Off-Season Fantasy Draft #2 Voting - Nikita Tryamkin Division

[biturbo19]

this is the way


But I also think it's worth it to call out some weird biases this group has.

I do think that i'm a little bit confused as to what people are even voting based on here.

My own team getting obliterated is part of it, but i feel like i'm on the wrong end of a lot of lopsided votes here.


I'm guessing it's an analytics thing? But i don't really pay enough attention to that stuff to even really know. There are a bunch of teams winning with players in roles and positions that they don't actually make any sense for. Which is confusing to me. But i'm new at this...so...maybe that's just how these games are played?

 

[abo9]

cut off nine games played

#17 goals saved above expected per 60

NHL Goalie Statistics

NHL Goalie Analytics, Expected Goals, Expected Rebounds

moneypuck.com

#16 dFSv% Evolving-Hockey.com | Standard Goalie Stats

#21 Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick although annoyingly doesn't do the gsax/60 for you but I just did it anyway because I'm cool

guess who's top right
View attachment 730193

How should the Vezina Trophy race be measured and which goalies are leading the way?

The Vezina Trophy's criteria of being awarded to the goalie who's best at their position can be interpreted a few ways.

theathletic.com

and hockeyviz is pissing me off since you can't grab full tables, but rest assured that Sam Montembeault saves more than expected according to Micah McCurdy too

and all of this is putting aside eye test and fan testimony from this season

My question for the fancy stats is the same as with the regular ones for goalies... how repeatable are these?

If we want to use them to predict the future, how good are they at predicting future success?

2020-21
Goalies	2020	2021	2022
Fleury	0.5	-0.321	0.149
Smith	0.468	0.281	NA
Hellebuyck	0.445	0.257	0.489
Vasilevskiy	0.433	0.453	0.422
Nedelkovic	0.414	-0.128	NA
2021-22
Shesterkin	0.095	0.666	0.483
Andersen	-0.203	0.543	-0.106
Bobrovskiy	-0.268	0.456	0.131
Vasilevskiy
Quick	-0.286	0.398	-0.462
Kuemper	-0.008	0.387	0.164
2022-2023
Ullmark	-0.193	0.147	0.883
Saros	0.386	0.316	0.735
Swayman	NA	0.105	0.715
Sorokin	0.118	0.25	0.647
Gustavsson	NA	NA	0.628
...
Samsonov	-0.307	-0.307	0.436
Montembeault		-0.534	0.303

For each of the last 3 years, I picked a different set of goalies who were amongst the top in XGSAA/60.

I'd need to do it over a larger sample of both years and goalies, but from the sample, I don't have a high confidence in the predictive ability of that stats to declare Montembeault "starter quality" yet.

He had a great year, but does it mean he can replicate? Idk. Worth the gamble as much as any mid-level goalie I guess

 

[hockeynorth]

I do think that i'm a little bit confused as to what people are even voting based on here.

My own team getting obliterated is part of it, but i feel like i'm on the wrong end of a lot of lopsided votes here.


I'm guessing it's an analytics thing? But i don't really pay enough attention to that stuff to even really know. There are a bunch of teams winning with players in roles and positions that they don't actually make any sense for. Which is confusing to me. But i'm new at this...so...maybe that's just how these games are played?

Call them out

My question for the fancy stats is the same as with the regular ones for goalies... how repeatable are these?

If we want to use them to predict the future, how good are they at predicting future success?

2020-21
Goalies	2020	2021	2022
Fleury	0.5	-0.321	0.149
Smith	0.468	0.281	NA
Hellebuyck	0.445	0.257	0.489
Vasilevskiy	0.433	0.453	0.422
Nedelkovic	0.414	-0.128	NA
2021-22
Shesterkin	0.095	0.666	0.483
Andersen	-0.203	0.543	-0.106
Bobrovskiy	-0.268	0.456	0.131
Vasilevskiy
Quick	-0.286	0.398	-0.462
Kuemper	-0.008	0.387	0.164
2022-2023
Ullmark	-0.193	0.147	0.883
Saros	0.386	0.316	0.735
Swayman	NA	0.105	0.715
Sorokin	0.118	0.25	0.647
Gustavsson	NA	NA	0.628
...
Samsonov	-0.307	-0.307	0.436
Montembeault		-0.534	0.303

For each of the last 3 years, I picked a different set of goalies who were amongst the top in XGSAA/60.

I'd need to do it over a larger sample of both years and goalies, but from the sample, I don't have a high confidence in the predictive ability of that stats to declare Montembeault "starter quality" yet.

He had a great year, but does it mean he can replicate? Idk. Worth the gamble as much as any mid-level goalie I guess

Love this for a couple reasons but especially because it sounds like whoever took the leagues most consistently great goalie in Vasi and built a great dcorps in front of them is well set up for success

If your goalie was sub 900 or Dcorps sucked it would’ve taken A LOT for me to vote for you

 

[hockeynorth]

For reference 3B I had some serious concerns about that second pair and Jarry

 

[Panda Bear]

My question for the fancy stats is the same as with the regular ones for goalies... how repeatable are these?

If we want to use them to predict the future, how good are they at predicting future success?

