Nabokov the Answer ?
by chrislanci on Jun 16, 2010 7:05 PM EDT
Email
PrintCould Nabokov be the Flyers answer in net? I am not sure but playing Devil's Advocate here are some reasons why he could be if the price is right.
1) Insane Regular Season Numbers - 2.43 GAA 0.922 SV PCT last year, for his career 2.39 GAA and 0.912 SV PCT.
2) Playoff experience - He played in 80 playoff games and took his team to the WCF last season with 2.56 GAA and 0.907 SV PCT pretty good numbers despite a lack luster performance against the Hawks. His career playoff numbers are even better with a 2.29 GAA and 0.913 SV PCT. For comparison sake Vokoun only played in 11 playoff games and hasn't made it since 2006-2007.
3) 71 starts - Nabokov was totally over used, 71 starts that is crazy especially for a 34 year old guy. No wonder why he hits the wall come playoffs. The Flyers could and should mix in Boucher more and give him something like 55 starts which is still a lot and have a well rested goalie come post-season. Also the Sharks gave up a ton of shots during the regular season 31.4 per game. The Flyers were 5th best at allowing shots only 28.5 / G another factor that could keep Nabokov sharper come playoffs.
4) True No. 1 - Nabokov comes with zero question marks in terms of if he should or can be a starting goalie in the NHL and signing him would be and end to the annual goalie controversy in Philadelphia.
5) UFA - That means we could get Nabokov without having to give up anyone, Carter, JVR, Giroux to get him. Assuming we can get him a the right price. Pronger will only cost slightly over 4 million on the cap next year there is no reason why we couldn't find a way to get Nabokov at a decent number.
6) Nabokov right now > Price > Bernier > Ellis
Thoughts...
This item was written by a member of this community and is not necessarily endorsed by Broad Street Hockey.
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Could we do this and still re-sign Carter, Giroux, and Leino next year? If we can then I am for it if not then no.
nope we'd be screwed and in cap hell
especially considering if you want nabokov @4m you’re looking at a very lengthy contract
The other guys are probably going to cost Carter in a trade anyway. We could go after Nabokov then lose Carter or Gagne next year to the Cap. The 2010 team with Nabokov and Carter is better than 2010 team with Price and no Carter. That would be a reasonable plan B if Carter can’t be traded for his full value a top 6 winger and young goalie.
Old, expensive (more than likely), continuous playoff failures.
Hmmmmm, I’d go with no
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
I would, but only for a 1 yr, 2 mill offer
Pilgrim: Be gone pest, and give me the Bird
Yakko: We'd love to but the FOX censors wouldn't allow it
I’d even go $2.75MM max. If 2 years gets it down to $2MM, I’d say yeah, but those are the only two I’d even offer.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 16, 2010 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions
If the question is: “can you give me an example that suggests that an elite highly-paid regular season goalie isn’t necessarily going to take you deep into the playoffs even if you have a great team around him?”
Then yes, Nabokov is the answer.
by PursuitOfLappyness on Jun 16, 2010 9:05 PM EDT reply actions
NO
NO
^ That
Clear enough on my opinion lol.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
NO!
Nabakov’s contract >>> Price >Ellis > Bernier. He isn’t worth the money you’d have to invest for someone that has never won on the big stage.
I had that argument has never won on the big stage. He has won several playoff series and has won more big stage games than Lundquist, Miller, and Luongo. Turco was the poster boy for playoff familiar posting GAA over 3.00 in back to back 1 round losses in 2003-2004 and 2005-2006. Those numbers were especially staggering compared to his regular season numbers 1.98 GAA and 2.55. That is not the case for Nabokov his playoff numbers are closer to his regular season.
SJS offense let them down in the playoffs, they were scoring at 3.13 G/G last regular season and manage only 2.73 G/G in the postseason.
Heatley 2 G in 14 playoff GMs 39 G in the Regular Season
Thorton 3 G in 15 playoff GMs 20 G in the Regular Season
Clowe 2 G in 15 playoff GMs 19 G in the Regular Season
Malhotra 1 G 1 PT in 15 playoff GMs 14 G 33 PTs in the Regular Season
If you want to bash Carter’s playoff he tied or outscored everyone on SJS besides Pavelski and Marleau with his 5 goals.
