Tuukka Rask sets all-time record for most wins by Leafs draft pick

[danpantz]

You can't think that's legitimate.

If a goalie were to allow 2 goals on 14 shots his GAA is still only 2 but a pitiful save percentage. If a goalie allows 3 goals on 37 his GAA is higher but clearly a much better goaltending performance.

Ya i would agree if Andersens save Percentage was much higher than Tuukka's, but it's not. So i dont understand how Andersen is better than him.

 

[Paris in Flames]

Ya i would agree if Andersens save Percentage was much higher than Tuukka's, but it's not. So i dont understand how Andersen is better than him.

He stops a higher percentage of shots behind a worse defensive team?

I do feel it's not really worth arguing about though. They feel like a wash to me.

 

[danpantz]

He stops a higher percentage of shots behind a worse defensive team?

I do feel it's not really worth arguing about though. They feel like a wash to me.

And Tuukka lets in less goals. But i'm not going into Andersen threads saying Tuukka is better like people are doing here.

Plenty of goalies could have been said, Andersen isn't one of them.

 

[Machinehead]

Goalie A
Regular season last two years
.917 Sv% 2.36 GAA
.912 sv% 2.48 GAA
Playoffs
.903 sv% 2.88 GAA
.934 sv% 2.02 GAA

Goalie B
reg season
.918 sv% 2.81 GAA
.917 sv% 2.77 GAA
playoffs
.896 sv% 3.76 GAA
.922 sv% 2.75 GAA


Which one would you rather have

Goalie B, again, considering that he plays behind a bottom 10 defensive team while the other plays on a top 1 defensive team.

 

[Sheppy]

Rask has been better than Anderson, lol. Especially when it count.

 

[danpantz]

Goalie B, again, considering that he plays behind a bottom 10 defensive team while the other plays on a top 1 defensive team.

Toronto wasnt a bottom 10 defensive team either of those seasons. In fact they were 11th in 2017-2018.

 

[Machinehead]

Toronto wasnt a bottom 10 defensive team either of those seasons. In fact they were 11th in 2017-2018.

I can't.

 

[danpantz]

I can't.

Very true.

 

[EON]

Toronto wasnt a bottom 10 defensive team either of those seasons. In fact they were 11th in 2017-2018.

Why do you think they were 11th in GA despite giving up a lot of high danger chances?

 

[danpantz]

Why do you think they were 11th in GA despite giving up a lot of high danger chances?

Why did Torontos back up goalie have a .016 higher Save Percentage that season playing behind the same defense?

 

[King Mapes]

That was one of those eyebrow-raising moments when they traded Rask and kept Pogge.

One backstopped a relatively weak Finnish team to a bronze medal they had no business winning, and the other played on an absolutely stacked Team Canada and did ok.

Did you not pay attention to prospects back then? Obviously not. Pogges hype was real.

“Did ok”? Didn’t he have 3 straight shutouts? I recall him doing quite well and he was the guy even Boston preferred. It was not an eyebrow raiser at all at the time.

 

[EON]

Why did Torontos back up goalie have a .016 higher Save Percentage that season playing behind the same defense?

McElhinney is a decent backup and had a great season in a limited sample size. Andersen played 66 games while he only played 18.

What's the explanation then for last season when Toronto still put up decent GA stats while once again bleeding chances against? Or why their backups (especially Sparks) looked so terrible last season?

Andersen has consistently put up a 0.917-0.918 SV% in Toronto while facing a lot of high danger chances and playing a much heavier workload than most goalies in the league. He shines in GSAA every year.

The fact that Andersen & Rask have similar SV %'s while Rask plays on one of the best defensively structured teams in the league and Andersen most certainly does not, is a clear indicator of him being the better goalie. And I say this as a Bruins fan.

 

[razkaz]

Goalie A
Regular season last two years
.917 Sv% 2.36 GAA
.912 sv% 2.48 GAA
Playoffs
.903 sv% 2.88 GAA
.934 sv% 2.02 GAA

Goalie B
reg season
.918 sv% 2.81 GAA
.917 sv% 2.77 GAA
playoffs
.896 sv% 3.76 GAA
.922 sv% 2.75 GAA


Which one would you rather have

Player A
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 82GP 30G 100Pts
2017-2018 82GP 41G 108Pts
2018-2019 78GP 41G116Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 13GP 5G 9Pts
2017-2018 Did not make playoffs
2018-2019 Did not make playoffs


Player B
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 40GP 16G 33Pts
2017-2018 82GP 22G 48Pts
2018-2019 82GP 40G 76Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 25GP 13G 21Pts
2017-2018 12GP 10G 21Pts
2018-2019 4GP 1G 1Pts


Player C
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 78GP 19G 55Pts
2017-2018 62GP 24G 59Pts
2018-2019 69GP 11G 36Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 11GP 4G 9Pts
2017-2018 Did not make playoffs
2018-2019 26GP 12G 20Pts

Which one would you rather have?

