quoipourquoi
Goaltender
Consistency
The following is a measurement of the number of games at or above the league average save percentage (excluding games in which they played less than a period of meaningful shutout relief hockey).
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: 661 games at/above, 359 games below
Playoffs: 169 games at/above, 77 games below
Cumulative: 830 games at/above, 436 games below
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: 473 games at/above, 257 games below
Playoffs: 79 games at/above, 39 games below
Cumulative: 552 games at/above, 296 games below
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: Net contribution of +302
Playoffs: Net contribution of +92
Cumulative: Net contribution of +394
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: Net contribution of +216
Playoffs: Net contribution of +40
Cumulative: Net contribution of +256
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: 64.8% of games at/above
Playoffs: 68.7% of games at/above
Cumulative: 65.6% of games at/above
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: 64.8% of games at/above
Playoffs: 66.9% of games at/above
Cumulative: 65.1% of games at/above
Patrick Roy is marginally more likely to produce at or above the league average save percentage in the regular season, but the difference there is negligible. Roy’s lead in terms of producing a game at or above the league average save percentage in the post-season is bigger. With Roy leading by a razor-thin margin in the regular season and having a noticeable lead in the playoffs, he leads the cumulative figure. Overall throughout their careers, Patrick Roy was less likely than Dominik Hasek to produce a below-average game in the regular season or the playoffs.
More than that, Patrick Roy played at this higher rate for a greater number of games than Dominik Hasek. In his 1020 regular season games (again, I am not counting meaningless relief performances), Roy produced an overall contribution of +302 (the difference between the number of games played at or above the league average save percentage and the number of games played below that same threshold). Hasek produced an overall contribution of +216 in the regular season - meaning that Hasek’s net contribution of quality games was roughly 71.5% that of Patrick Roy’s net contribution. In the playoffs, Hasek’s net contribution of quality games is 43.5% that of Patrick Roy’s. In the cumulative sense, Hasek’s net contribution of quality games is 65.0% that of Patrick Roy’s.
Conclusion - Dominik Hasek was more likely to produce a below-average game in the regular season, playoffs, and in the cumulative sense. Patrick Roy’s percentage of quality games is higher, as is the amount of games in which he played - creating a large gap in terms of their net contribution of quality games.
Adjusted Save Percentage
One of the biggest problems with save percentage is that people often misuse it. While most HOHers can rightfully acknowledge that the league average save percentage is different now than it was in 1985-86 (and that there is a night-and-day difference between a .914 goaltender in 2012 and a .914 goaltender in 1986), there have been several instances of HOHers cumulating save percentage from 1994 through 2002 and expecting it to be an irrefutable summation of Roy v. Hasek.
I ask that you stop and consider exactly what is wrong with running this type of spreadsheet on Hockey-Reference.
If you guessed that the problem is that Hockey-Reference gives equal weight to a save in 1994 as it does to a save in 2002, then you are correct. If save percentage is not adjusted prior to running a cumulative report, goaltenders with peak levels of play in seasons in which the league average save percentage is low are punished. Here is an example:
Patrick Roy (1990): .912 save percentage on 1524 shots
Patrick Roy (2001): .913 save percentage on 1513 shots
Running an unadjusted cumulative report on Patrick Roy’s career will regard these seasons as near equals (with slight preference to 2001). The issue with this is that Patrick Roy in 1990 was an elite goaltender, leading a league in which the league average save percentage was .881 - while Patrick Roy in 2001 was outside the top-ten in save percentage in a season in which the league average was .903.
Clearly there is more at play here than Patrick Roy stopping 2771 shots, but when you run a cumulative report prior to adjusting save percentage, Hockey-Reference cannot differentiate between them. So if a goaltender has an elite season in a year in which the league average save percentage is low, he might as be having a less-than-elite season with the same raw save percentage in a year in which the league average save percentage is higher, because Hockey-Reference doesn’t know the difference.
In short, don’t do it. Ever.
Ever.
