Post-Game Talk: Santa delivers Ladd a present! Jets 4-3 in a Shoot Out!

[broinwhyteridge]

To use SV% as the primary focus in your argument is to say that every single goal scored against the Jets is completely Pavelec's fault. Just some food for thought.

Data analysis over time (see garret's posts) indicates that over a large sample size this isn't an issue.

 

[winterpeg]

but there are a lot of folks saying that "if Pavs just got his save % up, we are good...", I think that is far too simplistic.

IMO, if Pavelec was playing well enough to hold a .915 save percentage, we WOULD be good.

It's not about raising the number, it's about how the number reflects the level of play needing to be raised. Pavelec needs to raise his level of play to the level of the goalies who are at least league average. Currently it is not there.

I believe that over a full season, it all averages out, and sv % is pretty representative. (Shouldn't he have a good Sv% this year cause we're playing so many games in the south-least division? Evidently it must average out year over year)

But I also, to speak subjectively, don't feel safe when he's in net.

Everybody who might suggest Pavs is an average starter in the league, name at least 9 other starters you would take him instead of, (you're fantasy drafting a team with no salary involved. Purely on their abilities as a goaltender.) the obvious tenth (to put 10 below him, putting him in the middle 1/3 of the league) is Bryz.

Granted I don't follow a lot of teams, but for one season, with no future consideration involved (therefore purely on his current abilities) I'm not sure I can think of 5.

 

[TCsmyth]

It is that simple though. If Pav made more saves, his save percentage would go up. Period.

I do understand that math!

I guess I was trying to say in my own way that Pavs is better than last year, and Pavs on some other teams in other systems with other D would have a better save % than with WPG.

 

[theamazingchris]

Save percentage is the number of shots out of the total that go in.

To say that each of those shots that goes in is an evaluation of the goalie(which is exactly what sv% does) is saying that those were completely on the goalie.

For example, if 26 out of 30 are saved, that says nothing about those 4 goals. Save percentage treats those four goals as the goalie's fault to give a final number.

Save percentage doesn't assume every goal is the goalie's fault. It just says how many goals are allowed per shot. Period. Sometimes those will be the goalie's fault, sometimes they won't be. But the fact of the matter is, long-term, a better goalie will let in fewer goals per shot. The team in front of him doesn't make a huge difference in that regard.

 

[theamazingchris]

If you want to evaluate Pavelec as a factor in this teams success, look at his performance. Was he terrible in this game? The ever so godly and all-encompassing sv% stat says he was trash tonight, but he made multiple saves that covered up for poor defense and a couple bad turnovers.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but using SV% to evaluate individual game performance is something nobody who knows the first thing about statistics would ever do.

 

[Waldo]

So much *****ing and complaining...... Didn't anyone notice we won ? So, are we to play Montoya for the rest of the season ? At least I didn't see anyone calling Ladd a 3rd line player if he was with a good team.

1st call on the post game show was someone trashing Chevy. Can't anyone be happy we won ? A few calls later I had to turn off the post game show because I couldn't stand the whineing and complaining.

We're in the race, the hockey we are playing is exciting, and we're on a roll. 1st 4 game winning streak of the year. Shortly it will be 5.

 

[TCsmyth]

Save percentage doesn't assume every goal is the goalie's fault. It just says how many goals are allowed per shot. Period. Sometimes those will be the goalie's fault, sometimes they won't be. But the fact of the matter is, long-term, a better goalie will let in fewer goals per shot. The team in front of him doesn't make a huge difference in that regard.

Correct! But, global save % does assume that every shot is the same difficulty.

 

[winterpeg]

So much *****ing and complaining...... Didn't anyone notice we won ? So, are we to play Montoya for the rest of the season ? At least I didn't see anyone calling Ladd a 3rd line player if he was with a good team.

1st call on the post game show was someone trashing Chevy. Can't anyone be happy we won ? A few calls later I had to turn off the post game show because I couldn't stand the whineing and complaining.

We're in the race, the hockey we are playing is exciting, and we're on a roll. 1st 4 game winning streak of the year. Shortly it will be 5.

Go back a few pages and read the discussion about Ladd being on Team Canada in Sochi.

And frankly? I'd feel just as safe with Monty in net. Not sure why Noel doesn't feel safe enough to even use him to give pav a rest in a 5 game slump. Monty is a good goalie, and far above the standard of the usual backup goalie, IMO.

Correct! But, global save % does assume that every shot is the same difficulty.

And assuming that we're so defensively flawed (which we aren't) that on average, Pavelec faces more difficult shots than other goalies and therefore justifies his Sv % being lower would be the only way to say that over a season, the global save% is screwed up by the average quality of shots against. I think that would be a pretty ridiculous assumption to make, when defense is our least flawed area of the depth chart, IMO.

You can't use Sv% to evaluate one game. It's hardly fair over 5, but over 30+ it's pretty telling.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

I do understand that math!

I guess I was trying to say in my own way that Pavs is better than last year, and Pavs on some other teams in other systems with other D would have a better save % than with WPG.

Maybe. But's it's been proven that coaches do not effect goalie save percentage to any significant degree, and although I don't have any studies on it, I don't think teams effect save percentage near to the degree people assume.

Luongo went from terrible terrible team to great team with no difference in save percentage. Niemi went from championship team to average playoff team and increased his numbers. Bryzgalov went from dominant on a borderline at best playoff team to a terrible on a top end team.

Go back a few pages and read the discussion about Ladd being on Team Canada in Sochi.

And frankly? I'd feel just as safe with Monty in net. Not sure why Noel doesn't feel safe enough to even use him to give pav a rest in a 5 game slump. Monty is a good goalie, and far above the standard of the usual backup goalie, IMO.

All the evidence points otherwise.

 

[winterpeg]

All the evidence points otherwise.

Fair enough. I figure a sv% of .900 for a backup is okay, and it'd likely be higher if he ever saw more than the bench. I don't get nervous knowing that he's going to play (when he actually does). But, fair enough.

 

[truck]

Save percentage is the number of shots out of the total that go in.

To say that each of those shots that goes in is an evaluation of the goalie(which is exactly what sv% does) is saying that those were completely on the goalie.

For example, if 26 out of 30 are saved, that says nothing about those 4 goals. Save percentage treats those four goals as the goalie's fault to give a final number.

EDIT: The point I'm trying to get across is that if you want to evaluate Pavelec as a factor in this team winning you have to do more than just spit out stats from nhl.com.

Those same rules apply to every single goalie in the leauge.

Things we know:

• If you look at a goalies' save percentage after about 6000 saves, that is likely were they will sit for the rest of their career.
• Moving from team to team doesn't effect a goalie's save percentage.
• Multiple good goalies put up good numbers on awful defensive teams every year.

Of course every shot is not created equal, but in general scoring chances mirror shots.

Even if you want to say it is all about the team, how the heck have Bobrovsky, Reimer, Dubnyk and Miller posted such good numbers this year. Their team defense hasn't been very good. Why do starters generally post better numbers than their backups?


Also, can somebody please make a list of very good goalies who year after year after year post bad numbers? Does this list exist?

Take a look at the career save percentages of active goalies:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=/BT4Tc

The good ones - regular Vezina candidates - are at the top.

 

[Whileee]

If you want to evaluate Pavelec as a factor in this teams success, look at his performance. Was he terrible in this game? The ever so godly and all-encompassing sv% stat says he was trash tonight, but he made multiple saves that covered up for poor defense and a couple bad turnovers.

He made a couple of good saves, but I can't remember more than that. None of them seemed extraordinary for an NHL caliber goaltender. The Stamkos goal seemed pretty weak, and one that I would have expected an NHL goalie to save more often than not. If he had stopped the long Stamkos wrister from a wide angle his SV% jumps to 92.6% for the game, and the Jets most likely win in regulation. That's how it works "in games".

 

[umwoz]

Save percentage doesn't assume every goal is the goalie's fault. It just says how many goals are allowed per shot. Period. Sometimes those will be the goalie's fault, sometimes they won't be. But the fact of the matter is, long-term, a better goalie will let in fewer goals per shot. The team in front of him doesn't make a huge difference in that regard.

