Strength of Opposition for Goaltenders

[overpass]

I used the Hockey Summary Project records to track the average quality of opposition faced by NHL goaltenders from 1967-68 to 1986-87.

This is of interest for several reasons. For some, it may be worthwile in its own right to look at the way in which NHL teams deployed their goalies. For those who look at NHL goalie stats, it’s important to know how those stats were affected by the strength of opposition they faced. And for those who wish to compare the records of goalies on the same team, it’s very important to know which of them, if either, got the tougher starts.

Method: For each goaltender, I calculated the average winning percentage and the average goals per game of their opponents. I weighted each game equally, not by minutes played, which is not ideal but shouldn’t make much difference. I also made an additional adjustment for home/road. For each road game played by a goalie, I increased the opponent’s winning percentage by 40 points (0.040). I also multiplied their opponent’s goals per game by 1.07. For home games, I applied the adjustments in reverse, subtracting and dividing instead of multiplying and adding. I made no adjustments for back-to-backs or anything else that could affect the difficulty in a particular game.

Here are some results for several goaltenders. Just to be clear, the numbers I'm posting here are only the strength of opposition numbers. I'm not posting their actual records - hockey-reference.com has that easily available if you must see it.

Strength of Opposition – Ken Dryden vs Backups

Year | GP(KD) | GP(Oth) | OppW%(KD) | OppW%(Oth) | OppG/G(KD) | OppG/G(Oth)
1972 | 64 | 16 | 0.489 | 0.488 | 2.91 | 2.93
1973 | 54 | 27 | 0.487 | 0.474 | 3.14 | 3.17
1975 | 56 | 25 | 0.489 | 0.469 | 3.40 | 3.26
1976 | 62 | 22 | 0.490 | 0.433 | 3.40 | 3.22
1977 | 56 | 26 | 0.491 | 0.454 | 3.27 | 3.08
1978 | 52 | 30 | 0.502 | 0.443 | 3.30 | 3.07
1979 | 47 | 34 | 0.493 | 0.462 | 3.47 | 3.43

Not surprisingly, Ken Dryden tended to face stronger opponents than his backup goalies. This tendency was most pronounced during the dynasty years of 1975-76 to 1978-79.

Using a weighted average, here are my estimates for Dryden vs his backups in the regular season, and the amount of the difference that is explained by the different opposition they faced.

Win %: Dryden was 0.026 worse than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, stronger than his backups faced by by 0.034.

GAA: Dryden was 0.44 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, stronger than his backups faced by by 0.11.

Strength of Opposition – Tony Esposito vs Backups

Year | GP(TO) | GP(Oth) | OppW%(TO) | OppW%(Oth) | OppG/G(TO) | OppG/G(Oth)
1970 | 63 | 14 | 0.519 | 0.441 | 2.82 | 2.69
1971 | 57 | 25 | 0.483 | 0.504 | 3.01 | 3.00
1972 | 48 | 34 | 0.455 | 0.526 | 2.84 | 3.19
1973 | 56 | 32 | 0.470 | 0.560 | 3.07 | 3.41
1974 | 70 | 10 | 0.486 | 0.469 | 3.09 | 3.12
1975 | 71 | 12 | 0.507 | 0.449 | 3.43 | 3.25
1976 | 68 | 15 | 0.471 | 0.574 | 3.29 | 3.74
1977 | 69 | 14 | 0.495 | 0.569 | 3.27 | 3.70
1978 | 64 | 16 | 0.483 | 0.502 | 3.27 | 3.40
1979 | 63 | 17 | 0.462 | 0.552 | 3.39 | 3.63
1980 | 69 | 11 | 0.492 | 0.535 | 3.53 | 3.58
1981 | 66 | 15 | 0.493 | 0.529 | 3.81 | 3.96
1982 | 52 | 29 | 0.479 | 0.512 | 3.92 | 4.12
1983 | 39 | 39 | 0.493 | 0.470 | 3.80 | 3.81

Tony Esposito tended to face easier opposition than his backup goalies. Chicago preferred to play their backups on the road.

Weighted average estimates
Win %: Esposito was 0.059 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, weaker than his backups faced by by 0.034.

GAA: Esposito was 0.37 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, weaker than his backups faced by by 0.17.

