Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Revenge of Michael Myers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,095
1,382
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
Do not care about the colour man. As much value as Don Cherry, none.
Please don't get me wrong- it is, to an extent, understandable to not care about the color man. The thing I found interesting was this- if I had watched with the audio muted, and had been asked to predict what the Comcast-feed announcer was saying, I would have guessed that he would have persistently gushed over Umberger (in some manner or other). [I have some experience with Philadelphia broadcasts-- trust me on this one.] Instead, someone had a moment of candor and said the polite equivalent of: the goalie blew the angle and gave up an ice-cream-truck-window special.

Or maybe it's just that- what with all the practice we've had, Philadelphia followers have gotten to the point that we know (in an almost reflexive manner) a soft goal when we see one.:wg:

Goalie should never been challenged.
That was "challenged?!":confused:
 

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

Giving up the first goal of the game:
Plante 41 in 110 GP (every 2.68 GP)
Hasek 49 in 114 GP (every 2.33 GP)
Roy 107 in 247 GP (every 2.31 GP)
Sawchuk 48 in 103 GP (every 2.15 GP)
Brodeur 96 in 204 GP (every 2.13 GP)
Dryden 55 in 112 GP (every 2.04 GP)
Hall 68 in 114 GP (every 1.68 GP)

By year...

Patrick RoyGPWLGAFirst Goal
1986201553910
1987642223
1988834245
198919136429
19901156266
19911375407
19921147305
199320164466
1994633163
199622166519
199717107387
1998734183
199919118528
200017116316
200123167419
2002211110528
2003734163
Total24715194584107
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Dominik Hasek GP GAFG
199220281
1994734133
1995514184
199731151
199815105325
199919136367
2000514122
20011376296
200223167459
2007181083410
2008422101
Total114644924249
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Martin Brodeur GP GAFG
19941789389
199520164344
19971055195
1998624123
1999734204
2000231673911
20012515105213
200262492
2003241684113
2004514135
2006954202
20071156285
2008514163
2009734173
2010514152
2012241495212
Total2041139042596
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Jacques Plante GP GAFG
195343172
1954853143
19551163291
19561082183
19571082174
19581082205
19591183263
1960880110
1961624164
1962624195
1963514144
19691082144
197064181
197120271
197210151
1973202100
Total110713623541
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Glenn Hall GP GAFG
19561055288
1957514152
1959624215
1960404144
19611284265
19621266313
1963624254
1964734226
19651376288
1966624225
196731282
196818810459
196920251
1970743215
197130391
114496532068
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Terry Sawchuk GPGA FG
1951624132
195288051
1953624214
19541284206
19551183267
1958404192
1960624192
1961853185
19631156355
19641265314
196510131
196620261
19671064255
1968522182
197010161
103544726548
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ken Dryden GP GAFG
1971201286113
1972624174
197317125508
19751165296
197613121257
197714122223
197815123296
197916124418
112803227455
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
More data to follow...
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

3rd period/OT lead management

"Surr. 3rd lead" means that goalie's team had a lead in the 3rd period and lost it.
"Surr. 3rd/OT tie" means that goalie's team was even with opponent in the 3rd period or OT and lost it.

Note: You can lose surrender a 3rd period lead AND a 3rd/OT tie in the same game. You can surrender them multiple times in a game, in fact. The per-game metric does not reflect the amount of leads or ties had, it is exactly what it says: per game.

Surrendered 3rd per lead:
Sawchuk 7 in 103 (every 14.71 GP)
Dryden 9 in 112 (every 12.44 GP)
Plante 10 in 110 (every 11 GP)
Brodeur 25 in 204 (every 8.16 GP)
Hall 15 in 114 (every 7.60 GP)
Hasek 16 in 114 (every 7.13 GP)
Roy 44 in 247 (every 5.61 GP)

By year...

