This is precisely what happened when people used to rely on +/- and probably the main reason the advanced stats were so appealing at the start. Goaltending performance doesn't affect these stats other than in some ephemeral way like making teams play tighter if the goalie is a sieve.My question is this,
Doesn't goaltending have an effect on all defensive stats?
So if Hutchinson is in goal and let's in his usual crap, doesn't that effect the players on the ice in this evaluation?
If you have a goalie that is a top tired goalie and always holds the fort, as opposed to a Hutchinson in net, doesn't that take all the players numbers down?
This is the whole question I've always had about qoc -- what is the magnitude of its impact? I've never seen anything concrete to quantify this, just eyebally correlational stuff.Just to give a better sense of the magnitude of the differences between Rielly and the other top four ...
elite toi% varies by 2.4 points between Rielly (most) and Ceci (least). Assuming 20 mins of ice time (which is high for 5v5), that's roughly half a minute or a shift per game. 3.8 points for weak comp toi% differential or a couple of shifts per game.
This is the whole question I've always had about qoc -- what is the magnitude of its impact? I've never seen anything concrete to quantify this, just eyebally correlational stuff.
No idea if the data for the Leafs blueline this year can be generalized, but these data show that there's little separating top four blueliners in facing different levels of comp (generously, 2-3 shift/game). The big difference is between the bottom pair and the top four. This seems to fit with the general impact we see when blueliners step up from sheltered bottom pair to top four.
Your whole Rielly super-elite usage is in tatters.