Red Wings

[froot loops]

Who pissed in your corn flakes Ace?

[Newbomb Turk]

I think maybe the answer to that question is EVERYONE

[gjdodger]

...and, he PREDICTED it!

[Rocky Bleier]

Yikes! The Wings outshot the Ducks 47-16. Were they that dominant?

[Panoptes]

Yikes! The Wings outshot the Ducks 47-16. Were they that dominant?

No.

The Ducks don't shoot enough shots at the net.

The Wings always shoot the puck at the net.

I think if GIGUERRE didn't pull himself out, we'd still be watching this one.

[chemiclord]

I really dislike how Wings fans use shots against as some sign of dominance.

The Wings offense shoots roughly 20 shots a game that have 0.00001% chance of actually getting in the net. They're looking for rebounds, deflections, or miscues to capitalize on. It's the way they have played for years. More often that not, those shots wind up right in the center of the goalie's chest protector.

I much rather look at the "scoring chances" stat (which is a bit subjective, I'll admit) for a sign of dominance. In a game the Wings outshoot an opponent 35-17 or whatnot, the scoring chances or more along the lines of 6-4. The Wings still outplay most opponents, make no mistake, but the shot totals make it look far more one sided than it really is.

[froot loops]

I look at wins and Stanley Cups for dominance.

The Wings get a lot of shots because they possess the puck more than any other team and have for what now seems like a generation. Teams retreat into a shell to combat this and get their scoring chances via couterpunching.

[DanO]

"I look at wins and Stanley Cups for dominance."
----------------------------LOL even though I'm not sure you meant it as a LOL.

GO LIONS "08" !!!!!!!!

[chemiclord]

I was speaking on a game to game scenario, but Froot's point is also valid.

[Malto Marko]

I really dislike how Wings fans use shots against as some sign of dominance.

The Wings offense shoots roughly 20 shots a game that have 0.00001% chance of actually getting in the net. They're looking for rebounds, deflections, or miscues to capitalize on. It's the way they have played for years. More often that not, those shots wind up right in the center of the goalie's chest protector.

I much rather look at the "scoring chances" stat (which is a bit subjective, I'll admit) for a sign of dominance. In a game the Wings outshoot an opponent 35-17 or whatnot, the scoring chances or more along the lines of 6-4. The Wings still outplay most opponents, make no mistake, but the shot totals make it look far more one sided than it really is.

You can look at "scoring chances" all you want. The main logic is that if you do not put the puck on the net, you do not have a "scoring chance".

Explain to me how putting the puck on the net is less of a scoring chance than that of one that is rushing in on a two on one but fails to get a shot off?

Two on ones are considered "scoring chances".

[chemiclord]

The point is that the Red Wings ALWAYS outshoot their opponents. That's not a sign of their dominance. That's ALL I'm saying.

[froot loops]

Actually it is and it shows up in their wins and their championships. If you look at the Wings record over the last 15 years, they are by far the most wins. They are regularly among the league leaders in goals for and goals against. They are regularly 1st or 2nd in their conference in points. They have been dominant. But that dominance only goes so far. In the NFL if a team consistently had double the amount of yardage of their opponent, they would certainly win the vast majority of their games. And in the NFL, if you got to the playoffs that would translate to a lot of Super Bowl championships.

But that dominance doesn't translate to the NHL in the playoffs as well as you would think.

[gjdodger]

It is a sign of their level of play; they have superior puckhandlers and therefore control the puck a majority of the time, so they get more shots. I did a breakdown at some point in the recent past; the Wings outshot their opponents in 90% of their wins, and 50% of their losses.

[chemiclord]

They get so many shots because they take shots that have no chance of scoring. They do it intentionally. It's their style.

I'm not saying the Wings don't dominate games. They do. I am saying that shots on goal are a lousy way of determining it, because the game they play inherently lends to more shots on goal.

Let me put it another way. The New Jersey Devils in their heyday were a pretty dominant team, but they didn't take many shots. They dominated with their defense and Brodeur. Were they not dominant because they didn't outshoot their opponents every game?

The Wings dominate because they are some of the best at getting to loose pucks, and controlling it once they've got it. The shots on goal are an after-effect of that dominance, not the reason for it.

[gjdodger]

I'm sure you checked all of this out before you posted the above claim. However, as you are well aware, the last time the New Jersey Devils won the Cup, 2002-3, they averaged 31.7 shots on goal, second in the League. By comparison, the Wings averaged 34.4 last year and were first. The somewhat higher average by the Wings may have contributed to their 54-21-7 record last year, compared to the slightly weaker 46-20-10-6 amassed by the Devils five years ago. In short, your theory is bonkers. When the Devils were winners, they took a lot of shots on goal, too.