These estimates are affected quite a bit by Esposito’s weaker last two years, in which he played fewer games, because of the weighting method. After removing those two seasons, from 1970-1981:

Win %: Esposito was 0.094 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, weaker than his backups faced by 0.054.

GAA: Esposito was 0.74 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, weaker than his backups faced by 0.23.

Strength of Opposition – Billy Smith vs Backups

Year | GP(BS) | GP(Oth) | OppW%(BS) | OppW%(Oth) | OppG/G(BS) | OppG/G(Oth)
1973 | 37 | 45 | 0.530 | 0.527 | 3.32 | 3.29
1974 | 46 | 36 | 0.530 | 0.503 | 3.23 | 3.17
1975 | 58 | 25 | 0.517 | 0.459 | 3.49 | 3.28
1976 | 39 | 44 | 0.452 | 0.524 | 3.29 | 3.48
1977 | 36 | 46 | 0.490 | 0.493 | 3.34 | 3.29
1978 | 38 | 46 | 0.517 | 0.466 | 3.28 | 3.24
1979 | 40 | 43 | 0.500 | 0.491 | 3.53 | 3.45
1980 | 38 | 47 | 0.497 | 0.501 | 3.50 | 3.53
1981 | 41 | 43 | 0.486 | 0.489 | 3.82 | 3.80
1982 | 46 | 36 | 0.514 | 0.459 | 4.04 | 3.90
1983 | 41 | 44 | 0.487 | 0.487 | 3.79 | 3.82
1984 | 42 | 49 | 0.495 | 0.485 | 3.84 | 3.88
1985 | 37 | 49 | 0.488 | 0.491 | 3.80 | 3.85
1986 | 41 | 45 | 0.512 | 0.485 | 3.85 | 3.84
1987 | 40 | 46 | 0.494 | 0.505 | 3.67 | 3.73

Billy Smith is an interesting case. He split regular season playing time equally with his fellow goaltenders for almost his whole career. And his regular season results were very similar to theirs. It appears that he faced slightly stronger opponents over most of his career, but not by much.

Weighted average estimates
Win %: Smith was 0.026 worse than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, stronger than his backups faced by 0.007.

GAA: Smith was 0.14 worse than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, identical in this respect to that which his backups faced.

Smith played opposite a number of different goaltenders, so we can break his results down by goaltender.

1973-74 (Gerry Desjardins): Smith’s winning percentage was better (0.034) against stronger opposition (0.015). His GAA was better (-0.29) against stronger opposition (0.05).

1975-81 (Chico Resch): Smith’s winning percentage was worse (-0.040) against stronger opposition (0.003). His GAA was worse (0.21) against stronger opposition (0.01).

1982-84 (Rollie Melanson): Smith’s winning percentage was worse (-0.038) against stronger opposition (0.017). His GAA was worse (0.09) against equal opposition in this respect.

1985-87 (Kelly Hrudey): Smith’s winning percentage was worse (-0.038) against stronger opposition (0.004). His GAA was worse (0.23) against weaker opposition (-0.03).

Strength of Opposition – Dan Bouchard vs Backups

Year | GP(DB) | GP(Oth) | OppW%(DB) | OppW%(Oth) | OppG/G(DB) | OppG/G(Oth)
1973 | 34 | 46 | 0.517 | 0.498 | 3.28 | 3.23
1974 | 46 | 36 | 0.500 | 0.506 | 3.15 | 3.15
1975 | 40 | 40 | 0.520 | 0.487 | 3.51 | 3.39
1976 | 47 | 37 | 0.529 | 0.483 | 3.49 | 3.40
1977 | 42 | 43 | 0.544 | 0.477 | 3.50 | 3.23
1978 | 58 | 26 | 0.490 | 0.483 | 3.28 | 3.23
1979 | 64 | 23 | 0.523 | 0.526 | 3.55 | 3.57
1980 | 53 | 32 | 0.520 | 0.426 | 3.56 | 3.38
1981 | 29 | 53 | 0.473 | 0.529 | 3.77 | 3.97
1982 | 60 | 22 | 0.511 | 0.537 | 3.98 | 4.06
1983 | 50 | 32 | 0.498 | 0.528 | 3.82 | 3.99
1984 | 57 | 29 | 0.504 | 0.515 | 3.86 | 3.99
1985 | 29 | 55 | 0.526 | 0.492 | 3.90 | 3.81
1986 | 32 | 61 | 0.474 | 0.517 | 3.85 | 4.05

Although he's not well remembered by history, Dan Bouchard outperformed the other goaltenders on his team by quite a bit over his career. (This was first brought to my attention on the Contrarian Goaltender's blog.) As a result, I decided to examine his strength of opposition here. It turns out that he faced clearly stronger opposition while with the Flames, and slightly weaker opposition with Quebec and Winnipeg. He was, at least, a much better NHL goaltender than Phil Myre.

