Grading the Islanders: Dwayne Roloson, beloved curmudgeon
by Dominik on Aug 16, 2010 1:29 PM EDT
in New York Islanders Report Cards
Email
Print(You know why we drag these out all summer? 'Cause August is a rocky place, where easy blog seeds can find no purchase.)
With Brendan Witt's time as an Islander officially complete, thankfully we have at least one more season of Dwayne Roloson's no-nonsense dry-wit post-game interviews to fill the void. Dwayne Roloson just wants to play the game (every game, if possible) and not be asked questions -- at least not dumb ones. I've gotta respect that. (While it's every NHLer's job to field the queries -- and he fields them fine -- it's fair to expect the queries to consist of more than, "How did it feel to win/lose/get that shutout/win after losing/end that streak?")
Roloson was signed at the beginning of Free Agency Fest 2009, the perfect bridge -- thanks to age and ability -- between rehab-era DiPietro and whichever goalie would take the reins in the post-DiPietro rehab era, be it #39 himself or one of the Isles' growing number of prospects. Goalie who can still deliver near age 40 meets team that needs a quality goalie without long-term aspirations. Thus a match was made.
Take the tour after the jump, then issue your grade in the poll.
Dwayne Roloson
#30 / Goalie / New York Islanders
6-1
180
Oct 12, 1969
12+
1 more year at $3M ($2.5M cap hit)
"Please don't decline just yet ol' feller."
As discussed in Friday's Isles league-ranking post and comments, Roloson delivered a fairly impressive year, though it was hindered in sections by the early season rotation with Martin Biron (who convincingly lost the battle for #1) and the late-season rotation with a returning Rick DiPietro and the briefly resurrected Biron.
Hockey Card Stats
There were a lot of goalies with better stats than Roloson last year -- either a higher save percentage or a lower GAA -- but few played in front of a weaker defense. The Islanders allowed 31.9 shots per game, seventh-most in the league. Roloson faced about 32.2 shots/60 minutes, and despite only playing in 50 games, Roloson's shots-against total of 1555 was in the range of other goalies who played 58-63 games.
The 2009 Free Agent Decision
If you take the numbers at face value, of six other free agent goalies last summer (Craig Anderson, Scott Clemmensen, Ray Emery, Manny Legace, Nikolai Khabibulin, Antero Niittymaki) only Anderson and Nifty Niittymaki both played full seasons and had better hockey-card numbers. (The other four were injury casualties and/or backups.)
| Crazy Goalie | GP | Shots | Save % | SH TOI/GP | PP TOI/GP |
| Anderson | 71 | 2233 | .917 | 5:23 | 5:27 |
| Niifftty | 49 | 1388 | .909 | 3:51 | 3:46 |
| Roloson | 50 | 1555 | .907 | 3:31 | 3:41 |
Personally, while I yearned for Anderson last summer -- and my goodness he had an insane season -- I also never thought there could realistically be a match with the Isles. Anderson was a guy looking for an opportunity to grab a long-term #1 job -- something the Islanders couldn't offer with DiPietro's situation still unclear. (In contrast, Roloson came with his own built-in expiration date, which makes things much less awkward when your injured starter has a 15-year contract.) Niifftty Niittymaki, meanwhile, was just as much of an injury risk as Emery, Khabibulin and Legace. While he survived the year in Tampa Bay, that would have been a double-health gamble for Snow.
All told, Snow chose wisely. Roloson was by far the best Islanders goalie last year, was one of the best free agent performers, and if you buy into the argument that the Biron-DiPietro rotation dampened his form and hence his stats in October and January (I do), he is poised to be that or better this season, provided Father Time doesn't suddenly wake up and decide Roloson should not enter the aged air of Dominik Hasek or Jacques Plante.
Hockey's 'The People Demand a Winner' Sideshow
In the shootout, Roloson overcame some alarming early-season struggles (remember how ugly his first two shootouts were?), finishing with a 5-5 record and .615 save pct. in the shootout -- which is not stellar but is also, in this small sample, a few ticks better than heralded Panthers keeper Tomas Vokoun.
As long as the NHL decrees that half a regulation win shall be awarded through this method, that bears watching.
The Poem
[Melody if you please]
You can run on for a long time
Stop pucks for a long time
Glove save for a long time
Sooner or later God'll cut you down
Hockey gods'll try to cut you down
But...you got a late start on your pro career
Those jobs are few and held so dear
You paid your dues, waited on and on
Backed up younger men who been and gone
Maybe nobody gonna cut you down
Not just yet will they cut you down
Hasek played at 40 didn't look so bad
Beezer played at 38 and it was sad
DP's only 28 but we can't say
In you come at 40 to save the day
Hope they wait before they cut you down
Hope they wait before they cut you down
You can stop pucks for a long time
Keep your mileage low for a long time
Keep your body fit for a long time
Someone comes, try to cut you down
This year we won't let 'em cut you down
We pray nobody come and cut you down
The Grade
Here we ask you to give your grade in the poll based on your preseason expectations. The words after the poll options are mostly jest, the numbers themselves not. If you thought Roloson was done but he surprised you, you give grade him well above average. If you thought he was a superstar but found him to be lacking, you grade below average. And so on. Elaborate or bring up other material in comments as you see fit.
