Miller is overpaid

[spndnchz]

This methodology gives an adjusted save percentage accounting for the quality and distribution of shots faced. To achieve the DIGR we build a model of each goalies performance during the season and then map every shot taken by the entire league to the individual goalie map.

 

Interesting.

 

http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~msch/sports/DIGR10-11.pdf

[wonderbread]

"goalieball"

 

Looks like some solid facts supporting their research.

 

If you think Miller is over paid look at Giguere, Brodeur, Backstrom and Kiprusoff.

[shrader]

I'd love to see how they defined quality shots. Without diving too deeply into it, to me it seems like an exercise in futility. Short of watching every single game tape there's no way of doing it. I actually tried to help a writer friend on a similar thing a year or two back. He was trying to keep track of some sort of quality shot metric. So one game we both kept our own separate charts of what we determined to be quality shots. Our results came out completely different.

[bunomatic]

Intersesting. One could set up a similar statistical analysis for any player in the league and the vast majority would come back as overpaid.

[thesportsbuff]

I'd love to see how they defined quality shots. Without diving too deeply into it, to me it seems like an exercise in futility. Short of watching every single game tape there's no way of doing it. I actually tried to help a writer friend on a similar thing a year or two back. He was trying to keep track of some sort of quality shot metric. So one game we both kept our own separate charts of what we determined to be quality shots. Our results came out completely different.

 

In high school, we were required to enter a local "science fair" at lease once before we graduated. So my partner and I devised some stupid premises for a project -- is a right handed shooter more or less effective than a left handed shooter against a right handed goalie, and vice versa. Then we threw in some other variables like which shot type is most effective: slapshot, wrist shot, snap shot, etc. Then we went down to the rink, played hockey for two hours, took a few pictures and captured a short video to "test" these different variables. Long story short, the project had absolutely NOTHING to do with actual science and was a total and complete "take the easiest way out" route on our part, with some fancy language and big words that made it sound scientific thrown in. :lol:

 

Obviously the masterminds behind this project put in a little more work than we did, but ultimately I think it's impossible to come up with truly accurate results for this type of thing because everything is so situation-dependent. Does this "study" weigh saves on snipers like Malkin or Kovalchuk more heavily than saves on a Gaustad or Avery? Etc.

[korab rules]

"goalieball"

 

Looks like some solid facts supporting their research.

 

If you think Miller is over paid look at Giguere, Brodeur, Backstrom and Kiprusoff.

Luongo is by far the most overpaid goalie in the NHL right now. They can't even count on the guy to show up for playoff games.

[Huckleberry]

Well lets be fair, they are all overpaid to :D

[Claude_Verret]

Everyone is overpaid until they win a cup.

[LastPommerFan]

I read through the detailed paper. The ONLY factor into the "quality" of shot was the location of the shot on the ice. So no factoring for screened shots, deflections, rebounds, odd man rushes, etc. Interesting novelty, nothing more.

[waldo]

My best guess is they weighted shots by zone, as they do in similar models. The weaknesses in this analysis, and most models that attempt to quantify goalie performance, can be found in the purity of the sample and interpretation. It becomes difficult to compare performance when you have not accounted properly for hundreds of variables like, the quality of the defense in front of the goalie, deflections, screens, body contact, shooter skill, shot location, shot type, speed, drinking binges etc. When you start using terms like “average shot speed” to account for those differentials, your analysis falls apart, especially when you are dealing with performance differences between individuals in tenths and thousandths of a percent. Junk statistics. Slightly more sophisticated than using save percentage or GAA in a definitive way to compare two goalies.

[That Aud Smell]

I read through the detailed paper. The ONLY factor into the "quality" of shot was the location of the shot on the ice. So no factoring for screened shots, deflections, rebounds, odd man rushes, etc. Interesting novelty, nothing more.

don't have time to read it.

 

but, to add to what pommerfan said above, the matter of rebounds is, to me, critical. a goalie's ability to control the puck when a save is made is huge.

 

also, remember that "stellar" save miller made on briere during the playoffs, in tight when briere was goal hanging during transition? i'm sure that would be characterized as a high quality chance, but it was probably a relatively easy save to make for miller.

 

i don't think goaltending readily admits of creating metrics to measure performance.

[Weave]

I read through the detailed paper. The ONLY factor into the "quality" of shot was the location of the shot on the ice. So no factoring for screened shots, deflections, rebounds, odd man rushes, etc. Interesting novelty, nothing more.

 

I suppose the thinking would be that screened shots, deflections, etc would be a similar percentage for all the goalies and cancelt hemselves out?

 

I'm just throwing that thought out there. Frankly, I'm too busy at work and not interested enough at the moment to dig into the article but I think a valid case can be made to ignore some situations with the expectation that all of the goalies would see about the same ratio of screened shots, etc. And really, if they attempted to take all that into play the study would become too cumbersome to accomplish in a reasonable timeframe.

 

It might have *some* merit to consider.

[shrader]

Luongo is by far the most overpaid goalie in the NHL right now. They can't even count on the guy to show up for playoff games.

 

Technically, they're not paid to play in the playoffs. :lol:

 

i don't think goaltending readily admits of creating metrics to measure performance.

 

I think it's definitely possible. The real problem is the amount of time necessary to make it happen.

[LastPommerFan]

I suppose the thinking would be that screened shots, deflections, etc would be a similar percentage for all the goalies and cancelt hemselves out?

