Next up is the goaltenders – the Achilles Heel of every hockey statistician. There are generally two ways to judge goalies. You either go with goals saved above average (GSAA) or you go with goals saved above expected (GSAx) which is based on xGA. GSAA relies solely on the number of shots against and the number of goals allowed. GSAx is the difference between expected goals against and actual goals against, so it depends on the number of shots and the quality of the shots. The problem is that xG-models aren’t perfect when it comes to evaluating goaltending.
My model is basically GSAx with some slight adjustments. Here’s the top 20 goalies since season 2007/2008:
| Player | GP | Sv% | GSAA | GSAx | LS-GAA_GK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henrik Lundqvist | 764 | 91.78 | 127.98 | 268.46 | 284.65 |
| Jaroslav Halak | 504 | 91.68 | 64.09 | 95.93 | 105.57 |
| John Gibson | 287 | 91.83 | 53.30 | 81.29 | 86.68 |
| Carey Price | 682 | 91.74 | 111.27 | 58.55 | 83.76 |
| Jonathan Quick | 644 | 91.34 | 18.49 | 53.08 | 67.82 |
| Roberto Luongo | 626 | 91.83 | 109.55 | 47.62 | 66.97 |
| Sergei Bobrovsky | 507 | 91.71 | 66.57 | 58.12 | 66.55 |
| Braden Holtby | 468 | 91.60 | 44.35 | 56.11 | 62.40 |
| Jonas Hiller | 404 | 91.44 | 21.59 | 52.61 | 61.87 |
| Corey Crawford | 486 | 91.78 | 68.38 | 56.29 | 60.34 |
| Cory Schneider | 409 | 91.80 | 54.87 | 58.17 | 58.13 |
| Frederik Andersen | 369 | 91.65 | 46.06 | 49.77 | 56.62 |
| Cam Ward | 611 | 91.03 | -30.56 | 35.12 | 55.06 |
| Cam Talbot | 314 | 91.51 | 20.67 | 49.39 | 49.43 |
| Tomas Vokoun | 316 | 92.16 | 104.68 | 26.39 | 48.07 |
| Ben Bishop | 413 | 92.05 | 88.40 | 41.95 | 48.04 |
| Evgeni Nabokov | 344 | 91.17 | 5.24 | 26.14 | 46.60 |
| Antti Raanta | 186 | 92.06 | 41.60 | 43.57 | 46.11 |
| Tim Thomas | 317 | 92.36 | 114.66 | 27.35 | 44.15 |
| Tuukka Rask | 536 | 92.18 | 134.88 | 36.47 | 43.21 |
I already discussed Lundqvist back in blog 3. While he’s obviously a great goalie, he still seems a bit overrated when it comes to GSAx/LS-GAA. New York Rangers historically has a bad xG against, which theoretically makes it “easier” for Lundqvist to have a good GSAx. Most of this is obviously due to the team play of the Rangers, but part of it could also be due to rebound control. If the goalie gives up a lot of rebounds it naturally leads to a bigger xGA, and perhaps a better GSAx. So even though bad rebound control isn’t a good goalie trait, it could actually be a good thing for your GSAx. This could be part of the explanation regarding Lundqvist.
Here’s the best goalies in terms of GSAA. Lundqvist is still great, but now he’s human.