The following is an adjustment of Patrick Roy’s 1990 and 2001 seasons to the league average save percentage in 2011-12 of .914:
Patrick Roy (1990): .946 adjusted save percentage
Patrick Roy (2001): .924 adjusted save percentage
Night and day. These are the career numbers with the same adjustment to .914 standards:
Year
|
AS%
|
GPA
|
GPB
|
QPCT
|
+/-
|
Playoff
|
AS%
|
GPA
|
GPB
|
QPCT
|
+/-
Patrick Roy, 1986 | 91.5% | 26 | 18 | 59.1% | 8 | | 96.5% | 17 | 3 | 85.0% | 14
Patrick Roy, 1987 | 92.6% | 29 | 17 | 63.0% | 12 | | 90.7% | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1988 | 93.5% | 30 | 15 | 66.7% | 15 | | 92.4% | 4 | 3 | 57.1% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1989 | 94.4% | 33 | 14 | 70.2% | 19 | | 95.7% | 17 | 2 | 89.5% | 15
Patrick Roy, 1990 | 94.6% | 41 | 13 | 75.9% | 28 | | 94.5% | 7 | 4 | 63.6% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1991 | 93.5% | 32 | 16 | 66.7% | 16 | | 92.7% | 7 | 6 | 53.8% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1992 | 94.1% | 51 | 15 | 77.3% | 36 | | 93.0% | 5 | 6 | 45.5% | -1
Patrick Roy, 1993 | 92.3% | 36 | 26 | 58.1% | 10 | | 95.9% | 19 | 1 | 95.0% | 18
Patrick Roy, 1994 | 93.7% | 45 | 23 | 66.2% | 22 | | 95.0% | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1995 | 91.9% | 23 | 20 | 53.5% | 3 | | | | | |
Patrick Roy, 1996 | 92.4% | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 93.8% | 15 | 7 | 68.2% | 8
Patrick Roy, 1997 | 93.2% | 43 | 19 | 69.4% | 24 | | 94.1% | 11 | 6 | 64.7% | 5
Patrick Roy, 1998 | 92.4% | 35 | 30 | 53.8% | 5 | | 91.4% | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1999 | 92.3% | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 92.6% | 12 | 7 | 63.2% | 5
Patrick Roy, 2000 | 92.4% | 39 | 23 | 62.9% | 16 | | 93.8% | 12 | 5 | 70.6% | 7
Patrick Roy, 2001 | 92.4% | 36 | 24 | 60.0% | 12 | | 94.5% | 17 | 6 | 73.9% | 11
Patrick Roy, 2002 | 93.1% | 43 | 20 | 68.3% | 23 | | 91.5% | 12 | 9 | 57.1% | 3
Patrick Roy, 2003 | 92.6% | 41 | 22 | 65.1% | 19 | | 91.5% | 3 | 4 | 42.9% | -1
| | | | | | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 1991 | 94.3% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1 | | 95.2% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1992 | 92.0% | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4 | | 91.2% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1993 | 92.5% | 16 | 12 | 57.1% | 4 | | 99.0% | 1 | 0 | 100.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1994 | 95.0% | 42 | 15 | 73.7% | 27 | | 97.0% | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Dominik Hasek, 1995 | 94.4% | 30 | 11 | 73.2% | 19 | | 87.5% | 1 | 4 | 20.0% | -3
Dominik Hasek, 1996 | 93.6% | 40 | 19 | 67.8% | 21 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 1997 | 93.9% | 49 | 19 | 72.1% | 30 | | 93.6% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1998 | 94.0% | 47 | 25 | 65.3% | 22 | | 94.6% | 12 | 3 | 80.0% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 1999 | 94.3% | 50 | 14 | 78.1% | 36 | | 94.5% | 14 | 5 | 73.7% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 2000 | 92.9% | 22 | 13 | 62.9% | 9 | | 92.9% | 3 | 2 | 60.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 2001 | 93.2% | 39 | 27 | 59.1% | 12 | | 92.8% | 9 | 3 | 75.0% | 6
Dominik Hasek, 2002 | 92.1% | 37 | 28 | 56.9% | 9 | | 92.6% | 15 | 8 | 65.2% | 7
Dominik Hasek, 2004 | 91.0% | 8 | 6 | 57.1% | 2 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2006 | 93.8% | 31 | 12 | 72.1% | 19 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2007 | 92.2% | 31 | 25 | 55.4% | 6 | | 93.3% | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4
Dominik Hasek, 2008 | 90.7% | 18 | 23 | 43.9% | -5 | | 89.3% | 2 | 2 | 50.0% | 0
Career
|
AS%
|
GPA
|
GPB
|
QPCT
|
+/-
Patrick Roy, Regular Season | 93.0% | 661 | 359 | 64.8% | 302
Dominik Hasek, Regular Season | 93.4% | 473 | 257 | 64.8% | 216
Career
|
AS%
|
GPA
|
GPB
|
QPCT
|
+/-
Patrick Roy, Playoff | 93.9% | 169 | 77 | 68.7% | 92
Dominik Hasek, Playoff | 93.5% | 79 | 39 | 66.9% | 40
Career
|
AS%
|
GPA
|
GPB
|
QPCT
|
+/-
Patrick Roy, Cumulative | 93.1% | 830 | 436 | 65.6% | 394
Dominik Hasek, Cumulative | 93.4% | 552 | 296 | 65.1% | 256
Top Adjusted Regular Seasons
.950: Dominik Hasek, 1994
.946: Patrick Roy, 1990
.944: Patrick Roy, 1989
.944: Dominik Hasek, 1995
.943: Dominik Hasek, 1999
.941: Patrick Roy, 1992
.940: Dominik Hasek, 1998
.939: Dominik Hasek, 1997
.938: Dominik Hasek, 2006
.937: Patrick Roy, 1994
.936: Dominik Hasek, 1996
.935: Patrick Roy, 1988
.935: Patrick Roy, 1991
.932: Patrick Roy, 1997
.932: Dominik Hasek, 2001
.931: Patrick Roy, 2002
.930: Henrik Lundqvist, 2012 - Measuring Stick
Top Adjusted Playoffs; Opponent’s Rank in Offense
.970: Dominik Hasek, 1994 (7 games); 2
.965: Patrick Roy, 1986 (20 games); 2, 5, 12, 20
.959: Patrick Roy, 1993 (20 games); 3, 5, 6, 7
.957: Patrick Roy, 1989 (19 games); 2, 8, 11, 14
.950: Patrick Roy, 1994 (6 games); 8
.946: Jonathan Quick, 2012 (20 games); 4, 11, 17, 22 - Measuring Stick
