Around the NHL: OMG HOCKEY Edition

[Boruto]

Why hasn't fleury's name been brought up yet in this Ws > performance convo

Nvm, I no read.

 

[Thirty One]

Why hasn't fleury's name been brought up yet in this Ws > performance convo

Nvm, I no read.

You should learn. I've found it's the best way to get all the information out of a book.

 

[Richter Scale]

Right behind Chris Osgood.

Ozzy gets **** on way more than he deserves in goalie discussions. Was he a great goalie the likes of Brodeur, Roy, Hasek? No.

But he was damn good, and no where near comparable to the crappiness Fleury has displayed in the playoffs the past several years...

 

[Tawnos]

The job of every player is to help the team win. Save percentage captures the goalie's contribution to winning and losing, while W-L record has a lot of noise that has nothing to do with a goalie.

That "noise" is simply context.

Either way, like I said earlier, we're simply not going to agree on this. I'm aware I have a minority opinion on these things. I don't really look at goalies as individuals performing in a vacuum. Even save percentage is tied to shot quality, which is affected hugely by the team in front of you. All goalie stats are relative to the team in front of them, so I choose to look at one more than others.

 

[Thirty One]

That "noise" is simply context.

No, it isn't.

Winning and losing is decided by goals for and goals against. Goalies have no impact on goals for, and a partial impact on goals against. Goals against are determined by the shots on net the team allows and the goalie stopping those shots.

I have no idea why wins and losses are recorded for goalies and not right-wingers (other than that's how it's always been done).

Yes, save percentage, like every other stat in hockey, can be affected by teammates. Not nearly to the extent of wins though.

 

[Blue Blooded]

My nomination for worst contract of the summer.

Crawford is 21st over the past 3 years in 5v5 Sv%. He will have the 7th highest cap hit among goalies.

For reference the Sharks are paying 4th place Niemi $3.8M. Niemi who incidentally the Hawks walked away from in 2010.

I want to retract this statement. The contract is bad, but I'm not sure it is worse than either of the contracts for the deadly duo of Clarkson/Bozak.

I does carry the greater risk though. You can hide an underperforming forward in the lineup, you can't hide an underperforming goalie.

 

[Blue Blooded]

That "noise" is simply context.

Either way, like I said earlier, we're simply not going to agree on this. I'm aware I have a minority opinion on these things. I don't really look at goalies as individuals performing in a vacuum. Even save percentage is tied to shot quality, which is affected hugely by the team in front of you. All goalie stats are relative to the team in front of them, so I choose to look at one more than others.

Shot quality effects have been proven to be miniscule over a season, especially for a goalie. Almost insignificant.

Playing behind a great D helps, no question about it. But the D will mainly help get the GAA down by limiting shots against, and will not affect the Sv% much.

 

[Tawnos]

That statistical treatment didn't actually address shot quality in any meaningful way....

 

[Blue Blooded]

That statistical treatment didn't actually address shot quality in any meaningful way....

It proved that switching teams didn't affect a goalie's Sv%. Since goalies have no control over shot quality, the implication is that the team doesn't really either.

That is not the only study, but the first one I came across.

Here is a better example.

Some quotes:

The average change in a goalie's save percentage from year to year when he stays with the same team is just 0.0005 larger than simple random chance would predict, and when a goalie changes teams the sv% difference is just 0.0011 larger than random chance. The best shot-quality-influencing system of this era (Jacques Lemaire's) reduced Fenwick shooting percentages by about 0.0015. The result is that any team effect on a goalie's save percentage doesn't add up to more than a goal or two per season.

• The point is not: "All teams face the same shots, so ignore shot quality completely."
• The point is: "Differences in shot locations are small and require a very large data set to overcome noise, so you won't be wrong by much if you ignore them."

Together, Fenwick/Corsi and Luck account for around 3/4 of team winning percentage. What's the remainder? Goaltending talent - which Tom Awad estimates at about 5% - and special teams, along with a very small sliver that's due to shooting talent and the oft-mentioned "shot quality."

 

[aufheben]

But the goalie's team obviously affects Wins more than SV%.

The statistic least effected by the goalie's team would by default be the best statistic to judge by, no? Hasek never had a 40+ W season in Buffalo (37: '97, '01), but as soon as he goes to Detroit he gets 41 ('02).

 

[Blue Blooded]

But the goalie's team obviously affects Wins more than SV%.

The statistic least effected by the goalie's team would by default be the best statistic to judge by, no? Hasek never had a 40+ W season in Buffalo (37: '97, '01), but as soon as he goes to Detroit he gets 41 ('02).

I get the logical argument for using wins: The goalie only has to perform good enough for the team to win, everything else is basically unnecessary.

However "how much it takes to win" differs greatly between teams and individual games and how much is required isn't something a goalie can control.

The Quality starts stat that I mentioned upthread is therefore the new stat that proponents of wins should turn to, i.e. games where the goalie gave his team a chance to win.

There does however occur an anomaly on poor teams where a lower QS% is actually preferable (assuming the same Sv%). Since the team is bad they more often than not need an exceptional performance from the goalie to win, so a regular QS will usually not cut it. A goalie with a lower QS% but the same Sv% has more awful games, but also more exceptional ones and will therefore likely win more games than the high-QS% one.

To summarize: A good team needs a high QS% from their goalie, while a bad team wants a high Sv% goalie with lower QS%.

 

[RangerBlues]

Dont know if this deserves its own thread. NY Times piece on expansion of KHL

To Vladivostok and Beyond
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/sports/hockey/khl-global-alternative-to-nhl-extends-its-reach.html

 

[NYRFAN218]

Buffalo's third jersey. I don't even need to say anything, the pictures do the talking.

 

[gary laser eyes]

Those are bruuuuuutal. Such a shame for a team that already has a very nice set of home/away uniforms.

 

[aufheben]

Hahaha those jersey's...wow, haha. What the ****, those are real?

 

[Blue Blooded]

What is the deal with incorporating grey into the uniforms, first the Islanders' 3rd and now this? It looks absolutely dreadful!

 

[RangerBlues]

I dont get the grey sleeves. All I can say its better than the one that looks like a slug.

 

[Jabroni]

The grey looks awful.

 

[Thirty One]

The grey looks awful.

Yes. Also, the blue and the yellow.

 

[aufheben]

Yes. Also, the blue and the yellow.

And the Ott.

 

[Loff]

Looks like something you could pick up for a buck on a thrashy flea market. Awesome.

 

[Thirty One]

 

[Boruto]

I think they're great.....for fake jersey sales! I mean, how can one tell the difference between that and a secondary reproduction of it? Nothing about that jersey screams value, design, style, or even a classic feel. When there are fakes of a Rangers Jersey, that umfph isn't there but I think fake BUF 3rd are going to have record high sales because no one is going to pay for the authentic anyway when it looks like that

 

[Boruto]

wasn't new MGMT applauded for getting rid of the slug sabre when they first took over? Boy, Sabres fans are wishing they can have slugbre back right about now.

 

[*Bob Richards*]

You can practically see the misery in Steve Ott's eyes.