[tvp2003]

Apologies in advance for the long read — if you want you can scroll to the bottom to see the actual numbers/analysis.

BACKGROUND:

I couldn’t find the exact tweet but I was intrigued by something that Darren Haynes posted on Twitter recently — about how Vladar had a better save percentage in the first period versus Markstrom. It has also been noted elsewhere that Vladar has been getting more “run support”, but why?

There has also been some recent discussion (specifically by Derek Wills) about how a team doesn’t play better or worse in front of one goalie versus another. I can’t say I necessarily agree with this, but how can you measure it?

With how this team has been constructed and coached, they are much better playing with the lead versus trying to generate offence when trailing. Specifically, we don’t have the offensive firepower to score at will, but if we’re tied (or ahead) and the other team has to take more risks to try and score, we are good at exploiting those openings with our forecheck and creating chances on offence.

So how does this relate to goaltending? In my mind, the trouble with Markstrom this year is that he’s been letting in goals — especially early in the game — that have put the team in a hole and have forced them to play from behind. Meanwhile, Vladar has seemingly been able to keep things closer for longer, allowing Calgary to attack with shot volume and eventually build a lead.

So while their GAA (2.75 vs 2.82), and to a lesser extent save percentage, aren’t substantially different, I wanted to see if there was more to the story because not all goals against are created equal. Case in point, on January 14, Vladar let in five goals against Dallas. However, all but one came after Calgary had built up a comfortable lead in the second period, and they hung on to win 6-5. Two nights later, Markstrom only let in two goals, in a 2-1 loss to Nashville. Both goals against came in the first period, and the Flames could only score once after that. Same thing the following game against Colorado — Markstrom lets in three goals in the first period, and Flames can only muster one goal in response the rest of the game.

So with that, I embarked on a statistical analysis to see who was letting in more:

(1) First period goals to put Calgary behind by 1 or 2 goals, aka “deficit goals against” or DGA;

(2) First period goals in total

(3) DGA for the entire game

I was also curious what percentage of DGA’s each goalie let in as a percentage of their total goals against.

Disclaimer: I came up with these metrics before diving into the data, so you can’t accuse me of fudging the numbers. I was just trying to quantify what I had observed on the ice and the stat sheet.

THE RESULTS!!!

Out of a sample size of 48 games — 32 starts by Markstrom and 16 by Vladar, there is definitely a difference:

Markstrom: 0.781 1st period DGA per start
Vladar: 0.375 1st period DGA per start

Markstrom: 1.125 1st period GA per start
Vladar: 0.750 1st period GA per start

Markstrom: 1.312 DGA total per start*
Vladar: 0.937 DGA total per start

* - Markstrom was pulled in two games so if anything that number is lower than what it might have been

Also: of Markstrom’s 84 GA in total, 42 were DGAs (50%), whereas Vladar had 15 out of 44 (34%).

Just for fun I also calculated:

(1) of Markstrom’s 36 1st period GA, 25 were DGAs (69%), whereas Vladar had 6 out of 12 (50%).

(2) of Markstrom’s 84 total GA, 36 were scored in the first period (43%), whereas Vladar had 12 out of 44 (27%).

CONCLUSION:

All of this seems to support the notion that Markstrom is letting in more goals early in the game, and putting the team in a hole as a result. So it shouldn’t be surprising — for this team in particular — that they’re able to produce more offence while playing in front of Vladar… it’s easier for them to score while they’re ahead (or at least tied). And while there are other variables that might be contributing to this, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that Vladar is giving the 2022/23 Flames a better chance to get the lead and then hold it, versus having to come from behind.

Agree? Disagree? Does measuring DGAs make sense? Either way, kudos to you for getting all the way to the end of this post without hitting the back button.

**********

Notes: I did not include overtime goals as I felt 3-on-3 (or often 4-on-3) play was not as meaningful from the goalie’s perspective. I also excluded shootout goals and obviously empty net goals.

Also, I limited DGA to goals that resulted in being down one or two goals, after that I think score effects impact how the teams play in front of them.