HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Flyers Sign Sergei Bobrovsky

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-11-2010, 03:35 PM
  #276
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
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.
Umm... let me get this straight then. So you are saying the team/system has no affect on how the goalie plays and its pure the goalies skill?

sa cyred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:36 PM
  #277
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
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.
Save percentage can get skewed either positively or negatively by the team as well.

For instance, in terms of a stronger offense versus a weaker defense, the stronger offense will stay in the zone longer and, often times, get more shots against.

Granted the more you pepper a goalie, his SV% stats could go up even if he lets in a number of goals.

His SV% could also go down against a team that's not necessarily trying to pepper him but, because of a weak defense, is trying to get quality scoring chances against resulting in more goals per shot fired.


Then again, in the case of a weaker offense versus a stronger defense, that defense would in theory be able to keep a heavy chunk of the shots, regardless of how many a team can send at the goalie, from being "dangerous" shots.

That would create an artificial inflation of SV%.

Also, there could an artificial deflation of save percentage against a strong defense as well if the team does manage to score on a few opportunities but is generally stopped from getting a lot of shots off. So the SV% goes down, but the "end" (the GAA) does not necessarily have to change.


The GAA is an end regardless of how you get there. SV% can be a means to that end, but it is not necessarily THE means to that end. It is another goalie stat directly effected by the team.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:38 PM
  #278
IrishSniper87
Registered User
 
IrishSniper87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Media, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,402
vCash: 500
If you analyze enough statistics, you can pretty much get them to say whatever you want.

IrishSniper87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:42 PM
  #279
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
Save percentage can get skewed either positively or negatively by the team as well.
Not much, if at all. This argument would largely rely on other teams consistently making stupid decisions and giving up puck control for poor scoring opportunities. Which the majority of NHL teams do not do. They'll take fewer shots in an effort to get to better scoring locations over just throwing the puck on net at random.

Quote:
For instance, in terms of a stronger offense versus a weaker defense, the stronger offense will stay in the zone longer and, often times, get more shots against.

Granted the more you pepper a goalie, his SV% stats could go up even if he lets in a number of goals.

His SV% could also go down against a team that's not necessarily trying to pepper him but, because of a weak defense, is trying to get quality scoring chances against resulting in more goals per shot fired.


Then again, in the case of a weaker offense versus a stronger defense, that defense would in theory be able to keep a heavy chunk of the shots, regardless of how many a team can send at the goalie, from being "dangerous" shots.

That would create an artificial inflation of SV%.

Also, there could an artificial deflation of save percentage against a strong defense as well if the team does manage to score on a few opportunities but is generally stopped from getting a lot of shots off. So the SV% goes down, but the "end" (the GAA) does not necessarily have to change.
...somewhat difficult to follow, and really doesn't address that some goalies are simply better than other goalies, and SVPCT remains the best metric to understanding that statistically...because that's a stat goalies "own," which is not the case with GAA...cuz GAA is a team stat.

Quote:
The GAA is an end regardless of how you get there. SV% can be a means to that end, but it is not necessarily THE means to that end.
GAA is the most important statistic for the team to be concerned with, sure. However, SV%, as a measure of the quality of goaltending you are getting, is key to analyzing the performance from a key component of the "team" in the process.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:45 PM
  #280
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
Umm... let me get this straight then. So you are saying the team/system has no affect on how the goalie plays and its pure the goalies skill?
A team/system has a HUGE effect on GAA. The team/system doesn't make Martin Brodeur.... Martin Brodeur. Just like Florida didn't make Luongo, Luongo. Goalies have their own skill that directly effects how they play, they aren't cardboard cutouts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishSniper87 View Post
If you analyze enough statistics, you can pretty much get them to say whatever you want.
Not really true. You can make an argument based on them, but that's true of anything.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:47 PM
  #281
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
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.


I understand that and said that, however it isnt meaningless as the better goalies will rarely give up the bad (at leats on a consistent basis) while avg ones will on a more frequent basis.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:50 PM
  #282
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
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.
There's the rub. I do.

As for why Luongo's save percentage wouldn't have moved that much, see my first post in this thread (not saying that is the entire explanation). A goalie who is playing on a team that is trailing 80% of the game is going to see easier shots then a guy on a team that's always in their games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
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.
The team made the play-offs this year playing injured starters or average-at-best back-up goalies for 75% of the year (Injured Emery, Boucher, Leighton). Last year we got a bit lucky in that when one of our two inconsistent goalies was slumping, the other would get hot. Put Michael Leighton behind last year's team and see what his save percentage numbers look like. Not 92%, that's for sure. They'd look straight-up ass.


