ATD2010 Rene Lecavalier Semi-Final: New Jersey Swamp Devils (2) vs. Regina Pats (3)

[VanIslander]

The Rene Lecavalier Division Semi-Final Round:


New Jersey Swamp Devils

coach Tommy Ivan

Busher Jackson - Sid Abel (C) - Gordie Howe
Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec
Don Marshall - Pit Lepine - Dirk Graham (A)
Jiri Holik - Murray Oliver - Wilf Paiement
Ray Getliffe

Börje Salming - Rob Blake
Babe Siebert (A) - Ted Green
Brian Engblom - Albert Leduc
Yuri Liapkin, Marty McSorley

Charlie Gardiner
Charlie Hodge


vs.


Regina Pats

coach Fred Shero

Dany Heatley - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald (A)
Dean Prentice - Ron Francis (C) - Glenn Anderson
Vic Stasiuk - Rick MacLeish - Mark Recchi
Harry P. Watson - Marty Walsh - Eddie Oatman
Bernie Nicholls, Pit Martin

Sprague Cleghorn (A) - Bill Quackenbush
Moose Johnson - Bill White
Phil Russell - Teppo Numminen
Glen Wesley

Bernie Parent
John Vanbiesbrouck​

Click to read more...

 

[VanIslander]

New Jersey Swamp Devils

PP1: Jackson-Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake
PP2: Tkachuk-Savard-Martinec-Siebert-Leduc

PK1: Lepine-Marshall-Siebert-Green
PK2: Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake

vs.

Regina Pats

PP1: Anderson-Mikita-McDonald-Cleghorn-Quackenbush
PP2: MacLeish-Francis-Recchi-Numminen-Heatley

PK1: Johnson-Francis-Cleghorn-White
PK2: Prentice-Mikita-Quackenbush-Numminen

 

[Leafs Forever]

Talk about heavyweight matchup. I thought these were the best two teams in the division, and had them very close. This should be a good one.

And here's where Regina moving away from elite shutdown thirdline kind of hurts them, I think. The question they must answer- How are they going to contain Gordie?

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Cleghorn and Quackenbush is a good matchup to have against that 1st line.

 

[Leafs Forever]

Cleghorn and Quackenbush is a good matchup to have against that 1st line.

This is true, but ideally, one would like a great forward to go up against Howie too. And although Regina has some good two-way LW's, I don't know that one of them really has the kind of defense to do well against him.

 

[Stoneberg]

I can't wait for the debating to kick off in this series.

 

[seventieslord]

Go Regina!

This is going to be epic - I knew the path to the division title would have to go through new jersey at some point.

TDMM, I look forward to this.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Congrats Regina, on defeating a very good Detroit team in the first round.

A shame that one of these teams has to go home this early. I'll be back later tonight or tomorrow to start to show why that team has to be Regina

 

[jarek]

It's true that containing Gordie in this series is going to have to be a cumulative effort between Cleghorn, Quack, and whichever line goes up against him. But please everyone, keep in mind a few things:

Gordie isn't the only player here. That entire top line is beastly, and it's the best line in the series. However, I feel that with the personnel we do have, we can tie the shifts with Howe at times, and do our best to contain the rest of those players.

I'm of the opinion that we have the edge in forward depth in this series, especially offensively, and that's going to be a factor. The other thing that's going to be a factor, and will be one of the primary factors to a Regina victory, is the mismatch in goal.

 

[jarek]

By the way, TDMM, before you do any arguments at all, I think you should wait a bit. I need to talk to seventies about some significant lineup restructuring for this series that is probably going to invalidate your opening arguments.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Goaltending comparison

Goaltending = Even to marginal advantage Regina

This matchup pits the best goalie of the 1930s vs. the 2nd best North American goalie of the 1970s. (3rd or 4th best if you include Tretiak and Holocek).

I. A simple comparison of hardware:

Gardiner:
-3 First Team All-Stars,
-1 Second Team,
-1 Stanley Cup,
-1 Smythe-worthy performance.
-All Star voting didn’t exist for the first 3 years of Gardiner’s career, so he may have gotten another "Third Team" or two.

Parent:
-2 First Team All-Stars,
-0 Second or “Third” Team All-Stars
-2 Stanley Cups,
-2 Conn Smythes


Basically, we are comparing a goalie with probably the best 2-year peak ever with a goalie who has one of the best 4-year peaks ever.


