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, Vote 8 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-01-2013, 09:13 AM
  #76
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,552
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=MXD;56971577]I'm curious about where you'd rank Kipper. Luongo vs. Kipper (for 03-12) is certainly debatable.



Kiprusoff was ahead of Luongo and Lundqvist on my original list, but all 3 very close together. For the Top 40 they all seemed to be right on the cusp.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 05:33 PM
  #77
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Playoff GVT of Post-Expansion Goailes

GVT is Tom Awad's Goals Vs Threshold metric. A GVT of 0.0 indicates "replacement level goaltending." I'm not including Original 6 goalies, because replacement level in a 6 team league would be much higher than in a larger league.

Note the following:
  • From 1968-1975, it took 3 rounds to win the Cup. From 1975-1979, it took 3 rounds for division winners, 4 rounds for non-division winners. After 1980, it took 4 rounds to win the Cup. Since GVT, has a Time-On-Ice component, more rounds means more chances to rack up a high GVT in a single season.
  • GVT is based off save percentage (and TOI), and has many of the same weaknesses as save percentage: namely a goalie like Barrasso who played on a run and gun team will be underrated. And if you think Thomas's save percentages are helped a little bit by the team he plays on, the same would be true about his GVT.
  • Since GVT is based of save percentages, any unusual ability at puckhandling (either good or bad) will not be included. Neither will any arena effects.
  • Data only goes up to the 2010 playoffs (Awad posted a 2011 update, but the playoff data is incomplete or corrupt). TCG PMed me Thomas's 2011 numbers, but doesn't have Luongo's numbers from that year).

The following goalies are listed in order of their career GVT in the playoffs.

Curtis Joseph
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +15.0 (1993), +7.3 (2000), +6.8 (2001)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1995), -0.7 (1997), -0.1 (1999)
Career GVT: +42.2

John Vanbiesbrouck
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +18.9 (1996), +4.2 (1999), +3.4 (1986)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.1 (1992), +0.2 (1989), +0.6 (1987)
Career GVT: +31.8

Thomas (stats don't include 2012)
Only three playoffs: 13.9 (2011), +7.4 (2009), +1.2 (2008)
Career GVT: +22.5 (as of 2011)

Tom Barrasso
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +13.9 (1991), +8.4 (1992), +5.9 (1996)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1999), -2.4 (1995), -1.8 (1985)
Career GVT: +25.0

Gerry Cheevers
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.9 (1969), +8.1 (1970), +3.2 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -3.4 (1977), -1.8 (1967), -1.8 (1980)
Career GVT: +16.6

Roberto Luongo (stats don't include 2011 or 2012)
Only 3 playoffs by GVT: +11.5 (2007), +1.7 (2009), -2.3 (2010)
Career GVT: +10.9 (as of 2010)

Mike Liut
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +8.0 (1986), +7.8 (1984), +2.4 (1983)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1983), -2.1 (1981), -0.9 (1990)
Career GVT: +10.7

Rogie Vachon
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.0 (1969), +2.6 (1975), +2.4 (1976)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -4.1 (1978), -3.2 (1977), -1.4 (1981)
Career GVT: + 10.6

Ed Giacomin
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +3.7 (1971), +1.9 (1973), +1.1 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1975), -4.7 (1970), -2.8 (1967)
Career GVT: -7.7

Comments:
  • Curtis Joseph's high number is largely driven by his performance in the first round, where he played the largest number of his playoff games.
    • 1st round: 39-29, .922
    • 2nd round: 20-29, .914
    • 3rd round: 3-8, .899
  • Beezer looks good on a career basis because he only had one single playoff year below replacement level (which is unusual - first round losses are often below replacement level since the number of games is so small). He also only has one good long run, but what a run it was!
  • Barrasso's career number is hurt by weak runs early and late in his career. Nonetheless, his prime numbers playing behind a run-and-gun team are quite impressive.
  • Thomas has a short career, but his playoff statistics have been great every time.
  • Interestingly, from a save percentage and GVT standpoint, Cheevers' 1969 was his best playoffs, even though Boston didn't win the Cup. His +3.2 in 1972 has to be one of the worst numbers ever for a Cup winning goalie. Edit: As DB reminded me, Cheevers split starts with Eddie Johnston in 1972 and Johnston had better numbers.
  • Luongo's career number should be higher if 2011 was included, possibly enough to pass Cheevers. Even if his finals were negative, it's tough to make the finals in 30 team-era without above replacement level goaltending through three rounds.
  • Liut was certainly up and down in the playoffs
  • Vachon was great in 1969, but otherwise didn't impress in the playoffs
  • Giacomin is the only post-expansion goalie considered who was below replacement level for his career. He never had a great playoff run, and by this metric, has two runs where he was farther below replacement level than he was above it in his best run.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-02-2013 at 05:58 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 05:49 PM
  #78
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
I was wavering as to whether or not to have Curtis Joseph in my top 4, but his playoff numbers are so good, that even if they are largely driven by first round performance, it's enough for me to give him a spot. I'll still have him a little bit below Barrasso, whose performances playing behind a defensively-challenged (but offensively-awesome) Penguins team really impress me (along with Barrasso's superior Vezina record ,though that is mostly from Buffalo).

Beezer and Luongo? Likely in my top 8, not sure where though.

I have no idea what to do with Tim Thomas. If he had anything like a normal career, he'd be a lot easier to rank. Two deserved Vezinas both followed by a good or great playoff appearance, losing his starting job the season in between to Rask with Rask putting up very good (but not as good as Thomas) numbers, and good but not great play before the Vezinas, all in a short career. What on Earth to do with that?

I would not be surprised if my top 6 ended up with Holmes, LeSueur, and 4 post-1980 goalies.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-02-2013 at 08:44 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 05:55 PM
  #79
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Playoff GVT of Post-Expansion Goailes

GVT is Tom Awad's Goals Vs Threshold metric. A GVT of 0.0 indicates "replacement level goaltending." I'm not including Original 6 goalies, because replacement level in a 6 team league would be much higher than in a larger league.

Note the following:
  • From 1968-1975, it took 3 rounds to win the Cup. From 1975-1979, it took 3 rounds for division winners, 4 rounds for non-division winners. After 1980, it took 4 rounds to win the Cup. Since GVT, has a Time-On-Ice component, more rounds means more chances to rack up a high GVT in a single season.
  • GVT is based off save percentage (and TOI), and has many of the same weaknesses as save percentage: namely a goalie like Barrasso who played on a run and gun team will be underrated. And if you think Thomas's save percentages are helped a little bit by the team he plays on, the same would be true about his GVT.
  • Since GVT is based of save percentages, any unusual ability at puckhandling (either good or bad) will not be included. Neither will any arena effects.
  • Data only goes up to the 2010 playoffs (Awad posted a 2011 update, but the playoff data is incomplete or corrupt). TCG PMed me Thomas's 2011 numbers, but doesn't have Luongo's numbers from that year).

The following goalies are listed in order of their career GVT in the playoffs.