Last edited by Giroux tha Damaja: 05-11-2010 at 04:02 PM.
Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:55 PM
  #283
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
I understand that and said that, however it isnt meaningless as the better goalies will rarely give up the bad (at leats on a consistent basis) while avg ones will on a more frequent basis.
Right, but that's the point... average-to-bad are just going to give up more goals as a matter of how things go.

---

Folks, look at this: http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/te.../2/order/false

Sorted by SA/G you have, roughly speaking, the view of how well teams limited chances against. Without getting into a deeper analysis of SOG v. "quality chances" or anything else, what should leap out from comparing SA/G and SVPCT is that there is almost no correlation between the two. The best in the league is Chicago, and they had a .901. The worst in the league was Florida, and they had a .916 (Florida has a significantly better goalie). Boston and Toronto allowed the same number of shots, and had a .892 to .922 difference.

Any argument that goalie's play is closely tied to that of the teams runs into serious problems.

Toskala and Gustavsson posted an .874 an .902.... JSG posted a .916.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:57 PM
  #284
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
There's the rub. I do.

As for why Luongo's save percentage wouldn't have moved that much, see my first post in this thread (not saying that is the entire explanation). A goalie who is playing on a team that is trailing 80% of the game is going to see easier shots then a guy on a team that's always in their games.
I am really struggling to see how this makes any sense.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 03:59 PM
  #285
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
There's the rub. I do.

As for why Luongo's save percentage wouldn't have moved that much, see my first post in this thread (not saying that is the entire explanation). A goalie who is playing on a team that is trailing 80% of the game is going to see easier shots then a guy on a team that's always in their games.
Huh? If the team is trailing, they're more likely to open up a bit defensively...making the trailing team's goalie see harder chances. Whereas if you have the lead, your team can clamp down on the game and reduce the dangerous chances.

Quote:
The team made the play-offs this year playing injured starters or average-at-best back-up goalies for 75% of the year (Injured Emery, Boucher, Leighton). Last year we got a bit lucky in that when one of our two inconsistent goalies was slumping, the other would get hot. Put Michael Leighton behind last year's team and see what his save percentage numbers look like. They'd look straight-up ass.
Well, Biron put back-to-back years of solid goaltending. So you can't just look at last year.

However, the argument is that the goalie is irrelevant in this equation. So, if that's true, you can't come back with the woes of Emery, Boucher, and Leighton. Our team defense improved, but goalie production went down. Huge hole in the "goalie stats are team stats" argument.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:16 PM
  #286
captainpaxil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
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.

id say the % of bad free agency contracts goalie is probably worst position. the difference between a suitable talent and a mediocre one isnt worth the difference in salary.
i think marty may actually be to blame for this as people have watched what an elite talent can do at the position and instead attribute that effect to the position and not to him. guys like roy and brodeur are to thier position what gretzky and lemieux were to thiers and to me its about generational talent.

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.
i didnt see the article but i have no doubt the fact that stevens could clear the crease (a higher percentage area) helped. but simply knowing how and where those chances come and protecting against them is just smart hockey.

alot of what are "low percentage shots" turn into "letdown goals" and figuring out the numbers and comparing them player vs player would probably be the best way to go. though i dont think any of us have the time or inclination to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
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."
watching the games is all you can really do right now but im sure theres a way to quantify it. but even then what may be a healthy amount of shots for one guy might be enough to shellshock another. the psychology of it is just baffling. theres a boatload of factors most of which confuse the snot outta me which is why i think its just easier to put a good team in front of a guy and hope he plays well off whatever my gut says

captainpaxil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:25 PM
  #287
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainpaxil View Post
i didnt see the article but i have no doubt the fact that stevens could clear the crease (a higher percentage area) helped. but simply knowing how and where those chances come and protecting against them is just smart hockey.

alot of what are "low percentage shots" turn into "letdown goals" and figuring out the numbers and comparing them player vs player would probably be the best way to go. though i dont think any of us have the time or inclination to do so.
The other big problem is a lot of time goalies create the "high quality chances" themselves with poor rebound control. Take Leighton, for example, if I was Boston and had tape on him, the first thing I would notice is that he has no effing clue where his rebounds are going to go, and he puts a lot of 'em right back into danger areas (and then, this season, managed to stop a remarkable number of those point blank chances). Good goalies do a better job of putting shots into the corners and away from danger...so that's going to reduce those 2nd chance opportunities, that really put the defense in a hard spot.

