Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Yankees Deny Rumors That Team Is For Sale

The Sharks' PP Turnaround; or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Regression to the Mean

SAN JOSE, CA - FEBRUARY 10:  Justin Braun #61 of the San Jose Sharks celebrates with Sharkey the Sharks mascot after they defeated the Chicago Blackhawks 5-3 at HP Pavilion at San Jose on February 10, 2012 in San Jose, California.  (Photo by Thearon W. Henderson/Getty Images)

Following last night's hat trick of tallies with the man advantage, the Sharks have now scored eight power play goals in their last five games, catapulting a power play unit that was ranked as low as 17th in the league in efficiency earlier in the season to fourth in the NHL. By comparison, the offensive powerhouse Los Angeles Kings have scored six goals in their last five games, full stop.

So clearly the power play has been kicking ass and taking names as of late, especially relative to their performance earlier in the season, but what's responsible for the turnaround? Did the group really dramatically improve their abilities this much? Was swapping Brent Burns with Logan Couture on the first unit the key to their success? Are the stonecutters at it again? (Who makes Jamie McGinn a star? We doooo...)

The short answer is probably not, but in order to provide a full and accurate response, we need to first determine what drives power play success in the NHL. Thankfully, the unparalleled Gabriel Desjardins looked at that very issue last year and found that 88% of a team's 5-on-4 shooting percentage regresses to the mean. This was very much in line with the findings from JLikens of Objective NHL that around 91% of power play SH% is the result of variance. Since such a substantial portion of a team's finishing ability on the power play can be chalked up to luck, it's hardly surprising that JLikens was also able to show that a team's shot rate on the power play (i.e., the number of pucks they direct at the net while on the man advantage) is a better predictor of their future PP efficiency than their goal rate on the power play.

Does this mean the Sharks' recent spike in power play efficiency was something we could have seen coming and was more or less bound to happen? Thanks to the data-scraping wizardry of the indispensable SnarkSD, we can examine the team's underlying power play performance over the course of the entire season and try to draw some conclusions. Graphs and more after the jump.

Star-divide

First, we'll take a look at the Sharks' cumulative shot rate on the power play this season, expressed as SF/60, which is just the number of shots the Sharks have taken on the PP divided by the number of minutes they've spent on the PP, all multiplied by 60 to give us a nice big number and one that's easy to contextualize from a hockey perspective. Again, this is a cumulative, running total of their performance over the season to date and only includes 5v4 data since the ridiculous shot rates teams are able to accomplish 5v3 really skew the numbers and with how little time teams spend on power play configurations other than 5v4, statistically evaluating those seems pretty irrelevant.

Sf60_3_medium

Click to enlarge. The Sharks really put a pounding on the Coyotes on the PP in the season opener which is why that data point is off the chart. Overall, there's a good deal of variance in the Sharks' power play shot rate early in the season as you'd expect in a small sample size (the team really only had a bit over one and a half full games' worth of power play time over the first 15 games of the season) but since about the 23-game mark and really as far back as game 18, they've been remarkably consistent, hovering between 67.3 and 71.4 5v4 SF/60 on the season.

Of course those numbers are useless without context; how do the Sharks stack up against the rest of the league in power play SF/60? Well, they're first in the NHL by a mile at 68.3 SF/60. The next closest team is the Vancouver Canucks at 57.3 SF/60, an average of over 10 fewer shots per sixty minutes of 5v4 time than the Sharks and San Jose is nearly 20 shots per sixty better than the league-average PP shot rate of 49.2 SF/60. In fact, over the past four seasons, only one team has finished the year with a 5v4 SF/60 rate greater than 68.3 and that was the 2010-11 San Jose Sharks at 72.6. This has been an area of dominance for the Sharks since Todd McLellan's arrival as they've finshed 6th, 1st, and 1st in the league his three full seasons behind the bench in San Jose and are on pace to finish 1st once again.

