Ondrej Pavelec V: The Netminder Strikes Back

[Andy6]

Pavelec has allowed 5 even-strength goals in his past 5 games. Just get back to the good PK and we're in the playoffs, no problem.

 

[Maplebeasts]

Never guess who the #1 NHL goalie is right now, according to NHL.com ...

Al Montoya ... 0.59 GPA and .974 SVP!

Admittedly he's only played about 5 periods but still ... I found it somewhat amusing to see that.

Montoya has a knack to be a quality tender in this league. Imo one of the best back ups around

 

[scelaton]

When was the last time Pavelec was top 20 in the league for Save % after >10 games?
If he can stay just above Carey Price I think we'll be OK....

 

[Samcanadian]

When was the last time Pavelec was top 20 in the league for Save % after >10 games?
If he can stay just above Carey Price I think we'll be OK....

I'd be happy if he stayed in the top 25 for the rest of the year. Would likely get us into the playoffs.

 

[Gil Fisher]

There will have to be a lot of crow-eating (including myself) if the Jets were able to successfully re-build Pavalec's style of play. There's certainly more evidence required, but the eye test suggests that the more upright posture, economical crease movements, tracking the play in the butterfly, and longer paddle are having a positive effect on save%.

He's always been a big goalie; nice to see him finally playing like one.

 

[allan5oh]

He's also using the reverse vh, although not as much as the beginning of the season.

 

[Jet]

His rebound control was pretty great last night, and his athleticism has always been there. I'm still concerned when he tracks the puck, and I don't think that is a teachable skill. I think he is always going to struggle with that to some extent.

What that means in the grand scheme of things? I don't know. We've seen Pav put up great numbers for stretches before. He's benefited from good bounces and the inability of our opposition to bury chances but he's also played very solidly of late.

Need a bigger sample size to truly believe we have a substantially improved goaltender here. I am obviously though very much enjoying this streak.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

The sv% from the last few games cannot go on. That's understood. They key is does it revert back to a tick over .900 or does it become something in the .9teens. That is the difference between the playoffs or golf come May.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The sv% from the last few games cannot go on. That's understood. They key is does it revert back to a tick over .900 or does it become something in the .9teens. That is the difference between the playoffs or golf come May.

If Pavs reverts to something like .912 - .915 and our scoring also normalizes we will continue to win. We are fortunate that Pavs hot streak has coincided with our scoring slump.

 

[StronGeer]

His rebound control was pretty great last night, and his athleticism has always been there. I'm still concerned when he tracks the puck, and I don't think that is a teachable skill. I think he is always going to struggle with that to some extent.

What that means in the grand scheme of things? I don't know. We've seen Pav put up great numbers for stretches before. He's benefited from good bounces and the inability of our opposition to bury chances but he's also played very solidly of late.

Need a bigger sample size to truly believe we have a substantially improved goaltender here. I am obviously though very much enjoying this streak.

I was about to ask if Pavs was actually playing better or if he was just being fortunate. Since I don't know jack about goaltending technical skills, I was hoping someone would enlighten.

This implies a bit of both?

 

[Flair Hay]

So people are still trying to figure out how Pavs play is ties to his save percentage?

The team has tightened up substantially. They're playing the game like its 0-0 the whole way through of the most part. Perfection is impossible, but we are minimizing mistakes, playing in position, back-checking, destroying opposition breakouts, collapsing to take away rebounds...

The goalie's numbers are better because the team is doing more to help him.

Yes the more defensive strategy has affected scoring. But we are missing on a good number of odd man rushes off of turnovers from our defensive game.

Pavelec's numbers are and always have been somewhat reflective of the team as a whole. He is benefitting a lot from having to do less.

 

[tbcwpg]

His rebound control was pretty great last night, and his athleticism has always been there. I'm still concerned when he tracks the puck, and I don't think that is a teachable skill. I think he is always going to struggle with that to some extent.

What that means in the grand scheme of things? I don't know. We've seen Pav put up great numbers for stretches before. He's benefited from good bounces and the inability of our opposition to bury chances but he's also played very solidly of late.