And I disagree with your argument. He has come up incredibly small in big games. I have no doubt his averages from all his post season games are fairly close to his regular season numbers. But I’ve also seen him do his best sieve impression in the olympics, and to me, that doesn’t warrant a $5mil cap hit. I think Nabby is a quality goalie, one of the best in the league, but I also think, that when he is in a must win game, he seems to buckle. I don’t have his numbers in must win game scenarios, and you haven’t shown me them either. It would be interesting to see them b/c I have a memory of them not being very good performances, but his numbers might actually be decent, I don’t know. So I’m going off of memory.
Also, your argument in point two is pretty weak in general. You gave his career playoff stats with no reference to must win games, and you just pointed out how his team did this year, that’s one year out of how many??? I’m not sold on the comparison either. Vokoun just won in Germany, and beat a Russian team there that had pretty much all of their top snipers from the NHL. However, I don’t want any goaltender that is going to cost over $3mil right now. I want to see how the new equipment rules effect goalies next year before the Flyers invest in anyone for more than $3mil, and that is my main point, that and I personally don’t trust him in high pressure situations.
Yes, I would.
Right now I’m trying to still figure out my version of the ideal off season. I would like to see a proven winger and a solid 5th D-man that can eat responsible minutes if necessary before anything else. But for $3mil you’d have to say yes to Nabby. I guess my wish list has a 1a: winger, a 1b: goalie, and a 1c: 5th defenseman. Still trying to figure scenarios out where they could get all 3 and be in a good cap situation moving forward.
No
IMO, we need a young goaltender we can keep between the pipes for a long time. I realize that’s an almost impossibility but it can happen. Picking up Nabby short term could work but I’d like for once to see a goaltender that the Flyers can sign and depend on for the long haul.
also
For comparison sake Vokoun only played in 11 playoff games and hasn’t made it since 2006-2007.
that’s not a great comparison — i see what you’re trying to do, but it isn’t Vokoun’s fault that his team didn’t make the playoffs.
i agree
i think Nabokov is awesome, I’d be happy if we signed him cheap — I don’t buy the notion of a goalie being good in the playoffs but not regular season or vice versa. I think Nabokov’s elite, and as long as he doesn’t preclude us keeping Giroux & Leino et al, absolutely get him.
I just also don’t think it’s fair to knock Vokoun for his playoff game total when he isn’t the reason his teams have sucked
Not a knock on Vokuon just a fact to that favors Nabokov. For those who are in favor of Vokuon, Nabokov is better or just as good and won’t cost us any players in a trade this season.
That's just flat out untrue.
Look at their numbers post-lockout:
Nabokov: .910 S%, .921 ESS% while playing on teams who give up 2.51 G/G and 27.1 S/G
Vokoun: .922 S%, .934 ESS% while playing on teams who give up 2.70 G/G and 33.2 S/G
Vokoun plays on worse teams and still is far and away better than Nabokov.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
still is far and away better than Nabokov.
I wouldn’t call those numbers far and away better. 1/100th and 2/100th of a save percentage if you don’t go back 5 years, Nobakov numbers are better. Also he plays in a much much better division every team in the Pacific had more points that all but Washington in the SE this season. I am not saying one guy is better than the other you can argue that the all day it is close.
What you can say is Nabokov has played in more meaningful games than Vokoun who has played in just about zero and under more pressure of the playoffs and under big expectations. They are practically the same age and if they earn the same amount of money the following statement is true and more important than all the stats.
Either way Carter + Nabokov is better than Vokuon hands down no questions about. Even if you don’t like Carter he is still one hell of an asset to move either now or at the deadline.
yeah carter + nabokov is better than Vokoun
but maybe Vokoun + Horton is better than Carter + Nabokov.
