Why Building from the Net Out is a Horrible Mistake

There's an old adage in hockey that says: You build from the net out. This adage points to the idea that Goalies are the single most important position in the NHL, and while the goaltender is a very important position, it is hard to for me to fathom the importance placed on the position. In fact, I'd say that , given the choice between a star position player and a Goalie one should just about always choose the position player as goalies are overvalued at the NHL level. This may sound odd but let me explain:

Before we get into any of this I'd like to present some numbers to you. These are the save percentages of goalies that get the majority of starts for a team. Two ends of the spectrum are shown high sv% to the left, low sv% to the right (Vesa Toskala is not a starter, I don't care what anyone says):

.931-- .908
.931-- .906
.927-- .905
.925-- .904
.924-- .903
.927/913-- .894

The first thing that you may notice is that there is not a drastic difference in these numbers. Granted, .931 to .894 looks incredible but that's 37 more goals out of 1000 shots. To put into perspective, a Sv% of .931 is only 4.1% more effective than a Sv% of .894. Again, the most effective starting goalie in the NHL is 3% better than the least effective starting goalie in the NHL and will have 28 fewer goals against.

Now, Here are the teams corresponding with the Sv%s listed above:
Florida-- Washington
Buffalo-- Pittsburgh
San Jose-- Philadelphia
Calgary-- Tampa Bay
Colorado-- Chicago
Montreal-- Columbus


The left hand column has only 1 team not in a playoff position (Florida). The right hand column also has 1 team on the outside looking in (Columbus). I guess what I'm pointing to here is that there is little correlation between Sv% and team success.

Still, when you think about it it shouldn't be that shocking. As I stated before, the most effective starter is only 4.1% better than the least effective starter. Still, the case against the importance of a goaltender gets even more damning when you consider the offensive numbers of a team and how they relate to success. We just looked at 6 of the top and bottom teams in terms of Sv%. Now we'll look at the top and bottom 6 teams in terms of shooting%.

11.9%-- 8.5%
10.6%-- 8.4%
10.5%-- 8.1%
10.4%-- 8%
10%-- 7.7%
9.9%-- 7.5%

Consider the highest shooting % compared to the lowest: .119 to .075. The highest shooting % is 58% more effective than the lowest and will score 44 more goals per 1000 shots. Remember the Goalie comparison indicated a 4.1% increase in effectiveness and a decrease of 37 goals against. Long story short, 44>37

Now here are the teams that correspond with those numbers:

Washington-- New York Rangers
Colorado-- New Jersey
Vancouver-- Toronto
San Jose-- New York Islanders
Los Angeles-- Detroit
Atlanta-- Boston


The left hand side has the teams with the 6 highest shooting%s. Of those 6 only 1 (the Atlanta Thrashers) is currently not in a playoff position. On the right there are the 6 lowest teams in terms of shooting%. Only one team is currently in a playoff position. The correlation here is incredibly strong. This isn't a phenomenon exclusive to the top 6 either. 11 of the top 15 teams in terms of shooting % are in playoff positions, 10 of the bottom 15 are not.

The real issue here isn't whether or not a goalie is important (it is important). The issue is that the disparity in effectiveness between a group of forwards, on average, is going to be greater than the disparity between two goalies. The issue is that building from the net out offers, at most, a 4.1% increase in effectiveness whereas taking the opposite route offers a 58% increase. This is why I see the goalie position as being overvalued in the NHL. This is why building from the net out is a horrible mistake.

What say you?