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
6
Had no expectations (hell, I’d never even heard of the guy before last season) and came away impressed by his performance overall.
Do we have good stats on his third-period performances? Seems like he always kicked into high gear as the rest of the team started to falter.
8 with attitude
If you would have asked me at the beginning of the year with all the shootout failures I would have said 5 but he didn’t exactly have Lidstrom in front of him. Hence the crazy amounts of
Plus he had the baseball slap… You have to admire a goalie with a little attitude as long as it doesn’t tear the team apart. There were nights that I would just continue watching for the slap. He made losses entertaining to watch.
Part of me wonders if the team didn’t perform for Biron in the same way because Biron did not have enough attitude.
It is official, I am moving back to Long Island in about 2-3 weeks.
Missed portion from above.
The crazy amounts of shootouts to expose an aging goalie…
It is official, I am moving back to Long Island in about 2-3 weeks.
by metalcoconut on Aug 16, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
That is my favorite Cash song...nice!
It is official, I am moving back to Long Island in about 2-3 weeks.
8
Stats do little justice towards helping us evaluate a goalies performance. So much of a goalies stats are influenced by the team ahead of him that you can really only fairly evaluate a goalies performance by watching him day in and day out. I’m glad I sucked it up and invested in NHL center ice (i live out of state) and got to watch most Islander games, because while Rollie’s stats aren’t overly impressive; anyone who watched him play last year know that he provided us with steady, sometimes spectacular, goaltending. Hockey is a little behind baseball in advanced stats (ie: sabermetrics in baseball) and while we are getting there (corsi numbers etc.) it still takes watching games to really be able to evaluate players. A 3 gaa and .900 save percentage won’t win you a vezina but I am going to make a bold statement and suggest that Rollie was up there with the top goalies last year. I rarely saw him let in a soft goal and stopped plenty of difficult shots. With our already shaky defense decimated with injuries last year and having to dig deeper and deeper into the pipeline for replacements Rollie had little help in front of him. Still, he kept us in most games and stole some games as well. Kudos, Rollie. I just wish you were 25 and not 40.
by MatthewM11 on Aug 16, 2010 2:43 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
8
agree MM11, rarely saw a soft goal, turnstyle rotation of Dmen, kept the Isles in a bunch of games where they were blitzed early before they got their legs. Key for him to stay healthy/not have some sort of massive decline due to a 40 yr tipping point.
8..MM says it all.
Thanks for sharing my thoughts… the only thing I will add to this post is that when people look at the stats who didn’t watch every game is this:
Mark Streit, Brendan Witt, Radek Martinek, Bruno Gervais, Jack Hillen, Andrew MacDonald, Dustin Kohn, Dylan reese, Freddy Meyer, Mark Flood and Anton Klementyev… If I missed any all-star performers (besides Mark Streit) I apologize.
Bravo old man!
My cup is 3/4 empty, How 'bout yours?
8
You can’t go by his stats for the simple reason that he kept the Islanders in a lot more games that they had no right to be in. Throw in the constant rotation of dmen in front of him and its surprising he was as good as he was. Also Rollie definitely got some revenge watching the Oilers completely collapse.
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
Agreed. Rollie deserves an 8. Just his presence instead of a Joey MacDonald or Yann Danis in the crease gave the team a sense of legitimacy that wasn’t there in 08-09. Hell, without him I doubt the Isles would have been as close to the playoff bubble as late as they were.
There are few things in this world I enjoy more than the English getting beaten like a rented mule.
by David Hanssen on Aug 16, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Just his presence instead of a Joey MacDonald or Yann Danis in the crease gave the team a sense of legitimacy that wasn’t there in 08-09.
Well said. The “We’re going to sign a veteren NHL goalie instead of putting some journeyman AHL goaltender in the crease” attitude is a little more consistent with the doings of a legitimate NHL team vrs. whatever you would call the team from 08-09.
In fairness, I think Snow gambled on DiP being healthy and got burnt on it. I don’t think he’ll make that mistake again.
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
8
Gotta go with an 8 here. I was at opening night in Buffalo and he looked HORRIBLE. I remember my father calling me during the game and saying it looked like Roli was just here to collect a paycheck. But then all of a sudden he turned int on and I was very surprised with how well he played this year. Didn’t really expect too much out of him. But he gave it his all right up until the end for this team. Excited to have him back this year.
Officially applying for the open Color Commentator position!
Only 8's comment here?
7
for me. Above my expectations, but I new he was a good goalie who could carry a weak team. He excelled for much of the season- but had his ups and downs and his stats weren’t over the top.
