The NHL and the Curious Case of Rookie Goalies

[diehardleafsfan9878]

I was going to create a poll listing all potentially available goalies, but then I got this thought of rookie goalies and the playoff. So I went back through every single playoff season since 1986. Roy is credited with revolutionizing the position so it seems fitting to start here. Regardless you could go back further and I'm sure the results would be similar like Dryden in '71.

Anyways, since 1986 36 years, 35 seasons, rookie goalies have played 561 playoff games. 293 wins, 268 loses, a winning percentage of 52.2%.

Over these 35 seasons, a rookie has made it to at least the 3rd round 17 times (48.6%). However, 6 of these 35 years failed to have a rookie record a single decision (0 wins and 0 loses). So, in the 29 years that has a rookie decision, they have gone to the 3rd round 58.6% of the time.

A rookie has been to the finals 8 times over this period (27.6%). They have won the cup 6 times (20.7%), and have won the Conn Smythe 3 times (10.3%).

Now there are a few caveats about these numbers. Matt Murray is included twice. He technically won the cup twice as a rookie. Vasilevskiy went to the finals as a rookie but in a backup role. He played 2 games during that run. These things affect the results, I know that, but the premise of the study I think still remains.

The playoffs is all about catching lightning in a bottle, and it seems like a rookie is the way to go.

The whole point of this is to suggest the idea of running with 2 rookies in net, Woll and Kallgren, or even someone else. It is an absolutely crazy idea, but does anyone think the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs this year if they had 2 rookies. They made the playoffs by 21 points. I don't think having 2 rookies makes them drop 21 points. From what I saw from Woll and Kallgren this year, Woll looked like the better player. I think Kallgren is a capable backup, but when Woll played, he looked like he had more in him.

Again I'm not saying the 2 have to be Woll and Kallgren. They could go out and get someone like Mikey DiPietro, maybe the Ducks part with Lukas Dostal, or any other rookie you can think of.

I'm also not saying to ride 2 rookies the entire season. I'd start the year of with 2 rookies, and by the deadline add a veteran as insurance. Maybe Fleury ends up on a shit team again. Maybe by the deadline NJ decides the like Daws and are willing to move Blackwell by then. I don't think they will move him before that.

If anyone wants to fact check this information. Either help prove or disprove any of it feel free. I'm sure I missed some guys. All my number were taken from hockeyreference and eyeballing their ages, then checking to see if they were a rookie or not.

Click to read more...

 

[BlueBaron]

If you are suggesting we try running with an elite rookie goalie sure. Name one available?

I've been around awhile and every year I say "I want to use a 2nd on a goalie" and every year I'm disappointed. I can't think of anyone who fits your bill currently but certainly no one in our system is up to this task.

 

[Stephen]

I think you might be missing the point. Good goalies coming into the league and having playoff success as rookies doesn't mean it's a great idea to find any old rookie and stake your whole season and playoff run on them. Leafs had one of their more successful eras backstopped by rookie/sophomore Felix Potvin. But we don't have a Potvin level prospect in net right now.

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

If you are suggesting we try running with an elite rookie goalie sure. Name one available?

I've been around awhile and every year I say "I want to use a 2nd on a goalie" and every year I'm disappointed. I can't think of anyone who fits your bill currently but certainly no one in our system is up to this task.

There are very few elite goalies and elite rookies. That is the whole point of my study. The skill difference between goalies is so negligible that it makes more sense to run with an unproven rookie, than to spend assets for someone who has roughly the same skill level as Campbell. We could have a ranking debate about every goalie in the League and we would go blue in the face before we could come to an agreement past the top 3-5.

And to answer your question, there is no elite rookie goalie that is available. The top goalie prospects who would be considered rookies for this upcoming season: Askarov, Wallstedt, Cossa, Luukkonen, Dostal, Wolf, none of these guys are available.

But that doesn't matter. It's not just elite prospects that have have this success as rookies in the playoffs.

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

I think you might be missing the point. Good goalies coming into the league and having playoff success as rookies doesn't mean it's a great idea to find any old rookie and stake your whole season and playoff run on them. Leafs had one of their more successful eras backstopped by rookie/sophomore Felix Potvin. But we don't have a Potvin level prospect in net right now.

Potvin was not a elite player. At the time he might have been considered an elite prospect, but reflecting back on it today, he shouldn't have been.

 

[GojuLeaf]

How often does a legit starter come along as a rookie? Were there any this year?

If we waste a first round pick on a reach for a goalie would that definately be a wasted pick?

 

[Stephen]

Potvin was not a elite player. At the time he might have been considered an elite prospect, but reflecting back on it today, he shouldn't have been.

Potvin was elite for the first two years here. Went to the final fours back to back and pitched 3x shutouts vs Chicago in one of those years. Also won 3x Game 7's in those runs.

