HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Flyers Sign Sergei Bobrovsky

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-11-2010, 12:33 PM
  #251
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
So you, like Montreal fans, are taking something that many people are playing up as incredible for the sheer fact that it is rare to see a goalie alone upset at least one team and come close to (if not possibly taking down) another and calling it a regular occurrence.
It's a lot more regular than you seem to think. Hell Lundqvist almost took out the Caps last year on his own.

Quote:
It's incredible because it doesn't happen often. That's why so many people are hyping up Halak's play, and rightfully so.

Still, you probably couldn't count the amount of times elite goaltending has fallen in the first round to a better team. Then some hot, young goalie absolutely turns the world upside down, and suddenly it takes an elite goalie to win a Stanley Cup.

Your point is baseless.
We'll ignore that poor goaltending COST the Caps a chance at the Cup last year.

Of the last 20 Cups:

3 won by Brodeur
3 won by Roy
1 won by Hasek
1 won by Belfour

Then you have some guys right on the edge, like JSG (who both won and took the Ducks to the cup finals--and was a ****ing Greek God in the playoffs when he got 'em to the Devs).

That's 8 of 20 won by guys who were clearly "elite" at the time their team pulled it off. This is without getting into the number of elite goalies that got their teams to the Stanley Cup finals.

Flames with Kipper, Devs with Brodeur, Buffalo with Hasek (btw, that's a guy that did it multiple times), etc.

It is actually quite regular that a hot goalie carries a team through a playoff round or two, and quite often it's an established guy.

If it was truly a random thing in a small sample size tournament, then it wouldn't so consistently play out that goaltending takes you further than any other one position.

So, the reality is that your "elite goalies don't matter" mantra remains ostrich-like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Even though I would like an elite goaltender....

The Devils arent laughing right now, the Rangers arent laughing right now, and the Canucks arent laughing now either
The Devils have 3 Cups from that elite goalie, who is now getting up there in years and it has consistently showed in the playoffs after they ride him into the ground during the regular season.

The Rangers are a terrible team that almost made the playoffs purely because of their goalie.

Canucks are going to Game 6 against one of the best two teams in the league...not sure why you're picking on Luongo.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 12:39 PM
  #252
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
It's a lot more regular than you seem to think. Hell Lundqvist almost took out the Caps last year on his own.



We'll ignore that poor goaltending COST the Caps a chance at the Cup last year.

Of the last 20 Cups:

3 won by Brodeur
3 won by Roy
1 won by Hasek
1 won by Belfour

Then you have some guys right on the edge, like JSG (who both won and took the Ducks to the cup finals--and was a ****ing Greek God in the playoffs when he got 'em to the Devs).

That's 8 of 20 won by guys who were clearly "elite" at the time their team pulled it off. This is without getting into the number of elite goalies that got their teams to the Stanley Cup finals.

Flames with Kipper, Devs with Brodeur, Buffalo with Hasek (btw, that's a guy that did it multiple times), etc.

It is actually quite regular that a hot goalie carries a team through a playoff round or two, and quite often it's an established guy.

If it was truly a random thing in a small sample size tournament, then it wouldn't so consistently play out that goaltending takes you further than any other one position.

So, the reality is that your "elite goalies don't matter" mantra remains ostrich-like.



The Devils have 3 Cups from that elite goalie, who is now getting up there in years and it has consistently showed in the playoffs after they ride him into the ground during the regular season.

The Rangers are a terrible team that almost made the playoffs purely because of their goalie.

Canucks are going to Game 6 against one of the best two teams in the league...not sure why you're picking on Luongo.
3.06 GAA, .889%? He hasnt been that good (Ive watched a decent amount of Canucks games for playoffs.)


Oh and one of the best teams in the league...with Huet/Niemi in net...

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 12:44 PM
  #253
IrishSniper87
Registered User
 
IrishSniper87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Media, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
3.06 GAA, .889%? He hasnt been that good (Ive watched a decent amount of Canucks games for playoffs.)


Oh and one of the best teams in the league...with Huet/Niemi in net...
As far as skaters and defense go, Chicago is NASTY.

IrishSniper87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 12:57 PM
  #254
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
3.06 GAA, .889%? He hasnt been that good (Ive watched a decent amount of Canucks games for playoffs.)


