How should we be judging goaltenders?

Fire Benning

diaper filled piss baby
Oct 2, 2016
6,970
8,252
Hell
  • Even strength save percentage - washes out short handed situations which can affect save percentage negatively or positively.
  • High danger save percentage - self explanatory.
  • Goals saved above average.
  • Difference between expected save percentage versus actual save percentage - factors in strength of defense.
 

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
I think that low danger Sv% would be more telling

Problem is that goalies are so tightly packed that ultimately it means nothing.

  • Even strength save percentage - washes out short handed situations which can affect save percentage negatively or positively.
  • High danger save percentage - self explanatory.
  • Goals saved above average.
  • Difference between expected save percentage versus actual save percentage - factors in strength of defense.
I'm pretty sure this is what dSV% is.
 

Knave

Registered User
Mar 6, 2007
21,627
2,226
Ottawa
On the size of their herd after a timed 60 minute window to get the goats from one field to the next.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Basic old time hockey. % of first goal of the game allowed. Very different game down 1-0 vs leading 1-0. Also leads protected vs leads lost.

First influences the strategy of a game and resulting shot totals and quality of shots for both teams.

Second has a similar effect except not necessarily a function of the first goal.
 

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
Basic old time hockey. % of first goal of the game allowed. Very different game down 1-0 vs leading 1-0. Also leads protected vs leads lost.

First influences the strategy of a game and resulting shot totals and quality of shots for both teams.

Second has a similar effect except not necessarily a function of the first goal.

There's no real relationship between the actual number of shots a team allows and the outcome of the game. There's no real relationship between the actual number of shots a team generates and the outcome of the game.

Allowing 30+ shots does not mean win
Generating 30+ shots does not mean loss

Ultimately a goalie that faces below average shot totals often will always have a deflated SV%.
 

Vipers31

Advanced Stagnostic
Aug 29, 2008
20,351
2,094
Cologne, Germany
You can use stats, but it will always be superficial. You have to watch the guys and know what you're looking at. Having played the position at a decent level helps immensely, but if you're analytical about what a goalie's play consists of and study more than the mere games, including exercises, it's possible. You've got to be able to identify specifics - how reliable is someone with his angles, how is he moving laterally, how does he control controllable rebounds (that one became a bit of a mainstream talking point on many shots where it makes limited sense - not every "big" rebound is a bad one...), how is he handling traffic, etc. Then, you have to watch these guys for a while to see how consistently they do what they do, as that's what really seperates the elite, with most AHL goalies having the raw ability to steal games on their nights. See how they handle the mental side of the game: do the angles get away from them slightly? Do they respond to goals by moving in too deep into.their crease? Do they collapse into themselves (arch the upper body too much) in the butterfly when things get rough and take away portions of their frame?

Stats aren't entirely useless. The low danger save percentage, for example, tends to correlate with how consistent a guy is with his angles. It's not the only part of it - reflexes and ability to fight through traffic impact this, for example. But it can help you out and at least make an attempt to verify impressions, particularly if the sample size of your viewings is limited.

If you can't do that, there's no shame in that. There's NHL coaches who can admit they can't adequately judge goalies, so it shouldn't be hard for fans of the game. Luckily, SV% isn't too bad in how it correlates with performances over time, so if you must go with stats, use it and it's derivatives. Just don't think that ever gets you the full story, and definitely don't build your argument around wins or stuff like that if you want people to take you seriously.
 

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
128,942
55,953
SV% is not a good way to evaluate goalies who play on strong defensive teams.
I think that's fair, to a point.

Just don't try to convince me that Martin Jones (or Jake Allen) are elite. Both face a lower amount of shots/are on strong defensive teams. Jones also routinely gets outplayed by his backup, and it's not exactly like Corey Schwab or Scott Clemmensen ''Outplaying'' Brodeur while only getting 5 starts a year.

Funny enough, Quick's save percentage has went up quite a bit this year, in facing more shots per game. However, I don't think it would everyone's go up, at least not by that much.
 

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
I think that's fair, to a point.

Just don't try to convince me that Martin Jones (or Jake Allen) are elite. Both face a lower amount of shots/are on strong defensive teams. Jones also routinely gets outplayed by his backup, and it's not exactly like Corey Schwab or Scott Clemmensen ''Outplaying'' Brodeur while only getting 5 starts a year.

Funny enough, Quick's save percentage has went up quite a bit this year, in facing more shots per game. However, I don't think it would everyone's go up, at least not by that much.

Every single goalie has a lower cumulative SV% in their lower shot volume games. Playing in a lot of low shot volume games does have a deflating effect on SV%.

FTR I hope people understand that when I say "deflated", I don't necessarily mean "lower" or "decreased".
 

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
128,942
55,953
Every single goalie has a lower cumulative SV% in their lower shot volume games. Playing in a lot of low shot volume games does have a deflating effect on SV%.

