Martin Brodeur....Overrated?

[Killion]

A goalie's job is to prevent goals, whether by stopping a shot or by preventing the shot from occurring.

It is also true that a goal is an objective fact (yes, subject to subjective rules, blah blah), but what constitutes a "shot" is highly subjective and consistently varies from scorekeeper to scorekeeper.

The ideal measure would be GAA, normalized by quality of team defense, but of course, normalizing for team defense is basically impossible. So we use Save % as a crutch, but don't pretend that save % accounts for everything that a goalie does to affect GAA.

Ya, these are all solid points. Whats not included as you point out scoring opportunities or shots that are negated as a result of something the Goaltender did in any given situation.... Guys like Plante, Giacomin, Brodeur & others, "Wanderers" who would play the puck themselves well outside of the crease for example... or perhaps diving on a loose puck before an opposing forward can take a shot. During the Stand-up Era, if you were playing the angles properly you'd force a lot of players to shoot wide as youd be well out of the paint leaving them nothing, continuing to move towards them as they advanced towards you & the net. They had 3 choices on a Breakaway or shot from the point or slot; 1) Shoot it directly at you; 2) Shoot it thinking they could beat you glove or stick side, maybe 5 hole but nope, not if you knew your angles & it would just sail wide or; 3) Go for a Deke but that problematical (time & space) as it was easy for the Goalie to read based on how the guy was holding his stick (on the forehand) and how he was cradling the puck. I was taught/told that even though the shots werent counted when you forced them wide, in your own head & for those in the know it did in fact "count" as in forcing shooters to shoot wide? You were doing your job. Counted where it mattered if not always on the stats sheets.

 

[Canadiens1958]

How to.....

Yes, teams with the best GAA have the best chance of winning - that's pretty much a literal translation of what I just said (and what you just responded to).

The question then becomes: for teams with a low GAA, how much of the credit belongs to the goaltender, and how much belongs to his teammates?

(Also not sure why where one learned hockey is relevant, other than as an appeal to authority somehow. I learned hockey primarily in Bellingham, WA, and Boulder, CO, in case you'd like to know).

The question then becomes how to lower the GAA and that is where SV% enters the picture. Credit for the low GAA is not an issue, each of the five skaters plus the goalie have to play in harmony.Improving the SV% on certain types of shots or in certain situations is the objective.

Authority. We are talking about Martin Brodeur who grew up in St.Leonard, bordering on Montreal(Rosemount) and his approach to goaltending reflects the way generations of Montreal goalies have been taught and evaluated.

We evaluate goalies based on background, training - Finland, Sweden, etc. Late 1950s you had an influx of Mauricie valley goalies in the NHL led by Jacques Plante but extending to the likes of Robert Perreault, Claude Pronovost, Marcel Paille, Gilles Boisvert. So forth.

 

[Doctor No]

The question then becomes how to lower the GAA and that is where SV% enters the picture. Credit for the low GAA is not an issue, each of the five skaters plus the goalie have to play in harmony.Improving the SV% on certain types of shots or in certain situations is the objective.

Authority. We are talking about Martin Brodeur who grew up in St.Leonard, bordering on Montreal(Rosemount) and his approach to goaltending reflects the way generations of Montreal goalies have been taught and evaluated.

We evaluate goalies based on background, training - Finland, Sweden, etc. Late 1950s you had an influx of Mauricie valley goalies in the NHL led by Jacques Plante but extending to the likes of Robert Perreault, Claude Pronovost, Marcel Paille, Gilles Boisvert. So forth.

I'm sure that you don't intend it this way, but it sounds like you're saying that your opinion on this topic is more valuable (and should be taken as more authoritative) solely because of where you grew up.