.946: Dominik Hasek, 1998 (15 games); 4, 5, 13
.945: Patrick Roy, 2001 (23 games); 1, 6, 8, 12
.945: Patrick Roy, 1990 (11 games); 11, 14
.945: Dominik Hasek, 1999 (19 games); 1, 5, 8, 13
.941: Patrick Roy, 1997 (17 games); 6, 8, 20
.938: Patrick Roy, 2000 (17 games); 1, 12, 21
.938: Patrick Roy, 1996 (22 games); 3, 6, 8, 12
.933: Dominik Hasek, 2007 (18 games); 6, 7, 8
.930: Patrick Roy, 1992 (11 games); 13, 19
.939: Patrick Roy’s Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage
.935: Dominik Hasek’s Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage
.934: Dominik Hasek’s Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage
.930: Patrick Roy’s Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage
Not surprisingly, Dominik Hasek comes ahead in adjusted save percentage in the regular season by .4%, and Patrick Roy comes ahead in adjusted save percentage in the playoffs by .4%. How you choose to judge them based upon adjusted save percentage depends on how you personally weight the regular season against the playoffs. If you give them the same weight, it’s a coin-flip. If you lean playoffs, it’s Patrick Roy. If you are like GuineaPig and draw no separation between a playoff game and a regular season game, the cumulative lead Dominik Hasek has over Patrick Roy is .934 to .931 with a difference of 422 games.
Level of Competition
Stop me if you’ve heard this one: “Dominik Hasek’s top seasons are more impressive than Patrick Roy’s top seasons because they came against greater competition.â€
And it sounds reasonable when you consider how many HOF goaltenders were playing from 1994-1999. But really, such a statement is akin to saying that “Corey Perry’s Richard and Hart season was impressive because it came against Crosby, Ovechkin, Stamkos, and Malkin.†Off the top of our heads, we all know that Crosby and Malkin were hurt, Ovechkin was in the beginning stages of a career slump, and Stamkos was just getting warmed up. They’re excellent marquee names though. Also excellent marquee names: Roy, Brodeur, Belfour, and Joseph - the goalies often cited as Hasek’s competition for save percentage titles from 1994-1999. But not unlike Corey Perry in 2011, the marquee names of Hasek’s era weren’t his perpetual competition. In fact, in the six seasons in which Hasek led the league in save percentage, none of the aforementioned four goaltenders were the runner-up in the metric. But naturally, their names sound more impressive than Jocelyn Thibault (#2 in 1995), Daren Puppa (#2 in 1996), Jeff Hackett (#2 in 1997), Trevor Kidd (#2 in 1998), and Byron Dafoe(#2 in 1999). Tom Barrasso (#2 in 1998), Chris Osgood (#2 in 1995), and John Vanbiesbrouck (#2 in 1994) are the only runner-ups that would get more than a five-second conversation and a locked thread about the HOF.
No position sees more fluctuation at the top of the leader-boards than goaltending. You see, it’s not an issue of beating out a future HOFer for a Vezina, an All-Star selection, or a save percentage title; goaltenders compete against each other’s spike seasons for those accolades. It doesn’t matter if it’s Jon Casey or Ed Belfour or Grant Fuhr or Jeff Hackett; if they spike high in that year and separate themselves from the league-average goaltender, they’re the competition at the top - not the marquee names making their HOF argument in other seasons or in the playoffs.
The following is a breakdown of the top-five save percentages (adjusted) in the six seasons in which Dominik Hasek led the league, the four seasons in which Patrick Roy led the league, and the two seasons in which Patrick Roy was the runner-up.
1988 (.935): .933, .931, .931, .931
1989 (.944): .936, .935, .933, .929
1990 (.946): .939, .937, .937, .932
1991 (.935): .939, .932, .931, .928
1992 (.941): .937, .937, .937, .928
2002 (.931): .937, .927, .927, .926
1994 (.950): .944, .937, .934, .932
1995 (.944): .930, .930, .928, .927
1996 (.936): .934, .932, .930, .929
1997 (.939): .936, .935, .932, .928
1998 (.939): .930, .930, .928, .925
1999 (.943): .932, .931, .929, .929
Removing Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek, the five most difficult seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage in the above sample are: 1994, 1990, 1991, 1992, 2002. These were the seasons in which a goaltender other than Patrick Roy or Dominik Hasek spiked the highest compared to the league average goaltender. 1994 was easily the most difficult Vezina of the group, and Hasek deserves a giant pat on the back for keeping ahead of John Vanbiesbrouck - something that he and Roy would have only done twice in their careers (1994, 1995 for Hasek; 1989, 1990 for Roy). Mike Liut (1990), Ed Belfour (1991), Curtis Joseph and Bob Essensa (1992), and Jose Theodore (2002) - all four seasons being part of Patrick Roy’s sample - are the rest of the goaltenders comprising the five most difficult seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage.
