HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2 Voting Results (HOH Top Goaltenders)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-09-2012, 12:00 AM
  #201
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Ultimate cherry picking of data.
Really? All I said was "food for thought".

Quote:
Effectively all Vezina winners from the last ten played seasons were viewed as having NHL potential. The round they were drafted fairly reflects how long they would take to reach their optimum NHL performance.
I feel like a fool for getting roped into this argument, but here's what you said:

Watching major junior, university, minor pro, European or Midget AAA goalies or players and it is fairly easy to evaluate NHL potential or success looking forward.


And here is the result of that "fairly easy" task as performed by industry professionals between 1994 and 2004. The column labeled "drafted" is goalie-exclusive in order to give us a clean look at how the goalie talent each class was perceived at the beginning.

1994
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Vokoun68023 
Theodore6335Hart, Vezina, 2nd AS
Nabokov605221st AS
Turco54392nd AS
Thomas37820Vezina x2, 1st AS x2, Smythe
Hedberg35421 
Cloutier3514 
Grahame22424 
Storr2191 
Fichaud952 

1995
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Kiprusoff59912Vezina, 1st AS
Giguere5571Smythe
Biron5002 
Denis3494 
Boucher3243 
Johnson30916 
Mason30614 
Toskala26610 
Aubin2188 
Bierk4724 

1996
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Garon3232 
Esche18612 
Valiquette4620 

1997
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Luongo72712nd AS x2
Aebischer2141313
Clemmensen15217 
Holmqvist9914 
Hurme767 
Noronen712 

1998
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Raycroft28014 
Niittymaki23416 
Labarbera1605 
Sabourin5710 
Sauve323 

1999
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Miller46017Vezina, 1st AS
Anderson2948 
Auld2374 
Leighton10421 
Caron9512 
Prusek5720 

2000
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Lundqvist46822Vezina, 1st AS
Bryzgalov38532nd AS
DiPietro3151 
Cechmanek212192nd AS
Ellis1655 
Tellqvist1136 

2001
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Anderson2947 
Huet27229 
Budaj2596 
Smith22921 
Gerber22931 
Emery20710 
Leclaire1731 
Markkanen12816 
Nurminen12524 
Blackburn632 
Bacashihua383 

2002
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Ward4142Smythe
Lehtonen3441 
Harding1176 
Norrena10027 
McElhinney6924 
Deslauriers624 
Toivonen613 

2003
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Fleury4341 
Halak20427 
Howard1923 
Elliott18029 
Crawford1222 

2004
NameNHL GPDraftedAwards
Rinne250302nd AS
Dubnyk1012 
Schneider684 
Montoya571 
Ramo4819 
Greiss3810 


I trust I won't be accused of "cherry picking" a full decade's worth of data.

So, you have the simple task of showing us which season's results prove that NHL scouts (and with few exceptions, the hockey world as a whole) found it "easy" to evaluate NHL career potential by viewing goalies at the amateur levels.

TL;DR guide to the data above:

- No. of times the #1 goalie actually turned out to be have the best career in his class: 2 (Luongo, Fleury)
- No. of times the #1 didn't even meet the 30-GP threshold: 3 (1996, 1998, 1999)
- No. of times that a goalie taken <15th turned out to have the best career in his class: 4 (1994, 1999, 2000, 2004)
- No. of times that each of the top-3 goalies met the 30-GP threshold: 4 (1995, 2001, 2002, 2003)
- No. of times that 3 or more goalies chosen <15th met the 30-GP threshold: 3 (1994, 1999, 2001)
- No. of Vezinas won by top-5 goalies: 1 (Theodore)
- No. of Vezinas won by goalies drafted <10th: 5 (Thomas x2, Miller, Kiprusoff, Lundqvist)

If the above doesn't show that goalie development is utterly unpredictable, I don't know what else could. Someone better at math than I am could undoubtedly apply a formula to show that the distribution of success compared to draft-age evaluations is just a little better than random. I'd even go a step beyond, and say it's probably the least predictable of all the positions in major sports.


