View Single Post
Old
02-03-2013, 05:41 PM
  #26
InGusWeTrust
hockey.tk
 
InGusWeTrust's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastopia View Post
I'm not a native English speaker either, but effectiveness is how well x brings the desired result while efficiency deals with how much wasted energy there is to achieve it. The percentage of the shots that result in a goal would be the efficiency in this case, while the total amount of goals would be effectiveness. (This is of course not always the case; see for example Lidström shooting for Holmström to deflect. By this measure Lidström would be shown to be less efficient than he really was, as these shots were not meant to end up in goal - the desired effect was a different one. (Even though the desired end result was the same - a goal - the desired result of the shot - a deflection - is what matters here, since that's the effectiveness/efficiency we're measuring. But this is neither here nor there. ))



Ignoring Filppula as you didn't include his stats, Brunner is here the least efficient shooter, but the second-most effective one.

This is my understanding, at least. Someone else may feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

InGusWeTrust is offline   Reply With Quote