Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Devils Pride 26

Did I just hear Chico correctly?

117 posts in this topic

If Marty didn't have that 6-game burst that ended as abruptly as it started, and had a season of save% in the .880-.890 range, there'd be a lot more fans calling for him to hang 'em up.  Those 6 games bought him a lot of currency this season (because deep down, Devils fans still want to see him succeed, see him have one more shutout, one more burst of games where he looks like Marty of old).  The fact that the Devils happened to win some of his more "meh" games bought him even more currency with PDB.  But yeah, the last 11 games for Marty have been rough, most of the last 39 games have, and all signs point to him no longer being effective sooner than later.  He's a former .340 hitter who now hits around .220 but has an occasional 4-for-4 day, or a 5-for-12 burst.  Those are fun to watch when they happen, but they require getting through a lot of 0-fers. 

 

 

 

Even WITH the out-of-nowhere hot streak Marty had, his save% over his last 39 games is still just .896.  That would rank him 43rd out of 46 qualifiers this year in save%.  That's not really sufficient.  And like Tri pointed out, Heaven forbid Schneider ever got hurt next season.  You might be watching something not much better than 2013 Hedberg if Marty was forced into being the starter.  I definitely don't ever want to see that.   

It's really easy to make arguments when you get to selectively pick which stats count and which don't. Take away Marty's 6 worst games this season and I bet he looks great. If you are going to make an argument based on stats, let them speak for themselves, don't cherry pick.

His season totals this year are more then fine for a back up, IMO. (I am sure I am sounding like a record at this point so I will try to stop re-iterating that point)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really easy to make arguments when you get to selectively pick which stats count and which don't. Take away Marty's 6 worst games this season and I bet he looks great. If you are going to make an argument based on stats, let them speak for themselves, don't cherry pick.

His season totals this year are more then fine for a back up, IMO. (I am sure I am sounding like a record at this point so I will try to stop re-iterating that point)

 

What I'm doing is showing that the .896 save% over his last 39 games is not only pretty bad (.896 overall over that large a sample), but going a step further and showing that even that poor number isn't as "good" as it looks.  How the hell is pointing out what his total save% over the ENTIRE sample, and breaking it down "cherry picking"?  It's called ANALYZING.  As in looking deeper into the numbers than apparently you are willing to, and seeing that it's much more likely Marty will be an .880-ish type puckstopper over long stretches (awful) than a .900-ish one (not too much better). 

 

If you think .896 over that many games is fine for a backup who could not only conceivably start 20-25 games, but possibly have to fill in for an extended period should the #1 goalie go down, then you're lost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy, Belfore, Khabibulin Vernon, Hasek, Vokoun, Richter. All guys with 600+ games played who were effective basically until the retired. who went out with good or moderate seasons, certainly good enough to qualify them as a back up. Maybe they knew when to quit, and I have no issues if Marty hangs em up after this season, but again his numbers this year are not great, but more then sufficient for a back up spot. Maybe next year is the year his stats plummet, maybe it's 4 years from now, either way we do need 'a' back up, for my money it might as well be him.

 

Roy, yes.  Belfour had 2 below average seasons before retiring.  Vernon was never good but his last two years were .883 and .899 - even with NHL average SV% lower those are not good years.  Richter's last 4 years were either at average or below and he had to retire for medical reasons so who knows what happens if he hangs on.  Vokoun had to retire for medical reasons.  I mean, he hasn't yet, but he probably will.  Khabibulin has had an odd career but sure - he was paid like a starter in Edmonton but produced like a backup.  One of the issues with the players you've taken here is that a lot of them retired around when the NHL expanded by 4 teams, making average SV% go lower than it otherwise would be, but that's because there was more replacement-level goaltending being used around the league, not because shooters got better.  If Mike Richter produces around the NHL average in an expansion year, that's still not as good as it seems because A: NHL average is being pulled down by clowns who wouldn't be in the league and B: Richter gets to face expansion teams who tend to shoot below average S%.  (although that below average S% may be in part because they don't get to face their own goalie)

 

CR1976:  squishy is right that if you start pulling games out of anyone's ledger you're data snooping.  Brodeur hasn't been good - taking out his best games doesn't serve to illustrate the point further.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm doing is showing that the .896 save% over his last 39 games is not only pretty bad (.896 overall over that large a sample), but going a step further and showing that even that poor number isn't as "good" as it looks.  How the hell is pointing out what his total save% over the ENTIRE sample, and breaking it down "cherry picking"?  It's called ANALYZING.  As in looking deeper into the numbers than apparently you are willing to, and seeing that it's much more likely Marty will be an .880-ish type puckstopper over long stretches (awful) than a .900-ish one (not too much better). 

 

If you think .896 over that many games is fine for a backup who could not only conceivably start 20-25 games, but possibly have to fill in for an extended period should the #1 goalie go down, then you're lost. 

Because your "sample" is just a moving target of Marty's worst games. Your second to last post opened by taking away his (presumably) best 6 games to try and make a point. In the next paragraph you tried to go under the pretense of being all inclusive, but in reality you did it again by going back to last year, but not including all of last year.

