Elite Goaltending Far from Essential to Win a Cup

[BillyShoe1721]

Vezina Trophy voting is unbiased because it is based on that season’s performance alone, and is (mostly) independent of reputation and the other factors that can influence cap hit.

The table below indicates how many playoff series Vezina Trophy finalists have won, going back to 2000-01 through 2014-15 (14 seasons).

Not what you expected? Me neither. The 42 best individual seasons by goaltenders over the past fourteen years have resulted in just 41 playoff series wins. Another way to look at this is that if your team’s goalie is a finalist for the Vezina Trophy, the most likely scenario for your team in the playoffs is to win your opening matchup, then get knocked out in the second round.

Read the rest here: http://thehockeywriters.com/goalies-overpaid-and-overrated-in-playoffs/

Click to read more...

 

[DucksAreCool]

Just by reading that little snippet, it might not be that surprising at all. Goalies that win the Vezina are often on teams that they have to bail out a lot or, at the very least, make remarkable saves every game and are regularly relied on to win games.

Teams that do well in the playoffs are usually more sound defensively throughout the year, so their goalies don't have to do as much and get ignored for the Vezina while the goalies forced to more routinely stand on their head take more of the votes. When the playoffs roll around, those sound defensive teams can usually outlast a team giving up more offensive chances and relying on their goalie.

Or that would be my guess.

 

[TOML]

1. Quick was elite. So was LA's defense and offense and coaching.

2. Crawford? Not quite elite. But again Chicago's defense, offense and coaching all top-notch.

3. Quick again. Elite.

4. Thomas was elite. Defense and offense too.

5. Niemi? Not elite, but offense and defense stacked.

6. Fleury? Not quite. But defense and offense? Esp. offense, was.

7. Osgood? Not quite. Defense and offense yes.

8. Giguere and his pads were elite. Defense and offense too.


These are all the post-lockout teams aside from the Carolina asterisk team.

4 out of 8 cup-winners had elite goaltending.
8 out of 8 had an elite offense.
7-8 out of 8 had an elite defense.
8 out of 8 had young impact players.

So overall I wouldn't say that goaltending matters as much as the other key factors. The less you spend on goaltending, the more you have available to assemble the offense and defense and impact young players you require to win. But there is no set formula or method to assembling a winner.

 

[KPower]

Elite goaltending is not necessary but your goalie is still going to need to win some big games for your team.

All 4 goalies left in the playoffs have had some stinkers but they also have had some incredible games that have helped their team win.

 

[Ishad]

So, the winner of the Vezina trophy only has won 16 playoff series in the last 14 seasons? Guess who else has only won 16 playoff series in the last 14 season? The Art Ross winner.

 

[Burke the Legend]

Instead of looking at overall save % in playoffs, or regular season, I think an individual game breakdown is needed. Basically, how many playoff games are won with sub .920 goaltending? I doubt many. How many of the teams that do manage to scrape out one or two series wins on the back of multiple sub .920 goaltending performance wins manage to win SCF? Remember it's OK to have an inconsistent goalie maybe whose save % is brought down by big losses, but then will bounce back with 2-4 strong performances, that will win you a playoff series. What I would not expect is a goalie who consistently puts up sub .920 performances, but his team keeps winning with strong goal support.

Looking at the Niemi example, who was one of the weakest of the 8 goalies TOML posted, and on arguably the best SCF winning team of the lot. 7 of his 16 wins were done with poor play, not just sub .920, but sub .900. Three of those were against the Flyers in the final, who had even worse goaltending though, which was kind of helpful for the Hawks. But the rest of his 9 wins he posted excellent #s. He had 6 losses, five of which he was under .900. One was a solid .917.

MAF in 2009 had 6 wins where he posted under .920. Not as bad as Niemi, only 2 were under .900, the other 4 were between .900 and .920.

So IMO elite goaltending does matter, a lot. Even goalies who posted less than elite stats were actually pretty elite in the majority of their wins, but weren't consistent and lost hard when they they did lose, dropping their stats. And also their teams were so good they managed to overcome a half dozen bad to mediocre starts and put up the extra goals needed to overcome.

 

[sharks9]

It's almost like hockey is a team game and winning the Cup doesn't make you the best goalie in the league!

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Ah, I remember this being the discussion after the Philly-Hawks series. Skimp on your goalie and you'll be fine. I've seen a lot of this moneyball replacement-level player stuff today, funny timing

The problem with it is, teams are paying for the luxury of reliability/consistency. Otherwise, sure, ride Leighton to the SCF and pray he can do it again next year. For every Hammond/Dubnyk there's an example of a team that played 5-6 goalies in one year and didn't strike gold (or above league-average) once.

It's almost like hockey is a team game and winning the Cup doesn't make you the best goalie in the league!

Let's be honest, though, and realize that narrative gets twisted to fit whatever goaltender is being discussed at the moment.

Elite goaltending is not necessary but your goalie is still going to need to win some big games for your team.

All 4 goalies left in the playoffs have had some stinkers but they also have had some incredible games that have helped their team win.

Yes. In the regular season you may be able to get by with a goalie who simply doesn't LOSE you games--but when you get deep in the playoffs, and have to play another elite team up to 7 times, you need your goalie to do more than have a pulse, at least in this era.

 

[Roomtemperature]

Its because the difference between the best the 20th best goalie and what the 8th best goalie can do when they are hot or playing well at least isn't as great as it once was. Now its about trusting your gut on who is playing well enough because most goalies in the league can play good enough

 

[Pure West]

I think you absolutely need great goaltending to win the cup. Now, does he need to have the reputation of being an "elite" goalie or a vezina nominee? Perhaps not, but he would need to play at that calibre.

With goaltending nowadays, you're much more likely to get a great performance from an average goalie than you are an average defenseman playing like a Norris contender, or perhaps a 3rd line center playing at the calibre of a 1st line center. Despite your goaltender being your most important player, the difference between a vezina winner and an AHL goalie is minimal compared to the difference between great players and average ones at other positions.