, it should hurt a PP if you give up a lot of shorties. And the PK should be credited with shorties scored. It just seems logical to me.
But I think one of the best measures of special teams is looking at the total of the percentage’s. I know we didn’t see many (1 or 2?) SHG for the Bolts last season, so keep the 83.8% PK and add the 15.8% adjusted PP, and we see 99.6%, which is very good. Maybe adding the 1 or 2 SHG that goes up to 100%, which I’ve heard refered to as “great”
And let’s remember, the PP was far better in the playoffs than in the regular season, and I think that counts more.
Getting psyched for the season!
true but
small sample size!
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Aug 30, 2011 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
A couple of very valid points
One of the things that made the Bolts powerplay so effective last year also made it vulnerable to allowing shorthanded goals. That was having Stamkos and St. Louis on the point and at times Kubina. Most of the other teams that allowed a lot of SHG had the same issue. In Dallas it was Richards on the point, in Buffalo Vanek. I think our SHGA numbers improved once we got Bergeron and Brewer playing some on the PP, and the addition of Gilroy may help too. It would be great if they could figure a way to keep Stamkos and St. Louis off the points and still have an effective powerplay.
Don in St Pete
by Don in St Pete on Aug 29, 2011 11:03 PM EDT reply actions
A guy over at On the Forecheck looked at the numbers and suggested that (at least to some extent) might reflect shots taken during the power play. I looked briefly at some numbers myself (stop giggling!) and it looked like that might be a factor, but certainly not the only factor. It’s something to keep in mind, though.
The overall offense gained by this power play far outweighs the defensive lapses. It may cost the team in specific situations but in general, playing the way we have been has helped.
"I'm a firm believer that in life, if you're happy then happy things will happen for you."--Bernie Parent
Part Predator, part Lightning.

by 
