Need a bigger sample size to truly believe we have a substantially improved goaltender here. I am obviously though very much enjoying this streak.

I think the reason he is playing a bit deeper this year is that they have identified he can't track the puck very well, so keeping him slightly deeper means that he can react a bit better. His strength is as a reactionary goalie, which can cause wild looking saves or lead to horrible goals against.

I think this is a good stretch for him coupled with improved coaching. I don't think he'll sustain this but I do think he'll be better.

 

[truck]

So people are still trying to figure out how Pavs play is ties to his save percentage?

The team has tightened up substantially. They're playing the game like its 0-0 the whole way through of the most part. Perfection is impossible, but we are minimizing mistakes, playing in position, back-checking, destroying opposition breakouts, collapsing to take away rebounds...

The goalie's numbers are better because the team is doing more to help him.

Yes the more defensive strategy has affected scoring. But we are missing on a good number of odd man rushes off of turnovers from our defensive game.

Pavelec's numbers are and always have been somewhat reflective of the team as a whole. He is benefitting a lot from having to do less.

Or maybe this isn't true at all.

It is a fun story, but these claims have been made repeatedly. People say the same thing every time he gets hot and double back when he lets in a load of goals.

It was literally 5 days ago that people were saying his numbers weren't good (.908), but that was because the team D sucked. Five days later, elite team D is lifting his numbers.

History suggests that team D isn't a sustainable model for improved goalie numbers.

Of course things vary over small sample sizes, but let's give it another 80 games before we call it a pattern. I mean, even last year people went through this whole discussion a couple times. Once at the end of November, and once again after PoMo. Both times he followed them up with a whole crap ton of bad play.

Every goalie gets hot like this a couple times a year, even Bryz.


*EDIT*


The linked article shows a month by month breakdown of Pav's numbers:

Since then he has done this:
Dec .863
Jan .894
Feb .926
Mar .891
Apr .907
Oct .908
Nov. TBD

 

[Flair Hay]

I don't even think he's gotten hot. Everyone is pitching in to limit the chances the opposition gets and Pavelec has had to make some saves. Not nearly as many quality chances against. Although I'm well aware you 2D guys call shot quality a unicorn.

It's not a narrative. It's what I'm seeing. I don't expect us to keep teams to a goal per game. But I do expect us to have better results than previous years because we are playing more systematic, patient hockey. Said this in the summer that team D would help Pavs numbers to the low 9-teens. It's better than that so far, but a couple posts->goals vs the Blackhawks alone would change his numbers.

The goalie is not independent of the team.

Oh, and go figure Pavs is looking a bit better (and the team defense) with our Corsi superstar playing forward. Hmm.

 

[truck]

I don't even think he's gotten hot. Everyone is pitching in to limit the chances the opposition gets and Pavelec has had to make some saves. Not nearly as many quality chances against. Although I'm well aware you 2D guys call shot quality a unicorn.

People cite improved team D every he has a run of nice numbers. This isn't the first time. That was my point. It was literally 5 days ago that people were blaming crappy D for Pav's sub par numbers.

Nobody said shot quality doesn't exist, it obviously exists and it is very very apparent over a small sample. The argument is that things even out and lines up proportionally to shot quantity.

It's not a narrative. It's what I'm seeing.

You see a number of factors, but you are building in a narrative of sustainability and causation.

I don't expect us to keep teams to a goal per game. But I do expect us to have better results than previous years because we are playing more systematic, patient hockey.

Historically, this does not impact goalie numbers.

Said this in the summer that team D would help Pavs numbers to the low 9-teens.

This has always been possible. He did it with bad D before and has hit many highs.

It's better than that so far, but a couple posts->goals vs the Blackhawks alone would change his numbers.

Yup. Empty cages have been missed too.

The goalie is not independent of the team.

No player is independant of their team, but their numbers usually remain the same regardless of trades or coaching changes.

Oh, and go figure Pavs is looking a bit better (and the team defense) with our Corsi superstar playing forward. Hmm.
Corsi has nothing to do with anything. The point is that we haven't seen enough for anyone to be claiming they are right. You would have had now legs to stand on with said argument literally five days ago. I told you sos flying around literally every 5 days doesn't make a ton of sense.