Weighted average estimates
Win %: Bouchard was 0.056 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, stronger than his backups faced by 0.005.

GAA: Bouchard was 0.47 better than his backups. He faced opposition that was, on average, weaker than his backups faced by 0.01.

Breaking it down to his years with the Flames, and after leaving for Quebec:

1973-80 (Flames): Bouchard’s winning percentage was better (0.053) against stronger opposition (0.035). His GAA was better (-0.26) against stronger opposition (0.11).

1981-86 (post-Flames): Bouchard’s winning percentage was better (0.059) against weaker opposition (-0.022). His GAA was better (-0.66) against weaker opposition (-0.11).

Click to read more...

 

[Derick*]

Wow, this is good stuff.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Very interesting stuff, overpass! This has been on my list for quite some time (admittedly, it's a long list).

 

[Goalie Guru*]

Great stuff!

Another good idea. Look at Ken Dryden's record for example against the weaker teams and see if he had a perfect record or how much better it was compared to the backups record against the weaker teams.

The Billy Smith stats (my hero, or former hero) don't surprise me at all. I now know, Smith was just an average goalie on a great team.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Although he's not well remembered by history, Dan Bouchard outperformed the other goaltenders on his team by quite a bit over his career.

You should rephrase that.
He's not remembered as well by non goaltenders

He is after all the pioneer of the modern goalie.

Btw, I would love for you to do the same kind of workup for Hasek, Roy and Brodeur.

Either way, great work as always Overpass.

 

[Big Phil]

The Billy Smith stats (my hero, or former hero) don't surprise me at all. I now know, Smith was just an average goalie on a great team.

He did win a Vezina in 1982 however.

The last thing I would call Smith though is "average" on a great team. He saved the Isles bacon enough times for me know he wasn't average

 

[Goalie Guru*]

You should rephrase that.
He's not remembered as well by non goaltenders

He is after all the pioneer of the modern goalie.

Btw, I would love for you to do the same kind of workup for Hasek, Roy and Brodeur.

Either way, great work as always Overpass.

Overpass, could you also find out what Ken Dryden's record was against the "weaker teams" from 1974/75 to 1978/79 when Bunny Laracque, Dryden's backup, lost only 18 games in 132 starts.

I would be curios to see if Dryden had the same winning percentage.

 

[reckoning]

Maybe a more important question is how they did against the top teams.

Their respective records in the dynasty years ('75-'76 to '78-'79) against teams that had 100+ points:

Dryden: 31-12-8 (.686)
Larocque: 5-4-2 (.545)

 

[MXD]

Maybe a more important question is how they did against the top teams.

Their respective records in the dynasty years ('75-'76 to '78-'79) against teams that had 100+ points:

Dryden: 31-12-8 (.686)
Larocque: 5-4-2 (.545)

Wow!
It's not like it's a bad sample size for Laroque either.

 

[reckoning]

I just looked up 74-75 and Dryden's record against 100+ point teams was fairly bad that season at 1-6-3 while Larocque was 2-1-2, but Dryden is still significantly ahead for the totals for the 5 year span (.615 to .563).

That's not even taking into account Dryden's playoff record against those teams in those five years (26-12 .685).

 

[overpass]

I ran the career strength of opposition vs backup numbers for all goaltenders from this time period. Because of the weighting method, it's probably best to go through and knock off weaker seasons at the beginning and end of careers, so I don't think the straight career estimates are terribly meaningful.

But to give you some idea of the range, among long-career goaltenders in this time period, Ken Dryden and Tony Esposito were at the top and bottom of the list - Dryden having played tougher games than his teammates, and Esposito easier.

