Recently, I took time to update my shootout statistic project from a few years ago (now includes 4,500+ shootout attempts in 650+ shootouts). In addition to tracking every shootout from the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 seasons, I went back and tracked two additional statistics to get a better understanding of the process before a shot attempt is made in the shootout. Tracking the shooter as he picked up the puck and skated down the ice, I noted what lanes of the ice he possessed the puck through and whether or not he crossed the Royal Road preceding an attempt on net. To compliment the shootout analysis, I also analyzed every penalty shot since 2012 to see how they compare to shootout attempts.

Contrary to popular belief, shootouts themselves aren’t luck-based but often involve a lot of luck. A strategy can be implemented by a team’s coaching staff to give their team a better chance at winning and picking up the important second point. This involves consistently taking attempts of higher quality to increase your expected shootout goals for. I’ll build on my original blog digging deeper into the elements of a successful shootout attempt before combining them together.

Recent History

The NHL implemented 3v3 overtime prior to the 2015-2016 season striving to add more excitement by increasing offense thus limiting the effect the skills competition has on the standings. The number of games that require extra time has remained consistent with prior years (slightly below 25%), but many more have ended by the way of an overtime goal.

Leading up to the change in overtime format, we consistently saw around 14% of all regular season games ultimately get decided by a shootout, even in the lockout shortened 2012-2013 season. The past two seasons have seen a considerable drop in total shootouts with about 8.5% of all regular season games heading into a fifth period. A clear distinction in shootout frequency can be seen on the above graph. This change has been very successful but the shootout remains an important part of the game as the content’s second point is on the line.

One effect of the overtime rule change has resulted in a great disparity among the number of shootouts each team participates in. Teams with high-powered offenses may be more inclined to take more chances in overtime where they can maximize the talents of their star players. The team’s system and overtime strategy along with luck could also play a large part in this as well.

San Jose, Dallas and Colorado only took part in three shootouts last season where Ottawa, Philadelphia and Florida have all participated in ten or more shootouts. In particular, the Toronto Maple Leafs fought for a playoff spot into the last week of the regular season. Their spot would have been secure much earlier if they had performed better than 1-8 in shootout contests whereas Detroit finished the season in 25th place and a perfect 9-0 record in shootouts. Finishing just two points ahead of 29th place, Detroit’s shootout success made them look stronger than they actually were.

Frequency and Likelihood of Scoring on Attempts

Tracking data from the 2012 season to the present, there have been over 1,300 player seasons of data. The range among attempts is large, varying from a single attempt in each season to 17 (Nicklas Backstrom in 2013-2014). A majority of players are only given a couple of shootout attempts in a single season which makes sense with the normal shootout length being three rounds. Teams usually have a small core of regular shooters, either because of actual or perceived shootout talent and most players will only get called on after other options have been exhausted.

The 3v3 overtime rule has dramatically impacted the number of attempts players may receive in a single season. From 2012-2013 through 2014-2015, an average of 22 players attempted a double digit amount of shootout attempts. There have been a total of only ten players to reach this feat in the two years since. This figure is largely impacted from the teams themselves participating in fewer shootouts rather than teams using players more sparingly but it does beg to ask an important question: are players less effective as they take more shootout attempts in a single season? Additionally, is there a point where you should stop betting on a unproven talent to continue scoring in a shootout?

Looking at the shooting percentage of players in any given attempt on the season, the success rate is calculated by dividing the number of goals scored by players in their X attempt of the season by the total number of players that took that number attempt and so on. This graph is subject to the volatility of the previous graph where the number of players that take X attempts in a season falls off exponentially and has to be considered when looking at the right side of the graph.

The average shooting percentage of the first five attempts taken in a season are around league average but falls off dramatically after that before rebounding on the seventh attempt. With video technology and scouting in today’s game, goalies are more likely to discover player tendencies as the season goes on, contributing to the overall negative trend of the graph.

