Pav is starting to lose, back to Hutch ...

[sweep the leg]

I feel stupid that I started this thread now

Why only now?

[sweep the leg]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

[kelownabomberfan]

If I had to guess, I would say that Pavs and Hutch start the year (barring trades or injuries) but Hellebuyck gets called up around the new year. If Comrie turns into the goalie they think he can, the Jets will have a nice crew of goalies in a few years.

 

Watched a game here last week - Rockets vs. Tri-Cities - playoff game. Comrie stood on his head but Tri-Cities still lost.  He looked really sharp.  Not bad for a rich kid.

[Floyd]

Pavelec has always been hot and cold... we were lucky to have Hutchinson when Pavs sucked, and now that Hutch has gone cold, Pavs is streaking...

 

Sadly $4 million is considered a reasonable contract, he's only signed for another year anyway, by that time, Helleybuck or Comrie should be ready.  Or maybe Pavs gets better, who knows.

[sweep the leg]

 

If I had to guess, I would say that Pavs and Hutch start the year (barring trades or injuries) but Hellebuyck gets called up around the new year. If Comrie turns into the goalie they think he can, the Jets will have a nice crew of goalies in a few years.

 

Watched a game here last week - Rockets vs. Tri-Cities - playoff game. Comrie stood on his head but Tri-Cities still lost.  He looked really sharp.  Not bad for a rich kid.

 

I read that he made 66 saves and still lost. That's crazy.

[The Unknown Poster]

I forgot what the debate it.  Pavs has a below average career save percentage.

 

The issue around here is its always "what have you done lately" and it works both ways.  Crap the bed all season = trade the bum.  Play one good game = sign lifetime contract.

 

Pavs is arguably playing the best hockey of his Jets' career right now.  But he's played great before.  The reason his career average is what it is is because he is inconsistent at best.  The wheels will fall off eventually.  The question is when.  If the Jets make the playoffs I have little doubt Hutch will see some action.

[Noeller]

People using the stats as a pure indicator of Pavelec's worth are being pretty silly. Again, you have to take in to account so much more than just the goaltender. The level of play from defense, and from the entire team's defensive play. Fuhr always had **** numbers, but is in the HOF and is unequivocally one of the best goaltenders of all time because of what he played behind. 

 

I'm not arguing for or against Pavelec, but you can't just post his numbers and say "There! Told you so..." There's so much more to it than that...

[Ducky]

Floyd, Pavs is an UFA in the 2017-2018 season.

 

gbill2004, you can use that flag at the first home playoff game...

[Ducky]

 

Psst, gbill - …………this is for you to have and use.

It surprises me how very few on here get it. A .915 vs .907 save % is an extra goal given up every 3rd game.

So Paul Maurice is wrong and all you guys are right...alrighty then. We will leave it at that.

You're probably right. I should have given up on this argument a long time ago. The guys in here just don't get it. And no logic or statistics will change that.

 

I am no mathematician but wouldn't that depend on shots per game?

[gbill2004]

Psst, gbill - …………this is for you to have and use.

It surprises me how very few on here get it. A .915 vs .907 save % is an extra goal given up every 3rd game.

So Paul Maurice is wrong and all you guys are right...alrighty then. We will leave it at that.

You're probably right. I should have given up on this argument a long time ago. The guys in here just don't get it. And no logic or statistics will change that.

I am no mathematician but wouldn't that depend on shots per game?

Yes, I'm basing that extra goal Pavs gives up every 3rd game on an average of ~35 shots against per game. Could be plus or minus a bit. If you say 30 shots per game then it's roughly an extra goal every 3 games plus one period. I used those numbers to simplify my point, and they're based on my experience in watching hockey over the years.

Edit: I just checked and for this year the highest team was the Blackhawks at 34.1 shots on goal per game. Buffalo was lowest at 24.1 shots per game.

[Brandon]

But shot stats can be misleading.. How do you compare the quality of shots.

So say goalie A faces forty shots from the blue line non screened and easy to stop. The defense is stout and giving the opposition nothing up close and most of the shots are simply them sliding it toward the net.

Now goalie B faces only 20 shots however many of them were on break aways , screened shots, power play shots etc...

Both goalies let in 3 goals... Does this make goalie A light years better?

Numbers don't always tell the story...

[Jacquie]

But there's a reason Maurice benched Pavelec for half the season; he's not very good. But any coach would be stupid not to ride out a goalies hot streak.

 

Rotating goalies or the other goalie going on a hot streak doesn't mean a player was benched. 

[gbill2004]

But there's a reason Maurice benched Pavelec for half the season; he's not very good. But any coach would be stupid not to ride out a goalies hot streak.

Rotating goalies or the other goalie going on a hot streak doesn't mean a player was benched.

Pavelec was benched for a good portion of the season. He even publicly admitted he was frustrated for not playing in like a month after that St Louis game where he let in that game winning goal softie from centre ice with a minute left in the game. He'd only had a few starts in the last couple months.

[Atomic]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

 

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks.  You don't think that makes a difference?

[Jacquie]

But shot stats can be misleading.. How do you compare the quality of shots.

So say goalie A faces forty shots from the blue line non screened and easy to stop. The defense is stout and giving the opposition nothing up close and most of the shots are simply them sliding it toward the net.

Now goalie B faces only 20 shots however many of them were on break aways , screened shots, power play shots etc...

Both goalies let in 3 goals... Does this make goalie A light years better?

Numbers don't always tell the story...

 

Throw in own goals as well.  That is one of the reasons why I think goalie stats are as much a team stat and not just an individual player stat. 

[gbill2004]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

[Jacquie]

 

 

But there's a reason Maurice benched Pavelec for half the season; he's not very good. But any coach would be stupid not to ride out a goalies hot streak.