Patrick RoyGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
198620155392
1987642222
1988834242
198919136424
19901156261
19911375401
19921147301
199320164465
1994633160
199622166516
199717107383
1998734183
199919118522
200017116311
200123167414
2002211110526
2003734161
Total2471519458444
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Dominik HasekGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
199220281
1994734130
1995514180
199731151
199815105324
199919136361
2000514120
20011376293
200223167451
200718108344
2008422101
Total114644924216
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Martin BrodeurGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
19941789385
199520164344
19971055192
1998624120
1999734202
200023167391
2001251510521
200262491
200324168411
2004514130
2006954201
20071156281
2008514161
2009734171
2010514150
201224149524
Total2041139042525
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Jacques PlanteGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
195343170
1954853141
19551163291
19561082180
19571082170
19581082201
19591183262
1960880112
1961624160
1962624190
1963514140
19691082142
197064180
197120271
197210150
1973202100
Total110713623510
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Glenn HallGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
19561055281
1957514151
1959624210
1960404140
19611284262
19621266311
1963624251
1964734220
19651376281
1966624221
196731280
196818810454
196920251
1970743211
197130391
114496532015
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Terry SawchukGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
1951624131
195288050
1953624210
19541284200
19551183260
1958404191
1960624191
1961853181
19631156350
19641265313
196510130
196620260
19671064250
1968522180
197010160
10354472657
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ken DrydenGPWLGASurr. 3rd lead
197120128611
1972624170
197317125501
19751165291
197613121251
197714122221
197815123292
197916124412
11280322749
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
More data to follow...
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

3rd period/OT lead management

"Surr. 3rd lead" means that goalie's team had a lead in the 3rd period and lost it.
"Surr. 3rd/OT tie" means that goalie's team was even with opponent in the 3rd period or OT and lost it.

Note: You can lose surrender a 3rd period lead AND a 3rd/OT tie in the same game. You can surrender them multiple times in a game, in fact. The per-game metric does not reflect the amount of leads or ties had, it is exactly what it says: per game.

Surrendered 3rd period/OT tie:
Plante 15 in 110 (every 7.33 GP)
Sawchuk 22 in 103 (every 4.68 GP)
Dryden 24 in 112 (every 4.67 GP)
Roy 59 in 247 (every 4.19 GP)
Brodeur 53 in 204 (every 3.85 GP)
Hasek 34 in 114 (every 3.35 GP)
Hall 36 in 114 (every 3.17 GP)

By year...

Patrick RoyGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
198620155392
1987642221
1988834243
198919136423
19901156262
19911375406
19921147302
199320164465
1994633161
199622166512
199717107385
1998734182
199919118527
200017116312
200123167418
2002211110525
2003734163
Total2471519458459
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Dominik HasekGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
199220282
1994734132
1995514181
199731150
199815105326
199919136364
2000514122
20011376294
200223167457
200718108345
2008422101
Total114644924234
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Martin BrodeurGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
19941789387
199520164344
19971055193
1998624122
1999734202
200023167396
2001251510523
200262492
200324168416
2004514131
2006954201
20071156284
2008514163
2009734173
2010514151
201224149525
Total2041139042553
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Jacques PlanteGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
195343170
1954853140
19551163292
19561082181
19571082173
19581082200
19591183263
1960880110
1961624163
1962624191
1963514140
19691082140
197064180
197120272
197210150
1973202100
Total110713623515
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Glenn HallGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
19561055281
1957514151
1959624212
1960404142
19611284262
19621266314
1963624252
1964734221
19651376283
1966624221
196731281
1968188104510
196920251
1970743212
197130393
114496532036
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Terry SawchukGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
1951624134
195288050
1953624211
19541284201
19551183261
1958404192
1960624192
1961853182
19631156352
19641265314
196510130
196620262
19671064251
1968522180
197010160
103544726522
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ken DrydenGPWLGASurr. 3rd/OT tie
197120128612
1972624174
197317125504
19751165293
197613121252
197714122221
197815123293
197916124415
112803227424
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
More data to follow...
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

Managing momentum/game script/compounding problems...

Surrendering a goal within ~2 minutes of any other goal is deflating and cancels the emotion of your goal or really lets the game get off the rails for you...

Note: 2 minutes is not a solid number, because the difference between 2:00 and 2:07 is irrelevant, the shift length, amount of whistles, the time of the game, the overall score, and many other factors (road/home, etc.) factor into this...I made a judgment call on some of these. To my knowledge, it never, ever exceeds three minutes though. Full disclosure: There are times when I take a goal that happens 2:34 after another, but a time where I won't take one that's 2:10 after another based on my sense of the game script...this happens very rarely, but I want to say the words. In a near-future post, I will compile something called "Garbage Time Goals" - garbage goals are not tabulated in any other category, including this one. So giving up boom-boom, two quick ones at 18:24 and 19:01 of the 3rd period to make 8-1 then 8-2 is not relevant. Further, spanning a period does not count (i.e. a goal at 19:01 of the 1st and then 0:24 of the 2nd does not register here...that would take a greater game script read and more liberties than I thought I should be afforded).