You claim you are trying to look at his recent play, so why bother looking at 2013 data, you have 25 games from this year that is a much better snapshot of his recent play. For the 2014 season, Marty has a .902 SV% and a 2.39 GAA. As noted that's good for 17th and 35th respectively *this* year. Marty's career average is .913 and 2.23. His deviation really isn't that far off his game.

Edited by squishyx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy, yes.  Belfour had 2 below average seasons before retiring.  Vernon was never good but his last two years were .883 and .899 - even with NHL average SV% lower those are not good years.  Richter's last 4 years were either at average or below and he had to retire for medical reasons so who knows what happens if he hangs on.  Vokoun had to retire for medical reasons.  I mean, he hasn't yet, but he probably will.  Khabibulin has had an odd career but sure - he was paid like a starter in Edmonton but produced like a backup.  One of the issues with the players you've taken here is that a lot of them retired around when the NHL expanded by 4 teams, making average SV% go lower than it otherwise would be, but that's because there was more replacement-level goaltending being used around the league, not because shooters got better.  If Mike Richter produces around the NHL average in an expansion year, that's still not as good as it seems because A: NHL average is being pulled down by clowns who wouldn't be in the league and B: Richter gets to face expansion teams who tend to shoot below average S%.  (although that below average S% may be in part because they don't get to face their own goalie)

 

CR1976:  squishy is right that if you start pulling games out of anyone's ledger you're data snooping.  Brodeur hasn't been good - taking out his best games doesn't serve to illustrate the point further.

Coincidence. I just picked other goalies from our era with the most games played that you hadn't already listed. I understand your point that maybe even most goalies bottom out hard, but even the guys you listed, many had decent twilight seasons until the very end. So even if Marty fits that mold, it's just speculation that he is flat-lining next year, or the one after, or maybe Marty has a few more .900/2.30 seasons left in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because your "sample" is just a moving target of Marty's worst games. Your second to last post opened by taking away his (presumably) best 6 games to try and make a point. In the next paragraph you tried to go under the pretense of being all inclusive, but in reality you did it again by going back to last year, but not including all of last year.

You claim you are trying to look at his recent play, so why bother looking at 2013 data, you have 25 games from this year that is a much better snapshot of his recent play. For the 2014 season, Marty has a .902 SV% and a 2.39 GAA. As noted that's good for 17th and 35th respectively *this* year. Marty's career average is .913 and 2.23. His deviation really isn't that far off his game.

 

No, this is awful.  First off, throw out GAA, it's useless.  Second, average SV% when Brodeur got into the league was .895 - now it is .914.  A .900 was good in 93-94, now it is bad.  Not to mention the Devils give up a below average number of shots on the PK - not well below average, but below average, making his save percentage even worse.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, this is awful.  First off, throw out GAA, it's useless.  Second, average SV% when Brodeur got into the league was .895 - now it is .914.  A .900 was good in 93-94, now it is bad.  Not to mention the Devils give up a below average number of shots on the PK - not well below average, but below average, making his save percentage even worse.

No, this is awful. First off throw out your argument, it's useless.  :whistling:

 

Anyway. just looking at SV%, and using a more generous games played qualifier (espn and yahoo use 15, but lets go down to 10) Marty is still 46th. Not great, certainly not a starter. But of course that's not the argument is it? On average every team has a starter, so the back ups start at #31 and on. That puts Marty smack dab in the middle of the pack for backups. That also means that if we had an "average" back up this year he would most likely have stats similar to Marty. 

Taking all that in, you guys would rather drop him in favor of someone else, that's fine, I don't really care to persuade anyone to think otherwise. However, given he long tenure with the Devils, considering he has ample NHL experience, especially in the playoffs, and considering he is putting up numbers exactly in line with what your average NHL back up is putting up this year (ignoring gaa, because, you know, that doesn't count), I'd rather have Marty. And if he can continue to put up similar numbers, I'll take him for the same reason next year.. assuming he actually comes back, contract etc etc.

Edited by squishyx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, this is awful. First off throw out your argument, it's useless.  :whistling:

 

Anyway. just looking at SV%, and using a more generous games played qualifier (espn and yahoo use 15, but lets go down to 10) Marty is still 46th. Not great, certainly not a starter. But of course that's not the argument is it? On average every team has a starter, so the back ups start at #31 and on. That puts Marty smack dab in the middle of the pack for backups. That also means that if we had an "average" back up this year he would most likely have stats similar to Marty. 

Taking all that in, you guys would rather drop him in favor of someone else, that's fine, I don't really care to persuade anyone to think otherwise. However, given he long tenure with the Devils, considering he has ample NHL experience, especially in the playoffs, and considering he is putting up numbers exactly in line with what your average NHL back up is putting up this year (ignoring gaa, because, you know, that doesn't count), I'd rather have Marty. And if he can continue to put up similar numbers, I'll take him for the same reason next year.. assuming he actually comes back, contract etc etc.