The five easiest seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage in the above sample are: 1998, 1995, 1999, 1988, 1996. These were the seasons in which a goaltender other than Patrick Roy or Dominik Hasek spiked the lowest compared to the league average goaltender. Tom Barrasso and Trevor Kidd (1998), Jocelyn Thibault and Chris Osgood (1995), Byron Dafoe (1999), and Daren Puppa (1996) come from Dominik Hasek‘s part of the sample. Pete Peeters (1988) comes from Patrick Roy’s part of the sample.
Place #1
Hardest: 1994 (Hasek), 1990 (Roy), 1991 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 2002 (Roy)
Easiest: 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1988 (Roy), 1996 (Hasek)
Place #2
Hardest: 1994 (Hasek), 1990 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 1989 (Roy), 1997 (Hasek)
Easiest: 2002 (Roy), 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1988 (Roy)
Place #3
Hardest: 1990 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 1994 (Hasek), 1989 (Roy), 1997 (Hasek)
Easiest: 2002 (Roy), 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1996 (Hasek)
The lesson here is when looking at single season accolades like Vezinas, All Star selections, and save percentage titles, you can’t judge level of competition by the number of marquee names; you must look at the performances the competition provided in their spikes. Patrick Roy may have only placed second in save percentage in 1991 (.935) and 2002 (.931), but if he was facing Dominik Hasek’s highest level of competition in 1995 (.930) and 1998 (.930) instead of the Hart-nominated spikes of Ed Belfour (.939) and Jose Theodore (.937), maybe they aren’t second-place finishes.
It is arguable that given their spikes relative to the league average goaltender, Patrick Roy’s competition for save percentage titles was stronger.
You may have noticed that the above samples are missing one of Dominik Hasek’s Vezinas: 2001. Don’t be alarmed; here is a breakdown:
2001 (.932): .936, .933, .933, .932
I just don’t believe that his fifth-place finish in save percentage really fit within the spirit of the analysis. It wouldn’t have placed above any of Patrick Roy’s competition - and would have only placed above Dominik Hasek’s personal competition in 1995 and 1998. Much like competition, not all Vezinas are created equal.
Pressure Playoff Games
Hey, did you hear that Patrick Roy had a really bad Game 7 in 2002? Of course. He dropped the ball in a pressure situation (and not in the literal sense of dropping the ball in Game 6, hehe). But do you remember his other two Game 7s against Los Angeles and San Jose that same playoff (Hint: Both were shutouts)? The reason one stands out above the others is because Patrick Roy dominating a pressure game is old-hat; watching Patrick Roy being dominated in a pressure game is like seeing a double-rainbow.
But how rare is it, really? How well does Patrick Roy perform when his team is facing elimination? How well does Patrick Roy perform when his team is trailing in a series? And what about Dominik Hasek?
The following is a look at the games at or above the league average save percentage in a pressure playoff game.
Team Facing Elimination
Patrick Roy: 15 games at/above, 8 games below (65.2%)
Dominik Hasek: 8 games at/above, 5 games below (61.5%)
Team Trailing in the Series
Patrick Roy: 35 games at/above, 10 games below (77.7%)
Dominik Hasek: 15 games at/above, 13 games below (53.6%)
Given Hasek’s small sample size in elimination games, there is little difference between him and Patrick Roy in terms of their expected performance in an elimination game. Looking at their respective performances when trailing in a series is a completely different story. Dominik Hasek, who typically delivers a quality playoff game (66.9% - a figure even higher than his regular season average), falls to 53.6% once his team is backed into a corner.
When Patrick Roy’s team is down in a series, his fight or flight instinct kicks in and his already high percentage of quality playoff games (68.7% - higher than his regular season number, Hasek’s regular season number, and Hasek’s playoff number) skyrockets to 77.7%. For all the press he gets in regard to his overtime success (69.0% winning percentage to Hasek’s 51.7%), he is even more likely than that to deliver a quality game when trailing in a playoff series.
And That Is Just Using Save Percentage
There are more arguments to be made that have nothing to do with the measure of save percentage and its game-by-game application -
1. Reliability (Patrick Roy’s 1994 playoff v. Dominik Hasek’s 1997 playoff, 2004 season, 2006 season)
2. The aforementioned playoff overtime records
3. Leadership
4. The relative significance of international leagues, tournaments, and the 1985 Calder Cup
5. Respective responses to teammate competition (Brian Hayward, Ed Belfour, and Jimmy Waite)
6. Award counting, nominations, and the distribution of Hart votes in the Gretzky/Lemieux era
7. Team strategy and the defensive mindset
8. The playoff offenses of the 1986 and 1993 Montreal Canadiens and the 1998 and 1999 Buffalo Sabres
- and I’m sure there will be some wonderful arguments made in the future as we build towards the HOH list of top goaltenders (not to mention, a sequel thread containing some of those very topics that I am currently writing), but with save percentage often being cited as the single biggest argument for Dominik Hasek as the greatest goaltender of his era, I figured that a save percentage evaluation was the best place to start.