Taking a binary probability approach, a shootout attempt either results in a goal or miss. Given that a player either scores or misses in his first attempt on the season, is he more or less likely to repeat the original outcome?

Starting with players that scored on their first attempt, they experienced above average success for the next three attempts before slightly scoring below average on the fifth attempt of the season. The scoring percentage falls off on the sixth attempt of the season. A single attempt shouldn’t determine a player’s talent in the shootout but it is worth giving a player who scores on his first attempt more looks to see what he can do. By the fourth or fifth attempt, the coaching staff will have a better idea of shootout talent. It may be worth trying someone else for the role if a player scores on his first attempt but struggles to score beyond that.

For players that miss their first attempt of the season, the odds aren’t in their favor to turn things around. They continue to post below average shooting percentages for the next three attempts. There is a quick spike on the fifth attempt before falling off dramatically on the sixth attempt. Coaches will have to determine whether players missed on the first attempt because of bad luck or if they lack talent in this part of game. Recently, Jack Han wrote an article for The Athletic analyzing a shooter’s plan (or lack thereof) leading up to their shot attempt in the shootout. This is the perfect place to start to determine if a player’s process matches the result. If not, coaches can determine if this process can be taught to a player or if they should tap someone else’s shoulder.

Scoring Beyond the First Three Rounds

Approximately one of every three shootouts remains tied after three rounds and requires at least one additional round of sudden death to determine a winner. A single goal and save in the extra frame is all it takes to ensure the victory but this is easier said than done. One could assume players would give themselves the best opportunity to score with the game on the line but it is the exact opposite. Players tend to simplify their attempts in the extra innings. It is much more typical to see a player skate down the center of the ice and take a wrist shot in the fourth round than make a move on the goalie.

Less dekes, further shot distances, fewer players crossing the Royal Road and less movement across multiple lanes of the ice result in a much lower expected shooting percentage and allows the shootout to last many more rounds (shooters score on 32.80% of shootout attempts in the first three rounds but only on 28.64% of attempts in rounds four onward). The talent discrepancy between a team’s top three shootout artists and depth shooters accounts for part of this difference (the threat of losing the puck due to choppier ice plays a part in this as well) but shootout success is a very coachable skill. Players should always be creative in order to give themselves a larger chance of scoring.

Royal Road

The Royal Road was introduced to hockey analytics in 2015 by former NHL goaltender and current MSG analyst Steve Valiquette and is defined as an imaginary line down the center of the ice (displayed above in black). Valiquette proved that a puck crossing this imaginary line immediately preceding a shot increases the shooter’s scoring opportunity by over 10 times. This puck movement forces goalies to open up as they move laterally in the net in attempt to stay square to the shooter.

Valiquette’s definition allows for the puck to cross the Royal Road either by a pass or by a possessing player. As the shootout only involves a single player, passing the puck over the Royal Road isn’t an option. The key to this definition is crossing the Royal Road immediately preceding a shot or deke attempt. For example, this Bobby Ryan shootout goal passes the Royal Road test where this Evgeny Kuznetsov failed attempt did not. While Kuznetsov crosses the Royal Road at the beginning of the attempt, the goaltender is given ample time to readjust and isn’t forced to move laterally.

Players that stickhandle the puck down the center of the ice cross the Royal Road many times. This may be hard to determine if this should qualify as crossing the Royal Road as the player isn’t making any real effort to make the goaltender move laterally. As long as a player stickhandling down the middle of the rink makes a move across the Royal Road, it was counted. This Valtteri Filppula attempt is a good example of this.

Of the 4,500 tracked shootout attempts, almost exactly half of the shooters crossed the Royal Road preceding a shot attempt. Attempts that crossed the Royal Road resulted in goals 34.0% of the time where those that did not resulted in goals 29.8% of the time. Crossing the Royal Road and causing the goalie to change his form as he adjusts to the new angle of the puck is an effective move in the shootout.

