Projecting Murray 3+ Years Forward

Shady Machine

Registered User
Aug 6, 2010
36,704
8,141
@nbonaddio I'm grateful for your analysis and think it's pretty interesting. It's clear you put a lot of work into it. People criticize whatever results go against their beliefs. I think the main contention is in conclusions drawn from the analysis as opposed to what the actual data says. It makes perfect sense that there is a wild swing in projections based on AHL stats and limited NHL action. Murray is an interesting case since he's had amazing success in short sample sizes, but I do agree that we still don't really know what he's going to be as a 60+ game starter. I think that may have more to do with injury concerns than ability, but that likely applies to everyone else in your model too. Keep updating us on this over time.
 

vikingGoalie

Registered User
Oct 31, 2010
2,901
1,324
well first off his dad passing away, that is awful and you can't predict the effect that might have on him. That said, he was playing poorly BEFORE his dad suddenly passed away.
I tend to look at how the goals are going in, specifically the part that the goalie can control. Right position, right angle, depth, square, rebound control, recover. All that sorta thing.

The big thing I see this year is that Murray's tracking is just not at the same level it was. Watch, when murray is tracking and focused (tracking is usually a focus issue) you can really tell on tips.
He will read that the shot is going to be tipped and square up on the person tipping the puck, not the shooter. I think most of what is going wrong with Murray this year is mental, last game, first goal was pretty dang bad, that was a focus issue. The back hander after that was in a good place and tricky because it's a back hander, but murray from last year would stop that. The blocker side shot from that pass from Vanek. I blame the defense, but Murray didn't read the pass and was very deep in net, he might not make that save anyway but just saying if he is tracking/reading the play his feet aren't where they where when the shot came in.

All goalies rely on anticipating the play to some degree, blocking style goalies like Murray even more so. When his focus/tracking comes back he will anticipate better and we'll see an improved product on the ice. I think Murray will come back to the level he was before, my only worry is that his lack of anticipation / tracking is some lingering effect from the Concussion. We've seen that before, where it takes a good number of games back to really get the brain working right again after a concussion for a goalie.
 

cheesedanish87

Registered User
Jun 27, 2012
10,797
2,157
Pittsburgh
Its very hard to predict because his play has been so drastically different over his first 3 years.

We need more of a sample size to figure out what hes going to be.
 

Dipsy Doodle

Rent A Barn
May 28, 2006
76,565
21,101
He doesn't care. You're responding to one of those facebook lunatics who went into histrionics about losing the soul of the team when Vegas claimed Monsieur Rouleau de Baril.

For sure. But I still like to indulge in a little fact-checking from time to time, if only for my own sanity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brandinho

Shady Machine

Registered User
Aug 6, 2010
36,704
8,141
Its very hard to predict because his play has been so drastically different over his first 3 years.

We need more of a sample size to figure out what hes going to be.

Depends what you mean. I hope you would agree he's a proven starting goalie at least.
 

Dipsy Doodle

Rent A Barn
May 28, 2006
76,565
21,101
View attachment 110581
Horny leads the league in High danger scoring chances in eleven games played less than McDavid

Not a coincidence that all of the guys mentioned there (aside from McD) make their living either in front of or driving opposition nets.

As you said, I'm still optimistic and as I said, the playoffs are the only thing that ultimately matters. But for whatever reason, people only look for what they want to hear, which is to say no criticism of Murray appears to be allowed. And certainly no pointing out of the hypocrisy of protecting Murray against years of burying MAF.

Next year is the big year. Floor is Steve Mason, ceiling is Price.

The difference, of course, is that Murray did nothing but put up historically great peformances in the AHL and NHL in the regular season and playoffs before the twin extenuating circumstances of concussions and his father dying, and MAF put up one of the worst 4 year runs of any playoff starter in league history (between '09-'10 and '12-'13 his GAA was 3.18 and his SV% was .880) despite no comparable extenuating circumstances.

Nobody can say for certain how things will play out - particularly with the concussion issues - but Murray deserves the benefit of the doubt far more than Fleury did. This isn't a "new toy" double standard, it's purely performance-based.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brandinho

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,720
46,691
Maybe I'm being naive, but if he just wanted to knock Murray, why write a post that starts by pointing out this is probably a giant anomaly, restates the case for him having a Price-like career, and finish by predicting a good next season for him? And why wait until know, when he's been struggling pretty much all season?

First off, I thought it was raggamuffin that bumped it to add his "band aid solution" post. That was where my "only posts when Murray struggles, but disappears when he's doing well" comment was directed at.

Second, the model used by the OP is suspect in analyzing this year's performance because no model could predict or include the effect of losing one's parent to it. If Murray had been healthy and no deaths in his family, and the model predicted he'd struggle, then sure, it has some validity. But I just don't see how you can use any sort of model to analyze *this* season Murray had, with all those outside factors.
 

Shady Machine

Registered User
Aug 6, 2010
36,704
8,141
First off, I thought it was raggamuffin that bumped it to add his "band aid solution" post. That was where my "only posts when Murray struggles, but disappears when he's doing well" comment was directed at.

Second, the model used by the OP is suspect in analyzing this year's performance because no model could predict or include the effect of losing one's parent to it. If Murray had been healthy and no deaths in his family, and the model predicted he'd struggle, then sure, it has some validity. But I just don't see how you can use any sort of model to analyze *this* season Murray had, with all those outside factors.

The model didn't predict this performance and the OP suggested he thought it was an anomaly. I think the point is that statistical models based on AHL success produce a wide range of NHL career results. Basically it boils down to "a goalie's career is crazy hard to predict based on stats in non NHL leagues and short sample sizes". With more time in NHL, the model is refined and comparisons become more accurate. Honestly, it's a lesson in why you need scouts, goalie coaches, etc and a caution to fans not to get super excited about flashes with any player, particularly a goalie (shout out to the pro-fleury facebook crowd claiming Jarry and Gus are going to be better than Murray).
 

