By the numbers: Game 59 vs. Nashville

Scoring Chances

Team	Period	Time	Note	Home						Away						State
Away	1	17:11	Karlsson from Pavelski, save	6	7	19	35	41	64	8	19	32	44	68	88	5v5
Home	1	16:44	Jarnkrok from Forsberg, save	3	9	19	35	41	59	15	32	44	81	88	89	5v5
Home	1	16:33	Josi from Forsberg, save	3	9	19	35	41	59	15	32	44	81	88	89	5v5
Home	1	16:21	Jarnkrok from Josi, miss	3	9	19	35	57	59	15	32	44	81	88	89	5v5
Away	1	14:34	Irwin from Karlsson, goal	6	18	33	35	59	63	12	32	39	44	83	88	5v5
Home	1	12:56	Ribiero from Neal, goalpost	3	18	33	35	63	83	27	32	48	50	52	57	5v5
Away	1	12:44	Hertl from Tierney, save	3	18	33	35	63	83	27	32	48	50	52	57	5v5
Away	1	12:42	Tierney from Hertl rebound, miss	3	18	33	35	63	83	27	32	48	50	52	57	5v5
Away	1	8:29	Nieto, save	14	18	28	35	63	64	4	12	32	39	61	83	5v5
Home	1	4:53	Jarnkrok from Forsberg, save	3	9	19	35	41	83	4	15	32	61	81	89	5v5
Home	1	4:00	Smith from Ekholm rebound, goal	6	7	14	15	35	63	32	39	44	52	68	83	5v5
Away	1	2:53	Pavelski from Thornton, save (5v4 PP)	6	24	28	35	59		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Home	2	19:08	Smith, goal (5v4 PP)	3	14	15	33	35	63	32	39	44	57	88		5v4
Home	2	18:19	Gaustad (yes, Paul freaking Gaustad) from Bourque, goal	6	24	28	35	57	59	4	8	19	32	61	68	5v5
Away	2	17:08	Burns from Thornton, save (5v4 PP)	3	14	24	28	35		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	17:07	Couture from Burns rebound, save (5v4 PP)	3	14	24	28	35		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	17:06	Couture, save (5v4 PP)	3	14	24	28	35		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	17:05	Pavelski, save (5v4 PP)	3	14	24	28	35		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	16:30	Burns from Marleau, save (5v4 PP)	6	19	35	57	59		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	15:51	Pavelski from Marleau, save (5v4 PP)	6	19	35	57	59		8	12	19	32	39	88	4v5
Away	2	15:34	Marleau from Burns, save	6	12	19	35	57	59	8	12	19	32	39	88	5v5
Home	2	9:30	Neal from Ribiero, goal because why not?	14	18	33	35	63	64	12	32	39	44	61	83	5v5
Away	2	8:57	Couture from Dillon rebound, save	7	12	14	15	35	64	4	12	32	39	61	83	5v5
Away	2	8:52	Karlsson from Pavelski, save	6	24	28	35	57	59	8	19	27	32	52	68	5v5
Away	2	7:01	Goodrow from Sheppard, miss	9	14	19	35	41	64	4	15	32	61	81	89	5v5
Home	2	0:06	Gaustad from Bourque, save (oh man, a save!)	3	14	24	28	35	57	4	12	32	39	52	83	5v5
Home	3	17:46	Jones from Bitetto, save	3	7	12	15	35	83	27	32	48	50	52	57	5v5
Home	3	17:20	Beck from Forsberg, save	3	9	19	35	41	83	4	15	32	44	81	89	5v5
Home	3	15:14	Fisher from Cullen, save	3	7	12	15	35	83	32	44	48	50	52	57	5v5
Home	3	12:09	Forsberg from Ribiero, save	3	9	18	35	63	64	4	15	32	57	61	89	5v5
Away	3	5:58	Wingels from Tierney, save	3	9	19	35	41	83	27	32	48	50	52	57	5v5
Away	3	5:09	Goodrow from Burns rebound, save	14	18	33	35	63	64	15	32	44	81	88	89	5v5
Away	3	2:21	Kennedy, miss	3	9	19	35	41	83	15	32	44	81	88	89	5v5
Home	3	1:16	Bourque from Gaustad, save	14	24	28	35	57	64	4	8	19	32	61	68	5v5
Away	3	0:27	Nieto from Couture, miss	3	18	33	35	63	83	12	27	32	39	52	83	5v5

