How much does a goalie impact wins and losses.

[Goalie Guru*]

Bernie Parent before joining the Flyers in 1973 never had a winning season in the NHL in 7 tries. His NHL totals before joining Philly were...

94-138-64

The season immediately before joining the Flyers he played in the WHA and went...

33-28-0

Then with Philly in 2 seasons he went...

47-13-12 & 44-14-10

He was injured and missed 70 games the following season and the team in his absence went...

45-11-13

Is there any formula that we can apply to determine how much the goalie impacts wins and losses or the value of the goaltender?

Parent struggled to win a whole lot before Philly and when he went down with injury his team did as well without him. If Philly stepped up their play in Parents absence, than how much does the goalie really play a part?

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

I can't tell if your question is general, or if it is about Parent in particular.

In general, goaltending is the most important position in the game. But not more important than all other positions combined, as anyone who focuses on the wins statistic as a method of evaluation implicitly does. I'd say it's about 18%. Which is huge because the other 18 skaters on the team share the other 82% of the credit, an average of about 4.5% each.

As it applies to Parent, he had tons to do with Philly's success and they had a lot to do with his. He may not have ever had a winning season before 1974, but he was always in the league sv% leaders. In simple terms, he was always doing his part but he didn't have good teams in front of him. During the BSB days, he was still doing his part (stats indicate even more) but the team in front of him was good, and this perfect storm led to two Stanley Cup victories.

Parent's sv% differential compared to his backups over his time with Philly is huge - higher than any longtime starting goalie of a franchise has seen except for Dominik Hasek.

 

[Goalie Guru*]

I can't tell if your question is general, or if it is about Parent in particular.

In general, goaltending is the most important position in the game. But not more important than all other positions combined, as anyone who focuses on the wins statistic as a method of evaluation implicitly does. I'd say it's about 18%. Which is huge because the other 18 skaters on the team share the other 82% of the credit, an average of about 4.5% each.

As it applies to Parent, he had tons to do with Philly's success and they had a lot to do with his. He may not have ever had a winning season before 1974, but he was always in the league sv% leaders. In simple terms, he was always doing his part but he didn't have good teams in front of him. During the BSB days, he was still doing his part (stats indicate even more) but the team in front of him was good, and this perfect storm led to two Stanley Cup victories.

Parent's sv% differential compared to his backups over his time with Philly is huge - higher than any longtime starting goalie of a franchise has seen except for Dominik Hasek.

Great comment and well thought out reply with stats and educated opinions.

18% is fairly close to what I had.

 

[Ensane]

I won't render an opinion, since I'm not well schooled in statistics, but a few have made bold claims that in the long run, a goaltender has a negligible effect on the success of a club. When I saw this topic, I figured I'd post the studies:
Study shows little difference between good, great NHL goalies
"Stumbling on Wins:" is there really little difference between goalies?
- this one is actually a post in response to the claims made in the book Stumbling on Wins.

Interesting reads. Draw your own conclusions.

EDIT: The second link is broken. Switch the "r" and "e" in Sabremetric in the URL, and it will work.

 

[Goalie Guru*]

I won't render an opinion, since I'm not well schooled in statistics, but a few have made bold claims that in the long run, a goaltender has a negligible effect on the success of a club. When I saw this topic, I figured I'd post the studies:
Study shows little difference between good, great NHL goalies
"Stumbling on Wins:" is there really little difference between goalies?
- this one is actually a post in response to the claims made in the book Stumbling on Wins.

Interesting reads. Draw your own conclusions.

Great reads. Really informative.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

I won't render an opinion, since I'm not well schooled in statistics, but a few have made bold claims that in the long run, a goaltender has a negligible effect on the success of a club. When I saw this topic, I figured I'd post the studies:
Study shows little difference between good, great NHL goalies
"Stumbling on Wins:" is there really little difference between goalies?
- this one is actually a post in response to the claims made in the book Stumbling on Wins.

Interesting reads. Draw your own conclusions.

Looks like an indictment of Brodeur, which I tend to agree with to a degree, but when a set of statistics point to Brodeur being only responsible for •two• extra wins on average per season over a typical goalie, I have a hard time taking them too seriously - in this case, based solely on SV%, which I agree is the most important stat in measuring a goalie's individual performance, but far from the only thing that needs to be considered.