Nearly enough defensemen to last through the injury bug
stats weren’t over the top.
I don’t think any goalie had a chance of coming to the Islanders and putting up good stats. The defense was just too young and raw. Obviously that would effect his GAA but save percentage is also effected by a weak defense. Opposing players have an easier time getting in close and setting up plays to get better shots against a weak defense core.
a bad “D” has a direct effect on W/L and GA, but I think the SV% is more indicative of how well the goalie performs. Rollie was heroic most nights, and the team had faith in him. As I expected from him, but his stats weren’t over the top.
Nearly enough defensemen to last through the injury bug
Like I was saying the other day about Rollie/Biron, the tendency of Biron to give up 1 or 2 bad goals a game tended to really crush the Islanders spirits. You play 18 minutes of good hockey, and your goalie decides he’s going to be lazy on odd angle shots and instead of hugging the post with his stick just leaves it out in the open. I wish I could remember what game it was, cause I was screaming in the comments that a puck was going to bounce off his exposed stick and into the net. It almost happened twice, and third try was a charm and it went in, just killing the team that night.
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
I disagree
I disagree. I think Save percentage is maybe more objective than GAA or certainly wins and losses, but it is still very much influenced by the team in front of you. A good defense not only cuts down on the shots a goalie faces, but also the quality of shots. With a weaker defense, opposing players are going to get better shots. If an opposing player blows by a defender and gets a break-away, well that shot he gets off is equal to a weak angle shot from a bad angle. A good defense can force opposing forwards to take shots from the perimeter or from bad angles. Again, as far as save percentage is concerned all shots are equal. So I think defense absolutely influences a goalies save percentage
You made me think of this story from BSH: 75 Reasons The Flyers beat the Devils the Chart shows where the Flyers players blocked shots over the 5 game series. Pretty much Cloutier would have been able to beat the Devils with that kind of protection.
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
That’s a great article; thanks, and illustrates my point:
They kept the Devils attack to the perimeter, not allowing many quality shots to get through on the goalie. As a result, he was able to stop the shots that did hit him with ease.
The devils still got shots off, but were easily blocked by the flyer’s goalie. Hence a good defense will absolutely effect a goalies save percentage, and conversely a bad defense=lower save percentage
BTW
http://brodeurisafraud.blogspot.com/ is a great resource for information of goalies beyond the ‘traditional’ stats. Almost like sabermetrics for goalies. The writers of the blog seem to be trying to find better metrics for evaluating goalies beyond GAA and SV%
The URL alone got my attention
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
7
That’s a very tricky question, I think. I’m not really in either camp because I simply don’t know enough about it, but I think what you mention here is more what we would expect just naturally from how we watch the game and how the media present it. You might have followed the discussions around Montreal’s success in the playoffs or Colorado’s run last season. Those were pretty converse indeed.
However, it’s sure possible that defense does influence a goalie’s save percentage, but well, let’s keep in mind that Vokoun has consistently had one of the best save percentages over the last few seasons and he’s most likely not had outstanding help of his team (Florida). Obviously it wouldn’t have been fair to expect Rollie to come to Long Island and put up incredible stats. But I wouldn’t say it’s impossible to do on a team like the Islanders. At the same time, you’re not automatically going to have good numbers playing for a good team – Chicago and Pittsburgh were at the bottom of the league last season in terms of save percentage. So, it’s really tough to tell.
Anyway, 7 for me. Rollie certainly did well overall, but I didn’t like the fact that he struggled when asked to share the workload. Of course, that might be difficult for any goalie, but let’s remember that the situation could have been even more complicated. DP could have been healthy for a bigger part of the season, or Biron could have been more consistent, and Rollie wouldn’t have got that many starts and perhaps would have been quite mediocre in sum indeed. Just trying to say that, given the situation last summer, one expectation was that Rollie would do well in combination with Biron and/or DiPietro. He didn’t really meet that one and that was a bit disappointing, although it probably was wrong to have that expectation, as Rollie seemingly has always been best when playing a lot. But then, I wonder how Garth’s expectation was there.
Other than that, Rollie certainly was pretty good, although I sometimes thought his overall contribution was overstated a little mainly for the fact that goaltending had been an issue previously, or with Biron. But surely, I didn’t see him let in many soft goals, either, but a bit of a weakness in terms of dealing with traffic around the net. Pretty funny, how he lost his stick once in almost every game.
Hockey is one of those sports where stats can only tell us so much, especially when it comes to defense and goaltending. But that is really the nature of stats with any sports. Baseball was completely revolutionized by the sabermetrics movement. All of sudden, you had a lot of baseball fans scratching there heads and thinking “gee, I guess ERA isn’t the best way to evaluate a pitcher.” I think we are seeing the same thing with in Hockey, only its a few years behind. If you go to the URL I mentioned above; http://brodeurisafraud.blogspot.com/, you can see that some bloggers are already trying to figure out new metrics to better measure a goalies success. I’ve generally agreed with most of what you have written, but personally I don’t think there is much of an argument saying that defense does not effect a goalies save percentage. You look at the Islanders defense last season, where among many shortcomings was lack of size. The Islanders were often out muscled down low and failed to clear the crease. This had to have had an affect on our goalies save percentage. Facing shots through screens, having forwards move through our defensive zone unmolested etc. had to have made the shots Roloson, Biron et al faced more diffacult to stop. I realize my argument is circumstantial but its all I have right now. Anyway, those are my thoughts.
correction
Sorry, its late. I meant to say anecdotal, not circumstantial. As in “..I realize my argument is anecdotal..” I swear that was in my head while I was typing the above post but somehow circumstantial came out. Must of been something someone said on the TV that was on in the background while I was typing.
Hockey is one of those sports where stats can only tell us so much, especially when it comes to defense and goaltending.
I don’t disagree with that. And I’m sure we’ll have many good discussions away from stats throughout the season. But I grew up following European sports and stats are not popular at all over here. Actually, in (Swiss) hockey, they still don’t even officially collate basic stats, such as +/- or shots and thus save percentage. And I see every day to what kind of not very profound talk that leads… So, I’m coming more from the side that any meaningful stat is worth a look. And I’d sure include save percentage there. brodeurisafraud sure knows the limits of that stat, but they’re also pretty clear about save percentage being the most important stat to look at when talking about goalies. Obviously that doesn’t mean defense can’t have an effect on this number. But we really don’t know how much and I somehow feel it’s not nearly as much as one might expect. But yeah, we won’t find out in the next few days, I guess. Just another anecdotal argument here:
Roloson’s EV save percentage over the last few seasons:
09-10, Islanders, 50 games: 91.5%
08-09, Oilers: 63 games, 92.6%
07-08, Oilers, 43 games: 91.1%
06-07, Oilers, 66 games: 91.0%
05-06, Wild, 24 games: 91.1%. Oilers (regular season), 19 games: 91.1%. Oilers (playoffs), 19 games: 93.2%
03-04, Wild, 48 games: 94.0%
02-03, Wild, 50 games: 93.0%
01-02, Wild, 45 games: 91.2%
A couple of seasons at Minnesota stand out, but let’s keep in mind that those were coached by Jacques Lemaire, whose teams indeed limit the rate at which opponents take high-percentage shots. Funnily, MacTavish, who coached Rollie in Edomonton, is relatively high up that list, too. However, Edmonton surely had a better defense in some years at least than the Islanders did this season. Taking these things into account, Rollie has been pretty consistently putting up 91.x% save percentages and thus his number this year with the Islanders (91.52%) is no worse than what we realistically should have expected.
Doing the same with Martin Biron:
09-10, Islanders, 29 games: 91.1%
08-09, Flyers, 55 games: 91.8%
07-08, Flyers, 62 games: 92.7%
06-07, Flyers, 16 games: 89.9%. Sabres, 19 games, 91.2%
05-06 , Sabres, 35 games: 91.6%
03-04, Sabres, 52 games: 92.9%
02-03, Sabres, 54 games: 92.4%
Well, Biron’s tough to read because he’s never been very consistent and probably didn’t have his best season himself this year anyway. So, I don’t want to speculate, but if he had played at the top of his game, something close to 92% would have been possible and that would have been close to what he averaged behind better defenses.
Biron's consistency
That’s what’s so maddening to me about Biron. He has the tools. He has the demeanor. But sometimes I watch him play and it’s like he left his goalie fundamentals box back in the smoking lounge.
By the way, to Roloson and the Oilers defense, no doubt Pronger for 30 minutes a night in 2006 was a help.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
good post
Thanks, that was an interesting post. I agree 100% that save percentage is the most important stat when looking at goalies, simply put it is the best and most objective stat we have right now to evaluate goalies. Its definitely more objective than GAA. A thing to consider though with save percentage is how its changed over the years. I first started watching hockey in the mid-eighties and both goals against average and save percentage were higher on average then now. The game was different then, more wide open and offense orientated. But if save percentage was an objective stat we wouldn’t expect it to have changed much. Goals against average would fluctuate as the game changed but save percentage would not. But it has, which goes back to my original point. That defense has a direct bearing on save percentage. When the game was more wide open goalies were facing tougher shots to stop. Of course a big variable in this argument is whether goaltending has just gotten better. I actually think it has gotten a little better (not that todays goalies are better athletes, but that they are more fundamentally sound) This is a whole other topic for another day, but if goalies are better today it would not account for such a higher average save percentage then 20 years ago. Thoughts?
Disagree a bit
I think the save percentage increase is due both to more sophisticated defenses (think Roger Nielsen expansion era and the migration toward demanding full back-checking skating (and hooking) out of every forward line) as well as the increase in equipment, size and conditioning of goalies.
