HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Notices

Luongo's potential impact?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-24-2012, 12:25 AM
  #1
TheMadHatTrick
Registered User
 
TheMadHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,641
vCash: 500
Luongo's potential impact?

I thought I would try to do a purely statistical analysis of Luongo's possible impact on the Leafs' playoff hopes.

Now there are a number of things to consider. First; Vancouver is a way better defensive team overall than the Leafs (duh). They might also have a better defensive unit in Edler, Hamuis, Bieksa, et all. Finally they have a better defensive system than the one Wilson chose to employ. We should therefore take the following numbers with a grain of salt.

In 2011 4 goalies saw time in net for the Leafs and these are their component stats.

James Reimer: 97(GA), 974(SV), .900(SV%)

Jonas Gustavvson: 112(GA), 1147(SV), .902(SV%)

Ben Scrivens: 35(GA), 359(SV), .903(SV%)

Jussi Rynass: 7(GA, 40(SV), .825(SV%)


That is a total of 251 goals allowed vs. 2520 shots against over the course of 82 games, or a collective .900 save percentage.

1 goal for every 10.04 saves
2 goals for every 20 saves
2.5 goals for every 25 saves
3 goals for every 30 saves


Now save percentage doesn't account for quality of shots against. But it should give us a general understanding of a goalie's level of efficiency.

Now let's look at Luongo's save efficiency over the last 4 years.

(2011) 55(GP) 127(GA) 1577(SV) .919(SV%)
(2010) 60(GP) 126(GA) 1753(SV) .928(SV%)
(2009) 68(GP) 167(GA) 1915(SV) .913(SV%)
(2008) 54(GP) 124(GA) 1542(SV) .920(SV%)

Four year composite: 544(GA) vs. 6787(SV) = 92.0(SV%)


Now how would that translate on a team like the Leafs who give up roughly 20-30 shots a game?

Based on the stats the difference between a .920 save percentage and a .900 save percentage given the same number of shots against is roughly 51 goals a year.

That is huge! Imagine giving up 51 less goals a year? Now the Leafs scored 226 goals in 2011 but they also gave up 251 goals against. Take away 51 goals and you have a +25 goal differential instead of a -25.

Now we should account for the fact that Luongo will not be making every start. He averaged about 59 starts a year for the Canucks over the last 4 years, though that number is somewhat low thanks to injuries and the pressence of Schneider.

With the Leafs he would likely play closer to 65 to 70 games a year (assuming health) with the backup (Reimer or Scrivens?) playing the remaining 12-17 games.

Lets go with a Luongo-Reimer tandem since "Optimus" has the longterm contract. How would their efficiency numbers theoretically translate?

Scenario 1:

Luongo 65 starts:

.920(SV%) the last 4 years
.793% of the starts and shots faced
He would face roughly 2197 shots
He can be expected to give up at least 176 goals against, which would be the most goals he's given up in a season since 2009.

Remier 17 starts:

.911(SV%) the last 2 years
.900(SV%) in 2011
.207% of the starts and shots faced
He would face roughly 574 shots
Reimer's save percentage over the last 3 years (.920) suggests that he would give up roughly 51 goals. His save percentage of last year would say he gives up 57.

Add that to Luongo's 176 and the Leafs would have had a -1 or -7 goal differential, depending on which one you think is the real Reimer.


Now if Luongo played 70 games instead of 65, the numbers obviously jump even more in our advantage.


Scenario 2:

Luongo 70 starts:

.920(SV%) the last 4 years
.854% of the starts and saves
He would face roughly 2366 shots
He can be expected to give up at least 189 goals against, which would be the most goals he's given up in a season since 2005 when he was with Florida.

Remier 12 starts:
.911(SV%) the last 3 years
.900(SV%) in 2011
.146% of the starts and saves
He would face roughly 405 shots
Reimer's save percentage over the last 3 years (.920) suggests that he would give up roughly 36 goals. His save percentage of last year would say he gives up 40.

So you take these numbers and add them to the hypothetical Luongo number (189) and you wind up with either 225 or 229 goals against which would give you a +1 or -3 goal differential.


Now it's impossible to determine the statistical correlation between wins and goal differential. The Leafs won 35 games and totaled 80 points with a -26 goal differential. The Senators made the Playoffs with only 6 more wins than the Leafs but had a +8 goal differential.

You would like to think that if flipped the goals for/against stat to the ones in the Hypothetical Luongo Pythagorean Expectation (HLPE or HELP!) it would help cover the 6 win 12 point spread.


For reference only 2 teams made the Playoffs with a negative goal differential Washington -8, and Florida -19, both in the relatively weaker Eastern conference.