| Player | GP | Sv% | GSAA | GSAx | LS-GAA_GK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tuukka Rask | 536 | 92.18 | 134.88 | 36.47 | 43.21 |
| Henrik Lundqvist | 764 | 91.78 | 127.98 | 268.46 | 284.65 |
| Tim Thomas | 317 | 92.36 | 114.66 | 27.35 | 44.15 |
| Carey Price | 682 | 91.74 | 111.27 | 58.55 | 83.76 |
| Roberto Luongo | 626 | 91.83 | 109.55 | 47.62 | 66.97 |
| Tomas Vokoun | 316 | 92.16 | 104.68 | 26.39 | 48.07 |
| Pekka Rinne | 657 | 91.73 | 91.28 | -16.58 | -0.23 |
| Ben Bishop | 413 | 92.05 | 88.40 | 41.95 | 48.04 |
| Ryan Miller | 650 | 91.62 | 80.15 | 13.42 | 37.35 |
| Corey Crawford | 486 | 91.78 | 68.38 | 56.29 | 60.34 |
| Sergei Bobrovsky | 507 | 91.71 | 66.57 | 58.12 | 66.55 |
| Jaroslav Halak | 504 | 91.68 | 64.09 | 95.93 | 105.57 |
| Robin Lehner | 301 | 91.85 | 57.16 | -9.80 | -2.21 |
| Andrei Vasilevskiy | 260 | 91.90 | 57.04 | -32.39 | -21.68 |
| Marc-Andre Fleury | 708 | 91.49 | 56.56 | 10.27 | 34.54 |
| Cory Schneider | 409 | 91.80 | 54.87 | 58.17 | 58.13 |
| John Gibson | 287 | 91.83 | 53.30 | 81.29 | 86.68 |
| Frederik Andersen | 369 | 91.65 | 46.06 | 49.77 | 56.62 |
| Connor Hellebuyck | 269 | 91.71 | 45.64 | 27.77 | 37.41 |
| Braden Holtby | 468 | 91.60 | 44.35 | 56.11 | 62.40 |
So what list ranks the goaltending best? The truth probably lies somewhere in between GSAA and GSAx. I honestly don’t think there’s any good way to measure goaltending as of right now. It’s almost impossible to distinguish between good goaltending and good team defense. The new upcoming tracking data may lead to a better goalie stat. Until then, this is what we got.
Here’s the players with the biggest positive difference between LS-GAA and GSAA. The worst teams in terms xGA per 60 minutes are: Edmonton, Islanders, Rangers and Carolina. Those are also the teams dominating this list.
| Player | Season | Team | GP | Sv% | GSAA | LS-GAA | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henrik Lundqvist | 09-10 | NYR | 73 | 92.08 | 20.17 | 51.52 | 31.35 |
| Henrik Lundqvist | 08-09 | NYR | 70 | 91.63 | 15.69 | 46.30 | 30.61 |
| Henrik Lundqvist | 07-08 | NYR | 72 | 91.19 | 5.28 | 28.23 | 22.95 |
| Jaroslav Halak | 14-15 | NYI | 59 | 91.39 | -1.18 | 18.17 | 19.35 |
| Ondrej Pavelec | 13-14 | WPG | 57 | 90.09 | -21.45 | -4.18 | 17.27 |
| Nikolai Khabibulin | 10-11 | EDM | 47 | 88.98 | -31.93 | -14.87 | 17.06 |
| Cam Ward | 09-10 | CAR | 46 | 91.47 | 4.68 | 21.44 | 16.76 |
| Kari Lehtonen | 16-17 | DAL | 59 | 90.24 | -17.17 | -0.98 | 16.19 |
| John Gibson | 18-19 | ANA | 58 | 91.68 | 12.83 | 29.00 | 16.17 |
| Kari Lehtonen | 13-14 | DAL | 65 | 91.9 | 9.55 | 25.00 | 15.45 |
| Devan Dubnyk | 11-12 | EDM | 47 | 91.45 | 1.33 | 15.55 | 14.22 |
| Cam Talbot | 16-17 | EDM | 73 | 91.93 | 12.31 | 26.42 | 14.11 |
| Ondrej Pavelec | 11-12 | WPG | 68 | 90.62 | -14.94 | -0.97 | 13.97 |
| Cam Ward | 07-08 | CAR | 69 | 90.37 | -9.90 | 3.91 | 13.81 |
| Dwayne Roloson | 09-10 | NYI | 50 | 90.65 | -7.44 | 6.14 | 13.58 |
| Evgeni Nabokov | 13-14 | NYI | 40 | 90.51 | -9.58 | 3.69 | 13.27 |
| Henrik Lundqvist | 11-12 | NYR | 62 | 92.98 | 28.59 | 41.09 | 12.50 |
| Cam Ward | 11-12 | CAR | 68 | 91.51 | 3.31 | 15.76 | 12.45 |
| Ondrej Pavelec | 14-15 | WPG | 50 | 92.02 | 7.50 | 19.67 | 12.17 |
| Nikolai Khabibulin | 11-12 | EDM | 40 | 91.02 | -3.67 | 8.48 | 12.15 |
We can also look at the other end of the spectrum. Here’s the goalies with the biggest negative difference between LS-GAA and GSAA. The teams with the lowest xGA per 60 are: Minnesota, Boston, New Jersey, St. Louis and Nashville.