Surrender a goal within 2 mins. of any other goal...(maybe this should be a per goal rate instead of per game? I'm providing the data, yous can interpret it)
Brodeur 37 in 204 (every 5.51 GP)
Hasek 21 in 114 (every 5.43 GP)
Roy 48 in 247 (every 5.15 GP)
Plante 29 in 110 (every 3.79 GP)
Hall 40 in 114 (every 2.85 GP)
Dryden 41 in 112 (every 2.73 GP)
Sawchuk 44 in 103 (every 2.34 GP)

By year...

Patrick RoyGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
198620155392
1987642222
1988834242
198919136423
19901156264
19911375406
19921147302
199320164465
1994633162
199622166514
199717107383
1998734180
199919118525
200017116312
200123167410
2002211110524
2003734162
Total2471519458448
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Dominik HasekGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
199220280
1994734131
1995514183
199731151
199815105324
199919136362
2000514120
20011376291
200223167451
200718108343
2008422105
Total114644924221
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Martin BrodeurGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
19941789382
199520164342
19971055191
1998624120
1999734203
200023167392
2001251510523
200262491
200324168414
2004514131
2006954202
20071156282
2008514163
2009734173
2010514152
201224149526
Total2041139042537
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Jacques PlanteGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
195343170
1954853142
19551163290
19561082184
19571082174
19581082201
19591183264
1960880113
1961624162
1962624191
1963514142
19691082141
197064180
197120272
197210151
1973202102
Total110713623529
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Glenn HallGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
19561055283
1957514150
1959624212
1960404140
19611284266
19621266315
1963624256
1964734223
19651376285
1966624222
196731281
196818810453
196920251
1970743211
197130392
114496532040
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Terry SawchukGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
1951624132
195288051
1953624212
19541284204
19551183264
1958404194
1960624194
1961853183
19631156354
19641265316
196510130
196620260
19671064254
1968522185
197010161
103544726544
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ken DrydenGPWLGASurr. Goal w/in 2
197120128619
1972624173
1973171255010
19751165292
197613121254
197714122224
197815123293
197916124416
112803227441
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
More data to follow...
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

Garbage time goals.

Goals that have only an impact on statistics and, in the vast majority of cases, do not impact the game...goals that were scored against a team up or down 3 or more in the 3rd period and goals that were scored against a team up or down 5 or more goals at any time were rinsed out...

Garbage time goals (new playoff GAA with these goals, but not minutes removed by a lazy, lazy man)
Plante 30 (2.12 -> 1.85)
Brodeur 30 (2.02 -> 1.88)
Sawchuk 24 (2.53 -> 2.30)
Roy 23 (2.30 -> 2.21)
Hall 18 (2.79 -> 2.63)
Dryden 18 (2.41 -> 2.25)
Hasek 12 (2.02 -> 1.92)


No more data to follow...for now. Thank you.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,134
6,429
Good point.

Potvin was not past his prime in 1981. Maybe at the end of his prime.

However, Potvin didn't play in the 1984 Canada Cup.
Potvin was 30 years old in 1984 and a 2nd team all star that year.

He didn't play in the Canada Cup for health reasons. He was on medication for hypertension that required him to turn down the tourney invite. It took ten seconds to google this info, a direct link to a July 31, 1984 New York Times article.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
Goalie playoff data that I have compiled in good faith, but also manually...(I have made some adjustments to account for GP that weren't really relevant games played, so if you see me off in playoff GP compared to the legend, that's me removing a 20 minute relief appearance that wasn't relevant or some such)...

Garbage time goals.

Goals that have only an impact on statistics and, in the vast majority of cases, do not impact the game...goals that were scored against a team up or down 3 or more in the 3rd period and goals that were scored against a team up or down 5 or more goals at any time were rinsed out...

Garbage time goals (new playoff GAA with these goals, but not minutes removed by a lazy, lazy man)
Plante 30 (2.12 -> 1.85)
Brodeur 30 (2.02 -> 1.88)
Sawchuk 24 (2.53 -> 2.30)
Roy 23 (2.30 -> 2.21)
Hall 18 (2.79 -> 2.63)
Dryden 18 (2.41 -> 2.25)
Hasek 12 (2.02 -> 1.92)


No more data to follow...for now. Thank you.

Epic Mr. Farkas. "Manually" you say?. :clap:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Farkas

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Haha thanks, killion. Yeah, went through game logs, matched to box scores, read through box scores manually, tallied in Excel...