II. For 4 years, Gardiner was clearly the best goalie in the NHL

-Gardiner had 3 First Team and 1 Second Team All-Star in the first 4 years of NHL All-Star teams (then died).

-Both Howie Morenz and Aurele Joliat considered Gardiner the best goalie they played against (see his profile)

-From 1929-1934, Gardiner had the best GAA in the league by a wide margin. He had a 1.92 GAA over 232 games. Second best was Tiny Thompson with a 2.17 GAA over 227 games. He did this despite playing for a team that wasn’t exactly stacked (his Pelletier profile talks about Gardiner basically carrying his team for most of his career), though it did have some good players. Save percentage is not available for these years as far as I am aware.

-Gardiner never received much offensive support from his team. In his 4 year peak, his team was 4th of 10 teams, 8th of 8 teams, 9th of 9 teams, and 9th of 9 teams in scoring. When the Blackhawks won the Cup in 1934, they were the worst offensive team in the league by far! They scored a mere 88 goals in 48 games. Second worst scored 99 goals.

-Gardiner led the league in shutouts twice – both times accounting for half of his team’s wins! Keep in mind that this is post-forward pass. His 12 shutouts in 30-31 accounted for half of his team’s wins and his 10 shutouts in 33-34 accounted for half of that team’s wins (the same team that would later go on to win the Stanley Cup with a 20-17-11 record in the regular season).

-The forward pass was finally allowed in all three zones in for the first time in 1929-30 All of Gardiner’s All-Star seasons happened under the same basic rules as the modern game.

-Gardiner was inducted into the Hall of Fame in its very first class in 1945.



III. Parent was only an elite goalie for 2 years.

Sure, he was an “above average” NHL starter for most of the rest of his career. So were virtually all ATD backups.

Bernie Parent might have the best two year peak of any goaltender in history. 2 First Team All-Stars. 2 Vezinas. 2 Cups. 2 Conn Smythes. But take away even one of those two years, and is Parent even an ATD starter?

I realize he was usually an above average NHL goaltender in those other years, but he really wasn't considered among the league's elite. He was never Top 3 in All-Star voting for any additional seasons.

I noticed that 70s highlights Parent's 4th and 5th place finishes in a 12 team league. Here are the top 5-6 in voting, along with actual vote totals in for Parent’s early years:

1967-68: Gump Worsley 55; Ed Giacomin 41; Johnny Bower 32; Glenn Hall 24; Bernie Parent 16; Doug Favell 15 (who?)

1968-69: Glenn Hall 115; Ed Giacomin 102; Jacques Plante 61; Bernie Parent 30; Gerry Cheevers 9

Hall was 38 years old and Plante was 40, so neither man was at his peak. Parent still finished well behind 3rd place.

1969-1970: Tony Esposito 180; Ed Giacomin 81; Jacques Plante 28; Bernie Parent 9; Roy Edwards 9

Sure Parent finished 4th... a mile behind the actual elite goalies in the league (which included a 41 year old version of Jacques Plante by the way), and tied with some guy most of us never heard of.

Remember, Hall and Plante were well past their primes, so this isn’t exactly the height of competition at the goaltender position, either.

In 1970-71, Parent was traded from Philadelphia to the Toronto Maple Leafs, where Jacques Plante was having a season good enough to be a 2nd Team All Star at the age of 42!

In Toronto, Bernie became the protégé of his boyhood hero, Jacques Plante. "There was no one in the world quite like Plante," Parent states, remembering his partner in Toronto. "I learned more from him in two years with the Leafs than I did in all my other hockey days. He taught me a great deal about playing goal both on the ice and in my head off the ice. He taught me to be aggressive around the goal and take an active part in play instead of waiting for things to happen. He showed me how I kept putting myself off-balance by placing my weight on my left leg instead of on my stick side. He taught me how to steer shots off into the corner instead of letting them rebound in front of me. That old guy made a good goalie out of me."

Bernie Parent himself admits that he wasn’t an elite goalie before hooking up with Plante in 1971!

71-72: Parent was not Top 5 in All-Star voting.

