Goalie prospect analysis

[Jouko-Pouko]

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look into prospect goalies. I opened the oldest Dobber Fantasy Prospect Report I could find which was from the year 2011. Here are the 32 goalie prospects listed on either Dobber's or Justin Goldman's Top-25 list.

(Notice: If goalie wasn't listed on the other list, I gave him a ranking of 30 to calculate the average rank. Anyways, the ranking is less important than the names on the lists.)

First Last AVG rank
Jake Allen 2
Jack Campbell 3
Matt Hackett 5
Leland Irving 5
Eddie Lack 5
Martin Jones 7
Brad Thiessen 8
Mike Murphy 10
Calvin Pickard 11
Mark Visentin 11
Darcy Kuemper 14
Jussi Rynnas 16
Joni Ortio 17
Allen York 18
John Gibson 18
Magnus Hellberg 18
Igor Bobkov 20
Atte Engren 21
Tyler Beskorowany 21
J-F Berube 22
Samu Perhonen 22
Joacim Eriksson 23
Keith Kinkaid 24
Jordan Binnington 24
Olivier Roy 24
Maxime Clermont 24
Jeff Zatkoff 25
Mark Owuya 25
Viktor Fasth 26
Ben Scrivens 26
Jacob De Serres 28
Marc Cheverie 28

From that list, I would say that only John Gibson and Martin Jones have become NHL starters. Allen and Pickard still have time to join that group. I don't see anyone else on that list becoming an NHL starter anymore. So that's 2/32 (6.25%) of the best goalie prospects who have become NHL starters and a total of 4/32 (12.5%) with a chance to become an NHL starter.

----------

In the 2012 Fantasy Prospect Report, there were a total of 29 goalie prospects on the two lists.

First Last AVG rank
Eddie Lack 1
Jake Allen 4
Jack Campbell 4
Mark Visentin 6
Darcy Kuemper 7
Martin Jones 7
Viktor Fasth 9
Calvin Pickard 9
Tyler Bunz 10
Igor Bobkov 10
Jeff Zatkoff 13
Scott Wedgewood 14
John Gibson 16
Oscar Dansk 17
Malcolm Subban 19
Petr Mrazek 19
Mark Owuya 19
Magnus Hellberg 20
Niko Hovinen 20
Olivier Roy 20
Eddie Pasquale 20
Carter Hutton 21
Harri Sateri 22
Andrei Vasilevski 23
FrederikAndersen 23
Jason Missiaen 23
Sami Aittokallio 25
Philipp Grubauer 25
Scott Stajcer 27

From this list, we have the same two guys from previous list (John Gibson and Martin Jones) but also Frederik Andersen and Andrei Vasilevski who could be added to that list of NHL starters (although Vasilevksi haven't really earned that job yet). So now we would have a success rate of 4/29 (13.8%). Again, Allen and Pickard could join that list as well as Petr Mrazek and even Malcolm Subban according to some people, so that would potentially be 8/29 (27.6%).

(By the way, what a find from Justin Goldman who ranked Frederik Andsersen #15 on his list; this was when he was still Carolina property and hadn't been re-drafted by Anaheim yet.)

The numbers between 2011 and 2012 are quite different; 6.25% vs 13.8% as NHL starters and 12.5% vs 27.6% as potential NHL starters. Was 2011 just a bad year for goalie prospects? Was 2012 just a great year for goalie prospects? I don't know, more research would be needed for that. Maybe I was generous by putting Vasilevski on the NHL starter list already. Or maybe the answer is between the two once again but we just don't know that when only looking at two years. If someone has older prospect reports, perhaps check which names were mentioned in them.

Some of you may say that we shouldn't look at all the names on the list but rather the top-20 or something. Fair enough but then you'd lose Vasilevski and Andersen from the 2012 list, dropping that year from 4/29 (13.8%) to 2/20 (10%). Of course the 2011 list would go up from 2/32 (6.25%) to 2/20 (10%). In either case, the average success rate is 10%. And by success I mean finding an NHL starter. I don't care about backup goalies in fantasy hockey. But more data would be needed to know if that's anywhere near the truth.

