Goalie gets a T for an EAG GTG?

[rhovorka]

OK, I had enough time to look for it.

From http://www.ncaa.org/library/statistical/ice_hockey_stats_manual/2004/2004IceHockeyStatsManual.pdf

[Q]OFFICIAL 2004 ICE HOCKEY STATISTICS RULES

SECTION 6—GOALTENDING
Article 1. In a non-tie game, whoever is in goal for each team when the game-winning goal is scored receives credit for the win or loss. In a tie game, whoever is in goal for each team when the game-tying goal is scored receives credit for the tie. If either net is empty when the GWG or GTG is scored, the goaltender of record is the goaltender that was pulled to create the empty-net situation. If a game ends in a 0-0 tie, the goaltender receiving credit for the tie for each team shall be the goaltender that started the game in the net.

Article 2. To determine won-lost-tied percentage, divide the number of decisions into the number of games won (each tie game is computed as half won and half lost).

Article 3. If two or more goaltenders from the same team participate in a shutout, credit the team with a shutout but do not award any goaltender an individual shutout. A goaltender must be solely responsible for holding the opposition scoreless to be credited with a shutout.

Note: Empty net time (i.e., during a delayed penalty call) does not preclude a goaltender from being awarded a shutout.

Article 4. A save for a goaltender and a shot on goal for a player or team shall be credited only when the goaltender has prevented the puck from entering the net, and must be recorded on each occasion that the goaltender prevents a goal. If a member of the goaltender's own team directed the puck at the goal, then a shot on goal shall be recorded for the last opposing player to have touched the puck. A team's shots on goal always must equal the sum of the team's goals and the opposing goaltender's saves.

Article 5. Each goaltending change shall be clearly indicated in the official game summary. It is not sufficient to record only total minutes played and saves. The length of each shift and the saves recorded in each shift (broken down by periods) shall be recorded each time a goaltending change occurs. A change occurs whenever one goaltender relieves another, a goaltender is pulled for an extra attacker, or a goaltender goes into the game following an empty-net situation.

Article 6. Any goal scored while a goaltender is clearly on the way to the bench in favor of an extra attacker or on the bench will be considered an empty net goal. If the goaltender returns to the crease at any time while entering or exiting the ice, and has a legitimate chance at making the save on an empty-net shooting opportunity, then they must be credited or charged with the result of the shot on goal. A goaltender's minutes played cease when the player disengages from play and begin again when the player returns to play. If the goaltender returns to play without leaving the ice, continue the minutes played as if the player never left the crease.

Article 7. When Team Blue's goaltender is pulled during a delayed penalty, subtract the time off the ice from the goaltender's minutes played. Additionally, if a goaltender is removed from the ice for a faceoff late in a period, time should be subtracted from the goaltender's minutes played.[/q]

[rhovorka]

[Q]While we're on the subject of "what if"s....say the goalie is out of position and the puck comes back into the slot where an opposing player takes a shot on goal. A defenseman dives and "saves" the puck. How does that get scored? Is it still a shot on goal? If the game is a shutout, does the goalie get 27 saves on 28 shots?[/Q]
Article 4 of my other post on this thread says that that is not recorded as a shot on goal.

[DeltaOne81]

Ah, the Ice Hockey STAT MANUAL... so close :-}.

-Fred

[jeh25]

[Q]OFFICIAL 2004 ICE HOCKEY STATISTICS RULES

SECTION 6—GOALTENDING
Article 1. If a game ends in a 0-0 tie, the goaltender receiving credit for the tie for each team shall be the goaltender that started the game in the net.

Article 3. If two or more goaltenders from the same team participate in a shutout, credit the team with a shutout but do not award any goaltender an individual shutout. A goaltender must be solely responsible for holding the opposition scoreless to be credited with a shutout.

[/q]

So if Colgate-Yale on Saturday had ended in a 0-0 tie, Cohen, not Modelski, would have gotten the tie? Wierd.

(Modelski was supposed to get the start but had a problem with his chin strap. Thus, Cohen started the game and played the 1st 0:33 while Modelski's chin strap was fixed. Modelski then played the next 64:07.)

[ugarte]

John E Hayes '98 '00 wrote:

So if Colgate-Yale on Saturday had ended in a 0-0 tie, Cohen, not Modelski, would have gotten the tie? Wierd.

(Modelski was supposed to get the start but had a problem with his chin strap. Thus, Cohen started the game and played the 1st 0:33 while Modelski's chin strap was fixed. Modelski then played the next 64:07.)

