It's the old War-on-Ice definition. Based on location, attempt type and if it's a rush or rebound attempt. A high danger chance is any unblocked attempt (miss/shot/goal) or blocked rush/rebound attempt from the blue, or any unblocked rush/rebound attempt in the red. A scoring chance is any attempt (block/miss/shot/goal) from the blue, any unblocked attempt or blocked rush/rebound attempt in the red, or any unblocked rush/rebound attempt in the yellow.
- j.boyd919

A shot’s Danger is then defined by this method:

Start with the zone in which the shot attempt was recorded, 1 through 3.
Add 1 if it was a rebound or a rush shot.
Subtract 1 if it was a blocked shot.
Increase to 1 if it was equal to 0.


You dont find this method a little too vague?

Ron Hainsey throws a backhand from the blueline (yellow zone) = 1 pt
its obviously blocked - 1
= 0
Increase to 1 if it was equal to 0

Ron Hainseys weak backhand from the blue line = shot attempt

Rebounds: Any shot that follows within 3 seconds of a blocked, missed or saved shot. All have measurably higher probabilities of success in each of the three zones.
Rush shots: Any shot that follows within 4 seconds of any event in the shooting team’s neutral or offensive zones.

Ron Hainsey gets the rebound from his weak backhand and flips it onto goal from the blue line for an easy save.

Shot from yellow = + 1
rebound = +1
total = 2

All shot attempts that have danger 2 or greater = Scoring chance!


Flip side:

Ovechkin receives a pass across the slot from Backstrom to his favourite scoring spot, top of the L. Circle (yellow region L1) he fires a heavy snap shot which is blocked.

shot + 1
block - 1
= 0
0 = 1 pt

OV's choice shot from his preferred location is equal to Ron Hainsey's weak backhand from the blue line.



Where am I wrong?

A shot’s Danger is then defined by this method:

Start with the zone in which the shot attempt was recorded, 1 through 3.
Add 1 if it was a rebound or a rush shot.
Subtract 1 if it was a blocked shot.
Increase to 1 if it was equal to 0.


You dont find this method a little too vague?

Ron Hainsey throws a backhand from the blueline (yellow zone) = 1 pt
its obviously blocked - 1
= 0
Increase to 1 if it was equal to 0

Ron Hainseys weak backhand from the blue line = shot attempt

Rebounds: Any shot that follows within 3 seconds of a blocked, missed or saved shot. All have measurably higher probabilities of success in each of the three zones.
Rush shots: Any shot that follows within 4 seconds of any event in the shooting team’s neutral or offensive zones.

Ron Hainsey gets the rebound from his weak backhand and flips it onto goal from the blue line for an easy save.

Shot from yellow = + 1
rebound = +1
total = 2

All shot attempts that have danger 2 or greater = Scoring chance!


Flip side:

Ovechkin receives a pass across the slot from Backstrom to his favourite scoring spot, top of the L. Circle (yellow region L1) he fires a heavy snap shot which is blocked.

shot + 1
block - 1
= 0
0 = 1 pt

OV's choice shot from his preferred location is equal to Ron Hainsey's weak backhand from the blue line.



Where am I wrong?
- stackthepads

You are wrong on page 1 when referencing pace.

You are wrong on page 1 when referencing pace.
- Feds91Stammer

You are wrong on page 1 when referencing pace.
- Feds91Stammer

Explain.

Explain.
- stackthepads

Teams that play at a higher pace generate more shot attempts. PIT hasn't been particularly strong in this regard.

Teams that play at a higher pace generate more shot attempts. PIT hasn't been particularly strong in this regard.
- Feds91Stammer

How to you make that correlation?

When I said the pace that the Pens play with I was referring to pace in the literal sense, as in the Pens are fast and play fast. Nashville has yet to face a team that plays with the pace the Pens play with.

I literally do not care if the Capitals are good or bad or if they lose. In fact, had I not be tasked to cover the team, I most likely would have cheered for the underdogs.

Anyways, I am being about as objective as it is possible to be here, the Capitals were the better team and they lost. I haven't seen a single serious person dispute this. I don't know why it's so hard for some people to recognize their team got a bit lucky - you still get to keep playing.


It really isn't sour grapes to say the Penguins who played most of the playoffs with a backup goalie and without their best defenseman have caught a few breaks. It is actually what happened.
- james_tanner1

Dude I am tired of hearing that the better team lost. Most of the caps shots were from the blue line. You can show the scoring chances #s all day but the better team won. The goals the Pens scored were by skill, even if they were on the counter attack. If the goals were all from crazy bounces I would listen to you but they weren't, they were scored by skill. I thought Fleury played well, but not as well as you allude. The Caps were out coached plain and simple. The Pens coaches out schemed the Caps in every way to neutralize their diadvantages and the Pens won.

Dude I am tired of hearing that the better team lost. Most of the caps shots were from the blue line. You can show the scoring chances #s all day but the better team won. The goals the Pens scored were by skill, even if they were on the counter attack. If the goals were all from crazy bounces I would listen to you but they weren't, they were scored by skill. I thought Fleury played well, but not as well as you allude. The Caps were out coached plain and simple. The Pens coaches out schemed the Caps in every way to neutralize their diadvantages and the Pens won.
- DubsHockey

100% true.

I like the Pens, and not just from a homer perspective. The pens put up 40+ shots in each of the last two games in Ottawa, before finally cracking Anderson. Nashville had ~20 shots in their game 6 win. Murray will eat them alive if they can't generate offense without their centers. The pens stars will make Rinne look human - as they have throughout his career (0.880 save percentage)

Dude I am tired of hearing that the better team lost. Most of the caps shots were from the blue line. You can show the scoring chances #s all day but the better team won. The goals the Pens scored were by skill, even if they were on the counter attack. If the goals were all from crazy bounces I would listen to you but they weren't, they were scored by skill. I thought Fleury played well, but not as well as you allude. The Caps were out coached plain and simple. The Pens coaches out schemed the Caps in every way to neutralize their diadvantages and the Pens won.
- DubsHockey

Tanner is literally one of the LEAST objective people on this board. He has his own agenda based on his own self-aggrandized beliefs and doesn't stop.

He also STILL doesn't even know what the word "luck" even means... or "impactful."

How to you make that correlation?

When I said the pace that the Pens play with I was referring to pace in the literal sense, as in the Pens are fast and play fast. Nashville has yet to face a team that plays with the pace the Pens play with.
- stackthepads

You're correct. Fedsteamer & the alt jboyd just argue for the sake of trying to belittle people - it must make him/her feel really good inside.

So now a fast team must have a high shot count according to steamer - must be some type of analytic dribble. Also you are correct in saying all shots are different in every way, though analytics only sees position & action - doesn't see force or accuracy (or at least I have seen a stat showing me Sid Crosby shoots from the hash mark in comparison to Geno Malkin shoots from the hash mark - or worse Sid shooting & Carl Hagelin).

You are also correct in saying he won't answer a simple question, he will deflect & redirect the conversation so you are answering his questions so avoiding the initial question he cannot or does not want to answer.

All in all, he's a poopbag!

Edit: If having a high shot count is imperative in being a high pace team, does having a high shot count signify you are a fast team? What makes you a fast pace 'player'?

pens in 5

did you watch the sens pens series? pitts and ottawa both looked exhausted and not very good, preds looked scary good. I dont think anybody in the east other then the leafs played as quick and energetic as nashville, and nashville has the D that the leafs needed to move past the first round. Nashville taking it and PK gonna bring the cup to montreal since the habs never will