 

GAA doesn't count.  So yes, throw it out.  What does Brodeur have to do with GAA?  Nothing besides his save percentage.  

 

Second, it's been half a season.  Luck is still going to be a large factor when it comes to SV%.  So great, Brodeur is in the middle of the pack among backups.  The problem is that Brodeur's last 3 seasons have been the same as this one, whereas that is not true of most of the players below him in SV%.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are we even looking that much into stats at all to determine anything? Lol Were all looking at the games and see whats going on.

Great goalies are mostly about making key saves and not giving up softies on a regular basis. Pretty obvious that marty is not doing that anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are we even looking that much into stats at all to determine anything? Lol Were all looking at the games and see whats going on.

Great goalies are mostly about making key saves and not giving up softies on a regular basis. Pretty obvious that marty is not doing that anymore.

 

'Watch the games' doesn't work with goalies at all.  It's really hard to see the difference between an elite goalie and an average one.  The only thing you can really see is the difference between an elite one and a bad one but even this board has had people wondering why Cory is starting, so maybe not everyone can see that.

 

Thing is Brodeur still makes his share of great saves and I bet he's had a pretty good SV% in 3rd periods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CR1976:  squishy is right that if you start pulling games out of anyone's ledger you're data snooping.  Brodeur hasn't been good - taking out his best games doesn't serve to illustrate the point further.

 

I disagree, I think I showed pretty fairly about what kind of play you can expect from Marty for the majority of his games going forward.  Yes, Marty may have a .902 save% overall this season, but it's not like he's been a consistent .900ish guy with mild peaks and valleys...he had one massive 6-game peak that's way above the rest of the sample size (which is .880ish play), which is significantly distorting the overall number.   

 

Does he have another peak in him?  I'm not talking about almost off-the-charts .960ish puck-stopping...I would happily settle for .910-.915ish play for 5+ games or so.  At least in 2010-11 and 2011-12, he had terrific second halves...not sure how relevant those second halves are in 2013-14, but it's at least something.  But I have a fairly big sample that suggests that a 41-year-old Martin Brodeur is going to have long stretches of not just below average play, but well below average play (as .880ish puck stopping is).  If some choose to pick apart how I arrived at that conclusion, so be it.  Hopefully it's wrong, and Marty turns in an overall NHL average or slightly better than that for the rest of the season.  I may not think he has much left, but that doesn't mean I'm not hoping he proves me wrong every time he's in the net. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this was posted already....

theres been a lot of talk about this " my heart says play another season but i dont know if my body will allow me to "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree, I think I showed pretty fairly about what kind of play you can expect from Marty for the majority of his games going forward.  Yes, Marty may have a .902 save% overall this season, but it's not like he's been a consistent .900ish guy with mild peaks and valleys...he had one massive 6-game peak that's way above the rest of the sample size (which is .880ish play), which is significantly distorting the overall number.

 

This doesn't exist, though.  Anyone's season is going to look 'inconsistent'.  Just because Brodeur's best games are all grouped together doesn't mean he can't have another game like that tonight or somewhere down the line - a good game for a goalie isn't just him stopping the puck, it can be people blowing empty net chances, your defenseman blocking a shot that would've gone in versus not, quick whistles, disallowed goals, etc. etc. - and those can happen on any given night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't exist, though.  Anyone's season is going to look 'inconsistent'.  Just because Brodeur's best games are all grouped together doesn't mean he can't have another game like that tonight or somewhere down the line - a good game for a goalie isn't just him stopping the puck, it can be people blowing empty net chances, your defenseman blocking a shot that would've gone in versus not, quick whistles, disallowed goals, etc. etc. - and those can happen on any given night.

 

Yes, I know that goaltending is not measured by puck-stopping only...Marty was never an awesome pure puck-stopper (not like Hasek, anyway), though clearly he was always capable of making his share of "OMG!" saves, and showed the ability to raise his game during three Cup-winning runs.  And I know that an .880ish save% over any given stretch doesn't mean that he's going to stop 88% of the shots each and every game.  He'll have some 93%+ games too...even a shutout or two.  And I know that there's luck and factors that can make any given start look better or worse that may have nothing to do with the goalie...you're not breaking any new ground here.  And I'm not saying that Marty will NEVER have a good game again.  The debate became about whether or not Marty should be back next season as a backup.  Some say yes, some say no.  I look at the overall performance and the numbers and say no, this should be Marty's last year as a Devil.  Others feel differently.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Chico is the trend of this topic, I have to bring something up. Did anybody else hear him whisper to himself "dang!" after he fvcked up on the telestrator for like the 10th time that game. Oh my god I was crying, gotta love Chico

Every time he uses it, the change the camera angle on him and there's just squiggles everywhere. It's hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time he uses it, the change the camera angle on him and there's just squiggles everywhere. It's hilarious.

Oh man! I crack up when that happens! he had circles drawn out and they switched it up on him last time. :) lol

Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0