72-73: Parent was in the WHA (2nd Team All Star for what that's worth)

73-74, 74-75: Parent returns to the Flyers and has his two elite seasons

1976: Parent injured most of the year

Here’s a typical Parent 5th place finish in All Star voting after coming back from injury:

1976-77: Ken Dryden 194; Rogie Vachon 164; Glenn Resch 101; Dunc Wilson 7; Bernie Parent 6; Gerry Cheevers 6; Tony Esposito 5

Sure, Parent was arguably the 4th or 5th best goalie in the NHL for a few seasons outside of his 2-year peak. But Gardiner had pretty league-average stats in a 9 team consolidated league for at least 2 of the seasons before the official "All-Star" teams, indicating he was probably 4th or 5th best those years himself.


IV. I'm not even sure Parent has an edge in the playoffs.

We all know how great Parent was in the playoffs - 2 Consecutive Conn Smythes say a lot. But Gardiner was great in the playoffs too:

-In 1934, Gardiner backstopped perhaps the weakest team to ever win the Cup

-Gardiner's career playoff GAA of 1.43 represents a drop of 30% from his regular season career GAA of 2.02

And of course there's the story of his final playoffs, complete with a Patrick Roy-like promise to his team:

Gardiner's finest moment came in the 1934 playoffs, as "Smiling Charlie" advanced the Hawks to the Stanley Cup Finals against Detroit. This despite the fact that Gardiner was feeling quite ill at the time. Unbeknownst to him or his doctors, Gardiner had long suffered from a chronic tonsil infection. The disease had spread and had begun to cause uremia convulsions. Undaunted, Gardiner pressed on as winning the Stanley Cup had become an obsession with him. Though playing in body-numbing pain, the Hawks prevailed over the Wings. He permitted only 12 goals in 8 playoff games - a 1.50 GAA.

A well liked and jovial fellow, Gardiner served as the Blackhawks captain, a rarity for a goalie even when it was allowed. Before the decisive 4th game, the "Roving Scotsman" showed his leadership and reportedly told his teammates that they would only need to score one goal that night. Sure enough, the game had gone into double overtime at a 0-0 tie. Suffering from growing fatigue, Gardiner was weakening considerably as the game went on. But he managed to hold the Red Wings scoreless until Chicago's Mush March finally scored.

The Hawks hoisted their first Stanley Cup, but Gardiner, the only goalie to captain a Cup champion, was just as happy he could escape the ice and collapse in the dressing room. A few weeks later Gardiner underwent brain surgery after suffering a massive brain hemorrhage. Unfortunately complications from the surgery would cost him his life on June 13, 1934.

-Gardiner’s actual stat line from that playoff season is: 6 wins, 1 loss, 1 tie, 2 shutouts, 1.33 GAA


V. It is far from clear who faced more competition for awards

-When Gardiner played, all the best players in the world were in the NHL, including the Scottish Gardiner. The last western league folded in 1926.

-When Parent played, the best players in the world were scattered. The majority were in the NHL, but many were in Europe, and a few were in the WHA. Parent himself played in the WHA in 72-73. And 2 of the Top 4 goalies in the world were playing in Europe at the time. Not that they would have beaten Parent in his 2 elite seasons – but they would have likely knocked him even farther down the leaderboards in other seasons.

-Parent does have the "more teams = more likely for a one-hit wonder" thing going in his favor. But how much does it matter when he finishes so far behind the Top 3 goalies outside of his 2-year prime?


In conclusion

So if I just spent all this time showing why I think Parent and Gardiner are effectively equals, why am I willing to concede a possible marginal edge to Regina? Honestly, for no other reason but "historical canon." THN ranked Parent as the 63rd best player of all-time and Charlie Gardiner as the 76th best player of all time. The 2008 HOH Top 100 list at hfboards ranked Parent at 81 and Gardiner at 91, though if you read the discussion, several voters admitted they initially underestimated Gardiner.

Perhaps that is why Gardiner is usually ranked a few spots below Parent - maybe we just because we aren't as familiar with him? Either way, this comment I made in my lineup assassination of Regina sums up my thoughts:

Parent is solidly in the mix with Bower, Brimsek, Gardiner, and Belfour among the "average" goalies in the draft. Hold a gun to my head and force me to choose one as the best of the group, and I'd probably choose Parent.

I don't expect goaltending to be much of a factor in this series, if it is at all.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Coaching comparison

Coaching = Even to marginal edge NJ

I’ll try to make this shorter than my novel on goaltending.