 

[BlueBaron]

There are very few elite goalies and elite rookies. That is the whole point of my study. The skill difference between goalies is so negligible that it makes more sense to run with an unproven rookie, than to spend assets for someone who has roughly the same skill level as Campbell. We could have a ranking debate about every goalie in the League and we would go blue in the face before we could come to an agreement past the top 3-5.

And to answer your question, there is no elite rookie goalie that is available. The top goalie prospects who would be considered rookies for this upcoming season: Askarov, Wallstedt, Cossa, Luukkonen, Dostal, Wolf, none of these guys are available.

But that doesn't matter. It's not just elite prospects that have have this success as rookies in the playoffs.

So this is a moneyball concept. Goalies aren't worth spending on?

Did you just invent moneypuck?

 

[Mickey Marner]

Okay, but unless you can reliably predict the next Roy, Hextall, Belfour, Ward, Murray, Binnington etc., it's not a reliable method.

 

[GojuLeaf]

In considering leaf history it is worth noting that our best goalies in recent memory came as signings, Joseph and Belfour. And I guess Potvin was drafted but we haven't had a good drafted goalie since then in 1992?

Could of had Rask though...

 

[A1LeafNation]

How often does a legit starter come along as a rookie? Were there any this year?

If we waste a first round pick on a reach for a goalie would that definately be a wasted pick?

I don't think any are available but some good rookies that debuted this year and played well after a couple games last year...

Ingraham Tarasov Dostal Daws Vejmelka Knight Kochetkov Soogard Kallgren Skinner Thompson

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

Okay, but unless you can reliably predict the next Roy, Hextall, Belfour, Ward, Murray, Binnington etc., it's not a reliable method.

Rookies are not often given a chance in the playoffs. Most of the time they come in because of injury. There is no predicting who is going to be good, even when it comes to known quantities. Nobody could have predicted the results those you mentioned had. This is the entire idea behind this thought.

 

[McSnypsky]

What about trying Pettruzzelli? I know it sounds desperate but come on we Mrazek!!

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

What about trying Pettruzzelli? I know it sounds desperate but come on we Mrazek!!

I'd be down for rotating all of Woll, Kallgren, Pettruzzelli, and Scott if he could get healthy. None of them need waivers, can move them around all year. Whoever plays the best gets the job.

 

[McSnypsky]

I'd be down for rotating all of Woll, Kallgren, Pettruzzelli, and Scott if he could get healthy. None of them need waivers, can move them around all year. Whoever plays the best gets the job.

eactly and the Leafs have proven they can win during the season with pretty much any goalie, it's about getting that run by someone heading into the playoffs. Plus right now for me fresh after the loss I really think a bigger goalie would help. That first goal in game 7 still replays in my mind and all I can think about is if Jack was 6'4" his pads would be large enough that that shot just hits his pads... I know maybe harping to much on that but it's kinda true.

 

[Buds17]

Roy and Dryden are HOFers, and Vasilevskiy was drafted in the first round. Woll was a third round draft choice (similar to Murray). While I don't feel as though management will opt to replace Campbell with a big name goalie - if they in fact are replacing Campbell - I don't exactly envision them willingly running with a tandem of Kallgren and Woll either.

 

[colchar]

So this is a moneyball concept. Goalies aren't worth spending on?

Did you just invent moneypuck?

Considering the fact that the A's haven't won the WS since Moneyball was initiated, they are hardly an organization that we should follow.

 

[Stephen]

I'd be down for rotating all of Woll, Kallgren, Pettruzzelli, and Scott if he could get healthy. None of them need waivers, can move them around all year. Whoever plays the best gets the job.

The idea that the Leafs have built the best roster in generations, only to go rotate 2x mostly AHLers and and an ECHL guy in the most critical defensive situation just seems... unsatisfying.

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

The idea that the Leafs have built the best roster in generations, only to go rotate 2x mostly AHLers and and an ECHL guy in the most critical defensive situation just seems... unsatisfying.

Unsatisfying until it works. Would be much more satisfying if they win with someone they developed as opposed to trading for someone like Gibson.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

Potvin was not a elite player. At the time he might have been considered an elite prospect, but reflecting back on it today, he shouldn't have been.

Potvin was a by-product of the Burns trap teams that were well balanced more than anything. He played pretty well but was exposed once he didn't have Rouse and the rest of them defending. He was pretty mediocre when he went on to other teams.

 

[Stephen]

Unsatisfying until it works. Would be much more satisfying if they win with someone they developed as opposed to trading for someone like Gibson.

Going Moneyball in net with a rookie goalie tandem (with no pedigree) in the playoffs would represent a real long shot bet.

It's not so much that Ken Dryden, Matt Murray, Patrick Roy, Cam Ward or Jordan Binnington have won the cup under those circumstances that makes your plan feasible, it's the % of goalies who have done it out of a sample of (every team that has qualified for the playoffs) x (number of years the NHL has been in operation).

Or, if you want to take it back to 1986, we have 34 years of play between 1986 and 2021 (minus one lockout year) 16 teams per year making the playoffs representing 544 playoff runs.