2020-21
Goalies	2020	2021	2022
Fleury	0.5	-0.321	0.149
Smith	0.468	0.281	NA
Hellebuyck	0.445	0.257	0.489
Vasilevskiy	0.433	0.453	0.422
Nedelkovic	0.414	-0.128	NA
2021-22
Shesterkin	0.095	0.666	0.483
Andersen	-0.203	0.543	-0.106
Bobrovskiy	-0.268	0.456	0.131
Vasilevskiy
Quick	-0.286	0.398	-0.462
Kuemper	-0.008	0.387	0.164
2022-2023
Ullmark	-0.193	0.147	0.883
Saros	0.386	0.316	0.735
Swayman	NA	0.105	0.715
Sorokin	0.118	0.25	0.647
Gustavsson	NA	NA	0.628
...
Samsonov	-0.307	-0.307	0.436
Montembeault		-0.534	0.303

For each of the last 3 years, I picked a different set of goalies who were amongst the top in XGSAA/60.

I'd need to do it over a larger sample of both years and goalies, but from the sample, I don't have a high confidence in the predictive ability of that stats to declare Montembeault "starter quality" yet.

He had a great year, but does it mean he can replicate? Idk. Worth the gamble as much as any mid-level goalie I guess

Love it.

To my mind, three things have a strong influence on goalie performance:

(1) Team quality. Montreal being an absolute laughing stock in 21-22 would have contributed to that (e.g. Ullmark in Buffalo versus Boston).

(2) Whether the goalie is dealing with an unresolved medical condition that season (e.g. Demko before surgery).

(3) Vibes (e.g. Samsonov in Washington).

 

[OB5]

Love it.

To my mind, three things have a strong influence on goalie performance:

(1) Team quality. Montreal being an absolute laughing stock in 21-22 would have contributed to that.

(2) Whether the goalie is dealing with an unresolved medical condition that season (e.g. Demko before surgery).

(3) Vibes (e.g. Samsonov in Washington).

I prefer you refer to them as a normal laughing stock rather than an absolute laughing stock.

 

[Panda Bear]

I prefer you refer to them as a normal laughing stock rather than an absolute laughing stock.

They were normal this year.

 

[biturbo19]

My question for the fancy stats is the same as with the regular ones for goalies... how repeatable are these?

If we want to use them to predict the future, how good are they at predicting future success?

2020-21
Goalies	2020	2021	2022
Fleury	0.5	-0.321	0.149
Smith	0.468	0.281	NA
Hellebuyck	0.445	0.257	0.489
Vasilevskiy	0.433	0.453	0.422
Nedelkovic	0.414	-0.128	NA
2021-22
Shesterkin	0.095	0.666	0.483
Andersen	-0.203	0.543	-0.106
Bobrovskiy	-0.268	0.456	0.131
Vasilevskiy
Quick	-0.286	0.398	-0.462
Kuemper	-0.008	0.387	0.164
2022-2023
Ullmark	-0.193	0.147	0.883
Saros	0.386	0.316	0.735
Swayman	NA	0.105	0.715
Sorokin	0.118	0.25	0.647
Gustavsson	NA	NA	0.628
...
Samsonov	-0.307	-0.307	0.436
Montembeault		-0.534	0.303

For each of the last 3 years, I picked a different set of goalies who were amongst the top in XGSAA/60.

I'd need to do it over a larger sample of both years and goalies, but from the sample, I don't have a high confidence in the predictive ability of that stats to declare Montembeault "starter quality" yet.

He had a great year, but does it mean he can replicate? Idk. Worth the gamble as much as any mid-level goalie I guess

Yeah. I don't think the analytics have remotely pinned down goaltending with any reliable, predictive value at this point.

The way i see it, we're in a weird era where the level of refined technique has leveled a lot of things off, to where external factors influence goaltending as much as, or more than individual play. We have maybe half a dozen goaltenders who are true "impact players" who are truly dependable in delivering top quality play year in and year out. Then we've got a big soupy mess of guys who are entirely capable of providing solid goaltending in any given year, but also capable of having a real stinker of a season. Then we've got some guys who are playing minutes because they're the best option available, but just kind of suck.


Everything is so systematized now. From goaltending technique itself, to the systems play of a team defensively. Gone are the days where a goaltender was just freelancing and reflex. They're one cog in the machine now. Play the percentages and hope the team in front of you can keep the play in front of you limited to mostly low percentage chances. And that obviously goes both ways. A team that is limiting chances to a lot of low percentage chances needs the goaltender to make those saves or the whole thing comes unraveled.



You've also got complete wildcards like Bobrovsky in there, who aren't as rigidly systematic in their approach. He's the poster boy for how erratic goaltending can be when it's played a little bit more adventurously. He can range anywhere from gamebreaker to complete sieve on any given day or year. But there only a handful of guys who still play this way.


I actually like Montembeault and have since he was a prospect. But i feel like he's the sort of guy that makes more sense when paired with a more "conventional" or "even keel" sort of goaltender. Something more "safe" where you may not get the same "highs" but avoid some of the same "lows" as well. MAF is another one of those wildly volatile guys who is a bit of a throwback. He's had a long career to establish that even in the same situation...his play can range anywhere from Vezina candidate to completely useless. He's got that "shotgun spread" of potential outcomes that is getting even more questionable with age as his reflexes start to go. Compared to a lot of other goaltenders who have a more narrow, "just alright" sort of spread.


But that's just my opinion. I'd like Montembeault better if he was paired with even...Jake Allen over MAF.