In short, I consider Tommy Ivan and Fred Shero both “second tier” coaches in this thing – decisively behind only Bowman, Blake, Arbour, and maybe Tarasov.

Both were tactical geniuses who got along with their players.

Both were great innovators.

Both had very good penalty kills (both apparently “invented the box for killing penalties” )

Tommy Ivan successfully employed an aggressive system based on team speed at a time when most coaches were trying to slow the game down. He also allowed his creative players to use their talents:

Ivan was beloved in the eyes of his players. His greatest strength as a coach was his positivism, his willingness to allow his players to be creative on the ice without hamstringing their talents. Red Wing immortal Ted Lindsay told me in a 2006 interview that Ivan allowed him, Howe, and Abel to design their own line rushes and work out new tricks and combinations on the ice. Their teammates were allowed the same leeway. In return his players gave Ivan and the Detroit fans some of the greatest on-ice artistry in the history of hockey.

I think Ivan’s a perfect fit for a team with creative players like Gordie Howe, Sid Abel, Denis Savard, Vladimir Martinec, and Borje Salming.

But Ivan wasn’t all offense – his teams were very well balanced – always finishing 1st or 2nd in both offense and defense.

Shero was more defensive-minded, devising systems to slow down the Canadiens, Bruins, and later Soviets.

He’s a solid fit with Regina’s two-way players, though not entirely perfect, as Regina isn’t the toughest team.

The biggest difference between Tommy Ivan and Fred Shero is the discipline level of their teams.

One aspect of that hockey intelligence was the ability of Ivan’s Red Wings to avoid the penalty box. Unlike Montreal and Toronto who finished at the top in team penalty minutes, Ivan’s Red Wings usually finished near the bottom.

And for all of Fred Shero’s strengths, avoiding the penalty box certainly wasn’t one of them.

So how do these coaches rank? Ivan is a consensus top 10 coach, and sometimes Top 5. Shero is a consensus Top 15 coach and usually Top 10. If a few spots in rankings makes a difference, then NJ has an edge, but it’s admittedly a small one if it's there.

Conclusion:

What does this mean for this series? Neither team will get the matchups we want all the time. NJ’s home ice advantage lets us have the matchups we want a bit more often, though.

The one real edge I can see the matchup giving NJ is the ability to avoid penalties. NJ has a lot of players who play on the edge, and with Ivan, Rob Blake, Ted Green, and Keith Tkachuk should stay on the right side of the edge more often than not.

On the other hand, I don’t think Shero will exert a calming influence on a loose cannon like Cleghorn.

 

[seventieslord]

You argue very fairly.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You argue very fairly.

I don't see the point of making crazy hyperbolic claims. I find that when other GMs go too far with their claims that I find it hard to take the rest of their argument very seriously, even if they do have other points that would be strong.

Anyway, I'm going to wait to see Regina's finalized lineup for this series before further analysis. I figured it was safe to go into goaltending and coaching though. I doubt Regina is planning to play Vanbiesbrouck in the series.

NJ will roll with the same forward lines as usual. Desired matchups will depend partly on how Regina plans to deploy their forwards.

The setup of our defensemen will also depend on how Regina plans to deploy their forwards. For now, I like having Salming and Siebert on 2 separate pairs, so one or the other will be on the ice for about 50 minutes of a 60 minute game. They will also be paired together in the last minute of the game if we are trying to hold a lead, and occasionally in the last minute of a period if both are fresh.

 

[seventieslord]

Few random comments:

- All-Stars do not tell the whole story, at all. From 1968 through 1979, Parent was always a sv% star. In his worst season, he was 8 points above the league average. sv% stats from this era can be found here: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=698806&highlight=save+percentages . Overpass also did a sv% estimator that puts goalies on an even playing field by assuming they faced 80% of their shots at ES and 20% on the PP instead of the huge imbalance Parent faced. Later on, I will be posting the year-by-year results for raw sv% to show that any notions of Parent "not doing anything aside from two seasons" are ill-advised, and that his sv% would likely have been even more impressive behind a less-penalized team.

- Cleghorn, loose cannon? Methinks you're just trying to rile up the boy wonder.

- I'd certainly like to see more about Ivan than what has been provided, before I concede a coaching advantage to New Jersey. The collection of players he had at his disposal was absolutely mind-boggling.

- Gardiner's 30% drop in GAA from the regular season to the playoffs may look impressive, and it is, but not to that degree. Scoring dropped considerably in the playoffs during his career, he wasn't far above par.