Definitely, Vokoun + Carter is better than Nabokov + Carter. It’s all semantics though, we can’t afford to sign Nabokov unless we trade Carter anyway — if we’re expecting to sign Giroux & Leino, that is.
You don’t want to argue Nabokov/Vokoun, fine. But it’s lunacy to think Vokoun isn’t one of the top 3 goalies in the NHL. Nabokov is not even close to that conversation.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Help me out with the ESS%- I don’t know what it is, I can’t find a definition for it and it is not here
Not that it matters that much- I disagree that Vokoun is far and away better than Nabokov. You can talk about save percentage and other stats all you want as defining what makes one goaltender better than another; at the end of the day all that really matters is wins and loses. While you can’t fault only Vokoun for being a member of a crappy team; he does bare at least some responsibility being a member of the team that he is on. It may not be scientific but good players find a way to play for good teams.
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Even Strength Save %
it’s a goalie’s save percentage when the hockey is 5 on 5 or 4 on 4.
Thank you
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Even-strength Save Percentage.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Also
at the end of the day all that really matters is wins and loses.
How do teams win?
They score more points than the other team. True of every sport.
How do you score more points? 2 methods:
A) Score a lot
B) Prevent the other guy from scoring.
Save % is the percentage of shots a goalie prevents from entering the net — the % of time he does B) prevent the other team from scoring. Someone with a better save % is better at B) than someone with a worse save %.
Vokoun is better than Nabokov in that he prevents the opponent from scoring more often than Nabokov does. I agree that perhaps his competition is worse, but it’s silly to say that Nabokov is somehow better because his team wins more. Sure, his team is better, but Vokoun on that team gives them even more wins.
GAA and GA
This argument you present would make GAA and GA the markers for good goaltenders rather than save percentage.
Also, and this is a minor point, I wasn’t saying Nabokov was better; I disagreed that Voukon was far and away better… I think in terms of what they bring to the table they are similar and I don’t really want either. I am one of the few people (assumption) around here that wants Leighton
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I have no idea what “in terms of what they bring to the table” means, but they are not similar. Nabokov is probably the most overrated goalie in the NHL (he’s battling Fleury) while Vokoun is easily the most underrated.
When Sharks fans think Nabokov’s only worth “Dan Ellis” money, how can you say he’s similar to Vokoun?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
They are both veteran guys, they have played at a high level for the majority of their careers.
You can say Nabakov is overrated if you want to, he has won a lot of games.
You can say Vokoun is underrated or the best goaltender in the league if you want he has not won as many games.
Neither of these guys has a Stanley Cup ring or a Vezina trophy for that matter
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
So wins and trophies?
I’m sorry, but that’s a horrible way to evaluate. You’re not even scratching the surface of what these guys have done or will do. Wins are dependent on the team in front of them. Trophies are dependent on the media’s opinion of them. Neither is dependent on the actual player.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay so do you want the goaltender with the best save percentage in the entire league on your team or do you want the one that is hoisting the cup over his head at the end of the year?
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
So now we’re no longer debating Nabokov v. Vokoun? Vokoun is better. He’s a lot better. It’s not even close.
But if you want to ask who’s a better fit, that’s an entirely different question. A mediocre goalie allows for a better team in front of him, producing fairly similar team results. If you drop $6 million in goal, that’s $3-5 million you aren’t spending on defense and/or scoring. Maybe your team is good enough, most likely they aren’t.
Either way, is Niemi now better than Ryan Miller? Roberto Luongo? Martin Brodeur? Henrik Lundqvist? Tomas Vokoun? No. Not even close. Which is why wins and trophies tell you nothing about his skill or value over other players at his position.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I was’t ever debating Nabakov vs. Vokoun. I simply disagree with you that Vokoun is far and away better because of his better stats at SV% et all.
Your evaluating the players in a way that I am not.
So- I disagree with you that Vokoun is far and away better and I am leaving it at that.
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
And I can’t stand that wins and trophies are how you are evaluating players. It just gets under my skin.
I should definitely handle it better, but argh. Those are two terrible ways to individually evaluate someone.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I care about wins and one trophy… The rest is facts figures and semantics (though I do have a special place in my heart for sematics).