And I'm still not sure that you're disagreeing with me on the actual topic at hand.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Neutralizing Scoring Chances

Ya, these are all solid points. Whats not included as you point out scoring opportunities or shots that are negated as a result of something the Goaltender did in any given situation.... Guys like Plante, Giacomin, Brodeur & others, "Wanderers" who would play the puck themselves well outside of the crease for example... or perhaps diving on a loose puck before an opposing forward can take a shot. During the Stand-up Era, if you were playing the angles properly you'd force a lot of players to shoot wide as youd be well out of the paint leaving them nothing, continuing to move towards them as they advanced towards you & the net. They had 3 choices on a Breakaway or shot from the point or slot; 1) Shoot it directly at you; 2) Shoot it thinking they could beat you glove or stick side, maybe 5 hole but nope, not if you knew your angles & it would just sail wide or; 3) Go for a Deke but that problematical (time & space) as it was easy for the Goalie to read based on how the guy was holding his stick (on the forehand) and how he was cradling the puck. I was taught/told that even though the shots werent counted when you forced them wide, in your own head & for those in the know it did in fact "count" as in forcing shooters to shoot wide? You were doing your job. Counted where it mattered if not always on the stats sheets.

The Southern Ontario approach, neutralizing scoring chances. Defining and tracking scoring chances. Force the wingers wide so that the goalie could poke check the shooter or negate the pass.

 

[Killion]

The Southern Ontario approach, neutralizing scoring chances. Defining and tracking scoring chances. Force the wingers wide so that the goalie could poke check the shooter or negate the pass.

Yes, absolutely. "Southern Ontario School". Modeled after the Leafs approach & philosophy. 5 Man Defensive Units. It was the function first & foremost of all 5 skaters to be Defensively Responsible, forcing the Offense wide, your job as the Goalie to communicate & train the lot of them that sure you force them wide but after doing so or even when defending a PK & facing shots from the point that they get the Hell out of the the Shooting Lanes. Imperative that as the Goalie you can Challenge & see the puck, the shooter. Let him go, let him shoot. If I can see the puck & the shooter, he's either going to shoot wide or right at me & Ive got it including Rebound Control. Its the deflections one worried about so you want those Shooting Lanes cleared (semi interference sure enough but you take your man, coverage) or Hero's, guys who try to block shots. Just dont even think about it. Get out of the way. Yet today, its what they Preach. Players getting seriously injured. Goalie "blocking" as he cant see the puck & shooters just vaguely winding up and letting er' rip, zero rebound control.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Recognition

I'm sure that you don't intend it this way, but it sounds like you're saying that your opinion on this topic is more valuable (and should be taken as more authoritative) solely because of where you grew up.

And I'm still not sure that you're disagreeing with me on the actual topic at hand.

No, not what I intended at all. Simply where I grew up allowed me to appreciate the difference between the various approaches to goaltending and the way goaltending was taught.Mauricie, Southern Ontario examples cited in the last hour.

Disagreeing. Interesting interpretation. Point is how the conclusion is or was reached. My strict team GAA position does not rely on SV% to be valid. SV% on a micro level may be handy when evaluating the team GAA in an effort to lower it but I do not see it as a macro stand alone metric.

 

[Doctor No]

No, not what I intended at all. Simply where I grew up allowed me to appreciate the difference between the various approaches to goaltending and the way goaltending was taught.Mauricie, Southern Ontario examples cited in the last hour.

Disagreeing. Interesting interpretation. Point is how the conclusion is or was reached. My strict team GAA position does not rely on SV% to be valid. SV% on a micro level may be handy when evaluating the team GAA in an effort to lower it but I do not see it as a macro stand alone metric.

I'm happy to assure you that I can also appreciate the difference between various approaches to goaltending and how it's been taught. I've attended many goaltending clinics across the continent, both as a student and as an instructor, and I've also scouted and recruited goaltenders across the continent, seeing a variety of systems implemented. Hopefully that helps to clear things up.

As to the question at hand, maybe a clarification as to what you're saying would be appropriate. It appears above that you're saying that it's not worthwhile trying to distinguish between a goaltender's contributions to a team's GAA and his teammates' contributions to a team's GAA. Can you clarify your stance on this?

 

[Killion]

No, not what I intended at all. Simply where I grew up allowed me to appreciate the difference between the various approaches to goaltending and the way goaltending was taught.Mauricie, Southern Ontario examples cited in the last hour.