In short, they have figured out the best way to goaltend: Butterfly in some way, taking up the most space and the most high-percentage shots, and the equipment evolved to support that style. So no matter the defense (which is also a factor, I agree), it’s simply harder to beat a goalie today than it was in 1985. I sort of tried to ask Mike Bossy this question (i.e. “Do you ever think about how you’d beat goalies today vs. in the ’80s?”) but he didn’t really bite.
Does that make sense? I think save percentage has changed for noticeable reasons.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
I don’t think we disagree at all, you are saying what I was trying to say. I acknowledged that part of the increase in save percentage is due to goalies having better fundamentals, as well as a better defense (backchecking etc.) I’m not always the most coherent writer but what you said what I was essentially trying to say
BTW
The point I was ultimately trying to make is that defense (including backchecking etc.) does account for some of the increase in a goalie’s save percentage. I conceded in my original post that much of the increase is due to goalies having better fundamentals.
I follow now
My mistake, I think I seized on one sentence from your comment and in the process neglected the rest of it. Now that I revisit I see what you were saying there.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
No problem. Its an interesting discussion. No doubt a lot of factors have lead to the increase in save percentage. Anyone can see that goalies styles have changed a lot throughout the years. I remember when guys like Potvin first came up, there was a lot of dissenting opinion about the effectiveness of the buttterfly style. I don’t think purists liked it off the bat, and a lot of writers felt that it left the upper part of the net vulnerable. I think there were initially some kinks in the original butterfly style that were worked out and now we see more of hybrid style that embraces much of the butterfly style but also utilizes good positioning and angles. This is purely anecdotal but watching hockey today it seems that goalies make a lot of shots look routine that 20 years ago would have likely found the back of the net. All the acrobatics and flopping around of the stand-up style would make goalies especially susceptible to rebounds. Goalies would make incredable stops but as a result put themselves out of position to stop the second or third attempt. This I think has had a huge impact on the increase in save percentage. But as we’ve said I think the changes in the way the overall game is played (ie: more focus on backchecking, defense, more responsible forwards etc.) has had a significant hand in it as well. Hope this makes sense.
Roy vs. Hextall, 1993
This is purely anecdotal but watching hockey today it seems that goalies make a lot of shots look routine that 20 years ago would have likely found the back of the net. All the acrobatics and flopping around of the stand-up style would make goalies especially susceptible to rebounds.
For the perfect example of this, I always recommend people watch the 1993 Quebec-Montreal playoff series, where both goalies “stood on their heads” at times but in completely different ways. Roy is in his butterfly-perfected zone, Hextall is flopping around looking at times alternately amazing and abysmal. They re-run the 1-hour condensed version every now and then on “Classic Series” on NHL Network. It’s like watching one era die and another begin.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
by Dominik on Aug 18, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
GnR was stand up and Nirvana was butterfly
I was watching that “classic series” on the NHL network recently and I think I even had that series in mind when I was typing that post. Hextall and Roy were both certainly on my mind. Its great when you get to see history kind of converge like that, the passing of one era to the next. Like when Nirvana and Guns and Roses both played live at the MTV music awards, and Kurt called out Axl on stage. Nobody thought anything of it at the time. Nirvana was just starting to blow up while GnR was huge and everyone still listened to hair metal…nobody saw the end coming.
Hahahaha
I love this analogy.
Long live GNR! (Despite Axl being a colossal tool who destroyed his own band.)
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
and I want to point out that when I say “defense” I am not just referring to defenseman but rather to the entire team’s approach to preventing scoring.
I certainly don’t disagree with that. It’s a different game nowadays and more sophisticated defenses certainly have helped the goalies and their save percentages. But well, it’s been a big change really in terms of how the teams play the game and the improvement of the goalies should get a fair share, too, and we’re still “only” looking at around 88% average save percentage in the early 80’s vs. 91% now. We can’t tell obviously, but let’s credit the goalies with 1.5% and better team defense with 1.5%. And again, that’s over 30 years with the game having changed quite a lot.
Now, it’s a bit more complicated of course than what follows… But let’s try to look at it this way – although the Islanders surely had some issues with their D, they obviously were very, very far away from playing the game like they did in the early 80’s… There’s no way therefore their team defense can have pulled down the save-percentage numbers by anything close to 1.5%.
But yeah, kind of a crazy comparison. However, I don’t disagree with defense having a bit of an influence on save percentage, but again, I still feel it’s not nearly as much as we’d expect just from how we watch the game and praise all the shot blockers and crease clearers.
That Lemaire thing, yes, the defense did influence the save percentage (positively) there, but the point is that Lemaire (and maybe Hitchcock) is the only coach who’s been able to do that consistently with a team.
Well, after speculating around a bit, I’ve just found something a bit more substantial. It’s about the influence of single defensemen on save percentage. That’s not what we were talking about, but it’s interesting, too, although they don’t seem to be that confident about what they’re actually measuring there, skill or luck. However, the save percentage dropped from 91.4% to 90.72% when a certain group of star defenders were out of the lineup.
