Preds lock up Rinne

[Bates]

In his 3 seasons in the nhl before this one his sv% have been .917, .911, and .930 for an average including this season of .921.  One season pretty much at average and one up .09 and one down .10.  Yes I would consider that pretty consistant.  I think that translates into 2 more goals per 1000 shots from best to worst season.  Math may be off???

Goals against average this season is about same as his career totals so again you get the point.  But it's Nik so I will assume you will never get my point and continue to point out my flawed reasoning.

 

[Kin]

In his 3 seasons in the nhl before this one his sv% have been .917, .911, and .930 for an average including this season of .921.  One season pretty much at average and one up .09 and one down .10.  Yes I would consider that pretty consistant.  I think that translates into 2 more goals per 1000 shots from best to worst season.  Math may be off???

Well, yes. A player saving every shot against him out of a thousand would have a 1.000. A player saving 93% of those shots would let in 930 goals. 91.1% would be 911 goals. So it's off, but only by a factor of ten. The difference is 19 goals, or around 8 or 9% of the total number of goals a team might allow in a year.

Of course, a starting goalie over the course of a season will face 1.5-2 times that many shots so you're more likely talking about 15-20% of a team's goals against, which is a pretty big difference. 

But aside from shoddy math it's just inescapably not true that there's not much difference between .911 and .930. The difference between .911 and .930 in the context of save percentage is the difference between a below average starter and one of the best in the league. To try and pass that off as consistency is laughable.

Goals against average this season is about same as his career totals so again you get the point.  But it's Nik so I will assume you will never get my point and continue to point out my flawed reasoning.

I love how even in a thread where you accuse people who disagree with you of not watching hockey, use bad math to try and prove a lousy point and are stubborn from the get go you still somehow seem to turn this into something personal with me where I'm somehow being objectionable. Grow up.

 

[Bates]

I said in my previous post that Rinne has neen "fairly" consistant with a Sv% range of .910 - .930 which I still would contend is fairly consistant.  So for fun I will give you the ranges for some of the leagues top goalies in same time frame:

Khabibulin .890 - .919
Luongo .913 - .928
Miller .916 - .929
Lundquist .916 - .932
Quick  .907 - .941
Price  .900 - .923
Fleury .905 - .932
Kiprosoff  .903  - .920
Thomas  .915 - .938


I think this will show that a swing of .20 on sv% is FAIRLY consistant.  I never once stated that it made him the best or worst goalie in the league simply that his play has been fairly consistant. 

 

[Kin]

I think this will show that a swing of .20 on sv% is FAIRLY consistant.  I never once stated that it made him the best or worst goalie in the league simply that his play has been fairly consistant.

Do you really think anyone is going to take those numbers seriously when some of the swings are based on "years" of 10 games or fewer?

 

[Bates]

The "years" of 10 games or less for Rinne is this year only.  The other 3 years he played 52, 58, and 64.  Stop spinning it Nik, Rinne is a fairly consistant goalie over last 4 years including this one.

 

[maplesyrup]

I recall reading it somewhere recently but aren't Rinne's SO/GP just right off the charts?

 

[Kin]

The "years" of 10 games or less for Rinne is this year only.  The other 3 years he played 52, 58, and 64.

I mean of the "top goalies around the league" Jonathan Quick's split of .905-.941 is if you take his first 10 games of the season as a "year". Likewise Carey Price and MAF and I'm sure some others I'm too disinterested to check.  That's laughable on the face of it.

Stop spinning it Nik, Rinne is a fairly consistant goalie over last 4 years including this one.

There are two problems with that. The first is that you ignore the pretty basic reality of what those numbers mean. Tim Thomas, after his year at .915, was available to anyone for nothing. His year of .938 was a Vezina winning, "greatest goalie on earth" year. That is not consistent.

Likewise, there's more to consistency than simply the range of save percentages. A goalie can go between .940 and .920 and he's fairly consistent because he's still achieving a really good level of performance throughout. Going from .900 to .920 is in the same range but you're spreading the gap between a very good season and a season where the goalie isn't likely to keep his job.

As I pointed out, the difference between a .911 season and a .930 season is the difference between one of the top goalies in the league and the fringes of mediocrity. That's not consistent regardless of what adverb you want to dress it up with.

 

[Kin]

Also, for what it's worth, the guys I mentioned as being inconsistent goalies(Halak, Anderson, Mason) all have SV% swings in their full seasons that are lower than Rinne's.

 

[bustaheims]

What I think you've actually done there, Bates, rather than show how Rinne might be considered consistent, is highlight just how inconsistent goalies in the league are these days - which is exactly why most people come out against long-term, expensive contracts for goalies.

 

[cw]

What I think you've actually done there, Bates, rather than show how Rinne might be considered consistent, is highlight just how inconsistent goalies in the league are these days - which is exactly why most people come out against long-term, expensive contracts for goalies.

Top 25 goalie cap hits in the NHL:
http://www.capgeek.com/leaders.php?type=CAP_HIT&position=G&limit=25#

The following have widely questioned deals:
Brygalov
Huet
Luongo
DiPietro
Hiller
Niemi
Halak
Mason

Jose Theordore recently came off that list of questionable goalies with a high price tag.

Others on the list are going through some scrutiny.

And a bunch of those goalies were more consistent or established when they got their deals than Rinne.

Prelockout, Roy, Brodeur, Belfour, Hasek, Joseph, etc - guys during the prime of their career were close to sure money in the bank goalies.

For some reason, that seems to have changed some. One season a guy is a God and the next, he's close to bum.

It used to seem that you either needed an incredible team with a pretty decent goalie (ie Wings & Osgood) or a close-to-great goalie to win a Cup. Now, all kinds of goalies can get hot for a season and parade with a Cup only to come back down to earth the next year.

I wish I could pin down why that's happening more but I can't. I could list a bunch of possibilities but it's tough to be absolutely certain. As a GM, I'd be very wary of long term, high priced contracts with goalies - particularly those with shorter resumes like Rinne. It seems to be a higher risk than it ever was before. It seems to have shifted such that the 27 yr old UFA skaters are a more reliable deal (as opposed to the 31 yr old UFA skaters pre lockout who ran out of gas in the first couple of seasons due to age related/wear related decline).