Goalie Evaluator Math?

[Pengwin7]

I like numbers... but goalie valuations always challenge me.
I've never pegged the Yahoo! algorithm.

Here's a great example.
Right now, Yahoo! has 'projections' for players.
This is great - as it also ranks them, which is certainly due to some final "total" based on an algorithm (or sum of category weightings).

Here's a great case to try to solve:
41 Carey Price (MON) - Rank is based off of Price having: 34w, 2.36gaa, .920sv%
42 Jonathan Quick (LA) - Rank is based off of Quick having: 34w, 2.35gaa, .922sv%

So... Price gets a higher mathematical rank.
The wins should have equal value and cancel.
But Quick's GAA & SV% are actually BETTER...

So Why Is Price Higher? (rhetorical)

Price may be higher because of "more minutes" weighting his score.
Let's say a guy gets (0.01pts x his amount below 2.50gaa) for every minute he plays.

If Price plays 4200min (70gp)... his score for GAA would be .01 x .14 x 4200 = 5.88pts
If Quick plays 3900min (65gp)... his score for GAA would be .01 x .15 x 3900 = 5.85pts
And this is why Price, even with tad higher GAA, would be better "rank" than Quick.

SV% would be similar type of effect.

But what are the magic numbers...
Anybody ever try to figure this out?
Basically - I think Yahoo! has some MEAN score goalie for GAA & SV%.

I'll be fiddling this in my Excel sheet now that we have projections.
If anybody else figures this one out - please share!!!

[Eskimo Brother]

I like numbers... but goalie valuations always challenge me.
I've never pegged the Yahoo! algorithm.

Here's a great example.
Right now, Yahoo! has 'projections' for players.
This is great - as it also ranks them, which is certainly due to some final "total" based on an algorithm (or sum of category weightings).

Here's a great case to try to solve:
41 Carey Price (MON) - Rank is based off of Price having: 34w, 2.36gaa, .920sv%
42 Jonathan Quick (LA) - Rank is based off of Quick having: 34w, 2.35gaa, .922sv%

So... Price gets a higher mathematical rank.
The wins should have equal value and cancel.
But Quick's GAA & SV% are actually BETTER...

So Why Is Price Higher? (rhetorical)

Price may be higher because of "more minutes" weighting his score.
Let's say a guy gets (0.01pts x his amount below 2.50gaa) for every minute he plays.

If Price plays 4200min (70gp)... his score for GAA would be .01 x .14 x 4200 = 5.88pts
If Quick plays 3900min (65gp)... his score for GAA would be .01 x .15 x 3900 = 5.85pts
And this is why Price, even with tad higher GAA, would be better "rank" than Quick.

SV% would be similar type of effect.

But what are the magic numbers...
Anybody ever try to figure this out?
Basically - I think Yahoo! has some MEAN score goalie for GAA & SV%.

I'll be fiddling this in my Excel sheet now that we have projections.
If anybody else figures this one out - please share!!!

I spent way too many hours two summers ago trying to figure it out. I think the magic number may be something close to a percent value of the total minutes played by goalies that season, or something to that effect.
Might try it again at some point during the season though.

[junyab]

I think yahoo rankings are based on a standard set of stat categories, not individual league settings, PLUS the value of projected stats.

So if your league has the following for goalies W, GAA, SV%, but yahoo has a standard set of W, L, GAA, SV&, SO, the rankings you will see in your league are based on yahoo's categories, not yours, then projected stats are added. I could be wrong, but it was the only reason I could come up with when I see rankings out of whack with stats.

Krug - 2015/16
4g, 40a, 44pts, 9+/-, 33pim, 19ppp, 0shp, 1gwg, 2fow, 61hits, 94blks

Suter - 2015/16
8g, 43a, 51pts, 10+/-, 30pim, 21ppp, 2shp, 2gwg, 0fow, 69hits, 142blks

As you can see here, Suter dominates in almost all categories.

Krug - 2015/16 standard cats
4g, 40a, 9+/-, 33pim, 19ppp, 244sog
Krug - 2016/17 projected
9g, 38a, 11+/-, 32pim, 21ppp, ?sog

Suter - 2015/16 standard cats
8g, 43a, 10+/-, 30pim, 21ppp, 188sog
Suter - 2016/17 projected
7g, 36a, 6+/-, 34pim, 15ppp, ?sog

Using standard cats, then using their projected stats you can see how the higher value has swung to Krug's side.

[Pengwin7]

^Um... well... thanks, but I really only am seeking help with GOALIE math.
Hence, why I posted this in the "goalie thread".

I've solved the skater algorithm.
I need zero help with skaters.

[junyab]

^Um... well... thanks, but I really only am seeking help with GOALIE math.
Hence, why I posted this in the "goalie thread".

I've solved the skater algorithm.
I need zero help with skaters.

I was simply giving you an example on why I thought their projected stats needed to be factored in.

Zero reason to be rude about it.

[Swels Stewart]

I like numbers... but goalie valuations always challenge me.
I've never pegged the Yahoo! algorithm.

Here's a great example.
Right now, Yahoo! has 'projections' for players.
This is great - as it also ranks them, which is certainly due to some final "total" based on an algorithm (or sum of category weightings).

A couple thoughts:
1. Do we know that rankings are based completely on the algorithm? I've always assumed (and could be way off) with the football rankings for example, that (human) expert rankings and maybe even ADP factor into the Yahoo ranking.

2. Perhaps other stats factor in? Would Losses, Saves, or Shutouts impact the ranking?

[holdUP]

What if Yahoo heavily favours wins, so the difference in gaa/sv% is negligible... and the only reason Price is one above Quick is because he is ahead alphabetically..... lol

[Torontos #2 Fan]

^Um... well... thanks, but I really only am seeking help with GOALIE math.
Hence, why I posted this in the "goalie thread".

I've solved the skater algorithm.
I need zero help with skaters.

is there a way I can see your skater algorithm? that would just be grand. Thanks