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
There’s no way of knowing how many wins or trophies you’ll get out of a goalie in a given season unless he’s elite (Vokoun, Kipper, and a couple of others fit that bill). You give yourself the best chance to win by getting the best goalie. Sure, a goalie can get hot, but there’s no way of knowing that.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jun 17, 2010 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude this is silly
There’s no point in arguing. You admit yourself that you don’t don’t care about “facts.” You think Nabokov is better for some gut feeling that no amount of facts or figures will tell you otherwise. At least you’re consistent in your opinion, I s’pose.
Thanks for calling me stupid. But hey at least I’m consistent with being stupid
I’ve chosen a different set of “facts” to follow. In roughly the same period of time Nabokov has 293 wins and Vokoun has 240.
Now if you want to argue who’s played for the better team, or who has been treated unfairly by those numbers because of the team in front of them by all means. My point was that they are about the same talent wise and if you want to look at numbers the most important numbers in any sport is wins and loses. Got that?
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 18, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
We're back to this...
So Jose Theodore (103 wins the past 4 years) and J.S. Giguere (100) are about the same talent wise. And Vesa Toskala (90) is about the same as those two. Martin Biron has less talent than Toskala, though, cause he won 86 games. Nikolai Khabibulin (80, only playing 18 games this year) is about the same as Vesa Toskala too.
There’s 5 names, ranging from Conn Smythe winner to Stanley Cup Champion, to Hart Trophy winner, to Martin Biron and Vesa Toskala. Not only do the Conn Smythe, Cup Champion, and Hart Trophy champion not belong in the same conversation as one another, but Vesa Toskala doesn’t belong on an NHL bench.
Wins don’t tell you anything about the players.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m a liar- please take a look at my comment below.
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 18, 2010 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I have no idea who dubs
any player “the most overrated” or “most underrated”.
What are the criteria?
IMO, the first one usually means “everybody seems to rave about this guy but I thinks he’s garbage”, and the second means “no one but me seems to realize what a gem this guy is”.
January 11, 1976
by TopShelfTony on Jun 18, 2010 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, for starters: People not realizing that Vokoun is actually good. The fact that he’s been the best goalie since the lockout tends to back that up.
And it doesn’t hurt that the previous link says:
Tomas Vokoun is perhaps the most criminally underrated goaltender in the NHL.
and:
Evgeni Nabokov is not an elite goaltender, but he is above average and only his 2005-06 numbers keep him from posting a comparable save percentage to those guys. He also deserves credit for posting those numbers as a starter (i.e. over more games).
But if you throw that season out, he’s in-between Jaroslav Halak and Brian Elliot.
If you don’t believe that, you can also look at shot quality, as was done here. Vokoun is the fourth-best in terms of exceeding expectations while Nabokov was… I can’t count that far down. He did worse than expected, and he ranked below such talented netminders as Jason LaBarbera, Peter Budaj, Alex Auld, Ty Conklin, Kevin Weekes, Frederik Norrena, Andrew Raycroft, and Brent Johnson.
So, it’s not “I think he’s garbage”, it’s that he IS garbage. Well, not quite, but you get the point.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you want more:
The Sharks goaltender might have had a career season after being the definition of mediocrity, but keep in mind that it was his contract season…GMs should try to ignore the amount of success the team had as a whole with him minding the net. In our view, the Sharks succeeded despite having Nabokov in net, not because of his presence there.
Of the upcoming goaltender free-agent class, the four currently highest-paid goalies are Evgeni Nabokov, Marty Turco, Jose Theodore and Vesa Toskala…But none of these goaltenders is any better than Chris Mason, a less touted name, and they’re not demonstrably better than Dan Ellis either.
Top Save Percentages Since the Lockout:
BIG lead for Tomas Vokoun(0.9224), but then very tightly packed from #2 to #10. Goalies making $6 million and not on this list: J-S Giguere (Toronto .9123), Evgeni Navokov (San Jose .9098).