Last edited by tarheelhockey: 12-09-2012 at 12:22 PM.
tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 12:08 AM
  #202
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
One last thought on those charts:

If you didn't do it the first time through, go back over them again and mentally include the draft positions of all the goalies that aren't listed. A draft like 2002 looks well-scouted in the format above... but then you consider that there were 18 busts between Harding and McElhinney...

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 06:04 AM
  #203
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Drafted

THH - nice charts but irrelevant to the point you artificially created and are now contesting.

At no point did I mention "drafted" you did.

For the time frame under consideration, all of the Vezina, Jennings, AST goalies were drafted. The 1980s era where a Belfour or a Joseph could sneak thru the NHL Entry Draft are long gone.

So the filtering system that is the NHL Entry Draft is fairly efficient.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 09:57 AM
  #204
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
THH - nice charts but irrelevant to the point you artificially created and are now contesting.

At no point did I mention "drafted" you did.
What better measure is there for judging the efficacy of talent evaluation? Let me know where you want to start instead.

Quote:
For the time frame under consideration, all of the Vezina, Jennings, AST goalies were drafted. The 1980s era where a Belfour or a Joseph could sneak thru the NHL Entry Draft are long gone.

So the filtering system that is the NHL Entry Draft is fairly efficient.
That's high praise for a system that missed Hiller, Roloson, Backstrom, Bobrovsky, Niemi and Gustavsson. Only a division's worth of NHL starters as of a couple of seasons ago.

In any case, the draft's record makes it quite clear that it's not "easy" to predict goalies' futures based on amateur play, and that was my only point. If it were easy, we wouldn't see #1 overall picks turning out to be average, 7th rounders turning out to be legends and undrafteds having solid careers.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 10:56 AM
  #205
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
What better measure is there for judging the efficacy of talent evaluation? Let me know where you want to start instead.



That's high praise for a system that missed Hiller, Roloson, Backstrom, Bobrovsky, Niemi and Gustavsson. Only a division's worth of NHL starters as of a couple of seasons ago.

In any case, the draft's record makes it quite clear that it's not "easy" to predict goalies' futures based on amateur play, and that was my only point. If it were easy, we wouldn't see #1 overall picks turning out to be average, 7th rounders turning out to be legends and undrafteds having solid careers.
I think you are speaking about evaluating how good of a pro a goalie will be and Canadiens1958 is talking about evaluating whether or not a youngster has pro potential, period.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 11:05 AM
  #206
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I think you are speaking about evaluating how good of a pro a goalie will be and Canadiens1958 is talking about evaluating whether or not a youngster has pro potential, period.
tarheel named several goalies with a pro career who went undrafted thought.

unknown33 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 11:14 AM
  #207
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
tarheel named several goalies with a pro career who went undrafted thought.
That's true. Although they are almost all European (seen less by NA scouts) and its possible that's a reason they slip through the draft.

On hold for Mr. Canadiens' response.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 11:16 AM
  #208
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Not the Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
What better measure is there for judging the efficacy of talent evaluation? Let me know where you want to start instead.



That's high praise for a system that missed Hiller, Roloson, Backstrom, Bobrovsky, Niemi and Gustavsson. Only a division's worth of NHL starters as of a couple of seasons ago.

In any case, the draft's record makes it quite clear that it's not "easy" to predict goalies' futures based on amateur play, and that was my only point. If it were easy, we wouldn't see #1 overall picks turning out to be average, 7th rounders turning out to be legends and undrafteds having solid careers.
The issue is rather straightforward - Top Goaltenders. The goalies you list were not drafted BUT they were never chosen to represent their country at the WJC level either - considering they represent Canada, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Russia, this is a pretty good indication that there was a consensus perception that they were iffy prospects during their NHL Entry Draft eligibility. All are interchangeable parts quality at best.

Dwayne Roloson was a weak Jr B goalie at the age of 20:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rolosdw01.html

Efficacy of the NHL Entry Draft. Keeping things simple, using the latest version, 7 rounds, 30 picks per round = 210 players. app 25 goalies drafted per year.