Now the overall defence has to improve, but Luongo would lead to an almost 25 goal improvement (+1), which while not guaranteeing a playoff spot would put us a step ahead of last year.


Last edited by TheMadHatTrick: 06-24-2012 at 06:31 PM.
TheMadHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:30 AM
  #2
Doshy
Registered User
 
Doshy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 500
Yeah, it pretty much guarantees playoffs in my mind. Since the lock out our goaltending has been really inconsistent. The first few years were just short by a hair, maybe 1 more win would've gotten us in, but recently it's been bad. When they were playing consistent for the first half last season we were securely in the playoffs all year. Then the wheels fell off.

Doshy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:26 AM
  #3
JMcLeaf
(╯□)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
JMcLeaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ♫d(-_-)b♫
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 17,466
vCash: 500
Nice work. Must have taken a lot of time.

I definitely hope we can find a way to get Lu.

Burkie just needs to be patient and wait until the price is reasonable.

I have troubles seeing Gillis going into next season with both goalies, since that could be a huge distraction for the team.

JMcLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:30 AM
  #4
e84*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Yup Burke is in the driver's seat.

Just wait em out.

e84* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:31 AM
  #5
Pi
Registered User
 
Pi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,941
vCash: 100
Slight problem, as good as Luongo is, the Leafs don't have:

A) Two elite players like the Sedins.
B) A Selke winning centre.

Getting Luongo is in no way a lock to make the playoffs. He surely increases our chances but there is no "lock" with this team.

Pi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:33 AM
  #6
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pi View Post
Slight problem, as good as Luongo is, the Leafs don't have:

A) Two elite players like the Sedins.
B) A Selke winning centre.

Getting Luongo is in no way a lock to make the playoffs. He surely increases our chances but there is no "lock" with this team.
There is no "lock" with any team.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:54 AM
  #7
BayStBullies
Burn the Boats!
 
BayStBullies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: @BayStBullies
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,861
vCash: 500
There already is a Luongo thread; which can't fall to the 2nd page quick enough.

Luongo is not the answer; that contract will bend this team backwards for the next decade... all relying on the risk that an aging goalie who may very well be on a decline; can be useful for the next decade. Let's also not forget that the Leafs are the only team interested for good reason. The Leafs take that contract; he is going no where.

Heck; Komisarek might have more suitors.

Let Vancouver deal with their mess; the Leafs should take a hint from every other team. Run away from that albatross contract.

BayStBullies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 10:55 AM
  #8
BayStBullies
Burn the Boats!
 
BayStBullies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: @BayStBullies
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rojac View Post
There is no "lock" with any team.
That contract would become a lock on this team.

BayStBullies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:13 AM
  #9
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastille's View Post
That contract would become a lock on this team.
Explain in detail what part of the contract you find onerous and why?

I'm not sure i see a serious issue with it .

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:14 AM
  #10
dubey
~manlets~
 
dubey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,555
vCash: 500
We should be able to win games we have no business winning

With Reimer/Gustavsson we were losing games we should have won

It would be a refreshing change

dubey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:21 AM
  #11
mapleleaf979
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,595
vCash: 500
Luongo is one of the most over-rated goalies in the league. He has looked shaky in many pressure situations. I personally think Luongo CHOKES on pressure. THe 2010 gold medal I only had one doubt and it was luongo letting in a weak one that would cost Canada. Last year in the Stanley Cup final I believe he choked again. He put his foot in his mouth when talking about TIm Thomas and then procedded to choke on the last 2 games. 5.3 million for the next 10 years? Luongo is better than James Reimer/Scrivens but will completely choke in a pressure situation and will never win a cup.


Last edited by mapleleaf979: 06-24-2012 at 11:30 AM.
mapleleaf979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:39 AM
  #12
nuck
Axis of Evil
 
nuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: North Korea
Posts: 5,010
vCash: 500
Sometimes it is the club in from that supports the good numbers. I have no idea what Lu's numbers would have been in Toronto but what it takes to get .919 in
Vancouver is not remotely close to what it would have taken in Toronto last season.
I think he has been a solid goalie for a lot of years, and a great one for two or three of those years. Your analysis downplays the contribution of the club in front of him a bit too much. The goalies didn't cause the collapse, they were only a part. Notice below an ex-Leaf goalie in almost every excellent tandem. If only we could get them all back.

