Goalie ratings concerns

Philippe27 · Guru

Goalie ratings concerns

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Unfortunately, there's several problems (in my opinion) with the analysis and the feel for a need of any changes.

- The reality of a hockey league in that if you're a goalie a starting goalie and you have a save percentage under .885, you're doing a pretty sucky job. The range of save percentages for goalies just isn't that big.

- Dividing into only 2 camps, the top 21 and bottom 21... is going the make numbers pretty difficult to actually mean anything.

- There's going to be goalies that simply defy logic and sure they may be outliers, but still are going to affect things. Sanford for example with his 74 OV, yet has 6 shutouts, and a .930 save percentage in 25 games. John Grahame, 74 OV, .920 save percentage in 26 games. Rick Dipietro, same team 78 OV and .898 OV. Kiprusoff, one of the best goalies in the league... .898 save percentage? Luongo, same thing. .896. Mika Noronen (who only played 24 games, so you wouldn't have counted him) whopping 66 ov, but has a .919 save percentage. Underachieving and overachieving doesn't mean things need to be changed...

- Counting all goalies 25+ games is also going to make a difference. Maintaining a great (or poor) save % for 25 games isn't the same as doing it for 50+ that the starters typically have.

- There's an assuption that the difference between a 79.5 goalie and 72.5 goalie means the same thing as a 7 point OV difference from an 84 rated goalie and a 77 rated goalie which is just that, an assumption. Plus again, lumping all those goalies together really minimizes the validity of the numbers.

-- Edited by Florida Panthers at 13:43, 2007-02-26

Philippe27 · Guru

Fine disagree with my analysis but what you said here proves my point:
- There's going to be goalies that simply defy logic and sure they may be outliers, but still are going to affect things. Sanford for example with his 74 OV, yet has 6 shutouts, and a .930 save percentage in 25 games. John Grahame, 74 OV, .920 save percentage in 26 games. Rick Dipietro, same team 78 OV and .898 OV. Kiprusoff, one of the best goalies in the league... .898 save percentage? Luongo, same thing. .896. Mika Noronen (who only played 24 games, so you wouldn't have counted him) whopping 66 ov, but has a .919 save percentage. Underachieving and overachieving doesn't mean things need to be changed...

We have no control as GM's over underachieving or overachieving, ratings should be done to minimize this effect. Us GM's have control over getting the best goalie on our team and it's really not fair that a guy who was smart enough to trade for Kiprusoff gets a guy with a save percentage below .900 because that would NEVER happen in the NHL.

All due respect to Montreal, he doesn't have the best team and sure he may be good and figured out good line sbut he's been VERY lucky and I just think it's unfair that someone who built an average team can win the cup because he gets lucky in the playoffs and has his goalies way overachieve.

BryceBruins · BRHL2 Co-Commish

Kinda like how Cam Ward overachieved in the NHL playoffs last season?
So shoudl Carolina not get the cup because of that?

Philippe27 · Guru

BryceBruins wrote:

Kinda like how Cam Ward overachieved in the NHL playoffs last season?
So shoudl Carolina not get the cup because of that?

Dude, there's a big difference between NHL and FHL, in NHL that's due to coaching, chemistry and some other factors, in FHL that factor is called luck.
Even if you increase the scale there will be players overachieving though but is there ANYWAY that Kiprusoff, Hasek and Luongo would have a save percentage below .900? They were all top 5 goalies in the NHL last year.
If we don't minimize the luck factor we might as well pull a team name out of a hat and give them the cup and the 350 bucks.

BryceBruins · BRHL2 Co-Commish

OK, so what stat in particular is the biggest effect on save percentage? If it were that easy it would be no problem. But the way the ratings are put together their is no set way to ensure a goalie performs well.

I don't understand how Cam Ward to go on the run he did wasn't luck, but "coaching, chemistry, and other factors". Yet when a team, like Montreal over achieves it is strictly luck. Hell look at that Hurricanes team in general last season they overperformed all season and then in the playoffs. When realistically on PAPER they are about as good as they've played this season.