San Jose

Even Strength Scoring Chance Save Percentage: 78.6%

Percent of Fenwick Events that were Scoring Chances: 27.1%

#	Player	EV			PP			SH
4	DILLON, BRENDEN	19:11	3	6	00:19	0	0	00:48	0	0
8	PAVELSKI, JOE	13:06	3	2	04:55	7	0	01:38	0	0
12	MARLEAU, PATRICK	15:05	5	2	03:48	7	0	00:56	0	0
15	SHEPPARD, JAMES	13:22	3	6	00:07	0	0	00:00	0	0
19	THORNTON, JOE	12:32	3	2	04:12	7	0	00:09	0	0
27	HANNAN, SCOTT	14:21	5	2	00:00	0	0	00:48	0	0
32	STALOCK, ALEX		13	14		7	0		0	1
39	COUTURE, LOGAN	14:21	5	3	03:48	7	0	01:35	0	1
44	VLASIC, MARC-EDOUARD	17:56	4	7	00:38	0	0	02:44	0	1
48	HERTL, TOMAS	10:33	3	3	01:41	0	0	00:00	0	0
50	TIERNEY, CHRIS	10:30	3	3	00:00	0	0	00:00	0	0
52	IRWIN, MATT	16:20	5	5	01:53	0	0	00:00	0	0
57	WINGELS, TOMMY	11:42	3	4	00:57	0	0	01:25	0	1
61	BRAUN, JUSTIN	15:34	3	5	00:00	0	0	00:00	0	0
68	KARLSSON, MELKER	13:04	2	3	01:08	0	0	00:00	0	0
81	KENNEDY, TYLER	12:38	3	5	00:07	0	0	00:00	0	0
83	NIETO, MATT	13:02	4	3	01:41	0	0	00:52	0	0
88	BURNS, BRENT	17:17	5	3	04:39	7	0	02:44	0	1
89	GOODROW, BARCLAY	12:04	3	6	00:07	0	0	00:29	0	0

Nashville

Even Strength Scoring Chance Save Percentage: 92.3%

Percent of Fenwick Events that were Scoring Chances: 36.8%

#	Player	EV			PP			SH
3	JONES, SETH	20:33	10	5	01:41	1	0	02:15	0	4
6	WEBER, SHEA	16:23	2	4	01:51	0	0	03:23	0	3
7	CULLEN, MATT	10:19	3	2	00:00	0	0	00:29	0	0
9	FORSBERG, FILIP	13:33	6	3	01:51	0	0	00:00	0	0
12	FISHER, MIKE	11:02	2	2	01:51	0	0	01:27	0	0
14	EKHOLM, MATTIAS	19:42	4	4	01:41	1	0	02:37	0	4
15	SMITH, CRAIG	11:00	3	1	01:41	1	0	00:00	0	0
18	NEAL, JAMES	14:29	3	6	01:51	0	0	00:00	0	0
19	JARNKROK, CALLE	12:53	5	5	00:00	0	0	02:22	0	2
24	NYSTROM, ERIC	11:22	3	1	00:00	0	0	02:40	0	5
28	GAUSTAD, PAUL	11:39	3	2	00:00	0	0	02:36	0	5
33	WILSON, COLIN	14:14	2	5	01:41	1	0	00:00	0	0
35	RINNE, PEKKA		14	13		1	0		0	7
41	BECK, TAYLOR	13:01	4	4	00:00	0	0	00:06	0	0
57	BOURQUE, GABRIEL	11:44	4	2	00:00	0	0	02:16	0	2
59	JOSI, ROMAN	15:12	4	3	01:51	0	0	03:23	0	3
63	RIBEIRO, MIKE	16:08	4	6	01:41	1	0	00:04	0	0
64	BARTLEY, VICTOR	15:37	3	5	00:00	0	0	00:22	0	0
83	BITETTO, ANTHONY	13:29	5	5	00:00	0	0	00:00	0	0