Andrew Raycroft 21 967 39 2.42 9 5 1 399 0.911
Roberto Luongo 68 3899 167 2.57 40 22 4 1748 0.913

Yann Danis 12 467 16 2.05 3 2 1 191 0.923
Martin Brodeur 77 4499 168 2.24 45 25 6 1836 0.916

Mikael Tellqvist 6 230 9 2.35 2 1 0 116 0.928
Ryan Miller 59 3443 145 2.53 34 18 6 1628 0.918

Scott Clemmensen 40 2356 94 2.39 25 13 1 1044 0.917
Martin Brodeur 31 1814 73 2.42 19 9 3 797 0.916
Kevin Weekes 16 795 32 2.42 7 5 0 367 0.920

Joey MacDonald 15 721 31 2.58 5 5 3 341 0.917
Chris Osgood 11 629 29 2.77 5 3 2 269 0.903
Jim Howard 63 3615 168 2.79 37 17 5 1662 0.908

nuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:46 AM
  #13
Erza Scarlet
following the mantle
 
Erza Scarlet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Requiem
Posts: 8,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pi View Post
Slight problem, as good as Luongo is, the Leafs don't have:

A) Two elite players like the Sedins.
B) A Selke winning centre.

Getting Luongo is in no way a lock to make the playoffs. He surely increases our chances but there is no "lock" with this team.
The other method is improving the overall quality of the top 6 as a whole if you don't have the high end like Sedins and Kesler.

Erza Scarlet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:47 AM
  #14
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mapleleaf979 View Post
Luongo is one of the most over-rated goalies in the league. He has looked shaky in many pressure situations. I personally think Luongo CHOKES on pressure. THe 2010 gold medal I only had one doubt and it was luongo letting in a weak one that would cost Canada. Last year in the Stanley Cup final I believe he choked again. He put his foot in his mouth when talking about TIm Thomas and then procedded to choke on the last 2 games. 5.3 million for the next 10 years? Luongo is better than James Reimer/Scrivens but will completely choke in a pressure situation and will never win a cup.
I struggle with the concept of him being over rated, the brain trusts that ran our Olympic program saw fit to make him our #1 in arguable to biggest, most important tourney in our life time, save for maybe 1972.

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:49 AM
  #15
Kessely Snipes
Great White North
 
Kessely Snipes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,435
vCash: 500
The way I look at it, consistent goaltending would have easily made us a playoff team last year. Luongo will get us in. He should give us a chance to win on most nights.

Kessely Snipes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:56 AM
  #16
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kessely Snipes View Post
The way I look at it, consistent goaltending would have easily made us a playoff team last year. Luongo will get us in. He should give us a chance to win on most nights.
And i believe that will have a impact is so many other areas, like player confidence, team style of play and possible improvement for UFA viability.

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:02 PM
  #17
Blaylock38
Bleeds Blue & White
 
Blaylock38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 789
vCash: 500
The contract is not bad at all, the cap hit is what 5.33 for a franchise player or an elite goalie, whatever you would like to classify him as. The rumour is that he only wants to play at most 5-6 years of that contract and than he will retire. His cap hit will be off the books. The contract is not bad at all.

He will bring stability to this team and Reimer and he would make an excellent tandem. Plus I am sure he would come here motivated to prove everyone in Vancouver wrong. Too many positives, too much motivation to succeed, it is a no-brainer to get him.

Blaylock38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:06 PM
  #18
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaylock38 View Post
The contract is not bad at all, the cap hit is what 5.33 for a franchise player or an elite goalie, whatever you would like to classify him as. The rumour is that he only wants to play at most 5-6 years of that contract and than he will retire. His cap hit will be off the books. The contract is not bad at all.

He will bring stability to this team and Reimer and he would make an excellent tandem. Plus I am sure he would come here motivated to prove everyone in Vancouver wrong. Too many positives, too much motivation to succeed, it is a no-brainer to get him.
Even if he does not retire down the road, he does not have a NMC, so if things go horribly bad there is always the Marlies option.

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:10 PM
  #19
Ricky Bobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,496
vCash: 500
Backup as a general rule get the easier starts which explains why they've got higher save % numbers than a lot of the starters. Something us Leaf fans should know as teams have loved using their backups against us post-lockout.

Luongo's Save % would likely go down because we our forwards don't have the defensive capabilities the Nucks do. Reimer or whoever else would be the backup would most likely have his Save % go up a little.

Shaving off around 35 goals seems more realistic but it could end up being a lot higher with the system that Carlyle will implement but at the same time are goals for will likely decrease. Basically it's nearly impossible to predict.

But something to consider is:

Tampa Bay got awful goaltending and D last season and there goal against went from 234 to 278 = 54 more goal against.