Quality of the shot is necessary if you are going to get a proper gauge on how he's playing.(AKA Watch Games!) Look at the very basic logic of it . . .

What about this game? .889 for Pavelec, he must have been absolute garbage! Oh wait, he was covering our ass on bad turnovers and sloppy defense multiple times. Yet save % says that Pavelec's sprawling save on a wide open net against Lecavalier is no more important than a weak wrister from the point that bounced off of him, and one of those kept us in the game. Would you say Pavelec played poorly against TB?

Hainsey behind the net put the puck on a tee for St. Louis giving Pavelec 0 time to react, oh wait, that counts against his save %. There isn't a suitable metric for quality of chance, or at least an objective one. SV% is fine to default on over time, but to say that our team has no impact on Pavelec's % by giving up way too many quality chances is absurd.

Again, a very good long term perspective stat. But if you are going to look at it on a game by game basis and directly correlate it to a loss.... that's something else.

 

[theamazingchris]

Those same rules apply to every single goalie in the leauge.

Things we know:

• If you look at a goalies' save percentage after about 6000 saves, that is likely were they will sit for the rest of their career.
• Moving from team to team doesn't effect a goalie's save percentage.
• Multiple good goalies put up good numbers on awful defensive teams every year.

Of course every shot is not created equal, but in general scoring chances mirror shots.

Even if you want to say it is all about the team, how the heck have Bobrovsky, Reimer, Dubnyk and Miller posted such good numbers this year. Their team defense hasn't been very good. Why do starters generally post better numbers than their backups?


Also, can somebody please make a list of very good goalies who year after year after year post bad numbers? Does this list exist?

Take a look at the career save percentages of active goalies:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=/BT4Tc

The good ones - regular Vezina candidates - are at the top.

You're like my guardian angel, truck. You always show up and write everything I want to say, but better, and with references!

 

[winterpeg]

You're like my guardian angel, truck. You always show up and write everything I want to say, but better, and with references!

Perhaps you can help me write my finals?

 

[theamazingchris]

Again, a very good long term perspective stat. But if you are going to look at it on a game by game basis and directly correlate it to a loss.... that's something else.

You will never see me do that, nor will you see anyone who knows what they're talking about do that.

Also, can someone tell me why people seem to think those who analyze statistics don't watch the games? It's irksome.

 

[CorgisPer60]

Those same rules apply to every single goalie in the leauge.

Things we know:

• If you look at a goalies' save percentage after about 6000 saves, that is likely were they will sit for the rest of their career.
• Moving from team to team doesn't effect a goalie's save percentage.
• Multiple good goalies put up good numbers on awful defensive teams every year.

Of course every shot is not created equal, but in general scoring chances mirror shots.

Even if you want to say it is all about the team, how the heck have Bobrovsky, Reimer, Dubnyk and Miller posted such good numbers this year. Their team defense hasn't been very good. Why do starters generally post better numbers than their backups?


Also, can somebody please make a list of very good goalies who year after year after year post bad numbers? Does this list exist?

Take a look at the career save percentages of active goalies:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=/BT4Tc

The good ones - regular Vezina candidates - are at the top.

Basically, what you are saying that we have a glorified back up goaltender for our starter.

 

[Whileee]

Quality of the shot is necessary if you are going to get a proper gauge on how he's playing.(AKA Watch Games!) Look at the very basic logic of it . . .

What about this game? .889 for Pavelec, he must have been absolute garbage! Oh wait, he was covering our ass on bad turnovers and sloppy defense multiple times. Yet save % says that Pavelec's sprawling save on a wide open net against Lecavalier is no more important than a weak wrister from the point that bounced off of him, and one of those kept us in the game. Would you say Pavelec played poorly against TB?

Hainsey behind the net put the puck on a tee for St. Louis giving Pavelec 0 time to react, oh wait, that counts against his save %. There isn't a suitable metric for quality of chance, or at least an objective one. SV% is fine to default on over time, but to say that our team has no impact on Pavelec's % by giving up way too many quality chances is absurd.

