Proof that Ilya Kovalchuk is an All-World Shooter

Gabe Desjardens brings up a question no one really considered - who's a better shooter, Ilya Kovalchuk or Jody Shelley. However, he statistically proves that Shelley's not even remotely close to coming near Kovalchuk's shooting skills; as Kovalchuk is likely the best shooter in the game today.

Man, whoever gets to see him on their team next season should feel excited about reading that!

over 1 year ago John Fischer 20 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I took a look at that information, then my left eye twitched and I decided to take a nap and forget the whole thing.

Devils fan for 23 of the 29 years I've been alive. Devils fan until the day I die.

by Marty 4 Prez on Sep 9, 2010 8:22 PM EDT reply actions

I don't get this..

Why are they comparing Ilya Kovalchuk to Jody Shelley?

Mathew Barnaby to Lyle Odelein: "Cornelius, as we like to call him, gets under your skin. Planet of the Apes. Look at him. Seriously. He looks like Cornelious."

Odelein to Barnaby: "He should take a look at his wife. She's God-awful to look at."

by RolliePollieKovy on Sep 9, 2010 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Because Jody Shelley is the second best shooter in the league!

I think it was a comparison to an average player, but I’m not sure what the result would look like compared to another decent shooter, like Marleau.

Backing Backlund for 2010-2011
Mourning Gagne forever.

by ToddtheFox on Sep 9, 2010 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions

It’s actually because Jody Shelley is one of the worst shooters in the league. The initial graph suggests the two aren’t far apart; but when accounting for other factors, it’s clear Kovalchuk is at the high end whereas Shelley’s at the low end.

Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog

by John Fischer on Sep 9, 2010 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Ohh gotchya

Mathew Barnaby to Lyle Odelein: "Cornelius, as we like to call him, gets under your skin. Planet of the Apes. Look at him. Seriously. He looks like Cornelious."

Odelein to Barnaby: "He should take a look at his wife. She's God-awful to look at."

by RolliePollieKovy on Sep 9, 2010 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions

In an earlier post the result was that we couldn’t be 95% sure Kovy is a better shooter than Shelley. He changed his approach and got ~99.99999% certainty that Kovy is better.

My blog and Twitter, featuring coverage of the winger that has now terrorized over 70 NHL goalies.

by red army line on Sep 10, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions

So Kovy has more talented than already observed? He has the best shot in the league? While I don’t fully understand the information it sounds good to me.

by devsfan9 on Sep 9, 2010 9:21 PM EDT reply actions

Works for me

Mathew Barnaby to Lyle Odelein: "Cornelius, as we like to call him, gets under your skin. Planet of the Apes. Look at him. Seriously. He looks like Cornelious."

Odelein to Barnaby: "He should take a look at his wife. She's God-awful to look at."

by RolliePollieKovy on Sep 9, 2010 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions

It took me forever to wrap my head around my own methodology, but here’s the gist of it:

- Clearly Kovalchuk is a better shooter than Shelley. I’ve watched Shelley play 50+ games and he can’t skate or carry the puck. It’s humiliating.

- If we watch Kovalchuk and Shelley play a bit – not a full season, but just a few games – it is somehow possible that we could convince ourselves that Shelley is not that bad (think that’s impossible? See Holmgren, Paul) while Kovy’s results might not be that great (he shot very poorly in NJ).

- The extra goals per 100 shots chart shows that effect. Standard sampling theory says Kovalchuk might not be a great shooter.

- However, if we figure out what the underlying talent distribution is for shooters in the league, start both Kovy and Shelley off with this distribution (aka naive bayesian classifier), and update the distribution based on their last five years worth of shooting performance, it’s clear that Kovalchuk is the better shooter – there is no likelihood that Shelley is better.

by Hawerchuk on Sep 10, 2010 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions

Wouldn’t the 14.8 – 4.7% edge in career shooting pct be enough to give Ilya the nod? Just looking at that I don’t think anybody would doubt it. You can make statistics prove anything for you if you bend them the right way. No way if Jody Shelley had as much ice time and shots as Kovalchuk would he have nearly as many goals.

Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free

by FrankG929 on Sep 10, 2010 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Do you think Andrew Brunette is a better shooter than Ilya Kovalchuk? Brunette led the league is Sh% last year and is an 18% shooter for his career.

The bulk of shooting is getting to your spot. But once you’re at your spot, there’s another less-publicized skill. Brunette doesn’t have it, for example.

by Hawerchuk on Sep 10, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Perhaps Brunette simply doesn’t take as many shots from “not his spot” therefore increasing his shooting percentage? If I shot 19% from the low-left circle, for example, and 1% from the right point, wouldn’t it be better to just not take the shot from the right point at all and pass the puck (which his goal to assist ratio leads me to believe this is at least partially true)? Brunette may indeed be a better shooter from a more limited number of spots, which overall might make him a worse shooter, but personally I’d rather see the extremely low percentage shots not taken at all.

And could you please explain your last 2 sentences if you don’t mind. If he has a higher shooting percentage, that tells me he does have that skill once he gets to his spot and the contrary would be true, i.e. not getting to his spot often enough since he’s never scored more that 27 where Kovy has never scored less than 29. It seems like you’re penalizing, discounting, whatever, Brunette for the shots he’s NOT taking. Kovy averages nearly 3.7 shots per game, Brunette almost 1.4. To me, Brunette sounds like the smarter/more efficient shooter. Whether that equates to “better” is arguable, of course. Not exactly an apples to oranges comparison, but more like oranges to tangerines…

Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free

by FrankG929 on Sep 10, 2010 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions

hawerchuk’s contention, and i only know it because i read his blog religiously, is that while brunette is skilled at getting to his spot, he doesn’t do better than league average when he gets there. so while brunette is able to generate more shots from optimal shooting positions, he’s not better at putting them away. whereas kovalchuk is able to generate shots from all over the offensive zone, and he shoots better than the average shooter from them.

by Triumph44 on Sep 11, 2010 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions

while brunette is skilled at getting to his spot, he doesn’t do better than league average when he gets there

Then logically, he does significantly better than league average from everywhere else other than his spot because he’s waaaaay over league average overall. So simple math says that if he’s average from “here”, and overall he’s above average, then from “there” he has to be way above average. Doesn’t make sense to me. One’s “spot” is going to be where he scores from most often, or the highest percentage of time, is it not?

Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free

by FrankG929 on Sep 11, 2010 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions

i didn’t make myself clear. imagine a theoretical spot on the ice from where the shooting percentage is 25% for all shots taken there. imagine that the average forward gets 20 shots from there a season. now imagine that brunette gets 40 shots from there and shoots 25%. wouldn’t this increase his shooting percentage relative to the average forward?

brunette’s shooting percentage is high because of the locations on the ice where he’s shooting, not his ability to score from that spot once he’s gotten there. he’s not better or worse than the average guy at putting the puck in from that point, he’s just better at getting to that particular spot.

by Triumph44 on Sep 11, 2010 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions

And could you please explain your last 2 sentences if you don’t mind.

It’s logical that a guy like Mike Knuble who shoots from under 15 feet all the time would have a higher shooting percentage than Mike Green who’s mainly shooting from the point. The best scorers both take lots of shots and shoot them from in close. The skill Hawerchuk is talking about is getting open in good scoring areas. Kovalchuk is one of the best at that. After that, you try and snipe corners or holes in the goalie. Most players shoot the average from their shooting position, but Kovy shoots way over.

My blog and Twitter, featuring coverage of the winger that has now terrorized over 70 NHL goalies.

by red army line on Sep 11, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions

Throwing a defenseman into the equation doesn’t help the comparison. Knuble is a bad comparison because his average shot distance is 27.8 ft, not 15. Kovalchuk’s is 33.0, Brunette’s 24.5. But I will grant you that point in comparison to high scoring forwards.

Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free

by FrankG929 on Sep 11, 2010 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions