Scoring Chances: Game 49 v. Dallas

by The Neutral on Feb 3, 2012 9:00 AM PST in Statistical Analysis

I usually try to avoid the Sharks pre-game show at all costs but my DVR picked some of it up last night and the panel was inexplicably discussing potentially trading Joe Pavelski at the deadline. To be fair, it wasn't a topic that was lingered upon but trading Pavelski would, of course, be an incredibly terrible decision and I feel fairly confident in stating that it will not happen seeing as Doug Wilson is a sane individual. Although the puck hasn't always gone in for him and his linemates so far this season, Pavelski was probably the Sharks' best forward of the first half, as he consistently drove the play north and generated scoring chances at an elite rate despite starting in his own zone more often and facing tougher competition than any other Sharks forward.

Hopefully anyone contemplating the trade of Pavelski as a real option was watching last night as Pavs put on a show, dominating the Stars to the tune of six scoring chances to one when he was on the ice at even-strength (five of which came off his stick) in addition to winning six out of seven faceoffs, a category in which he now ranks second in the league behind Jonathan Toews (albeit with the caveat that he's taken far fewer draws than most of the league leaders having lined up at right wing for much of the season). Overall, the Sharks posted one of their most dominant performances of the year, outchancing Dallas 19-8 at evens, 21-10 overall and allowing zero chances against in the second period - despite Dan Boyle shooting the puck into his own net - marking only the third time this season San Jose has held an opponent chance-less in a period.

Best EV Forward: Joe Pavelski (+5), Joe Thornton (+5), Michal Handzus (+5), Jamie McGinn (+5)

Worst EV Forward: Jim Vandermeer (-2)

Best EV Defenseman: Colin White (+9)

Worst EV Defenseman: Douglas Murray (-3)

Period	Totals		EV		PP		5v3 PP		SH		5v3 SH
1	8	4	8	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	8	1	6	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
3	5	4	5	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Totals	21	9	19	8	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0

Team	Period	Time	Note	SJS						Opponent
DAL	1	19:55	Ott	1	3	12	29	39	88	3	14	29	31	44	73	5v5
SJS	1	18:59	Mitchell	1	5	17	26	61	64	20	24	31	33	38	44	5v5
DAL	1	18:11	Eriksson	1	8	19	22	44	69	10	21	31	33	36	63	5v5
DAL	1	16:06	Ott	1	3	12	29	39	61	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
SJS	1	15:18	Goal - Handzus	1	5	26	29	64	88	2	6	20	24	31	38	5v5
SJS	1	12:55	Mitchell	1	5	17	26	61	64	2	6	20	24	31	38	5v5
SJS	1	12:53	McGinn	1	5	17	26	61	64	2	6	20	24	31	38	5v5
SJS	1	11:52	Couture	1	12	29	39	44	88	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
SJS	1	8:11	Pavelski	1	8	19	22	44	69	3	10	21	31	44	63	5v5
SJS	1	8:10	Pavelski	1	8	19	22	44	69	3	10	21	31	44	63	5v5
DAL	1	7:25	Wandell	1	2	3	10	43	88	14	16	23	31	33	36	5v5
SJS	1	19:01	Thornton	1	5	17	26	61	64	20	24	31	33	38	44	5v5
SJS	2	18:39	Burns PP	1	26	29	61	64	88	6	20	28	31	38		5v4
SJS	2	16:12	McCarthy	1	5	10	29	43	61	2	6	20	24	31	38	5v5
SJS	2	12:06	McGinn	1	17	22	43	61	64	6	20	24	31	36	38	5v5
SJS	2	10:37	Pavelski	1	5	8	19	44	69	3	10	21	31	33	63	5v5
SJS	2	5:01	Goal - Marleau PP	1	8	12	26	39	88	3	6	24	29	31		5v4
SJS	2	3:57	Clowe	1	5	12	29	39	61	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
SJS	2	3:55	Couture	1	5	12	29	39	61	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
SJS	2	3:17	Goal - Thornton	1	8	19	22	44	69	2	6	10	21	31	63	5v5
DAL	2	19:26	Ryder	1	8	12	19	22	39	3	21	29	31	44		5v4
SJS	3	19:09	Pavelski	1	8	19	22	44	69	3	10	21	31	44	63	5v5
SJS	3	18:04	McGinn	1	5	17	26	61	64	20	24	31	33	36	38	5v5
SJS	3	16:15	Clowe	1	3	12	29	39	88	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
DAL	3	13:38	Goal - Benn	1	3	12	29	39	88	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
SJS	3	12:10	Pavelski	1	8	19	22	44	69	3	20	24	31	38	44	5v5
SJS	3	8:26	Goal - Clowe	1	3	12	29	39	88	2	6	14	29	31	73	5v5
DAL	3	5:29	Ryder	1	3	17	26	64	88	14	29	31	33	36	73	5v5
DAL	3	4:53	Goligoski	1	2	10	43	44	88	29	31	33	36	63	73	5v5
DAL	3	0:35	Burish	1	5	17	64	69	88	16	23	24	31	33	36	5v5

