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
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Goalies that didn't win the Vezina that should have?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-31-2017, 03:43 PM
  #26
MXD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 33,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crobro View Post
Gary Smith 74-75

Pete peeters 90-91
Peeters 90-91 might just have been the... worse possible Vezina selection?

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 03:45 PM
  #27
Doctor No
Registered User
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,691
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Peeters 90-91 might just have been the... worse possible Vezina selection?
I was wondering about that.

http://hockeygoalies.org/awards/vezinavoting.html

Twelve goalies received votes in 1990-91, none of them Peeters.

And Peeters received votes in three seasons, none of them 1990-91.

__________________
The Goaltender Home Page (http://hockeygoalies.org) - Preserving Goaltender History since 1994
2016-17 NHL Goaltending Performances by Team: http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/logs/NHL2016.html
Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 03:49 PM
  #28
MXD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 33,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor No View Post
I was wondering about that.

http://hockeygoalies.org/awards/vezinavoting.html

Twelve goalies received votes in 1990-91, none of them Peeters.
I mean, there's no doubt Peeters played some solid hockey, but he didn't play that much. I mean, Cristobal Huet played just about twice as much minutes in 05-06 as Peeters did in 90-91, and outplayed his teammates more than Peeters did (quite decisively, I might add) and didn't get a single Vezina vote (rightly so), because he didn't play enough.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 03:51 PM
  #29
Doctor No
Registered User
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,691
vCash: 50
Agreed - this chart shows it pretty well:

http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/logs/PHI1990.html

But in 1990-91, Peeters pretty much only played even as much as he did because of injuries to Hextall and Wregget.

Now if you want a great Peeters season, you can't beat 1982-83:

http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/logs/BOS1982.html

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 03:58 PM
  #30
RedWings51930
Registered User
 
RedWings51930's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 98
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
SV% is also very team effected even if it's not team based.
I know, but that's probably the stat that's the least team-based.

RedWings51930 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 05:02 PM
  #31
Wingsfan 4 life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Country: Canada
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor No View Post
No, it *was* awarded as per how the Jennings Trophy is awarded today.

So I'm not sure how there's an argument that can be made here.
Yup. Fun fact: 1973-74, Chicago and Philly tied for fewest goals against, making it the only time two goalies from different teams(Esposito and Parent) shared the Vezina.

Prior to 1980-81, closest criteria to today's Vezina would probably be being named to the 1st All-Star team.

Wingsfan 4 life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 11:00 PM
  #32
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merya View Post
This is a huge gap tho. Think nowadays .920 vs .933. It's a decisive difference.
Here's the funny thing about the 04 season.

Martin Brodeur played MORE games than Luongo, had a lower SV% than Luongo, but still gave up fewer goals than Luongo.

So what did that difference in SV% really accomplish for Luongo?

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2017, 11:09 PM
  #33
BeerHockey*
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Country: Canada
Posts: 43
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings51930 View Post
Who would you say was robbed of a Vezina win or was more deserving of one?
I'll name a few I can think of:

Semyon Varlamov 2013-14 (Rask made Bs better, Varlamov made the Avs a playoff team)



Can here to post this - he really should have won so much that season!

BeerHockey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2017, 12:17 AM
  #34
Trafalgar McLaw
Waive Dallas Eakins
 
Trafalgar McLaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
Here's the funny thing about the 04 season.

Martin Brodeur played MORE games than Luongo, had a lower SV% than Luongo, but still gave up fewer goals than Luongo.

So what did that difference in SV% really accomplish for Luongo?
New Jersey Devils defense 2003-2004: Niedermayer, Stevens, Rafalski, Martin, Hale, White

Florida Panthers defense 2003-2004: Bouwmeester, Van Ryan, Odelein, Biron, Lilja, Trnka

Trafalgar McLaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2017, 12:35 AM
  #35
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
Here's the funny thing about the 04 season.

Martin Brodeur played MORE games than Luongo, had a lower SV% than Luongo, but still gave up fewer goals than Luongo.

So what did that difference in SV% really accomplish for Luongo?
Is this going to be like that Tim Thomas argument where someone says that stopping pucks isn't important for goalies?

That difference in save percentage stopped ~34 more goals from going in.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2017, 12:28 PM
  #36
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trafalgar McLaw View Post
New Jersey Devils defense 2003-2004: Niedermayer, Stevens, Rafalski, Martin, Hale, White

Florida Panthers defense 2003-2004: Bouwmeester, Van Ryan, Odelein, Biron, Lilja, Trnka
Why are we punishing goalies for being on good teams?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Is this going to be like that Tim Thomas argument where someone says that stopping pucks isn't important for goalies?

That difference in save percentage stopped ~34 more goals from going in.
This argument only works if two goalies are facing equal number of shots per game.

There's a reason why every goalie has a lower cumulative SV% in lower shot volume games than they do in their higher shot volume games.

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2017, 06:00 PM
  #37
Merya
Jokerit & Finland
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Helsinki
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post

So what did that difference in SV% really accomplish for Luongo?
I'm not arguing in this goalie comparison. I just pointed out that the .013 difference is significant, unlike argued before.

