G24 2015-11-28 Oilers at Small Aquatic Flightless Birds – shot and distance data

  • Hey, we got the better goalering!  And we won!  Wonder if the two are related?
  • I started watching after the first period.  Yep, it’s official.  I suck. But I battled back.
  • So did the Oilers.  Good to see.
Game at a Glance

Lost the Corsi battle but the shot distance is interesting, yes?  Lots of long range slappers from the Pens.

CF% SACF% FF% DFF% SF% Avg Dist F Avg Dist A RelDist% GF%
42.4 45.9 44.2 44.2 50.9 32.7 38.2 17 50

See the ‘0.7’ backhand goal by PIT?  That was the incredible spinaround laser from Malkin.

Team Period Time Strength Shot Distance Danger
EDM 1  2:02  EV  Wrist 12 2.3
EDM 1  7:30  PP  Tip-In 10 2.3
PIT 2  0:48  EV  Backhand 21 0.7
PIT 2  3:29  PP  Slap 32 1.1
EV  Wrist Slap Snap Backhand Tip-In Wrap-around Deflected
For  19 / 34.7  1 / 62.0  4 / 38.0  3 / 11.3  –  1 / 7.0  –
Against  14 / 38.8  2 / 65.0  7 / 41.3  4 / 17.5  –  –  –
All x 3  Wrist Slap Snap Backhand Tip-In Wrap-around Deflected
For  22 / 34.3  3 / 51.0  4 / 38.0  4 / 11.5  1 / 10.0  1 / 7.0  –
Against  20 / 34.2  6 / 47.2  8 / 38.2  5 / 17.8  2 / 11.0  –  –

I’ll include this one so you can see the long range shots from the Burgers:

Defensemen Dangerous Fenwicks

Did not see Klefbom or Fayne good til the very end.  The DFFs mostly agree.  They sure like Davidson though.

Player EVTOI DFA60 AvgDistA AvgDanger
B. Davidson  16:10 35.6 32 1.06
J. Schultz  15:25 40.1 32.7 1.03
M. Fayne  15:35 44.3 32 0.96
Klef  18:12 47.8 34.8 0.97
D. Nurse  17:57 54.5 40.8 0.86
A. Sekera  17:55 55.9 42.8 0.83

TMc did not blend the pairings much tonight.

Pairing EVTOI DFA60 AvgDistA AvgDanger
A. Sekera D. Nurse  16:40 56.2 40.9 0.86
M. Fayne Klef  15:20 45 32 0.96
J. Schultz B. Davidson  14:48 38.9 32 1.06
H2H Charts

New chart!  Major lines and pairs (by TOI) for the game.

Malkin got all the love, but Letang is a freaking beast.  He’s stuck with Scuderi and still owned the Oilers souls.

Data for Download



7 thoughts on “G24 2015-11-28 Oilers at Small Aquatic Flightless Birds – shot and distance data

  1. I’m missing something basic here.

    Higher Average Danger = poor
    Lower Average Danger = good


    Higher DFA60 = poor
    Lower DFA60 = good


    If so, why are they inversely related?

    Or is my understanding of average danger flipped?


    1. Nope, you are correct!

      Average danger is a function of shot distance and shot type. Lower is better for a defender.

      DFA/60 also then rolls in unblocked shot volume and TOI, so although danger drives part of it and so usually they all end up pointing in the same direction, but sometimes they can do weird things like they did this game. Like if one pair gave up low average danger but a ton of shots, and the other gave up fewer but very dangerous shots.


  2. Thanks, that makes more sense. It makes me think average danger is the closer proxy for D performance than dfa60.

    Also, I’m sure I’ve asked this before but rebounds (as measured by time between save and next shot, iirc) are collected, right? Is it possible to tease this from the source data or does it get rolled into average danger? or point me to the source?

    Also, is it possible to look at pass location prior to a shot?


    1. I think sometimes average danger may be a better proxy. But you have to be careful! Remember that the average alone doesn’t give you a sense of volume.

      For example:
      Player A – 2 shots @ 2.0 each = 2.0 average danger
      Player B – 2 shots @ 2.0 each and 2 shots @ 1.0 danger = 1.5 average danger

      But Player A actually gave up less.

      Then of course there’s TOI. If two players give up 2 shots of average 2.0 danger, but A does that in 10 minutes and B does that in 20 minutes – again, you’d have to say that B had a better game.

      So that’s where DFA/60 comes in – it’s taking volume, danger, and time all into account.

      DFA/60 = number of Fenwicks (unblocked shot attempts) given up x average danger / TOI x 60

      I already include the average danger and TOI, but I think I’ll add the raw Fenwicks given up as well – that will make the calculations as transparent as possible.


    2. Also: rebounds. Yes, I calculate those based on time between shots. But I don’t post those anymore (you can see them in the earlier game pages, where I included a lot more data). But you can still find them in the data downloads, where I include everything I calculate.

      The pass locations are a whole different story! The only way to track those is manually as far as i know. There is a passing project to do that (Ryan Stimson) but I don’t have any of that data.


  3. I see the DFF% has been below 46% in 4 of the last 5 games (except vs. Washington). I think we can consider the 3 points in the last 2 games as gifts. Let’s hope it’s a temporary funk and not a trend.

    The strong games against Chicago and LA, and their upward trend in general, were giving me hope that they were turning that mythical corner. The next 5 games should be telling, especially now that Schultz is back.

    I’m feeling bad for Nurse. I was hoping they would ease him gently into the line-up, but he’s been given top-pairing minutes against the toughest competition. Baptism by fire is not something I’d recommend for a rookie defense-man, but what do I know?


    1. No question, the trend has weakened. But I think not enough to change it altogether is my guess (I’ll rerun it in a few games).

      I’m OK with the goaltending winning us a few games though – it’s caused us to lose a few we deserved to win, so you’d hope that evens out over the season!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s