I just don't find the shot location stuff compelling, because there's too much context that gets lost and is important. Thus, I prefer the raw empirical stats (there were X shots on goal).

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:37 PM
  #288
captainpaxil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The other big problem is a lot of time goalies create the "high quality chances" themselves with poor rebound control. Take Leighton, for example, if I was Boston and had tape on him, the first thing I would notice is that he has no effing clue where his rebounds are going to go, and he puts a lot of 'em right back into danger areas (and then, this season, managed to stop a remarkable number of those point blank chances). Good goalies do a better job of putting shots into the corners and away from danger...so that's going to reduce those 2nd chance opportunities, that really put the defense in a hard spot.

I just don't find the shot location stuff compelling, because there's too much context that gets lost and is important. Thus, I prefer the raw empirical stats (there were X shots on goal).
so theres obviously gotta be a primary shot vs secondary shot category. seperating the initial shot on goal from one that came off a rebound and even sequential rebounds. this is good i like where this is going.

captainpaxil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 04:53 PM
  #289
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainpaxil View Post
so theres obviously gotta be a primary shot vs secondary shot category. seperating the initial shot on goal from one that came off a rebound and even sequential rebounds. this is good i like where this is going.
Maybe, but I'm not sure it's that simple. The issue is still that there's a shot coming at the goalie in the slot...it's just he goalie that created that chance, not the defense. So, if Brodeur, for example, doesn't create those chances and you're paying attention purely to where chances are coming from, it's going to make it look as if his D is doing a much better job than someone else's.

I mean, the Devs have had a demonstrable reduction in talent around Brodeur, but he continues to chug right along and the team has maintained itself as a very good defensive club. 10 years ago you might have been able to make the Stevens and Nieds argument, but he's pretty much done the same thing without them around.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 06:48 PM
  #290
captainpaxil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Maybe, but I'm not sure it's that simple. The issue is still that there's a shot coming at the goalie in the slot...it's just he goalie that created that chance, not the defense. So, if Brodeur, for example, doesn't create those chances and you're paying attention purely to where chances are coming from, it's going to make it look as if his D is doing a much better job than someone else's.
but youd be able to see that right in the numbers. a goalie facing a higher number of secondary shots or would give us an idea on not just ability to stop the first one but rebound control in what area those 2nd shots come from. the fact that there is a 3rd shot tells us alot about the defense and those give us more.

why i think goalie stats really get blurry is they tell you little about how that goalie plays. jumbling all of the shots together is like saying every pitch in baseball should be a homerun.its just leaves absent so many aspects of the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I mean, the Devs have had a demonstrable reduction in talent around Brodeur, but he continues to chug right along and the team has maintained itself as a very good defensive club. 10 years ago you might have been able to make the Stevens and Nieds argument, but he's pretty much done the same thing without them around.
the devils were a combination of alot of factors. most teams had to dump the puck to get through the trap and if marty didnt handle the puck stevens was there to negate the down low cycling game.. it was a near unbeatable combination. id say martys decline over the last few years (from godly to simply incredible) has been due to changes among those other factors. but youd probably never get a read on that just looking at the stats

captainpaxil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 07:32 PM
  #291
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainpaxil View Post
why i think goalie stats really get blurry is they tell you little about how that goalie plays. jumbling all of the shots together is like saying every pitch in baseball should be a homerun.its just leaves absent so many aspects of the game.
That's the wrong way to think about large sample size. It isn't that they are "blurry" it's that they use that "blurry" quality as a strength because ultimately all the variance noise gets knocked out by volume of shots. It isn't that jumbling the shots together is like saying every pitch in baseball should be a homerun, it's that if I look at 30 shots as opposed to trying to find 10 shots that are "quality," I'm getting those shots without having to look hard to find 'em.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 08:47 PM
  #292
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Huh? If the team is trailing, they're more likely to open up a bit defensively...making the trailing team's goalie see harder chances. Whereas if you have the lead, your team can clamp down on the game and reduce the dangerous chances.
Fair counter-points. Either way, the point I'm making is that the play of the team does influence the number and nature of shots a goalie faces. It would seem you agree with the concept but not the example, that's fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Well, Biron put back-to-back years of solid goaltending. So you can't just look at last year.