Someone with talent probably could have done this in about 45 seconds...but I had my first Saturday afternoon free in months and, well, here we are...

Now that it's Saturday night, I've come to the determination that we cannot compare skaters and a goalies... :siren: oh darn, I'll get the vodka...
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
Haha thanks, killion. Yeah, went through game logs, matched to box scores, read through box scores manually, tallied in Excel...

Someone with talent probably could have done this in about 45 seconds...but I had my first Saturday afternoon free in months and, well, here we are...

Now that it's Saturday night, I've come to the determination that we cannot compare skaters and a goalies... :siren: oh darn, I'll get the vodka...

Major wonderful piece of work, and you deserve a drink, beverage of your choice.... copious amounts. Vodka though? I suggest you stay away from the white goods Son, vodka, rum... everclear.... Now, red wine, beer, scotch, rye etc, good to go.... Got smokes?..
:cheers:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Farkas

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Potvin was 30 years old in 1984 and a 2nd team all star that year.

He didn't play in the Canada Cup for health reasons. He was on medication for hypertension that required him to turn down the tourney invite. It took ten seconds to google this info, a direct link to a July 31, 1984 New York Times article.

I stated he didn't play in the Canada Cup in 1984. What difference does it make why he didn't play?
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Major wonderful piece of work, and you deserve a drink, beverage of your choice.... copious amounts. Vodka though? I suggest you stay away from the white goods Son, vodka, rum... everclear.... Now, red wine, beer, scotch, rye etc, good to go.... Got smokes?..
:cheers:
Bourbon.

Please include bourbon, which has numbed me to the fact that my Bruins have once again fallen to the curse of the Habs and my Red Sox are in the process of an (another) epic fold in the World Series.

I could use an Ashton Churchill, also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Farkas

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Little bit of digestion...

Jacques Plante comes out of this looking really good...

So I re-purposed some of the garbage that I dumped here...

A percentage of "crucial" goals (that is, goals that I have listed above minus garbage goals divided by total goals against)...

Percentage of goals deemed to be "crucial" - Career:
Plante 27.66%
Sawchuk 36.60%
Roy 40.24%
Dryden 40.51%
Brodeur 42.59%
Hall 44.06%
Hasek 44.63%

"Best" individual runs (min. 8 GP pre-1967, min. 12 game post-1967) [result]
1955 Plante - I don't know how to calculate this percentage because he had more garbage time goals than crucial goals...so he gets some imaginary number, let's call it 0% [Lost game 7 SCF]
1967 Sawchuk - 24% [Won Cup]
1958 Plante - 25% [Won Cup]
2001 Brodeur - 26.9% [Lost game 7 SCF]
1977 Dryden - 27.3% [Won Cup]
1956 Plante - 27.8% [Won Cup]


So you look at that career percentage, and boy, that almost kind of lines up where you'd like on the edges, huh? Plante and Sawchuk (Plante career and Sawchuk's razor sharp peak) dominating in the playoffs...Hall and Hasek leaving something to be desired...

Roy is the only one on the list who plays between 1980 and 1993, so I think he is damaged by that...or so I thought...from 1994 and on, Roy is at 40.3%...exactly where he's at career. So I can't really help us here...even if I try to single out his Cup runs, he's just not that impressive by this set of metrics...I let the stat demons pick apart the reasons why - he does play an awful lot of games in a high scoring era...I've already exhausted my mental capacity, no more questions...

Last one for now...

"Bad" 3rd period goals by percentage of total goals against...in other words, the percentage of all playoff goals against that fall into the "surrendered 3rd period lead" or "surrendered 3rd/OT tie" category...

Plante 10.6% (!)
Sawchuk 10.9% (!)
Dryden 12.0%
Sawchuk 15.9%
Roy 17.6%
Brodeur 18.3%
Hasek 20.7%
 
Last edited:

ContrarianGoaltender

Registered User
Feb 28, 2007
868
788
tcghockey.com
A percentage of "crucial" goals (that is, goals that I have listed above minus garbage goals divided by total goals against)...

Very nice work running those numbers. Nothing of what I'm about to say is intended to be critical, I'm just hoping to help you refine the analysis a bit.

First of all, I think you should consider revising the quoted formula. Right now it rewards goalies for letting in garbage goals, because every garbage goal effectively cancels out a crucial mistake.