Penguinsyay

Registered User
Jul 20, 2007
402
32
Although this is marginally interesting, I wouldn't put much stake in a stat comparison like this. As so many of the other comments have said, extenuating circumstances have really shaken up anyone's potential predictions, as seems to often be the case in the real world. And the similarities between Murray and some of these other goalies begins and ends at AHL and Rookie statistics, which is already a stretch considering Murray entered the league under very unique circumstances. I'm still curious to see how much of his great performance was influenced by having the strong competition with MAF, and having the pressure of the playoffs. Similarly, how much of his poor performance this year was due to family stuff and injuries. It could just be that he performs phenomenally under pressure or fighting for a position, or maybe he is always great when he isn't emotionally distraught or concussed. I'd give it these playoffs and probably another season before making a judgement call.
 

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,477
25,327
First off, I thought it was raggamuffin that bumped it to add his "band aid solution" post. That was where my "only posts when Murray struggles, but disappears when he's doing well" comment was directed at.

Second, the model used by the OP is suspect in analyzing this year's performance because no model could predict or include the effect of losing one's parent to it. If Murray had been healthy and no deaths in his family, and the model predicted he'd struggle, then sure, it has some validity. But I just don't see how you can use any sort of model to analyze *this* season Murray had, with all those outside factors.

Oh well if you thought it was Ragamuffin that's different :laugh:

And... eh, disagree. I agree his personal circs and shizzle means you take the model with a grain of salt - particularly with how unlikely such a season was - but it still has some value. But each to their own.
 

Brandinho

deng xiaoping gang
Aug 28, 2005
14,804
1,405
República de Cuba
Yes.



This board is a weird place. The initial projections for MM were pretty mediocre, which led people to criticize the original post with an eye towards MAF-ism. Based on his 2017 play, the projections got adjusted up, and everyone was happy. Now in 2018 that his performance has underperformed even relative to the original projections, apparently it's flawed and there's a bunch of excuses as to why.

As you said, I'm still optimistic and as I said, the playoffs are the only thing that ultimately matters. But for whatever reason, people only look for what they want to hear, which is to say no criticism of Murray appears to be allowed. And certainly no pointing out of the hypocrisy of protecting Murray against years of burying MAF.

Next year is the big year. Floor is Steve Mason, ceiling is Price.

The results of the projections themselves are not the reason why I don't take your posts seriously, it's your methodology. You don't account for things that can't be measured statistically because there's no viable way for you to do so. Ergo, you can only ever show an incomplete picture by plugging data into an algorithm. However, despite this incomplete picture, you seem to act as if your results are gospel and use them solely to inform your opinions. That is a mistake. There is no emotion in anything I've said, I just don't find much value in anything you've posted. Others are free to disagree and assign whatever credence to your work that they choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sidney the Kidney

nbonaddio

BELLOWS: THE BEST
Mar 28, 2007
900
184
No statistical model can account for the tumultuous season that Murray has had mentally and physically. He'll be fine, there is not a shred of doubt in my mind about that.

Nope. But thanks for being a dick to me through the entire thread!

I wish the situation was different. Obviously. But man, I'd sure love the .917/2.36 that was seen as bearish and impossibly pessimistic.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
92,040
74,298
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Nope. But thanks for being a dick to me through the entire thread!

I wish the situation was different. Obviously. But man, I'd sure love the .917/2.36 that was seen as bearish and impossibly pessimistic.

Nice call on this one.

But, I wonder if your numbers just prove the extreme ups and downs of young goaltenders in this league. Regardless great work.
 

nbonaddio

BELLOWS: THE BEST
Mar 28, 2007
900
184
Nice call on this one.

But, I wonder if your numbers just prove the extreme ups and downs of young goaltenders in this league. Regardless great work.

Oh, for sure, it's 99.99% that and 0.01% anything that I did. I think that was actually the point I was (poorly) trying to get across, that there were many, many unknowns about Murray at the time and many were already anointing him as the GOAT.
 
Last edited:

ChaosAgent

Registered User
May 8, 2018
17,851
12,181
Nope. But thanks for being a dick to me through the entire thread!

I wish the situation was different. Obviously. But man, I'd sure love the .917/2.36 that was seen as bearish and impossibly pessimistic.

Bumping this thread is like when you leave the dentist and they're like "um, so are you able to make your next appointment Tuesday, September 22, 2021 at 10AM?"

But I still kinda love it.

Would be cool if this morphed into the "Matt Murray Appreciation Thread."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shady Machine

nbonaddio

BELLOWS: THE BEST
Mar 28, 2007
900
184
Would be cool if this morphed into the "Matt Murray Appreciation Thread."

Without him, we don't win two cups. Full stop. He forever deserves respect for that.

He's also far from washed -- many elite goaltenders suffered a fallow patch and came through the other side. Carey Price 2013 comes to mind.

He also could have been an asshole about the demotion, fought publicly with management, refused to have a cordial relationship with Jarry, etc.

I actually think he'll be fine. I just don't think it'll be here.
 

heysmilinstrange

Registered User
Nov 10, 2016
3,321
4,765
I love the pettiness of this bump, OP. I think Murray can still be a great goalie in the league, and a fresh start will probably be great for him.
 

Pancakes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 4, 2011
26,278
18,174
Plug Murray in on a team that plays defense well and I'm sure he'll be fine. Does anyone doubt for example that if he were the Islanders goalie that his numbers would be stellar?

Not saying I don't want him moved mind you. It's clearly not working here. But I don't think he's done as a good goalie.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad