SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

UpsideDownQue

Membre depuis
11 août 2017
Équipe favorite
Avalanche du Colorado
Messages dans les forums
8306
Messages par jour
3.7
Forum: Armchair-GM20 sept. à 14 h 9
Sujet: Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ledge_And_Dairy</b></div><div>They do have a small chance of going in, no ones arguing that but we are speaking hypothetically here. When a goalie faces 13 LD shots a game for 20 games vs 8 in that same amount period that is a difference of 100 shots. Even at 1% that is still +1 on GSAx. LD shots range from 1-8% in probability of going in so in theory over a 20 game sample size that is a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx.

Now I am not taking anything away from Georgiev here as he did have a very solid year but of the 55 goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5 he lead the league with 680 LD shots against and Vladar finished 55th with 168.

As for his LD GSAx, he let in 6 LDGA at 5v5 and 6 on the PK. I personally avoid using special teams as they can vastly swing numbers from the norm all across the board (ie a high penalty game vs Edmonton vs a high penalty game vs Philly could completely distort the truth). So looking at 5v5 I think thats a rather small sample size to justifiably say it will absolutely continue to trend downwards.</div></div>

Its not necessarily a +1 to +8 difference in GSAx. It's a +1 to +8 difference in xGA, and depending on how many actual goals the goalie let's in on those shots then the GSAx can be up to +1 to +8. If the goalie saves every single one of those low danger shots then he deserves that GSAx. If he makes the expected number of saves for those low danger shots then his GSAx would be 0. If you trust the xG model to provide an accurate probability of a goal for each shot location then GSAx is completely up to the goalies ability

Why are you so sure that more low danger shots against leads to a higher GSAx? Do you think xG models overestimate the probability of low danger shots resulting in goals?

For the Georgiev comparison it doesn't even make sense cause he also had a negative GSAx on shots from low danger areas so it's not like he's getting free GSAx stat padding from that. He was just good enough at medium and high danger chances which more than made up for that
Forum: Armchair-GM20 sept. à 12 h 38
Sujet: Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ledge_And_Dairy</b></div><div>xGA is literally just the sum of the percentage of each shot against. How exactly does it account for some goalies making more easy saves than others?</div></div>

Easy saves still have a small percentage change of going in, so it's not like every low danger shot is free stat padding for GSAx. If that was the case then every goalie would have positive GSAx on low danger shots (which obviously isn't true - and if it was then the xG model would be updated to better reflect the percentage chance of low danger shots going in). It's literally the entire reason they weigh the shots against by their xG values to compensate for that

Plus for Vladar last season he actually had a negative GSAx on low danger shots. So if he faced more low danger shots and kept playing the way he was then his GSAx would have been even worse
Forum: Armchair-GM20 sept. à 1 h 14
Sujet: Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ledge_And_Dairy</b></div><div>Why are you just repeating back to me what xGA is? I know what it is an I explained it quite thoroughly in my post. What I don't think you get is low quality shots still add up. It's like the old saying "every penny counts." Vladar faced 5 less low danger shots than Georgiev a game last year. those 5 easy saves add up over 10-20 games.

<a href="https://www.espn.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/3942459/dan-vladar" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Here</a> is a list of all of Vladar's games from last year. You don't need to watch the whole game through either, just go to youtube type in "Flames vs Team X" and the date of the game and watch the ~10 minute highlight real. Hell you could choose all 6 games where he had more than 3 goals against and you will still see that most of the goals were not on him</div></div>

xGA already accounts for that. I'm not sure what your point is
Forum: Armchair-GM20 sept. à 0 h 27
Sujet: Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ledge_And_Dairy</b></div><div>Eye test is almost always king and it should absolutely be noted that Georgiev had a negative GSAx the 2 seasons prior to being traded to Colorado. I find it to be a very volatile stat that can be hard to predict goalies success.