With Montreal in particular could it not be a reflection of their coach Jacques Lemaire? He's rated as one of the best coaches in the league so the have coaching covered. They have some weird chemistry going, and they have other mitigating factors, of which is luck and a few players having huge years like Halpern and Pettinger.

I think your quest to have the best team on paper win kinda defeats the purpose of simming, or playing the games in the NHL, pretty much every year people can look at a teams roster and say that 2 or 3 teams are definetely the favourites for the cup. Unfortunately no-one wins without playing the games, as NHL Senators fans have found in the last few years.

Without looking into the goalie rankings I'd bet that the best goalies in regards to GAA and SP% are on the best teams, now how much of that is a reflection on the team? And how much is a reflection of the goalie? Everyone knows a goalie can't take you to the playoffs by himself, but a very good deep team can make a goalie look good. Case in point Luongo in Florida and Legace in Detroit.

-- Edited by BryceBruins at 14:47, 2007-02-26

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

Fine disagree with my analysis but what you said here proves my point:
- There's going to be goalies that simply defy logic and sure they may be outliers, but still are going to affect things. Sanford for example with his 74 OV, yet has 6 shutouts, and a .930 save percentage in 25 games. John Grahame, 74 OV, .920 save percentage in 26 games. Rick Dipietro, same team 78 OV and .898 OV. Kiprusoff, one of the best goalies in the league... .898 save percentage? Luongo, same thing. .896. Mika Noronen (who only played 24 games, so you wouldn't have counted him) whopping 66 ov, but has a .919 save percentage. Underachieving and overachieving doesn't mean things need to be changed...
We have no control as GM's over underachieving or overachieving, ratings should be done to minimize this effect. Us GM's have control over getting the best goalie on our team and it's really not fair that a guy who was smart enough to trade for Kiprusoff gets a guy with a save percentage below .900 because that would NEVER happen in the NHL.
All due respect to Montreal, he doesn't have the best team and sure he may be good and figured out good line sbut he's been VERY lucky and I just think it's unfair that someone who built an average team can win the cup because he gets lucky in the playoffs and has his goalies way overachieve.

Really? How's Hart and Vezina trophy winner Jose Theodore doing? How about Vezina winner Jim Carey? The drop in their save percentages may not have quite been to under .900, but the drop was huge in one season for Theodore, and now he's regarded as a $5 million bum.

What team a goalie is on is also going to have an effect on his numbers. GAA more than save %, but save % is still going to be effected.

If the OVs as they exist right now, I'll swap ya Sanford for Turco in the offseason. Look at the numbers Sanford's putting up. Clearly you'd rather have Sanford!

Philippe27 · Guru

What you need to understand is we are simming the 2005-06 season and based on those stats and the goal of ratings is to reproduce stats as close to those as possible. IT IS NOT to recreate a Jose Theodore or a Jim Carey.
If a goalie has a **** season like Theodore in the NHL then his ratings will drop the next season and that season he will be a 5 million bum.

and Bryce, stats that affect save percentage for a goalie: IT, SP, SK and PC

In the NHL they can make a team overachieve, a team that you think sucks on paper I may think is good. In FHL that isn't the case, the paper is there, we all have the same view of a player's scoring skills from the ratings. You may think Huet was overachieving in the NHL this season, I didn't. There's no question that Kipper or Ovechkin is underachieving in BRHL though.

Hawks_G · Guru

Interesting debate.

Phillipe. The problem with your argument is that the goalies playing on teams that are terrible in the BRHL should, by your argument play like their NHL counterparts regardless of what is in front of them.

Brodeur in NJ and Brodeur in the BRHL have different groups of guys in front of them. There you are going to find the difference.

Why would a great NHL goalie with a crap team in front of him in the BRHL still have the same numbers....that wouldn't make sense.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

What you need to understand is we are simming the 2005-06 season and based on those stats and the goal of ratings is to reproduce stats as close to those as possible. IT IS NOT to recreate a Jose Theodore or a Jim Carey.
If a goalie has a **** season like Theodore in the NHL then his ratings will drop the next season and that season he will be a 5 million bum.