Curtis Joseph
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +15.0 (1993), +7.3 (2000), +6.8 (2001)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1995), -0.7 (1997), -0.1 (1999)
Career GVT: +42.2

John Vanbiesbrouck
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +18.9 (1996), +4.2 (1999), +3.4 (1986)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.1 (1992), +0.2 (1989), +0.6 (1987)
Career GVT: +31.8

Thomas (stats don't include 2012)
Only three playoffs: 13.9 (2011), +7.4 (2009), +1.2 (2008)
Career GVT: +22.5 (as of 2011)

Tom Barrasso
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +13.9 (1991), +8.4 (1992), +5.9 (1996)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1999), -2.4 (1995), -1.8 (1985)
Career GVT: +25.0

Gerry Cheevers
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.9 (1969), +8.1 (1970), +3.2 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -3.4 (1977), -1.8 (1967), -1.8 (1980)
Career GVT: +16.6

Roberto Luongo (stats don't include 2011 or 2012)
Only 3 playoffs by GVT: +11.5 (2007), +1.7 (2009), -2.3 (2010)
Career GVT: +10.9 (as of 2010)

Mike Liut
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +8.0 (1986), +7.8 (1984), +2.4 (1983)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1983), -2.1 (1981), -0.9 (1990)
Career GVT: +10.7

Rogie Vachon
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.0 (1969), +2.6 (1975), +2.4 (1976)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -4.1 (1978), -3.2 (1977), -1.4 (1981)
Career GVT: + 10.6

Ed Giacomin
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +3.7 (1971), +1.9 (1973), +1.1 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1975), -4.7 (1970), -2.8 (1967)
Career GVT: -7.7

Comments:
  • Curtis Joseph's high number is largely driven by his performance in the first round, where he played the largest number of his playoff games.
    • 1st round: 39-29, .922
    • 2nd round: 20-29, .914
    • 3rd round: 3-8, .899
  • Beezer looks good on a career basis because he only had one single playoff year below replacement level (which is unusual - first round losses are often below replacement level since the number of games is so small). He also only has one good long run, but what a run it was!
  • Barrasso's career number is hurt by weak runs early and late in his career. Nonetheless, his prime numbers playing behind a run-and-gun team are quite impressive.
  • Thomas has a short career, but his playoff statistics have been great every time.
  • Interestingly, from a save percentage and GVT standpoint, Cheevers' 1969 was his best playoffs, even though Boston didn't win the Cup. His +3.2 in 1972 has to be one of the worst numbers ever for a Cup winning goalie.
  • Luongo's career number should be higher if 2011 was included, possibly enough to pass Cheevers. Even if his finals were negative, it's tough to make the finals in 30 team-era without above replacement level goaltending through three rounds.
  • Liut was certainly up and down in the playoffs
  • Vachon was great in 1969, but otherwise didn't impress in the playoffs
  • Giacomin is the only post-expansion goalie considered who was below replacement level for his career. He never had a great playoff run, and by this metric, has two runs where he was farther below replacement level than he was above it in his best run.
Cheevers only played in 8 of the 15 games. Eddie Johnston had better numbers than Cheevers. But Cheevers did shutout the Rangers in Game 6 of the finals in NY.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 05:57 PM
  #80
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Cheevers only played in 8 of the 15 games. Eddie Johnston had better numbers than Cheevers. But Cheevers did shutout the Rangers in Game 6 of the finals in NY.
Gotcha. I knew that at one point, but it must have slipped my mind when commenting. I know one of the arguments (the main argument?) against Cheevers as a "clutch goalie" is that Johnston posted better numbers during the 1972 Cup run.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-02-2013 at 06:04 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 06:07 PM
  #81
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Gotcha. I knew that at one point, but it must have slipped my mind when commenting. I know one of the arguments against Cheevers as a "clutch goalie" is that Johnston posted better numbers during the 1972 Cup run.
Cheevers was 6-2 and the Bruins really were not in any danger during the playoffs until Game 6 of the finals.

What Cheevers was well known for in Boston was giving up big leads. Some people thought he would lose concentration in the one-sided games. Others thought it was the real reason he was known as the "Money Goalie".

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 06:23 PM
  #82
Trebek
Mod Supervisor
 
Trebek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,963
vCash: 500
TDMM's GVT totals are reasonably close to my goals above replacement calculation. I'll just list the career playoff totals here, although the season-by-season are in the links.

These are up-to-date through 2012.

Curtis Joseph
83.4 goals above replacement, 69-60 SNWL playoff record

John Vanbiesbrouck
58.7 goals above replacement, 38-28 SNWL playoff record

Tim Thomas
55.5 goals above replacement, 31-19 SNWL playoff record

Tom Barrasso
65.3 goals above replacement, 61-54 SNWL playoff record

Gerry Cheevers
37.1 goals above replacement, 44-43 SNWL playoff record

Roberto Luongo
30.4 goals above replacement, 31-30 SNWL playoff record

Mike Liut
32.6 goals above replacement, 30-31 SNWL playoff record

Rogie Vachon
24.2 goals above replacement, 23-23 SNWL playoff record

Ed Giacomin
4.1 goals above replacement, 29-35 SNWL playoff record

Trebek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 06:42 PM
  #83
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 25,415
vCash: 500
I guess I still don't see how Joseph passes Vanbiesbrouck on an overall ranking. Guess it just doesn't sync with me that Cujo played worse in the playoffs than the regular season almost the entire first half of his career. Tack on those years in Toronto and Detroit while in his 30s and he's all of a sudden golden?

I dunno. I put a little more stock in what these guys did during the 90s, given their ages and the offense faced at the time. 2000 involves playing for 3 different teams in one calendar year at the end of Beezer's career, so that's my head-to-head cut off, so to speak.

I don't care what Cujo's stats in Detroit look like, or how they help his cause in the long run, because I know he wasn't a better goalie than any version of him I'd seen previously in St. Louis, Edmonton, or Toronto - not even a question in my mind. It also kinda sticks out to me that he was the only Detroit goalie during their decade of division dominance (i.e. consecutive 1st place finishes) who DIDN'T end up winning a Cup there. I know that's not completely fair, but for a goalie that used to play so many games, I always thought he looked best when called on to do the least, lol (outside of that one year in Edmonton, maybe). Just about every other goalie up for discussion can have the opposite said about them, imo.

So I look at the 90s, and Cujo and Beezer come out pretty close (both with 500+ games played, SV% 0.908 to 0.907, GAA 2.64 to 2.87, etc). Problem is, Beezer has a similar track record going back even further, into the 80s, that has an even higher peak in terms of performance vs peers. So how does the Vezina-winning two-time all-star lose out in the balance of these two particular Cup-less goalies? It truly is a lesson in differences in values and trying to work backwards toward the "truth" with numbers.

Worst part of the deal is trying to figure out how Thomas doesn't beat the lot of them. As good of a story as he is, I'm not sure how comfortable I am yet with lumping his name in among some of these others. Fact is, though, that his resume deserves serious consideration "already".