One interesting single-season result I noticed - Jacques Plante was playing easier games for St Louis and Toronto in the last few seasons of his career. In his 1970-71 season where he put up a .940 save percentage, his average opponent had an 0.451 W% and scored 2.80 goals per game. The average opponent for teammates Gamble, Parent and McLachlan had an 0.532 W% and scored 3.26 goals per game. The 0.46 difference in goals per game is by far the largest for any goaltender that played between 20 and 60 games.

If anyone wants a copy of these results let me know.

 

[BM67]

Are the goalies record enough to distort the record of the opposition? How much of the difference in record for Toronto goalies in 70-71 is because they faced/lost to Plante?

Another factor that will be harder to track is injuries. Playing Pittsburgh with Mario and/or Jagr isn't the same as facing them without either.

 

[overpass]

Are the goalies record enough to distort the record of the opposition? How much of the difference in record for Toronto goalies in 70-71 is because they faced/lost to Plante?

Good question. As far as I can tell the effect is pretty small. I adjusted the strength of opposition numbers for Plante and his teammates so both reflected the difference in goals and wins if all Toronto goalies had a 2.50 GAA and 0.500 W%. Plante's strength of opposition went from 0.451 W% and 2.80 GAA to 4.55 W% and 2.81 GAA. His teammates' numbers went from 0.532 W% and 3.26 GAA to 0.529 W% and 3.25 GAA.

And Plante's numbers were much better than his teammates, so this is about as large an effect as you will find.

 

[reckoning]

Overpass, was there any noticeable difference in opposition quality with Cheevers/Johnston, Giacomin/Villemure or Fuhr/Moog?

Thanks for all the data you've posted in this thread. Great work as always.

 

[overpass]

Overpass, was there any noticeable difference in opposition quality with Cheevers/Johnston, Giacomin/Villemure or Fuhr/Moog?

Thanks for all the data you've posted in this thread. Great work as always.

Cheevers, Giacomin, and Fuhr all faced tougher opposition.

1968-72 Boston Bruins - Cheevers vs Johnston

Year | Team | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1968 | BOS | Cheevers | 47 | 0.520 | 2.69 | Johnston | 28 | 0.518 | 2.63
1969 | BOS | Cheevers | 52 | 0.513 | 2.82 | Johnston | 24 | 0.462 | 2.77
1970 | BOS | Cheevers | 41 | 0.499 | 2.74 | Johnston | 37 | 0.510 | 2.78
1971 | BOS | Cheevers | 40 | 0.474 | 2.89 | Johnston | 38 | 0.484 | 2.91
1972 | BOS | Cheevers | 41 | 0.513 | 3.03 | Johnston | 38 | 0.450 | 2.80
68-72 | BOS | Cheevers | 221 | 0.505 | 2.83 | Johnston | 165 | 0.485 | 2.79

1971-75 New York Rangers - Giacomin vs Villemure

Year | Team | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1971 | NYR | Giacomin | 45 | 0.470 | 3.04 | Villemure | 34 | 0.503 | 3.04
1972 | NYR | Giacomin | 44 | 0.534 | 3.05 | Villemure | 37 | 0.440 | 2.81
1973 | NYR | Giacomin | 43 | 0.509 | 3.25 | Villemure | 34 | 0.475 | 3.10
1974 | NYR | Giacomin | 56 | 0.484 | 3.08 | Villemure | 21 | 0.522 | 3.17
1975 | NYR | Giacomin | 37 | 0.532 | 3.50 | Villemure | 45 | 0.491 | 3.32
71-75 | NYR | Giacomin | 225 | 0.504 | 3.17 | Villemure | 171 | 0.483 | 3.09

1982-87 Edmonton Oilers - Fuhr vs Moog

Year | Team | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1982 | EDM | Fuhr | 48 | 0.480 | 3.90 | Moog | 8 | 0.466 | 3.87
1983 | EDM | Fuhr | 32 | 0.492 | 3.86 | Moog | 50 | 0.480 | 3.82
1984 | EDM | Fuhr | 45 | 0.502 | 3.92 | Moog | 38 | 0.448 | 3.88
1985 | EDM | Fuhr | 46 | 0.494 | 3.93 | Moog | 39 | 0.503 | 3.92
1986 | EDM | Fuhr | 40 | 0.504 | 3.99 | Moog | 47 | 0.490 | 3.89
1987 | EDM | Fuhr | 44 | 0.506 | 3.71 | Moog | 46 | 0.482 | 3.62
82-87 | EDM | Fuhr | 255 | 0.496 | 3.88 | Moog | 228 | 0.480 | 3.82

 

[Goalie Guru*]

overpass, good work by the way, but where are you getting your stats from? My stats seem to be slightly different.

