Who will have the better save percentage this year?
- Thread starter MBH
- Start date
Fil Larkmanthanasiou
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2018
- 1,116
- 603
I think it will be close. It was close last year mainly because Bernier got hung out in his first game back in nearly a month returning from injury for 7 goals.
Taking away that game, Bernier stopped .920 of the shots he faced. One bad game like that has much greater impact in fewer game totals.
Nedeljkovic was great in Carolina, I doubt he will be better than Bernier was with the Wings but time will tell.
Taking away that game, Bernier stopped .920 of the shots he faced. One bad game like that has much greater impact in fewer game totals.
Nedeljkovic was great in Carolina, I doubt he will be better than Bernier was with the Wings but time will tell.
Henkka
Registered User
TheOtherOne
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2010
- 8,274
- 5,272
JustJokinenAround
just a goofball
voted greiss. hes a lifetime .914 and i would expect him to stick around there as he has the past two seasons with detroit. i expect ned to have a drop off and his high danger sv% last year was .571, i'm betting he faces way more high danger chances here in det and thus ends up lower than greiss
DatsDeking
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2013
- 2,104
- 946
I think Greiss will at the end of the season, but Ned will solidify his game by the end of the year and have a better % for the last 2 months of the season.
It also won't even tell us who played better. Unless it's markedly different.
Goalie stats require a ton of context.
MBH
Players Play
Over the course of the season, the save percentage of two goalies on the same team can say quite a bit.
The Zetterberg Era
Ball Hockey Sucks
I lean Greiss because he has the system knowledge at the beginning. I think Ned is better to be clear.
Lazlo Hollyfeld
The jersey ad still sucks
- Mar 4, 2004
- 28,617
- 27,073
If they played the same number of games, if they both played a good mix of opponents, if they got a fairly equal share of second game of back to backs, if one doesn't get more starts when there are significant injuries on the team, then yes I think it could say something but I still wouldn't call it a lot.
Assuming 40 starts each and 30 shots a game, the difference between a .920 and .930 is 12 goals.
Now factor in random bounces, difference in shot quality, and quality of competition... And it's not hard to imagine that those two goalies could have performed nearly the same give or take a handful of goals.
Mike Smith and Vasi had nearly identical save percentages last year. I'm not going to read too much into it, you know?
Now if we're talking .930 vs .910 then it becomes much harder to find enough random variance to explain that.
Lazlo Hollyfeld
The jersey ad still sucks
- Mar 4, 2004
- 28,617
- 27,073
I don't watch the Kings as much these days but when they were a defensive powerhouse Quick's stats would often swing wildly from game to game because he faced so few shots. Sounds great but they give up a doozy of a turnover, the opponent scores then his save percentage takes a big hit in spite of playing a great game overall.
MBH
Players Play
So two goalie splaying in front of the same team, with very similar deployment - and that wouldn't trust save percentage as saying "a lot."
And people wonder why nobody gives a f*** about goalie stats when it comes to Hall of Fame stats.
MBH
Players Play
But it actually might not be significant. That's the point.
You'd need to run a more comprehensive look at multiple data sets to actually draw meaningful conclusions that exhibit wisdom instead of drawing conclusions from base level averages.
Someone actually wrote a scholarly paper on it.
Link to PDF:
Goalie Analytics: Statistical Evaluation of Context-
Specific Goalie Performance Measures in the
National Hockey League
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...MQFnoECEMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0aWLd2i3nX0VwhgRnyJpuS
Lazlo Hollyfeld
The jersey ad still sucks
- Mar 4, 2004
- 28,617
- 27,073
It's "very similar deployment" that's the key. And doesn't usually happen with the two goalies on a team. I think it's where backup goalie love often comes from. Backups get fewer starts, tend to get easier opponents, so if they play well some people think they should be starting. But it's not the same as being the starter.
Goalie stats over a career is a different thing, but still needs context.
Red Stanley
Registered User
MBH
Players Play
Right.
If Ned gets injured at the same time as Larkin and Hronek - that's probably going to tax Greiss's save percentage
Some goalie might get most of game 2s on back to backs.
Some goalies might get the puff games, and some goalies might get the tough games.
Hard to say.
But I look at
20-21
Bernier .914
Greiss .912
19-20
Bernier .907
Howard .882
18-19
Howard .909
Bernier .904
17-18
Howard .910
Mrazek .910
None of those numbers seem off to me.
In 17-18, Mrazek was struggling and pumped up his average with a good run before he was traded.
In 18-19, Bernier was lower - mostly due to a slow start, likely due to very little action
In 19-20, the wheels fell off Howard
In 20-21, Bernier was a bit higher. Like Bernier 18-19, Greiss had a bit of a slow start but got stronger as the season went on.
Sure, there are nuances in those numbers. Many I haven't thought about or considered yet - and probably never will.
But those numbers reflect a reality that's signficiant.
I trust the Bernier-vs-Greiss save percentage last year more than I do Ned vs Greiss from last year.
#1 reason. Bernier and Greiss played for the same team.
So shitting save percentage of two goalies playing for the same team is basically saying save percentage is a totally useless stat.
And while it has limitations - that's not a position I'd support.
MBH
Players Play
Don't have time to get into that right now.
But if two goalies play significant time for the same team and one goalie goes .912 and the other goes .899 - there would need to be a serious and quite obvious explanation for me to discount the save %.
SpookyTsuki
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2014
- 15,916
- 671
kliq
Registered User
- Dec 17, 2017
- 2,727
- 1,319
Exactly. I believe that there are some people out there who have never taken a stats class in their life, yet cite stats all the time while having no understanding about hot to analyze them properly. Its not always apples to apples. Strength of Opponent alone is enough alone to skew stats.
Of course stats mean something, but I think the entire point many are making is that you need to take context into consideration.
Last edited:
Henkka
Registered User
This is a big factor. Just look at some years when Red Wings were a contender, and how many times the backup goalie had better SV% than starter. Thanks to easier opponents.