| Player | Season | Team | GP | Sv% | GSAA | LS-GAA | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Devan Dubnyk | 16-17 | MIN | 65 | 92.35 | 18.35 | -9.86 | -28.21 |
| Andrei Vasilevskiy | 17-18 | T.B | 65 | 91.95 | 15.09 | -12.00 | -27.09 |
| Niklas Backstrom | 08-09 | MIN | 71 | 92.28 | 29.45 | 3.60 | -25.85 |
| Robin Lehner | 16-17 | BUF | 59 | 92.05 | 13.41 | -9.60 | -23.01 |
| Devan Dubnyk | 17-18 | MIN | 60 | 91.8 | 10.23 | -11.80 | -22.03 |
| Niklas Backstrom | 07-08 | MIN | 57 | 91.81 | 14.54 | -6.05 | -20.59 |
| Devan Dubnyk | 18-19 | MIN | 67 | 91.32 | 6.17 | -13.30 | -19.47 |
| Tim Thomas | 11-12 | BOS | 59 | 92.04 | 11.46 | -7.80 | -19.26 |
| Tuukka Rask | 13-14 | BOS | 58 | 92.99 | 26.29 | 7.07 | -19.22 |
| Jimmy Howard | 09-10 | DET | 63 | 92.37 | 23.10 | 4.18 | -18.92 |
| Niklas Backstrom | 09-10 | MIN | 60 | 90.33 | -12.96 | -31.50 | -18.54 |
| Tuukka Rask | 14-15 | BOS | 70 | 92.24 | 15.67 | -1.45 | -17.12 |
| Andrei Vasilevskiy | 16-17 | T.B | 50 | 91.69 | 5.03 | -11.67 | -16.70 |
| Pekka Rinne | 11-12 | NSH | 73 | 92.29 | 20.18 | 3.99 | -16.19 |
| Pekka Rinne | 14-15 | NSH | 64 | 92.25 | 14.26 | -1.93 | -16.19 |
| Sergei Bobrovsky | 13-14 | CBJ | 58 | 92.29 | 15.28 | -0.78 | -16.06 |
| Roberto Luongo | 14-15 | FLA | 61 | 92.08 | 10.79 | -4.56 | -15.35 |
| Steve Mason | 11-12 | CBJ | 46 | 89.45 | -25.83 | -40.66 | -14.83 |
| Tim Thomas | 10-11 | BOS | 57 | 93.82 | 45.85 | 31.17 | -14.68 |
| Ben Bishop | 15-16 | T.B | 61 | 92.65 | 19.47 | 5.04 | -14.43 |
My point is some goalies are likely overvalued if you judge them by LS-GAA or GSAx, while others are undervalued. I don’t think GSAA is any better though, so perhaps the smartest way to evaluate goalies is by combining the two. That’s something for another blog. Let’s instead turn our attention to this season.