Plus, nobody has ever said Pav can't improve his numbers. Nobody knows the future. Nobody who understands numbers or life would put limits on these things. The argument has always been about likelihoods.

Historically, a team, system or coaching change does not impact goalie numbers.
Historically, few goalies start to figure things out at 27.

That doesn't mean it can't happen.

Pav has visibly changed some elements of his game. That was always possible.
Apparently he actually tried to get in shape this summer too. That was also possible, but it does say something about his past training habits.

Could this be enough to improve his numbers? Sure.

If there is a change in his game I'd look there before team play, because history shows that team play has little to no impact on save percentage (over a proper sample).

Regardless, I'd wait and see what happens before pretending to have a load of proof. Pav has had many hot streaks. The stories that surround them are always the same.

Wait and see. Get back to me in 90 games with proof.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Plus, nobody has ever said Pav can't improve his numbers. Nobody knows the future. Nobody who understands numbers or life would put limits on these things. The argument has always been about likelihoods.

Historically, a team, system or coaching change does not impact goalie numbers.
Historically, few goalies start to figure things out at 27.

That doesn't mean it can't happen.

Pav has visibly changed some elements of his game. That was always possible.
Apparently he actually tried to get in shape this summer too. That was also possible, but it does say something about his past training habits.

Could this be enough to improve his numbers? Sure.

If there is a change in his game I'd look there before team play, because history shows that team play has little to no impact on save percentage (over a proper sample).

Regardless, I'd wait and see what happens before pretending to have a load of proof. Pav has had many hot streaks. The stories that surround them are always the same.

Wait and see. Get back to me in 90 games with proof.

I agree but shouldn't 30-40 games be sufficient? At least to indicate what kind of a season he will have this year if not talking about the rest of his career. Then we can debate whether 1 improved season based on improved conditioning and changed techniques will be a good predictor of the future. We will be able to fill our entire summer with that debate.

 

[Jet]

So people are still trying to figure out how Pavs play is ties to his save percentage?

The team has tightened up substantially. They're playing the game like its 0-0 the whole way through of the most part. Perfection is impossible, but we are minimizing mistakes, playing in position, back-checking, destroying opposition breakouts, collapsing to take away rebounds...

The goalie's numbers are better because the team is doing more to help him.

Yes the more defensive strategy has affected scoring. But we are missing on a good number of odd man rushes off of turnovers from our defensive game.

Pavelec's numbers are and always have been somewhat reflective of the team as a whole. He is benefitting a lot from having to do less.

Of course that has something to do with it but the way a goalie plays will always have the MOST impact on his stats, no matter what his team does.

Pavelec has flaws in his game that will always limit his long term performance. He has done some things to improve his overall play and I am hoping that it will reflect positively in his numbers throughout this season, not just a streak of games.

 

[garret9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

 

[truck]

I agree but shouldn't 30-40 games be sufficient? At least to indicate what kind of a season he will have this year if not talking about the rest of his career. Then we can debate whether 1 improved season based on improved conditioning and changed techniques will be a good predictor of the future. We will be able to fill our entire summer with that debate.

I am sure the debate will be there, but I am not selling or buying on 30 or 40. In the lockout year, Varlamov posted a .903 and Quick posted a .902. Both were behind Pav,but I never bought that Pav had passed them.

Take a look at Pav's numbers from the last Atlanta year. He posted a .927 in his first 38 games. He had Atl in a playoff spot, but posted a .883 in his final 20 to land at .914.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I am sure the debate will be there, but I am not selling or buying on 30 or 40. In the lockout year, Varlamov posted a .903 and Quick posted a .902. Both were behind Pav,but I never bought that Pav had passed them.

Take a look at Pav's numbers from the last Atlanta year. He posted a .927 in his first 38 games. He had Atl in a playoff spot, but posted a .883 in his final 20 to land at .914.

Another 30-40 on top of his 12 so far = pretty much a full season. OK, add 10. Make it 40-50 and it is a full season. You first said another 70-80 then said 90. Another 90 games makes it pretty much 2 full seasons. I understand the skepticism. Fool me once ..... yada yadda. Why don't we just specify that we need to see a complete season from him and we will go from there?