Lastly, Philip Myrland:
Evgeni Nabokov is probably the most overrated goalie in the league. He didn’t deserve his Vezina runner-up finish last season, and he doesn’t deserve his status as one of the league’s elite goalies
It’s not just me. Evgeni Nabokov is overrated.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Oh, that last link is amazing. It compares Nabokov to Boucher and Toskala. And it doesn’t come out with Nabokov as clearly superior to either of them, let alone an elite NHL goaltender.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Is it a coincidence that they all played for the Sharks for a period of time?
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Well, that’s why he picked those.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow, I really hit a nerve there.
My post was not about Nabokov or Vokoun.
It was about how terms like the ones I mentioned are used.
January 11, 1976
by TopShelfTony on Jun 18, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Really, it’s not you or Patter so much as it’s Chris who said Nabokov is just as good if not better than Vokoun. Coincidentally, it was his post saying Nabokov might be the answer, and he’s clearly not.
I got very defensive on the thread mainly because of what I said above and you questioned: Nabokov is so overrated it’s laughable. Vokoun is so underrated is sickening. Your question on what those terms mean exactly is a good one, since it’s all relative.
But the fact that Nabokov is thought of highly enough to warrant $5MM a year, that other teams covet him and that fans think he’s an elite goalie is just… laughable. Since his numbers tell you he is below average to average, those people are overrating him. And that’s the crux of my argument.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions
On the other hand
I love the passion with which hockey fans defend their team and/or favorite players and attack hockey fans who are so sadly misguided as to hold different opinions or who somehow don’t manage to see the blatantly obvious and completely irrefutable facts that can be succinctly stated: Everybody knows I’m right and you’re wrong, including you. Why don’t you just admit it?
January 11, 1976
by TopShelfTony on Jun 18, 2010 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions
haha, I am kind of embarrassed reading that. But really, I think my baseball fandom has carried over in that regard:
Ubaldo Jimenez’s BABIP is so ridiculously low that he surely cannot sustain it. He’s not that good, I don’t know why anybody thinks he is. Any fantasy owners out there who have Ubaldo should trade him to a gullible manager NOW!
(P.S. my gf has Ubaldo and won’t take my advice. Thankfully, she’s in first and I need to catch back up, so I’m quite alright with saying “I told you so” from first place)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions
There's just one caveat to the thoughts expressed in "On the other hand"
and surely you are well aware of it, but in the extremely unlikely case that you aren’t…
RX for a happy relationship
Say: “Yes, dear.”
(Repeat as necessary)
Use this prescription wisely, and never insincerely; and may you either rise to first place or accept defeat with grace.
January 11, 1976
by TopShelfTony on Jun 18, 2010 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I use those wisely. But I still like to gloat.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Um "BABIP"...
Was that Ubaldo’s childhood name for his Grandma back in Nagua?
January 11, 1976
by TopShelfTony on Jun 18, 2010 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions
haha, batting average on balls in play
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions
GAA and GA
are team dependent in a large way. Yes, they’re also important; GA is the most important defensive metric of a team. But a goaltender cannot be penalized for all the goals his team gives up — a lot are not his fault. Obviously, this is also true for save %. Neither are great stats, both are okay.
Even strength save percentage (not total—shorthanded save percentage is hugely variable from year to year) is a pretty good indicator—you’ll see all the hockey statisticians on the internet use it.
GA is okay, but is affected by special teams (Caps ES D was 5th. Total D, not even close to 5th, for example. Stupid PK) and by shot totals (partly why CHI finished 2nd in the West despite below average regular season goaltending).
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jun 17, 2010 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Wins and losses. I’m glad you brought that up.
This past year, Vokoun had 18 games where he had at least a 0.912 save percentage and failed to get a win. 11 times he gave up 2 or fewer goals and either got a loss or an overtime loss. 17 times, he stopped at least 27 shots and didn’t get a win. 10 times he stopped at least 35 shots and failed to get a win. In all 18, he gave up 2 or fewer even-strength goals and failed to get a win.