Single-defenseman effect
That’d be interesting. I guess the question is, does a great defenseman limit just shots total (fewer shots, but not necessarily increasing save %) or also the quality of shots (fewer rebounds and more bad-angle shots, thus increasing save %)? Or rather, which might he affect to a greater degree?
Having watched Pronger (and by extension, Lidstrom) for a decade of Central battles, I can attest to the dominant effect a single great defenseman can have on his shifts. In Pronger’s case, I can also attest to how catastrophic a great d-man’s rare mistakes can be (suddenly the teammates he’s carrying are ill-equipped to deal with the aftermath, and a goal follows the chaos).
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
agreed with Dom
All you’ve got to do is look at the league leaders for the various stats, season by season:
Save Percentage
Goals Against Average
A sharp change, yes? By definition if it’s easier to score, the goalies’ save percentages will be lower, and goals against averages higher. Billy Smith won the Vezina with ZERO shutouts one season! His GAA that year wsa 2.97 – third overall in the league. Goalkeeping was tough in the go-go 80’s. Then, the benchmarks for a great goalie were .890 and 3.00; now it’s more like .910 and 2.33. Just look at the overall league averages for save percentage, starting in 1982-1983.
Here’s a list of the qualifying goalies (25 games played) who reached a .900 save percentage and 3.00 GAA, per season -
83-84.. 1 (Melanson, .903) and 3
84-85.. 1 (Skorodenski, .903 in 27 GP) and 2 (!!)
85-86.. 2 and 1 (Froese, 2.55)
86-87.. 2 and 1 (Hayward, 2.81)
87-88.. 1 (Roy, .900) and 2
88-89.. 2 and 6
89-90.. 4 and 5
90-91.. 5 and 8 (we see goalkeeping getting more technical now)
91-92.. 8 and 6
92-93.. 5 and 2
93-94.. 14 and 19 (of course the Rags won, this was the year hockey went rocketing to Planet Wacko)
95.. 19 and 18
95-96.. 25 and 26
96-97.. 28 and 30
97-98.. 26 and 33
98-99.. 34 and 37
99-00.. 35 and 36
At this point you have more guys on the list than there are starting goaltenders. In the space of ten years you went from having one of five elite guys to possibly having two who weren’t going to get you anywhere.
00-01.. 31 and 35
01-02.. 37 and 38
02-03.. 32 and 37
03-04.. 41 and 43
Post-lockout…
05-06.. 28 and 31 (hey! yeah!)
06-07..32 and 33 (uhhh…)
07-08.. 37 and 40 (waitaminute)
08-09.. 40 and 38 (NONONONONONO)
09-10.. 42 and 39 (so much for increased offense)
To get a more complete picture, it helps to also track average shots per game for those years. Thanks to quanthockey.com, we have that data in one convenient page, back to the 1967-68. Things took an alarming dip starting in 1997-98 through to the lockout. Shots are back up to about 30/gm per team, but scoring is slow to follow – the keepers are up to the challenge so far.
So… fewer shots + more saves = soccer on ice.
My latest contract is for 31 years.
What I was trying to sort out was how much of that increase is due to teams being more responsible defensively versus goalies being more fundamentally sound these days. This discussion started from the debate of how much defense factors into a goalies save percentage. My argument was that defense has a pretty big bearing on a goalies save percentage.
I understood that
I was more responding to your assertion that save percentage had to be relatively stable to be a 100% objective stat. Nothing is that stable! It’s still worth trying to sort out defense v. goaltending contributions to shot quality and save percentage; the above was just to demonstrate that across the board, the numbers have changed wildly – if the worst teams in the league have guys posting .900 sv% and 3.00 GAA, when before only the very BEST team would have that asset – my suspicion is that the change is deeper than technique. The goalies are better, but during a lot of that time, the defense was allowed far greater liberties in slowing down the game’s pace, taking away ice from players without the puck (interference, basically), and hacking and harassing puck carriers.
I think that the defense’s contribution to overall goal prevention lies most in preventing shots, period – the shot quality will take care of itself. I’m trying to remember what study I saw that shot quality is relatively uniform for a full season, team to team… I may be mistaking one of the many posts I’ve read, so if someone else has a link, I’d be grateful. I don’t want to screw this up.
My latest contract is for 31 years.
I was more responding to your assertion that save percentage had to be relatively stable to be a 100% objective stat. Nothing is that stable!
That’s a very good point. I also agree that a defense’s primary goal is to prevent shots. That is absolutely true. And if shot quality is in fact relatively uniform than my hypothesis falls apart and save percentage is certainly more objective than I may have previously thought. I was just throwing my opinion out there and was interested to hear from smart hockey fans like yourself, behansa and Dom. Either way you slice its an interesting discussion, and one not easily resolved. One of the great things about stats is examining what they really tell us.