Compared to a league average of 31.9% SH% (shown with a black dashed line on above graph), this difference of four percentage points is the difference between shooting above and below league average. This advantage isn’t quite the “10 times more likely to score” Valiquette found but the success rate in shootouts is much higher to begin with so measuring up to that amount would be impossible to reach. A shooter may still score without crossing the Royal Road but he is putting himself in a much tougher position to do so.

Lanes of the Ice

The second additional statistic I tracked was the movement of the puck through different lanes of the ice. Two vertical lines on the inner hash marks (shown above in black) divide the rink into three lanes (left/center/right). While every attempt starts with the player picking up the puck at center ice, the player’s first lane was determined by the location of where they crossed the blue line. A player crossing the blue line in the center of the ice, skating through the left circle and circling back towards the slot where they shot the puck on net would be marked with the lane movement of “CLC” (broken down visually here). Dissecting a player’s lane movement will help determine the components of a shootout attempt leading up to the shot or deke.

As one would expect, an overwhelming majority (95.6%) of the shot attempts came from the center lane of the ice whereas only a small majority came from the left or right lanes. As almost all of the shooting attempts came from the middle lane, it is no surprise that the overall SH% is almost exactly at league average (black dashed line). The biggest takeaway from this graph isn’t that shooting from the center of the ice gives the shooter an advantage but rather shooting from the outside lanes puts them at a disadvantage. Only 36 players have scored a shootout goal from the outside lanes since 2012 so unless you possess a fantastic shot like Vladimir Tarasenko, Corey Perry or Auston Matthews, your best bet is to stay within the slot.

In cases with such distorted sample sizes as we have here, there is always a potential issue that the smaller sample doesn’t accurately represent the population, but it is safe to assume a shot taken from a sharper angle has a smaller percentage of resulting in a goal.

The motivation behind the lane analysis wasn’t to determine where players were shooting from but rather their overall movement as they skate down the ice on an attempt. My hypothesis was that travelling through multiple lanes would cause the goalie to move laterally (similar to the Royal Road) and make squaring up for a shot harder. This was proven to be true as shootout attempts that only encompass one lane of the ice (includes the center and outside lanes) have a lower shooting percentage than those that include multiple lanes (the most popular approach passing through two lanes is starting on either the left or right lane before cutting into the center lane).

Penalty Shots

The aura of a penalty shot is much different than that of a shootout attempt. Besides a rare infraction for covering the puck in the crease or throwing a stick at your opponent, a penalty shot is usually called on a play involving a breakaway. A player gets behind the defense by the way of a miscue along the blue line, blocked shot or stretch pass and is in alone on the goalie before getting obstructed from an opposing player chasing him. NHL Rule 24.3 states that the infracted player is awarded the penalty shot (for team fouls, the Captain may choose the shooter among the skaters on the ice at the time of the incident). With less than 60 seconds real time between the referee blowing the play dead and signaling the start of the penalty shot, there is little time for the player to think about his upcoming penalty shot attempt. Adrenaline is likely still flowing through his veins and the roaring crowd makes it difficult to communicate with the coaching staff. Because of all of these factors, there is much less time for a shooter to identify the goalie’s weaknesses and develop a game plan.

Brad Marchand leads the league in penalty shot goals since the 2012-2013 season, going a perfect 4 for 4. His signature move is faking a wrist shot in the high slot and moving the puck across the Royal Road to his backhand which gives him the option to either roof the puck or slide it through the outstretched goaltender’s fivehole. Having all scored two goals, Jeff Skinner, Jonathan Huberdeau, Brandon Dubinsky and Boone Jenner are the only other players to have scored more than one penalty shot goal in the past five seasons. Ovechkin’s inability to score in the shootout has carried over to penalty shots, where he was 0-5.

Roberto Luongo faced the most penalty shots and was wildly successful, stopping 12 of 13 total penalty shots. Additionally, Jimmy Howard (2 GA on 10 PS), Ryan Miller (2 GA on 9 PS) and Corey Crawford (1 GA on 7 PS) all found success in facing penalty shots. Howard’s success is the most surprising due to his bottom of the league shootout save percentage.