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 01-02-2013 at 06:50 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 07:34 PM
  #84
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I guess I still don't see how Joseph passes Vanbiesbrouck on an overall ranking. Guess it just doesn't sync with me that Cujo played worse in the playoffs than the regular season almost the entire first half of his career. Tack on those years in Toronto and Detroit while in his 30s and he's all of a sudden golden?

I dunno. I put a little more stock in what these guys did during the 90s, given their ages and the offense faced at the time. 2000 involves playing for 3 different teams in one calendar year at the end of Beezer's career, so that's my head-to-head cut off, so to speak.

I don't care what Cujo's stats in Detroit look like, or how they help his cause in the long run, because I know he wasn't a better goalie than any version of him I'd seen previously in St. Louis, Edmonton, or Toronto - not even a question in my mind. It also kinda sticks out to me that he was the only Detroit goalie during their decade of division dominance (i.e. consecutive 1st place finishes) who DIDN'T end up winning a Cup there. I know that's not completely fair, but for a goalie that used to play so many games, I always thought he looked best when called on to do the least, lol (outside of that one year in Edmonton, maybe). Just about every other goalie up for discussion can have the opposite said about them, imo.

So I look at the 90s, and Cujo and Beezer come out pretty close (both with 500+ games played, SV% 0.908 to 0.907, GAA 2.64 to 2.87, etc). Problem is, Beezer has a similar track record going back even further, into the 80s, that has an even higher peak in terms of performance vs peers. So how does the Vezina-winning two-time all-star lose out in the balance of these two particular Cup-less goalies? It truly is a lesson in differences in values and trying to work backwards toward the "truth" with numbers.

Worst part of the deal is trying to figure out how Thomas doesn't beat the lot of them. As good of a story as he is, I'm not sure how comfortable I am yet with lumping his name in among some of these others. Fact is, though, that his resume deserves serious consideration "already".
Did you look at the support he got in comparison to the other Detroit goalies?

Detroit seems to have sealed him as a "first round goalie" forever but you don't win without goals.

Secondly, I'll reiterate that Joseph gets his reputation by and large by literally carrying teams that had no business making it to later rounds to their eventual defeat.

I know I went through all his series the last time someone was spouting off about how he was a choker in the later rounds and there were a couple of series where he was sub par and a bunch of series where his team ran out of gas or hit a brick wall after beating far superior opponents in earlier rounds.

I'll have to see if I can find the post.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 08:43 PM
  #85
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco MacArthur View Post
TDMM's GVT totals are reasonably close to my goals above replacement calculation. I'll just list the career playoff totals here, although the season-by-season are in the links.
Hmm, I wonder what about Awad's GVT calculation is different from your goals-above-repalcement. Beezer and Barrasso are basically flipped between the two of them.

(I understand the basics of both calculations, but not the details).


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-02-2013 at 08:59 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:55 PM
  #86
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Playoff GVT of Post-Expansion Goailes

GVT is Tom Awad's Goals Vs Threshold metric. A GVT of 0.0 indicates "replacement level goaltending." I'm not including Original 6 goalies, because replacement level in a 6 team league would be much higher than in a larger league.

Note the following:
  • From 1968-1975, it took 3 rounds to win the Cup. From 1975-1979, it took 3 rounds for division winners, 4 rounds for non-division winners. After 1980, it took 4 rounds to win the Cup. Since GVT, has a Time-On-Ice component, more rounds means more chances to rack up a high GVT in a single season.
  • GVT is based off save percentage (and TOI), and has many of the same weaknesses as save percentage: namely a goalie like Barrasso who played on a run and gun team will be underrated. And if you think Thomas's save percentages are helped a little bit by the team he plays on, the same would be true about his GVT.
  • Since GVT is based of save percentages, any unusual ability at puckhandling (either good or bad) will not be included. Neither will any arena effects.
  • Data only goes up to the 2010 playoffs (Awad posted a 2011 update, but the playoff data is incomplete or corrupt). TCG PMed me Thomas's 2011 numbers, but doesn't have Luongo's numbers from that year).

The following goalies are listed in order of their career GVT in the playoffs.

Curtis Joseph
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +15.0 (1993), +7.3 (2000), +6.8 (2001)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1995), -0.7 (1997), -0.1 (1999)
Career GVT: +42.2

John Vanbiesbrouck
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +18.9 (1996), +4.2 (1999), +3.4 (1986)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.1 (1992), +0.2 (1989), +0.6 (1987)
Career GVT: +31.8

Thomas (stats don't include 2012)
Only three playoffs: 13.9 (2011), +7.4 (2009), +1.2 (2008)
Career GVT: +22.5 (as of 2011)

Tom Barrasso
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +13.9 (1991), +8.4 (1992), +5.9 (1996)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -2.5 (1999), -2.4 (1995), -1.8 (1985)
Career GVT: +25.0

Gerry Cheevers
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.9 (1969), +8.1 (1970), +3.2 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -3.4 (1977), -1.8 (1967), -1.8 (1980)
Career GVT: +16.6

Roberto Luongo (stats don't include 2011 or 2012)
Only 3 playoffs by GVT: +11.5 (2007), +1.7 (2009), -2.3 (2010)
Career GVT: +10.9 (as of 2010)

Mike Liut
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +8.0 (1986), +7.8 (1984), +2.4 (1983)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1983), -2.1 (1981), -0.9 (1990)
Career GVT: +10.7

Rogie Vachon
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +10.0 (1969), +2.6 (1975), +2.4 (1976)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -4.1 (1978), -3.2 (1977), -1.4 (1981)
Career GVT: + 10.6

Ed Giacomin
Best 3 playoffs by GVT: +3.7 (1971), +1.9 (1973), +1.1 (1972)
Worst 3 playoffs GVT: -5.7 (1975), -4.7 (1970), -2.8 (1967)
Career GVT: -7.7

Comments:
  • Curtis Joseph's high number is largely driven by his performance in the first round, where he played the largest number of his playoff games.
    • 1st round: 39-29, .922
    • 2nd round: 20-29, .914
    • 3rd round: 3-8, .899
  • Beezer looks good on a career basis because he only had one single playoff year below replacement level (which is unusual - first round losses are often below replacement level since the number of games is so small). He also only has one good long run, but what a run it was!
  • Barrasso's career number is hurt by weak runs early and late in his career. Nonetheless, his prime numbers playing behind a run-and-gun team are quite impressive.
  • Thomas has a short career, but his playoff statistics have been great every time.
  • Interestingly, from a save percentage and GVT standpoint, Cheevers' 1969 was his best playoffs, even though Boston didn't win the Cup. His +3.2 in 1972 has to be one of the worst numbers ever for a Cup winning goalie. Edit: As DB reminded me, Cheevers split starts with Eddie Johnston in 1972 and Johnston had better numbers.
  • Luongo's career number should be higher if 2011 was included, possibly enough to pass Cheevers. Even if his finals were negative, it's tough to make the finals in 30 team-era without above replacement level goaltending through three rounds.
  • Liut was certainly up and down in the playoffs
  • Vachon was great in 1969, but otherwise didn't impress in the playoffs
  • Giacomin is the only post-expansion goalie considered who was below replacement level for his career. He never had a great playoff run, and by this metric, has two runs where he was farther below replacement level than he was above it in his best run.
This looks almost exactly like I'd have predicted.