 

[danpantz]

Player A
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 82GP 30G 100Pts
2017-2018 82GP 41G 108Pts
2018-2019 78GP 41G116Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 13GP 5G 9Pts
2017-2018 Did not make playoffs
2018-2019 Did not make playoffs


Player B
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 40GP 16G 33Pts
2017-2018 82GP 22G 48Pts
2018-2019 82GP 40G 76Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 25GP 13G 21Pts
2017-2018 12GP 10G 21Pts
2018-2019 4GP 1G 1Pts


Player C
Regular Season last 3 years
2016-2017 78GP 19G 55Pts
2017-2018 62GP 24G 59Pts
2018-2019 69GP 11G 36Pts

Playoffs
2016-2017 11GP 4G 9Pts
2017-2018 Did not make playoffs
2018-2019 26GP 12G 20Pts

Which one would you rather have?

What does this have to do with Tuukka and Andersen?

 

[Merrrlin]

Tuuka is a much better goalie than Andersen. Not sure why that name is coming up.

With that being said, we do need to see Tuuka win to cement his legacy. To me he's given up a lot of softies in key games over the past decade.

 

[razkaz]

What does this have to do with Tuukka and Andersen?

Not that hard to follow along is it?

Someone said that Andersen is better now and your counter argument to that is that Rask outplayed Andersen in the past 2 playoffs so you asked them to explain their version of "better". That same poster then made the claim that over the last 4 years Andersen's numbers have been superior to those of Rask in the regular season and that the playoffs are too small of a sample size, to which you replied the games that matter the most, the playoff games, count the most. This is where I chimed in with a pretty silly example of how Jake Guentzel has outperformed Connor McDavid in the playoffs so he must be better /s (that's sarcasm).

Back to the point at hand. I'm pretty sure GSAA is more commonly used for goalie comparisons.

Andersen
2016-2017 8.58
2017-2018 12.06
2018-2019 14.48

Rask
2016-2017 2.33
2017-2018 7.79
2018-2019 3.21

 

[danpantz]

Not that hard to follow along is it?

Someone said that Andersen is better now and your counter argument to that is that Rask outplayed Andersen in the past 2 playoffs so you asked them to explain their version of "better". That same poster then made the claim that over the last 4 years Andersen's numbers have been superior to those of Rask in the regular season and that the playoffs are too small of a sample size, to which you replied the games that matter the most, the playoff games, count the most. This is where I chimed in with a pretty silly example of how Jake Guentzel has outperformed Connor McDavid in the playoffs so he must be better /s (that's sarcasm).

Back to the point at hand. I'm pretty sure GSAA is more commonly used for goalie comparisons.

Andersen
2016-2017 8.58
2017-2018 12.06
2018-2019 14.48

Rask
2016-2017 2.33
2017-2018 7.79
2018-2019 3.21

Literally the first thing that comes up when you google GSAA is the following

"
What GSAA Does Not Do Well

• Goalies that play more games will accumulate more goals saved. If the stat was expressed as GSAA/per 60 minutes, it would be even more accurate. You would have to turn it into a percentage, though. Only goalies that have played a certain number of games would be able to qualify."

 

[razkaz]

Literally the first thing that comes up when you google GSAA is the following

"
What GSAA Does Not Do Well

• Goalies that play more games will accumulate more goals saved. If the stat was expressed as GSAA/per 60 minutes, it would be even more accurate. You would have to turn it into a percentage, though. Only goalies that have played a certain number of games would be able to qualify."

Did you bother to read the entire thing?

Let me go ahead and paste the entire page of the Pros and Cons:

What GSAA Does Well

• It is a very good stat at equalizing goalies across the league, regardless of the team that they play for. For example, a goalie that has a .925 save percentage and has faced a lot more shots than average is actually playing better than a goalie that has a .930 save percentage and has faced less shots. The first goalie has faced more scoring opportunities, and has saved more goals from going in based on their quality of play.

• It tells you how much a team relies on their goaltending to win games. If a team gives up a lot of shots, but their goalie is continually bailing them out, their goalie will have a very high GSAA number. Those teams are more likely to struggle if their goalie goes into a slump or gets injured. Teams that succeed despite having a goaltender that is in the middle of the pack (or worse) in GSAA are actually more stable, because if their goalie slumps or gets injured, they still have a very good chance to win using a replacement netminder.

• It gives you a physical number of goals saved, rather than a percentage. It’s a stat that can be very shocking. For example, Ben Bishop has saved almost 24 goals from being scored on the Tampa Bay Lightning in 44 games. A number that large will draw a lot of attention. It is a great stat to prove Bishop’s worth to the Lightning. 24 goals saved is a VERY significant number.

