NHL.com article on the drop in save percentage

[Romang67]

I thought this article was interesting, given all the talk about how bad goaltending is right now.

Unmasked: Examining drop in NHL save percentage | NHL.com

Vasilevskiy says lack of wasted shots big reason overall number has gone down

www.nhl.com

“I feel like guys don't waste shots anymore,” Vasilevskiy told NHL.com. “You know, back when I came into the League (in 2014-15), it used to be 30 or 35-plus shots each game. It was almost every night, you felt good about your game, you were into it all the time. Nowadays, guys don't waste shots. It's all about the quality. They're all looking for that perfect play, perfect pass, perfect shot.”

Former NHL goalie Steve Valiquette, who founded Clear Sight Analytics and works as a television analyst for New York Rangers broadcasts on MSG, said the number of unscreened shots -- he calls them clear-sighted shots because the goalie can see the release -- from long range is down 27.9 percent the past six seasons, and the amount of those shots from outside the slot has dropped 20.8 percent.

Click to read more...

 

[Vipers31]

That definitely matches my impression and overarching trends. We went from „you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take“ to „you’re just turning the puck over if you take the wrong shot“. Instead of hoping to win the lottery on the scratch-off ticket you get on top, teams prefer to just keep the puck and go for a higher-percentage shot - the 3-on3 overtime evolution is kind of the embodiment of that attitude.

 

[895]

The rise in shots was a natural reaction to the analytics revolution. Players would start taking shots they didn't really believe in because it makes their corsi better.

Now it's trending the other way because analytics is just de jour now and everyone is back to focusing on trying to score goals.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

No mention of equipment change and stick tech?

Bad time in the league to be a goalie that's for sure

 

[TheBeerNerd]

Not applicable to my team this year, therefore not my problem

 

[JPT]

No mention of equipment change and stick tech?

Bad time in the league to be a goalie that's for sure

At least their pay has finally started to increase

 

[BraveCanadian]

So funny. When save percentages were rising due to size selection and improved equipment allowing the butterfly to become a default stance it was because goalies of the past "sucked". When save percentages are going down it is because players are just so good they are being more selective. Even though a lot of them are the same goalies.

No, I think this is just the equipment rule changes along with the natural ebb and flow of the officiating in the league. The NHL is a copycat league big time.

There was a time not too long ago when everything was getting called and teams went full puck possession to dipsy doodle around with no fear at all to get good shots. Now we're back in a time when there is tons of traffic in front, occasional real hits catching guys with their heads down, and a lot of garbage goals going in off people's asses and skates and tip ins that goalies don't even see.

It will likely go the other way once the pendulum swings back again.

 

[Toby91ca]

Players would start taking shots they didn't really believe in because it makes their corsi better.

I think you'll have a hard time finding a player that spends any time at all thinking about their corsi stats.

 

[Gm0ney]

I thought this article was interesting, given all the talk about how bad goaltending is right now.

Unmasked: Examining drop in NHL save percentage | NHL.com

Vasilevskiy says lack of wasted shots big reason overall number has gone down

www.nhl.com

Vasilevskiy is wrong about shot quantities. They're generally up from 2014-15. This year so far is trending a bit lower, but we're only 1/3 of the way through the regular season. Expected goals are way up though, so teams are taking better shots.

 

[braunm]

When Gretzky recorded 215 points in 1985-86, the average save percentage was only 0.872 compared with the current 0.901. This is a 2.9% difference in save percentage.
Based on this, Gretzky would only have had 209 points in 2024.
I know there are other mathematic variables, but regardless, this points towards Gretzky’s inconceivable dominance.

 

[ijuka]

The rise in shots was a natural reaction to the analytics revolution. Players would start taking shots they didn't really believe in because it makes their corsi better.

Now it's trending the other way because analytics is just de jour now and everyone is back to focusing on trying to score goals.

Or the advanced stat they're focusing on is expected goals instead of corsi.

 

[bossram]

The rise in shots was a natural reaction to the analytics revolution. Players would start taking shots they didn't really believe in because it makes their corsi better.

Now it's trending the other way because analytics is just de jour now and everyone is back to focusing on trying to score goals.

This is a hilarious comment considering Corsi has largely fallen out of favour to scoring chance and shot-quality based metrics (i.e. expected goals).

 

[pi314]

When Gretzky recorded 215 points in 1985-86, the average save percentage was only 0.872 compared with the current 0.901. This is a 2.9% difference in save percentage.
Based on this, Gretzky would only have had 209 points in 2024.
I know there are other mathematic variables, but regardless, this points towards Gretzky’s inconceivable dominance.

If it’s .872 when Gretzky played and .901.

That’s a change 9.9% of goals going to 12.8%.

(.128 - .099)/.099 = 29.3% more goals.

Or 70.7% of his usual production.

That’s more like 152 points.

 

[Bard Marchand]

The rise in shots was a natural reaction to the analytics revolution. Players would start taking shots they didn't really believe in because it makes their corsi better.

Now it's trending the other way because analytics is just de jour now and everyone is back to focusing on trying to score goals.