So if the Sharks have consistently been downright elite at power play shot generation throughout the year, and we know that PP shot rate is the best indicator of a unit's talent level, why in the world was the team's PP efficiency % flirting with the bottom third of the league less than a month ago? For that, we turn to the team's cumulative 5v4 shooting percentage this season:

Sh_medium

Again, we can disregard the first game against Phoenix for the purposes of this post. As you can see, the reasons behind the Sharks' PP doldrums were entirely to do with horrendous shooting luck. Until about seven games ago, the Sharks' season-long 5v4 SH% was 8.1%. That's exactly what league-average SH% was last season...at even strength.The hockey gods were certainly not enamored with the Sharks' power play for much of the year.

League-average SH% on the power play this year is 12%, which is a bit lower than the 12.8% 5v4 SH% the Sharks have averaged over the past four seasons. With personnel changes and player development, it's impossible to say whether that's exactly where the current group's true talent level lies but seeing as four out of the five players currently comprising the top unit have been in San Jose for the majority of that time period, that's probably a reasonable estimate.

What the Sharks' PP most certainly isn't is one capable of scoring on just 8% of the shots it takes. Over the past four seasons, only the 2010-11 Florida Panthers were able to sustain that inept of a 5v4 SH% over a full season and they were essentially an AHL team after the trade deadline (and lacked any semblance of high-end talent even before). Shooting percentage is fickle and erratic in the short term but over the long haul tends to regress strongly towards a team's talent level, which is usually around league average. Since the team's 4-3 loss to Vancouver last month in which Logan Couture netted a power play marker, the regression has been in full effect for the Sharks at 5v4.

The notion of shot quality is inevitably brought up in discussions like this, the argument being that although the Sharks' shot rate on the power play has been consistent for much of the season, the uptick in shooting percentage coincides with an increase in generation of quality opportunities by the team that they weren't creating on the power play earlier in the season. We can verify that claim using the scoring chance data I've tracked this season. SCF/60 is the same idea as SF/60 but with scoring chances instead of just shots.

5v4scf60_medium

First of all, I consider shots that miss the net from the scoring area to be chances while SF/60 is purely confined to shots on goal which is why although the Sharks' SCF/60 and SF/60 rates are nearly identical at 5v4 this season, that obviously doesn't mean every shot they've taken on the power play has been a scoring chance.

Anyway, if anything, this data shows us that the Sharks have been just as consistent in their generation of scoring chances on the power play this season as they have been in registering shots, if not more so. Since Game 6, the team has never dipped below 59.2 SCF/60 and has never crested 69.3. The fact that team has been averaging more than 2 scoring chances per 2 minutes of PP time on the season is extremely impressive and indicative of how potent their power play has been but there isn't a lot of evidence here suggesting that an uptick in chances is the driving force behind the Sharks' increase in 5v4 shooting percentage. It's certainly something worth monitoring going forward as the team appears to have slightly improved in this category over the last few games but it's only to a level that they were already at earlier in the season and, at that time, nothing was going in on the power play.

Sometimes Joe Pavelski point shots deflect off Derek MacKenzie or Vernon Fiddler and end up in the net, sometimes perfectly executed cross-crease passes collide with the crossbar or are robbed by a netminder's glove hand. It's the nature of the game. Since teams spend so little time on the power play relative to even strength, when unfavorable bounces afflict a team's PP unit, the effects can be exaggerated in the media and elsewhere. The truth appears to be that the Sharks have been the best team in the league this season at the aspect of power play success that clubs can fully control - the rate at which they create shots and scoring chances - while a 5v4 SH% that was in the gutter earlier in the season may have given the impression that the team's man-advantage was in need of an overhaul. Slowly but surely that percentage has been climbing back to league mean although even after the Sharks' recent PP scoring binge, they remain 24th in the league in 5v4 SH%, 2% below league average in that category (yet are 4th in the league in overall PP% - that's crazy). That probably makes it a good bet that the power play will continue to be a significant source of offense for the Sharks down the stretch.

I'd be remiss if I didn't say that the most important conclusion we can draw from this is that the roughly 4,500 fans screaming "SHOOOOOT!" at the top of their lungs during every Sharks power play at the Tank might be smarter than you give them credit for.

Major stick tap to SnarkSD for helping compile the cumulative power play data.

Comment 18 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Impressive!