Again, a very good long term perspective stat. But if you are going to look at it on a game by game basis and directly correlate it to a loss.... that's something else.

I agree that it's nonsense to use one game's save percentage to evaluate a goalie's play in that game, just as it's nonsense to dismiss long-term statistics on SV% as a measure of a goalie's proficiency.

Actually, before the shoot-out I thought that Pavs needed to redeem himself a bit. I didn't think he had that many tough saves, and I'm pretty sure he'd like to have another shot at Stamkos' third period tying goal.

 

[TCsmyth]

Also, can somebody please make a list of very good goalies who year after year after year post bad numbers? Does this list exist?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/fuhrgr01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/barrato01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/r/richtmi01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/belfoed01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/v/vernomi01.html

Truck, is it possible to adjust for era's? These guys had really "poor" save percentages, but they were tremendous goalies.

 

[umwoz]

You will never see me do that, nor will you see anyone who knows what they're talking about do that.

Keep in mind that none of what I've said has actually been in response to arguments/statements you've made about Pavelec.

There's simply too many people in these PGT's that look directly at Pavelec in a loss and throw blame on him, yet when he keeps our ass in a game it's a good team win.

The sv% simply says he is inconsistent, that's undeniable(although it has climbed most of the year). But so is our team defense. There are too many factors in this game to point at SV% individually as a factor of win/loss.

 

[umwoz]

Those same rules apply to every single goalie in the leauge.

Things we know:

• If you look at a goalies' save percentage after about 6000 saves, that is likely were they will sit for the rest of their career.
• Moving from team to team doesn't effect a goalie's save percentage.
• Multiple good goalies put up good numbers on awful defensive teams every year.

I know this is nitpicky, but on your second point . . .(because if I quote just that I'll screw up the bbcode somehow).

Look right at Mike Smith from TB to PHX and Bryz from PHX to PHI. Some major shifts in their sv% when they moved teams. It's not super common for goalies to switch teams so it's hard to get too many other examples.

 

[Whileee]

Keep in mind that none of what I've said has actually been in response to arguments/statements you've made about Pavelec.

There's simply too many people in these PGT's that look directly at Pavelec in a loss and throw blame on him, yet when he keeps our ass in a game it's a good team win.

The sv% simply says he is inconsistent, that's undeniable(although it has climbed most of the year). But so is our team defense. There are too many factors in this game to point at SV% individually as a factor of win/loss.

I don't think that people are doing that. Last night's game is a good example. I thought Bishop was pretty weak, but he had a better SV% than Pavs.

Still, Pavs should have had Stamkos' shot...

 

[Grind]

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/fuhrgr01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/barrato01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/r/richtmi01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/belfoed01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/v/vernomi01.html

Truck, is it possible to adjust for era's? These guys had really "poor" save percentages, but they were tremendous goalies.

is that fact that you can't find any whose careers started in the modern era (96/98 on) not telling of how unlikely it is?

 

[Grind]

I know this is nitpicky, but on your second point . . .(because if I quote just that I'll screw up the bbcode somehow).

Look right at Mike Smith from TB to PHX and Bryz from PHX to PHI. Some major shifts in their sv% when they moved teams. It's not super common for goalies to switch teams so it's hard to get too many other examples.

Goalies have suprisingly good years in the middle of mediocre ones without changing teams.


Mike smiths numbers have again this year regressed to a pedastrian .909


People have done alot of work on this.


we aren't making it up. No team has consistantly(2+ seasons) had a goaly perform (edit) significantly better under their system then the one previously.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

I know this is nitpicky, but on your second point . . .(because if I quote just that I'll screw up the bbcode somehow).

Look right at Mike Smith from TB to PHX and Bryz from PHX to PHI. Some major shifts in their sv% when they moved teams. It's not super common for goalies to switch teams so it's hard to get too many other examples.

Roberto Luongo saw no dropoff at all going from terrible team to great team. Niemi saw an increase slight increase from a championship team to an average playoff team. Evgeni Nabokov has same numbers of real solid playoff team to out playoff/borderline playoff team. Khabibulin has been up and down with plenty of different teams in his career.

Those two are extreme examples that have more to do with role than team play, IMO.