Fun with a gun: the Shootout
Love it or hate it, the shootout is here to stay for the foreseeable future. I pray it never enters the playoffs, but I don't have too much of a problem with it after the 5 minute 4-on-4 OT during the regular season. A 10 minute 4-on-4 OT (with no timeouts/commercial breaks) before the shootout would be more interesting though.
Regardless of any of that crap, I thought it would be interesting for our Avs fans to get a little more acquainted with the shootout - especially since last season's playoff appearance was clinched with it (thanks Dutchie).
To see how the Avalanche stack up against other NHL clubs, and to discover which Colorado players are bona fide studs or duds, read on.
Since the NHL adopted the shootout as a marketing ploy to excite fans and get rid of annoying tie games, the Avalanche have the 9th most wins in the league, with 31. Their record is 31-22 for a .584 win %, 7th all time. The Avs are good one on one.
|
TEAM |
SHOOTOUTS |
WINS |
LOSSES |
WIN % |
|
Devils |
62 |
39 |
23 |
.629 |
|
Stars |
63 |
39 |
24 |
.619 |
|
Coyotes |
51 |
31 |
20 |
.607 |
|
Oilers |
65 |
39 |
26 |
.600 |
|
Islanders |
55 |
33 |
22 |
.600 |
|
Thrashers |
54 |
32 |
22 |
.592 |
|
AVALANCHE |
53 |
31 |
22 |
.584 |
|
Penguins |
56 |
32 |
24 |
.571 |
|
Rangers |
65 |
37 |
28 |
.569 |
|
Predators |
51 |
29 |
22 |
.568 |
|
Kings |
56 |
30 |
26 |
.535 |
|
Sabers |
60 |
31 |
29 |
.516 |
|
Lightning |
49 |
25 |
24 |
.510 |
|
Canadiens |
53 |
27 |
26 |
.509 |
|
Adjectives |
56 |
28 |
28 |
.500 |
|
Bruins |
65 |
31 |
34 |
.476 |
|
Blackhawks |
56 |
26 |
30 |
.464 |
|
Blues |
56 |
26 |
30 |
.464 |
|
Hurricanes |
37 |
17 |
20 |
.459 |
|
Sharks |
48 |
22 |
26 |
.458 |
|
Red Wings Suck |
52 |
23 |
29 |
.442 |
|
Ducks |
62 |
27 |
35 |
.435 |
|
Canucks |
50 |
22 |
28 |
.440 |
|
Blue Jackets |
57 |
24 |
33 |
.421 |
|
Maple Leafs |
49 |
20 |
29 |
.408 |
|
Capitals |
53 |
21 |
32 |
.396 |
|
Flyers |
43 |
16 |
27 |
.372 |
|
Flames |
38 |
14 |
24 |
.368 |
|
Senators |
44 |
16 |
28 |
.363 |
|
Panthers |
57 |
20 |
37 |
.350 |
In preparing this chart, it became more apparent than ever that the shootout is moronic and doesn't tell you anything about how good/bad a team is, or how far they may go towards winning the Cup. But that's not what it's about. It's about bringing in fans, which I think it probably has.
The seemingly only effect the shootout itself has on the teams is getting/losing a few extra points towards playoff/draft positioning. The Devils and Stars have been the biggest beneficiaries of the frivolous system, registering an extra 39 points each. The Flames sit at the bottom of the stack, cashing in only 14 extra points thanks to shootouts. Where as the Ducks have squandered the most opportunities leaving 35 points on the table by losing shootouts. And the poor Panthers......well, at least they had a great draft.
SHOOTERS
Hejduk leads all active Avalanche players with 16 shootout goals in 41 shots for a 39%. Here's your active Avs' stats. McLeod should quit now and forever be perfect (as in the Highlander, there can be only one!), and SoS should never shoot again. Seriously Sacco, just send somebody else. Anybody. How 'bout Cumiskey? Or anybody else? Mueller? Mueller?
|
Shooter |
Attempts |
Goals |
% |
|
Hejduk |
41 |
16 |
39 |
|
Mueller |
24 |
9 |
37.5 |
|
Stewart |
8 |
3 |
37.5 |
|
Duchene |
7 |
2 |
28.6 |
|
McLeod |
1 |
1 |
100 |
|
Liles |
2 |
1 |
50 |
|
O'Reilly |
3 |
1 |
33 |
|
Foote |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
Yip |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
Walter |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
Jones |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
Galiardi |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
Stastny |
8 |
0 |
0 |
Svatos actually led the team last season blasting home 4 out of 7, or 57.1% of his attempts - and you thought he didn't do anything last year! Other former Avs performed like this: Hendricks 1 for 2, Tucker 1 for 3, Wolski 1 for 8.