The 2nd link points to a dead end for me.

 

[Jumptheshark]

oilers cup run a few years ago is an example of how ONE goalie can change a team

this thread needs more Hardy Astrom

 

[Derick*]

I can't tell if your question is general, or if it is about Parent in particular.

In general, goaltending is the most important position in the game. But not more important than all other positions combined, as anyone who focuses on the wins statistic as a method of evaluation implicitly does. I'd say it's about 18%. Which is huge because the other 18 skaters on the team share the other 82% of the credit, an average of about 4.5% each.

As it applies to Parent, he had tons to do with Philly's success and they had a lot to do with his. He may not have ever had a winning season before 1974, but he was always in the league sv% leaders. In simple terms, he was always doing his part but he didn't have good teams in front of him. During the BSB days, he was still doing his part (stats indicate even more) but the team in front of him was good, and this perfect storm led to two Stanley Cup victories.

Parent's sv% differential compared to his backups over his time with Philly is huge - higher than any longtime starting goalie of a franchise has seen except for Dominik Hasek.

Goaltending may be the least important position and the goaltender the most important player.

I think part of the reason goaltending seems so much more important than it is, is that the other team's shooting percentage (which of course equals your goalie's save percentage) is so important. There's a huge correlation between a goalie's save percentage in any particular game and who wins. But that represents luck more than goaltending. Every goalie varies hugely in save percentage from game to game and in the longrun they all return to the mean, and the mean is relatively small.

 

[seventieslord]

Goaltending may be the least important position and the goaltender the most important player.

I think part of the reason goaltending seems so much more important than it is, is that the other team's shooting percentage (which of course equals your goalie's save percentage) is so important. There's a huge correlation between a goalie's save percentage in any particular game and who wins. But that represents luck more than goaltending. Every goalie varies hugely in save percentage from game to game and in the longrun they all return to the mean, and the mean is relatively small.

The difference between a good goalie and a bad one might be 4 save percentage points. That might not sound like a lot, but flip it around and it's the difference between allowing 8% of shots, and 12%.

12 is 50% more than 8.

 

[Derick*]

The difference between a good goalie and a bad one might be 4 save percentage points. That might not sound like a lot, but flip it around and it's the difference between allowing 8% of shots, and 12%.

12 is 50% more than 8.

You're right that save percentages look like a smaller difference than they are because it's the inverse of the real number, percentage of shots in which a goals are allowed.

But your example is between a .880 and a .920 save percentage, which isn't a realistic disparity. No goalie is that low over the course of several seasons and few are that high.

Looking at the top 30 goalies in games played since the lockout, the highest save percentage over that time is .922 and the lowest is .891, which is only 40% more goals. Take Leafs goalies out of the picture, and the lowest is .900, which is only 28% more goals.

Throw in the effect team has on save percentage and I'd say that at any particular time the 30th best goalie in the league only lets in about 20-25% more goals than the best if both are playing for the same team.

 

[seventieslord]

You're right that save percentages look like a smaller difference than they are because it's the inverse of the real number, percentage of shots in which a goals are allowed.

But your example is between a .880 and a .920 save percentage, which isn't a realistic disparity. No goalie is that low over the course of several seasons and few are that high.

Looking at the top 30 goalies in games played since the lockout, the highest save percentage over that time is .922 and the lowest is .891, which is only 40% more goals. Take Leafs goalies out of the picture, and the lowest is .900, which is only 28% more goals.

Throw in the effect team has on save percentage and I'd say that at any particular time the 30th best goalie in the league only lets in about 20-25% more goals than the best if both are playing for the same team.

I'm not sure I agree with all that minimization of the original figure, bit 20-25% is still a huge difference especially when we're now talking about five year sample sizes.

 

[Starchild74]

Goalies impact a teams win more then anyone and they impact the teams loss more then anyone

It is the most important position in hockey. A great goalie will give an average team a chance to win every night. An average goalie will cause a great team to lose games. No position is talked about more in hockey then the goalie.

In the last couple years there have been average goalies that have either won cups or led their teams to the Stanley Cup. Although most of the times the winning team has one of the best goalies. However despite that nothing is more important then a hot goalie

The best way to show how a goalie can truly change an outcome of a teams future is like this

Ask the Montreal Canadiens how well Patrick Roy did in 1993. He pretty much carried the Canadiens and holds the record for most concescutive Stanley Cup overtime wins.