An NHL organization has 50 pro contracts - 23 at the NHL level, 27 in affiliates plus they retain rights to unsigned draftees. So an organizations needs 4-6 goalies signed to pro contracts.

Efficacy is simply a function of how many starters an organization drafts over a fixed period of time. Montreal drafting the likes of Theodore,Garon, Vokoun, Halak, Price between 1994 and 2005 is very impressive.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 11:19 AM
  #209
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
True

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I think you are speaking about evaluating how good of a pro a goalie will be and Canadiens1958 is talking about evaluating whether or not a youngster has pro potential, period.
True but I will expand the scope a bit.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 11:24 AM
  #210
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Commonality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
That's true. Although they are almost all European (seen less by NA scouts) and its possible that's a reason they slip through the draft.

On hold for Mr. Canadiens' response.
Key point is that none of the goalies listed played on their national WJ teams. So neither group of scouts saw qualities that were requisite to play on the WJ team or merit a NHL Entry Draft pick.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 12:28 PM
  #211
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The issue is rather straightforward - Top Goaltenders. The goalies you list were not drafted BUT they were never chosen to represent their country at the WJC level either - considering they represent Canada, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Russia, this is a pretty good indication that there was a consensus perception that they were iffy prospects during their NHL Entry Draft eligibility.
And consensus was wrong. All the goaltenders listed (and the list was not exhaustive) turned out to be much better than the scouts and national program administrators expected. Correct?

Quote:
All are interchangeable parts quality at best.
That depends on whether you're measuring them against successful NHL goalies or the entire prospect pool. They are definitely not interchangeable parts with the majority of goalies in their draft classes.

Quote:
Dwayne Roloson was a weak Jr B goalie at the age of 20:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rolosdw01.html
Which reinforces the point about extreme variability in goalie development and success.

Quote:
Efficacy is simply a function of how many starters an organization drafts over a fixed period of time. Montreal drafting the likes of Theodore,Garon, Vokoun, Halak, Price between 1994 and 2005 is very impressive.
Absolutely. They scored some very impressive steals in the lower rounds while the other 29 teams were wasting picks on guys with no future in the league, 2003 being a great example. Clearly it wasn't "easy" to predict the future of the 26 guys who went ahead of Halak, or he would have been picked ahead of at least 25 of them.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 12:51 PM
  #212
Doctor No
Retired
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,447
vCash: 500
Is the claim really being offered up that it's easy to tell who the successful goaltenders will be at the time of their draft age, and that the evidence supporting this claim is the large number of goaltenders who weren't drafted or played for their WJC teams, but starred in the NHL?

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 04:24 PM
  #213
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Post #190

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco MacArthur View Post
Is the claim really being offered up that it's easy to tell who the successful goaltenders will be at the time of their draft age, and that the evidence supporting this claim is the large number of goaltenders who weren't drafted or played for their WJC teams, but starred in the NHL?
Claim is offered in post #190, in response to a comment about evaluating competition looking backward. Claim copied below
__________________________________________________ _____
How so? Watching major junior, university, minor pro, European or Midget AAA goalies or players and it is fairly easy to evaluate NHL potential or success looking forward.
__________________________________________________ _____

In any NHL Entry Draft app 25 goalies are drafted. Generous estimate would be maybe 5% of eligible goalies in the hockey playing world. The remaining undrafted goalies with rare exceptions are never heard from again. Usually they are not chosen for WJ teams either.

The NHL Entery Draft for a specific year,offers a snapshot of the consensus top 25 or so goalie candidates for future NHL positions.More or less the elite. Later if organizational spots are open, non-drafted free agents may get a look.

Basically it is fairly easy to tell which goalies are not future NHL candidates by the time they reach 18.

