View Single Post
08-28-2012, 09:21 PM
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,909
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by wgknestrick View Post
You also have to account for shot quality allowed on ice. (and yes I've heard all the arguments that SV% and SH% are not repeatable across the entire NHL population). I don't buy it for D men population though. They have much more impact of what goes on in front of the netminder than forwards who just add to the noise.

On ice SV% 5v5 the last 4 years:

Dman A

Dman B

Example A is Rob Scuderi (defensive Dman with relatively - corsi)
Example B is Alex Goligoski (offensive Dman) with + corsi)

The last year listed (08-09), they were both playing in front of the same goaltender, yet Scuds "lucked" (sarcasm) out by having a huge SV% advantage (.031) while on ice, AND while facing tougher qual comp.

There are players that allow a lot of low quality shots (Good defensive only Dmen) and players that allow few, but high quality chances (offensive defensemen). Then you have your elite that are good at both and your scum which aren't good at anything.

2 parts

- # of shots allowed vs expected
- SV% of goalie on ice vs expected
I agree that Corsi, adjusted for strength of teammates and opposition, and based on quality of shots allowed, not just quantity, would be as perfect a stat as you could get.

And we have everything we need to calculate this, IIRC, so what are we waiting for?

then again there is one hitch. Corsi is based on all shots directed at the net, not just SOG. Shot quality "rates" shots based on their likelihood of scoring, with a base of 1.0 being an "average" shot. tough shots are higher, easy shots are lower. what are missed shots? how do you assign them a rating? it would have to be based on a percentage chance that the missed shot could have been a legitimate shot, based on more data. also, a blocked shot would have to still count as a shot directed at the net (which is bad) but could be counted as "less of a shot" since it didn't get there (which is good). that's all well and good, but then what is it? 0.2? 0.9? somewhere in between? It would have to be somehow quantified logically.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote