How teams should acquire their goalies? (long)

[tony d]

Defintely the draft. Always good to have that good goalie of the future in your organization.

 

[BlueDream]

Interesting post, cool stats in this thread. More were traded for than I thought, but the previous Cup winners says a lot.

Drafting one per year is a very good idea though, I have to agree.

 

[StreetHawk]

I think teams no matter what, should take a goalie in every draft.

That is a bit overkill. Every other year is about right. And when you take them depends on the age of your #1 guy and his injury history. And whether you have a future guy in the organization already.

No reason to be using a 2nd rounder if you are TB right now.

LA with quick at 32 for example should be thinking about life after quick. Do they have their replacement already drafted? If not they should consider using a high pick to get one.

 

[Cor]

That 2nd graph there is interesting.

To me, it shows that goalies drafted in the 61-75 range are the best value, unless there is a can't miss goalie prospect in the top half of the first round.

 

[Brainiac]

I think a good middle-ground approach would be to draft one goalie per round per 7 years. One first rounder, one second rounder, etc. Cycle starts over after 7 years.

Sounds potentially problematic. Deciding in advance like that leaves you open to all kind of mistakes. What if there's no good goalie in 'your' round, but there's an interesting skater? You're gonna take a goalie regardless?

I just don't see how it could help in the long run.

 

[treple13]

Last 7 cup winners:

2018: Holtby (drafted by org)
2017: Murray (drafted by org)
2016: Murray (drafted by org)
2015: Crawford (drafted by org)
2014: Quick (drafted by org)
2013: Crawford (drafted by org)
2012: Quick (drafted by org)

On the other hand, the losers of those series:

2018: Fleury (expansion draft, essentially trade)
2017: Rinne (drafted by org)
2016: Jones (traded for)
2015: Bishop (traded for)
2014: Lundqvist (drafted by org)
2013: Rask (traded for)
2012: Brodeur (drafted by org)

And then you have the Finals previous:

2011: Thomas (European UFA) vs. Luongo (traded for)
2010: Boucher/Leighton (UFA/waivers) vs. Niemi (undrafted FA)

I would suggest that most of those battles weren't won by whether the goalie was drafted by the team or not. It's likely a bit of a statistical anomaly.

 

[Aceboogie]

My strategy would be that in every draft, I would take a 3rd and 4th round pick and trade down with other teams. I would acquire a lower pick, but also get another, also lower pick, in return. I would then take my chances on goalies with those added picks. The value difference of picks after round 2 is negligible, even between a 3rd and 6th round pick, so I would want as many lottery tickets as possible

I would look at taking alot of goalies from the NCAA or Europe in order to be able to see them against better comp early on, but also have them not taking up AHL space right away

I would also rely on a blended scouting and model approach to picking the goalies. I would hesitate to rely solely on scouts, as scouting junior-aged goalies is very hard and no one or no team has been shown to be able to do it consistently good. I would probably test out a system where whenever a certain goalie meets a certain requirement, we would pick them. No matter how many other goalies in the system and would pick them higher if it was justified

 

[tarheelhockey]

Sounds potentially problematic. Deciding in advance like that leaves you open to all kind of mistakes. What if there's no good goalie in 'your' round, but there's an interesting skater? You're gonna take a goalie regardless?

I just don't see how it could help in the long run.

No, not in order like that. It would be more like:

2012: 1st
2013: 4th
2014: 7th
2015: 6th
2016: 3rd
2017: 5th
2018: 2nd

So for 2019, you’ve got license to take a risk on a 1st rounder (unless you’re a lottery team, obv) because it’s been 7 years since the last time.

The goal being, in a 7-year window you want to be touching every round about 1 time. That gives you continuous shots at upper-end talents, middle-range safe picks, and boom-or-bust dark horses.

 

[libertarian]

That draft chart is pretty interesting, and I think your volume-based approach is correct. As a Canes fan we’ve spent several years lamenting the fact that Jim Rutherford didn’t draft a goalie in ‘05, ‘06, ‘07, or ‘09, and didn’t draft a goalie any higher than the 6th round between ‘05 - ‘11. That left the Canes without any kind of goalie pipeline for a generation, which continues to haunt them to this day.

It’s pretty clear to me that ANY goalie pick is better than no goalie picks, but the smart thing is to pepper your draft record with occasional high picks. That’s not “voodoo” so much as common sense that if you can turn out one good talent in a generation, you’ve spent those picks wisely.

