Scoring Chances
| Team | Period | Time | Note | Home | Away | State | ||||||||||
| Away | 1 | 17:34 | Kennedy from Burns, miss | 3 | 14 | 18 | 22 | 26 | 40 | 25 | 31 | 44 | 48 | 81 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 16:24 | Korpikoski from Ekman-Larsson rebound, miss | 4 | 10 | 23 | 24 | 28 | 40 | 4 | 8 | 15 | 31 | 61 | 89 | 5v5 |
| Away | 1 | 15:27 | Burns from Marleau, miss | 3 | 14 | 18 | 22 | 26 | 40 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 44 | 83 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 13:31 | Vermette from Erat, miss | 4 | 10 | 19 | 23 | 40 | 50 | 27 | 31 | 39 | 52 | 57 | 68 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 10:41 | Erat from Stone rebound, save | 3 | 10 | 19 | 26 | 40 | 50 | 8 | 31 | 39 | 44 | 68 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 5:43 | Boedker from Ekman-Larsson, goal | 4 | 8 | 23 | 24 | 40 | 89 | 12 | 19 | 27 | 31 | 52 | 83 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 4:56 | Boedker, save | 3 | 4 | 8 | 9 | 40 | 89 | 15 | 27 | 31 | 52 | 57 | 89 | 5v5 |
| Home | 1 | 4:18 | Gagner from Stone, save | 3 | 9 | 18 | 26 | 38 | 40 | 4 | 15 | 31 | 57 | 61 | 89 | 5v5 |
| Away | 1 | 3:17 | Kennedy from McGinn, miss | 5 | 10 | 14 | 19 | 20 | 40 | 25 | 31 | 44 | 48 | 81 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Away | 1 | 2:03 | Nieto from Thornton, save | 3 | 9 | 26 | 38 | 40 | 89 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 44 | 83 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Away | 1 | 1:34 | Goodrow, miss | 5 | 8 | 20 | 24 | 28 | 40 | 15 | 31 | 44 | 57 | 88 | 89 | 5v5 |
| Away | 2 | 19:31 | Pavelski from Thornton, goal (5v4 PP) | 4 | 8 | 14 | 23 | 40 | 8 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 39 | 88 | 4v5 | |
| Away | 2 | 18:28 | Hertl from Burns, goal | 3 | 10 | 19 | 26 | 40 | 50 | 25 | 31 | 44 | 48 | 81 | 88 | 5v5 |
| Home | 2 | 9:02 | Doan from Vermette, goal | 4 | 10 | 19 | 23 | 40 | 50 | 4 | 8 | 31 | 39 | 61 | 68 | 5v5 |
| Home | 2 | 8:42 | Boedker from Gagner, miss | 5 | 9 | 20 | 38 | 40 | 89 | 4 | 8 | 31 | 39 | 61 | 68 | 5v5 |
| Away | 2 | 1:02 | Nieto from Marleau, save | 4 | 8 | 23 | 24 | 28 | 40 | 4 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 61 | 83 | 5v5 |
| Away | 3 | 19:16 | Pavelski from Thornton, save (5v4 PP) | 4 | 10 | 23 | 40 | 50 | 8 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 39 | 88 | 4v5 | |
| Away | 3 | 19:07 | Pavelski from Burns, miss (5v4 PP) | 4 | 10 | 23 | 40 | 50 | 8 | 12 | 19 | 31 | 39 | 88 | 4v5 | |
| Home | 3 | 11:14 | Gagner from Yandle, save (5v4 PP) | 3 | 8 | 9 | 23 | 38 | 40 | 31 | 44 | 61 | 83 | 89 | 5v4 | |
| Away | 3 | 4:21 | Couture from Burns, save | 4 | 9 | 10 | 20 | 38 | 40 | 4 | 31 | 39 | 61 | 68 | 83 | 5v5 |
| Home | 3 | 0:25 | Vermette, save (6v5) | 3 | 9 | 18 | 23 | 50 | 89 | 8 | 31 | 39 | 44 | 68 | 88 | 5v5 |
San Jose
| # | Player | EV | PP | SH | ||||||
| 4 | DILLON, BRENDEN | 18:25 | 2 | 4 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:07 | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | PAVELSKI, JOE | 13:22 | 0 | 5 | 04:07 | 3 | 0 | 01:58 | 0 | 0 |
| 12 | MARLEAU, PATRICK | 12:35 | 3 | 1 | 04:07 | 3 | 0 | 02:45 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | SHEPPARD, JAMES | 12:50 | 1 | 3 | 00:40 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | THORNTON, JOE | 12:54 | 3 | 1 | 03:59 | 3 | 0 | 01:17 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | MCGINN, TYE | 11:23 | 3 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | HANNAN, SCOTT | 14:23 | 0 | 3 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 01:50 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | NIEMI, ANTTI | 8 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |||
| 39 | COUTURE, LOGAN | 13:04 | 1 | 5 | 04:07 | 3 | 0 | 01:18 | 0 | 0 |
| 44 | VLASIC, MARC-EDOUARD | 17:27 | 6 | 2 | 00:29 | 0 | 0 | 03:12 | 0 | 1 |