Obviously, that won’t sink in until you look at this. Vokoun’s Tough Luck Losses
Seriously, look at it.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
damn
that jan 10 loss is pretty sad. a .971 save % and a loss to show for it. harsh.
December 5, .973 S% – L
January 7, .974 S% – L
January 20, .968 S% – L
January 21, .972 S% – L
Wins are a terrible metric.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Four games without giving up an ES goal and still losses. If Florida trade him they don’t deserve to be in the NHL
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
This is what I’m sayin!
But really, Florida SHOULD trade him. Clearly, he’s eating up $5.7 million in salary when the Panthers aren’t good enough to be spending that much money on a veteran in the last year of his contract. He’s more valuable to them as a trading asset than a hockey player, which means he should be moved.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure he is their most valuable trade asset, but he is far and away their most important player. Without him, they are possibly looking at going from terrible to lower than AHL caliber. Sure it might get them a #1 pick but they need to be terrible for a while to rebuild. Keeping Vokoun at least gives them some credibility
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
But what good is credibility when you aren’t going to make the playoffs or bring fans to the arena? You’re not going to re-sign him, so at most you have one more year of him being on your team. Is that perceived credibility for one year worth not getting a good return for him?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking about this more last night and I’m starting to lean more towards your idea. Initially I was thinking he could be dealt at the next trade deadline, but most contenders should have a worthy goalie or little cap space by then anyway.
But just think how terrible the Panthers would be. I don’t see how any GM could pull the trigger on a move that would count towards an added ~15 losses for next season
New Zealand's 4th best Philadelphia Flyers fan
Yeah, the Panthers would be terrible. But right now, they will be pretty bad. It’s the whole one two steps forward, one step back thing.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions
It's a lot harder to market an elite goaltender too
Not only are his stats heavily dependent on the team in front of him (so you can’t just easily say that’ he’s the best in the league), his success is often just great positioning and strategy, and is not necessarily flashy.
It’s a lot easier to market your no. 1 draft pick who’s faster than the rest, stickhandles better than the rest, shoots more accurately and racks up the points.
by PursuitOfLappyness on Jun 18, 2010 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Again- I am not being scientific about this. So if it is an argument of stats and what stats are better or more indicative of who is better you win.
Good players find a way to play for good teams. Nabakov has played for a team that makes the playoffs every year and contends every year.
Also, this is not an either/or proposition for me. I am not interested in seeing the Flyers trade for Vokoun (unlikely anyways) and I am not interested in seeing them sign Nabakov (just as unlikely).
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
But you’re not the one who said they’re the same player. They’re clearly not. And I disagree with “good players find a way to play for good teams”, as you just have to look at Eric Lindros, Wayne Gretzky (post Edmonton), Henrik Lundqvist, Ryan Miller, Dan Marino, Ted Williams, etc.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
This is somewhat confusing so I am ignoring the first sentence…
Dan Marino, Eric Lindros, and Ted Williams played for some very, very good teams they just never won a championship. I think you could say the same for Gretzky post Edmonton. I’d put Miller and Lundqvist in the same category as Nabakov and Voukon
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 17, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
A good player cannot find a way to play for a good team by himself. He can sign there or get traded, but only if the receiving team has interest. It’s completely out of the player’s hands unless the player takes a giant (and I mean giant, like 20% or more) pay cut.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jun 17, 2010 10:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Look, this isn’t your argument, so I don’t want to keep going with this. You’re saying something else, but I’m saying Nabokov is no where near as good as Vokoun. I’m not even sure I want Vokoun on the Flyers (purely a salary cap reason) so I’m not entirely sure what we’re arguing about. If Nabokov signed in Philly for $2.5MM, I’d be happy. That’s a good goalie at a good price. But Vokoun would still be better, just maybe not at a good price.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 17, 2010 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s on NHL.com—> stats, individuals, goalies, special teams, sv% (the column to the right of the one by which the page is already sorted)
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jun 17, 2010 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
That Really
Escalated quickly! I mean that got out of hand fast!
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
Where’d you get your goalie the toilet store?
