1995-96 Vezina Trophy Revisit

[Gerulaitis]

That wins/losses are more of a team stat and not necessarily indicative of a particular goaltender's individual performance?

Well, it's Hasek.

A guy like him doesn't lose often on any team

 

[Cruor]

Well, it's Hasek.

A guy like him doesn't lose often on any team

You're not wrong but it's still true that he can only do so much and that he depends on goals for. And Buffalo was dire that year. He led the league in save percentage and an eye watering goals saved above average (43+).

 

[JackSlater]

Hasek recorded a lot of losses that year.

Or am I missing something?

Ted Nolan. That year is almost certainly the most challenging year Hasek ever had for chances against, and Buffalo didn't have a roster to outscore defensive problems.

 

[Hobnobs]

Ted Nolan. That year is almost certainly the most challenging year Hasek ever had for chances against, and Buffalo didn't have a roster to outscore defensive problems.

Yup, spot on. And you can really see ti on the poor backups that got shelled straight to hell that season.

 

[Cruor]

Yup, spot on. And you can really see ti on the poor backups that got shelled straight to hell that season.

Hasek: GP 59, GAA 2.83
Trefilov: GP 22, GAA 3.51
Blue: GP 5, GAA 3.52
Biron: GP 3, GAA 5.05
Shields: GP 2, GAA 3.19

 

[MadLuke]

Carey: 2.26
Kolzig: 3.08 (36% higher)

Hasek: 2.83
not hasek: 3.615 (28% higher)

I am not sure if we can say Hasek dominated his replacement more than Carey that year, wins vs losses result as well.

 

[Felidae]

How about Hebert? Statistically very similar to Puppa, his GSAA and sv% is right below him. GP is nearly identical and had a harder workload in terms of facing shots (7th in Shots against to Puppa's 11th)

Also on a team of similar quality (arguably worse), except didn't make the POs.

I'm not sure I'd have him as a finalist over Hasek, Puppa and Brodeur.. but he deserved better than 10th.

 

[reckoning]

Washington without Carey: 4-8-2
Tampa Bay without Puppa: 9-16-3
Buffalo without Hasek: 11-12-1.

I am a huge Hasek fan, but considering that Carey and Puppa got their teams in the playoffs, I have no problem with them getting Vezina noms instead of him.

The four main contenders from the East were all on teams in the thick of the playoff race. The standings after Feb. 29 were:

5. Montreal 67
6. Washington 66
7. Tampa Bay 64
8. New Jersey 62
9. Boston 62
10. Buffalo 58
11. Hartford 57

All those teams were still in the race. How did their goalies do down the stretch run from Mar. 1 to end of season?

Carey: 10-6-3, 1.51, .936
Puppa: 9-5-4, 2.27, .918
Brodeur: 10-8-4, 2.37, .915
Hasek: 3-9-1, 2.83, .925

That was a really good finish for Carey. Maybe his Vezina wasn't such a surprise in retrospect.

But the oddest thing that season was the Grant Fuhr hype. First half of the season, the media was talking about him as not only the Vezina favourite, but a legitimate Hart candidate. All because he was starting every game.

His workload was impressive, but the fact is he was really only playing just a bit above average, he got pulled something like 15 times, and the Blues were hovering around .500 for most of the year despite having a lot of big names on their roster.

I know Fuhr was a competitor who probably always wanted to play, but why did Mike Keenan go along with it? What would have possessed him to think that overworking a goalie who was in his 15th pro season was a good idea? I am just starting to listen to Keenan's book, so maybe he explains it there.

 

[Hobnobs]

Carey: 2.26
Kolzig: 3.08 (36% higher)

Hasek: 2.83
not hasek: 3.615 (28% higher)

I am not sure if we can say Hasek dominated his replacement more than Carey that year, wins vs losses result as well.

I think if you look at the difference between the quality of teams Trefilov and Kölzig faced. That would explain why Kölzig looks like a bigger dud.

Trefilov were often in net vs non-playoff teams like the Sharks and Sens. While Kölzig for some reason had to face the Wings, Avs, Rangers and Blues.

 

[Doctor No]

I think if you look at the difference between the quality of teams Trefilov and Kölzig faced. That would explain why Kölzig looks like a bigger dud.

Trefilov were often in net vs non-playoff teams like the Sharks and Sens. While Kölzig for some reason had to face the Wings, Avs, Rangers and Blues.

There is data to support this claim.

Trefilov's average opponent was about 0.1 goals/game above average.

Andrei Trefilov

1995-1996 Buffalo Sabres Goaltender Game-by-Game Performance

Kolzig's average opponent was about 0.26 goals/game above average.

Olaf Kolzig

1995-1996 Washington Capitals Goaltender Game-by-Game Performance

The difference between Kolzig and Carey (-0.09 goals/game) is impressive especially considering how many games Carey played. Also notable: 56% of Carey's minutes were at home. Only 24% of Kolzig's minutes were at home.

 

[MadLuke]

Trefilov were often in net vs non-playoff teams like the Sharks and Sens. While Kölzig for some reason had to face the Wings, Avs, Rangers and Blues.

The Avs they played Dallas the game before, the wings they played 3 games in 4 nights (the leaf right after), St-Louis they played the Lighting the night before, that could be why maybe Kolzig played the second game of back-to-back quite a bit.

 

[Hobnobs]

The Avs they played Dallas the game before, the wings they played 3 games in 4 nights (the leaf right after), St-Louis they played the Lighting the night before, that could be why maybe Kolzig played the second game of back-to-back quite a bit.

Yeah, that's probably why. Just a tough spot to put a youngish and inexperienced goalie in. Which Sabres succesfully avoided with Trefilov.