#	Player	EV			PP			SH
1	T. GREISS	48:55	19	8	7:43	2	1	3:22	0	0
2	J. VANDERMEER	9:32	0	2	0:00	0	0	0:00	0	0
3	D. MURRAY	15:21	2	5	0:00	0	0	1:01	0	0
5	C. WHITE	15:26	10	1	0:00	0	0	0:58	0	0
8	J. PAVELSKI	14:16	6	1	5:46	1	1	1:32	0	0
10	B. WINCHESTER	9:37	1	2	0:00	0	0	0:00	0	0
12	P. MARLEAU	13:21	5	3	5:43	1	1	1:27	0	0
17	T. MITCHELL	11:34	6	2	0:24	0	0	0:15	0	0
19	J. THORNTON	14:30	6	1	5:49	0	1	0:37	0	0
22	D. BOYLE	16:45	6	1	6:14	0	1	0:59	0	0
26	M. HANDZUS	11:34	6	1	1:54	2	0	0:56	0	0
29	R. CLOWE	12:58	7	3	2:04	1	0	0:00	0	0
39	L. COUTURE	12:31	5	3	5:36	1	1	1:00	0	0
43	J. MCCARTHY	10:38	2	2	0:00	0	0	0:00	0	0
44	M. VLASIC	19:14	7	2	0:46	0	0	2:00	0	0
61	J. BRAUN	15:22	9	1	1:04	1	0	0:39	0	0
64	J. MCGINN	11:53	7	2	1:39	1	0	0:00	0	0
69	A. DESJARDINS	14:04	6	2	0:00	0	0	0:57	0	0
88	B. BURNS	15:59	4	6	1:36	2	0	1:07	0	0

Head-to-head scoring chances:

The third line had one of their finest games of the season which isn't particularly surprising when you consider that the line they were matched up against has been atrocious in terms of scoring chance differential this season. Great to see the top two lines handily win their matchups against the top two lines for the Stars. Brent Burns was better than his chance differential would indicate as he had the misfortune of being on the ice a bunch late when the game was already out of hand and the Stars registered a trio of late chances.

More stats from the game: Corsi/Fenwick, Shift Charts, H2H Ice Time, Zonestarts, Play-By-Play, Box Score

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good to see the points start to add up for Burns

But I am still a bit troubled by the frequency with which the Burns/Murray pairing is out-chanced. It’s basically been every game since they’ve been put together.

And yet, with the way the Braun/White pairing is clicking again, I think the only solution is to be patient—there’s no reason to mess with the defense right now, really.

Winter. Time to eat fat and watch hockey. -- Margaret Atwood

by Timorous Me on Feb 3, 2012 9:18 AM PST reply actions

I dig how Braun/White were positive against EVERYONE. Like, ownage went down whenever they were on the ice, I guess.
I also agree that it’s nice to see Burns get some points up, but I wish they would’ve just given him the goal. I think he needs it more than Zus. Plus, Clowe would’ve gotten an assist on it, which would’ve been nice as well.

by JBarrow on Feb 3, 2012 10:00 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

Trading Pavelski!?!?

Whoever suggested that feel shame.

by Briceratops on Feb 3, 2012 10:37 AM PST reply actions

I think it was Ray Ratto

Go Big or Go Home

by ChangoT on Feb 3, 2012 10:41 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

Enough said

And I don’t even live in the Bay Area to see his fat mug spewing nonsense on TV.

Winter. Time to eat fat and watch hockey. -- Margaret Atwood

by Timorous Me on Feb 3, 2012 11:19 AM PST up reply actions

Fatto

Yeah, enough said.

Now that the Sharks seem to be in a better groove, looking forward to next week’s Hawks and Blues game to see how they stack up.

by IsThisTheYear? on Feb 3, 2012 11:56 AM PST up reply actions

NHL.com hates the Sharks so much

If the Sharks lose it’s always front page, wins are ignored. A dominating win last night turns into this on the front page:

by AndrewTeix on Feb 3, 2012 12:37 PM PST reply actions

No...

NHL.com does not hate the Sharks

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 3, 2012 1:42 PM PST up reply actions

I kinda wanna see Vlasic and Burns back together and make them our top pairing while Boyle moves back with Murray on our 2nd pairing. White and Braun could be our 3rd pairing while Demers is traded for Shane Doan or Chris Stewart. =P

by Khaaz on Feb 3, 2012 4:05 PM PST reply actions

I kinda wanna see Vlasic and Burns back together and make them our top pairing while Boyle moves back with Murray on our 2nd pairing. White and Braun could be our 3rd pairing while Demers is ~~traded for Shane Doan or Chris Stewart. =P~~ in the press box, waiting patiently as our 7th defenseman.

Right now, even that’s something I could live with. I hope we don’t have to give anything but draft picks up for anyone we might add.

Winter. Time to eat fat and watch hockey. -- Margaret Atwood

by Timorous Me on Feb 3, 2012 4:57 PM PST up reply actions

Wilson won’t move any of the d-men for a rental and defensemen are the last thing the Coyotes need.

I think most of the big names that are floating around, Stewart, Hemsky, Ruutu are going to cost way too much since there are so many ‘buyers’…it’s going to be interesting to see what kind of move the Sharks decide to make.

by milanahalek on Feb 3, 2012 5:03 PM PST up reply actions

Chris Stewart would be so badass in Teal though...

by Briceratops on Feb 3, 2012 6:23 PM PST up reply actions

Blues aren't about to trade him to the Sharks and make it harder to beat them in the playoffs

by hit 'em on Feb 3, 2012 8:44 PM PST up reply actions

There was an article on Puck Daddy about the possibility of him being traded.

The Blues aren’t ‘sellers’ but Stewart’s been a disappointment for St. Louis so they may be open to a deal. Maybe Demers + Mitchell for Chris Stewart?

by Khaaz on Feb 4, 2012 12:21 AM PST up reply actions

Stewart

There are some ‘rumors’ as to why he’s falling out of favor in St. Louis and obviously, they are just rumors but if any of them are true, I’d be very hesitent to trade for him.

His style of play would be a great fit for the team though and since he’s a RFA, I’d really, really hate to move Demers but this is one trade that would make sense – except that St. Louis is looking for a top 4 lefty d-man.

by milanahalek on Feb 4, 2012 7:03 AM PST up reply actions

I actually didn’t mean to say i’d trade Demers for Shane Doan. Doans too old and he’s just a rental.

Demers for Chris Stewart i would do in a heartbeat though.

by Khaaz on Feb 4, 2012 12:14 AM PST up reply actions

Or....

