Here’s a list of teams that missed out on playoff births by having poor shootout records (in the post-lockout Shootout Era), and the teams that took advantage of them:
| Where shootouts made the difference | |||
| Team in playoffs | Record | Team that missed out | Record |
| Lightning, 2005-6 | 6-4 | Maple Leafs, 2005-6 | 3-7 |
| Lightning, 2006-7 | 10-2 | Maple Leafs, 2006-7 | 4-7 |
| Islanders, 2006-7 | 8-5 | Hurricanes, 2006-7 | 0-5 |
| Rangers, 2008-9 | 10-6 | Panthers, 2008-9 | 3-8 |
If the above teams had all won half of their shootouts, they would have switched places, between on-ice and on-the-links. That’s an average of one playoff team per season that changed, due to the shootout. And curiously, all in the Eastern Conference – Although it would’ve been a close call for Anaheim last season.
**Check out my article “Inside the Projections: Shootouts” over at ESPN Insider for a preview on the impact of shootouts in 2009-10**
sorry to continue my Buffalo-focus (it’s what i know) but I recall the shootout hurting the Sabres in the 2 seasons ago as well.
In 2007-8 they missed the playoffs by 4 points (90 pts/39 wins. BOS: 94 pts, 41 wins. OTT: 94/43, PHI: 95/42). The Sabres were 4-9 in shootouts, so an 8-5 record would have at least tied them for 8th. Not entirely unrealistic since the year before they’d gone 10-4 in the shootouts. I should probably quantify reasons with more time, but based on my faulty memory Ryan Miller was far more stellar vs. the breakaway in the 2007 (10-4) season than in the following season.
also, Lindy Ruff needs to stop counting on Vanek in the shootout. Horrible: 4-23 over the past 3 seasons.
Well now, I’m guessing that my comment will be longer than my original post. Here goes…
In 2007-8, all of the playoff bubble teams in the East were .500 or worse in the shootout: NYR 8-9, PHI 3-6, OTT 3-5, BOS 6-7, WSH 4-4, BUF 4-9, FLA 5-6. Therefore, none of the teams really gained or lost on it. Buffalo’s .605 goaltending (.660 or so is average) and 27.9% shooting (33% or so is average) were both 24th in the NHL. That was “good” for a 28th best shootout winning percentage.
With the very small sample sizes, shootout results are going to vary a lot from year to year (Therefore, we look at career rates for predictions). Last season, Buffalo was 8-5 (.615 – 7th in NHL) with .740 goaltending and 38% shooting.
For my own predictions -different from Puck Prospectus’ VUKOTA predictions- I used the career shootout rates of the top 3 shooters with at least a handful of attempts, plus a weighted average of career goaltending, based on my estimate of usage. Not surprisingly, I’m predicting the Sabres to be mid-pack (sort of an average of the varied results of the last two seasons), with a .497 winning percentage, based on good .701 goaltending and poor 35% shooting of the top three shooters. Miller has been an excellent career goaltender in the shootout at .728, but if that Patrick Lalime (.594) guy is in the game in overtime, you’re in trouble.
I agree with your intuition on the shooters – they’re poor. You typically want to see your top 3 shooters having 40% career rates…the Sabres don’t have one shooter at 40% or more. Their top career rates are Stafford 38.9%, Roy 35.3%, Pominville 30.8% (terrible for a team’s 3rd best shooter), Connolly 21.4%, and your boy Vanek at 20.7%.
The Leafs have generally blown shoot-outs from both ends. They fail to score and they fail to stop the other team from scoring. It’s become a real bugaboo for them. Last year, Wilson even pulled a goalie switch just for the shoot-out. He removed Toskala after the 5-minute OT and put in Joseph who had better career numbers in the shoot-out. Naturally, the Leafs lost.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxscores/200810210TOR.html
NAturally, thetr Leafs on both of their attempts and the Ducks potted both times against Jospeh for an abbreviated SO round.
The issue I have generally had with rating goalies on their SO success is that their rates improve when the shooter misses the net, which is not a clear indication of goalie success.
Talking about missed shots is opening a big can of worms that hockey stats have not handled adequately…but that is really much more of an issue of measuring shooting % outside the shootout. I’ll go out on a limb and say that for shootouts, the missed shots should more or less even out and that shootout save % is okay as a concept…The big, big issue is small sample size, which is why career percentages are really the best way to go (especially as shootout careers only go back 4 years in history as of 2009-10).
I was going to mention the pulling a poor shootout goalie before the shootout…but I didn’t, as it didn’t really sound like a good idea. At whatever point you put the Relief Goalie in -either at the beginning of OT or right before the shootout- aren’t you risking a goal against a cold goalie or possibly even an injury if a goalie is not properly warmed up? Like I said, I had thought about it, and considered it a bad idea not worth mentioning. Therefore, I’m not surprised that the Joseph tactic that you mention failed (Actually, I’m more surprised that a coach was bold enough to try).
I see the temptation in this case, though: the differences were stark. Toskala has a brutal .525 save percentage in 59 career attempts through 2008-9, while Joseph has a scintillating .744 save percentage in 43 attempts. In fact, his save percentage would be an outstanding .780 without the 2 shot failed experiment you describe (which would be 4th best among goalies with as many attempts against). Going forward, Toronto has to hope that Jonah the Whale -I mean, Jonas “The Monster” Gustavsson- is at least an average performer.
In 2005-6, Toronto was brutal at both ends (.583, 16.7%), actually making their 3-7 shootout record a small miracle. By 2008-9, though, shooting was an above average 37.2% (9th), while save % was a dismal .548 (28th), giving last season’s Leafs a below average winning percentage (.462 T-18th). Toronto’s situation going forward is very volatile, based not only on Gustavsson’s performance, but also on if Burke decides to finally trade Tomas Kaberle, by far their best shooter (50%, albeit in 10 career attempts).
Well, Burke did decide to trade Kaberle. He had a window when Kaberle’s no-trade clause was not in effect over the summer. Burke attempted to trade him to the Bruins for Kessel and a 1st rounder. Ciarelli apparently thought that Burke was offering Kaberle and a 1st rounder for Kessel. So that trade died. Kaberle’s no-trade clause is now back in effect and Burke cannot trade him until (I think) next summer, or if Kaberle decides to waive the clause.