(In case someone wants to add Allen to the list of NHL starters, that means 15% success rate if looking at top-20 and 13.3% if looking at all the names on the lists.)

For what it's worth, the 2013 report only had the same names (Gibson, Jones, Vasilevski and Andersen) who have become NHL starters but I think it's a bit too early to close the book on some of the names there (mostly Fucale, Jarry and Comrie), so that's why I didn't go any further than 2012 on my analysis.

[stevegamer]

While I agree generally with the longshot odds of finding goalies, I disagree with a few things regarding designations.

1. Mrazek has to be "NHL Starter" not potential. He started something like 50 games last year, and was Detroit's starter. My thinking is that if you did this list last year, he's clearly listed as a starter. Once you do something, you've done it, period. He's 24, and this is his first poor year.

2. I suspect there are more guys capable of becoming a NHL starter on the lists than you think, notably Berube & Grubauer, who are 25. Especially with expansion coming, it's certainly too soon to rule them out.

It's unlikely we will see many Chad Johnson type careers where a guy becomes a starter at 29/30, but one of those could happen as well. I am defining Johnson as a starter since he's starting most of his team's games. I know he wasn't supposed to be that guy the last two years.

[Sulla]

That was my thoughts re Grubauer - interested to see what he does in Vegas

[Jouko-Pouko]

While I agree generally with the longshot odds of finding goalies, I disagree with a few things regarding designations.

1. Mrazek has to be "NHL Starter" not potential. He started something like 50 games last year, and was Detroit's starter. My thinking is that if you did this list last year, he's clearly listed as a starter. Once you do something, you've done it, period. He's 24, and this is his first poor year.

2. I suspect there are more guys capable of becoming a NHL starter on the lists than you think, notably Berube & Grubauer, who are 25. Especially with expansion coming, it's certainly too soon to rule them out.

It's unlikely we will see many Chad Johnson type careers where a guy becomes a starter at 29/30, but one of those could happen as well. I am defining Johnson as a starter since he's starting most of his team's games. I know he wasn't supposed to be that guy the last two years.

I actually had Mrazek as a starter but then changed it because he's been what, the 3rd best goalie in Detroit this season?

I think the ship has definitely sailed on Berube. The Islanders ruined him when he didn't really get any games for two years. I doubt Grubauer does anything significant either but sure, there's a small chance of that happening. But would you really hold on to a prospect all they way from his prospect times until he's 29/30 and becomes a starter? Most likely not. We're talking about ~10 years of holding onto someone. So from the point of view of the fantasy hockey GM who drafted him, that player is still a bust. Someone else picks up that player from FA/WW and looks like a genius for a year or two before that goalie once again becomes worthless and goes back to FA/WW. I'm not sure I'd call that "success" either.

Maybe I'm a bit harsh but I'm just not placing much value on a goalie like Chad Johnson. Goalies like him definitely have value in 1-year leagues but not so much in keeper leagues. I doubt anyone is able to sell him right now as an NHL starter. Most people think he cannot continue being that, so they wouldn't buy at that price. So yeah, different angle of looking at things but I appreciate your feedback.

[butch]

the door is actually just opening for Berube in ny though JP ; fwiw he looked pretty good v.s kings considering his lack of playing time .

appreciate the list though -certainly makes you wonder how tough it is to become an nhl G

- - - Updated - - -

the door is actually just opening for Berube in ny though JP ; fwiw he looked pretty good v.s kings considering his lack of playing time .

appreciate the list though -certainly makes you wonder how tough it is to become an nhl G

[Axeman33]

Goes to show you just how hard it is to figure out prospect goalies and how you can't put much stock into them.

It also shows that you can't give up on kids who are 21/22 years of age playing in the AHL. Still plenty of time for them to come around and prove something.