As one could expect based, the historical shooting percentage is lower in penalty shots (29.88%) than shootout attempts (31.84%). Penalty shots are drawn much more frequently in the second and third periods, likely because of the longer change in the middle frame and tired bodies towards the end of the game. They are also more likely to be drawn by the home team (54.98%). With the nature of how penalty shots are awarded, very few defensemen attempted them but were successful scoring on 5 of 8 opportunities.

Breaking down the shot selection between penalty shots and shootout attempts, there isn’t too much of a deviation. A player’s shot type, shot distance, and area of the net they aimed towards during penalty shots weren’t all that different from shootout attempts. Nothing stood out in terms of shooting percentage from any of these variables either.

Despite this, there does seem to be a variation in the process leading up to the shot attempt in penalty shots. Half of all shootout attempts featured the shooter crossing the Royal Road and resulted in a conversion rate five percentage points higher than those who didn’t. This percentage of shooters crossing the Royal Road was down to 45% in penalty shots and the shooting percentage gap between shooters that did and didn’t cross the Royal Road increased to ten percentage points. Players found themselves in much more of a disadvantage in penalty shots by not making the goalie move laterally.

The Elements of a Successful Shootout Attempt

It is important to recognize that the variables previously analyzed don’t occur in a vacuum. They interact with each other and many other variables in a very fluid environment. A shooter may have a certain move on his mind but when as he approaches the slot and notices a large part of the net open under the goalie’s blocker, he may be inclined to change his strategy on the fly.

Shooters often fake a shot from further out to freeze the goalie and keep him honest but they can’t give away their move too early or the goalie may eliminate any attempt with a poke check. Goalies are also involved in this gamesmanship by purposely showing an opening, baiting the shooter into changing his strategy to attack the opening and quickly closing off the available area before the shooter can capitalize.

Should players look to exploit a weakness shown by the opposing goaltender or create their own opportunity? There isn’t a right or wrong answer to this question but players should always give themselves the best chance possible to score. From a statistical standpoint, what elements make up a successful shootout attempt?

Earlier it was established that making the goaltender move laterally takes them out of position giving the shooter an advantage. Attempts that the puck travels through multiple lanes and crosses the Royal Road have a historical scoring percentage of 34.03% (this includes over 1,300 attempts; *insert Garrett Hohl rant about binning*). From this, consider the resulting shot attempt aimed towards the upper part of the net, directed to beat him past the high glove or blocker. This scenario results in a historical shooting percentage of 52.10% (of over 400 qualifying attempts). Additionally, attempts taken closer to the net, especially in the crease, have a higher percentage of scoring. Combining all elements presented, attempts that make the goalie move laterally by passing through multiple lanes and crossing the Royal Road, back the goalie into the net by holding onto the puck longer and force the goalie to make a save vertically by shooting high have the highest chance of resulting in a goal. A stunning 67% of all attempts fitting these criteria have resulted in a goal (of 120 qualifying attempts).

This isn’t the most mathematically correct analysis but it does a good job identifying the key factors contributing to a successful shootout attempt.

Aleksander Barkov has established himself among the league’s best in the shootout, scoring on 12 of 16 attempts over the past two seasons. His shootout goal against the Philadelphia Flyers perfectly combines these elements and makes goaltender Steve Mason look foolish. Barkov starts his attempt skating from the right lane to the middle lane, passing the Royal Road. While stickhandling through the slot, he keeps the puck to his side, protecting himself from any potential poke check. This allows him to disguise his move as he approaches the top of the crease while Mason backs off towards the goal line. With the goaltender backed into his post, Barkov is able to quickly cut across the crease and roof a backhand over Mason’s outstretched blocker.

Follow Steve Ness on Twitter: @QuickkNess

All shootout/penalty shot data comes directly from the NHL or was manually tracked myself.