Merya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2017, 02:50 PM
  #38
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merya View Post
I'm not arguing in this goalie comparison. I just pointed out that the .013 difference is significant, unlike argued before.
It's only significant when the two goalies in comparison are facing around the same number of shots per game.

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2017, 04:07 PM
  #39
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
It's only significant when the two goalies in comparison are facing around the same number of shots per game.
Your argument that more shots = higher save percentage doesn't hold up all that well because you're ignoring score effects. If it was as simple as you say it was, then there would be a much clearer pattern. In reality goalies often lead the league in save percentage while playing on teams that allow few shots. Remember when everyone was saying how St. Louis was inflating Elliott's stats?

Team effects are more important with respect to how many shots they are allowing in special teams situations, as short-handed and powerplay shots are more likely to go in than even-strength shots.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2017, 09:36 PM
  #40
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Your argument that more shots = higher save percentage doesn't hold up all that well because you're ignoring score effects. If it was as simple as you say it was, then there would be a much clearer pattern. In reality goalies often lead the league in save percentage while playing on teams that allow few shots. Remember when everyone was saying how St. Louis was inflating Elliott's stats?

Team effects are more important with respect to how many shots they are allowing in special teams situations, as short-handed and powerplay shots are more likely to go in than even-strength shots.
Every single goalie has a higher cumulative SV% in their "30 or more shot" games than they do in their "29 or fewer shot" games. Why did I make the base line 30 shots?

30 or more shots = Above league average
29 or fewer shots = Below league average

For the record, this table does not include this season. The data was from this past offseason. Also, this data is for COMPLETE GAMES only (games where the goalie played 55 minutes or more).

Goaltender<=29 shots SV%>=30 shots SV%
Frederick Andersen.922.928
Craig Anderson.899.928
Ben Bishop.912.937
Sergei Bobrovsky.910.930
Marc Andre Fleury.909.924
Jaroslav Halak.915.931
Braden Holtby.920.931
Jimmy Howard.911.929
Robin Lehner.899.930
Henrik Lundqvist.916.933
Roberto Luongo.913.932
Steve Mason.901.929
Carey Price.910.931
Tuukka Rask.916.936
Cory Schneider.920.938
Cam Ward.899.927

WESTERN CONFERENCE
Goalie<=29 shots SV%>=30 shots SV%
Jake Allen.919.928
Corey Crawford.915.933
Devan Dubnyk.903.928
Brian Elliott.917.932
John Gibson.917.937
Connor Hellebuyck.902.955
Martin Jones.913.940
Kari Lehtonen.909.923
Ryan Miller.905.928
Jonathan Quick.912.933
Pekka Rinne.907.938
Mike Smith.902.929
Cam Talbot.915.934
Semyon Varlamov.906.931

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2017, 11:45 PM
  #41
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
Every single goalie has a higher cumulative SV% in their "30 or more shot" games than they do in their "29 or fewer shot" games. Why did I make the base line 30 shots?

30 or more shots = Above league average
29 or fewer shots = Below league average
[/Table]
Again, you're ignoring score effects. Goalies that face a high number of shots in a game are probably winning that game, probably because they've let in few goals that game. Goalies that face lower shots in a game are likewise probably losing (or when they face <20 shots, probably got yanked).

Here's a better methodology: compare team by team. Teams that face the fewest shots should have lower save % right? Here's the top 10 teams in shot suppression in 2015-16, with their respective rank in save%:

1. Nashville, 21
2. San Jose, 19
3. Los Angeles, 9
4. Anaheim, 5
5. Carolina, 29
6. Washington, 2
7. Minnesota, 14
8. New Jersey, 12
9. Tampa Bay, 8
10. Dallas, 23

Do you see any correlation? Because I sure as hell don't.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2017, 12:41 AM
  #42
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Again, you're ignoring score effects. Goalies that face a high number of shots in a game are probably winning that game, probably because they've let in few goals that game. Goalies that face lower shots in a game are likewise probably losing (or when they face <20 shots, probably got yanked).
First off, that table does not include games where the goalie got yanked. Hence I said "complete games only". 2nd, the intent of that table was to compare each goalie to himself, not goalie to goalie.

Also, score effects or not, the data is just too overwhelming to simply say adjusting for score effects would make a significant dent in the data. I can even separate wins and losses if you like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Here's a better methodology: compare team by team. Teams that face the fewest shots should have lower save % right? Here's the top 10 teams in shot suppression in 2015-16, with their respective rank in save%:

1. Nashville, 21
2. San Jose, 19
3. Los Angeles, 9
4. Anaheim, 5
5. Carolina, 29
6. Washington, 2
7. Minnesota, 14
8. New Jersey, 12
9. Tampa Bay, 8
10. Dallas, 23

Do you see any correlation? Because I sure as hell don't.
1st, you're comparing each team to the rest of the league. This is flawed because it doesn't address in any way what my point really is.

2nd, what are you using as your shot suppression metric? If you're using SA/60, then you're using the WRONG metric. With SA/60 there is an overlap effect which is what you want to avoid.