Season 19/20:
| Player | GP | Sv% | GSAA | LS-GAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connor Hellebuyck | 58 | 92.20 | 22.35 | 26.18 |
| Darcy Kuemper | 29 | 92.80 | 16.63 | 11.79 |
| Tuukka Rask | 41 | 92.85 | 22.48 | 11.60 |
| Corey Crawford | 40 | 91.66 | 9.06 | 10.84 |
| Mikko Koskinen | 38 | 91.74 | 9.13 | 10.06 |
| James Reimer | 25 | 91.43 | 3.36 | 9.70 |
| Jake Allen | 24 | 92.67 | 11.21 | 9.39 |
| Antti Raanta | 33 | 92.11 | 11.66 | 9.19 |
| Ben Bishop | 44 | 91.99 | 13.25 | 8.93 |
| Carter Hart | 43 | 91.36 | 4.44 | 8.76 |
| Anton Khudobin | 30 | 92.97 | 17.73 | 8.70 |
| Chris Driedger | 12 | 93.79 | 10.00 | 8.40 |
| Jordan Binnington | 50 | 91.20 | 3.45 | 8.26 |
| Robin Lehner | 36 | 91.98 | 12.64 | 7.76 |
| Jacob Markstrom | 43 | 91.76 | 11.36 | 7.75 |
| Igor Shesterkin | 12 | 93.16 | 9.33 | 7.44 |
| Calvin Petersen | 8 | 92.19 | 3.32 | 7.28 |
| Pavel Francouz | 34 | 92.25 | 12.85 | 6.62 |
| Henrik Lundqvist | 30 | 90.50 | -4.09 | 6.56 |
| Alexandar Georgiev | 34 | 90.97 | 0.09 | 6.55 |
Hellebuyck has been pretty great this season, especially when looking at LS-GAA. If you look at Sv% he has still been good, but not quite as good. It’s also worth noting that a true starter like Hellbuyck is rare these days. Most teams go with an 1A/1B situation and that strategy seems to be working for a lot of teams.
I have also listed best goalies measured by GSAA:
| Player | GP | Sv% | GSAA | LS-GAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tuukka Rask | 41 | 92.85 | 22.48 | 11.60 |
| Connor Hellebuyck | 58 | 92.20 | 22.35 | 26.18 |
| Anton Khudobin | 30 | 92.97 | 17.73 | 8.70 |
| Darcy Kuemper | 29 | 92.80 | 16.63 | 11.79 |
| Ben Bishop | 44 | 91.99 | 13.25 | 8.93 |
| Pavel Francouz | 34 | 92.25 | 12.85 | 6.62 |
| Robin Lehner | 36 | 91.98 | 12.64 | 7.76 |
| Andrei Vasilevskiy | 52 | 91.71 | 12.09 | -1.53 |
| Elvis Merzlikins | 32 | 92.27 | 12.07 | 2.81 |
| Antti Raanta | 33 | 92.11 | 11.66 | 9.19 |
| Jacob Markstrom | 43 | 91.76 | 11.36 | 7.75 |
| Jake Allen | 24 | 92.67 | 11.21 | 9.39 |
| Tristan Jarry | 33 | 92.06 | 10.77 | 4.38 |
| Chris Driedger | 12 | 93.79 | 10.00 | 8.40 |
| Igor Shesterkin | 12 | 93.16 | 9.33 | 7.44 |
| Mikko Koskinen | 38 | 91.74 | 9.13 | 10.06 |
| Corey Crawford | 40 | 91.66 | 9.06 | 10.84 |
| Jaroslav Halak | 31 | 91.93 | 8.81 | 6.18 |
| Cam Talbot | 26 | 91.92 | 7.51 | 3.07 |
| Mackenzie Blackwood | 47 | 91.46 | 7.26 | 4.68 |
That’s it for now. Goaltending is very difficult to measure, and LS-GAA is in no way perfect. It does however fit with the other LS-GAA components, so that the overall result is right. In other words, LS-GAA_Total describes team results really good, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the goaltending component tells the truth.
Next time I will divide players into tiers using LS-GAA per 60, and use these tiers to discuss how to best construct a team.
Conclusion:
- Goaltending can’t be effectively measured – that’s my belief.
- Goaltending is more or less unpredictable with the current metrics, but at the same time goaltending is hugely important. So if you can somehow predict future goaltender performance, then you can make a great projection model.
Stay safe and remember to be kind
All raw data from evolving-hockey.com