- No detailed sv% results exist for Gardiner except for a snapshot from the 1929 season which I will dig up later. I don't recall them being particularly impressive (Hainsworth and Worters were stealing the show, mostly)

- Much like my last series, I don't want any comparisons between goalies to be boiled down simply to all-star teams, and comparisons between coaches should not be boiled down to cups. The size of league argument is the most important one, but there are other factors to consider, and what I should have made more clear in my last series is as follows - It's not that we should just completely disregard the all-star team and stanley cup edges, but the matchups should not be defined by these edges, either.

- FWIW, my last HOH top-120 submission had Parent at 95th and Gardiner at 107th. My opinion of Parent has changed drastically since that submission a year ago, and not just for the hell of it, either - His sv% records are impressive, and that was revealed in a recent book, and the effect of powerplays on save% has only really been quantified over the past year as well. My opinion of Gardiner has not changed. I think he's about the 17th-best goalie of all-time, with Parent 11th. Does that mean goaltending will be the difference? Maybe, if it's a really close series... and it is going to be.

 

[jarek]

For what it's worth, the voters definitely felt that goaltending WAS a factor last series, as Parent was voted the 3rd star of the series. Is Durnan a better goalie than Gardiner? Probably, considering there was a case that he was a better goalie than Parent. I think goaltending will be more of a factor in this series than it was in the last, at least based on how the voting went.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

For what it's worth, the voters definitely felt that goaltending WAS a factor last series, as Parent was voted the 3rd star of the series. Is Durnan a better goalie than Gardiner? Probably, considering there was a case that he was a better goalie than Parent. I think goaltending will be more of a factor in this series than it was in the last, at least based on how the voting went.

I'd say it is worth exactly nothing.

You are speaking of taking what happened in a previous fantasy world (last series) and projecting it on to this one. In the real world, Bernie Parent and Charlie Gardiner had very comparable accomplishments.

There is certainly a case that Gardiner was better than Parent. In addition to what I posted earlier about his accomplishments, there is of course this simple comparison: Best goalie of the 1930s and 2nd best goalie to play the game before 1940 (after Benedict) vs. 3rd or 4th best goalie of the 1970s. That alone is a case for Gardiner before we even get into the meaning of 4 elite seasons vs. 2 elite seasons. Before we get into the fact that all the best players in the world were in the NHL in the 1930s, competing against Gardiner, which is far from the case in the 1970s.

Frankly, I think goaltending is a wash in this series, as outlined in excruciating detail above.

Besides, two can play this game. Borje Salming was the 2nd star of NJ's first round win. None of Regina's defensemen were stars of their first round series. So NJ has the better #1 defenseman in this series, by a similar logic.

 

[DoMakc]

Cleghorn and Quackenbush is a good matchup to have against that 1st line.

Quackenbush? Sure. Cleghorn? Howe will get under his skin, so it's only question of time when he loses it.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Few random comments:

- All-Stars do not tell the whole story, at all. From 1968 through 1979, Parent was always a sv% star. In his worst season, he was 8 points above the league average. sv% stats from this era can be found here: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=698806&highlight=save+percentages . Overpass also did a sv% estimator that puts goalies on an even playing field by assuming they faced 80% of their shots at ES and 20% on the PP instead of the huge imbalance Parent faced. Later on, I will be posting the year-by-year results for raw sv% to show that any notions of Parent "not doing anything aside from two seasons" are ill-advised, and that his sv% would likely have been even more impressive behind a less-penalized team.

And I've previously said what I think of save percentage without context: It's marginally better than simple GAA at separating a goalie's contributions from those of his team. Quality of a team's defense, a team's style of play, and the goaltender's style of play all affect save percentage.

As does what the score counter counts as a shot - it has been effectively proven by now that NJ and St. Louis undercount shots, whereas Nashville overcounts. I also find it fishy that the last two save % leaders have been 2 different Boston goalies, though this is likely a combination of the shot counter in Boston, Chara, and the system they play. And I trust the standardization of shot counts across arenas even less in a time before save % became an official stat in the early 1980s.