No.  Yale would get a shutout, but neither goalie would get credit for a shutout (see Article 3).  Article 1 refers to a situation in which a goalie was pulled for an extra attacker, and the game ended with an unscored-upon empty net.  In that case, the shutout would be awarded to the goalie that was pulled (ie, the goalie that started, but did not finish, the game).  This is a similar ruling to the note in Article 3 about giving credit for a shutout even if there was empty-net time during a delayed penalty.

EDIT:  I see you said "tie", not "shutout".  Need to think about it, but had to quickly correct my own error before I was called on it.

EDIT 2: I think your interpretation is right, John.  The rule appears designed to give an injured starting goalie credit for the scoreless tie he had been working on at the time of the injury.  "Why else would a goalie be pulled for a replacement with a shutout?", was the likely thinking behind not allowing any leeway (like the discretionary assignment of wins to relievers in baseball if the starter leaves before 5 innings with a lead).  But if you wait long enough, there will always be a reason. Like a broken chinstrap.



Post Edited (11-14-03 12:37)

[DeltaOne81]

Yup, and it really makes sense... although, a goalie starting for only 33 seconds is certainly an outlier what from is intended. The rules are pretty much intended so that the only way a replacement goalie gets to be the goalie of record, is if something happens that alters the status of the game based on the new goaltender letting a goal / goals in, assuming the old goalie would have been perfect (follow that? if not, the new goalie becomes the goalie of record only if he lets up the GW or GT goal).

Since the replacement in a 0-0 tie has done no such thing, nothing has happened to justify changing the goalie of record, so the starter gets it.

As for the Yale situation, I was never quite clear on why the refs couldn't have just waited a minute for an equipment change. I guess the rules say not to wait after a violation, but they woulda if it was broken equipment or something, I'd think.

[jeh25]

DeltaOne81 '03 wrote:

As for the Yale situation, I was never quite clear on why the refs couldn't have just waited a minute for an equipment change. I guess the rules say not to wait after a violation, but they woulda if it was broken equipment or something, I'd think.

Well, in full disclosure, I oversimplified what really happened for my hypothetical shutout question and in doing so, changed the meaning, at least with regard to your question. My (secondhand) understanding is that Modelski's chin strap was *illegal*, not merely broken. As such,  I suspect the officials were feeling less forgiving than had it merely been broken. That having been said, the correction probably took under 20 s with Modelski coming back during the first stoppage...

[DeltaOne81]

Right, I heard that on my own. Which is why I said I figure the rules say to only wait for broken equipment, but probably not for a violation. Seems rather harsh to me for a 20 second fix though. Oh well :-).

[Dart~Ben]

[Q]Well in baseball, the last pitcher who pitched before the game-winning run gets the win, right?[/Q]

In baseball, the pitchers of record are whoever is pitching when the last lead change occurs, not when the game winner scores. So say Prior and the Cubs are winning 2-1 over Glavine and the Mets. Both get pulled in the 7th, and the Cubs go on to win 6-5.

If the Cubs never surrendered the lead, Prior gets the W, Glavine the L.
If at some point the Mets tied it up or took the lead, then the relievers are the pitchers of record.

And of course this changes if a starter doesn't throw 5 innings. Even if he leaves a game where they're winning 10-0, he does not get the W.

[David Harding \'72]

[q]In baseball, the pitchers of record are whoever is pitching when the last lead change occurs, not when the game winner scores.[/q]
I thought that if a pitcher left the game with a man on base who later scored the winning run, the pither who let him on was responsible, not the one who let him score.

[nyc94]

You are correct.  The pitcher of record is the one that let the go ahead run on base.

[Keith K \'93]

[Q]In baseball, the pitchers of record are whoever is pitching when the last lead change occurs, not when the game winner scores.[/Q]
Strictly speaking it's both.  Baseball does game-winning differently than hockey.  If you win 11-10 but hold the lead from the first inning, the first RBI is the GWRBI.  Or at least that's how it was done in the '80s.  GWRBI has not always been an official stat (and is kind of silly anyway).

[DeltaOne81]

Essentially what we're talking about here is the difference between Game Winning Goal/Run, and "Last Lead". You can go ahead 1-0 and never trail or even be tied, and end up winning 10-9 . The game winning run/goal is your 10th one, the last lead run/goal is your first one.

I know hockey bases goalie stats on game-winning statistics, not on last lead. So much so that when I first saw "(LL)" on College Hockey Stats, I had to email the sites to ask what the heck it meant. I thought baseball's the same way. If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to share. But one thing I do know is hockey does Game Winning.



Post Edited (11-15-03 16:31)

[Keith K \'93]

Hockey definitely does "Game Winning".  I don't have a link to point to about baseball and "Last Lead" - just a strong memory that this was what was called "Game Winning" in baseball when I was growing up.