The following is a measurement of the number of games at or above the league average save percentage (excluding games in which they played less than a period of meaningful shutout relief hockey).
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: 661 games at/above, 359 games below
Playoffs: 169 games at/above, 77 games below
Cumulative: 830 games at/above, 436 games below
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: 473 games at/above, 257 games below
Playoffs: 79 games at/above, 39 games below
Cumulative: 552 games at/above, 296 games below
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: Net contribution of +302
Playoffs: Net contribution of +92
Cumulative: Net contribution of +394
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: Net contribution of +216
Playoffs: Net contribution of +40
Cumulative: Net contribution of +256
Patrick Roy
Regular Season: 64.8% of games at/above
Playoffs: 68.7% of games at/above
Cumulative: 65.6% of games at/above
Dominik Hasek
Regular Season: 64.8% of games at/above
Playoffs: 66.9% of games at/above
Cumulative: 65.1% of games at/above
Patrick Roy is marginally more likely to produce at or above the league average save percentage in the regular season, but the difference there is negligible. Roy’s lead in terms of producing a game at or above the league average save percentage in the post-season is bigger. With Roy leading by a razor-thin margin in the regular season and having a noticeable lead in the playoffs, he leads the cumulative figure. Overall throughout their careers, Patrick Roy was less likely than Dominik Hasek to produce a below-average game in the regular season or the playoffs.
More than that, Patrick Roy played at this higher rate for a greater number of games than Dominik Hasek. In his 1020 regular season games (again, I am not counting meaningless relief performances), Roy produced an overall contribution of +302 (the difference between the number of games played at or above the league average save percentage and the number of games played below that same threshold). Hasek produced an overall contribution of +216 in the regular season - meaning that Hasek’s net contribution of quality games was roughly 71.5% that of Patrick Roy’s net contribution. In the playoffs, Hasek’s net contribution of quality games is 43.5% that of Patrick Roy’s. In the cumulative sense, Hasek’s net contribution of quality games is 65.0% that of Patrick Roy’s.
Conclusion - Dominik Hasek was more likely to produce a below-average game in the regular season, playoffs, and in the cumulative sense. Patrick Roy’s percentage of quality games is higher, as is the amount of games in which he played - creating a large gap in terms of their net contribution of quality games.
Adjusted Save Percentage
One of the biggest problems with save percentage is that people often misuse it. While most HOHers can rightfully acknowledge that the league average save percentage is different now than it was in 1985-86 (and that there is a night-and-day difference between a .914 goaltender in 2012 and a .914 goaltender in 1986), there have been several instances of HOHers cumulating save percentage from 1994 through 2002 and expecting it to be an irrefutable summation of Roy v. Hasek.
I ask that you stop and consider exactly what is wrong with running this type of spreadsheet on Hockey-Reference.
If you guessed that the problem is that Hockey-Reference gives equal weight to a save in 1994 as it does to a save in 2002, then you are correct. If save percentage is not adjusted prior to running a cumulative report, goaltenders with peak levels of play in seasons in which the league average save percentage is low are punished. Here is an example:
Patrick Roy (1990): .912 save percentage on 1524 shots
Patrick Roy (2001): .913 save percentage on 1513 shots
Running an unadjusted cumulative report on Patrick Roy’s career will regard these seasons as near equals (with slight preference to 2001). The issue with this is that Patrick Roy in 1990 was an elite goaltender, leading a league in which the league average save percentage was .881 - while Patrick Roy in 2001 was outside the top-ten in save percentage in a season in which the league average was .903.
Clearly there is more at play here than Patrick Roy stopping 2771 shots, but when you run a cumulative report prior to adjusting save percentage, Hockey-Reference cannot differentiate between them. So if a goaltender has an elite season in a year in which the league average save percentage is low, he might as be having a less-than-elite season with the same raw save percentage in a year in which the league average save percentage is higher, because Hockey-Reference doesn’t know the difference.
In short, don’t do it. Ever.
Ever.
