News Article: Sharks’ goaltending is historically bad for Stanley Cup contender

[Fistfullofbeer]

Created a different post in the Martin Jones thread, but for reference, for goalies with more than 800 minutes TOI Jones is dead last in SV%.

 

[stator]

One thing about DW is that he never believes in hope and pray that things will turn around. He's aggressive about acquiring pieces to improve the competitive picture.

Thus, I have to believe that DW made significant effort to acquire a goaltender, but couldn't close a deal. Probably because high asking price to the Sharks, and not having trade pieces as most were used up prior.

I don't think there was much in the way of goaltender availability at the TDL this season either. Things like CBJ deciding to go for it, rather than trade their players that won't sign and are UFA after this season affected inventory.

 

[Bleedred]

You did count a double screen as a stoppable goal for jones because we had this arguement in the game day thread. And if that is even remotely close to your standard as a stoppable goal then i am going to take your data on this stuff with even less then a grain of salt.

Edit: and how is the 3rd goal vs nashville counted as a stoppable goal?

Because Jones got beat on a wraparound.

Goaltending 101: clean wraparound goals are BAD goals.

I know it wasn’t exactly clean, but he did the same thing he did on the third goal last game. Overplayed it and got caught out of the net. That’s a bad goal.

It was either the second or third goal against Florida that was also bad. Whatever one went flying past him blocker side from distance. By that Dryden guy. Most of the GDT also didn’t have a problem faulting Jones on that one either.

Don’t worry, Koskinen is right on his back and might pass him in my stoppable goal count soon enough. He’s ripped through the 30’s and into the 40’s the last several starts.

As far as screens go, I think some people are very generous with screens. A guy standing in the corner slightly off to his side and it’s a screen. Or some guy 20-30 feet out is a screen to some people. If something like that is screening the goalie then it’s provably his fault that it screened him.

A maze of players or a guy right in front of the goalie’s face and I won’t count it as stoppable.

And even if you don’t like my list, we still have 56 games worth of .898% goaltending this year from Jones. Those numbers are bad enough.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Um, how is a guy screening up high provably the goalie's fault? That seems overly simplistic.

 

[tony d]

Hope he picks it up for the playoffs. The talent on this team right now, it'd be to bad if it bad goaltending sunk us.

 

[Bleedred]

Um, how is a guy screening up high provably the goalie's fault? That seems overly simplistic.

Because if you let one single guy screen you from all the way to there then you have to do a better job.

And with people who excuse every little screen, you gotta do more to battle through the screen as a goalie. You can’t just accept that the goalie keeps getting screened and absolve him of all blame.

Getting screened by one single skater up high is pretty poor.

I’ve never counted a goal as stoppable where there was a maze of players or a guy in front of the goalie though.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Because if you let one single guy screen you from all the way to there then you have to do a better job.

And with people who excuse every little screen, you gotta do more to battle through the screen as a goalie. You can’t just accept that the goalie keeps getting screened and absolve him of all blame.

Getting screened by one single skater up high is pretty poor.

I’ve never counted a goal as stoppable where there was a maze of player or a guy in front of the goalie though.

You also can't have a baseless claim that a screen from whatever arbitrary distance you want to come up with is provably the goalie's fault either. It requires much more context than that.

 

[Bleedred]

You also can't have a baseless claim that a screen from whatever arbitrary distance you want to come up with is provably the goalie's fault either. It requires much more context than that.

You said the same thing with Bernier a few weeks back on the slightest of screens.

Did you ever think the reason a goalie like Bernier gets beat on the slightest of screens because Bernier sucks?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

You said the same thing with Bernier a few weeks back on the slightest of screens.

Did you ever think the reason a goalie like Bernier gets beat on the slightest of screens because Bernier sucks?

Well, it's because your view of what screens are and what they do is seemingly without any level of understanding of what the goaltender actually sees from his position. And you're still wrong about that screen regarding Bernier and it's mind boggling that you still can't see that and it fundamentally skews your project because of that perception you have that I view as unreasonable.

 

[wraith985]

You can quibble about the specific line to draw, but as long as the standard is consistent there's at least some value to the results. When they jive so well with the raw stats and the advanced stats, I'm more inclined to believe than not because there's additional confirmatory information to look to. I've yet to see the same for the opposite position.

Generally this year I feel like people have tried to quibble about a lot of specific goals in an attempt to defend Jones. OK, fine, but when there are THAT many goals where you have to make an excuse for the goaltender and have it "not count", that's a problem in and of itself. That's like when we were in grade school and something "didn't count" because someone "wasn't ready" or whatever. If it happens once or sparingly, fine. When it happens all the time, there's no longer any benefit of the doubt to be given.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

You can quibble about the specific line to draw, but as long as the standard is consistent there's at least some value to the results. When they jive so well with the raw stats and the advanced stats, I'm more inclined to believe than not.