Not sure where you find the hours in the day to pull all of this together but well done!

by hit 'em on Feb 11, 2012 4:04 PM PST reply actions  

Quality stuff

Mostly because it reaffirms my beliefs haha

Leslie Knope: "...but it has a lot of heart."
April Ludgate: "That's what people always say when something sucks."
Fear The Fin's Fifth-String Moderator and Recap Specialist !!

by idunno723 on Feb 11, 2012 4:07 PM PST reply actions  

I wonder how Zone entries effect this

I attributed the Sharks PP struggles to two things this year, both of which seem to have been fixed lately.

1) Horrible Zone entry
2) Grinding it out for puck retention in the O zone

When they do those things, it seems to me anyway, the Sharks all of a sudden start seeing a spike in shots on net and PP goals. Too bad I can’t think of an accurate way to track it, but it seems to me it has a lot to do with the regression to the mean you speak of. Now that the PP looks good out there, they are regressing.

by Dermal Denticles on Feb 11, 2012 4:51 PM PST reply actions  

I think the guys at Broad Street Hockey have been tracking zone entries for the Flyers this year (although possibly only at even strength), that might be an interesting project in the future.

I do agree that, at least by eye, the Sharks have had games this season when they’ve struggled to gain the blue line on the power play but I think the shot and chance data suggests that it hasn’t really been to a significant degree. If they had stretches where they repeatedly failed to enter the zone, I don’t think the shot rates would look as consistent as they do.

by The Neutral on Feb 11, 2012 5:30 PM PST up reply actions  

No, the shot rate has been really consistent for a while now – it’s fluctuated between 67 and 71 SF/60 over the past thirty games and the range has been even smaller than that for the last 15-20. Basically the same story with the chances. What’s gone up and triggered the rise in PP% is power play SH% and it wouldn’t make a ton of sense for zone entries to drive an increase in SH% but not affect the shot rates. The only way that might work is if they were scoring a ton of PP goals off the rush but that’s obviously not been the case.

by The Neutral on Feb 11, 2012 6:36 PM PST up reply actions  

4,500 fans screaming “SHOOOOOT!” at the top of their lungs during every Sharks power play at the Tank

I find those people rather obnoxious. I’m pretty sure the players on the ice know what to do. I hope one of the Sharks players after the game stops by a grocery outlet on his way home and shouts “BAAAAAAG” at the guy bagging his groceries. See how he likes getting yelled at.

by Briceratops on Feb 11, 2012 5:08 PM PST reply actions  

This is why FTF advocates the screaming of “Shootthepuckunlesstheresnolanethentrytomovethepuckacrossthezone!!!”

Leslie Knope: "...but it has a lot of heart."
April Ludgate: "That's what people always say when something sucks."
Fear The Fin's Fifth-String Moderator and Recap Specialist !!

by idunno723 on Feb 11, 2012 5:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Haha yeah, I’m not a fan of them either. That part was mostly tongue-in-cheek.

by The Neutral on Feb 11, 2012 5:30 PM PST up reply actions  

I still remember at the last State of the Sharks (which was in 2009, grr…) Jumbo actually said that they didn’t shoot on the power play because the crowd wasn’t yelling, “SHOOOOOOOT!” loud enough.

Ahhh, Joe Thornton.

Fear the Fin - NEEDS MORE DOVES

by mymclife on Feb 11, 2012 7:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Like Joe needs an excuse not to shoot. :p

If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.

by Kazoonole on Feb 12, 2012 10:12 AM PST up reply actions  

if shots per 60 is important for pp doesnt that mean shots against is what we should look at for pk?

by ivanchu02 on Feb 11, 2012 7:03 PM PST reply actions  

Absolutely although as JLikens demonstrated here, PK SV% is more reliable than PP SH% but still contains a ton of noise and is dwarfed in repeatability by the rate of shots against.

For the record, the Sharks are currently 17th in SA/60 (as in they average the 13th most shots against per sixty minutes of PK time among NHL teams) which is still very mediocre but better than their overall PK% ranking that’s been hurt by a low 0.862 PK SV%. It’s probably a good bet that SV% finishes the season closer to the league average of 0.881.

by The Neutral on Feb 11, 2012 8:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Excellent, excellent article

First off, its just really well put together. I think you hit the key point here early in that multiple studies have shown the impact of Sh% on PP success. In essence Sh% is the butterfly effect; seemingly small fluctuations create large waves of consequnces, however (and this is often forgotten by hollywood) things always regress to their natural state.