Period-by-Period Summary

Period	Totals		EV		PP		5v3 PP		SH		5v3 SH
1	6	6	5	6	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	10	4	4	3	6	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
3	4	5	4	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

-Much like the Tampa game, this game wasn’t as lopsided as the score indicates, as scoring chances at evens were 14-13 in favor of Nashville

-What certainly helped the Sharks in this game was the powerplay. They didn’t score a goal with it, but the Sharks generated seven scoring chances on the powerplay, thanks in large part to a flurry of four scoring chances in four seconds during a net-mouth scramble in the second period (the Sharks would go on to generate two more scoring chances during that powerplay).

-Although the fourth line had its first decent game in a while in the offensive zone, it came at the cost of good defense, as the fourth line was on the ice for six scoring chances against at evens. It’s hard to say what the reason for that line’s struggles was, but I think it’s maybe about time Shep had a turn watching from the pressbox, as he’s running a (small sample size warning) -8 scoring chance differential over his last three games.

-For the second straight game, I’d say the Sharks’ second line was their strongest, as Marleau in particular looked very good, finishing his night with a +3 scoring chance differential.

-The Sharks were able to avoid getting hammered too much by Ribiero’s line, but Forsberg and his linemates were able to produce quite a bit, as Forsberg was on the ice for six NSH scoring chances at evens.

-The five scoring chances against he was on the ice for doesn’t look pretty, but Seth Jones put up a very respectable +5 scoring chance differential in this game, being on the ice for over 70% of Nashville’s even strength scoring chances.

-For some reason, the Sharks had a hard time handling Nashville’s fourth line (which is especially embarrassing when you see that line started zero shifts in the offensive zone).

-I have no knowledge of how sustainable such a statistic is, but it is worth noting that 37% of the Preds’ even strength Fenwick events were scoring chances, while only 27% of San Jose’s were.

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	4	2	0.50	3	2	0.67	75%	0
8	5	3	0.60	5	3	0.60	100%	1
12	6	1	0.17	3	0	0.00	50%	1
15	6	6	1.00	3	5	1.67	50%	0
19	1	0	0.00	0	0	#DIV/0!	0%	0
27	2	2	1.00	1	2	2.00	50%	0
39	6	5	0.83	6	5	0.83	100%	1
44	4	5	1.25	3	3	1.00	75%	0
48	0	0	#DIV/0!	0	0	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	1
50	5	2	0.40	5	2	0.40	100%	1
52	3	2	0.67	1	1	1.00	33%	0
57	9	2	0.22	4	0	0.00	44%	0
61	1	0	0.00	1	0	0.00	100%	0
68	1	1	1.00	1	1	1.00	100%	2
81	3	1	0.33	3	1	0.33	100%	0
83	8	2	0.25	5	1	0.20	63%	0
88	1	1	1.00	0	0	#DIV/0!	0%	0
89	4	3	0.75	2	2	1.00	50%	0
Team	69	38	0.55	46	28	0.61	67%	7
Opp	63	39	0.62	31	20	0.65	49%	9