Out of 544 playoff runs, Ward, Roy, Murray x 2 and Binnington would represent rookie/unknown goalies, so let's call it 5x cup winning rookie goalies.

5/544 = 0.00919% chance of success.

I don't know what kind of Moneyball model would pitch a % success like that as a viable strategy, to say nothing of the poor quality of goalie prospects you'd be attempting that with in Toronto.

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

Going Moneyball in net with a rookie goalie tandem (with no pedigree) in the playoffs would represent a real long shot bet.

It's not so much that Ken Dryden, Matt Murray, Patrick Roy, Cam Ward or Jordan Binnington have won the cup under those circumstances that makes your plan feasible, it's the % of goalies who have done it out of a sample of (every team that has qualified for the playoffs) x (number of years the NHL has been in operation).

Or, if you want to take it back to 1986, we have 34 years of play between 1986 and 2021 (minus one lockout year) 16 teams per year making the playoffs representing 544 playoff runs.

Out of 544 playoff runs, Ward, Roy, Murray x 2 and Binnington would represent rookie/unknown goalies, so let's call it 5x cup winning rookie goalies.

5/544 = 0.00919% chance of success.

I don't know what kind of Moneyball model would pitch a % success like that as a viable strategy, to say nothing of the poor quality of goalie prospects you'd be attempting that with in Toronto.

I showed the math in my original post. A rookie goalie has gone to the 3rd round 17 times in 35 years, 48.6% of the time. They have been to the finals 8 times (27.6%) and have won 6 (20.7%). Not every season had a rookie goalie play in it.

 

[Stephen]

I showed the math in my original post. A rookie goalie has gone to the 3rd round 17 times in 35 years, 48.6% of the time. They have been to the finals 8 times (27.6%) and have won 6 (20.7%). Not every season had a rookie goalie play in it.

If the Leafs are still trying to win a cup, I'm not really sure what the significance of a rookie goalie going to the third round is or what the significance of the success rate of rookie goalies to other rookie goalies is. The actual success rate of riding a rookie goalie to a cup win is infinitesimally small.

And that's premised on the idea that rookie goalies aren't dissimilar among themselves as a category, aka age, development time and pedigree.

 

[zeke]

I was going to create a poll listing all potentially available goalies, but then I got this thought of rookie goalies and the playoff. So I went back through every single playoff season since 1986. Roy is credited with revolutionizing the position so it seems fitting to start here. Regardless you could go back further and I'm sure the results would be similar like Dryden in '71.

Anyways, since 1986 36 years, 35 seasons, rookie goalies have played 561 playoff games. 293 wins, 268 loses, a winning percentage of 52.2%.

Over these 35 seasons, a rookie has made it to at least the 3rd round 17 times (48.6%). However, 6 of these 35 years failed to have a rookie record a single decision (0 wins and 0 loses). So, in the 29 years that has a rookie decision, they have gone to the 3rd round 58.6% of the time.

A rookie has been to the finals 8 times over this period (27.6%). They have won the cup 6 times (20.7%), and have won the Conn Smythe 3 times (10.3%).

Now there are a few caveats about these numbers. Matt Murray is included twice. He technically won the cup twice as a rookie. Vasilevskiy went to the finals as a rookie but in a backup role. He played 2 games during that run. These things affect the results, I know that, but the premise of the study I think still remains.

The playoffs is all about catching lightning in a bottle, and it seems like a rookie is the way to go.

The whole point of this is to suggest the idea of running with 2 rookies in net, Woll and Kallgren, or even someone else. It is an absolutely crazy idea, but does anyone think the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs this year if they had 2 rookies. They made the playoffs by 21 points. I don't think having 2 rookies makes them drop 21 points. From what I saw from Woll and Kallgren this year, Woll looked like the better player. I think Kallgren is a capable backup, but when Woll played, he looked like he had more in him.

Again I'm not saying the 2 have to be Woll and Kallgren. They could go out and get someone like Mikey DiPietro, maybe the Ducks part with Lukas Dostal, or any other rookie you can think of.

I'm also not saying to ride 2 rookies the entire season. I'd start the year of with 2 rookies, and by the deadline add a veteran as insurance. Maybe Fleury ends up on a shit team again. Maybe by the deadline NJ decides the like Daws and are willing to move Blackwell by then. I don't think they will move him before that.

If anyone wants to fact check this information. Either help prove or disprove any of it feel free. I'm sure I missed some guys. All my number were taken from hockeyreference and eyeballing their ages, then checking to see if they were a rookie or not.

There's a couple factors at play here:

1. Rookie goalies weaknesses' are unknowns, and the shooters haven't figured them out.

2. Rookie goalies are blissfully naive and fearless and haven't had their confidence shaken yet.


You're absolutely right that Rookie goalies crush the playoffs quite often....and did doesn't even matter if they're actually good goalies or not in the end...many of them quickly turn into pumpkins like Cam Ward and Matt Murray.

 

[Leafblooded]

How about another Zamboni driver?