Round 2, Vote 9 (HOH Top Goaltenders)
View Single Post
01-14-2013, 10:43 PM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Originally Posted by
Odd save percentages. Connell was miles better than Beveridge, but his opponents were considerably better. I can think of a couple conflicting interpretations of what those numbers mean.
Of course the small, incomplete sample might be part of the reason. Interesting numbers though.
If Beveridge was that much below the league average, he would probably never have played any other games. He's pretty much in Bucinzki territory with such numbers.
The worst is, Wilf Cude possibly posted numbers that were even worst than Beveridge (pretty unlikely that he was worst than Connell, unless the Quakers routinely gave up 80 shots per game -- which wouldn't be that surprising, but I remember seeing a few quotes to the effect that Cude was just plain bad that season), so having a SV% average that high, with one starter that was THAT low, means that guys like Hainsworth and Gardiner possibly posted SV% in the .950 (if Senators forward were league-average in shooting percentage. Which they probably weren't).
IMO, opponents averages are odd. Gap between Connell and Beveridge isn't. Keep in mind that the Sens defense..heck... the Sens as a whole were just a terrible team at that point.
Other possibility : The Senators were experts at shooting pucks in the opposing goalie chest, hence why those terrible shooting percentages. However, the Sens outscored two teams that year.
As far as bad backup goes, I remember the gap between Roy Worters and his backup during that span (backups being Benny Grant -- arguably a lesser player than Beveridge, according to GP at least -- and borderline Top-100 candidate Jake Forbes) being much narrower, if not inexistant.
Last edited by MXD: 01-14-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MXD