Oh and one of the best teams in the league...with Huet/Niemi in net...
I've watched a fair amount of 'em, he's had some bad games and some absolutely stellar games in the playoffs.

Niemi who has been good....all year?

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:06 PM
  #255
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I've watched a fair amount of 'em, he's had some bad games and some absolutely stellar games in the playoffs.

Niemi who has been good....all year?
Looking off of stats yea...but I guess looking at purely stats Huet has been also?

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:08 PM
  #256
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Looking off of stats yea...but I guess looking at purely stats Huet has been also?
...no he hasn't. That's why Niemi got the nod as a rookie. Huet put up an .895 this year, he was terrible.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:13 PM
  #257
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,454
vCash: 500
I dont think there is anyway the Flyers would have been passed on Kane if they had the top pick. it was going to be Kane at 1 or JVR at 2. People need to relax and be patient for JVR. I think hes done fine given the circumstances and the linemates he has had for the most part this season.
Sure we would all like more out of him, especially this post season but this is a learning situation for him this year. He will learn from this and be better down the line. He isnt going to learn anything sitting in the pressbox watching anything. He needed to be out there competing.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:14 PM
  #258
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireHolmgrenDotCom View Post
I dont think there is anyway the Flyers would have been passed on Kane if they had the top pick. it was going to be Kane at 1 or JVR at 2. People need to relax and be patient for JVR. I think hes done fine given the circumstances and the linemates he has had for the most part this season.
Sure we would all like more out of him, especially this post season but this is a learning situation for him this year. He will learn from this and be better down the line. He isnt going to learn anything sitting in the pressbox watching anything. He needed to be out there competing.
I just think he needs to get bigger...as I've said before, when I saw him in the mall I was blown away with how skinny/lanky he was.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:24 PM
  #259
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I just think he needs to get bigger...as I've said before, when I saw him in the mall I was blown away with how skinny/lanky he was.
He just turned 21. He's hardly a man yet.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 01:26 PM
  #260
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
He just turned 21. He's hardly a man yet.
Yep, and it's why guys with his frame/game take a bit longer to develop at the NHL level. You need to get bigger and stronger, and that takes a couple of years.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 02:24 PM
  #261
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,698
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The Devils have 3 Cups from that elite goalie, who is now getting up there in years and it has consistently showed in the playoffs after they ride him into the ground during the regular season.

The Rangers are a terrible team that almost made the playoffs purely because of their goalie.

Canucks are going to Game 6 against one of the best two teams in the league...not sure why you're picking on Luongo.
Also because of Gaborik. Albeit the fact that it's more-so Lundqvist then Gaborik.

As for Niemi and Luongo, they've both been average to below average judging by their stats and what I've seen of them.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 02:37 PM
  #262
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,005
vCash: 500
Funny, a war just popped up on the main boards about goaltending value based on this:

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_yl...besmyths050610

Quote:
Both economics professors, Schmidt at William & Mary and Berri at Southern Utah University, the two previously co-authored a book called The Wages of Wins, a look at how payroll and other statistics affect competitive balance and winning in sports. But it’s their new research that’s likely to attract attention. According to their findings:

...

• Hockey goalies are overpaid. Their goals against averages are determined as much by the quality of their teams as anything else. Most all stop about 90 percent of the shots they face. Put any goaltender on the New Jersey Devils and his numbers would likely resemble those of the renowned Martin Brodeur.
I wouldn't go quite into the Martin Brodeur issue, but the reality of the position is that it is effected more by the players on the ice than the actual skill of the goaltender...something I've been saying for months now.

You should see the bloody murder they're crying on the boards over something I've been saying all along. It's kind of shocking (or maybe not so) how people forget logic when enticed by a little drama (i.e. Halak).

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 02:55 PM
  #263
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Funny, a war just popped up on the main boards about goaltending value based on this:

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_yl...besmyths050610



I wouldn't go quite into the Martin Brodeur issue, but the reality of the position is that it is effected more by the players on the ice than the actual skill of the goaltender...something I've been saying for months now.

You should see the bloody murder they're crying on the boards over something I've been saying all along. It's kind of shocking (or maybe not so) how people forget logic when enticed by a little drama (i.e. Halak).
The happenings and dynamics of a hockey game are numerous, interconnected, and immensely difficult to quantify. So if you handed me a copy of a hockey book written by a bunch of statisticians and economists, I would thank you kindly for the toilet paper and go on about my business.