Ask the Buffalo Sabres. Without Hasek the Sabres don't even make the playoffs most times and definately don't get to the Stanley Cup final in 1999.

Ask the Boston Bruins who had to play against Ken Dryden all those years always making the big save when needed

Billy Smith the most consecutive series wins by a goalie in the Playoffs. The Islanders were a great team but how many cups would they have won without the best money goalie ever

The Philadelphia Flyers who never had a star goalie one that could win the big game and not let in those weak goals. I mean How many years had the Flyers been doing it all without a number 1 goalie. How many times did Hextall(His second go stint in Philly), Chechmanek, Boucher etc... leave in a bad goal at the wrong time

Ask the Ottawa Senators about Patrick Lalime. It wasn't that he was a bad goalie I mean he playwed decent in the playoffs except for one thing. Always leaving up that bad goal. How many years when the Senators were playing the Leafs and were acutally outplaying them or looked like they could win, and then Lalime would leave in that bad goal

Everyone in Vancouver remembers Dan Cloutier. How it looked like they were going to beat the Red Wings and Cloutier lets in that bad goal and changes the series

I don't like bringing up Salo but even though he was the winning goalie when they won years before his one bad goal totally ruined Sweden in 2002

In the end every one who has watched hockey for many years will remember the big saves that either changed the game or kept their team in it. Everyone will remember that bad goal that a goalie gave up that totally ruined the team's chances of winning.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Goalies impact a teams win more then anyone and they impact the teams loss more then anyone

It is the most important position in hockey. A great goalie will give an average team a chance to win every night. An average goalie will cause a great team to lose games. No position is talked about more in hockey then the goalie.

In the last couple years there have been average goalies that have either won cups or led their teams to the Stanley Cup. Although most of the times the winning team has one of the best goalies. However despite that nothing is more important then a hot goalie

The best way to show how a goalie can truly change an outcome of a teams future is like this

Ask the Montreal Canadiens how well Patrick Roy did in 1993. He pretty much carried the Canadiens and holds the record for most concescutive Stanley Cup overtime wins.

Ask the Buffalo Sabres. Without Hasek the Sabres don't even make the playoffs most times and definately don't get to the Stanley Cup final in 1999.

Ask the Boston Bruins who had to play against Ken Dryden all those years always making the big save when needed

Billy Smith the most consecutive series wins by a goalie in the Playoffs. The Islanders were a great team but how many cups would they have won without the best money goalie ever

The Philadelphia Flyers who never had a star goalie one that could win the big game and not let in those weak goals. I mean How many years had the Flyers been doing it all without a number 1 goalie. How many times did Hextall(His second go stint in Philly), Chechmanek, Boucher etc... leave in a bad goal at the wrong time

Ask the Ottawa Senators about Patrick Lalime. It wasn't that he was a bad goalie I mean he playwed decent in the playoffs except for one thing. Always leaving up that bad goal. How many years when the Senators were playing the Leafs and were acutally outplaying them or looked like they could win, and then Lalime would leave in that bad goal

Everyone in Vancouver remembers Dan Cloutier. How it looked like they were going to beat the Red Wings and Cloutier lets in that bad goal and changes the series

I don't like bringing up Salo but even though he was the winning goalie when they won years before his one bad goal totally ruined Sweden in 2002

In the end every one who has watched hockey for many years will remember the big saves that either changed the game or kept their team in it. Everyone will remember that bad goal that a goalie gave up that totally ruined the team's chances of winning.

Great points - Lalime in particular, when based solely on SV% is one of the greatest playoff goalies of the past decade.

I'm a huge proponent of the SV% stat (definitely over 'wins'), but it is not the end-all be-all.

 

[seventieslord]

There is an awful lot of attributing team results to goaltending in that post. Those teams don't win without the contributions the rest of the team made, and they don't lose without their teams failing to score enough goals in the playoffs.

Cloutier is the exception. He was truly awful.

 

[Derick*]

I'm not sure I agree with all that minimization of the original figure, bit 20-25% is still a huge difference especially when we're now talking about five year sample sizes.

