Much has been made of the downfall of the Colorado Avalanche so far this season. As predicted by many bloggers and mainstream media alike the Avalanche have come back to earth, so to speak, this season.
Unlike last season when the Avalanche had 35 wins (76% of the games) when they were out shot, which was good for first in the NHL, this season the Avalanche have only won two games (17% of the games) when being out shot, which dropped them to 26th in the NHL.
Clearly the Avalanche did not have the magical shot quality formula that they thought. How did Colorado get to this point believing they were better than they have shown this year?
Similar to the Toronto Maple Leafs in the lockout shortened 2012-13 season, the Colorado Avalanche rode a high percentage of puck luck, also known as PDO, to the playoffs. This masked the key issues in how the team was constructed and how they played.
Last season Colorado had 101.8 PDO rating, which I will refer to as puck luck rather than some obscure acronym, which included an 8.8 shooting percentage and a 93.1 save percentage. All the while they only had 47 percent of the shots for over the course of the year.
Consider that the average puck luck rating last season was 99.99 with averages of 7.7 shooting percentage and 92.3 save percentage combining to make that number. The Avalanche had an extra success rate of 1.1 percentage points on their shots for. Over their total of 1871 shots for that makes up 21 goals for. They also had a save percentage that was 0.8 percent higher than the league average, which would account for 16 more goals against over their 2049 shots against.
Essentially because of favorable percentages the Colorado Avalanche went from 143 goals for and 158 goals against to 164 goals for and 142 goals against. A swing from a minus 15 rating to a plus 22 rating.
Based on a very basic theory of goals for and goals against being used to calculate winning percentages the Avalanche would have been projected for 44 regulation and overtime wins last year, they actually had 47. Based on the 143 goals for and 158 goals against they would have been projected to win only 39 regulation or overtime games.
Looking back to last year’s standings these totals, adjusted for puck luck, would have them making the playoffs in a wildcard spot (7th most likely) instead of winning the Central Division. That would have seen them face the Chicago Blackhawks in the first round instead of the Minnesota Wild, all other things being equal.
This is just another team that has illustrated that puck luck is not sustainable year to year. As well the shot quality argument does not carry much, if any, weight when predicting future performance. The theory is that you can be out shot as long as your shots are of higher quality than the opposition.
The amount of shot attempts for, better known as CORSI or FENWICK is still the best indicator of future success. It is high time all NHL teams accepted that fact and worked to improve in those areas.
I am looking at you Colorado and Toronto!
Thanks to Stats.HockeyAnalysis.com for the use of their statistics.