For everyone who misses WW in the shootout, his career numbers are: 18 for 41, or 43.9%. But in 08-09 he was lord of all: 10 for 12, or 83.3%. But last year he went just 1 for 15. That is a horrifying drop off over one year. He was at 65% for his career before tanking it in 09-10 with a 6% clip. One has to wonder what happened to our former hero. Did goalies get wise? Did WW get too cocky? Was the sun in his eyes? We may never know....
Here's your top eleven active shootout goal scorers: Jussi Jokinen (26), Pavel Datsyuk (24), Ales Kotalik (21), Zach Parise (21), Mikko Koivu (20), Brad Richards (20), Sydney Crosby (20), Brad Boyes (19), Erik Christensen (18), Anze Kopitar (18), The Baron Von Double Dub (18).
Jokinen also leads that group in goal scoring percentage with 52% of his attempts finding twine. Here's you top ten percentage-wise (minimum 20 attempts): Frans Nielsen 57.9%, Shawn Horcoff 56.2%, Jonathan Toews 53.8%, Michael Handzus 53.8%, Jussi Jokinen 52%, Joe Pavelski 51.5%, Erik Christensen 51.4%, Ales Kotalik 50%, T.J. Oshie 50%, and Pavel Datsyuk at 48%. (Note: Crosby lead all players last season going 8 for 10).
GOALIES
Anderson went 7-4 in shootouts last season (he was previously a ghastly 1-7). His career numbers look like this: 8-11, .606 save %.
Budaj is 11-16 with a .578 save % for his career.
John Grahame is 5-2, .636 save %. Bacashihua is 2-1 with a .700 save %.
Brodeur leads all active netminders with 34 shootout wins. If you take those away from Marty, his 602 record wins drops down to 568. That's still 17 more than Roy had without the help of shootouts. Lundquist (30), Miller (29), Tim Thomas (22), and Lehtonen (21) round out the top five. It's Lehtonen however that leads all those studs with a .755 save %.
CONCLUSION
So what does all this mean? I have no idea.
0 recs |
47 comments
|
Comments
I love
The subtle reference to the Wild. I have no who came up with that nickname, or the meme of referring to them as a non-tangible being, but it may be the most creative nickname from this site.
Fantastic read, yet again, Paul. I am a little surprised how little shoot-out success matters but then again didn’t Edmonton have something like 70% of their wins two years ago from shootouts?
Jimmy Howard invented the Stanley Cup.
Captain Kirk
2 for 2 in Lake Erie last year.
I'm neutral on the subject
The 09/10 Colorado Rockies: Starring Johnny Herrera as THE ANSWER
THIS IS BUFFALO NATION GODZILLA HAS AWAKEN - abayarde
SBNation Denver: Because the Rapids are people too!
Burgundy Wave: My Rapids Blog
What makes a man turn neutral … Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
Intelligent opinion does not follow the transitive property
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Jul 20, 2010 8:03 AM MDT up reply actions 2 recs
It’s being very passionate about being swiss.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 20, 2010 2:28 PM MDT up reply actions
I like the shootout
It’s made-for-ESPN and it’s actually kind of fun to watch live. As long as they never institute it for the playoffs (and I don’t think they ever will), I’m all for it.
If it’s made for ESPN they should pony-up with a proper TV contract for the NHL.
by niwotsblessing on Jul 20, 2010 9:27 AM MDT up reply actions
I agree. I’ve never minded a game that ended in a shootout because I remember the feeling of leaving the building after a tied hockey game.
Plus, is anybody sitting down during the shootout?
And I guess it must be said, but no shootout can beat the excitement of overtime playoff hockey, so there’s no chance in hell it will ever see the light of day in postseason play.
"Half the game is mental; the other half is being mental." -- Jim McKenny
I have mixed feelings
because is does inflate the standings a bit (making a 2 pt game worth 3 pts). We visited this last season when the standings were really close. I just don’t like how it forces a team to win. Sometimes, it’s not the best team on the ice who wins the shootout.