Generally this year I feel like people have tried to quibble about a lot of specific goals in an attempt to defend Jones. OK, fine, but when there are THAT many goals where you have to make an excuse for the goaltender and have it "not count", that's a problem in and of itself. That's like when we were in grade school and something "didn't count" because someone "wasn't ready" or whatever. If it happens once or sparingly, fine. When it happens all the time, there's no longer any benefit of the doubt to be given.

And if the other side has a similar claim about an issue that is happening all the time that is contributing to the issue then the same argument happens. Both things can be true but only one of those things is there something coherent to be done about it at this stage.

 

[SactoShark]

The basic stats are bad, the fancy stats are bad, the eye test is bad.

I haven't smelled the goalies, but I image they smell bad too.

 

[wraith985]

And if the other side has a similar claim about an issue that is happening all the time that is contributing to the issue then the same argument happens. Both things can be true but only one of those things is there something coherent to be done about it at this stage.

Oh I don't think anyone's disputing that. Most Jones 'haters' can acknowledge it's not all on Jones. At least for me, all I want is for Jones defenders to at least acknowledge that he's been bad. He may not be the only problem, but he's been a big part of it. And I just don't see that being admitted very often. Yeah, the only thing left to do is tighten up on team defense and hope Jones doesn't wet the bed. That doesn't mean people are suddenly absolved from representing reality at least somewhat accurately. It really is a horrible position when having Cam Ward's statline would be a massive improvement and people still refuse to put any responsibility on the goaltender.

 

[Barrie22]

Because Jones got beat on a wraparound.

Goaltending 101: clean wraparound goals are BAD goals.

I know it wasn’t exactly clean, but he did the same thing he did on the third goal last game. Overplayed it and got caught out of the net. That’s a bad goal.

It was either the second or third goal against Florida that was also bad. Whatever one went flying past him blocker side from distance. By that Dryden guy. Most of the GDT also didn’t have a problem faulting Jones on that one either.

Don’t worry, Koskinen is right on his back and might pass him in my stoppable goal count soon enough. He’s ripped through the 30’s and into the 40’s the last several starts.

As far as screens go, I think some people are very generous with screens. A guy standing in the corner slightly off to his side and it’s a screen. Or some guy 20-30 feet out is a screen to some people. If something like that is screening the goalie then it’s provably his fault that it screened him.

A maze of players or a guy right in front of the goalie’s face and I won’t count it as stoppable.

And even if you don’t like my list, we still have 56 games worth of .898% goaltending this year from Jones. Those numbers are bad enough.

Here is where context and your so called data get ruined.

Jones vs nashville 3rd goal. Low point shot off the toe, rebound right to a preds player who was in a good position to shoot right away (jones got in position for the rebound shot, like he should) and score. But instead holds onto the puck and goes around the back of the net. Jones gets caught up with braun and still manages to almost make it back. Preds player just throws it outfront and the puck goes in off the sharks stick and right up to the top of the net.

 

[Barrie22]

Oh I don't think anyone's disputing that. Most Jones 'haters' can acknowledge it's not all on Jones. At least for me, all I want is for Jones defenders to at least acknowledge that he's been bad. He may not be the only problem, but he's been a big part of it. And I just don't see that being admitted very often. Yeah, the only thing left to do is tighten up on team defense and hope Jones doesn't wet the bed. That doesn't mean people are suddenly absolved from representing reality at least somewhat accurately. It really is a horrible position when having Cam Ward's statline would be a massive improvement and people still refuse to put any responsibility on the goaltender.

But its not some magical coincidence that when the defense tightens up. Jones stats goes up.

Every one has put responsibilty on the goalies. Every one has said they need to be better. But there are a few that understand that not every single goal allowed is the goalies fault. Some here can actually dissect the plays that happen in the games to point the blame at the right person/s.

 

[hockeyball]

The basic stats are bad, the fancy stats are bad, the eye test is bad.

I haven't smelled the goalies, but I image they smell bad too.

I mean, have you ever smelled a goalie? If a goalie smells anything less than putrid, he either just got new pads or he's never played before.

 

[wraith985]

Of course it's not a magical coincidence. I would have thought that was so obvious so as to be perfunctory. But the Sharks aren't the only team in the league that gives up those chances. The Sharks aren't the only uneven ones while everyone else plays to their potential every night. Every goaltender's statistics are affected by the play of the team in front of them. Is it seriously anyone's contention that the spurts of bad San Jose outweigh the consistently bad defense on other teams? For example, Cam Ward faces more than 11 HD shots against *per night*, *on average* at evens. Are we saying that these spurts of bad San Jose outweigh 60 minutes a night, every night of league worst defense, to the tune of a .015 save percentage differential?

