On the other hand - all three of the last cup winning goalies have been kind of garbage in this playoffs.
Vasi got lit the f*** up.
Bob straight up lost Florida the first two games of that Toronto series playing like a complete sieve, although he likely won them game 4.
Idk, having watched a lot of playoff hockey, that chart matches the eye test pretty well to me. Perhaps the take away is less "we shouldn't trust stats" and more "goaltenders are too fickle to trust as your anchor for 8+ years"?
Which kind of feels like conventional wisdom to me.
Fair enough. I haven't been following the other series at all.
There is a third and fourth possibility too:
3) A goalie, any goalie, can only do so much, and related
4) Over a small sample of time, discrete events skew the data way too much... what is a breakaway worth in GSAA, 0.5ish?? You get a couple more than the other guy, you get one from McD vs hmmm... 2023 Connor Brown.. the GSAA can't tell the difference, but as a goalie you certainly can.
Anyway... I personally feel those big-name goalies ARE worth it, and do generally make a difference... short-term stats be damned (though Helly now has 3 playoffs of hot garbage, so HE may be a true flake in the playoff pressure).
However if you take the "too fickle to trust as your anchor" perspective, then I have trouble squaring that with your anti-Skinner lamentations. If you can't trust an $8M, 10-year, multi-Vezina guy, shouldn't we expect the $2.6M 4-season, never-will-be-Vezina guy to be even more Jekkyl and Hyde on a game to game basis?
Holland by the way... the former goalie who wouldn't invest in goaltending would agree with you by the way... I think he was quoted as such... and you can see it (generally) in who he employed during playoff years in Detroit.... taking the perspective that it was better to invest in superstar forwards and D rather than an upgrade on Osgood or Legacy or whomever. I fear more of the same from Bowman (Crawford also never a big name guy).