From what I’ve seen – he gets a lot of shots in good areas, but is a bit slow and his shot often very soft at the chest. Analytics go DINGDINGDING red alarm high danger chance! but when you watch the game they don’t look nearly as dangerous.
Watching the Blackhawks game at one point we had 40 shots, I think 9 were from Kane at that point, and none of them looked remotely dangerous until ironically Kane fired in a random hard shot from the point late in the game that would have likely rated as a low danger chance.
He’s starting to see some go in and should regress back to some sort of mean but it’s not entirely shocking that his overall shooting percentage is low.
I’ve watched a lot of Edmonton over the past several years, and Kane has been getting chance after chance right in his wheelhouse, where’d score the majority of his goals for the Oilers. Shots from inside the hash marks and jam plays. He *should* be finishing a lot more than he has been, and is overdue for some positive regression towards the mean.
Actually most of his chances aren’t high danger they are perimeter muffins and he is grossly underperforming his contract. He is for sure out there actively stat pumping.
For the uninitiated, ixG calculates how many goals you *should* have as an average NHL shooter, based upon where you are shooting from and the situation you’re in.
Each shot gets a score based upon things many factors, but primarily distance from the net. Other things that go into the calculation are: shot type, angle, if its a rebound, if its off the rush, or if they just got a pass. Every major site calculates xG and ixG in a different way with different factors, but the key factor in all of them is how far from the net you shot from.
Some side tidbits of information:
1. This is a cumulative stat, which means if you take a lot of shots, you build up more ixG. Kane is top 3 in shots 5v5, and throughout his career has been an insanely high volume shooter. This helps him get a higher score.
2. ixG does not account for how good of a shooter someone is. It is literally saying “this guy shoots from these places in these situations, and usually when a guy shoots from these places in these situations pucks go in”. If you teleport your grandmother into the slot in an NHL game and she takes a shot, it counts for the same as if Brock Boeser took the shot.
You could walk away from this with the hypothesis that Evander Kane has been unlucky. You could also walk away with this with the hypothesis that Evander Kane takes a lot of shots and it cheats this specific stat. Just with all stats, the goal is to take one piece of data and try to figure out what it is suggesting, and then use other data and the eye test to see if it is true. Never use a single stat to tell the whole story.
Guy has zero finish and shoots like a beer league player does way too many no look passes to no one.
I just want him to pump his value so we can retain and ship him off at the deadline. Is that too much to ask??
Great we can flip him at the deadline
Probably got him mixed up with Patrick
He’s been good 5 on 5 and somehow ends up the high minute guy or close to it most nights
13 comments
He’s being played more than Nathan MacKinnon. Wow.
I think there’s an error though, the SH% says 0% for Kane.
Mr. Hit the Logo
I distinctly remember that most of his shots were from bad angles
https://preview.redd.it/al4vepi14w0g1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=7c53c2935818aab919213b631d38828ca7901ee7
Am I missing something?
From what I’ve seen – he gets a lot of shots in good areas, but is a bit slow and his shot often very soft at the chest. Analytics go DINGDINGDING red alarm high danger chance! but when you watch the game they don’t look nearly as dangerous.
Watching the Blackhawks game at one point we had 40 shots, I think 9 were from Kane at that point, and none of them looked remotely dangerous until ironically Kane fired in a random hard shot from the point late in the game that would have likely rated as a low danger chance.
He’s starting to see some go in and should regress back to some sort of mean but it’s not entirely shocking that his overall shooting percentage is low.
I’ve watched a lot of Edmonton over the past several years, and Kane has been getting chance after chance right in his wheelhouse, where’d score the majority of his goals for the Oilers. Shots from inside the hash marks and jam plays. He *should* be finishing a lot more than he has been, and is overdue for some positive regression towards the mean.
Actually most of his chances aren’t high danger they are perimeter muffins and he is grossly underperforming his contract. He is for sure out there actively stat pumping.
For the uninitiated, ixG calculates how many goals you *should* have as an average NHL shooter, based upon where you are shooting from and the situation you’re in.
Each shot gets a score based upon things many factors, but primarily distance from the net. Other things that go into the calculation are: shot type, angle, if its a rebound, if its off the rush, or if they just got a pass. Every major site calculates xG and ixG in a different way with different factors, but the key factor in all of them is how far from the net you shot from.
Some side tidbits of information:
1. This is a cumulative stat, which means if you take a lot of shots, you build up more ixG. Kane is top 3 in shots 5v5, and throughout his career has been an insanely high volume shooter. This helps him get a higher score.
2. ixG does not account for how good of a shooter someone is. It is literally saying “this guy shoots from these places in these situations, and usually when a guy shoots from these places in these situations pucks go in”. If you teleport your grandmother into the slot in an NHL game and she takes a shot, it counts for the same as if Brock Boeser took the shot.
You could walk away from this with the hypothesis that Evander Kane has been unlucky. You could also walk away with this with the hypothesis that Evander Kane takes a lot of shots and it cheats this specific stat. Just with all stats, the goal is to take one piece of data and try to figure out what it is suggesting, and then use other data and the eye test to see if it is true. Never use a single stat to tell the whole story.
Guy has zero finish and shoots like a beer league player does way too many no look passes to no one.
I just want him to pump his value so we can retain and ship him off at the deadline. Is that too much to ask??
Great we can flip him at the deadline
Probably got him mixed up with Patrick
He’s been good 5 on 5 and somehow ends up the high minute guy or close to it most nights