What GSAA Does Not Do Well

• Goalies that play more games will accumulate more goals saved. If the stat was expressed as GSAA/per 60 minutes, it would be even more accurate. You would have to turn it into a percentage, though. Only goalies that have played a certain number of games would be able to qualify.

• It does not take penalty killing into account. On average this season in the NHL, goalies have seen a 4.4% drop in save percentage while on the penalty kill compared to even strength. This is a major problem for some goalies that play for a team that is constantly killing penalties. Undisciplined teams will have goalies with a lower save percentage and a lower GSAA as a result.

• It does not take fatigue into account. Saves that are made after the 30 shot mark should be worth more, because goalies that face more shots than the league average will be more tired, and will make less saves due to the poor quality of the team in front of them giving up more scoring attempts.

• It also does not take shot quality into account. This can be related to the number of penalties a certain team commits, or even a team’s quality of defence, but that would be very difficult for any statistic to quantify.

GSAA is definitely not a perfect statistic, but it is one of the best ones available at the moment when it comes to analyzing goaltenders. It has flaws, but it is more accurate than save percentage and should become more widely used.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

the bum we traded him for was absolutely hot trash smothered in warm ****

I won't even say his name

Andrew Raycroft

 

[hockeyguru]

Link please? He would have won them the cup.

impossible. he wouldn't have even won them a playoff series

 

[Incognito]

The Leafs circa-2005ish likely would have ruined his development anyways. Rask always had high potential, but Toronto during that time period was just not equipped to help him meet it.

 

[danpantz]

Did you bother to read the entire thing?

Let me go ahead and paste the entire page of the Pros and Cons:

What GSAA Does Well

• It is a very good stat at equalizing goalies across the league, regardless of the team that they play for. For example, a goalie that has a .925 save percentage and has faced a lot more shots than average is actually playing better than a goalie that has a .930 save percentage and has faced less shots. The first goalie has faced more scoring opportunities, and has saved more goals from going in based on their quality of play.

• It tells you how much a team relies on their goaltending to win games. If a team gives up a lot of shots, but their goalie is continually bailing them out, their goalie will have a very high GSAA number. Those teams are more likely to struggle if their goalie goes into a slump or gets injured. Teams that succeed despite having a goaltender that is in the middle of the pack (or worse) in GSAA are actually more stable, because if their goalie slumps or gets injured, they still have a very good chance to win using a replacement netminder.

• It gives you a physical number of goals saved, rather than a percentage. It’s a stat that can be very shocking. For example, Ben Bishop has saved almost 24 goals from being scored on the Tampa Bay Lightning in 44 games. A number that large will draw a lot of attention. It is a great stat to prove Bishop’s worth to the Lightning. 24 goals saved is a VERY significant number.

What GSAA Does Not Do Well

• Goalies that play more games will accumulate more goals saved. If the stat was expressed as GSAA/per 60 minutes, it would be even more accurate. You would have to turn it into a percentage, though. Only goalies that have played a certain number of games would be able to qualify.

• It does not take penalty killing into account. On average this season in the NHL, goalies have seen a 4.4% drop in save percentage while on the penalty kill compared to even strength. This is a major problem for some goalies that play for a team that is constantly killing penalties. Undisciplined teams will have goalies with a lower save percentage and a lower GSAA as a result.

• It does not take fatigue into account. Saves that are made after the 30 shot mark should be worth more, because goalies that face more shots than the league average will be more tired, and will make less saves due to the poor quality of the team in front of them giving up more scoring attempts.

• It also does not take shot quality into account. This can be related to the number of penalties a certain team commits, or even a team’s quality of defence, but that would be very difficult for any statistic to quantify.

GSAA is definitely not a perfect statistic, but it is one of the best ones available at the moment when it comes to analyzing goaltenders. It has flaws, but it is more accurate than save percentage and should become more widely used.

Literally says this stat is no good for comparing a goalie who plays a lot. Andersen plays a ton, and Tuukka doesn't.

Seems like it wouldnt be a good statististic to use based on that alone.

 

[hockeyguru]

imagine thinking andersen is worse than rask

 

[danpantz]

imagine thinking andersen is worse than rask

Where was that posted? Because literally no one said that, only people saying Andersen was better than Rask in a thread about Rask because every thread needs people coming in to say how Toronto's players are gods gift to hockey.

 

[hockeyguru]

Where was that posted? Because literally no one said that, only people saying Andersen was better than Rask in a thread about Rask because every thread needs people coming in to say how Toronto's players are gods gift to hockey.

...and you're refuting it because you believe the opposite holds true...