FTR I hope people understand that when I say "deflated", I don't necessarily mean "lower" or "decreased".
Jones faces over 28 shots on goal this year, so I don't think he's hardly facing any. He's an average starting goalie if you ask me, not any better than that.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
There's no real relationship between the actual number of shots a team allows and the outcome of the game. There's no real relationship between the actual number of shots a team generates and the outcome of the game.

Allowing 30+ shots does not mean win
Generating 30+ shots does not mean loss

Ultimately a goalie that faces below average shot totals often will always have a deflated SV%.

Never made that claim. Issue is allowing the first goal of the game and the impact the first goal has on the rest of the game.
 

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
Jones faces over 28 shots on goal this year, so I don't think he's hardly facing any. He's an average starting goalie if you ask me, not any better than that.

Jones did have one elite season in 15-16, but the past two seasons he's been average to above average at best.

Never made that claim. Issue is allowing the first goal of the game and the impact the first goal has on the rest of the game.

I don't disagree one bit. My point though is that score effects have a minimal impact on the game's final shot totals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bleedred

HamiltonNHL

Parity era hockey is just puck luck + draft luck
Jan 4, 2012
20,128
10,637
Their hearing.
22b2ade70da9f469a245253483756b3e.jpg

The worse the hearing the better the goalie.
 

maacoshark

Registered User
Jul 22, 2017
9,629
3,723
I still think the best way to rate a goalie is to watch him play. Goaltender stats are very deceiving. So much depends on how well the team plays in front of him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deathstroke

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
Can you please clarify how you are defining deflate and decrease, because it seems to me they are synonyms in this context?

Deflate means a goalie can have a high SV%, but if they play in a lot of low shot volume games, sustaining it becomes more difficult. Expecting a goalie to sustain a high SV% over multiple seasons when playing on strong defensive teams is unrealistic. Marty Turco was able to do it for one season in 2003, but he never really came close again.

Since the 2005 lockout, when goalies face 29 or fewer shots, the average SV% is .905, and that's even after omitting the bad games where goalies get pulled early or come in for relief. When facing 30 or more shots, the average SV% is .925.
 

CuriousGeorge

Registered User
Jun 8, 2007
1,530
492
Basically, whenever I see any argument about goaltenders on here it always comes down to save percentage. Whenever I see someone talking about a goalie, save percentage is the most important stat. I rarely, if ever, see an argument about a goaltender that uses a stat other than save percentage. There has to be more to goaltending than that though, right?

I've seen the argument that wins is the most important statistic for goaltenders, and I'm almost inclined to agree. There's nothing more important in hockey than winning! At the same time though, it could easily be argued that having a better save% and GAA would lead to more wins.

This partially stems from a recent thread I saw in the Polls section about whether or not Robin Lehner was a #1 goaltender. The only argument I saw for Lehner from anyone in the entire thread was that his Sv% was good. I saw a couple Buffalo posters talk about how his Sv% numbers might be a bit misleading. Sure he absorbs a lot of shots, but does he make the key saves when he needs to? I'm really not trying to make this into a thread about Robin Lehner or any specific goaltender, this is purely an example.

I've seen posts on this site before talking about the relationship between a higher # of shots and a higher Sv%. I also feel as though lots of people would expect goalies on worse teams that allow more shots to have a lower Sv%. I think what it comes down to more than anything is the quality of shots that a goalie faces.

I think that Jonathan Quick is a good example for the point I'm trying to convey here. Often times his Sv% isn't at the top of the league, but his GAA is. I feel like he gets a bit overlooked on here because so many people focus purely on Sv%. I think his Sv% is lower because he faces less shots than a lot of goalies on worse teams, but he also lets in a lot less goals than most goalies. Is it his fault that his team has been generally very good at limiting shots against him? Again, I'm not trying to make this about any specific players.

My main question is, how should we be judging goalies? I personally believe that there's no better way to judge a player than to watch them play, but I'm a lot worse at judging a goalies abilities than a skaters. Surely there's more we can look at than just a goalie's Sv% though am I right?
The goaltender that has the most wins.
 

Uncle Dru

Formerly Kakk Addict
Mar 12, 2012
645
494
Deflate means a goalie can have a high SV%, but if they play in a lot of low shot volume games, sustaining it becomes more difficult. Expecting a goalie to sustain a high SV% over multiple seasons when playing on strong defensive teams is unrealistic. Marty Turco was able to do it for one season in 2003, but he never really came close again.

Since the 2005 lockout, when goalies face 29 or fewer shots, the average SV% is .905, and that's even after omitting the bad games where goalies get pulled early or come in for relief. When facing 30 or more shots, the average SV% is .925.

Interesting stuff!

I wonder what it looks like if broken down into multiple tiers...possibly <25, 25-35 (2 5-shot intervals), >35. Simple CA/60 search shows a range of 10 from first to worse over an entire decade so there certainly is significance there.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->