However, that is not what the data showed. What was found is that the amount of shutouts spiked just above of the average shots per game of 27 from season 1980 to 2013. Why would shutouts spike above the average shots per game though?
One theory I believe makes sense is that teams with less shots per game have invested in good defense, not necessarily spending big money for a superstar goaltender, and thus giving up goals with the defense not giving up a lot of shots. Teams that average a lot of shots (over 30) per game, invest in a very good goaltender instead of a top notch defense. Thus, giving up a lot of shots where even a great goaltender will have trouble keeping teams to a shutout.
This leaves us with the middle. Teams that invest in a good goaltender and a good defense. Not great, not poor, but a good balance of defense and goaltending. These are the teams that are able to shutout their opponents. The defense keeps teams to enough shots in order for their goaltender to have a reasonable chance of getting a shutout. Of course, it is possible for teams to have a great defense and a great goaltender in the data with there being no cap pre 2004 and teams not paying quality defensemen and goaltenders market value in their early years,. However in the cap system we see now, this is more difficult to get great goaltending AND a great overall defense. Teams need to find a good balance of defense and goaltending, as relying on one or the other to win games may not be a solid plan.
An example of this system is the St. Louis Blues in 2011-2012. They had a decent goaltender in Brian Elliot, with a very good defense as well. They averaged 25 shot against per game, but Elliot was still able to put up 9 shutouts.
If you have another theory about this, please feel free to comment on the story.
No comments:
Post a Comment