 

[overpass]

overpass, good work by the way, but where are you getting your stats from? My stats seem to be slightly different.

The Hockey Summary Project.

Did you notice the adjustment I made for home/road games? That may be the cause of the difference.

 

[overpass]

I've run the full numbers for every season from 1952-53 until 2009-10, with the exception of 1992-93 where the numbers were not available.

The strength of opposition for Hasek, Roy, and Brodeur were fairly neutral. But I'll post them anyway.

Over their careers, their strength of opposition compared to teammates were:

Hasek: -0.003 in winning percentage, -0.03 in goals per game.
Roy: -0.004 in winning percentage, -0.02 in goals per game
Brodeur: 0.003 in winning percentage, -0.03 in goals per game

Dominik Hasek Strength of Opposition

Year | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1991 | Hasek | 5 | 0.483 | 3.58 | Others | 88 | 0.491 | 3.46
1992 | Hasek | 20 | 0.503 | 3.49 | Others | 70 | 0.502 | 3.49
1994 | Hasek | 58 | 0.490 | 3.19 | Others | 32 | 0.525 | 3.38
1995 | Hasek | 41 | 0.491 | 2.89 | Others | 9 | 0.485 | 2.94
1996 | Hasek | 58 | 0.508 | 3.20 | Others | 34 | 0.515 | 3.26
1997 | Hasek | 67 | 0.489 | 2.91 | Others | 16 | 0.520 | 3.03
1998 | Hasek | 72 | 0.494 | 2.62 | Others | 16 | 0.530 | 2.68
1999 | Hasek | 64 | 0.511 | 2.68 | Others | 25 | 0.477 | 2.60
2000 | Hasek | 35 | 0.512 | 2.71 | Others | 55 | 0.521 | 2.78
2001 | Hasek | 67 | 0.512 | 2.80 | Others | 21 | 0.515 | 2.78
2002 | Hasek | 65 | 0.528 | 2.61 | Others | 20 | 0.511 | 2.59
2004 | Hasek | 14 | 0.512 | 2.51 | Others | 74 | 0.512 | 2.47
2006 | Hasek | 41 | 0.551 | 3.09 | Others | 43 | 0.553 | 3.08
2007 | Hasek | 56 | 0.544 | 2.81 | Others | 29 | 0.555 | 2.94
2008 | Hasek | 41 | 0.547 | 2.74 | Others | 48 | 0.533 | 2.70

Patrick Roy Strength of Opposition

Year | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1985 | Roy | 1 | 0.560 | 4.18 | Others | 82 | 0.501 | 3.85
1986 | Roy | 47 | 0.505 | 3.87 | Others | 41 | 0.512 | 3.87
1987 | Roy | 46 | 0.501 | 3.68 | Others | 37 | 0.492 | 3.61
1988 | Roy | 45 | 0.494 | 3.69 | Others | 40 | 0.509 | 3.68
1989 | Roy | 48 | 0.480 | 3.65 | Others | 37 | 0.500 | 3.78
1990 | Roy | 54 | 0.488 | 3.59 | Others | 30 | 0.511 | 3.73
1991 | Roy | 48 | 0.502 | 3.46 | Others | 42 | 0.483 | 3.41
1992 | Roy | 67 | 0.483 | 3.45 | Others | 18 | 0.470 | 3.54
1994 | Roy | 68 | 0.503 | 3.25 | Others | 26 | 0.492 | 3.30
1995 | Roy | 43 | 0.507 | 2.94 | Others | 7 | 0.554 | 3.00
1996COL | Roy | 39 | 0.471 | 3.09 | Others | 47 | 0.500 | 3.18
1996MON | Roy | 22 | 0.517 | 3.14 | Others | 66 | 0.495 | 3.14
1997 | Roy | 62 | 0.490 | 2.91 | Others | 24 | 0.482 | 2.83
1998 | Roy | 65 | 0.493 | 2.65 | Others | 23 | 0.498 | 2.68
1999 | Roy | 61 | 0.483 | 2.59 | Others | 25 | 0.498 | 2.65
2000 | Roy | 63 | 0.529 | 2.77 | Others | 25 | 0.538 | 2.82
2001 | Roy | 62 | 0.531 | 2.72 | Others | 26 | 0.509 | 2.72
2002 | Roy | 63 | 0.527 | 2.60 | Others | 21 | 0.532 | 2.73
2003 | Roy | 63 | 0.534 | 2.69 | Others | 22 | 0.536 | 2.59

