Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
For all the flack I am getting about QS% - I sincerely think it's an important stat and a star goalie should be posting a QS% over .600 during a good year.
I think he's a good enough goalie, but he hasn't been the single best goalie in the league this year and I don't think a nine game sample size really changes my overall opinion of his eliteness versus the other 250+ games of his career.
What I am glad to be wrong about however is that Markstrom has flashed an ability to win games where he is seeing low shot totals. This was a legitimate concern he seems to be reducing my concerns over every time he wins a game with low shot totals. It is NOT a guaranteed transition.
Now I'm actually done.
|
I can certainly agree that QS% has value as a stat, but I also think that with only 8 starts, because it reduces everything that happens in a game to a binary value, it is particularly susceptible to random variation and to schedule considerations (who we've played and under what circumstances).
I think, for one thing, that Markstrom's first game should simply be thrown out for the purposes of analysis of his contributions to the team, because the circumstances were so bizarre. I can't remember the last time a team that hadn't played for a week and had not played a single regular season game played another team that had already played a regular season game. It was almost a guaranteed loss with lots of goals against as players shook off the rust against an opponent that wasn't rusty (and really, the Flames should be complaining to the NHL head office about that scheduling, it gave a massive advantage to the Oilers). I know that you can't just exclude results willy-nilly from statistical analysis, but in this case, I would compare that game to a study subject who didn't meet the inclusion criteria for the study (i.e., a game in which either team had a reasonable chance of winning, which was not significantly altered by an artificially introduced confounding variable). I also think that because 3 on 3 OT is such an artificial environment created specifically for the purpose of causing goals to be scored at a greatly increased rate, that OT (and even worse, shootout) event counting and results (win or loss) should not be included in the QS%.
Now give me a goalie with 30 starts, and exclude all OT events from the calculations of QS%, and I think you might have something. But half of Markstrom's games (and all of his losses) have been either OT games or that Oilers game that was played under rare, bizarre, inequitable circumstances, so I don't believe that we have a representative sample at this point as far as that stat is concerned.