Rotating goalies or the other goalie going on a hot streak doesn't mean a player was benched.

Pavelec was benched for a good portion of the season. He even publicly admitted he was frustrated for not playing in like a month after that St Louis game where he let in that game winning goal softie from centre ice with a minute left in the game. He'd only had a few starts in the last couple months.

 

 

Pavs has played 700 minutes more than Hutchinson this season. Maurice was rotating goalies regularly for a lot of the season. Hutchinson going on a hot streak doesn't mean Pavs was benched anymore than it means Hutchinson is now benched. 

[Atomic]

 

 

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

 

 

So?  Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim.  Just common sense.

[gbill2004]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

So? Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim. Just common sense.

That's not correct. Worse teams typically give up more shots on goal but the quality of shots is an incorrect assumption.

[gbill2004]

But there's a reason Maurice benched Pavelec for half the season; he's not very good. But any coach would be stupid not to ride out a goalies hot streak.

Rotating goalies or the other goalie going on a hot streak doesn't mean a player was benched.

Pavelec was benched for a good portion of the season. He even publicly admitted he was frustrated for not playing in like a month after that St Louis game where he let in that game winning goal softie from centre ice with a minute left in the game. He'd only had a few starts in the last couple months.

Pavs has played 700 minutes more than Hutchinson this season. Maurice was rotating goalies regularly for a lot of the season. Hutchinson going on a hot streak doesn't mean Pavs was benched anymore than it means Hutchinson is now benched.

I don't disagree at all with your last sentence. Hutch has clearly been benched recently. Just like Pavelec was earlier in the season.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

 

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

So? Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim. Just common sense.

That's not correct. Worse teams typically give up more shots on goal but the quality of shots is an incorrect assumption.

 

 

lol based on what?  Some online article from 2 years ago by a 19 year old stats student?  You need to consider your sources.  Shot quality makes a huge difference and there are several people doing research into it right now.  It is ignored to some degree by the advanced stats crowd because they can't quantify it easily, but make no mistake, the difference is there.

[gbill2004]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

So? Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim. Just common sense.

That's not correct. Worse teams typically give up more shots on goal but the quality of shots is an incorrect assumption.

lol based on what? Some online article from 2 years ago by a 19 year old stats student? You need to consider your sources. Shot quality makes a huge difference and there are several people doing research into it right now. It is ignored to some degree by the advanced stats crowd because they can't quantify it easily, but make no mistake, the difference is there.

GAA is widely accepted as a team stat and save percentage is considered an individual goalie stat.

And if you want to consider the eye test, well I can tell you over the past few years Pavelec typically lets in one soft goal per game and his technique and positioning is considered terrible.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

So? Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim. Just common sense.

That's not correct. Worse teams typically give up more shots on goal but the quality of shots is an incorrect assumption.

lol based on what? Some online article from 2 years ago by a 19 year old stats student? You need to consider your sources. Shot quality makes a huge difference and there are several people doing research into it right now. It is ignored to some degree by the advanced stats crowd because they can't quantify it easily, but make no mistake, the difference is there.

GAA is widely accepted as a team stat and save percentage is considered an individual goalie stat.

And if you want to consider the eye test, well I can tell you over the past few years Pavelec typically lets in one soft goal per game and his technique and positioning is considered terrible.

 

 

Eye test is irrelevant because you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

"Widely accepted" doesn't fly with me.  "Widely accepted" just means the majority believe what someone told them and repeat it like parrots.

 

Read the downloadable PDF found here:

 

http://hockeyanalytics.com/2012/02/defense-independent-goaltender-ratings/

 

You might learn something.

[gbill2004]

gbill is right about comparing small sample sizes. Historically, those other goalies have been better than Pavelec. It's easy to laugh now b/c the stats are close, but that's with the power of hindsight. Was it really a reach to think, prior to the season, that Halak would have been an upgrade on Pavelec?

Yeah they have been better, Halak played for Montreal and the Blues, while Hiller spent his career with the Ducks. You don't think that makes a difference?

Talking save percentage. Not goals against average.

So? Quality of shots against makes a difference... a goalie playing for Edmonton will naturally have a lower save percentage than one playing for Anaheim. Just common sense.

That's not correct. Worse teams typically give up more shots on goal but the quality of shots is an incorrect assumption.

lol based on what? Some online article from 2 years ago by a 19 year old stats student? You need to consider your sources. Shot quality makes a huge difference and there are several people doing research into it right now. It is ignored to some degree by the advanced stats crowd because they can't quantify it easily, but make no mistake, the difference is there.

GAA is widely accepted as a team stat and save percentage is considered an individual goalie stat.

And if you want to consider the eye test, well I can tell you over the past few years Pavelec typically lets in one soft goal per game and his technique and positioning is considered terrible.

Eye test is irrelevant because you have no idea what you're talking about.

"Widely accepted" doesn't fly with me. "Widely accepted" just means the majority believe what someone told them and repeat it like parrots.

Read the downloadable PDF found here:

http://hockeyanalytics.com/2012/02/defense-independent-goaltender-ratings/

You might learn something.

That is interesting, but those stats are from 5-6 years ago, Pavelec only played 42 games that year.

[Atomic]

I didn't post it for the stats, I posted it to show that shot quality is not as irrelevant as some would have you believe.

 

What you don't realize is that because shot quality pokes a big hole in Corsi/Fenwick reliability, the advanced stats supporters have been fighting against recognizing shot quality for years and trying to make it seem illegitimate.  But the numbers say different.

 

And there are intangible factors at play as well.  A goalie playing behind a better team has more confidence, which allows him to play better.  Again, common sense.