Martin Brodeur Strength of Opposition

Year | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1992 | Brodeur | 4 | 0.453 | 3.35 | Others | 82 | 0.519 | 3.60
1994 | Brodeur | 47 | 0.510 | 3.21 | Others | 46 | 0.499 | 3.27
1995 | Brodeur | 40 | 0.496 | 2.87 | Others | 15 | 0.533 | 3.12
1996 | Brodeur | 77 | 0.508 | 3.17 | Others | 14 | 0.494 | 3.08
1997 | Brodeur | 67 | 0.487 | 2.89 | Others | 30 | 0.502 | 3.05
1998 | Brodeur | 70 | 0.492 | 2.61 | Others | 17 | 0.477 | 2.58
1999 | Brodeur | 70 | 0.492 | 2.62 | Others | 12 | 0.491 | 2.66
2000 | Brodeur | 72 | 0.501 | 2.70 | Others | 12 | 0.558 | 2.78
2001 | Brodeur | 71 | 0.514 | 2.78 | Others | 14 | 0.507 | 2.73
2002 | Brodeur | 73 | 0.523 | 2.66 | Others | 13 | 0.511 | 2.67
2003 | Brodeur | 73 | 0.519 | 2.64 | Others | 11 | 0.499 | 2.53
2004 | Brodeur | 75 | 0.529 | 2.62 | Others | 7 | 0.418 | 2.46
2006 | Brodeur | 73 | 0.546 | 3.13 | Others | 13 | 0.514 | 3.05
2007 | Brodeur | 78 | 0.545 | 3.04 | Others | 6 | 0.550 | 3.06
2008 | Brodeur | 77 | 0.551 | 2.82 | Others | 9 | 0.586 | 2.89
2009 | Brodeur | 31 | 0.544 | 2.95 | Others | 55 | 0.538 | 2.88
2010 | Brodeur | 77 | 0.553 | 2.85 | Others | 12 | 0.529 | 2.85

One name that I found an interesting result for was Jim Carey. Carey faced much weaker opposition over his short career than his teammates.

Jim Carey Strength of Opposition

Year | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G
1995 | Carey | 28 | 0.471 | 2.79 | Others | 26 | 0.555 | 3.09
1996 | Carey | 72 | 0.491 | 3.11 | Others | 17 | 0.552 | 3.28
1997BOS | Carey | 19 | 0.505 | 3.00 | Others | 78 | 0.503 | 2.92
1997WAS | Carey | 40 | 0.489 | 2.91 | Others | 47 | 0.527 | 2.99
1998 | Carey | 10 | 0.501 | 2.73 | Others | 79 | 0.504 | 2.61
1999 | Carey | 4 | 0.538 | 2.79 | Others | 88 | 0.498 | 2.63

Other goaltenders who faced weaker opposition include Roger Crozier, Jocelyn Thibault, Ron Tugnutt, and the already mentioned Tony Esposito. Goaltenders who faced stronger opposition include Ken Dryden, Dave Dryden, Marc Denis, and Ernie Wakely.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Dominik Hasek Strength of Opposition

Year | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G | Player | GP | OppW% | OppG/G

1997 | Hasek | 67 | 0.489 | 2.91 | Others | 16 | 0.520 | 3.03
1998 | Hasek | 72 | 0.494 | 2.62 | Others | 16 | 0.530 | 2.68
1999 | Hasek | 64 | 0.511 | 2.68 | Others | 25 | 0.477 | 2.60

Great work as always Overpass.

These numbers are quite surprising - while winning back to back Hart trophies, Hasek consistently played opponents 3%+ weaker than his opponents? This is the opposite of what I would have assumed - does anybody who remembers the Sabres better than I do have an explanation?

Also, why the sudden change in 1999 (to a playing pattern more consistent with what we'd expect from a team's undisputed #1 goalie)?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Great work as always Overpass.