"All hail the Flyers" Jim Jackson.
by darkside3744 on Jun 17, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Geoff
First take a deep breath. I mean it one big breath.
Now, please reread Alon’s comment that I responded too with “thanks for calling me stupid.”
Thank you.
I’m not the smartest guy in the room by any stretch but Alon’s condescending tone towards me was neither subtle nor thinly veiled. That is the reason, and THE ONLY reason that I commented on this thread again. I have no problems disagreeing with people and passionately so (it’s a good thing) however, I’m not into being called stupid. When it happens I won’t endlessly retort but I will retort.
As to your argument, if I was saying that wins were the ONLY thing that mattered you’d be correct. I wasn’t and am not. All stat categories are relevant but to me Wins is the most important. If I were to categorize goalie stats in levels of importance I would start with wins, GA, GAA, SV%, etc.. I understand that you will feel those are poor evaluators and I get that you are a stats guy (it’s awesome). I consider myself a generally simple person so when it comes down to it I am looking at the simplest things to measure value by. But at the end of the day I’m not an NHL scout, reporter, commentator and am never going to be any of those things. At best I will be a poor arm chair commissioner.
As far as the debate goes I am not going to re-enter it but I will say that stats are only one thing, history. They may be able to indicate how a player might perform but they will never tell you how a player will perform.
That’s it. I’m never ever posting on this thread again…
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
Well, I entirely disagree he was calling you stupid. Ignoring facts doesn’t make one stupid, it does carry other negative connotations, but I digress.
You’re entirely correct that stats aren’t a predictor of future success, but they’re really the only thing anyone has to predict future success. Even then, to even make an educated guess on future performance, you have to use the right stats.
As I said above, I fully acknowledge that I got defensive. For that, I apologize. It was never really about you anyway, but there is a huge difference between Evgeni Nabokov and Tomas Vokoun. The evidence that wins are a poor stat to evaluate players is staring us in the face – their Win totals.
None of this is to say that Nabokov is terrible, but as one of the links above show, he could very well be Miika Kiprusoff or Vesa Toskala. Tomas Vokoun, however, has been the best goalie in the NHL over the past 5 years. That’s where this all started, and you just happened to be the guy who stuck with the argument.
I’m callin you out Chris! You’re the one who said Nabokov might even be better, so where are you at where I had to act like a dick to Patter here?
Again, I do apologize if I came across too harshly.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Making myself a liar twice now, thank you.
I don’t think you were in any way a dick. By any objective evaluation you won the argument (3, 4 and 5 times over) you just didn’t convince me to change my ways.
I also don’t think I am ignoring facts (and I said I wasn’t being “scientific” about it not I was ignoring facts) I am making a value judgement, perhaps a poor one, but that’s different then ignoring facts.. Anyways Uncle Uncle Uncel
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 18, 2010 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions
haha, touche.
But winning and not convincing is like… a tie! We can’t have this in the Bettman era!
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 18, 2010 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I just read this
I never once called you stupid, I doubt you are stupid, I just think you’ve had a different set of experiences and therefore a different worldview from mine — one that precludes stats, which I think in this case is “silly”
All this goalie discussion has me doing some reading
Here are some opinions I came across if anyone’s interested:
http://www.habsinsideout.com/main/36363 (lots of articles here)
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/37790399/ns/sports-nhl/
January 11, 1976
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Wednesday’s Three Stars: Devils fourth line steps up; Watch Prust dive
- Stephen Gionta leads Devils in Game 5 triumph over the New York Rangers
- Rangers, Devils back at MSG for pivotal Game 5; NHL 13 screenshots (Playoff Puck Previews)
- CBC announces ‘While the Men Watch Hockey Night,’ sets off backlash over sexism
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 Phoenix Coyotes
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Carter rescues Devils; New Jersey moves within 1 win of Cup finals with 5-3 win over Rangers
- Rangers' best game fails; Devils once again find holes in New York G Lundqvist in 5-3 victory
- Lundqvist struggles as Rangers lose Game 5, 5-3
- Devils-Rangers Sum
- Huberdeau leads Saint John to Memorial Cup semis