I can’t tell anything about it, as it’s actually a bit too technical for my liking, but maybe you were thinking of that study of Vic Ferrari, who found that “we can’t say with any confidence at all that there is any shot quality difference between the teams in the sample whatsoever. But the fact that both the std dev and difference in save% are in the vicinity of the 80th percentile … that suggests that it may exist.”
But I can also give you a link about a more recent one of Tom Awad, who doesn’t exactly agree with what Vic found…
that's it!
That Vic Ferrari post was the one. Clutch find, Ben. You get a Frans Sniper Backhand Award.
I was unfamiliar with the Awad post, but I’m not quite convinced by his method… He loves his complex models! When he explains his work (like he did with GVT) I find I can follow it. When he just lists what he did and here’s the result, it’s harder to decide when his premises are sound.
FWIW, however, his conclusions definitely pass the smell test. There’s a reason coaches (and goalies!) plead to keep the shooter to the outside, fill the passing lanes, and keep the crease relatively clear! Describing it statistically is a totally different kind of flying, altogether.
Probably, both Vic and Tom have a point, and part of the greatness of hockey is how teams balance those points to maximize the talent they have.
My latest contract is for 31 years.
Absolutely this
Probably, both Vic and Tom have a point, and part of the greatness of hockey is how teams balance those points to maximize the talent they have.
It’s like the fountain of youth, the northwest passage, this elusive magic formula.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
The growing goalie stats
Thanks for posting those, mikb. It almost makes me wish Hasek played in the ’80s so we could even better see just how other-worldly he was. The man was an alien dropped on to an ice rink.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
BTW
Good point about Vokoun and I don’t have a simple answer. Maybe Vokoun was just that good, maybe Florida’s D was doing something right, maybe I’m wrong.
Rink bias: One potential variable with Vokoun?
By the way, I tend to really respect Vokoun, but one thing I’ve seen stat wonks note about him (sorry, I think only via email and not on a published story that I’m aware of) is that both Florida and Nashville had some of the highest shots recorded overall (for and against) at their home rinks over the time he was there.
In other words, if the statisticians at the rink where he played half his games tend to record more shots than those at other rinks, it’s possible they inadvertently “nudged” his save pct. up over the years.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
That’s a good point. Tom Awad has looked at that, but also confirmed in the comments here that Vokoun most likely still was great last season.
…as a supplement, you can see Roloson’s numbers since the lockout in that same post over at behindthenet. It shows what I tried to explain above, Rollie’s number with the Islanders last season (91.52%) matched exactly his average since the lockout (91.5%) and thus his numbers last season were not over the top not necessarily because the Isles D struggled, but because that simply is Rollie’s level indeed. Biron’s over here.
You mentioned his time with Lemaire in Minnesota
whose teams indeed limit the rate at which opponents take high-percentage shots.In other words Roloson’s high save percentage those years were influenced by the teams defense. I think that its hard to really look at last season and draw a conclusion based on his numbers. Maybe he had an above average year, which in mitigated the hit on his save percentage by playing on team with a sub-par defense; bringing it closer to career average.
Thanks! Good stuff. I’d forgotten about that Awad piece. Funny that it actually credits Brodeur in that situation (since he is the stat whipping boy in most cases).
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
6 from me
(Now I feel like the tough-grading jerk.) I gave him a 6 because I really did expect him to be good, and I thought he was. As a lot of people mentioned, his stats rank doesn’t do justice to what he put up with most nights, and how he kept the team in games and stole others, outside of a few rough patches.
Now that I think about it, it’s a crime to have done his report card without mentioning the epic 58-save win over the Leafs.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
SHAME ON YOU!
There were maybe four playoff worthy (effort/production) seasons on the team. Roloson topped that list. Roloson, Moulson, Streit and Sutton… The effort he put forth, I believe would have carried a better team to the playoffs*. We got to see what a not so spectacular goaltending effort produced behind the same team (not throwing Biron under the bus, just saying this wasn’t one of his better seasons). That’s really the only comparison that needs to be made to see what a great job Rollie did with this team.
- I hope he proves me right this year.
PS: Why didn’t the twit who gave him a 1 justify it with comment?
My cup is 3/4 empty, How 'bout yours?
Why didn’t the twit who gave him a 1 justify it with comment?
Seems to happen on every one of the LHH polls- no matter what it is, there is always a vote for the worst/most pessimistic/most negative choice. I presume its a Rag fan or two completely devoid of what the rest of us refer to as “a life.”
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Aug 16, 2010 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
All I did was say to my wife, "That piece of halibut is good enough for Jehovah"
…then the stoning came. Seriously, all I can say is what I saw in him was about what I expected, though a little more heroic.
Re: P.S. Since the poll are open to non-members, I suspect they draw the random hater who likes to try to skew the numbers. But the masses of LHH loyalists always win.
