A new way to measure goaltending performance

[nevesis]

This is a great read, and reminds me of lots of the discussion going back and forth the other night.

Hey Machinehead, you might enjoy this article too.

If there’s one area in hockey analytics that’s lagging behind, it’s primarily in the realm of goaltender studies. Outside of multi-year even-strength save percentage – which, of course, requires a goaltender to face thousands of shots over a series of seasons – there simply isn’t a ton to measure a goaltender’s true talent level...

http://www.tsn.ca/yost-a-new-way-to-measure-goaltending-performance-1.132438

Click to read more...

 

[haohmaru]

Lundqvist on top of the list with all of the softies he gives up every game and twice as many in important games? IMPOSSIBLE. He should've stopped everything and he's the only reason we lose games.

 

[haohmaru]

Seriously, though, this what Nevesis and I have been arguing for YEARS on these boards. Quality chances against, and saves on those chances, are what sets elite goalies apart from other goalies. Save % doesn't matter nearly as much if the opposing team isn't getting good looks. Martin Brodeur benefitted from quite a few years of having a terrific defensive team in front of him that excelled on clogging up everything. I'm not saying he's not one of the best goalies of all time, but he clearly had help.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Agreed. Honestly people almost never accurately analyze goalies. And people ere unfairly rip on henrik way too much.

 

[Kakko]

Interesting stuff, but his adjusted% is still behind

Fleury
Lehtonen
Neuvirth
Hiller
Pavelec
Andersen
Crawford
Quick
Luongo
Elliott
Rinne
Anderson

 

[haohmaru]

Interesting stuff, but his adjusted% is still behind

Fleury
Lehtonen
Neuvirth
Hiller
Pavelec
Andersen
Crawford
Quick
Luongo
Elliott
Rinne
Anderson

And how many of those guys are played with 4 of their starting 6 D out? Those stats are for this season, not career %.

In any event, I'm not taking any of those guys, with the possible exception of Quick, over Lundqvist. I'd like to see last year's Final quality shots statistics. I'll bet LA was 2:1 or 3:2 over the Rangers for the series.

 

[Richter915]

Lundqvist on top of the list with all of the softies he gives up every game and twice as many in important games? IMPOSSIBLE. He should've stopped everything and he's the only reason we lose games.

You, plus the whole stats community, is looking for exactly that: shot quality. The biggest failure of corsi and fenwick is that it blindly looks at shot attempts. We know that not all attempts are created equal. Until that metric is reliably quantified, we're at a standstill. I think that if analytics shows some success at the NHL level, they can push for reliably quantifying shot quality.

 

[Kane One]

Steve Valiquette last night on HNL said there are green goals and red goals. I believe green goals are ones where the goalie has more than a half of a second to react to the shot and a red goal is one where the goalie has less than a half of a second.

I'd love to know if there's a place that tracks this.

 

[Beer League Sniper]

Lundqvist on top of the list with all of the softies he gives up every game and twice as many in important games? IMPOSSIBLE. He should've stopped everything and he's the only reason we lose games.

Uhh, he's not at the top of the list. All that list shows is that him and Cam Ward have had the most difficult shots against. He's still been giving up way too many soft goals. He makes $1.5M (or 21.4%) more than the next highest paid goaltender. That alone is going to garner him higher expectations and more scrutiny.

I love the guy. He's one of my favorite players on the team, but that doesn't mean he's immune to criticism like everyone else on the team.

 

[Richter915]

Steve Valiquette last night on HNL said there are green goals and red goals. I believe green goals are ones where the goalie has more than a half of a second to react to the shot and a red goal is one where the goalie has less than a half of a second.

I'd love to know if there's a place that tracks this.

you'd imagine that reaction time correlates well with shot distance (the farther shot, the greater time for reaction).