- Cujo on top. But in the same neighbourhood "per game" as Beezer and Barrasso.
- Out of the elite modern trio, Barrasso is the one with the lowest lows, as we all thought
- Giacomin way, way, way behind the rest.
- Cheevers looks good, but not otherworldly enough to make you go "see, that's a money goalie right there, that's why we need to vote him in now"
- Interesting to see Luongo and Liut right there next to eachother in the updated numbers.
- vachon is in the same "per game" range as Liut, Luongo, Cheevers, just with fewer games.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 10:04 PM
  #87
Trebek
Mod Supervisor
 
Trebek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hmm, I wonder what about Awad's GVT calculation is different from your goals-above-repalcement. Beezer and Barrasso are basically flipped between the two of them.

(I understand the basics of both calculations, but not the details).
Three things I do, that I could see being done differently:

I remove the goaltender in question from my calculation of league-average save percentage.

I arbitrarily (although founded in data) set "replacement level" to be 0.015 below league average. Tom undoubtedly does something more rigorous.

I use playoff save percentage as the baseline (not regular season save percentage).

Trebek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 10:58 PM
  #88
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
This looks almost exactly like I'd have predicted.

- Cujo on top. But in the same neighbourhood "per game" as Beezer and Barrasso.
- Out of the elite modern trio, Barrasso is the one with the lowest lows, as we all thought
- Giacomin way, way, way behind the rest.
- Cheevers looks good, but not otherworldly enough to make you go "see, that's a money goalie right there, that's why we need to vote him in now"
- Interesting to see Luongo and Liut right there next to eachother in the updated numbers.
- vachon is in the same "per game" range as Liut, Luongo, Cheevers, just with fewer games.
A similar "per game" rate between Cujo, Beezer, and Barrasso favors Barrasso by a little, since the Penguins were like a mini-Oilers in the way they traded chances, right?

And to be clear, the numbers for Luongo are not updated - they don't include trip to the finals in 2011 or his brief appearance in 2012.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:19 PM
  #89
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 25,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Did you look at the support he got in comparison to the other Detroit goalies?

Detroit seems to have sealed him as a "first round goalie" forever but you don't win without goals.
Again, I won't go out of my way to try to make the details of a goalie's seasons at 35/36 on strong team say more than can. One year as a starter, one as a backup, close to the best GAA and SV% of his career... easy enough to connect the dots there, so Detroit doesn't add much value (if at all) to Cujo's case, imo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Secondly, I'll reiterate that Joseph gets his reputation by and large by literally carrying teams that had no business making it to later rounds to their eventual defeat.
And I'll add that he has that reputation in Toronto with Toronto fans only, as that's the only team he, personally, did anything substantial for in terms of "carrying a team" anywhere. St. Louis was good enough to reach round 2 at least once in five years with or without Joseph, lol. One of the two Edmonton years was kind of impressive, but even then it boils down to a LOT of credit for 3 games to close out the Colorado series, and little else. Detroit certainly doesn't qualify as a team that needed carrying by Joseph, and nothing afterwards means anything, that's for sure.

So, it's Toronto and only Toronto where Joseph sees the 3rd round. Getting out of the first round and getting killed in the 2nd round doesn't count as carrying anyone anywhere in my books. Anyone in any year can win a round; that has been proven time and time again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I know I went through all his series the last time someone was spouting off about how he was a choker in the later rounds and there were a couple of series where he was sub par and a bunch of series where his team ran out of gas or hit a brick wall after beating far superior opponents in earlier rounds.

I'll have to see if I can find the post.
Either way, we're still talking about the top goalies of all time here, so I'd expect more of everything from a goalie without any major accolades like championships, awards, or all-star honours to pick up the slack.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:34 PM
  #90
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
A similar "per game" rate between Cujo, Beezer, and Barrasso favors Barrasso by a little, since the Penguins were like a mini-Oilers in the way they traded chances, right?

And to be clear, the numbers for Luongo are not updated - they don't include trip to the finals in 2011 or his brief appearance in 2012.
It's similar, but still a clear edge for Joseph.

And I was referring to Taco's updated Luongo numbers, which are calculated more or less the same way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
And I'll add that he has that reputation in Toronto with Toronto fans only, as that's the only team he, personally, did anything substantial for in terms of "carrying a team" anywhere.
1997...

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:45 PM
  #91
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 25,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
1997...
Dallas... great during the regular season, but you know what? They still had a 36 year old Moog between the pipes, and that's just as much why the series went 7 games as anything. But okay, we can give him one more series while in Edmonton - even if the team in front of him also pulled their weight with 4 goals in three of their four wins against Dallas (a team that allowed less than 200 goals over 82 regular season games that year).

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 01:53 AM
  #92
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
The case for Tom Barrasso

The following is a summary of the pro-Barrasso posts last round. Barrasso will definitely be in my top 4 this round, and has a good shot at 1st.

He was probably the 2nd most important Penguin behind Lemieux in each of their back to back Cup wins.

1991: Barrasso had the best save percentage and GAA of all playoff goaltenders. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette said, "He easily could have won the Conn Smythe MVP if Mario Lemieux had not played so spectacularly in the final three games in Minnesota." Ulf Samuelsson said, "With this team, you start with Mario Lemieux. He's half of the team. Then, you add Tom Barrasso. After that, anybody could go out there and win."

1992: Mario Lemieux plays the humble card after winning his second straight Conn Smythe and said that he thought Tom Barrasso should have won it. In one of the rare reports on Conn Smythe voting, Barrasso was said to have finished a distant second behind Lemieux.

Link to Hawkey Town 18's post

More votes for the Vezina than any other goalie remaining

Barrasso received more votes for the Vezina (as calculated by Vezina shares) than any goalie other than Brodeur, Hasek, Roy, or Belfour: Link to my previous post

Barrasso is a 5-time Vezina-finalist (1 win). Joseph and Luongo are both 3-time finalists (0 wins each). Vanbiesbrouck is a 2-time finalist (1 win). Tim Thomas won 2 Vezinas but was not a finalist any other time.

