View Single Post
Old
09-03-2013, 08:09 PM
  #109
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
That statistical treatment didn't actually address shot quality in any meaningful way....
It proved that switching teams didn't affect a goalie's Sv%. Since goalies have no control over shot quality, the implication is that the team doesn't really either.

That is not the only study, but the first one I came across.

Here is a better example.


Some quotes:

Quote:
The average change in a goalie's save percentage from year to year when he stays with the same team is just 0.0005 larger than simple random chance would predict, and when a goalie changes teams the sv% difference is just 0.0011 larger than random chance. The best shot-quality-influencing system of this era (Jacques Lemaire's) reduced Fenwick shooting percentages by about 0.0015. The result is that any team effect on a goalie's save percentage doesn't add up to more than a goal or two per season.
  • The point is not: "All teams face the same shots, so ignore shot quality completely."
  • The point is: "Differences in shot locations are small and require a very large data set to overcome noise, so you won't be wrong by much if you ignore them."
Quote:
Together, Fenwick/Corsi and Luck account for around 3/4 of team winning percentage. What's the remainder? Goaltending talent - which Tom Awad estimates at about 5% - and special teams, along with a very small sliver that's due to shooting talent and the oft-mentioned "shot quality."

Blue Blooded is offline