Demers with Boyle on the second pairing and Murray as 7. I think going up against the full range of competition in the NHL throughout a 82 game season Murray is an asset, but when we have to beat teams like CHI and VAN in the playoffs it would be a plus to have 6 defensemen that can be mobile and move the puck efficiently and responsibly, as opposed to more muscle. Would you say there is any sense to this?

"I believe in you guys in the media. I believe that you will find a way to doubt this team. Just as long as what's written is written against us we'll be happy." - Jim Harbaugh

by SanFranciscoKnights on Feb 3, 2012 6:27 PM PST up reply actions

Murray moves the puck well – his only limitation is his skating, his hockey IQ, positioning, first pass are all very good. I agree with Khaaz that Vlasic and Burns should eventually be put back together as the top pairing and Boyle with Murray taking on secondary competition.

by milanahalek on Feb 3, 2012 6:33 PM PST up reply actions

Demers with Boyle would potentially kill off the entire Sharks fanbase—heart attack city. But I did think Demers played fairly well with Burns. He did a good job of being more mindful defensively.

Winter. Time to eat fat and watch hockey. -- Margaret Atwood

by Timorous Me on Feb 3, 2012 11:49 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah let's trade Pavs! For a bag of chips. EVERYONE LOVES CHIPS!

Chips never fail to be crunchy. They’re vacuum-sealed from their unholy creation in a fry lab somewhere after being drained of water and potato-ness and deep-fried and deep-frozen to be re-fried and then rolled in a powdery mix of orange imitation cheese and Hot Pepper Flavouring #11 and that’s why when you pop open the bag you get some powdery orange crunch that never, ever fails to make noises when you shatter it with your teeth.

Hockey players are not chips. Sorry, they aren’t crunchy all the time. Sorry, they’re real. Nobody can be a consistent scorer 100% of the time. Nobody can avoid making mistakes 100% of the time either.

However, Ratto said it, so it doesn’t matter.

Screaming to trade a good player is stupid. The Sharks are one of those teams who are typically spoiled with good players and effort so their fans often don’t appreciate what they’ve got. My Leafs fan friend thinks it’s incredible that people get on Marleau for his mistakes, but it’s equally stupid to get on Boyle, Clowe, or Pavs for not being a consistent fight-to-the-death win machine.

What are your highest, but realistic, hopes in a trade anyway? To receive another flawed, yet somewhat consistently good hockey player that fits you better and is somewhat durable, right? Trading and getting a new coach are often hilariously looked at as quick fixes. It boggles the mind. :D

Waffles, Digimon, SETOGUCHI

STALOCK GET A ROBOT LEG OR SOMETHING AND COME BACK~WE NEED SOME LOCK STOCK STALOCK HERE!!

Like manga, sci fi, webcomics, and Metaphorical Bazookas? Check out http://firework.the-comic.org!

Defense wins games, championships, and my heart, as in the case of Avery Bradley, Jr., Boston Celtics guard #0

by YeahTommyB4ZGermansGetThere on Feb 3, 2012 6:31 PM PST reply actions

Just an aside to say....

… That is really like a lot of the new feature writers added this season.

Great work, one and all…

"Never start a fight, but ALWAYS finish it."
@TheFourthPeriod How intense with the #Bruins #Habs PO series be? || @Noctro Like K-Y Jelly lit on fire. || @TheFourthPeriod Wow. Best. Answer. Ever.
"I still say McLellan needs to roll Pavelski, Marleau, and Stetoguchi together. No one would go NEAR that line."
My Twitter

by Noctro on Feb 3, 2012 10:43 PM PST reply actions

Yeah, I really enjoy checking out the scoring chances after the game. I await them eagerly—it’s fun to see how the eye test matches up with the scoring chances. And while scoring chances aren’t everything, I think they do speak (particularly with the matchups) to how guys are playing.

Winter. Time to eat fat and watch hockey. -- Margaret Atwood

by Timorous Me on Feb 3, 2012 11:51 PM PST up reply actions