It is, however, really exciting to watch. I like the Avs recent success over the Wings in shootouts. But I think it would make more sense in a 3pt-win type system.
Agreed
Whenever I bring a casual fan to a game, more often than not they’re hoping for the game to go to a shootout. It’s really exciting to them. I don’t deny shootouts are exciting, but prefer the purer result of straight overtime. But if shootouts attract more fans, I’m for them.
by MalachiConstant on Jul 20, 2010 9:32 AM MDT up reply actions
Screw that noise
The SO sucks. Win or lose, I always feel like the ending should have been a hell of a lot more exciting than it was.
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day.
by SlamDunkTheFunk on Jul 20, 2010 8:45 AM MDT reply actions
I don’t particularly mind the shootout, but I like the idea of a 10-minute OT before it gets that far. What’s an extra 15 or so minutes (with stoppages) added onto a game? Exactly…not much.
I just HATE ties. It’s probably the one thing that bothers most about soccer. I just feel there is no conclusion with a tie. I invest 2-plus hours in a game per night, I like having a definite outcome.
Help help! I'm being repressed!
I don’t really mind ties in soccer, but am not to keen on them in hockey. In soccer, a tie can be a huge upset b/c of the diversity in skill between clubs. A long, epic match featuring an unfaltering attack from a very skilled club running up against the stalwart defense of a smaller club who only manages to pull a draw from sheer will and desperation is often really fun to watch. Unless its Switzerland playing, in which case it’s just freaking awful. I feel like there’s a lot more parity in the NHL and the game is quite a bit faster which for some reason makes ties less pleasing.
by MalachiConstant on Jul 20, 2010 9:29 AM MDT up reply actions
I love the shootout, but if they ever brought it into the postseason I’d stop watching hockey all together.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 20, 2010 9:14 AM MDT reply actions
I’m all for getting rid of the charity point and keeping the shootout. Especially with the added change of having a ten minute overtime.
absolutely. this would be my plan too.
Assistant *to* the Managing Editor, Mile High Hockey
by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jul 20, 2010 9:39 AM MDT up reply actions
I don’t like the charity point either, but the reason they give it out is to give a team that’s down late in the third some hope and fight to tie the game to get at least a point. I agree with the reasoning behind it, but don’t agree with how it has been executed.
What they could do is make a regulation win worth 3 pts, OT/SO win worth 2, and a OT/SO loss worth 1. This would make the charity point a little less meaningful in the standings, but still give a losing team a reason to fight at the end. This way, every regular season game is worth 3 points. How the 2 teams split those 3 points is dependent on how they play, not the league rules.
"Here's your dream: Matt Duchene, can he do it?... HE CAN! HE DID IT! MATT DUCHENE AND THE AVS ARE IN THE PLAYOFFS!" - Mike Haynes
Isn’t it enough incentive that the team that’s down can tie so that they can win in OT or the shootout?
Haynes and McNabb talk about this playing for the 1 point mentality and I think it’s BS.
play to win, I agree. At least take away the charity point for OT losses — OT wins and losses are legit. if someone tried to sit back in 4 on 4 and go for the charity point, they’d lose anyways.
as for the 3 point thing, they’ll never do it, just because of the historical aspect. it’s always been 2 points for a win.
I don’t think they’ll go to 3 points, but for a different reason:
I disagree with the historical aspect. They added an OTL to the scoresheet with little hassle, so making regulation wins 3 points instead of 2 is even less of an adjustment to the standings. It’s not like the NHL has a points record that’s in line with 16-0 in the NFL, so more points won’t make a big difference.
However, I don’t think they’ll change it because the 2 point wins act like a restrictor plate and force more teams to bunch up in the standings, which creates more tension toward the end of the season and tighter playoff races.
But personally, I want 3 points for a regulation win.
"Half the game is mental; the other half is being mental." -- Jim McKenny
I’d tweak that just a little. 3pts for Reg/OT, 2pts for SO win, 1pt for SO loss, 0pt for Reg/OT loss.
Running-dog lackey counter-revolutionary malcontent, Not an expert.
by Busted Twigg on Jul 21, 2010 10:26 AM MDT up reply actions
I’d like to see them go to straight wins and losses.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 21, 2010 11:00 AM MDT up reply actions
Agreed.