Posters cite Dwayne Roloson who by the age of 18 had played all of 44 Jr B and C games. another 57 Jr B games total by the age of 20 before going to an NCAA school for four years. No NHL team would draft such a goalie. If he develops on someone else's nickle they will have a look later.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 04:45 PM
  #214
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Basically it is fairly easy to tell which goalies are not future NHL candidates by the time they reach 18.
If you're saying it's easy to tell, for the most part, which goalies will be candidates in the sense of being worth a draft pick then I would agree with that.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 04:55 PM
  #215
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Bingo

Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
If you're saying it's easy to tell, for the most part, which goalies will be candidates in the sense of being worth a draft pick then I would agree with that.
Effectively although the DNDs, do not draft are easier to determine.

When goalies get drafted in a specific NHL Entry Draft or why certain teams do not draft goalies in a given year are separate issues.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 10:56 AM
  #216
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,099
vCash: 500
Here are the results of vote 6. There were 23 out of a possible 27 voters this round

PlayerTotal1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8thN/R
Tiny Thompson1383103321001
George Hainsworth125724223120
Billy Smith112234542201
Hugh Lehman111812132213
Grant Fuhr102236222051
Gump Worsley95112753222
Hap Holmes54011215445
Harry Lumley49020122565
Ed Giacomin240010213214
Rogie Vachon150000024314

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:01 AM
  #217
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,463
vCash: 500
I'm a little surprised to see Billy Smith leapfrog over both Fuhr and Lehman - if for no other reason, than the results of the previous round. Didn't seem like anyone made a really strong case for him.

Guess we're maxing out at 23 voters now, which is fine.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:03 AM
  #218
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,099
vCash: 500
Lehman finishes 4th despite having the most 1st place votes.

It's interesting that Lehman went from 3 points behind Thompson to 27, and from 3 ahead of Hainsworth to 14 behind, and from 24 points ahead of smith to 1 behind.

That's a total of 66 spots lost to those three goalies, and only 11 of those can be accounted for by the new goalies (Holmes, Giacomin, Vachon) being ranked ahead.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:42 AM
  #219
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,055
vCash: 500
What in the hell? How did Billy Smith get ahead of Fuhr? I'm sorry, but that just strikes me as incorrect. He's better than I initially thought, but I didn't think he would go this round, or would be the #4 guy at best...

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:43 AM
  #220
intylerwetrust
Space Oddity
 
intylerwetrust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,572
vCash: 500
Billy Smith 3rd? wow... I had everyone but Vachon ahead

and how does Giacomin get 14 N/R? he had 2 1st and 3 2nd team AS! Thats AS MUCH as: Smith, Fuhr, and Vachon combined. Put him on the Isles or Oilers and he gets 4 Cups or MORE


Last edited by intylerwetrust: 12-17-2012 at 11:54 AM.
intylerwetrust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:51 AM
  #221
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,613
vCash: 500
This is the first time I flat-out disagree with the rankings.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:53 AM
  #222
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,240
vCash: 500
The most surprised I've been by the results in any round so far. Strange not to see Fuhr and Smith next to each other. The difference seems to be that 6 voters had Fuhr from somewhere from 8th-10th, while only 1 had Smith in that range. I'd be interested to hear why that is.

Hawkey Town 18 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:53 AM
  #223
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
What in the hell? How did Billy Smith get ahead of Fuhr? I'm sorry, but that just strikes me as incorrect. He's better than I initially thought, but I didn't think he would go this round, or would be the #4 guy at best...
I voted Billy Smith 5th, so its not like I think it's a travesty that he was added. But I would like to hear from someone who voted him in their top 3.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 11:57 AM
  #224
intylerwetrust
Space Oddity
 
intylerwetrust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
The most surprised I've been by the results in any round so far. Strange not to see Fuhr and Smith next to each other. The difference seems to be that 6 voters had Fuhr from somewhere from 8th-10th, while only 1 had Smith in that range. I'd be interested to hear why that is.
agreed, I had Fuhr 8th and Smith 9th (NR)

intylerwetrust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 12:00 PM
  #225
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by intylerwetrust View Post
agreed, I had Fuhr 8th and Smith 9th
2 more people had Smith 7th, which would also be right next to Fuhr, so really it appears that 3 voters for sure had those two apart by quite a bit, although it could have been more

Hawkey Town 18 is online now   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 03:19 PM.

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.