Disagreeing. Interesting interpretation. Point is how the conclusion is or was reached. My strict team GAA position does not rely on SV% to be valid. SV% on a micro level may be handy when evaluating the team GAA in an effort to lower it but I do not see it as a macro stand alone metric.

Ya, pretty much this, that as a "macro stand alone" no, not accurate particularly from a historical perspective. The game has changed much over the years and of course Goaltending reacting to those changes with stark fundamentals altered along the way. What was once essential doctrine & craft replaced in reaction to evolutionary changes both philosophically & technologically.... Theres no question that Quebec was in many ways the smeltering plant containing the furnaces from which the entire approach to playing goal were forged & still is on the cutting/leading edge in that regard as the way the game was approached at the elite amateur & Junior levels far more unconstrained, wide open, a lot more liberal. Encouraging of creativity in Forwards & Defencemen than what you would find in Ontario or Western Canada / PNW US. Minnesota in particular and in more modern times, the old Rust Belt region & New England has also produced a considerable number of excellent Goaltenders as there too more freedom afforded the skaters resulting in goalies seeing a lot more rubber, some strong personalities emerging beginning with Frankie Brimsek. Guys like that, they dont just live on an island out there stopping impossible shots, they have vision, act as almost Rovers, Quarterbacks, directing the ebb & flow, reminding their Defenceman & Forwards of their responsibilities. Force of Will.

 

[Canadiens1958]

No

I'm happy to assure you that I can also appreciate the difference between various approaches to goaltending and how it's been taught. I've attended many goaltending clinics across the continent, both as a student and as an instructor, and I've also scouted and recruited goaltenders across the continent, seeing a variety of systems implemented. Hopefully that helps to clear things up.

As to the question at hand, maybe a clarification as to what you're saying would be appropriate. It appears above that you're saying that it's not worthwhile trying to distinguish between a goaltender's contributions to a team's GAA and his teammates' contributions to a team's GAA. Can you clarify your stance on this?

No, I'm asking how you would attribute part of the team GAA specifically to a LW, a C or any other skater position.

Look at the 2015-16 Montreal Canadiens stats provided previously and explain. Basically the difference in GAA between Carey Price and Mike Condon is .42GAA per game, yet Condon is facing fewer shots per game. So what are the skaters doing wrong?

Same question with Brodeurs career numbers. The consensus seems to be that his career stats are not impressive because of his RS 91.2 SV%, PO 91.9 SV%. So what was he doing wrong? What was the team doing wrong?

 

[Doctor No]

Ah, I see. Since you said "Fail to see why someone would even separate the two," I assumed that you were arguing that it's not worthwhile to separate the two.

The most appropriate way (theoretically) to ascribe goaltender credit would be to risk-adjust each shot opportunity faced by a goaltender for how easy it was to convert similar opportunities into goals. Similar to what Michael Schuckers is working on. I wouldn't bother distinguishing between a LW and a C's contribution (other than that neither are goaltenders), but that's largely because I focus my efforts on goaltending.

As for your continued exhortation for me to watch all of the game film for the 2015-16 Montreal Canadiens, I've seen fourteen games of theirs this year (all on TV, none live). Obviously the missing piece in the equation "fewer shots + higher GAA = ???" is that a greater proportion of shots are going in against Condon.

First of all, the fact that you keep saying this suggests that you find this ridiculous, that Condon would allow more shots to go into the net than Carey Price would. Beyond that, perhaps the Canadiens skaters are allowing shooters to shoot from more valuable locations against Condon than they were against Price. Whatever the reason, I sure wouldn't rely solely upon the "eye test" to give me an unbiased view of what's going on. I don't credit my brain to be able to keep all of that straight (and nor should you).

 

[Killion]

The most appropriate way (theoretically) to ascribe goaltender credit would be to risk-adjust each shot opportunity faced by a goaltender for how easy it was to convert similar opportunities into goals. Similar to what Michael Schuckers is working on. ... First of all, the fact that you keep saying this suggests that you find this ridiculous, that Condon would allow more shots to go into the net than Carey Price would. Beyond that, perhaps the Canadiens skaters are allowing shooters to shoot from more valuable locations against Condon than they were against Price. Whatever the reason, I sure wouldn't rely solely upon the "eye test" to give me an unbiased view of what's going on. I don't credit my brain to be able to keep all of that straight (and nor should you).