| 48 | HERTL, TOMAS | 11:12 | 3 | 0 | 00:32 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 52 | IRWIN, MATT | 15:40 | 0 | 3 | 00:32 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 57 | WINGELS, TOMMY | 13:02 | 1 | 3 | 00:32 | 0 | 0 | 01:03 | 0 | 0 |
| 61 | BRAUN, JUSTIN | 16:47 | 2 | 4 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 03:12 | 0 | 1 |
| 68 | KARLSSON, MELKER | 13:17 | 1 | 5 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 81 | KENNEDY, TYLER | 11:15 | 3 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 83 | NIETO, MATT | 12:41 | 4 | 1 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 01:22 | 0 | 1 |
| 88 | BURNS, BRENT | 17:37 | 6 | 2 | 04:10 | 3 | 0 | 01:57 | 0 | 0 |
| 89 | GOODROW, BARCLAY | 12:18 | 1 | 3 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:35 | 0 | 1 |
Arizona
| # | Player | EV | PP | SH | ||||||
| 3 | YANDLE, KEITH | 18:00 | 4 | 4 | 05:09 | 1 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 4 | MICHALEK, ZBYNEK | 14:23 | 5 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 03:38 | 0 | 3 |
| 5 | MURPHY, CONNOR | 17:34 | 1 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:58 | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | RIEDER, TOBIAS | 11:36 | 2 | 2 | 01:42 | 1 | 0 | 00:08 | 0 | 1 |
| 9 | GAGNER, SAM | 16:30 | 4 | 2 | 01:42 | 1 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 | ERAT, MARTIN | 13:26 | 4 | 3 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 01:37 | 0 | 2 |
| 14 | VITALE, JOE | 09:33 | 0 | 3 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 02:00 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | MOSS, DAVID | 10:09 | 2 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 02:28 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | DOAN, SHANE | 10:04 | 3 | 2 | 03:27 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | SUMMERS, CHRIS | 17:44 | 1 | 3 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:58 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | MCMILLAN, BRANDON | 08:14 | 0 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:07 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | EKMAN-LARSSON, OLIVER | 15:33 | 5 | 1 | 04:27 | 1 | 0 | 03:41 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | CHIPCHURA, KYLE | 14:28 | 2 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:03 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | STONE, MICHAEL | 17:10 | 2 | 4 | 00:42 | 0 | 0 | 00:03 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | KORPIKOSKI, LAURI | 13:02 | 1 | 2 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 38 | LESSIO, LUCAS | 15:59 | 2 | 2 | 01:42 | 1 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
| 40 | DUBNYK, DEVAN | 8 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | |||
| 50 | VERMETTE, ANTOINE | 11:52 | 4 | 1 | 03:27 | 0 | 0 | 02:36 | 0 | 2 |
| 89 | BOEDKER, MIKKEL | 15:53 | 4 | 1 | 03:27 | 0 | 0 | 00:19 | 0 | 0 |
Period-by-Period Summary
| Period | Totals | EV | PP | 5v3 PP | SH | 5v3 SH | ||||||
| 1 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
I don’t think it will come as any surprise to anyone who watched last night’s game that San Jose’s fourth line was easily their strongest, with their numbers here supporting that perception, as every member of that line had a +3 scoring chance differential and was on the ice for zero scoring chances against. As great as the fourth line’s performance was, it did somewhat come at the cost of the other line’s performances. While Thornton’s line did almost as well as the fourth line, the Sharks’ other lines did not, with Pavelski’s line especially putting up a stinker of a game with only one scoring chance generated while that line was on the ice (or the majority of that line. Pavelski was not on for their one scoring chance), and five being generated against the Sharks while they were on. Despite notching his first tally of the season, Dillon didn’t have the best game on scoring chances, as he and Braun both finished the night a -2 on scoring chance differential. Burns and Vlasic, on the other hand, had a pretty good game, finishing with +4 differentials.