Even if you you adjust for competition by removing Roy, Hasek, Brodeur, and Belfour, Barrasso's top finishes look better. If you do that, Barrasso wins 3 Vezinas with 2 2nd place finishes. Compare to Josepeh (1 win, 3 2nds, 1 3rd), and Vanbiesbrouck (2 wins, 2 3rds). Link to seventieslord's post

Barrasso may have accomplished more in the first 10 years of his career than any remaining goalie accomplished in a similar stretch

He received at least a vote for the Vezina in 5 of his first 6 seasons (a finalist in 3 of them). He was injured in his 7th season, won the Cup in his 8th and 9th seasons, and was a Vezina finalist in his 10th season. Link to Hawkey Town 18's post

The case for Barrasso over Giacomin
  • Giacomin was a post-season All Star 5 times, Barrasso was a Vezina finalist 5 times. (However, Giacomin's best 5 years were consecutive, Barrasso's weren't).
  • Barrasso, had much more regular season success outside his best five years.
  • Barrasso was much better than Giacomin in the playoffs.
Link to my previous post


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-03-2013 at 03:59 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 02:55 AM
  #93
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagorim Jarg View Post
He seems to waver between absolutely brilliant and absolutely terrible. I wonder what his save percentage is against teams that aren't Boston or Chicago.
Roberto Luongo, career playoffs:
.894 on 734 SA against Chicago/Boston
.930 on 1134 SA against everyone else

Both of those samples need to be considered when evaluating his playoff career.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
I'm curious about where you'd rank Kipper. Luongo vs. Kipper (for 03-12) is certainly debatable.
I have Luongo quite comfortably ahead of Kipper, who didn't make my top 40. Over those seasons Luongo was at .920 compared to Kipper's .914, which accounts for a difference of 120 goals on Luongo's shots against, equivalent to 2-3 wins per season. The main reason Kipper has a Vezina while Luongo doesn't is that Martin Brodeur had a much better year in 2006-07 than he did in 2005-06.

Also, as BM67 showed earlier, Luongo may have been helped by the Vancouver shot counter over the last couple of seasons but otherwise has mostly strong road numbers throughout his career. Kiprusoff has a majorly skewed home/road split (.920 career home, .907 career on the road). In his Vezina year he was .940 at home and .904 on the road.

Generally if goalies have major home/road splits it implies some kind of shot counting bias or team effects going on, and when choosing between the two the road sample is usually considered more reliable since it is much less likely to be impacted by biased shot counting or a team's unusual home ice advantage. Since the lockout Kiprusoff's numbers have been all over the place, seemingly varying much more than subjective evaluations of his play, which is why I think he wasn't quite as good as he looked when he was winning the Vezina, and probably not quite as bad as his numbers suggested when he was posting below-average save percentages. As a result, I don't give Kipper a peak advantage over Luongo at all, and I think Luongo's elite consistency from year to year puts him a level up on Kiprusoff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagorim Jarg View Post
Also, the "comparative" part of me says that if Giacomin doesn't get in, then a guy like Roger Crozier has no business whatsoever to do in the Top-60.
Works for me, Crozier didn't make my top 60. I don't think goaltending from the immediate post-expansion era should be over-represented on this list, but that's the way we're apparently headed. The uneven competition of that time period certainly made a lot of goalies look good, but I think there were fewer true standouts than it appears.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Then why punish Giacomin, either?

Lundqvist hadn't accomplished much of anything until last year (when the Rangers put out a Defensive core that blocked more shots than anyone). Yet he had already equaled Giacomin and his 5 consecutive all-star berths?
I thought you were one of the guys who valued save percentage over awards voting, it certainly seemed that way when you were arguing against Martin Brodeur. How come you're now willing to give Giacomin the benefit of the doubt when he was the guy getting All-Star votes with merely decent save percentages behind a really good shot preventing team? Using a 25 GP minimum, Giacomin ranked 2nd and 5th (of only 8 qualifying goalies) in his 1AST seasons, and just 6th, 8th, and 8th in his 2AST seasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Dallas... great during the regular season, but you know what? They still had a 36 year old Moog between the pipes, and that's just as much why the series went 7 games as anything. But okay, we can give him one more series while in Edmonton - even if the team in front of him also pulled their weight with 4 goals in three of their four wins against Dallas (a team that allowed less than 200 goals over 82 regular season games that year).
I think you're definitely underselling Joseph's contributions. Let's ask the losing coach what he thought about that series:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Hitchcock, May 1, 1997
"The legacy of this series will be Joseph and our inability to finish. Joseph kept it together, especially in the third period and the overtime. When you have that, you usually win the series and the hockey game. His timely saves were the key to the series."
And reporters were certainly throwing around the words "stole" and "single-handedly" after Joseph's performance:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil LeBreton, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, May 1, 1997
Edmonton's Curtis Joseph might never have another series like he enjoyed in this one. In the NHL playoffs, they say, one goalie can stand on his head and single-handedly elevate his team to unexpected heights. Joseph soared thrice. The man they called "Cujo" all but stole three games in the best-of-seven series. His paw prints were all over Game 7.

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 05:50 AM
  #94
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I thought you were one of the guys who valued save percentage over awards voting, it certainly seemed that way when you were arguing against Martin Brodeur. How come you're now willing to give Giacomin the benefit of the doubt when he was the guy getting All-Star votes with merely decent save percentages behind a really good shot preventing team? Using a 25 GP minimum, Giacomin ranked 2nd and 5th (of only 8 qualifying goalies) in his 1AST seasons, and just 6th, 8th, and 8th in his 2AST seasons.
So, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 8th? How terrible, especially compared to Lundqvist's glorious 4th, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th on a super-defensive team.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:01 AM
  #95
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,601
vCash: 500
Vanbiesbrouck's numbers are thrown off a little by a game where he replaced Richter in the 3rd period, 10:49 played, 2:47 OT.

Luongo has a game where he made a 3rd period relief (32:59, 15:30 OT), and a game where he played the whole game except for the first 3:34 of OT (80:56, 20:56 OT).

Liut played the 3rd period and the OT (9:10) of a game vs Pittsburgh in the 91 playoffs, yet his game log only credits him with 28:10 played. I've taken the liberty of giving him 29:10 for the game.

Here is a home/road breakdown in playoff OT games.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
Brodeur T402991:451624961.9313320.928126.7174:48
Brodeur H191418:02910431.826110.930125.8574:38
Brodeur R211573:43714532.027210.926027.4974:56
Roy T584123:0240181402.0419210.927127.9671:05
Roy H231613:05158542.017100.924026.4170:08
Roy R352509:572510862.0612110.929128.9571:42
Hasek T292190:591514742.039960.926127.2875:33
Hasek H151061:2669382.154650.918126.2970:46
Hasek R141129:3395361.915310.932028.2180:41
Belfour T423227:592220981.8214740.934227.4076:51
Belfour H181388:58108492.126400.923027.6577:10
Belfour R241839:011212 491.608340.941227.2176:38
Joseph T271987:571314672.0210230.935230.8873:38
Joseph H161188:5879412.075710.928028.8174:19
Joseph R11798:5965261.954520.9422 33.9472:38
Vanbiesbrouck T12829:2348332.394280.923030.9669:07
Vanbiesbrouck H6439:5424182.462270.921030.9673:19
Vanbiesbrouck R6389:2924152.312010.923030.9664:55
Giacomin T8521:0353131.502050.937023.6165:08
Giacomin H4259:372261.39860.930019.8864:54
Giacomin R4261:263171.611190.941027.3165:21
Barrasso T12814:4057433.173980.892029.3167:53
Barrasso H9599:3145333.302900.886029.0266:37
Barrasso R3215:0912102.791080.907030.1271:43
Cheevers T171177:07710512.605420.906027.6369:15
Cheevers H9590:3636262.642540.898025.8065:37
Cheevers R8586:3144252.562880.913029.4673:19
Luongo T161194:5497311.566110.949030.6874:41
Luongo H9712:0554201.693590.944030.2579:07
Luongo R7482:4943111.372520.956031.3268:58
Thomas T13893:4476302.014660.936131.2868:45
Thomas H7509:4643121.412300.948127.0772:49
Thomas R6383:5833182.812360.924036.8864:00
Vachon T8589:5053212.143100.932031.5373:44
Vachon H4273:0931132.861260.897027.6868:17
Vachon R4316:412281.521840.957034.8679:10
Liut T151002:25105412.455230.922031.3066:50
Liut H4271:3840102.211330.925029.3867:54
Liut R11730:4765312.553900.921032.0266:26

