Aug 11, 2017
Posts per Day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>habs1289</b></div><div>Hahaha wow okay so basically you’re saying that every goalie faces the exact same type of high scoring chances same amount of one timers, breakaways, in tight, 2 on 1’s . 3 on 1’s etc the list goes on sweet stats you’re throwing out there</div></div>
What are you taking about? Thats not at all what im saying. The sheer number of high danger chances a goalie faces doesnt necessarily change his save percentage in high danger situations. For example: lets say, on average, goalie A faces 5 high danger shots per game and saves 3 of them, while goalie B faces 10 high danger chances and saves 8 of them. In this situation Goalie B still has a better high danger sv% despite having more high danger chances against per game. You cant use the argument "____ has a low HDSv% because he faces more high danger chances" as an excuse for a low HDSv%. If anything, more high danger chances against would increase the sample size which would increase the accuracy of the data.
As for the dSv%, this stat is a function of expected xSv% (expected save percentage). xSv% is already adjusted for shot quality (shot type, shot distance, shot angle, rebounds, rush shots, and strength state as per <a href="http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/03/03/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-i/" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">corsica hockey</a>), so its an apples-to-apples comparison relative to league average.