Aside from their bottom two lines sharing the load of facing the Sharks’ suddenly-good fourth line, Arizona’s players basically all managed respectable scoring chance numbers. Arizona’s top two lines especially did quite well, and their first D-pair put up very good numbers. Good to see Gagner finally experiencing a bit of success in the desert, as the start of his season wasn’t great. Also, congrats to whoever ends up trading for Vermette, because whoever does will be adding quite a nice piece to their roster.
Zone Entries
San Jose
| Player | # of successful entries | Shots generated from player’s entries | Shots per entry | # of controlled entries | Shots generated from player’s controlled entries | Shots per controlled entry | % of entries with control | Failed entries |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 100% | 0 |
| 8 | 5 | 0 | 0.00 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 40% | 0 |
| 12 | 3 | 2 | 0.67 | 3 | 2 | 0.67 | 100% | 1 |
| 15 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| 19 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 33% | 0 |
| 25 | 5 | 2 | 0.40 | 2 | 1 | 0.50 | 40% | 0 |
| 27 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 100% | 0 |
| 39 | 5 | 3 | 0.60 | 2 | 1 | 0.50 | 40% | 1 |
| 44 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0 |
| 48 | 4 | 3 | 0.75 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 | 50% | 0 |
| 52 | 3 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| 57 | 10 | 4 | 0.40 | 4 | 2 | 0.50 | 40% | 0 |
| 61 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| 68 | 4 | 2 | 0.50 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 25% | 0 |
| 81 | 5 | 4 | 0.80 | 3 | 1 | 0.33 | 60% | 0 |
| 83 | 4 | 2 | 0.50 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 | 50% | 2 |
| 88 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 50% | 0 |
| 89 | 4 | 3 | 0.75 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 1 |
| Team | 62 | 27 | 0.44 | 26 | 13 | 0.50 | 42% | 5 |
| Opp | 61 | 29 | 0.48 | 20 | 11 | 0.55 | 33% | 2 |
Arizona
| Player | # of successful entries | Shots generated from player’s entries | Shots per entry | # of controlled entries | Shots generated from player’s controlled entries | Shots per controlled entry | % of entries with control | Failed entries |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI3 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| ARI4 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0 |
| ARI5 | 2 | 1 | 0.50 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| ARI8 | 5 | 1 | 0.20 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 20% | 0 |
| ARI9 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 50% | 1 |
| ARI10 | 7 | 5 | 0.71 | 5 | 4 | 0.80 | 71% | 0 |
| ARI14 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0 |
| ARI18 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 33% | 0 |
| ARI19 | 6 | 4 | 0.67 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 33% | 0 |
| ARI20 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| ARI22 | 4 | 3 | 0.75 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 25% | 0 |
| ARI23 | 1 | 2 | 2.00 | 1 | 2 | 2.00 | 100% | 0 |
| ARI24 | 5 | 1 | 0.20 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | 20% | 0 |
| ARI26 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | 0% | 0 |
| ARI28 | 4 | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 25% | 0 |
| ARI38 | 6 | 3 | 0.50 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 17% | 0 |
| ARI50 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 50% | 1 |
| ARI89 | 8 | 5 | 0.63 | 4 | 2 | 0.50 | 50% | 0 |
| Team | 61 | 29 | 0.48 | 20 | 11 | 0.55 | 33% | 2 |
Again, great effort by San Jose’s fourth line last night, as their good play carried over to the neutral zone and all three members of that line put up pretty good zone entry numbers (like I said when Nieto came back, really good to have Kennedy back in the lineup, as he was one of the Sharks’ best zone entry guys last season). Nieto put up good numbers, as did Goodrow (despite him not carrying the puck in on any of his entries), and zone entry wizards Patrick Marleau and Scott Hannan both carried the puck into the zone on 100% of their entries.