We're 70 games in now. His stats are buoyed by the good times just like they're getting hurt by the bad times. And his numbers are flatly unacceptable, bottom line. He's been bad. Of course the team can tighten up around him to hide him and make it work. That's what has to happen, and I think Jones is good enough to make it work too. But make no mistake, that's what this is - the way Jones has played this year, they have to hide him.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Of course it's not a magical coincidence. I would have thought that was so obvious so as to be perfunctory. But the Sharks aren't the only team in the league that gives up those chances. The Sharks aren't the only uneven ones while everyone else plays to their potential every night. Every goaltender's statistics are affected by the play of the team in front of them. Is it seriously anyone's contention that the spurts of bad San Jose outweigh the consistently bad defense on other teams? For example, Cam Ward faces more than 11 HD shots against *per night*, *on average* at evens. Are we saying that these spurts of bad San Jose outweigh 60 minutes a night, every night of league worst defense, to the tune of a .015 save percentage differential?

We're 70 games in now. His stats are buoyed by the good times just like they're getting hurt by the bad times. And his numbers are flatly unacceptable, bottom line. He's been bad. Of course the team can tighten up around him to hide him and make it work. That's what has to happen, and I think Jones is good enough to make it work too. But make no mistake, that's what this is - the way Jones has played this year, they have to hide him.

Well said. Agreed on all counts.

The one thing that I will add regarding the team defense is that a very high percentage of the shots that Jones faces are high danger, grade A type shots - maybe higher than any other goaltender in the NHL. The Sharks do a great job of suppressing shots (they allow the lowest shot rate in the NHL at 5V5), but only a mediocre or good job of suppressing high danger, true grade A type chances.

So, while the Sharks definitely don’t have the worst defense in the NHL, they might have the least flattering defense to SV% in the NHL. I’m not saying they do, but it’s something to consider.

That’s not to excuse our goaltenders, who have been absolutely terrible. The Sharks have a 89.99% SV% at 5V5 - by far the worst in the NHL. Second worst is Ottawa at 90.74%.

 

[wraith985]

If you look at the data I pulled in the other thread, you'll see that Mrazek, Smith, and (surprisingly) Rinne are probably Jones' closest comparables in terms of share of high danger shots vs all shots against. I was shocked to see Rinne facing well over 8 HDSA/60 on not much more volume than Jones sees. Three guesses whether that evened out the stats...

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

If you look at the data I pulled in the other thread, you'll see that Mrazek, Smith, and (surprisingly) Rinne are probably Jones' closest comparables in terms of share of high danger shots vs all shots against. I was shocked to see Rinne facing well over 8 HDSA/60 on not much more volume than Jones sees. Three guesses whether that evened out the stats...

To be clear, I’m not talking about “HDSA”. I’m talking about grade A, wide open net type chances that aren’t always accurately quantified by those stats.

 

[Barrie22]

If you look at the data I pulled in the other thread, you'll see that Mrazek, Smith, and (surprisingly) Rinne are probably Jones' closest comparables in terms of share of high danger shots vs all shots against. I was shocked to see Rinne facing well over 8 HDSA/60 on not much more volume than Jones sees. Three guesses whether that evened out the stats...

High danger shots stat is a good stat but it is still far from perfect.

A 2 on 1 with a cross ice pass for a tap in goal is counted the same as a wrist shot with no traffic from the hash marks. Both high danger shots but 1 is harder then the other.

And if people pay attention jones and dell face a lot of those 2 on 1 scenarios.

Scrambling has never been jones style and he has never shown an ability to turn into hasek when he does need to.

For the most part when jones is able to get his body set and challenge the shooter he does good no matter how difficult the shot is.

 

[zeus]

Someone needs to get Jones a bungee cord. I cringe every time he goes behind the net to handle the puck.

 

[Barrie22]

Someone needs to get Jones a bungee cord. I cringe every time he goes behind the net to handle the puck.

He very rarely does though. And to be fair i can't remember the last time he has gone behind the net and cost us a goal. He is no mike smith in this area where its almost guaranteed to be a goal against.

 

[wraith985]

Ok, so now the contention is that San Jose's high danger shots against are so much worse than every other team's that it makes a .897 sv% turn into something resembling league average (.909) goaltending? San Jose has given up 17 extra goals this year over and above even the most putrid defenses in the nhl because their HDSA are especially dangerous? I just don't find that plausible in the slightest.

 

[Barrie22]

Ok, so now the contention is that San Jose's high danger shots against are so much worse than every other team's that it makes a .897 sv% turn into something resembling league average (.909) goaltending? San Jose has given up 17 extra goals this year over and above even the most putrid defenses in the nhl because their HDSA are especially dangerous? I just don't find that plausible in the slightest.

It is plausible. The sharks for the most part limit shots. But the shots that they let up are frequently high danger breakaways or 2 on 1's.