As for Vladar, out of all goalies that played at least 1000 minutes at 5v5, he faced some of the lowest SA in the league on average last year, as well as the lowest LDSA/60 and the 3rd lowest HDSA/60 (8.63/60). Whereas Georgiev for example had a middling HDSA/60 and one of the highest LDSA/60 (13.77)

GSAx is xGA-GA. xGA is determined based on xG of all Fenwick shots, which is essentially shots given a % chance of going in. A goalie that faces very few low quality shots will not add a lot of low value xGA to their total and those small numbers add up over a season.</div></div>

xGA already accounts for the danger level of the shots against, that's the whole point of assigning an expected goal value to each shot location/timing/rebound/etc. That's a huge reason why GSAx is the best goaltending stat available. Comparing low/med/high danger shots against is already accounted for when comparing GSAx which isn't the case when comparing raw SV% numbers for example

Eye test is good if you watch every single game and have tons of experience as a goaltending scout. For the vast majority of hockey fans they don't fit that description and watching a few games here and there isn't a big enough sample size to value that opinion over advanced stats accumulated over a goalies entire career

Georgiev had a negative GSAx for 2 seasons but also had a positive GSAx the previous 3 seasons. Overall in his career he was a + GSAx goalie which Vladar has never been. There was a risk when they traded for Georgiev that he wouldn't bounce back and would continue to underperform like he did his last 2 years with NYR, luckily for Colorado he did bounce back, but with Vladar there is no history of him performing well at the NHL level so that's not a risk I would be willing to take for that acquisition cost and cap hit
Forum: Armchair-GM19 sept. à 19 h 28
Sujet: Starting Lineup Option with 2 Veteran Signings and Vladar Traded
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KingofRnR</b></div><div>Comps are Georgiev, Nedeljokovic, Adin Hill, Vanecek, etc. who all performed and were similar ages when they were Traded for 2nds or the Equivalent and had similar performance and signed similar $2-3mil contracts

Goalie Market isn’t hot right now, but when Training Camp Starts and Injuries happen, it should go up. DeSmith was Traded to VAN today, so what available options out there are any better right now!?

I’m not high on Foudy tbh, a Right Shot Centre Prospect would just be a good organizational depth pickup imo (Nolan Patrick is currently available for Free). I’d actually prefer Calgary Born Logan O’Connor, but we have a bunch of Right Shot Bottom-6 Forwards available to us already
</div></div>

Georgiev had a career +4.01GSAx in 129GP when he was traded (+0.0311GSAx/GP)
Nedeljkovic had a career +12.25GSAx in 29GP when he was traded (+0.4224GSAx/GP)
Hill had a career -1.38GSAx in 49GP when he was traded (-0.0282GSAx/GP)

Vanecek had a career -10.34GSAx in 79GP when he was traded (-0.1309GSAx/GP)

Vladar currently has a career -13.61GSAx in 55GP (-0.2475GSAx/GP)

Vladar is the weakest by far out of all of those goalies you listed. Hes still somewhat young so maybe he can develop into a better goalie but based on what hes done so far I dont think hes in the same tier as those guys at all

As for other goalie options: Halak is still available as a UFA, Stolarz if Knight comes back in time, Rittich, Daccord if Driedger is healthy, Delia, Lyon, Lankinen depending on Askarov, 2 of Tokarski/UPL/Comrie depending on how Levi does, Stalock if Dostal gets the backup role, etc

Not all of those guys are better than Vladar (even though a lot of them were last season), but if the acquisition cost is significantly less (or free via waivers) then they would be better options imo
Forum: Armchair-GM12 sept. à 21 h 14
Sujet: Is This Better Than The Current Leafs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Avsfantrumpetman</b></div><div>I say this not as an attack, but just matter-of-fact. Duchene could not handle being the face of the franchise in Denver. He struggled mightily in Ottawa with high expectations. He only thrived when he got to Nashville. I truly think that playing in Toronto would wreck that man. I doubt you would get more than 40 points out of him and he would likely miss time.</div></div>

I dont know about that. In Colorado he was the best player on the team for multiple years. In Ottawa he disappointed a bit in his first season when he was traded mid season and had to learn new systems, but the following year scored 58P in 50GP. Then struggled on CBJ in the reg season as a rental but performed with 10P in 10GP in the playoffs. In NSH he's had up and down years but recently has been very good. I know theres bad blood with him and the Avs but im trying to be objective and im not really following how his history suggests he would crumble under the pressure in Toronto