The Desert Dogs’ carry-in percentage was pretty low in this game, and a pretty big reason for that was the play of Lessio, Chipchura, and McMillan, who all carried the puck in on 25% or less of their entries, while accounting for almost a quarter of Arizona’s entries overall. The players who did do well on zone entries for the Coyotes are basically the usual suspects, as both Boedker and Erat put up great numbers. Arizona did a good job of generating shot attempts off of Doan’s entries, but he didn’t carry the puck in that often.
Entry Targeting
San Jose
| Player # | # of entry attempts against | Carry-ins against | Failed entries against | Carry % against | Break up % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 28.57 | 0.00 |
| 5 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 8 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 10 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 12 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 13 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 15 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 18 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 19 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 50.00 | 0.00 |
| 20 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 25 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 27 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 28.57 | 0.00 |
| 37 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 38 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 39 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 41 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 43 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 44 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 50.00 | 0.00 |
| 48 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 50 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 52 | 10 | 3 | 0 | 30.00 | 0.00 |
| 57 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 61 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 10.00 | 0.00 |
| 68 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 75 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 76 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 80 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 81 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.00 | 100.00 |
| 83 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 88 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 66.67 | 0.00 |
| 89 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Team | 56 | 18 | 1 | 32.14 | 1.79 |
Arizona
| Player # | # of entry attempts against | Carry-ins against | Failed entries against | Carry % against | Break up % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 28.57 | 14.29 |
| 4 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 25.00 | 12.50 |
| 5 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 33.33 | 0.00 |
| 6 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 50.00 | 0.00 |
| 9 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 10 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 11 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 12 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 14 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 18 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 19 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 20 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 54.55 | 0.00 |
| 22 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 23 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 66.67 | 33.33 |
| 24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 26 | 8 | 6 | 1 | 75.00 | 12.50 |
| 28 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 33 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 36 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 38 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 44 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 50 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 89 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 66.67 | 0.00 |
| Team | 56 | 24 | 4 | 42.86 | 7.14 |
Aside from Burns (surprise, surprise), the Sharks’ D did fantastic in this game at preventing the Desert Dogs from carrying the puck into their offensive zone. Excluding Burns, the Sharks’ D averaged just over a 25% carry-in against percentage, which is obviously fantastic. DIllon played a big role in that, as he had a good bounce back game after allowing quite a few carry-ins his last few games. The Sharks’ third pair did exceptionally well at preventing Arizona carry-ins, that pairing only allowing five carry-ins against on seventeen Arizona entry attempts. Although Irwin’s contributions to those numbers can’t be ignored, it’s worth noting that Hannan contributed a lot to it as well, as he did a good job of the only thing he really does well anymore–defending opposition zone entry attempts.
Reading down the numbers for Arizona, you’d wonder why their carry-in against percentage is as high as it is, as Murphy, Michalek and Yandle all allowed three or fewer carry-ins against. Then you get to Summers’ numbers, then Stone’s, and realize why. Although the team as a whole did relatively well at stifling San Jose in the neutral zone, Summers and Stone put up some pretty below-average numbers, and those numbers really inflated Arizona’s overall numbers. Special shoutout to Yandle’s numbers here, as they go to building the case that he isn’t just a defenseman who does good work in the O-zone.