Colorado on the other hand got good goaltending last season and a top pairing dman in Johnson and went from 287 goal against in 10-11 to 218 in 11-12 = 69 less goals against.

Ricky Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:14 PM
  #20
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
Backup as a general rule get the easier starts which explains why they've got higher save % numbers than a lot of the starters. Something us Leaf fans should know as teams have loved using their backups against us post-lockout.

Luongo's Save % would likely go down because we our forwards don't have the defensive capabilities the Nucks do. Reimer or whoever else would be the backup would most likely have his Save % go up a little.

Shaving off around 35 goals seems more realistic but it could end up being a lot higher with the system that Carlyle will implement but at the same time are goals for will likely decrease. Basically it's nearly impossible to predict.

But something to consider is:

Tampa Bay got awful goaltending and D last season and there goal against went from 234 to 278 = 54 more goal against.

Colorado on the other hand got good goaltending last season and a top pairing dman in Johnson and went from 287 goal against in 10-11 to 218 in 11-12 = 69 less goals against.
My one and only hesitation with Lou is what does Gillis want in return.

I don't see BB getting burned and i don't see him doing a desperation trade either but it's impossible to gauge what both GMs place as his value.

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:19 PM
  #21
TheMadHatTrick
Registered User
 
TheMadHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuck View Post
Sometimes it is the club in from that supports the good numbers. I have no idea what Lu's numbers would have been in Toronto but what it takes to get .919 in
Vancouver is not remotely close to what it would have taken in Toronto last season.
Roberto Luongo's save percentage with an equally enept Florida team over his last 5 years there was 92.6%, or, exactly the same number as it has been with a very good Canucks team over the last 4 years.

The team in front of you should only really affect the amount and quality of shots a goalie faces, and therefore theoretically should not affect a goalie's efficiency relative to their actual ability, and the numbers bear that out.

Luongo gave up way more goals with Florida

213
172
164
140
107

Than he did with Vancouver

127
126
167
124

But his save percentage remains remarkably the same, because those numbers are the closest statistically you can come to judging a goalie's actual ability over a large sample size.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nuck View Post
Your analysis downplays the contribution of the club in front of him a bit too much. The goalies didn't cause the collapse, they were only a part. Notice below an ex-Leaf goalie in almost every excellent tandem. If only we could get them all back.
I didn't downplay anything. I prefaced the entire post with the neccesary caveats. It is also a purely statistical analysis, meaning that it can only measure things that can be statistically quantified.

Notice that all of those goalies you have chosen are predominantly backup goalies and have not produced close to a large enough sample size against top competition over an extended period of time from which a reasonable conclusion can be drawn.


Last edited by TheMadHatTrick: 06-24-2012 at 12:31 PM.
TheMadHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:24 PM
  #22
TheMadHatTrick
Registered User
 
TheMadHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
Backup as a general rule get the easier starts which explains why they've got higher save % numbers than a lot of the starters. Something us Leaf fans should know as teams have loved using their backups against us post-lockout.
You are a wise one Ricky Bobby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
Luongo's Save % would likely go down because we our forwards don't have the defensive capabilities the Nucks do. Reimer or whoever else would be the backup would most likely have his Save % go up a little.
Luongo's save percentage with an equally horrible Florida team was 92.6% which is exactly what it was with an amazing Vancouver team. The only difference was he faced way more shots, and therefore allowed more goals.

TheMadHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 12:58 PM
  #23
006leafs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Quote:
Four year composite: 544(GA) vs. 6787(SV) = 92.6(SV%)
I agree that having Luongo would make a huge difference and I am hoping Burke manages to get him for a decent price. I am willing to give up Big Joe, a future first and one of our Dmen. That said, I think your numbers are wrong.

Feel free to correct me but Luongo's save % over the last 4 years is not 92.6% it's actually 91.9%. (1-(544/6787)) = 0.91984

Unless I am missing something here (which I might be) the goal differential calculations you made could be off by 15 goals or so which would knock us down a peg.

That said, with Luongo I feel we'll be going to back the playoffs and he'll steal us a few games the way Belfour and CUJO used to.

006leafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 01:10 PM
  #24
Max Quackenbush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
There is zero chance Lou goes to Toronto if they sign Schultz. Burke is on the clock and by that I mean does he like his job. If he does, which player gives him the best chance to keep it?

Max Quackenbush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 01:16 PM
  #25
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Quackenbush View Post
There is zero chance Lou goes to Toronto if they sign Schultz. Burke is on the clock and by that I mean does he like his job. If he does, which player gives him the best chance to keep it?
Err, what does Schultz have to do with Lou?

Faltorvo 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 08:57 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.