I really am interested to see how Parent's save % before 1971 compares - before "That old guy made a good goalie out of me." This could be the basis for a great argument against this slavish devotion to save percentage. As Parent said about Plante: "He taught me to be aggressive around the goal and take an active part in play instead of waiting for things to happen.... He taught me how to steer shots off into the corner instead of letting them rebound in front of me." Both of the above are descriptions of the goalie himself playing a direct role in reducing shots against, which is not reflected in save percentage.

- No detailed sv% results exist for Gardiner except for a snapshot from the 1929 season which I will dig up later. I don't recall them being particularly impressive (Hainsworth and Worters were stealing the show, mostly)

Interesting to see, but note that 28-29 was one of Gardiner's seasons as an average NHL goalie (so probably top 4-5) overall. It was also the last year before the forward pass was allowed in all 3 zones. From 28-29 to 29-30, Hainsworth's GAA ballooned from 0.92 to 2.42 in just one season, so the forward pass (and how teams handled it) had a huge effect on goaltender stats. Gardiner's peak seems to be from 30-34, or maybe 29-34.

 

[DoMakc]

For what it's worth, the voters definitely felt that goaltending WAS a factor last series, as Parent was voted the 3rd star of the series. Is Durnan a better goalie than Gardiner? Probably, considering there was a case that he was a better goalie than Parent. I think goaltending will be more of a factor in this series than it was in the last, at least based on how the voting went.

I'm not sure that the difference between Parent and Gardiner is that big - they are actually pretty similar - average regualr season goalies that elevated their game in playoffs and which careers (or life) were short due to some unfortunal circumstances. Does Parent have an edge on Gardiner? Sure, but it isn't big enough to decide the series.

 

[seventieslord]

And I've previously said what I think of save percentage without context: It's marginally better than simple GAA at separating a goalie's contributions from those of his team. Quality of a team's defense, a team's style of play, and the goaltender's style of play all affect save percentage.

What do you mean by "without context"? Comparing it to the league average and other goaltenders in the league, is context. And, estimating the impact of powerplays on sv% to provide a "normalized" number, is context as well.

As does what the score counter counts as a shot - it has been effectively proven by now that NJ and St. Louis undercount shots, whereas Nashville overcounts. I also find it fishy that the last two save % leaders have been 2 different Boston goalies, though this is likely a combination of the shot counter in Boston, Chara, and the system they play. And I trust the standardization of shot counts across arenas even less in a time before save % became an official stat in the early 1980s.

We're talking about 12 years of data. And sv% was not an official stat, but shots on goal were. So knowing what constituted a shot on goal and when and when not to count one had to be a prerequisite for keeping stats for players.

I really am interested to see how Parent's save % before 1971 compares - before "That old guy made a good goalie out of me." This could be the basis for a great argument against this slavish devotion to save percentage. As Parent said about Plante: "He taught me to be aggressive around the goal and take an active part in play instead of waiting for things to happen.... He taught me how to steer shots off into the corner instead of letting them rebound in front of me." Both of the above are descriptions of the goalie himself playing a direct role in reducing shots against, which is not reflected in save percentage.

No discernable difference. Out of goalies with 1000+ minutes:

1968: 4th/23
1969: 3rd/19
1970: 3rd/19
1971: 9th/28
1972: 8th/26
1973: WHA
1974: 1st/27
1975: 2nd/32
1977: 11th/35
1978: 3rd/34
1979: 8th/34

Pre-Plante, he was in the 3rd/4th range. With Plante, he was 8th/9th (part of this slight drop could have been because Plante took the easier starts, I sometimes read) - after that, he was above the 3rd/4th range twice, in it once, and below it twice, averaging 5th in the league, which, relative to league size, is basically just how he was performing before. One thing, however, is painfully clear - Parent was almost ALWAYS an elite goaltender. Not just anyone places top-4 in sv% six times.

I will still go into more detail with this, but there is an elementary guide for you.

Interesting to see, but note that 28-29 was Gardiner's last season as an average (so probably top 4-5) goalie. It was also the last year before the forward pass was allowed in all 3 zones. From 28-29 to 29-30, Hainsworth's GAA ballooned from 0.92 to 2.42 in just one season, so the forward pass (and how teams handled it) had a huge effect on goaltender stats.

Not sure what the forward pass has to do with anything. I think games from before and after the rule change are just as valid, as all goalies played under the same conditions.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm not sure that the difference between Parent and Gardiner is that big - they are actually pretty similar - average regualr season goalies that elevated their game in playoffs and which careers (or life) were short due to some unfortunal circumstances. Does Parent have an edge on Gardiner? Sure, but it isn't big enough to decide the series.