 

I'm just throwing that thought out there. Frankly, I'm too busy at work and not interested enough at the moment to dig into the article but I think a valid case can be made to ignore some situations with the expectation that all of the goalies would see about the same ratio of screened shots, etc. And really, if they attempted to take all that into play the study would become too cumbersome to accomplish in a reasonable timeframe.

 

It might have *some* merit to consider.

 

Also, due to the youth and inexperience of half of our D-corps, Miller faced lots of shots on transition and without a Sabres body on the shooter. The "Quality" of the shot, IMO, would be most affected by the proximity of a Sabre to the stick of the shooter. The Butler goal in game six, for instance. I think the positioning of Toni and Henrik vs. Weber and Butler was the largest contributing factor to Miller's sv% decrease from 09-10 to 10-11. Location of shot is such a small part of a shot's "quality" once you get below the top of the circle, that I can't see this analysis being of significant value.

[That Aud Smell]

i don't think goaltending readily admits of creating metrics to measure performance.

I think it's definitely possible. The real problem is the amount of time necessary to make it happen.

 

DUDE!

 

LIKE. I. SAID. READILY!

 

;)

 

:lol:

[LGR4GM]

here is an idea for this. Take out all the shots that were fired straight into the goalie from outside the circles that were super easy saves (no screens, into the chest, lalime would have got it). Count every single goal as a shot because it went in. Give special consideration to deflections and odd man rushes shots. Finally look at shots that were immediately following a cross ice pass in which the goalie had to make a lateral move. O wait and also count count pp and sh shots and factor that in.... omg this is freaking crazy... umm i give up. I feel like i can eye a goalie who is good versus one who is not but other than that I think it would take some serious thought and a well thought out plan to rank, rate, and account for the many nuances of the shots a goalie sees a year.

 

 

not to mention positioning is important and makes saves easier for some goalies (Miller) than perhaps others (Enroth) its the butterfly style versus the reaction style.

[shrader]

 

DUDE!

 

LIKE. I. SAID. READILY!

 

;)

 

:lol:

 

You and your big words.

[nucci]

I think all professional athletes are overpaid.

[Taro T]

Didn't have time to read the article, but it sounds like it is still a quite over simplified analysis.

 

If they've taken the time to chart out where each shot was taken, how much more difficult would it be to add a checkmark to their base spreadsheet on a few more variables?

 

I definitely need to hit the lottery, because there are a ton of very interesting regressions that could be run regarding this sport but unfortunately I don't have the time to gather / enter the data on my own nor the $'s to pay some kids to gather / enter it for me.

[donteatyellowsnow]

Luongo is by far the most overpaid goalie in the NHL right now. They can't even count on the guy to show up for playoff games.

 

Nah, he made it to game 7 of the Cup finals. Can't count on him at all.

 

I would take that! When is the last time our goalie showed up and won a playoff series?

 

So if Luongo is overrated what does that make our guy? Overrated big time!

[korab rules]

Nah, he made it to game 7 of the Cup finals. Can't count on him at all.

 

I would take that! When is the last time our goalie showed up and won a playoff series?

 

So if Luongo is overrated what does that make our guy? Overrated big time!

You apparently didn't watch much of that series.

[LGR4GM]

Nah, he made it to game 7 of the Cup finals. Can't count on him at all.

 

I would take that! When is the last time our goalie showed up and won a playoff series?

 

So if Luongo is overrated what does that make our guy? Overrated big time!

But Luongo looked like a colander during that entire final and Miller was hung out to dry in game 7 by a team that literally didn't show up... I think Miller is probably a little over hyped and he hasn't gotten his team a trophy so I get what your alluding too but Luongo is def overrated and def one of the reasons game 7 in vancouver went from "lets win the cup" to "lets riot in the streets"

 

Playoff Numbers for last 2 seasons

Luongo's : 10-11 .914sv% 2.56gaa / 09-10 .895% 3.22gaa

 

Miller's: 10-11 .917sv% 2.93gaa / 09-10 .926% 2.34gaa

[donteatyellowsnow]

You apparently didn't watch much of that series.

 

 

Oh I did, and Loungo could have played better. Still had 2 shutouts like our guy did, except our guy lost again in the 1st round.

 

Again if Luongo is overrated and has a much better resume than our guy, what does that make our guy? He's extremely overrated, don't quite understand why people can't see that.

[dEnnis the Menace]

But Luongo looked like a colander during that entire final and Miller was hung out to dry in game 7 by a team that literally didn't show up... I think Miller is probably a little over hyped and he hasn't gotten his team a trophy so I get what your alluding too but Luongo is def overrated and def one of the reasons game 7 in vancouver went from "lets win the cup" to "lets riot in the streets"

 

Playoff Numbers for last 2 seasons

Luongo's : 10-11 .914sv% 2.56gaa / 09-10 .895% 3.22gaa

 

Miller's: 10-11 .917sv% 2.93gaa / 09-10 .926% 2.34gaa

 

I believe the word you were looking for is...SIEVE...

 

it rolls off the tongue much nicer than colander :rolleyes:

[korab rules]

Oh I did, and Loungo could have played better. Still had 2 shutouts like our guy did, except our guy lost again in the 1st round.

 

Again if Luongo is overrated and has a much better resume than our guy, what does that make our guy? He's extremely overrated, don't quite understand why people can't see that.

You must have missed the part where he was pulled from multiple games, couldn't stop a beach ball, and was outplayed by his backup. Could have played better? That's the understatement of the year.