Nashville

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
NSH3	3	2	0.67	2	0	0.00	67%	0
NSH6	2	1	0.50	1	1	1.00	50%	0
NSH7	3	1	0.33	1	1	1.00	33%	1
NSH9	10	8	0.80	7	6	0.86	70%	2
NSH12	3	2	0.67	2	2	1.00	67%	0
NSH14	4	0	0.00	0	0	#DIV/0!	0%	0
NSH15	2	7	3.50	1	2	2.00	50%	0
NSH18	5	3	0.60	3	1	0.33	60%	0
NSH19	2	0	0.00	2	0	0.00	100%	2
NSH24	4	2	0.50	2	2	1.00	50%	0
NSH28	3	0	0.00	0	0	#DIV/0!	0%	0
NSH33	3	0	0.00	1	0	0.00	33%	2
NSH41	2	4	2.00	1	1	1.00	50%	0
NSH57	7	3	0.43	2	1	0.50	29%	0
NSH59	3	1	0.33	1	0	0.00	33%	0
NSH63	5	3	0.60	5	3	0.60	100%	2
NSH64	2	2	1.00	0	0	#DIV/0!	0%	0
NSH83	0	0	#DIV/0!	0	0	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	0
Team	63	39	0.62	31	20	0.65	49%	9

-We mentioned last night in our recap that the Sharks’ neutral zone attack was way better than usual last night, and the numbers here bear that out. While Nashville carried the puck in on a surprisingly-high 49% of their entries, San Jose did so on 67% of their entries.

-The biggest contributor’s to San Jose’s neutral zone efforts were Dillon, Couture, Vlasic, Nieto, and Tierney, who had another good game in the neutral zone.

-Karlsson wasn’t able to have much success last night, getting denied on two out of his three entry attempts

-Ribiero, Fisher, and Forsberg put up pretty good numbers for Nashville, while Smith put up a ridiculously high number of shot attempts/entry for some indiscernible reason.

-The #Perds weren’t able to generate much offense off of Seth Jones’ carry-ins, but his neutral zone performance was pretty impressive, as he carried the puck in two times on three entries.

Entry Targeting

San Jose

Player #	# of entry attempts against	Carry-ins against	Failed entries against	Carry % against	Break up %
4	10	5	3	50.00	30.00
5				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
8				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
10				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
12	2	0	0	0.00	0.00
13				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
15				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
18				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
19				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
20				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
25				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
27	6	3	0	50.00	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	14	9	0	64.29	0.00
48	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
50	1	1	0	100.00	0.00
52	7	4	0	57.14	0.00
57				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
61	7	3	2	42.86	28.57
68	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
71				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
75				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
76				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
80				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
81				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
83	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
88	10	3	2	30.00	20.00
89	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
Team	61	28	7	45.90	11.48

Nashville

Player #	# of entry attempts against	Carry-ins against	Failed entries against	Carry % against	Break up %
3	9	5	1	55.56	11.11
4				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
6	12	7	1	58.33	8.33
7	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
9				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
10				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
12	1	0	0	0.00	0.00
13				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
14	12	9	3	75.00	25.00
15	2	2	0	100.00	0.00
16				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
18	2	1	1	50.00	50.00
19	2	0	0	0.00	0.00
20				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
21				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
24				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
25				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
26				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
28	1	1	0	100.00	0.00
33	1	1	0	100.00	0.00
41				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
44				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
57				#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
59	5	5	0	100.00	0.00
63	5	1	1	20.00	20.00
64	8	6	0	75.00	0.00
83	8	4	0	50.00	0.00
Team	69	42	7	60.87	10.14

-Braun didn’t have a fantastic first game back from injury, but he did do a good job stifling Nashville’s entry attempts, as he only allowed carry-ins on three of the seven entries Nashville attempted against him, and he denied another two of them.

-Burns also had another one of his rare good games defending against entries, as Nashville only managed three carry-ins against him on ten entry attempts.

-One of the best parts of this type of analysis is that you can see what players in particular contributed most to their team’s numbers. Through this analysis, we can see that the defensemen most responsible for Nashville’s bad numbers in this game was… anybody not named Anthony Bitetto.

-Seriously though, Bitetto was the only Nashville defenseman in this game who had a carry-in against percentage that was 50 or lower.

-During the game, I was thinking it was weird how many carry-ins Weber was allowing, but it’s funny looking back at the numbers now and seeing that he wasn’t even the worst NSH defenseman in that regard, as Mattias Ekholm allowed nine carry-ins against on twelve SJ entry attempts.