Here's Roy split for era, 86-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
T 86-93281934:59226682.119260.927028.7169:06
T 94-03302188:031812721.979950.928127.2872:56
H 86-93141009:35122311.844360.929025.9172:07
H 94-039603:3036232.292740.916027.2467:03
R 86-9314925:24104372.404900.924031.7766:06
R 94-03211584:33156491.867210.932127.3075:27

Here's Vanbiesbrouck split for era, 84-93 & 94-02.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
T 84-936352:1324193.241790.894030.4958:42
T 94-026477:1024141.762490.944031.3179:32
H 84-933199:0912113.31920.880027.7266:23
H 94-023240:451271.741350.948033.6480:15
R 84-933153:041283.14870.908034.1051:01
R 94-023236:251271.781140.939028.9378:48

Here's Barrasso split for era, 84-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
T 84-937468:0843293.722400.879030.7666:53
T 94-035346:3214142.421580.911027.3669:18
H 84-935327:4632213.841630.871029.8465:33
H 94-034271:4513122.651270.906028.0467:56
R 84-932140:221183.42770.896032.9170:11
R 94-03174:470121.60310.935024.8774:47

Here is an home/road breakdown for the OT only.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
Brodeur T40593:161624242.432800.91428.3214:50
Brodeur H19278:50910102.151430.93030.7714:41
Brodeur R21314:26714142.671370.89826.1414:58
Roy T58662:224018181.633460.94831.3411:25
Roy H23233:5715882.051140.93029.2410:10
Roy R35428:252510101.402320.95732.2112:14
Hasek T29473:401514141.772270.93828.7516:20
Hasek H15181:386992.971030.91334.0212:07
Hasek R14292:029551.031240.96025.4820:52
Belfour T42728:132220201.653650.94530.0717:20
Belfour H18309:4410881.551730.95433.5117:12
Belfour R24418:291212121.721920.93827.5317:26
Joseph T27372:551314142.251930.92731.0513:49
Joseph H16229:397992.351080.91728.2214:21
Joseph R11143:166552.09850.94135.6013:01
Vanbiesbrouck T12161:214882.97780.89729.0113:27
Vanbiesbrouck H679:542443.00440.90933.0413:19
Vanbiesbrouck R681:272442.95340.88225.0513:34
Giacomin T873:545332.44290.89723.559:14
Giacomin H452:282222.29180.88920.5813:07
Giacomin R421:263112.80110.90930.795:21
Barrasso T1295:145774.41610.88538.437:56
Barrasso H960:054554.99340.85333.956:41
Barrasso R335:091223.41270.92646.0911:43
Cheevers T17157:07710103.82920.89135.139:15
Cheevers H950:363667.11290.79334.395:37
Cheevers R8106:314442.25630.93735.4913:19
Luongo T16278:579771.511480.95331.8317:26
Luongo H9173:375441.38820.95128.3419:17
Luongo R7105:204331.71660.95537.5915:03
Thomas T13114:537663.13700.91436.568:50
Thomas H790:084332.00470.93631.2912:53
Thomas R624:453337.27230.87055.764:08
Vachon T8109:505331.64560.94630.5913:44
Vachon H433:093111.8190.88916.298:17
Vachon R476:412221.56470.95736.7719:10
Liut T15142:2510552.11810.93834.139:30
Liut H431:384000.00231.00043.627:54
Liut R11110:476552.71580.91431.4110:04

Here's Roy split for era, 86-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
T 86-9328273:1322661.321470.95932.289:45
T 94-0330389:091812121.851990.94030.6812:58
H 86-9314169:3512220.71750.97326.5412:07
H 94-03964:223665.59390.84636.357:09
R 86-9314103:3810442.32720.94441.697:24
R 94-0321324:4715661.111600.96229.5615:28

Here's Vanbiesbrouck split for era, 84-93 & 94-02.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
T 84-93644:112445.43230.82631.237:22
T 94-026117:102442.05550.92728.1719:32
H 84-93319:091226.2790.77828.206:23
H 94-02360:451221.98350.94334.5720:15
R 84-93325:021224.79140.85733.568:21
R 94-02356:251222.13200.90021.2718:48

Here's Barrasso split for era, 84-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
T 84-93748:304333.71300.90037.116:56
T 94-03546:441445.14310.87139.809:21
H 84-93528:083224.27140.85729.865:38
H 94-03431:571335.63200.85037.567:59
R 84-93220:221112.95160.93847.1410:11
R 94-03114:470114.06110.90944.6414:47

Taking the OT away leaves what they did in regulation.

PlayerGPMINGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60
Brodeur T402398:29721.8010520.932426.32
Brodeur H191139:12331.744680.929224.65
Brodeur R211259:17391.865840.933227.83
Roy T583460:401222.1215750.923327.31
Roy H231379:08462.005960.923125.93
Roy R352081:32762.199790.922228.22
Hasek T291717:19602.107690.922126.87
Hasek H15879:48291.983620.920124.37
Hasek R14837:31312.224070.924029.16
Belfour T422499:46781.8711090.930426.62
Belfour H181079:14412.284670.912026.02
Belfour R241420:32371.566420.942427.16
Joseph T271615:02531.978300.936430.84
Joseph H16959:19322.004630.931128.83
Joseph R11655:43211.923670.943333.49
Vanbiesbrouck T12668:02252.253500.929131.44
Vanbiesbrouck H6360:00142.331830.923130.50
Vanbiesbrouck R6308:02112.141670.934032.53
Giacomin T8447:09101.341760.943023.62
Giacomin H4207:0941.16680.941019.70
Giacomin R4240:0061.501080.944027.00
Barrasso T12719:26363.003370.893028.11
Barrasso H9539:26283.112560.891028.47
Barrasso R3180:0082.67810.901027.00
Cheevers T171020:00412.414500.909026.47
Cheevers H9540:00202.222250.911025.00
Cheevers R8480:00212.622250.907028.12
Luongo T16915:57241.574630.948130.33
Luongo H9538:28161.782770.942130.87
Luongo R7377:2981.271860.957029.56
Thomas T13778:51241.853960.939130.51
Thomas H7419:3891.291830.951126.17
Thomas R6359:13152.512130.930035.58
Vachon T8480:00182.252540.929031.75
Vachon H4240:00123.001170.897029.25
Vachon R4240:0061.501370.956034.25
Liut T15860:00362.514420.919030.84
Liut H4240:00102.501100.909027.50
Liut R11620:00262.523320.922032.13

Here's Roy split for era, 86-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60
T 86-93281661:46622.247790.920028.13
T 94-03301798:54602.007960.925326.55
H 86-9314840:00292.073610.920025.79
H 94-039539:08171.892350.928126.15
R 86-9314821:24332.414180.921030.52
R 94-03211259:46432.055610.923226.72

Here's Vanbiesbrouck split for era, 84-93 & 94-02.

PlayerGPMINGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60
T 84-936308:02152.921560.904030.39
T 94-026360:00101.671940.948132.33
H 84-933180:0093.00830.892027.67
H 94-023180:0051.671000.950133.33
R 84-933128:0262.81730.918034.21
R 94-023180:0051.67940.947031.33

Here's Barrasso split for era, 84-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60
T 84-937419:38263.722100.876030.03
T 94-035299:48102.001270.921025.42
H 84-935299:48193.801490.872029.82
H 94-034239:4892.251070.916026.77
R 84-932120:0073.50610.885030.50
R 94-03160:0011.00200.950020.00

Here are the number of playoff OT wins where each goalie had to make 0 or 1 save to earn the win or lost after only 1 or 2 shots.

PlayerOT Wins0 Save Wins1 Save WinsOT Losses0 Save Loss1 Save Loss
Belfour22402012
Brodeur16212422
Hasek15111430
Joseph13111401
Roy40671833
Vanbiesbrouck420800
Giacomin511310
Barrasso510711
Cheevers7311022
Luongo911702
Thomas702611
Vachon500301
Liut1012501

W-L by length of OT.

PlayerTotal OT>5 min5-10 min10-20 min20-40 min40-60 min60+ min
Belfour22-207-46-43-42-64-20-0
Brodeur16-243-95-63-44-21-20-1
Hasek15-143-33-34-63-11-11-0
Joseph13-142-12-75-43-11-10-0
Roy40-1812-98-214-44-32-00-0
Vanbiesbrouck4-83-10-20-31-10-10-0
Giacomin5-33-11-20-00-01-00-0
Barrasso5-71-33-21-20-00-00-0
Cheevers7-103-61-02-31-10-00-0
Luongo9-71-23-22-12-20-01-0
Thomas7-63-42-01-11-10-00-0
Vachon5-31-12-01-11-10-00-0
Liut10-55-02-41-12-00-00-0


Last edited by BM67: 01-06-2013 at 12:01 PM.
BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:16 AM
  #96
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
So, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 8th? How terrible, especially compared to Lundqvist's glorious 4th, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th on a super-defensive team.
These numbers don't mean much without looking at how many goalies qualified. 5th out of 30 is a lot better than 5th out of 8.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:29 AM
  #97
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
Also, as BM67 showed earlier, Luongo may have been helped by the Vancouver shot counter over the last couple of seasons but otherwise has mostly strong road numbers throughout his career. Kiprusoff has a majorly skewed home/road split (.920 career home, .907 career on the road). In his Vezina year he was .940 at home and .904 on the road.

Generally if goalies have major home/road splits it implies some kind of shot counting bias or team effects going on, and when choosing between the two the road sample is usually considered more reliable since it is much less likely to be impacted by biased shot counting or a team's unusual home ice advantage. Since the lockout Kiprusoff's numbers have been all over the place, seemingly varying much more than subjective evaluations of his play, which is why I think he wasn't quite as good as he looked when he was winning the Vezina, and probably not quite as bad as his numbers suggested when he was posting below-average save percentages. As a result, I don't give Kipper a peak advantage over Luongo at all, and I think Luongo's elite consistency from year to year puts him a level up on Kiprusoff.
I used to have Kipper higher, but I changed my mind about him when I saw the numbers that almost guarantee that Calgary was overcounting shots. I still think Kipper's half year in 2003-04 and full year in 2005-06 were legit though.

Quote:
Works for me, Crozier didn't make my top 60. I don't think goaltending from the immediate post-expansion era should be over-represented on this list, but that's the way we're apparently headed. The uneven competition of that time period certainly made a lot of goalies look good, but I think there were fewer true standouts than it appears.
Crozier didn't make my top 60 either, but he wasn't that far from making it.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:15 AM
  #98
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Again, I won't go out of my way to try to make the details of a goalie's seasons at 35/36 on strong team say more than can. One year as a starter, one as a backup, close to the best GAA and SV% of his career... easy enough to connect the dots there, so Detroit doesn't add much value (if at all) to Cujo's case, imo.
It does seem to reinforce a poor judgement of him for many, though.


Quote:
And I'll add that he has that reputation in Toronto with Toronto fans only, as that's the only team he, personally, did anything substantial for in terms of "carrying a team" anywhere. St. Louis was good enough to reach round 2 at least once in five years with or without Joseph, lol. One of the two Edmonton years was kind of impressive, but even then it boils down to a LOT of credit for 3 games to close out the Colorado series, and little else. Detroit certainly doesn't qualify as a team that needed carrying by Joseph, and nothing afterwards means anything, that's for sure.
You're severely underrating his playoff performances outside of Toronto.

1993 is where Curtis Joseph first started getting recognition for being lights out in the playoffs and deservedly so.. he was insanely good and he was insanely good in both rounds I might add.

Cujo practically stole a series in 1997 vs. a much stronger opponent and *deserves* a LOT of credit for it.

Similarly in 1998 he was lights out in defeating a much stronger Colorado squad before succumbing to a much stronger Dallas squad.

What did you expect him to do realistically? Have you actually looked at the difference between his team and these teams he was supposedly choking against?


Quote:
So, it's Toronto and only Toronto where Joseph sees the 3rd round.
Right, and in one of those 3rd round appearances he played pretty well and one he was so-so.

However in both of those 3rd round appearances his team ended up being badly outplayed.

Frankly as a Leaf fan, both losses were embarrassing and not because of Joseph. Particularly the loss against the Devils where the Leafs only managed 6 shots in the entire deciding game was pathetic!

EDIT: Got the Devils and Carolina series mixed up but whatever.. the Leafs were bad against them too.

Quote:
Getting out of the first round and getting killed in the 2nd round doesn't count as carrying anyone anywhere in my books. Anyone in any year can win a round; that has been proven time and time again.
Not some of the first rounds that he was winning. Especially with Edmonton.. those squads had no business advancing except for him.

Quote:
Either way, we're still talking about the top goalies of all time here, so I'd expect more of everything from a goalie without any major accolades like championships, awards, or all-star honours to pick up the slack.
That has as much to do with bad timing by his parents and the style of play his teams played as it does with his performance.

This constant downgrading of his reputation in hindsight bothers me.


EDIT - Found my old post detailing Joseph's playoffs:


Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
His losses outside of the first round were generally to teams that so overwhelmed his own it isn't even funny.