These numbers are quite surprising - while winning back to back Hart trophies, Hasek consistently played opponents 3%+ weaker than his opponents? This is the opposite of what I would have assumed - does anybody who remembers the Sabres better than I do have an explanation?

Also, why the sudden change in 1999 (to a playing pattern more consistent with what we'd expect from a team's undisputed #1 goalie)?

I haven't gone through and checked the schedules/game logs yet, but let's remember that Hasek was playing 70 games per season those years. He was pretty much the farthest thing from "sheltered" in terms of which teams he was sent out against, hehe. If there were any back-to-backs though, for example, that ended up getting split - say, Pittsburgh on Friday, Boston on Saturday - it's possible that each of those rare games against "top competition" ended up weighing too heavily in favour of the backup in the end. Small sample sizes and all that jazz... you know.

 

[overpass]

Great work as always Overpass.

These numbers are quite surprising - while winning back to back Hart trophies, Hasek consistently played opponents 3%+ weaker than his opponents? This is the opposite of what I would have assumed - does anybody who remembers the Sabres better than I do have an explanation?

Also, why the sudden change in 1999 (to a playing pattern more consistent with what we'd expect from a team's undisputed #1 goalie)?

Steve Shields played mostly road games during those two years. In 1996-97, 9 of his 13 starts were on the road. In 1997-98, 12 of his 16 games and 9 of his 12 starts were on the road. In addition, all 3 of Andrei Trefilov's games (2 starts) in 1996-97 were on the road.

The home/road split alone boosted Shields/Trefilov's strength of opponent by 0.020 in winning percentage. Hasek's would also have been slightly lower due to playing more home games, although not as much.

Maybe the Sabres wanted to play their star player in front of the home fans as much as possible? Although I don't know why they stopped in 1998-99 - Roloson played 9 games at home and 9 on the road, and Biron played 4 at home and 2 on the road.

I wouldn't read too much into it, but it is worth keeping in mind if you compare Hasek's numbers to Shields and Trefilov's numbers for his two Hart seasons.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Maybe the Sabres wanted to play their star player in front of the home fans as much as possible? Although I don't know why they stopped in 1998-99 - Roloson played 9 games at home and 9 on the road, and Biron played 4 at home and 2 on the road.

I wouldn't read too much into it, but it is worth keeping in mind if you compare Hasek's numbers to Shields and Trefilov's numbers for his two Hart seasons.

The differing home/road split in 1998-99 appears to be just random chance. Hasek missed a month because of injury, and during that period the Sabres just happened to play 8 home games and 4 road games.

Other than that, Roloson started 4 games on the road and 2 at home in 1998-99, with both of those home starts coming on the second night of back-to-backs. Back-to-back games and injuries account for nearly all of the backup home starts in Buffalo during this period.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Well Done

Interesting data as usual. Matching against play-off performance by the same goalie would advance our understanding as well.

As data is accumulated it may be interesting to see how present day goalies match against present day teams.

Strength of opposition is just one metric. We could look at strength vs strength. Example a strong perimeter team against a goalie who is strong against a perimeter game. Let our imaginations run. Teams make adjustments based on similar analysis of data.

 

[overpass]

The differing home/road split in 1998-99 appears to be just random chance. Hasek missed a month because of injury, and during that period the Sabres just happened to play 8 home games and 4 road games.

Other than that, Roloson started 4 games on the road and 2 at home in 1998-99, with both of those home starts coming on the second night of back-to-backs. Back-to-back games and injuries account for nearly all of the backup home starts in Buffalo during this period.

Good catch. I remembered that Hasek had missed a month somewhere in there, but forgot about that when checking the 98-99 numbers.

Most likely the team had directions from John Rigas that the Sabres' only star player had to play at home whenever possible.

 

[overpass]

Looking at Hasek's other years in Buffalo...

In 1999-2000, Martin Biron played in 6 games while Hasek was healthy, 3 at home and 3 on the road. Not much to look at here.

In 2000-01, Martin Biron did not start a game at home until the third last game of the season. He started 13 road games before that.

1995-96 is tricky, because Hasek missed time with two separate injuries. Leaving out those games, Andrei Trefilov and John Blue started 13 games, 4 at home and 9 on the road.

It appears that Buffalo's policy was to play Hasek in as many home games as possible, most likely to sell tickets.