Zone Exits

San Jose

Player #	Touches	In-Zone Passes	Pass-Outs	Carry-Outs	Turnovers	Icings	Overall Success %	Exit Success %	Turnover %
4	13	8	1	1	3	0	15.38	40.00	23.08
5							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
8	13	6	0	4	3	0	30.77	57.14	23.08
10							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
12	4	1	1	0	2	0	25.00	33.33	50.00
13							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
15	6	0	1	2	3	0	50.00	50.00	50.00
18							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
19	8	4	1	1	2	0	25.00	50.00	25.00
20							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
25							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
27	6	3	1	0	2	0	16.67	33.33	33.33
37							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
38							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
39	8	2	2	1	3	0	37.50	50.00	37.50
41							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
43							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
44	8	4	3	0	1	0	37.50	75.00	12.50
48	5	2	1	0	2	0	20.00	33.33	40.00
50	4	0	3	0	1	0	75.00	75.00	25.00
52	9	5	1	0	3	0	11.11	25.00	33.33
57	0	0	0	0	0	0	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
61	15	6	0	0	6	3	0.00	0.00	40.00
68	7	2	2	1	2	0	42.86	60.00	28.57
71							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
75							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
76							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
80							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
81	4	2	0	0	2	0	0.00	0.00	50.00
83	8	2	2	1	3	0	37.50	50.00	37.50
88	17	11	0	1	5	0	5.88	16.67	29.41
89	4	0	0	0	3	1	0.00	0.00	75.00
Totals:	139	58	19	12	46	4	22.30	38.27	33.09

Nashville

Player #	Touches	In-Zone Passes	Pass-Outs	Carry-Outs	Turnovers	Icings	Overall Success %	Exit Success %	Turnover %
3	12	8	1	1	2	0	16.67	50.00	16.67
4							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
6	12	7	1	0	3	1	8.33	20.00	25.00
7	3	0	0	0	3	0	0.00	0.00	100.00
9	9	1	1	4	3	0	55.56	62.50	33.33
10							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
12	2	0	1	0	1	0	50.00	50.00	50.00
13							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
14	12	4	3	1	4	0	33.33	50.00	33.33
15	4	1	0	0	3	0	0.00	0.00	75.00
16							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
18	13	3	4	2	4	0	46.15	60.00	30.77
19	6	4	1	1	0	0	33.33	100.00	0.00
20							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
21							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
24	5	2	0	2	1	0	40.00	66.67	20.00
25							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
26							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
28	4	4	0	0	0	0	0.00	#DIV/0!	0.00
33	3	0	0	1	2	0	33.33	33.33	66.67
41	4	3	0	0	1	0	0.00	0.00	25.00
44							#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
57	5	1	2	1	1	0	60.00	75.00	20.00
59	14	9	2	1	2	0	21.43	60.00	14.29
63	11	3	2	2	4	0	36.36	50.00	36.36
64	4	3	0	0	1	0	0.00	0.00	25.00
83	8	5	0	0	3	0	0.00	0.00	37.50
Team	131	58	18	16	38	1	25.95	46.58	29.01

-Burns had a very ineffective game last night on zone exits, as his only successful breakout occurred when there was only three minutes left in the game.

-Overall the Sharks had a pretty weak game on zone exits, turning the puck over on about 33% of their touches

-A big reason for SJ’s ugly numbers here is the work of Barclay Goodrow and Justin Braun. Goodrow’s generally been very hit-or-miss on entries this season, and last night was definitely one of his “miss” games, as he turned the puck over three times, and iced it once on four touches.

-The highlights for the Sharks here were Chris Tierney, Joe Pavelski, and Marc-Edouard Vlasic, who had one of his most effective zone exit games that I can remember.

-Nashville had quite a few forwards impress on zone exits last night, with Forsberg, Neal, and Nystrom really leading the way for them.

-Nashville’s D didn’t have nearly as much success exiting the zone as their forwards did, though Ekholm and Josi did somewhat counter their bad efforts on entry targeting with pretty good efforts breaking the puck out of Nashville’s defensive zone.