I am still concerned that he will play well just long enough to confirm Chevy and Maurice in their opinions that he is a good goaltender. Chevy will sign him for another 5 @6mil per. I don't know how long it will take me to build confidence in him but I know I am not there yet. Not even close.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

The biggest doubt I have with goalie stat analysis is that defense and shot quality do not affect sv%. It doesn't pass the admittedly unreliable eye test. But more than that, it doesn't pass the logic test.

Here's a thought experiment.
Two teams, built with identical clones, are exactly the same in every way. Except team 1 is good at clearing rebounds, and team 2 is bad at clearing rebounds. Rebounds have a much higher shot quality and result in goals more often, as I'm sure could be statistically demonstrated.

So, it seems logically infallible that team 1's goaltender would have a higher sv% than team 2's goaltender, because he proportionally faces a lower amount of high quality rebound shots. Goalie 1's sv% is higher, even though they are clones and according to the stat analysts should have equal sv%.

 

[garret9]

There is no real good vs bad threshold for statistical performance in save percentage...
Really it is simply more is always better.
The larger the sample is, the more confident you are it is good.

I'm avoiding the word significant on purpose.

 

[Evil Little]

My hopes of change are still bouyed by my preseason certainty that Pavelec was going to be hot, cold and end up right around .908. But I've noticed some changes to his game in particular that I was not expecting.

I think Pavelec is playing a more constrained game, as though he's suppressing his instincts to over-commit toward shooters or shots. We've seen a couple goal-mouth scrambles and I was surprised (and delighted!) to note that he wasn't flying about the crease like Mike Smith when someone skates by him. He's not breaking formation as quickly.

Whether or not this means substantial change, my hopes and expectations don't necessarily align.

If Pavs reverts to something like .912 - .915 and our scoring also normalizes we will continue to win. We are fortunate that Pavs hot streak has coincided with our scoring slump.

I'm not very good at reading charts, but it doesn't seem to me that the team's PDO over this stretch has been unsustainable (until last night). Though I suppose a couple shootout losses will normalize what would otherwise be unsustainable.

I am sure the debate will be there, but I am not selling or buying on 30 or 40. In the lockout year, Varlamov posted a .903 and Quick posted a .902. Both were behind Pav,but I never bought that Pav had passed them.

Take a look at Pav's numbers from the last Atlanta year. He posted a .927 in his first 38 games. He had Atl in a playoff spot, but posted a .883 in his final 20 to land at .914.

He only played 58 games that year!? Sure hope that coach got fired...

 

[garret9]

The biggest doubt I have with goalie stat analysis is that defense and shot quality do not affect sv%. It doesn't pass the admittedly unreliable eye test. But more than that, it doesn't pass the logic test.

Here's a thought experiment.
Two teams, built with identical clones, are exactly the same in every way. Except team 1 is good at clearing rebounds, and team 2 is bad at clearing rebounds. Rebounds have a much higher shot quality and result in goals more often, as I'm sure could be statistically demonstrated.

So, it seems logically infallible that team 1's goaltender would have a higher sv% than team 2's goaltender, because he proportionally faces a lower amount of high quality rebound shots. Goalie 1's sv% is higher, even though they are clones and according to the stat analysts should have equal sv%.

There is an issue with the thought experiment, that it doesn't account for everything...

You noted a team could be better at decreasing high quality shots, but you ignored two important things:

1) Significance of effect. Just because a team can decrease quality shots, doesn't mean the difference between teams is large enough to impact goals. Goals are rare, even for high quality shots. It takes a large amount of high quality shots to make a significant difference in goals.

2) The likelihood of whether or not that same team would be more talented in other areas. Teams who are skilled and have good coaching to be able to decrease low-quality shots against which would then lessen the effect on the ratio.

 

[Grind]

The other issue is that I can't think of anything that would reduced "high scoring" chances and NOT reduce low scoring chances as well. Picked up rebounds also rsukt in good cycles to the point, etc.