Drafting a quality goalie is probably the most difficult job in hockey. The whole goalies are voodoo thing. The best way to get one through the draft is to use one of your late picks every draft year and pick one hoping that one will develop to a good NHL goalie eventually.

 

[Newsworthy]

Whatever you do don't draft a goalie round 1. The best goalies in the league were not first rd picks.

 

[Maukkis]

That 2nd graph there is interesting.

To me, it shows that goalies drafted in the 61-75 range are the best value, unless there is a can't miss goalie prospect in the top half of the first round.

...alternatively, Jonathan Quick and Steve Mason were drafted in that range in the mid-2000s, which gives that group a massive boost. I mentioned it in the post already, but it's tough to find a good sample size that is recent enough. Heck, the last six drafts haven't produced nearly any goalies at all yet.

 

[Maukkis]

On the other hand, the losers of those series:

2018: Fleury (expansion draft, essentially trade)
2017: Rinne (drafted by org)
2016: Jones (traded for)
2015: Bishop (traded for)
2014: Lundqvist (drafted by org)
2013: Rask (traded for)
2012: Brodeur (drafted by org)

And then you have the Finals previous:

2011: Thomas (European UFA) vs. Luongo (traded for)
2010: Boucher/Leighton (UFA/waivers) vs. Niemi (undrafted FA)

I would suggest that most of those battles weren't won by whether the goalie was drafted by the team or not. It's likely a bit of a statistical anomaly.

Correlation =/= causation.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Drafting a quality goalie is probably the most difficult job in hockey. The whole goalies are voodoo thing. The best way to get one through the draft is to use one of your late picks every draft year and pick one hoping that one will develop to a good NHL goalie eventually.

TBH the best bet is probably just to invest in strong goalie coaches at the NHL and minor league levels. Goalies aren’t voodoo, they just play a position where pure athletic talent isn’t enough to set them apart. Coaching, training, equipment, and health are huge factors in the final outcome.

 

[libertarian]

TBH the best bet is probably just to invest in strong goalie coaches at the NHL and minor league levels. Goalies aren’t voodoo, they just play a position where pure athletic talent isn’t enough to set them apart. Coaching, training, equipment, and health are huge factors in the final outcome.

While I believe you may be right about training your goalies to be technically better will help but it will be the ones with the natural talent that become the best. This is no different then any forward or defensive player who is well coached. Some will become top 6 forwards or top 4 D and others will not no matter how well they are coached. The problem with goalies is they on their own can make or break a teams success depending if they are having a good season or not. The Oilers are a great example of this. Talbot plays great in 2016/17 and the Oilers make it to the 7th game of the 2nd PO round while McDavid leads the league in points. Talbot has a bad year in 2017/18 and the Oilers are bottom feeders with McDavid still leading the league with points. Goalies are voodoo. The trick is to find one that can be consistent over many seasons. This is where natural talent plus good technical positioning (coaching) come into play. You can have the best goalie coaches on the planet but they will mean nothing if the goalie doesn't have the natural talent and the confidence to be the best.

 

[StreetHawk]

Whatever you do don't draft a goalie round 1. The best goalies in the league were not first rd picks.

I would not take a goalie before #20 in the draft. Timeline to develop an 18 year old is around 4 year at best to be a backup. Then around 2 years before getting starter role. So, to get from drafted goalie to starting goalie is about 6-7 years normally.

Seeing it now as oettinger was a very late 2017 1st. And prior to him samsonov went in the early 20’s in 2015. Brock boeser was taken right after samsonov. Caps still had holt by who was turning 26 in 2015 and coming off a 73 game regular season with GAA of 2.22 and sv % of 0.923

Really no reason to go goalie at that point. If holtby was 31/32 then it would have made more sense.

 

[Newsworthy]

It amazes me how the experts get it wrong when predicting the success of a goaltender.
What do the Capitals know that other teams dont?
Whatever it is a good GM would be smart to find out.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

All goalies should be grown in a lab using the DNA of the top 5 goalies of all time.

 

[Newsworthy]

All goalies should be grown in a lab using the DNA of the top 5 goalies of all time.

I like this idea.
Need to clone Hasek

 

[Rydgar]

Seems like trading is the way to go with the lower cost in trading and the lower risk of the player busting. Schneider was drafted I believe #26 overall and after an excellent development path over 5-6ish years, he was traded for a mere 9th pick. Even in the best case scenario it doesn't seem worth it to draft a goalie so early on.