The following is an adjustment of Patrick Roy’s 1990 and 2001 seasons to the league average save percentage in 2011-12 of .914:
Patrick Roy (1990): .946 adjusted save percentage
Patrick Roy (2001): .924 adjusted save percentage
Night and day. These are the career numbers with the same adjustment to .914 standards:
Patrick Roy, 1986 | 91.5% | 26 | 18 | 59.1% | 8 | | 96.5% | 17 | 3 | 85.0% | 14
Patrick Roy, 1987 | 92.6% | 29 | 17 | 63.0% | 12 | | 90.7% | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1988 | 93.5% | 30 | 15 | 66.7% | 15 | | 92.4% | 4 | 3 | 57.1% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1989 | 94.4% | 33 | 14 | 70.2% | 19 | | 95.7% | 17 | 2 | 89.5% | 15
Patrick Roy, 1990 | 94.6% | 41 | 13 | 75.9% | 28 | | 94.5% | 7 | 4 | 63.6% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1991 | 93.5% | 32 | 16 | 66.7% | 16 | | 92.7% | 7 | 6 | 53.8% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1992 | 94.1% | 51 | 15 | 77.3% | 36 | | 93.0% | 5 | 6 | 45.5% | -1
Patrick Roy, 1993 | 92.3% | 36 | 26 | 58.1% | 10 | | 95.9% | 19 | 1 | 95.0% | 18
Patrick Roy, 1994 | 93.7% | 45 | 23 | 66.2% | 22 | | 95.0% | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1995 | 91.9% | 23 | 20 | 53.5% | 3 | | | | | |
Patrick Roy, 1996 | 92.4% | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 93.8% | 15 | 7 | 68.2% | 8
Patrick Roy, 1997 | 93.2% | 43 | 19 | 69.4% | 24 | | 94.1% | 11 | 6 | 64.7% | 5
Patrick Roy, 1998 | 92.4% | 35 | 30 | 53.8% | 5 | | 91.4% | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1999 | 92.3% | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 92.6% | 12 | 7 | 63.2% | 5
Patrick Roy, 2000 | 92.4% | 39 | 23 | 62.9% | 16 | | 93.8% | 12 | 5 | 70.6% | 7
Patrick Roy, 2001 | 92.4% | 36 | 24 | 60.0% | 12 | | 94.5% | 17 | 6 | 73.9% | 11
Patrick Roy, 2002 | 93.1% | 43 | 20 | 68.3% | 23 | | 91.5% | 12 | 9 | 57.1% | 3
Patrick Roy, 2003 | 92.6% | 41 | 22 | 65.1% | 19 | | 91.5% | 3 | 4 | 42.9% | -1
| | | | | | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 1991 | 94.3% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1 | | 95.2% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1992 | 92.0% | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4 | | 91.2% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1993 | 92.5% | 16 | 12 | 57.1% | 4 | | 99.0% | 1 | 0 | 100.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1994 | 95.0% | 42 | 15 | 73.7% | 27 | | 97.0% | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Dominik Hasek, 1995 | 94.4% | 30 | 11 | 73.2% | 19 | | 87.5% | 1 | 4 | 20.0% | -3
Dominik Hasek, 1996 | 93.6% | 40 | 19 | 67.8% | 21 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 1997 | 93.9% | 49 | 19 | 72.1% | 30 | | 93.6% | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1998 | 94.0% | 47 | 25 | 65.3% | 22 | | 94.6% | 12 | 3 | 80.0% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 1999 | 94.3% | 50 | 14 | 78.1% | 36 | | 94.5% | 14 | 5 | 73.7% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 2000 | 92.9% | 22 | 13 | 62.9% | 9 | | 92.9% | 3 | 2 | 60.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 2001 | 93.2% | 39 | 27 | 59.1% | 12 | | 92.8% | 9 | 3 | 75.0% | 6
Dominik Hasek, 2002 | 92.1% | 37 | 28 | 56.9% | 9 | | 92.6% | 15 | 8 | 65.2% | 7
Dominik Hasek, 2004 | 91.0% | 8 | 6 | 57.1% | 2 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2006 | 93.8% | 31 | 12 | 72.1% | 19 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2007 | 92.2% | 31 | 25 | 55.4% | 6 | | 93.3% | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4
Dominik Hasek, 2008 | 90.7% | 18 | 23 | 43.9% | -5 | | 89.3% | 2 | 2 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, Regular Season | 93.0% | 661 | 359 | 64.8% | 302
Dominik Hasek, Regular Season | 93.4% | 473 | 257 | 64.8% | 216
Patrick Roy, Playoff | 93.9% | 169 | 77 | 68.7% | 92
Dominik Hasek, Playoff | 93.5% | 79 | 39 | 66.9% | 40
Patrick Roy, Cumulative | 93.1% | 830 | 436 | 65.6% | 394
Dominik Hasek, Cumulative | 93.4% | 552 | 296 | 65.1% | 256
Top Adjusted Regular Seasons
.950: Dominik Hasek, 1994
.946: Patrick Roy, 1990
.944: Patrick Roy, 1989
.944: Dominik Hasek, 1995
.943: Dominik Hasek, 1999
.941: Patrick Roy, 1992
.940: Dominik Hasek, 1998
.939: Dominik Hasek, 1997
.938: Dominik Hasek, 2006
.937: Patrick Roy, 1994
.936: Dominik Hasek, 1996
.935: Patrick Roy, 1988
.935: Patrick Roy, 1991
.932: Patrick Roy, 1997
.932: Dominik Hasek, 2001
.931: Patrick Roy, 2002
.930: Henrik Lundqvist, 2012 - Measuring Stick
Top Adjusted Playoffs; Opponent’s Rank in Offense
.970: Dominik Hasek, 1994 (7 games); 2
.965: Patrick Roy, 1986 (20 games); 2, 5, 12, 20
.959: Patrick Roy, 1993 (20 games); 3, 5, 6, 7
.957: Patrick Roy, 1989 (19 games); 2, 8, 11, 14
.950: Patrick Roy, 1994 (6 games); 8
.946: Jonathan Quick, 2012 (20 games); 4, 11, 17, 22 - Measuring Stick
.946: Dominik Hasek, 1998 (15 games); 4, 5, 13
.945: Patrick Roy, 2001 (23 games); 1, 6, 8, 12
.945: Patrick Roy, 1990 (11 games); 11, 14
.945: Dominik Hasek, 1999 (19 games); 1, 5, 8, 13
.941: Patrick Roy, 1997 (17 games); 6, 8, 20
.938: Patrick Roy, 2000 (17 games); 1, 12, 21
.938: Patrick Roy, 1996 (22 games); 3, 6, 8, 12
.933: Dominik Hasek, 2007 (18 games); 6, 7, 8
.930: Patrick Roy, 1992 (11 games); 13, 19
.939: Patrick Roy’s Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage
.935: Dominik Hasek’s Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage
.934: Dominik Hasek’s Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage
.930: Patrick Roy’s Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage
Not surprisingly, Dominik Hasek comes ahead in adjusted save percentage in the regular season by .4%, and Patrick Roy comes ahead in adjusted save percentage in the playoffs by .4%. How you choose to judge them based upon adjusted save percentage depends on how you personally weight the regular season against the playoffs. If you give them the same weight, it’s a coin-flip. If you lean playoffs, it’s Patrick Roy. If you are like GuineaPig and draw no separation between a playoff game and a regular season game, the cumulative lead Dominik Hasek has over Patrick Roy is .934 to .931 with a difference of 422 games.