I don’t particularly like the shootout, but I hate ties even more, and try as I might I can’t think of any viable alternative save longer OT. It does piss me off that a team games outcome is decided by an individual skills competition, but sometimes an individual’s skill (or lack thereof) can also decide a game in regulation. The only thing I would really like to see gone is the loser point, but as it makes the league “seem” more equal, Bettman will never let it go.
MHH- A drinking site with a hockey problem
Detroit Sucks
who says gadzooks anymore?! instead of hellz yes i was expecting Gee Willikers! or Hot Dog!!
more to the point though, I voted number C. I don’t hate them..but sometimes I feel the L isnt deserved cause we may have played our asses off yet we got screwed by some one handed deke that will be imitated for years on end.
and screw 3 pt games
Is it October yet?!
I had to google it too see if it was a “real” word or just something stuck in my subconscious. I’ve never said it out loud, but after this semi-successful post, I’m adding it to the repertoire.
by Paul's Coffey on Jul 20, 2010 11:42 AM MDT up reply actions
They should line up at center ice and have a fight off.
It’s just as arbitrary and exciting as a shootout. In a team game is there anything that’s more of an antithesis than the skills competition?
BTW, I’m bitter that I missed my shootout goal last Sunday in my beer league game. I had to make it to continue the shootout but got stoned. Damned 8 foot goalie that sat deep in his net. Mike, what’s the unwritten rule on taking as hard a slapper as I can take from about 3 feet away? I’m a great fighter with my full cage and gloves on if that helps.
the first rule about fight off is you don’t talk about fight off
by Paul's Coffey on Jul 20, 2010 11:41 AM MDT up reply actions
Warning - Set meter to 11
There is a certain amount of logic in this. There’s roughly the same number of fights as goals in a game today. Turn the post-OT period into a gang fight. Just empty the benches – leave your gloves and helmets behind. Last team with a player standing wins. Guys like CGDS will rule the league. Make OT 15 minutes with the last 5 as 3v3. You think the fans stand during a shootout? They’ll be in tiptoes during the gang fight.
We’d definitely see a lot better hockey in Regulation and OT if it meant that people were going to be seriously bleeding at the end.
Running-dog lackey counter-revolutionary malcontent, Not an expert.
by Busted Twigg on Jul 21, 2010 10:44 AM MDT up reply actions
Plus one for referring to the winged wheel properly. I would prefer that every game be played the same as the playoffs. Regular OT until someone wins. Sure some games would go on forever, but so does baseball, and in baseball you’re stuck with 4 to 5 hours of absolutely no action.
Your 2010-2011 Colorado Avalanche: Reaching Up to the Cap Floor
someone would die, the product would suffer if you had a 3 hour overtime and had to play 4 games in 6 or 8 nights even.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 21, 2010 10:11 AM MDT up reply actions
But that’s the rub: outside of pitching/catching and the occasional hustled-out double, there is no physical action for most players for the vast majority of the game of baseball. They can go 5 hours and few of them will break a sweat.
If we don't get our sauce, we ain't watching the game!
This is true. But I guess I’d be interested in a statistical breakdown of how long NHL playoff OT games usually do run. My guess is that a pretty small percentage go beyond the first OT. And I’d also guess that fewer regular season OT games would go as deep into OT, as there wouldn’t be as much on the line and teams wouldn’t be playing as tight.
Your 2010-2011 Colorado Avalanche: Reaching Up to the Cap Floor
by Bob in Boulder on Jul 21, 2010 10:27 AM MDT up reply actions
the intensity would be toned down since it’s not the playoffs, while you could get those stats, I’d be willing to be that over a season the comparisons between a regular season with unlimited ot’s v. the stats you have now for the playoff ot’s would vary.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 21, 2010 5:25 PM MDT up reply actions
And PS
I would definitely get rid of the loser point. All W’s and L’s. No more of the OTL crap.
Your 2010-2011 Colorado Avalanche: Reaching Up to the Cap Floor
by Bob in Boulder on Jul 21, 2010 10:45 AM MDT up reply actions
I would do that reguardless.
Are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jul 21, 2010 11:00 AM MDT up reply actions

by 































