article: Goaltender Workload Management

[fletch]

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/26760836/the-big-winners-2019-nhl-playoffs-far

Goaltender workload management

 

'It's no accident that this has been somewhat of a recurring theme for teams that have enjoyed playoff success of late. This postseason has been an extension of that, because it felt like we saw more 1A-1B tandems than ever before, and considering the largely positive results, it stands to reason that we'll only see more of it moving forward. Just look at how the teams that won at least one playoff round distributed their goalie starts throughout the regular season:'

 

TEAM STARTER BACKUP

Sharks 62 20

Blue Jackets61 21

Bruins 45 37

Stars 45 37

Islanders 43 39

Hurricanes 40 33

Avalanche 33 49

Blues 30 45

[fletch]

1A-1B allows teams to ride the hot hand going into the playoffs. Bobrovsky was a stud, but Martin Jones was mediocre, so mixed bag from the true no. 1s

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?report=goaliesummary&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20182019&seasonTo=20182019&gameType=3&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=savePctg

[ThirtyONE]

No point in paying a goalie big money. It’s just not worth it.

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

I've always felt that the whole 'paying big money to a goalie debate' was a bit misguided.

 

I think you pay the big money to the guy who is your 'x factor'

 

Guys like Crosby, McDavid, Kane and a host of others are their teams 'x factor.' They give their team a chance to win every single night.

 

For us, for a long time, Henrik was our x factor. He gave us a chance to win every night, so you had to pay him that money.

 

Going back to the 'Keep Talbot trade Hank' debate from a while back, I really don't think the cap space saved between Talbot (I'm talking the Talbot that was good when we had him, not Edmonton Talbot) and the maybe one other player we'd be able to get with that space would have made us a better team.

 

Where it really helps is if we have a cost-controlled goalie on an ELC (ie. Murray in Pittsburgh). Shestyerkin (I still don't know how we should be spelling it lol) on an ELC playing at an elite level changes that debate though. We'll have to really wait and see what he is.

[Future]

Tying playoff success to workload management is dumb. Bobrovsky was just as good as Tuuka.

[fletch]

Perhaps in any given year there are 2 or 3 elite goaltenders that are demonstrably above their brethren. But compared to the 1960s I would argue that the larger pool of NHL goalies is much better given training, coaching, etc.

 

Ken Dryden and Jacques Plante were likely a bigger edge over their contempories than Patrick Roy and Martin Brodeur were over their contemporaries. And the gap is less still.

 

Having the best goalie in the league is less of an advantage than it used to be.

 

Binnington may not do anything the rest of his career, but this year he is good enough to put the Blues in position to win a cup.

 

So if you've got x number of dollars for goaltending, having a 1A and 1B may be better than a 1 and cheap backup.

 

The argument against this approach is Edmonton, who doesn't have a goalie on the roster that can win 16 games in the playoffs. So if you whiff on less expensive options, tough to compete in the playoffs.

[Gravesy]

Well, the two teams in the Stanley Cup final this year have unquestionable #1 goaltenders.

I think you’ll see more platooning of goaltenders going forward, but what the best solution is will be 100% situational.