I'll use the example of Jacques Plante in 1955. I did this quickly so my count might not match yours exactly (I didn't check the two minute thing because you said it was partially subjective and it was also not always easy to tell whether Hodge or Plante was in net), but it looks like Plante let in the first goal of the game once, he let in a goal that broke a third period tie twice and he let in a go-ahead goal in the third period once. That should give him at least four "crucial" goals against.

On the other hand, he gave up six garbage goals in the high scoring Stanley Cup Finals that year based on your definition. I agree that it's fine to disregard them because who cares what happened when the score is 5-0, 5-1, 4-1 or 5-2, none of them had any significant impact on the Habs' win probability. But no amount of blowout goals against erases the fact that the Canadiens with Plante in net still blew a 2-1 lead in the third period of game 1 of the Finals and lost 4-2, which was a crucial swing in a series they lost in 7. So it seems a bit odd to suggest that Plante's final playoff score would still somehow work out to 0%.

Perhaps a better formula would be to subtract the garbage goals from the total goals first, and then divide the crucial goals by the new "meaningful but not crucial" amount. That would put Plante at 17% (4/23), for example.

But even that denominator might still have a bit of a problem, because the other thing with this type of analysis when interpreting it is that (like with all goalie stats) you have to factor in what kind of team the goalie is playing on. For example, here were the scores after two periods in every one of Montreal's games in the 1955 playoffs:

2-0
3-1
0-4
2-2 (1 crucial GA in 3rd)
4-1
1-1 (2 crucial GA in 3rd)
0-7
3-2
4-1
1-4
4-2
0-2

There were only three games in the entire Montreal postseason where the game was a one-goal game at any point in the third period, and Jacques Plante gave up three crucial goals in those three games, and just one in all the other games combined (the first goal of the game). That's not all that surprising, really, because that's pretty much what we'd expect based on your definitions.

Compare that to, say, the 1999 Dallas Stars, who entered the third period with the score within one goal in 20 of 23 games during their Cup run. That means that a much higher percentage of the goals are going to count as "crucial" even if the goalie isn't giving up very many of them. For example, 15 of the 21 goals scored in the Stanley Cup Finals would count as crucial, and despite his sparkling 1.26 Finals GAA Ed Belfour would get dinged for an awful 78% crucial goals percentage over those 6 games just because the score was basically always close. In the 1955 Final, just 9 out of 46 goals overall and only 3 of 15 third period goals would count as "crucial". I'm not convinced that Sawchuk and Plante trading blowouts actually means they were more reliable than a guy winning a crazy goalie duel.

It might be possible to narrow the situations down to where you are comparing similar score lines, i.e. looking only at games that enter the third period within a goal. Or you could potentially focus solely on each goalie's GAA in each specific situation. The problem is that you will probably end up with a very small sample size, so who knows how meaningful it is, but so it goes with pretty much any attempt at 3rd period/OT type analysis in the playoffs. Anyway, great start, I'll be interested to see where this goes in round 2.
 

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,095
1,382
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
Where is this "polls board"?
Question deserves an answer. Main-board has active project- in the low-20s at the time of this writing.

General Hockey Discussion>National Hockey League Talk>Polls (hockey related only)

Or: https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/the-22nd-best-player-in-nhl-history.2560577/

We could sneer- but I won't (well... not so much, anyway). I think they were a mere transposition away from getting the order of the Big Four just right.

You'll see worse-looking lists. Bowman. Fischler. NHL-100. Main-board effort looks jurist-sober compared to those three iterations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Please don't get me wrong- it is, to an extent, understandable to not care about the color man. The thing I found interesting was this- if I had watched with the audio muted, and had been asked to predict what the Comcast-feed announcer was saying, I would have guessed that he would have persistently gushed over Umberger (in some manner or other). [I have some experience with Philadelphia broadcasts-- trust me on this one.] Instead, someone had a moment of candor and said the polite equivalent of: the goalie blew the angle and gave up an ice-cream-truck-window special.

Or maybe it's just that- what with all the practice we've had, Philadelphia followers have gotten to the point that we know (in an almost reflexive manner) a soft goal when we see one.:wg:
That was "challenged?!":confused:

Fruity comment((cherries are a fruit) brings to mind the ''Where's the beef commercial?'' from the the 1980s. Colourful posts lacking in sunstance. Specifically any defenceman Worth his skates knows that one a forward goes past the icing red line. you do not let him come out to challenge the goalie. Hockey 101.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
I let the stat demons pick apart the reasons why - he does play an awful lot of games in a high scoring era...I've already exhausted my mental capacity, no more questions...