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
If you already had high expectations then a 6 makes sense. I was a little less confident about Rollie going into the season. I actually thought Biron would get the bulk of the goal-tending duties. I hadn’t seen a whole lot of him, being a vet of the western conference and all. I was more familiar with Marty’s work. I remembered Dwayne’s cup run with Edmonton, and he stood on his head at times during those playoffs. What I didn’t know was whether that was a random stretch of above average play or if that he was consistently that good. He also had those years with the Wild where he put up incredible numbers, but Jaques Lemaire has a way of making goalies looking really good. Age was another concern I had for Rollie coming into the season. I wondered how his quickness and reaction time may have declined do to age. I don’t have any old footage of vintage Rollie so I have nothing to compare this years performance to, but he seemed pretty quick and agile. So I was definitely pleasantly surprised by Rollie this year. And you’ve gotta love his appropriately redneck name, Dwayne. (my apologies to anyone from Simcoe Ontario or any Dwaynes’ reading this)
His Wild years, his Oilers years (not just the Cup run but also 08-09, where he almost single-handedly cost them their lottery spot) all made me think he was the second-best available last summer behind Anderson. But I confess I was worried that last year would be the year Father Time said “enough.”
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
I get it...
But high expectations for a 40 year old goaltender are worthy of 10 Hail Mary’s and I’d better see you at mass next Sunday Mr. Lighthouse.
I think what Roloson did was prove to the rest of the league that for now, Long Island is where careers go to die.
I hope that changes soon, because it’s getting overwhelmingly depressing.
It’s a good thing Guerin escaped in time.
My cup is 3/4 empty, How 'bout yours?
what Roloson did was prove to the rest of the league that for now, Long Island is where careers go to die.
I just dont see it, JP. Isles have one of the youngest teams in the league, and I dont see all these retirement players coming here. If you want to see guys playing at the end of their careers, take a look at the Detroit Grey Wings.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Aug 17, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I would think that older players, especially elite older players, would avoid the Islanders and want to play somewhere with a chance to win that last cup before moving on to greener pastures of Florida and golf. We’d be better off attracting younger players who want to build towards something and be part of an up and coming team
Sutton?
Sutton? in Front of Frans, Bailey, Okposo, and even Richard Park?
I realize he’s a big hitting dman, but I think this season he’s going to look more like another Witt
Dominik signed me for 20 years, and all I got was a press conference and a voided contract...
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
Yes.
I’m surprised I left out Frans. My bad. But I’ll put Sutton’s year in front of Okposo (production, -infinity…really… you have to ask that), Bailey took the first half of the season to find himself. That’s not a bad thing, on a better club he’d still be in the AHL finding himself… and Park was not impressive at all for more than half the season. Those are three players I like, but they did not have the type of seasons that push teams into the playoffs.
Sutton had a career year for him. He may never do it again, and even in the playoffs he looked like a statue… but he played well for Gordon, and gave them something they desperately needed… a second round pick so they could move up and get a BIG TWO WAY CENTER. Who else gave them that?
My cup is 3/4 empty, How 'bout yours?
I can’t seem to go a week without quoting it…
Lighthouse Hockey: More defensemen than we know how to spell.
played great with heavy load
but fell off a lot when he had to share time, and seemed to lose it late in season
by Rickfansince76 on Aug 17, 2010 11:06 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Islanders Schedule
Next 5 Games
@
Philadelphia
|
Tue 02/07 | 7:00 PM EST |
|
Montreal
|
Thu 02/09 | 7:00 PM EST |
|
Los Angeles
|
Sat 02/11 | 1:00 PM EST |
|
Florida
|
Sun 02/12 | 3:00 PM EST |
|
@
Winnipeg
|
Tue 02/14 | 8:30 PM EST |
Last 5 Games
|
Buffalo
|
Sat 02/04 | SO - L 3 - 4 |
|
@
Ottawa
|
Fri 02/03 | OT - W 2 - 1 |
|
@
Carolina
|
Tue 01/31 | W 5 - 2 |
|
Toronto
|
Tue 01/24 | OT - L 3 - 4 |
|
@
Toronto
|
Mon 01/23 | L 0 - 3 |
Atlantic Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
New York Rangers
|
50 | 33 | 12 | 5 | 71 |
|
Philadelphia
|
52 | 30 | 16 | 6 | 66 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
53 | 30 | 19 | 4 | 64 |
|
New Jersey
|
52 | 30 | 19 | 3 | 63 |
|
New York Islanders
|
51 | 21 | 22 | 8 | 50 |
(updated 2.5.2012 at 4:42 PM EST)
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Sunday’s Three Stars: Price blanks Jets; Kovalchuk powers Devils; Gomez doesn’t score
- Two more reasons Teemu Selanne rules: Holding ceramic pig, wearing panty-dropper shirt (Photo)
- Congratulations to Canadiens’ Scott Gomez on the one-year anniversary of his last goal
- NHL relocation to Seattle: Will new arena, Coyotes’ plight bring pucks to Pacific Northwest?
- How to score on KHL goalies: Shoot from your own end (Video)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