Level of Competition
Stop me if you’ve heard this one: “Dominik Hasek’s top seasons are more impressive than Patrick Roy’s top seasons because they came against greater competition.â€
And it sounds reasonable when you consider how many HOF goaltenders were playing from 1994-1999. But really, such a statement is akin to saying that “Corey Perry’s Richard and Hart season was impressive because it came against Crosby, Ovechkin, Stamkos, and Malkin.†Off the top of our heads, we all know that Crosby and Malkin were hurt, Ovechkin was in the beginning stages of a career slump, and Stamkos was just getting warmed up. They’re excellent marquee names though. Also excellent marquee names: Roy, Brodeur, Belfour, and Joseph - the goalies often cited as Hasek’s competition for save percentage titles from 1994-1999. But not unlike Corey Perry in 2011, the marquee names of Hasek’s era weren’t his perpetual competition. In fact, in the six seasons in which Hasek led the league in save percentage, none of the aforementioned four goaltenders were the runner-up in the metric. But naturally, their names sound more impressive than Jocelyn Thibault (#2 in 1995), Daren Puppa (#2 in 1996), Jeff Hackett (#2 in 1997), Trevor Kidd (#2 in 1998), and Byron Dafoe(#2 in 1999). Tom Barrasso (#2 in 1998), Chris Osgood (#2 in 1995), and John Vanbiesbrouck (#2 in 1994) are the only runner-ups that would get more than a five-second conversation and a locked thread about the HOF.
No position sees more fluctuation at the top of the leader-boards than goaltending. You see, it’s not an issue of beating out a future HOFer for a Vezina, an All-Star selection, or a save percentage title; goaltenders compete against each other’s spike seasons for those accolades. It doesn’t matter if it’s Jon Casey or Ed Belfour or Grant Fuhr or Jeff Hackett; if they spike high in that year and separate themselves from the league-average goaltender, they’re the competition at the top - not the marquee names making their HOF argument in other seasons or in the playoffs.
The following is a breakdown of the top-five save percentages (adjusted) in the six seasons in which Dominik Hasek led the league, the four seasons in which Patrick Roy led the league, and the two seasons in which Patrick Roy was the runner-up.
1988 (.935): .933, .931, .931, .931
1989 (.944): .936, .935, .933, .929
1990 (.946): .939, .937, .937, .932
1991 (.935): .939, .932, .931, .928
1992 (.941): .937, .937, .937, .928
2002 (.931): .937, .927, .927, .926
1994 (.950): .944, .937, .934, .932
1995 (.944): .930, .930, .928, .927
1996 (.936): .934, .932, .930, .929
1997 (.939): .936, .935, .932, .928
1998 (.939): .930, .930, .928, .925
1999 (.943): .932, .931, .929, .929
Removing Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek, the five most difficult seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage in the above sample are: 1994, 1990, 1991, 1992, 2002. These were the seasons in which a goaltender other than Patrick Roy or Dominik Hasek spiked the highest compared to the league average goaltender. 1994 was easily the most difficult Vezina of the group, and Hasek deserves a giant pat on the back for keeping ahead of John Vanbiesbrouck - something that he and Roy would have only done twice in their careers (1994, 1995 for Hasek; 1989, 1990 for Roy). Mike Liut (1990), Ed Belfour (1991), Curtis Joseph and Bob Essensa (1992), and Jose Theodore (2002) - all four seasons being part of Patrick Roy’s sample - are the rest of the goaltenders comprising the five most difficult seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage.