A guess, but a goaltender cannot surrender a lead/tie in the 3rd period - or any period really - if he doesn’t play well enough to have one. So each game in which a goaltender didn’t have a 3rd period lead to lose in the first place, that goaltender lowers the percentage of games in which they surrendered a 3rd period lead because the calculation was done based on career GP as opposed to opportunity GP.

So when we’re looking at 2004 Martin Brodeur surrendering the 1st goal five times in five playoff games and then also not losing any 3rd period leads, I’m going to assume (and verify) that he only had to hold serve once, while the ratio gets recorded as 0 surrenders in 5 games as opposed to 1 hold in 1 game and 4 games where no data could be recorded.

I get the idea behind the statistic, but it also seems like it has the unusual effect of rewarding not having leads, which was probably not the intention.
 

Michael Farkas

Grace Personified
Jun 28, 2006
13,352
7,834
NYC
www.HockeyProspect.com
Very nice work running those numbers. Nothing of what I'm about to say is intended to be critical, I'm just hoping to help you refine the analysis a bit.

First of all, I think you should consider revising the quoted formula. Right now it rewards goalies for letting in garbage goals, because every garbage goal effectively cancels out a crucial mistake.

I'll use the example of Jacques Plante in 1955. I did this quickly so my count might not match yours exactly (I didn't check the two minute thing because you said it was partially subjective and it was also not always easy to tell whether Hodge or Plante was in net), but it looks like Plante let in the first goal of the game once, he let in a goal that broke a third period tie twice and he let in a go-ahead goal in the third period once. That should give him at least four "crucial" goals against.

On the other hand, he gave up six garbage goals in the high scoring Stanley Cup Finals that year based on your definition. I agree that it's fine to disregard them because who cares what happened when the score is 5-0, 5-1, 4-1 or 5-2, none of them had any significant impact on the Habs' win probability. But no amount of blowout goals against erases the fact that the Canadiens with Plante in net still blew a 2-1 lead in the third period of game 1 of the Finals and lost 4-2, which was a crucial swing in a series they lost in 7. So it seems a bit odd to suggest that Plante's final playoff score would still somehow work out to 0%.

Perhaps a better formula would be to subtract the garbage goals from the total goals first, and then divide the crucial goals by the new "meaningful but not crucial" amount.

Great point, that's absolutely right. I was doing it in the wrong order...should have realized that when I got a negative number haha

Maybe shouldn't have cracked that second bottle of the sauce...
 

danincanada

Registered User
Feb 11, 2008
2,809
353
Nice to see the knives, cleavers, and hatchets already came out for Lidstrom from the usual suspects. This may take away from the rest of the project so someone should start a separate thread titled “Lidstrom sucked and is overrated” to save this from becoming another gong show like the playoff project. Maybe it’s too late already seeing how individual plays have been displayed from a 20 year career that apparently show he wasn’t a good defender and couldn’t learn or adapt.

Apart from trophy counting, AS nominations, great playoff performances, and Cup rings that all shine a bright light on Lidstrom as an all-time great and at least a top 20 player of all-time, there are more facts that are less talked about.

Since ‘87-88 he’s got both the most regular season and playoff wins as a skater. I read on Reddit that those were both tops all-time as well but obviously the NHL played fewer games in the past and had ties. You’d still think Howe, Messier, Gretzky, or a great Hab would still have more but apparently not.

http://hkref.com/tiny/hn4mg

http://hkref.com/tiny/eCcTE

His play was elite for obvious reasons but he also had great intangibles such as being so consistent and level headed, taking so few penalties and rarely missing games. Having an elite player and key cog with these attributes helped his team win a lot of games.

Five seasons in his career he lead the league in goals for while on the ice. That’s the same as Orr, Lemieux and Potvin only did it twice, and Gretzky did it 8 times. Did Lidstrom have some great forwards and defense partners with him? Sure did, but it speaks to how much they scored with him back there getting the puck up the ice and manning the point on the PP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,134
6,429
A guess, but a goaltender cannot surrender a lead/tie in the 3rd period - or any period really - if he doesn’t play well enough to have one...
Bad guess!

A goalie could have given up 3 or 4 goals on weak scoring opportunities but his team scored 4 or 5 goals by the end of the second period.

Or a great defensive coaching style and committed skaters could have allowed only 10-15 shots against through two periods, and the scoring chances against low quality from far away, yet a goalie let one or two in, the team leading 2-1 or 3-2 heading into the third, no thanks to the goaltender.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->