As I understand it, there's conflicting views and evidence on how these things are connected. Was wondering what this Board has to say about it.
Also, I remember a thread that had some good info, think it was on the History Board, and it pertained to binning games based on how many shots the goalie faced which showed that SV% rose with Shots against; but posters broke down how there were problems with that analysis and what not. Wasn't able to find it though, if someone could, that might be helpful.
I'll have to see if I can dig up the threads (they may have been pre-2017 data migration), but the evidence is quite straightforward.
At the individual game level, it appears that there's a positive relationship between shots faced and save percentage. In other words, goalies who face more shots in a single game are more likely to have a higher save percentage.
At the season or career level, there's essentially zero relationship between shots faced and save percentage.
This sounds confusing because how can something be true at the game level, and not at the seasonal level? There are two explanations:
1. There's a wide range in shots faced at the individual game level. It's rare, but not really exceptional, to see a goalie face <20 shots, or >35 shots, in a single game. (From 2006 to 2020, in the regular season, there have been 171 instances of a goalie facing at least 50 shots in a game; and 278 instances of a goalie facing no more than 15 shots in a game - with a minimum of 50 minutes played so the data isn't getting skewed from goalies who are pulled early). You simply don't get that range in shots at the seasonal level, where usually the spread from most to fewest shots faced per game is perhaps 10 shots. So maybe this phenomenon would hold true if one goalie averaged 18 shots per night over the course of a season, and another averaged 43; but that simply doesn't happen at the NHL level. The phenomenon, if it really does exist, is ultimately irrelevant because the spread in shots faced (at the season and career level) is so small.
2. There are likely game-specific effects that, by definition, don't impact an entire season. It's generally accepted that losing teams will try to shoot the puck more, and often these are less dangerous shots (ie throw the puck on net from the point). So it might look like the goalie is doing better when he's facing more shots - but the real reason is he's facing more, easier shots which inflate his save percentage, but that has nothing to do with his actual level of performance.
My conclusion, which I think is supported very clearly by the data, is you shouldn't draw conclusions from a single game's save percentage (especially when you're comparing two goalies who faced a significantly different number of shots). But the impact of shot volume at the season and career level is essentially zero.
So to answer your question - there's no conflict in the data that's been presented. The issue is some people don't understand that what's true at the individual game level doesn't hold true at the season/career level.
I'm tagging
@Doctor No as I believe he looked into this as well.