Zone Exits
San Jose
| Player # | Touches | In-Zone Passes | Pass-Outs | Carry-Outs | Turnovers | Icings | Overall Success % | Exit Success % | Turnover % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 17 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 29.41 | 62.50 | 17.65 |
| 5 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 50.00 | 50.00 | 50.00 |
| 10 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 12 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 33.33 | 40.00 | 50.00 |
| 13 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 15 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 42.86 | 75.00 | 14.29 |
| 18 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 19 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 14.29 | 33.33 | 28.57 |
| 20 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 25 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 66.67 | 66.67 | 33.33 |
| 27 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 10.00 | 20.00 | 40.00 |
| 37 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 38 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 39 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 41.67 | 50.00 | 41.67 |
| 41 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 43 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 44 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 30.00 |
| 48 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 40.00 | 66.67 | 20.00 |
| 50 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 52 | 15 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6.67 | 20.00 | 20.00 |
| 57 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 28.57 | 50.00 | 28.57 |
| 61 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 20.00 |
| 68 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 66.67 |
| 75 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 76 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 80 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 81 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 66.67 |
| 83 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 16.67 | 20.00 | 66.67 |
| 88 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 10.00 | 33.33 | 20.00 |
| 89 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 50.00 | 50.00 | 50.00 |
| Totals: | 146 | 64 | 15 | 19 | 47 | 1 | 23.29 | 41.46 | 32.19 |
Arizona
| Player # | Touches | In-Zone Passes | Pass-Outs | Carry-Outs | Turnovers | Icings | Overall Success % | Exit Success % | Turnover % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 13 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23.08 | 75.00 | 7.69 |
| 4 | 11 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 9.09 | 20.00 | 36.36 |
| 5 | 13 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 30.77 |
| 6 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 8 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 50.00 | 55.56 | 40.00 |
| 9 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 44.44 | 66.67 | 22.22 |
| 10 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 28.57 | 66.67 | 14.29 |
| 11 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 12 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 14 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 28.57 | 100.00 | 0.00 |
| 18 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33.33 | 100.00 | 0.00 |
| 19 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 60.00 | 75.00 | 20.00 |
| 20 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 9.09 | 16.67 | 45.45 |
| 22 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 50.00 | 75.00 | 16.67 |
| 23 | 15 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 13.33 | 40.00 | 13.33 |
| 24 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 14.29 | 25.00 | 42.86 |
| 26 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 33.33 | 57.14 | 25.00 |
| 28 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 50.00 | 50.00 | 50.00 |
| 33 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 36 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 38 | 13 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 30.77 | 40.00 | 46.15 |
| 44 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||||||
| 50 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 25.00 |
| 89 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 22.22 | 50.00 | 22.22 |
| Totals: | 159 | 76 | 17 | 23 | 42 | 1 | 25.16 | 48.19 | 26.42 |
While Kennedy didn’t put up great numbers, both Hertl and McGinn did, as the fourth line really did manage to do well in all three zones of the ice last night. Dillon also did really well, posting his best numbers on zone exits so far in his short career in teal. Goodrow, Sheppard and Pavelski put up some pretty good numbers as well, as did Couture, though his high turnover count does lessen how much praise I’m tempted to give him. The third pairing struggled to break the puck out of the zone, as Irwin only managed one successful breakout, and Hannan’s only successful breakout came due to Nieto winning an icing race. I know I’ve been critical of Tennyson a few times here, largely due to my high expectations for him, but he’s clearly a better choice to have in the lineup than Hannan more often than not, and here’s to hoping that the defenseman who will be watching the game against the Maple Leafs on Thursday from the press box will be #27.
A lot of Arizona’s zone exit success came from their forwards, as guys like Rieder, Doan, Gagner, and McMillan all managed pretty good numbers. Yandle led the Coyotes’ D with his zone exit success, only turning the puck over once while attempting a zone exit (though his high number of in-zone passes certainly plays a role in that), and managing three successful pass-outs. Stone helped make up for his poor effort defending against zone entries by doing very well on zone exits, managing a successful zone exit on one-third of his touches.
Notes:
-San Jose’s fourth line did fantastic in all three zones, putting up good numbers in every category
-Arizona managed good scoring chance numbers all around, as only their bottom two lines didn’t post good numbers
-Boedker and Erat led ARI on zone entries, while Marleau led the Sharks’ with a 100% carry-in rate
-Every Shark defenseman but Burns put up solid numbers defending against the Desert Dogs’ entry attempts, with Dillon posting his first good numbers there in a few games
-Stone and Summers
-The Sharks’ third pairing struggled to exit the zone, with Hannan’s only successful breakout coming courtesy of Matt Nieto winning an icing race
-Four Yotes’ forwards led the way on their zone exit attempts, while Yandle and Stone put up good numbers from their backend
As many of you know, Fear the Fin is an independent site run by Sharks fans for Sharks fans. Help keep Fear the Fin independent by contributing to our