Well I have to say that if a goalie can't sustain that number for the length of multiple seasons then goaltending is very very influenced by luck and it's not really them causing it when their save percentage is high in small sample sizes.

For instance, since the lockout, among the top 30 goal scorers, the highest goals per game is Ovechkin with 0.67 and the lowest is Knuble with 0.37... much bigger disparity between the best goal scorer and the 30th than the best goalie and the 30th.

 

[Derick*]

Goalies impact a teams win more then anyone and they impact the teams loss more then anyone

It is the most important position in hockey. A great goalie will give an average team a chance to win every night. An average goalie will cause a great team to lose games. No position is talked about more in hockey then the goalie.

In the last couple years there have been average goalies that have either won cups or led their teams to the Stanley Cup. Although most of the times the winning team has one of the best goalies. However despite that nothing is more important then a hot goalie

The best way to show how a goalie can truly change an outcome of a teams future is like this

Ask the Montreal Canadiens how well Patrick Roy did in 1993. He pretty much carried the Canadiens and holds the record for most concescutive Stanley Cup overtime wins.

Ask the Buffalo Sabres. Without Hasek the Sabres don't even make the playoffs most times and definately don't get to the Stanley Cup final in 1999.

Ask the Boston Bruins who had to play against Ken Dryden all those years always making the big save when needed

Billy Smith the most consecutive series wins by a goalie in the Playoffs. The Islanders were a great team but how many cups would they have won without the best money goalie ever

The Philadelphia Flyers who never had a star goalie one that could win the big game and not let in those weak goals. I mean How many years had the Flyers been doing it all without a number 1 goalie. How many times did Hextall(His second go stint in Philly), Chechmanek, Boucher etc... leave in a bad goal at the wrong time

Ask the Ottawa Senators about Patrick Lalime. It wasn't that he was a bad goalie I mean he playwed decent in the playoffs except for one thing. Always leaving up that bad goal. How many years when the Senators were playing the Leafs and were acutally outplaying them or looked like they could win, and then Lalime would leave in that bad goal

Everyone in Vancouver remembers Dan Cloutier. How it looked like they were going to beat the Red Wings and Cloutier lets in that bad goal and changes the series

I don't like bringing up Salo but even though he was the winning goalie when they won years before his one bad goal totally ruined Sweden in 2002

In the end every one who has watched hockey for many years will remember the big saves that either changed the game or kept their team in it. Everyone will remember that bad goal that a goalie gave up that totally ruined the team's chances of winning.

This is all circular logic. "Look at these great teams... they had a goalie, and they won, it must have been because of the goalie."

 

[seventieslord]

Well I have to say that if a goalie can't sustain that number for the length of multiple seasons then goaltending is very very influenced by luck and it's not really them causing it when their save percentage is high in small sample sizes.

For instance, since the lockout, among the top 30 goal scorers, the highest goals per game is Ovechkin with 0.67 and the lowest is Knuble with 0.37... much bigger disparity between the best goal scorer and the 30th than the best goalie and the 30th.

Is comparing the GPG averages of the top-30 goal scorers anything close to the same as comparing the sv% of the top-30 goalies based on games played? I'm not seeing any connection there.

 

[Starchild74]

There is an awful lot of attributing team results to goaltending in that post. Those teams don't win without the contributions the rest of the team made, and they don't lose without their teams failing to score enough goals in the playoffs.

Cloutier is the exception. He was truly awful.

I agree that no matter how well your goalie is if you don't score you can't win. However if you can't score isn't it because of the other goalie. I mean how many times have you seen a game end up 1-0. Both goalies probably played well but one made that mistake or left in that one goal. The other didn't in the end the one who let in didn't complete his job the best.

On the other end when a game ends 6-5 and both goalies are still in the game. Even though it is a high scoring game the one who made the big save at the right time kept his team in the lead or did just more then the other goalie. That was the argument and I agree with it with Fuhr. It was that he was usually always there for the Oilers whether it was a 2-1 game or 6-5 game doing the most important thing just win the game no matter how you do it.

 

[Derick*]

Is comparing the GPG averages of the top-30 goal scorers anything close to the same as comparing the sv% of the top-30 goalies based on games played? I'm not seeing any connection there.

