HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 17 Feb 1995 14:54:15 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
After seeing JohnE's description of this and JohnH's ranking of CCHA
goalies, I decided to see how the HE goalies stack up.  Note that I
only used HE stats (because the HE release does not give overall
numbers for minutes played, etc.) and only evaluated the top 9 HE
goalies as ranked by GAA since that's where the cutoff is on the release.
 
GOALIE PERSEVERANCE (HOCKEY EAST)
1 Legault, Merrimack   959 (excellent)
2 Heinke, UNH          948 (very good)
  Veisor, NU           948 (very good)
4 Reynolds, NU         943 (very good)
5 Allison, Maine       931 (good)
  Taylor, BC           931 (good)
7 Cavicchi, UNH        930 (good)
8 Noble, BU            910 (poor)
9 Herlofsky, BU        881 (horrible)
 
Again, that is based on the formula JohnE posted.
 
A couple of questions I have are:
 
* What is a "reasonable" number of minutes played?  HE teams have
played, on average, about 1200 minutes.  The goalies listed above have
played anywhere from 477 minutes (Noble) to 1210 (Allison).  (Maine
has played 21 games including 6 overtime games.)
 
* WHY is this formula supposed to mean anything?  I ask because anyone
can come up with a formula and claim it means something.  And why is
the formula set up the way it is - i.e., why multiply save% by 6?
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93

ATOM RSS1 RSS2