Look, I don't blame you for thinking Parent was an average goalie aside from two seasons; I thought the same thing just a year ago. New evidence has been presented strongly indicating that this is not the case; there is no excuse for this mindset anymore.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What do you mean by "without context"? Comparing it to the league average and other goaltenders in the league, is context. And, estimating the impact of powerplays on sv% to provide a "normalized" number, is context as well.

By "context," I mean things like the following: Did the team give up a high amount of low quality shots? Or did the team play a style where they control play for most of the game, only allowing odd man rushes the other way? Did the goalie want his defensemen to block shots or did he feel more comfortable always handling the first shot and letting the defensemen worry about rebounds? Without knowing the answers to these questions, raw save % is barely better than raw GAA.

You point out that Parent faced more PKs than most goalies. But he also played on a more defensive-minded team than most. How did that factor into his save percentage? What about the fact that Philly was in the expansion team division, whereas the powerhouse Bruins and Canadiens were in the O6 division? Could that have affected his save percentage?

Then, there is the style of the goalie himself, and this is directly applicable to Parent. How did the goalie tend to play the puck? Did he attack the play, stopping a shot from happening before it could be counted? Did he put rebounds into corners or did he prefer to put himself into position to make a save on the rebound? Actually, from that one quote, it seems like we know Parent's deal. He stayed in the net letting the play come to him before being tutored by Plante. After Plante, Parent says he learned how to attack the play more often, which undoubtedly made him a better goalie, while having either no effect on his save percentage or a negative effect.

By now, I'm sure 90% of the GMs in this thing know how seriously they take save percentage stats as a measure of a goalie's worth. So we'd probably be wasting bandwidth to carry this on much further.

One last thought, if raw save % is all that matters, these should have been the Vezina winners and runners up post-lockout:

2006: Dominik Hasek (Miika Kiprusoff, Henrik Lundqvist)
2007: Nicklas Backstrom (Chris Mason, Martin Brodeur)
2008: Dan Ellis (JS Giguere, Tim Thomas)
2009: Tim Thomas (Tomas Vokoun, Niklas Backstrom)
2010: Tuukka Rask (Ryan Miller, Tomas Vokoun)

That's right, Brodeur a 3rd runner up just once and Luongo never Top 3. There is certainly an strong correlation/overlap between the top save % goalies and who we perceive as the best in any given year, but it's not even close to exact.

Not sure what the forward pass has to do with anything. I think games from before and after the rule change are just as valid, as all goalies played under the same conditions.

Not much perhaps. The bigger factor is that Gardiner probably wasn't in his prime yet. He didn't start leading the league in GAA until after the forward pass, but that probably has more to do with him hitting his prime than anything.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Look, I don't blame you for thinking Parent was an average goalie aside from two seasons; I thought the same thing just a year ago. New evidence has been presented strongly indicating that this is not the case; there is no excuse for this mindset anymore.

I assumed he meant "average in terms of the ATD, but both step it up in the playoffs." I can agree to that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Edited: Swapped 3rd and 4th lines.

Since Regina has very good Top 4 defensemen but weak wingers, I'm giving NJ's 2way line more ice time at even strength than the checking line. Graham is a big part of the PK, so Liapkin won't dress.

Here is the Swamp Devils roster for this series, subject to change based on any tweaks Regina might make.

New Jersey Swamp Devils

Coach: Tommy Ivan

C: Sid Abel
A: Babe Siebert
A: Dirk Graham


Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe*
Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec
Jiri Holik - Murray Oliver - Wilf Paiement*
Don Marshall - Pit Lepine - Dirk Graham*

Börje Salming - Rob Blake
Babe Siebert - Ted Green
Brian Engblom - Albert Leduc

Charlie Gardiner
Charlie Hodge​

PP1: Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PP2: Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec - Babe Siebert - Albert Leduc

PK1: Pit Lepine - Don Marshall - Babe Siebert - Ted Green
PK2: Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PK3: Murray Oliver - Dirk Graham - Babe Siebert - Ted Green

*Gordie Howe will see some shifts on both the 3rd and 4th line in place of either Graham or Paiement.

Salming and Siebert will play together in the last minute of a game if protecting a lead, or the last shift of a period if they are both fresh.