All the times Cujo made it to the second round:

89-90: Strong in all 4 first round wins against the Leafs. Doesn't play in the second round and I forget why to be honest. I assume injury? EDIT (Taco pointed out that this was a shoulder injury)

92-93: I'm sure Phil will pile on about game 7 again, but the fact is the Blues wouldn't have even got there without Joseph. He was sensational.

96-97: 81 point Edmonton team against 104 point Dallas first round. Think about that for a moment. Absolutely incredible in the first round in defeating a far superior team. His reward? 107 point Colorado attempting to repeat on their first Stanley Cup. I do think Roy outplayed him (in the stat line) but I don't think a chance is a chance between two teams a whopping 26 points apart in the standings.

97-98: 80 point Edmonton faces off against the team that beat them the year previous.. the 95 point Avs. Both Roy and Joseph are up and down until the last three games of the series where Joseph allows 1 goal in the final three games and shuts out the Avs in Game 6 and Game 7. His reward? Advancing to play the 109 point Dallas Stars one year before their Cup win. A 29 point difference in the standings. The only game the Oilers win in the 5 game series is a shutout by Joseph. They also lose 1-0 in OT during game 3. The Oilers score a total of 5 goals in the 5 game series. Could any goalie, ever, win a 7 game series where his team scores 5 goals in 5 games?

98-99: Yahoo Curtis is on the financially capable Leafs! Whoops Pat Quinn is coach and they are the 21st best defensive team despite their 97 points and league best offense. First up Philly 93 point team. Joseph is very strong winning a 6 game series where the Leafs league best offense is only capable of 9 total goals, including a 2-1OT win in game 5 and a 1-0 shutout in game 6 to cap the series. Next up 90 point Pens. After being shut out the first game of the series, the Leaf offense finally comes to life, lighting up the Pens for 18 goals in the next 5 games. This is actually a pretty easy series for the Leafs. Next up, 91 point Buffalo with all time goalie Hasek. Roloson splits the first two games with Toronto and in the final 3 games Hasek keeps Toronto to 2 goals each game. By all accounts the Leafs and Joseph in particular don't play very well. They bow out meekly in 5 games.

99-00: Leafs are a 100 point team for the first time ever. They are 4th in the league in offense this time around but still an extremely mediocre 15th in defense.. this at the height of the dead puck era. First up, Ottawa 95 points. Joseph is outstanding in the series outside of game 3 and the Leafs win in 6. Round 2 is 103 point Devils, on their way to the Cup. The Leafs are hopelessly outclassed against a disciplined team with a plan, much like Buffalo the previous year. In the 6 game series the Leafs are outshot 192-117, including being outshot 26-6 in the clinching game. Yes, the Leafs managed 6 shots in a complete game. That pathetic choker Curtis Joseph should have been the difference!

00-01 The Leafs falter a bit to a 90 point team but their defense is 10th. Joseph and the Leafs in general are sensational in the first round, sweeping Ottawa. Joseph only allows 3 goals in the 4 games even though the games were close enough that two of them go to OT. Next up are the 111 Devils on their way to a repeat Finals appearance. Here Curtis is back to his 20+ point differentials.. Joseph pitches a 32 save shutout to take the series lead in a game 1 where Brodeur faces a total of 17 shots. Game 2 is a goal fest where the Leafs are outshot again and lose 6-5 in OT. Game 3 is an OT loss for the Leafs again while again being heavily outshot. Games 4-7 the Leafs continue to be outshot but the difference is not great and the teams trade wins. Toronto loses in a game 7 where the Leafs manage 16 shots. Shots on Joseph for the series: 206. Shots on Brodeur for the series: 148.

01-02: This is the one that hurts. Leafs 100 points, 3rd in offense, 13th in defense. First up 96 point Isles. Series is back and forth and chippy, both teams (and Joseph) are up and down. Leafs win in 7. Next up 94 point Ottawa. No Sundin on the Leafs. Leafs are blown out in game one. Joseph stops 54/56 for an OT win in game 2 (choker!). They seesaw games 3-6. Game 7.. 3-0 shutout where the Leafs limit Ottawa to 19 shots. Next up Carolina. Game one the Leafs win. Sundin comes back. You'd think that would help an overachieving team to get their first ballot hall of famer back but.. it is an extremely tight series. 3 games going to overtime. The Leafs score 6 goals in the 7 games!! Again.. what goalie could ever win a 7 game series with 6 goals! (Edit, I goofed it was 6 games but the point stands)

After that Joseph had two Detroit teams also forget how to score and that was basically it for his playoff career.

Outside of the third round series against Buffalo, which in hindsight really just showed how undisciplined the Leaf strategy was in comparison, Joseph's teams were either hopelessly outclassed or hopelessly outplayed or both pretty much every time he went past the first round.

I have a hard time believing even Saint Patrick could win some of those series that Joseph supposedly "lost" by not "stepping up". I mean unless he could score goals too. The fact that he was routinely beating or extending hilariously better teams than his own is quite impressive.


Last edited by BraveCanadian: 01-03-2013 at 08:27 AM.
BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:23 AM
  #99
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Frankly as a Leaf fan, both losses were embarrassing and not because of Joseph. Particularly the loss against the Devils where the Leafs only managed 6 shots in the entire deciding game was pathetic!
I'm not as high on Cujo as you are, but I think he was the best Leafs player in both their losses to the Devils in 2000 and 2001. Especially 2000, when Mats Sundin spent as much energy running and hiding from Scott Stevens as he did trying to create offense.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:31 AM
  #100
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm not as high on Cujo as you are, but I think he was the best Leafs player in both their losses to the Devils in 2000 and 2001. Especially 2000, when Mats Sundin spent as much energy running and hiding from Scott Stevens as he did trying to create offense.
Yeah I've seen you with the first rounder label out in full force in the thread here I don't buy that for a second.

But you're right, when he was on the Leafs, Curtis Joseph was their best player -- not Mats Sundin.. especially come playoff time. (The main reason I am not much of a Mats Sundin fan to be honest)

I found this in the other thread too, courtesy of TCG:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
The notion that Curtis Joseph consistently let his teams down in pressure situations in the playoffs is absolutely and demonstrably false. In 22 career playoff games with his team facing elimination, Curtis Joseph had a 2.12 GAA and a .926 save percentage. His record in those games? 10-12. And that's the story of Joseph's playoff career right there, he played well but his team didn't score. In those 12 losses Joseph's teams scored 1.2 goals per 60 minutes of play.

Joseph also had 4 shutouts in those elimination games, plus a 1-0 OT loss against Calgary. That means that with his team's back against the wall in a do-or-die scenario and the entire season hanging in the balance, nearly one-quarter of the time the other team didn't score a single goal in regulation. What a pathetic choker.
Can't win if you don't score. And Curtis Joseph isn't responsible for scoring goals.


Last edited by BraveCanadian: 01-03-2013 at 08:41 AM.
BraveCanadian 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 03:33 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.