Both are supposed to represent the best at their position over that period. I added the "among top 30 in goals" and "among top 30 in games played" criteria so there wouldn't be small sample size interference. While you're right that because the first is a positive metric the general sample of skaters should be better, that also applies to the lower end, so it shouldn't affect the disparity if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Derick*]

I agree that no matter how well your goalie is if you don't score you can't win. However if you can't score isn't it because of the other goalie. I mean how many times have you seen a game end up 1-0. Both goalies probably played well but one made that mistake or left in that one goal. The other didn't in the end the one who let in didn't complete his job the best.

On the other end when a game ends 6-5 and both goalies are still in the game. Even though it is a high scoring game the one who made the big save at the right time kept his team in the lead or did just more then the other goalie. That was the argument and I agree with it with Fuhr. It was that he was usually always there for the Oilers whether it was a 2-1 game or 6-5 game doing the most important thing just win the game no matter how you do it.

When is the wrong time to make a save?

Brodeur saves 13 out of 15 in a 3 - 2 win against the Leafs.
Joseph saves 32 out of 35.
They both save the last shot against them in the game, and it's similar quality. Everyone says "Brodeur wins because he makes the key saves."

Why was Brodeur's key/big/etc. and Joseph's wasn't? Because the Devils scored more and allowed fewer shots, meaning Brodeur had the opportunity to lose the gave for them if he missed it, while Joseph's team was going to lose regardless.

There's no such thing as a "key save." All saves are worth the same no matter when they are.

This whole "big save" thing is ridiculous. Goals in the first period are just as valuable. The idea that goalies that win but have lower save percentages because they aren't as good in blowouts or something is a ridiculous myth. Something like 80% of the game is played with the score tied or within one.

A "key save" is "a save while playing for a good team."

 

[seventieslord]

The other didn't in the end the one who let in didn't complete his job the best.

Just because he didn't outplay the other goalie doesn't mean he didn't play well! 9 times out of 10, that performance wins the game. It's not his fault what happens at the other end.

It was that he was usually always there for the Oilers whether it was a 2-1 game or 6-5 game doing the most important thing just win the game no matter how you do it.

And his big save to keep it 6-5 late wouldn't have been so big if he hadn't already allowed 4 goals. The same save would be insignificant if the game was 5-2 at that time. That's not good logic.

 

[seventieslord]

When is the wrong time to make a save?

LOL, exactly.

 

[Derick*]

Doesn't matter how you do it? So if you and a classmate are taking a test and he has the answer key, and shows off a better grade, can he say "lol it doesn't matter how you do, I got it done, you didnt, don't be a baby."?

When a goalie wins a game 6 - 5 he didn't do it. His team did. You could say that makes their fourth liners better. "They got the job done, doesn't matter how."

 

[Rhiessan71]

There's more than just the numbers though in evaluating one goalie to the next.
As Goalie Guru has tried to say in multiple posts around the forums, he believes NHL goalies are pretty much robots and the difference between them is almost nothing.

There will always be the Jim Carey's that come along and completely dominant for one season then disappear.
I am more than willing to concede that there isn't much difference in technical ability of the 60 or so tenders in the league.
However, at some point that technique won't be enough and things like anticipation, reflexes and instinct have to take over and become the difference between making a save or not.

It's the goalies that are consistently able to utilize and have success with those non-technical abilities that stay above the rest and deserve all the credit they get.

About the easiest way to put this is to do it in baseball terms by asking a simple question.
What is the difference between a .250 hitter and .300 hitter....about one whole, measly hit a week, that's it.

 

[Starchild74]

Just because he didn't outplay the other goalie doesn't mean he didn't play well! 9 times out of 10, that performance wins the game. It's not his fault what happens at the other end.



And his big save to keep it 6-5 late wouldn't have been so big if he hadn't already allowed 4 goals. The same save would be insignificant if the game was 5-2 at that time. That's not good logic.

I never said that the goalie that lost didn't play well. I mean there are times a goalie makes 50 saves and the opposite goalie only make 20 saves. Yes the one who faced the more shots probably played better. But that is the point. He had to make those saves. SO even though he might not have been the best goalie in the game it doesn't make his work that much less important. I mean in history there are games where a goalie only faces 15 to 20 shots and leaves in 5 goals.

What I am saying is that the game is decided by goalies more often then not. You can always look back in a game and see where a goalie let in a goal he shouldn't have. It usually changes the game.