3rd, most importantly, I never said that lower shots automatically means lower SV%. The quality of the goalie is still a factor. Jonathan Quick is a great goalie who has the luxury of playing behind a great defensive team. The downside is that his SV% takes a hit as a result.

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2017, 03:44 AM
  #43
Bleedred
Boedker sucks
 
Bleedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: #freejonmerrill
Country: United States
Posts: 66,510
vCash: 500
Luongo is the obvious answer here. We can debate what years he could have won it or what years guys who did it win it, shouldn't have but should have in whatever other year instead. Luongo probably should have won it in 03-04, but they weren't giving the Vezina to goalies who with a losing record or non-playoff teams back then. I think Bobrovsky might be the first to win it in a season in which his team did not make the playoffs. How pathetic would the Panthers have been in 03-04 if not for Luongo?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nabby12 View Post
Evgeni Nabokov in 2007-08.
Even though the Sharks have been my second favorite team for over 17 years now, I never wanted Nabokov to win it over Brodeur in 07-08. Maybe that's because the Devils are my favorite team, who knows?

But seriously though, I thought 09-10 was Nabokov's best year, not that I think he should have won it over Miller. I think 03-04 was another great year for Nabokov. That was a very tight Vezina race that year. I'm not sure how close the votes were that year, but you could have made legit cases for all of Brodeur (the one who did win it that year), Luongo, Nabokov, Belfour. Roloson was good but played significantly fewer games.

I've always said that Kiprusoff probably shouldn't have finished second in voting that year, he only played 38 games. Significantly fewer than anybody else that got votes that year.

Bleedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2017, 09:04 PM
  #44
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crobro View Post

Pete peeters 90-91
Pete Peeters won nine games that season. Am I missing a joke here?

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2017, 01:42 AM
  #45
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,973
vCash: 50
Here is more proof SV% us heavily influenced by shot volumes.

Belfour Overall
<=29 Shots: .906
>=30 Shots: .918

Belfour Wins
<=29 Shots: .933
>=30 Shots: .943

Belfour Losses
<=29 Shots: .859
>=30 Shots: .879
-----------------------

Brodeur Overall
<=29 Shots: .910
>=30 Shots: .930

Brodeur Wins
<=29 Shots: .937
>=30 Shots: .946

Brodeur Losses
<=29 Shots: .863
>=30 Shots: .896
-----------------------

Burke Overall
<=29 Shots: .901
>=30 Shots: .912

Burke Wins
<=29 Shots: .934
>=30 Shots: .940

Burke Losses
<=29 Shots: .859
>=30 Shots: .879
-----------------------

Hasek Overall
<=29 Shots: .916
>=30 Shots: .933

Hasek Wins
<=29 Shots: .939
>=30 Shots: .954

Hasek Losses
<=29 Shots: .869
>=30 Shots: .896
-----------------------

Joseph Overall
<=29 Shots: .904
>=30 Shots: .919

Joseph Wins
<=29 Shots: .933
>=30 Shots: .941

Joseph Losses
<=29 Shots: .857
>=30 Shots: .888
-----------------------

Roy Overall
<=29 Shots: .908
>=30 Shots: .924

Roy Wins
<=29 Shots: .933
>=30 Shots: .942

Roy Losses
<=29 Shots: .861
>=30 Shots: .891

As you can see, for these 6 goalies no matter which outcome, the >=30 Shots games' cumulative SV% is always higher than the <=29 Shots games.

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2017, 01:59 AM
  #46
MapleLeafsFan75
Registered User
 
MapleLeafsFan75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,530
vCash: 500
I thought Curtis Joseph should have won the Vezina in both 1999 and 2000.

MapleLeafsFan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2017, 03:52 PM
  #47
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MapleLeafsFan75 View Post
I thought Curtis Joseph should have won the Vezina in both 1999 and 2000.
That's crazy. Kolzig won 41 games and had a 2.24 GAA and a .917 save percentage in 2000. Joseph trailed in all three of those categories. How do you justify that?

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2017, 03:57 PM
  #48
RedWings51930
Registered User
 
RedWings51930's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 98
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by MapleLeafsFan75 View Post
I thought Curtis Joseph should have won the Vezina in both 1999 and 2000.
In 1999? I mean, yes, he helped the Leafs turn around, but I don't see how he could be seen as better than Hasek that year.

RedWings51930 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2017, 04:29 PM
  #49
Admiral Awesome
Registered User
 
Admiral Awesome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathstroke View Post
I'm not seeing it. If you're looking at only SV%, you're not doing it right.
I'm also looking at things like gps and gsaa, with Luongo crushing Brodeur in both categories, especially the latter.

Admiral Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2017, 01:41 AM
  #50
ChrisK97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox View Post
That's crazy. Kolzig won 41 games and had a 2.24 GAA and a .917 save percentage in 2000. Joseph trailed in all three of those categories. How do you justify that?

Joseph also trailed Roman Turek in two of those three stats and barely edged him in save percentage (.915 to .912)

ChrisK97 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 04:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.