The problem with looking at the save percentage stat is that good ones and bad ones look so similar. In reality the better stat would be the opponents shooting percentage (100 - SVPCT).

When you look at it like that then the numbers seem to make a little more sense. To the naked eye of a person who knows good goal tending, Ryan Miller is worlds better than Brian Boucher. Yet somehow opponents only score on a few percent more shots.

Now when you look and see that opponents scored on ~7.5% of their shots against Miller, and ~10% of their shots against Boucher, with out even accounting for the much better defense in front of Boucher, you can see that opponents are scoring 33% more often when they get a shot off on Boucher than on Miller. If you wanted to remove shots that posed absolutely no threat whatsoever to any goalie in the league (dump ins clearly visible wristers from the blue line, etc.) then the numbers are even bigger. That's ****ing huge. Massive. Mind numbingly important.

The intensity of team's efforts to score are also different at different times. Terrible goalies who give up soft goals early probably aren't going to face a hungry team the rest of the game. They're going to face a team that is playing with a lead and dumping softies on net. Where as a guy like Halak might be under siege all game and win only because he bought his offense enough time. At the end of the day these guys might have the same save percentage, but got there entirely different ways and performed at entirely different levels.

That is just one example of one single way in which the stats for goalies are contaminated by other factors. Save percentage and GAA alone are not perfect metrics of a goalie's ability.


Last edited by Giroux tha Damaja: 05-11-2010 at 03:00 PM.
Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:05 PM
  #264
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
The happenings and dynamics of a hockey game are numerous, interconnected, and immensely difficult to quantify. So if you handed me a copy of a hockey book written by a bunch of statisticians and economists, I would thank you kindly for the toilet paper and go on about my business.

The problem with looking at the save percentage stat is that good ones and bad ones look so similar. In reality the better stat would be the opponents shooting percentage (100 - SVPCT).

When you look at it like that then the numbers seem to make a little more sense. To the naked eye of a person who knows good goal tending, Ryan Miller is worlds better than Brian Boucher. Yet somehow opponents only score on a few percent more shots.

Now when you look and see that opponents scored on ~7.5% of their shots against Miller, and ~10% of their shots against Boucher, with out even accounting for the much better defense in front of Boucher, you can see that opponents are scoring 33% more often when they get a shot off on Boucher than on Miller. If you wanted to remove shots that posed absolutely no threat whatsoever to any goalie in the league (dump ins clearly visible wristers from the blue line, etc.) then the numbers are even bigger. That's ****ing huge. Massive. Mind numbingly important.

The intensity of team's efforts to score are also different at different times. Terrible goalies who give up soft goals early probably aren't going to face a hungry team the rest of the game. They're going to face a team that is playing with a lead and dumping softies on net. Where as a guy like Halak might be under siege all game and win only because he bought his offense enough time. At the end of the day these guys might have the same save percentage, but got there entirely different ways and performed at entirely different levels.

That is just one example of one single way in which the stats for goalies are contaminated by other factors. Save percentage and GAA alone are not perfect metrics of a goalie's ability.
Agreed completely, and let me be clear that I wasn't suggesting that better goalies don't have a more positive impact on the outcome of games.

I was just simply pointing out that it's not as cut and dry as some people think that an elite goalie is the key and end-all-be-all factor for producing a successful team (not particularly the Flyers' board because I find that a lot of you guys are pretty bright compared to some of the other people I run into here).

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:06 PM
  #265
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
stats look similiar for msot goalies give or take few % points. It is the type of goal they give up that separates the good from the avg. good goalies for the most part dont give up the bad goasl that should be stopped.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:01 PM
  #266
captainpaxil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
id be interested to see a study done with shots from different areas of the ice ala the nfl's passing chart and what each goalies save percentage was then. breaking the ice surface down territorially would be the first step in trying to gauge any real statistical value to what the stats actually mean

captainpaxil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:05 PM
  #267
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Funny, a war just popped up on the main boards about goaltending value based on this:

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_yl...besmyths050610



I wouldn't go quite into the Martin Brodeur issue, but the reality of the position is that it is effected more by the players on the ice than the actual skill of the goaltender...something I've been saying for months now.