Actually the goal is to reproduce the characteristics that the similar player would have based on the 05-06 season. And that's what we have. It's not to reproduce the stats. The reality is that the BRHL2 is not the NHL. The players are created to represent their real life counterparts, but the second that the first game is simmed, it's an entirely different reality where players are not necessarily going to do as well, or as poorly, as their real life counterparts for the next season.

Philippe27 wrote:
In the NHL they can make a team overachieve, a team that you think sucks on paper I may think is good. In FHL that isn't the case, the paper is there, we all have the same view of a player's scoring skills from the ratings. You may think Huet was overachieving in the NHL this season, I didn't. There's no question that Kipper or Ovechkin is underachieving in BRHL though.

And...? So they're underachieving. So what? There's real life NHL under and overachievers, why should an FHL league be any different?

Philippe27 · Guru

Hawks_G wrote:

Interesting debate.

Phillipe. The problem with your argument is that the goalies playing on teams that are terrible in the BRHL should, by your argument play like their NHL counterparts regardless of what is in front of them.

Brodeur in NJ and Brodeur in the BRHL have different groups of guys in front of them. There you are going to find the difference.

Why would a great NHL goalie with a crap team in front of him in the BRHL still have the same numbers....that wouldn't make sense.

I know I understand that but I don't think save percentage is that affected by the team in front of the goalie. Sure it is a little but not a whole lot. I'll run some tests when I get a little time with a test season with 30 goalies all playing on a team with the same ratings and it'll be easier to prove my point.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

I know I understand that but I don't think save percentage is that affected by the team in front of the goalie. Sure it is a little but not a whole lot. I'll run some tests when I get a little time with a test season with 30 goalies all playing on a team with the same ratings and it'll be easier to prove my point

- Run that same test 10 times and see if you get the same result.
- Again... even if that turned out to be the case... so what? This is not the NHL. The goal is not to ensure that players play the same as their NHL counterparts. The goal is to have the players created with the same abilities and skill. But there will be underachievers and overachievers in both the NHL and the BRHL2. And not necessarily the same players. There's nothing wrong with that.

WildJamie · Senior Member

I generally agree with Philippe on this one. The numbers the goalies are producing in this league are way out of whack... I have never seen it this bad in any other league I have been in. There are always a few guys that under or over achieve, and this should be.... but in this league there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the numbers. There are more guys vastly under or over achieving than there are playing to form, regardless of the team in front of them.
I think all Philippe is asking for, and I agree 100% with, it increase the range of the ratings. This makes it much easier for a top goalie to perform as a top goalie and a 3rd stringer to perform as such.
Currently there is little incentive for a team running for the cup to try and pick up Luongo, Kipper or Brodeur. I am not paying the premium price for one of those guys when I already have a guy that has near his rates and doesn't perform significantly worse.

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida Panthers wrote:

Philippe27 wrote:

I know I understand that but I don't think save percentage is that affected by the team in front of the goalie. Sure it is a little but not a whole lot. I'll run some tests when I get a little time with a test season with 30 goalies all playing on a team with the same ratings and it'll be easier to prove my point
- Run that same test 10 times and see if you get the same result.
- Again... even if that turned out to be the case... so what? This is not the NHL. The goal is not to ensure that players play the same as their NHL counterparts. The goal is to have the players created with the same abilities and skill. But there will be underachievers and overachievers in both the NHL and the BRHL2. And not necessarily the same players. There's nothing wrong with that.

Yes I know there will be but you don't want the top goalie becoming a below average goalie. A guy like Brodeur if you sim 10 seasons thould always be a top 5 goalie, not go from 1st to 15th.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

Yes I know there will be but you don't want the top goalie becoming a below average goalie. A guy like Brodeur if you sim 10 seasons thould always be a top 5 goalie, not go from 1st to 15th.

Why? Why should he always be a top 5 goalie? He's not always going to be a top 5 goalie in the NHL... run it 10 times and likely you'd see that 8 times (nothing more than a guess on my part) that he WILL be a top 5 goalie. But there's nothing wrong when those 2 times happen that he does tank the season. Because it does happen in the NHL. Not a lot... but it does.