Oh?. Who's this guy? Sounds like a more than useful model..... As for the rest... maybe the Canadien players simply do not have the confidence in Condon that they have in Price... Drilled into their heads to be playing considerably more conservative out front, afraid to mistakes, that philosophy & vibe spreading like a virus, engendering a lack of confidence in everyone in a game that is about 95% psychological to begin with?... This is obviously a problem on any team. Doom. But absolutely. Often huge gaps in talent between Starter & Backup as you know.

 

[Doctor No]

As for the rest... maybe the Canadien players simply do not have the confidence in Condon that they have in Price...

Certainly possible (likely) - I mean, Price is one of the league's best goaltenders. If I were a Canadien, I'd have more confidence in Price.

When I played college, I'd have some games where my contact lenses would dry up during the game - I could see, but I couldn't SEE, if you know what I mean. I never mentioned it to teammates, because their inclination would be that they have to STOP EVERY SINGLE SHOT OMG, and that leads to more mistakes and tougher chances. And things usually worked out fine.

Here was the originally DIGR paper by Schuckers (in 2011):
http://www.sloansportsconference.co...g-Spatially-Smoothed-Save-Percentage-Maps.pdf

I know that he's improved it on multiple fronts since then, but hasn't published them (to my knowledge). He posts here as "schuckers".

 

[Killion]

Certainly possible (likely) - I mean, Price is one of the league's best goaltenders. If I were a Canadien, I'd have more confidence in Price.

When I played college, I'd have some games where my contact lenses would dry up during the game - I could see, but I couldn't SEE, if you know what I mean. I never mentioned it to teammates, because their inclination would be that they have to STOP EVERY SINGLE SHOT OMG, and that leads to more mistakes and tougher chances. And things usually worked out fine.

Here was the originally DIGR paper by Schuckers (in 2011):
http://www.sloansportsconference.co...g-Spatially-Smoothed-Save-Percentage-Maps.pdf

I know that he's improved it on multiple fronts since then, but hasn't published them (to my knowledge). He posts here as "schuckers".

Huh. Thats on pdf (obviously) and appears quite fascinating. Love his use of the word (premise) "spatial". Definitely. Thats what we deal with as Goalies. Physics yes but blended with far more temporal down to earth psycho-kinetic / pedestrian issues.

As for the rest, you remind me of Tony Esposito.... One of the first to ever wear Contacts when they were first introduced late 60's.... so.... Tony would "lose" one in-game.... I mean... what'dya do?..... "Hey Ref, stop plz".... Trying to find a clear invisible o.ooo5 mm sized contact lense in a crease full of ice chips & slivers?... Ya... Good luck.... All custom made... replacements? Thats a joke.

 

[SladeWilson23]

A big reason why Brodeur's SV% actually looks lower than say Hasek is because Hasek played in more higher shot total games than Brodeur. Having a great defense that prevents shots does help goalies out, BUT IT ALSO IS A FACTOR TO ARTIFICIALLY BRINGING DOWN SV%'s.

GP with 30 OR MORE shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 301 GP; .930 SV%; 2.33 GAA
Hasek: 312 GP; .933 SV%; 2.29 GAA

GP with 20 OR FEWER shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 238 GP; .893 SV%; 1.87 GAA
Hasek; 93 GP; .898 SV%; 1.78 GAA

PERCENTAGES OF CAREER GAMES
30+ Shots
Brodeur: 24%
Hasek: 42%

-20 Shots
Brodeur: 19%
Hasek: 12%

 

[shadow1]

He was great. I don't think he was the best ever because I think some of his success was due to being in a great defensive situation (remember that playoff game against Toronto when he had a six save shutout?).

That being said, you have to make the saves, and some of those low shot totals were due to his excellent puck skills away from the crease.