Which brings me to this point. I always wonder if “random” or “luck” is really the right word… I think maybe there is something there, we just cant measure it because it may be 1) too infrequent or 2) heavily confounded, ie. we just haven’t thought through the smoke. Also, and this speaks to point 2, NHL teams don’t exist in a vaccuum where they can continually play the same way. A successful strategy will result in counter-strategies (eg. left wing lock, and the countered drop-pass breakout). Whether luck, or reaction we dont know, we just know that high or low Sh% are not sustainable, and I personally would error on the side of “things too infrequent for us to measure” (what a lot of people mean by luck).

Why do shots matter so much? I think what’s emerged in the new NHL era are players that pay incredible attention to their defensive zone responsibility. Shots are like bombs dropped into those defensive schemes. A rebound following a shot is probably extremely difficult to predict, and puts the defensive team out of position. In a sense, you could categorize shots as those with the intention of introducing chaos, and those intended for the back of the net, when in reality they are indistinguishable. Player’s shoot to accomplish both simultaneously.

On that note- if I had to define T Mac’s era it would definitely be “Power Play success.” His strategy is intimately linked to shots on net. -And yes, most advanced stats guys would look at PK SA/60 before anything else.

by SnarkSD on Feb 11, 2012 7:16 PM PST reply actions  

That’s a terrific point about randomness v. luck and, really, reducing the unpredictability of SH% to purely a question of bounces fails to tell the entire story and is pretty simplistic and reductive interpretation. With the caliber of coaching and video review available now, a lot of “corrections” or regression that we observe in shooting percentage can probably be attributed to specific tactical changes that we aren’t necessarily privy to. I guess the thing to keep in mind is that, whatever the cause, the end result is a league in which SH% and SV% inevitably stabilize in the long term and we can use that to our advantage to make at least somewhat accurate predictions and evaluations.

Thanks again for all the help in compiling the data for this thing.

by The Neutral on Feb 11, 2012 8:27 PM PST up reply actions  

In a sense, you could categorize shots as those with the intention of introducing chaos, and those intended for the back of the net, when in reality they are indistinguishable. Player’s shoot to accomplish both simultaneously.

Exactly.

I guess, in my mind, the effectiveness of a shot is the degree to which the shot causes chaos, or a goal. A weak shot directed to an in-position, unscreened goalie is not very effective. A hard, low shot in that situation is more effective, because it may cause a rebound. Adding a screen helps. But a quick pass across the ice can cause just as much or possibly more chaos, as it forces the goalie to move, opening up shooting areas, and forcing the defense to adjust.

I wonder if there’s any way of tracking the percentage of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. shots in a sequence score? I would guess that the 2nd or 3rd shots go in more often than the first shot.

Picklesnakebit since 2011.
@shampeon

by ievans on Feb 12, 2012 1:58 PM PST up reply actions  

great article

It’s interesting that the statistics show shots on goal and scoring chances have stayed relatively consistent throughout the season. Perhaps the statistics don’t tell us the whole story because I can’t help but feel that the sharks are producing more/better scoring chances. I would argue that while they are producing just a many shots from high scoring areas of the ice as earlier in the season, it appears to me that they are creating more dynamic and effective scoring opportunities from these areas. This may be in part to better passing and puck movement, zone entry, a strong cycle and holding the zone effectively. No doubt though, your argument and evidence for regression to the mean holds quite some weight, but I think there might be more to it. Once again, fantastic post! Really impressed with your articles

by logancouturesteeth on Feb 12, 2012 8:50 AM PST via iPhone app reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The Official SB Nation blog of the San Jose Sharks.

Managing Editor

Bender-smoking_small The Neutral

Authors

Pavs2_small idunno723

Poseypavelski_small mymclife

Shark_trek_small jwizzle241

Ovechkin-russia-080518-584_small Ivano M

Xbox360hockey_small Jon Allred

Moderators

2296_s_small Nael M.

Mikeyicon_small ElvisVF101

Z_small ZeroIndulgence

313483_2054510893373_1562580382_31984672_1965025_n_small James Brady