You get a soup du jour at a restaurant or you do things de jure lol.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

When Gretzky recorded 215 points in 1985-86, the average save percentage was only 0.872 compared with the current 0.901. This is a 2.9% difference in save percentage.
Based on this, Gretzky would only have had 209 points in 2024.
I know there are other mathematic variables, but regardless, this points towards Gretzky’s inconceivable dominance.

You're conflating "percent change" with "percentage point change", and are arriving at an exceptionally incorrect conclusion.

 

[ijuka]

If it’s .872 when Gretzky played and .901.

That’s a change 9.9% of goals going in to 12.8%.

(.128 - .99)/.99 =-0.871 = 29.3% more goals.

Or 70.7% of his usual production.

That’s more like 152 points.

Mathing with percentages:

Convert to logit:

.872 -> ln(0.872/0.128) = 1.91876
.901 -> ln(0.901/0.099) = 2.20839

Subtraction of logits:

2.20839 - 1.91876 = 0.28963


Convert to multiplier with natural exponent:
e^(0.28963) = 1.33593.
e^(-0.28963) = 0.74854.


So 1.33593 times (or 33.593%) more goals. Or 0.74854 times fewer goals(25.146%) currently

And the reason this is done, is because percentages exhibit squeezing behavior. You cannot compare them directly. This removes the squeezing, and just compares the flattened difference in scoring.

Note: These are rather low percentages, so the rounding effect isn't that great, so it's pretty close to the unrounded value. Nevertheless, what you did doesn't properly capture the difference in scoring.

For example, these multipliers will be the exact same when comparing saving %s of .901 and .872, meaning .901 should be considered to be 1.33593 times better a saving percentage than .872, even though .901 / .872 = 1.033257. Here, the squeezing is much more noticeable, and it becomes clear that you cannot compare percentages like this.


Percentages are transformed scalars and you cannot perform normal mathematical operations on them(addition, subtraction, multiplication, division). They all have distinct meaning for percentages that don't correspond to how these operations are intuitively understood.

Percentages are centered at 0.50(ranged 0 to 1), while multiplication is centered at 1(ranged 0 to infinity). Conversion via logit to natural exponent makes them centered at 1(multiplicative identity) and gives them the range of 0 to infinity(domain of multiplication), at which point you can perform such comparisons again.

 

[TheNumber4]

I got on the shots are overrated train in 2021. For me, "SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT" was obsolete, and I much preferred my Oilers to pass pass pass and find the Premium High Danger Dagger. I feel like this evolution has been coming on for awhile now, and I 100% agree with Vasilevsky's assessment here.

 

[MadLuke]

This year so far is trending a bit lower, but we're only 1/3 of the way through the regular season.

That a giant amount of games sample size wise....

 

[wintersej]

I think you'll have a hard time finding a player that spends any time at all thinking about their corsi stats.

It is an arbitration hearing eligible stat now.

 

[Statto]

If it’s .872 when Gretzky played and .901.

That’s a change 9.9% of goals going to 12.8%.

(.128 - .099)/.099 = 29.3% more goals.

Or 70.7% of his usual production.

That’s more like 152 points.

It doesn’t work like that because s%is only one variable, so it doesn’t translate to what he’d get today.

Heavy skates and equipment.
Different skate technology
Wood sticks

 

[Nogatco Rd]

If it’s .872 when Gretzky played and .901.

That’s a change 9.9% of goals going to 12.8%.

(.128 - .099)/.099 = 29.3% more goals.

Or 70.7% of his usual production.

That’s more like 152 points.

Username checks out

 

[Video Nasty]

It doesn’t work like that because s%is only one variable, so it doesn’t translate to what he’d get today.

Heavy skates and equipment.
Different skate technology
Wood sticks

Not to mention that it disregards the impact of Gretzky himself. While more than half the teams scored or surpassed the 302 goals the Avs led the league with last year, the 1985-1986 Oilers outscored the next highest team by 72 goals; they out scored all but two teams by at least 90 goals.

Let’s keep in mind that Lemieux was second in the league in points with 141. Coffey and Kurri were next with 138 and 131. The next closest non-Oiler was Bossy with 123. Excluding Gretzky himself, there were five 50+ goal scorers and twelve players who crossed 100 points. We saw four and nine in those categories last season.

These attempts at adjusted stats are flawed because they try to treat the outlier as just another player. Where in these formulas does it factor in Gretzky and the Oilers playing with the two line pass rule versus not playing with it today?

When McDavid scored 153, the Oilers led the league with 325 goals. If I’m being honest, I think modern day Gretzky and the Oilers still hit 400 because Gretzky without the two line pass rule might demolish the league more than he did in reality. It won’t make sense to people trying to do straight calculations that can’t factor in context, but nothing about todays league leads me to believe that just because the overall goals scored are 25% less than they were forty years ago, Gretzky and the Oilers themselves would be held back proportionally.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

When Gretzky recorded 215 points in 1985-86, the average save percentage was only 0.872 compared with the current 0.901. This is a 2.9% difference in save percentage.
Based on this, Gretzky would only have had 209 points in 2024.
I know there are other mathematic variables, but regardless, this points towards Gretzky’s inconceivable dominance.

This is not how math works.