You should see the bloody murder they're crying on the boards over something I've been saying all along. It's kind of shocking (or maybe not so) how people forget logic when enticed by a little drama (i.e. Halak).
Read it previously, and don't think they really understand what they're talking about (the Brodeur claim speaks for itself). Goalies are, however, overpaid against the cap when you get into the mid-tier where there isn't a whole lot of difference between the bottom 20 starters. However, arguing that someone is economically overpaid, and not as important in their effect upon the game are two intrinsically different arguments.

For example, the split in goaltending this season was a .909 SVPCT (and, no, SVPCT isn't driven by the team's play in front of the goalie, no matter how much you may think it is).

Lets, for example, adjust the Flyers SVPCT to that of Boston's... .922 from .905, or 1.7%...that would be 40 less goals against. Notice how both teams stopped "about 90%" but there is HUGE value in a single % point swing.

The reality is that your argument about the skill of goaltenders being driven by the team is... wrong. Just like the argument being made in that article is... wrong. That doesn't mean goalies aren't overpaid, there's a good chance they are due to the realities of supply and demand. There are a select group of elite guys, and everyone else is kind of the same.

The same dynamic, however, is seen on defense. Where depth defenseman get stupid contracts every single offseason. To a lesser extent, it is also seen at forward, where the top 6 guys have gotten overpaid to the point where 2nd, 3rd, and 4th line guys get ridiculously underpaid because too much of the salary cap has been taken by the top echelon.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:10 PM
  #268
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Read it previously, and don't think they really understand what they're talking about (the Brodeur claim speaks for itself). Goalies are, however, overpaid against the cap when you get into the mid-tier where there isn't a whole lot of difference between the bottom 20 starters. However, arguing that someone is economically overpaid, and not as important in their effect upon the game are two intrinsically different arguments.

For example, the split in goaltending this season was a .909 SVPCT (and, no, SVPCT isn't driven by the team's play in front of the goalie, no matter how much you may think it is).

Lets, for example, adjust the Flyers SVPCT to that of Boston's... .922 from .905, or 1.7%...that would be 40 less goals against. Notice how both teams stopped "about 90%" but there is HUGE value in a single % point swing.

The reality is that your argument about the skill of goaltenders being driven by the team is... wrong. Just like the argument being made in that article is... wrong. That doesn't mean goalies aren't overpaid, there's a good chance they are due to the realities of supply and demand. There are a select group of elite guys, and everyone else is kind of the same.

The same dynamic, however, is seen on defense. Where depth defenseman get stupid contracts every single offseason. To a lesser extent, it is also seen at forward, where the top 6 guys have gotten overpaid to the point where 2nd, 3rd, and 4th line guys get ridiculously underpaid because too much of the salary cap has been taken by the top echelon.
I agree that save percentage is primarily a result of goal tending, but the rest of the team has a big effect on it too. If they didn't there would be no point in playing defense other than to lower the amount of shots on net (versus lowering both the quality and quantity of shots).

Bad defense leads to lower save percentages via greater quality scoring chances. You aren't really debating that, are you?

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:10 PM
  #269
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
stats look similiar for msot goalies give or take few % points. It is the type of goal they give up that separates the good from the avg. good goalies for the most part dont give up the bad goasl that should be stopped.
The "type" of goal they give up is meaningless over 82 games. Every goalie gives up some bad goals, no matter how good they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by captainpaxil View Post
id be interested to see a study done with shots from different areas of the ice ala the nfl's passing chart and what each goalies save percentage was then. breaking the ice surface down territorially would be the first step in trying to gauge any real statistical value to what the stats actually mean
The dude at behindthenet (pretty sure that's who it was) has tried, and he argued that Brodeur is a product of NJs D. However, his analysis isn't really compelling, because how do you judge a dangerous opportunity? A guy taking a shot from a foot away with the goalie blocking out the entire net isn't really all that "dangerous" (unless he shoots it through the goalie's body), whereas a shot from the point through traffic can be extremely dangerous.