Of the guys I've seen (mid-90's-present), I have him number 3. I think Hasek was the most talented ever, but Roy was the best ever due to being arguably the greatest post-season player the NHL has seen (along with historic regular season numbers which he could have easily padded if not for his premature retirement).

 

[quoipourquoi]

A big reason why Brodeur's SV% actually looks lower than say Hasek is because Hasek played in more higher shot total games than Brodeur. Having a great defense that prevents shots does help goalies out, BUT IT ALSO IS A FACTOR TO ARTIFICIALLY BRINGING DOWN SV%'s.

GP with 30 OR MORE shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 301 GP; .930 SV%; 2.33 GAA
Hasek: 312 GP; .933 SV%; 2.29 GAA

GP with 20 OR FEWER shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 238 GP; .893 SV%; 1.87 GAA
Hasek; 93 GP; .898 SV%; 1.78 GAA

PERCENTAGES OF CAREER GAMES
30+ Shots
Brodeur: 24%
Hasek: 42%

-20 Shots
Brodeur: 19%
Hasek: 12%

Interesting stuff. I might have to take a look at some year-to-year numbers of the usual suspects.

 

[Stephen Gionta]

Martin Brodeur is the best goaltender of all time.

Patrick Roy # 2 and Dominick Hasek # 3

 

[Hammer Time]

A big reason why Brodeur's SV% actually looks lower than say Hasek is because Hasek played in more higher shot total games than Brodeur. Having a great defense that prevents shots does help goalies out, BUT IT ALSO IS A FACTOR TO ARTIFICIALLY BRINGING DOWN SV%'s.

GP with 30 OR MORE shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 301 GP; .930 SV%; 2.33 GAA
Hasek: 312 GP; .933 SV%; 2.29 GAA

GP with 20 OR FEWER shots playing at least 55 minutes
Brodeur: 238 GP; .893 SV%; 1.87 GAA
Hasek; 93 GP; .898 SV%; 1.78 GAA

PERCENTAGES OF CAREER GAMES
30+ Shots
Brodeur: 24%
Hasek: 42%

-20 Shots
Brodeur: 19%
Hasek: 12%

Interesting stuff.

I wonder if score effects could have an impact: if a goalie gives up a few goals early, and his team is (say) losing 3-1, the other team could retreat into a defensive shell to defend the lead and stop shooting; thus, the goalie ends up facing fewer than 20 shots. So it's actually a case of low save percentages causing the other team to take 20 or fewer shots.

If the above pattern shows up in wins as well as in losses, and also shows up in a number of other goalies' records, then there's a good case that facing fewer shots actually causes a lower save percentage (this also sounds plausible ... defences which block a lot of shots probably suppress mostly low-quality shots).

 

[SladeWilson23]

Interesting stuff. I might have to take a look at some year-to-year numbers of the usual suspects.

"Player game finder" on Hockey-Reference was my source.

Interesting stuff.

I wonder if score effects could have an impact: if a goalie gives up a few goals early, and his team is (say) losing 3-1, the other team could retreat into a defensive shell to defend the lead and stop shooting; thus, the goalie ends up facing fewer than 20 shots. So it's actually a case of low save percentages causing the other team to take 20 or fewer shots.

If the above pattern shows up in wins as well as in losses, and also shows up in a number of other goalies' records, then there's a good case that facing fewer shots actually causes a lower save percentage (this also sounds plausible ... defences which block a lot of shots probably suppress mostly low-quality shots).

Exactly.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Martin Brodeur is the best goaltender of all time.

Patrick Roy # 2 and Dominick Hasek # 3

Based on?

 

[Voight]

Martin Brodeur is the best goaltender of all time.

Patrick Roy # 2 and Dominick Hasek # 3

You have to be a huge Devils Homer to say this, because there really isnt much of a case for him to be rated above those two.

 

[SladeWilson23]

You have to be a huge Devils Homer to say this, because there really isnt much of a case for him to be rated above those two.

There's enough of a case to say he belongs in the same group as those 2.