However, the argument is that the goalie is irrelevant in this equation. So, if that's true, you can't come back with the woes of Emery, Boucher, and Leighton. Our team defense improved, but goalie production went down. Huge hole in the "goalie stats are team stats" argument.
WHOA. I never argued the irrelevance of goalies in a team's svpct stat. That's a bit of a straw man you're tearing apart (via the extreme you took my original point to). My point was that the team's play effects save percentage (therefore goalie stats are team stats). Not everyone on the team is equally responsible for those stats, obviously the goalie bares the lion's share of that responsibility, but the team's influence is still there.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 08:50 PM
  #293
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Damn, it's like Jester Vs. The Boards right now.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 08:52 PM
  #294
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
I am really struggling to see how this makes any sense.
Teams with leads don't press as hard for prime scoring chances. They'll take the shots you give them, but not necessarily expose themselves defensively in order to create offense.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 09:19 PM
  #295
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
Teams with leads don't press as hard for prime scoring chances. They'll take the shots you give them, but not necessarily expose themselves defensively in order to create offense.
Which is easily counterbalanced by the fact that the team trailing is willing to take more risks pressing forward...

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 09:27 PM
  #296
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
Fair counter-points. Either way, the point I'm making is that the play of the team does influence the number and nature of shots a goalie faces. It would seem you agree with the concept but not the example, that's fine.
I agree that team defense influences what a goalie sees, but what I would argue is that if you look at the shots goalies face it looks more like

(quality shots)% + (mediocre shots)% + (weak shots)% = total shots faced.

That relationship remains relatively constant between teams. Some teams absolutely make their goalie work harder, but they make them work harder across the board...thus their SVPCT isn't terribly affected by the team, but their GAA is.

That's why if you look at the shot totals teams allow, there's almost ZERO correlation between shots faced and SVPCT.

Quote:
WHOA. I never argued the irrelevance of goalies in a team's svpct stat. That's a bit of a straw man you're tearing apart (via the extreme you took my original point to). My point was that the team's play effects save percentage (therefore goalie stats are team stats). Not everyone on the team is equally responsible for those stats, obviously the goalie bares the lion's share of that responsibility, but the team's influence is still there.
The post you responded to was me engaging with Shafer, who explicitly stated that goalie stats are "team stats."

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."
SVPCT is a goalie stat.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 11:34 PM
  #297
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,870
vCash: 500
So when is rookie camp this year? And is there any news on the Kempe/Bodrov/Popov fronts yet? I'm really looking forward to seeing Bobrovsky in training camp and more important, I'm looking forward to seeing him play in the AHL this year.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2010, 12:31 AM
  #298
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
Which is easily counterbalanced by the fact that the team trailing is willing to take more risks pressing forward...
The point was that there are influences in goalie's stats outside of their own ability. That point still stands. That was just an example to show what I meant when I said that. Your counter example is valid, but now you have to quantify the influence of each change in tactics if you want to actually show that they are equivalent . . . . . . . good luck.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I agree that team defense influences what a goalie sees, but what I would argue is that if you look at the shots goalies face it looks more like

(quality shots)% + (mediocre shots)% + (weak shots)% = total shots faced.

That relationship remains relatively constant between teams. Some teams absolutely make their goalie work harder, but they make them work harder across the board...thus their SVPCT isn't terribly affected by the team, but their GAA is.

That's why if you look at the shot totals teams allow, there's almost ZERO correlation between shots faced and SVPCT.
I understood your point about the composition. I just disagree with it. Shots allowed is not directly correlated to quality of defense in front of the goalie.

So demonstrating the lack of correlation between shots allowed and save percentage doesn't debunk the idea that shot composition changes depending upon the quality of a goalie's defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The post you responded to was me engaging with Shafer, who explicitly stated that goalie stats are "team stats."
I don't care what Schafer stated, I didn't say it . . . however, he is right that goalie stats are team stats. The whole team influences them (no one nearly so much as the goalie, but still).

Granted, we disagree on that point. However, it is still a long, long way from Chris and I saying they're team stats, and either of us saying that "the goalie is irrelevant in this equation". I know I didn't say that (FWIW I don't recall Chris saying it either, and doubt he would say that).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
SVPCT is a goalie stat.
It is, primarily. It is also a team stat, in a sense.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2010, 07:30 AM
  #299
JSTAFF
Registered User
 
JSTAFF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: Italy
Posts: 4,386
vCash: 500
Every goalie stat is also a team stat. That's why people look at the team hes on, when analyzing the stats. See: Bobrovsky.

JSTAFF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2010, 08:00 AM
  #300
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSTAFF View Post
Every goalie stat is also a team stat. That's why people look at the team hes on, when analyzing the stats. See: Bobrovsky.
Not really...one of the key analytical points with Bobrovsky, which I'm pretty sure even Shafer has been guilty of: "His team sucked, but he posted a good SVPCT..." If his team sucked and he sucked, then his SVPCT would likely suck too.

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 09:36 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.