People have done stuff looking at "scoring chances", but that proves problematic as "scoring chances" are wildly subjective in how they are determined.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:13 PM
  #270
lancer247
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
stats look similiar for msot goalies give or take few % points. It is the type of goal they give up that separates the good from the avg. good goalies for the most part dont give up the bad goasl that should be stopped.
I was thinking the same thing. Most goalies make the save 90% of the time but the better goalies make those saves in big games.

lancer247 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:15 PM
  #271
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The "type" of goal they give up is meaningless over 82 games. Every goalie gives up some bad goals, no matter how good they are.



The dude at behindthenet (pretty sure that's who it was) has tried, and he argued that Brodeur is a product of NJs D. However, his analysis isn't really compelling, because how do you judge a dangerous opportunity? A guy taking a shot from a foot away with the goalie blocking out the entire net isn't really all that "dangerous" (unless he shoots it through the goalie's body), whereas a shot from the point through traffic can be extremely dangerous.

People have done stuff looking at "scoring chances", but that proves problematic as "scoring chances" are wildly subjective in how they are determined.
Then for you, what classifies a good goaltender from a bad one?

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:22 PM
  #272
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
I agree that save percentage is primarily a result of goal tending, but the rest of the team has a big effect on it too. If they didn't there would be no point in playing defense other than to lower the amount of shots on net (versus lowering both the quality and quantity of shots).
The point of playing defense is to lower the chances put on net. NHL players do not, on the whole, just shoot the puck for the hell of it if the defense is doing an excellent job of taking away "quality" shots. They hold the puck, cycle it, and look for quality chances. So, really good defensive teams lower shot totals against...in the process of lowering quality chances. If you're a player just giving up the puck from bad spots, you're not going to last long at this level.

Quality chances surely have a higher conversion rate for goals, but if they are correlated to shot totals then their relative effect on SVPCT isn't direct. A goalie facing more shots faces more quality chances...a goalie facing less shots will face less quality chances... SVPCT will remain steady throughout assuming quality chances are simply steady proportion of SOG. Now, sure, there may be some variance there, but I just don't believe it has a huge effect at the NHL level.

Quote:
Bad defense leads to lower save percentages via greater quality scoring chances. You aren't really debating that, are you?
I am. Because if this is true I would expect Roberto Luongo to be putting up .940 numbers in Vancouver based on how well he did behind a dreadful team in Florida. Goalies are what they are. Vokoun has put up great numbers behind a not so good Florida team the last two years (as did Anderson last year, and look what he did this year).

Hell, there's long been an argument that more SOG/weaker defense helps the goalies SVPCT, if not his GAA.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:23 PM
  #273
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Then for you, what classifies a good goaltender from a bad one?
Erm, the guy that stops the most pucks. Ya know, the goalie's job.

I don't care how the puck ends up behind the guy, just as long as it is as rarely as possible.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:24 PM
  #274
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Then for you, what classifies a good goaltender from a bad one?
As it stands now, like most things, the only way you determine a good goaltender from a bad one is to watch how they play.

But then there are other factors. There can be goalies that benefit in a certain system while imploding in others. Confidence and luck are also big factors in goaltending.

Anything that tries to subjugate them outside of visual confirmation with your own eyes is going to be flawed by its very nature.

In the end, as much as people want to strangle this to death, the only thing you have to go on are results. In that regard you can consider a goalie an entity created by the team itself, but also not being tied down to the team because it can operate on its own.

It's a hard concept in a sense. A strong goalie can succeed at times regardless of the team in front of him, but it's much easier to succeed with a stronger team.

Regardless of the team there will be chances against that goalie; great chances, ones that are almost assuredly goals. With a good defense you cut back on those. With a good goaltender you cut back on things that should be saved, but might not be with a bad goaltender. Then there are times a good goalie can make up for a defensive mistake by making a save he shouldn't make.

There's far too many factors and variables to prove anything outside of understanding the basic principle that goaltending stats are a team stat as opposed to a "goalie stat."

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:26 PM
  #275
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
There's far too many factors and variables to prove anything outside of understanding the basic principle that goaltending stats are a team stat as opposed to a "goalie stat."
False. This is simply false, and if you watched good goalies on bad teams you'd understand how false this statement is.

GAA is a team stat.

SVPCT is a goalie stat.

RBIs is largely a team's stat.

OPS is a hitter's stat.

Our team defense was DEMONSTRABLY better throughout much of this season (even under Stevens), yet our SVPCT stat dropped notably. If that's a team stat, I would like an explanation of how that happened given improved team defense play.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.