- - - Updated - - -

Goes to show you just how hard it is to figure out prospect goalies and how you can't put much stock into them.

It also shows that you can't give up on kids who are 21/22 years of age playing in the AHL. Still plenty of time for them to come around and prove something.

[Jouko-Pouko]

the door is actually just opening for Berube in ny though JP ; fwiw he looked pretty good v.s kings considering his lack of playing time .

appreciate the list though -certainly makes you wonder how tough it is to become an nhl G

Allow me to put my thoughts in another way. If you draft a goalie prospect, you don't do it hoping they become someone like Berube or Chad Johnson. You hope they become John Gibson or Martin Jones. You probably pick up a goalie like Berube or Chad Johnson for free from FA/WW or you pay very little to acquire him when you think he might have an opportunity to get some games at the NHL level. If you spend a high draft pick on them, you're probably not happy with the return of your investment.

I'm definitely not saying Berube won't be an NHL goalie. I just don't see any potential to become an NHL starter - someone who regularly gets 50+ games a year. He could do well in a 1A/1B situation but I don't see him being a starter.

Hopefully this clarifies my list a bit. I was thinking about goalie prospects who make you happy you drafted them. My designation was pretty much: "If I drafted this goalie prospect 5 years ago, would I be happy with that right now?" I doubt anyone is looking to draft a goalie prospect, wait 8 (or 10) years and then enjoy 1 year of moderate success.

[nickchau2000]

Good discussion here. Goalie's can really come out of nowhere and become NHL regulars with the right opportunity (Talbot was undrafted). But sometimes there are guys who seem like surefire goalies who work out that way (Price), and sometimes who just implode (DiPietro). Out of all the positions, G's are easily the most volatile, and they are probably the most susceptible to the quality of their organization and coaching systems.

I've had Vasilevski for 3 years now just waiting and waiting for it to turn out golden. Still optimistic, but by no means a guarantee. I'm also holding out for Samsonov and Sorokin, but know I'm probably gonna have to wait another 3-4 years before we get any clarity on what they'll turn out to be.

- - - Updated - - -

Good discussion here. Goalie's can really come out of nowhere and become NHL regulars with the right opportunity (Talbot was undrafted). But sometimes there are guys who seem like surefire goalies who work out that way (Price), and sometimes who just implode (DiPietro). Out of all the positions, G's are easily the most volatile, and they are probably the most susceptible to the quality of their organization and coaching systems.

I've had Vasilevski for 3 years now just waiting and waiting for it to turn out golden. Still optimistic, but by no means a guarantee. I'm also holding out for Samsonov and Sorokin, but know I'm probably gonna have to wait another 3-4 years before we get any clarity on what they'll turn out to be.

[Tobias Funke]

It really is by far the position with the least linear or predictable path of development.

[stevegamer]

Doing analysis with active players is tricky, and not having access to rankings form a long time ago means one is sort of stuck doing that. I appreciate that difficulty, and the discussion is good.

I actually had Mrazek as a starter but then changed it because he's been what, the 3rd best goalie in Detroit this season?

The problem with doing this is that it is essentially deciding to ignore what has actually happened and pretending that it hasn't happened. It doesn't matter that he's been the 3rd best goalie this year, since he was the best goalie last year, and was the starter. If Gibson tanks completely next season, does that mean he wasn't the starter for the Ducks this season?

When you decide to define "have become NHL starters" to essentially mean "guys I'm willing to have on my roster moving forward because I think they can still be NHL starters" that opens up all sorts of problems. It's either become starters or not, or define something that talks about being a quality starter over multiple years, but then pretty much none of these guys qualify.

Your clarification helps a lot, but if you are looking for guys who have more than 1 year of success as a pure starter, excluding tandems your list is:

Andersen
Jones

Including tandems gets you Gibson, since he was a co-starter with Andersen last year. He started one more game than Adnersen, but got into 3 less.

The real lesson is simply "don't draft prospect goalies". If they aren't really close tho the NHL, let someone else waste the spot.