The five easiest seasons for a goaltender to lead the league in save percentage in the above sample are: 1998, 1995, 1999, 1988, 1996. These were the seasons in which a goaltender other than Patrick Roy or Dominik Hasek spiked the lowest compared to the league average goaltender. Tom Barrasso and Trevor Kidd (1998), Jocelyn Thibault and Chris Osgood (1995), Byron Dafoe (1999), and Daren Puppa (1996) come from Dominik Hasek‘s part of the sample. Pete Peeters (1988) comes from Patrick Roy’s part of the sample.
Place #1
Hardest: 1994 (Hasek), 1990 (Roy), 1991 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 2002 (Roy)
Easiest: 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1988 (Roy), 1996 (Hasek)
Place #2
Hardest: 1994 (Hasek), 1990 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 1989 (Roy), 1997 (Hasek)
Easiest: 2002 (Roy), 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1988 (Roy)
Place #3
Hardest: 1990 (Roy), 1992 (Roy), 1994 (Hasek), 1989 (Roy), 1997 (Hasek)
Easiest: 2002 (Roy), 1998 (Hasek), 1995 (Hasek), 1999 (Hasek), 1996 (Hasek)
The lesson here is when looking at single season accolades like Vezinas, All Star selections, and save percentage titles, you can’t judge level of competition by the number of marquee names; you must look at the performances the competition provided in their spikes. Patrick Roy may have only placed second in save percentage in 1991 (.935) and 2002 (.931), but if he was facing Dominik Hasek’s highest level of competition in 1995 (.930) and 1998 (.930) instead of the Hart-nominated spikes of Ed Belfour (.939) and Jose Theodore (.937), maybe they aren’t second-place finishes.
It is arguable that given their spikes relative to the league average goaltender, Patrick Roy’s competition for save percentage titles was stronger.
You may have noticed that the above samples are missing one of Dominik Hasek’s Vezinas: 2001. Don’t be alarmed; here is a breakdown:
2001 (.932): .936, .933, .933, .932
I just don’t believe that his fifth-place finish in save percentage really fit within the spirit of the analysis. It wouldn’t have placed above any of Patrick Roy’s competition - and would have only placed above Dominik Hasek’s personal competition in 1995 and 1998. Much like competition, not all Vezinas are created equal.
Pressure Playoff Games
Hey, did you hear that Patrick Roy had a really bad Game 7 in 2002? Of course. He dropped the ball in a pressure situation (and not in the literal sense of dropping the ball in Game 6, hehe). But do you remember his other two Game 7s against Los Angeles and San Jose that same playoff (Hint: Both were shutouts)? The reason one stands out above the others is because Patrick Roy dominating a pressure game is old-hat; watching Patrick Roy being dominated in a pressure game is like seeing a double-rainbow.
But how rare is it, really? How well does Patrick Roy perform when his team is facing elimination? How well does Patrick Roy perform when his team is trailing in a series? And what about Dominik Hasek?
The following is a look at the games at or above the league average save percentage in a pressure playoff game.
Team Facing Elimination
Patrick Roy: 15 games at/above, 8 games below (65.2%)
Dominik Hasek: 8 games at/above, 5 games below (61.5%)
Team Trailing in the Series
Patrick Roy: 35 games at/above, 10 games below (77.7%)
Dominik Hasek: 15 games at/above, 13 games below (53.6%)
Given Hasek’s small sample size in elimination games, there is little difference between him and Patrick Roy in terms of their expected performance in an elimination game. Looking at their respective performances when trailing in a series is a completely different story. Dominik Hasek, who typically delivers a quality playoff game (66.9% - a figure even higher than his regular season average), falls to 53.6% once his team is backed into a corner.
When Patrick Roy’s team is down in a series, his fight or flight instinct kicks in and his already high percentage of quality playoff games (68.7% - higher than his regular season number, Hasek’s regular season number, and Hasek’s playoff number) skyrockets to 77.7%. For all the press he gets in regard to his overtime success (69.0% winning percentage to Hasek’s 51.7%), he is even more likely than that to deliver a quality game when trailing in a playoff series.
And That Is Just Using Save Percentage
There are more arguments to be made that have nothing to do with the measure of save percentage and its game-by-game application -
1. Reliability (Patrick Roy’s 1994 playoff v. Dominik Hasek’s 1997 playoff, 2004 season, 2006 season)
2. The aforementioned playoff overtime records
3. Leadership
4. The relative significance of international leagues, tournaments, and the 1985 Calder Cup
5. Respective responses to teammate competition (Brian Hayward, Ed Belfour, and Jimmy Waite)
6. Award counting, nominations, and the distribution of Hart votes in the Gretzky/Lemieux era
7. Team strategy and the defensive mindset
8. The playoff offenses of the 1986 and 1993 Montreal Canadiens and the 1998 and 1999 Buffalo Sabres
- and I’m sure there will be some wonderful arguments made in the future as we build towards the HOH list of top goaltenders (not to mention, a sequel thread containing some of those very topics that I am currently writing), but with save percentage often being cited as the single biggest argument for Dominik Hasek as the greatest goaltender of his era, I figured that a save percentage evaluation was the best place to start.
