Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Is Adebayor About To Become A Full-Time Spur?

A (Modest) Defense of Jeff Deslauriers

Defending Jeff Deslauriers, in these parts, is not an easy thing to do.

The truth is that Jeff Deslauriers is not a particularly good NHL goaltender and everyone knows it. So the defense seems to have failed before it has begun. Some of his champions have favoured unfortunate and now-infamous backside-related statements of confidence, which has further eroded Jeff's credibility. And, of course, watching him every game, we Oiler fans grow infuriated at his gaffes: his puckhandling, his seemingly inalienable ability to let in elementary-school goals on the short side. We watch, essentially, Ty Conklin except without that one year where he nearly saved us from Tommy Salo and got all our hopes up.

Also, Conklin? A surprisingly good puckhandler. But that's neither here nor there.

The truth is that, when we began this season, Jeff Deslauriers was the backup. Number two with a bullet, as they say. He ought not to have appeared in many games at all, but then Nikolai Khabibulin got hurt and the rest is history. So a young man has been forced into a role he's wasn't ready for and we, as fans, have suffered the consequences.

Bear that in mind, and Jeff Deslauriers hasn't actually been bad. Certainly, he's been good value to the Oilers, who pay him approximately six bucks an hour. Compared to his fellow backups, his save percentage isn't too bad, particularly when you consider the epic failure that is his defense (call it the reverse of "Brodeur is a fraud"). He hasn't blown the barn doors off and he shouldn't make any NHL GM pencil him in for a handsome $2 million offer sheet when he goes restricted in July. But, compared to his peers, Deslauriers has been pretty handsome value for the Oilers

Star-divide

Any defense or assault on a goaltender obviously needs to be compared to other goaltenders. Three teams in the NHL - Atlanta, Boston, and Montreal - have platooned their goaltenders and have no clear backup. For the other twenty-six non-Edmonton teams, I pulled the save percentages and the cap hits of the goaltenders who have played the second-most games for them. Note that this therefore ignores deadline trades: Jean-Sebastien Giguere is a Duck, Vesa Toskala is a Maple Leaf, and so forth. This is the closest thing to a fair method I could devise. Then I threw Jeff Deslauriers into the mix to see where he would come up.

The usual caveats to a backup goaltender's save percentage applies: the sample size will be smaller and the backup will, as a rule, be facing lousier teams. That's why he's the backup. Therefore, your average backup 'tender will have a somewhat inflated save percentage compared to his actual ability.

Deslauriers clocks in at a tie for fifteenth in save percentage among these twenty-seven goaltenders with a .900 save percentage. This is a shade below the median, which is between Mathieu Garon's .905 and Martin Biron's .902. A lot of the guys above him on the list ought, however, to be starting. Columbus, for example, runs out Steve Mason and his .898 save percentage. Antti Niemi's .909 is seventh among backups, preposterous when his starter Cristobal Huet is posting a .899. Chris Mason in St. Louis has a not-bad .911 save percentage, but Ty Conklin's .922 is off the freakin' hook.

So, in exchange for this marginally sub-par for a backup performance, Deslauriers is paid significantly below par. His 2009-10 cap hit of $625,000 is twenty-first among backups by this measurement, against an average of $1,385,222. So, in exchange for a fairly marginal drop in performance to a median backup - in a 2,000-shot season, the difference between Jeff Deslauriers and Martin Biron is four goals - we're getting Zack Stortini's cap hit, or Aaron Johnson plus a bit, or close enough to Gilbert Brule that the rest is a matter of demoting two-way contracts at the right time. And I'm not unconvinced that the .002 between Biron and Deslauriers isn't just the difference between playing behind the New York Islanders defense and playing behind a defense whose fourth-best healthy member is Jason Strudwick.

Now, this isn't show-stopping stuff. Deslauriers provides tolerable play at a pretty good price, and that's not going to win or lose you the Stanley Cup. But it sure helps. This team has a lot of problems, but if Jeff Deslauriers returned for $800,000 next year as the backup, he wouldn't be one of them.

Comment 19 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I’ll agree with most of that, with the caveat that as long as Khabibulin’s the starter the Oilers will need a 1A as a backup, which Deslauriers is not.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Mar 23, 2010 7:02 AM MDT reply actions  

JDD would have been a good backup option when Roli was playing 65 games a season. Cheap and can come in provide replacement level goaltending for a low price. But he’s not a 35 game starter, and if the Oilers have to pay any sort of premium on him he loses any sort of value.

If he gets a raise in to the $1mil area, he’s a liability.

by dawgbone98 on Mar 23, 2010 8:33 AM MDT reply actions  

Well he would have been a good backup option if they ever f@#$ing used him as such. Starting Roli in 36 straight games was a real problem last year IMO.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Mar 23, 2010 9:01 AM MDT up reply actions  

But that’s exactly the point though… I’d have JDD in that situation there, where my started plays an obscene amount of games in a row.

Playing Roli in 36 straight games wasn’t an issue.

Playing Roli in 36 straight games while not being able to find out what you had in JDD while there were 3 goalies on the team was. It was the first half of the season that was the issue.

by dawgbone98 on Mar 23, 2010 4:05 PM MDT up reply actions  

I believe that Dubnyk has the higher ceiling than JDD, even though his numbers up until this weekend didn’t bear that out. He just seems so much more cool and confident, and although he’s not a good puckhandler either, at least he’s not constantly passing the puck past his defensemen and onto an opposing forward’s stick.

Since both of them are restricted this summer, and both would need to pass through waivers to be sent to Oklahoma next year, what does Tambellini do? He wouldn’t bring back the dreaded 3-headed monster in goal, would he? Didn’t work 2 seasons ago, won’t work again.

by jonnybluejay on Mar 23, 2010 8:55 AM MDT reply actions  

But Deslauriers should be paid cheaply right now, at this stage

One thing about salary is that some of these guys were UFAs and had more bargaining power than JDD. He should be getting less, as he doesn’t have any kind of hammer in negotiations, neither freedom nor performance.

From what I’ve seen, I continue to be a Dubnykobor, rather than a Deslauriersite. Deslauriers has million dollar reflexes and 10-cent positioning in net, coupled with 5-cent puckhandling. He might be a good, dependable goalie after 200 more games in the AHL/KHL/SEL, but he’s not going to be one any time soon.

Dubnyk is somewhat closer. He can handle the puck. He’s calm. He maintains better position in net. He’s not so athletic, but he’s bigger.

Dubnyk can be the backup next year, IMO.

 

by David Staples @ The Cult of Hockey on Mar 23, 2010 10:22 AM MDT reply actions  

Of course he should be cheaper than, say, Martin Biron, but that’s not really the point. If we’re just looking at the value Edmonton is getting from its backup position, Deslauriers is one of the best and the reasons why his contract is so good are, for the purposes of this comparison, irrelevant.

by Benjamin Massey on Mar 23, 2010 10:41 AM MDT up reply actions  

The problem, as others have noted, is that going into the season we knew that it was very likely that Deslauriers needed to play in about thirty games because Khabibulin had averaged about a 50-game workload in the four season prior to coming to Edmonton. There was also no convincing statistical evidence that Deslauriers would end up being as good as he’s been (which is to say, not all that good). If we go into next season with similar expectations for Khabibulin of 50 games and recognize that the downside risk could be that he plays far less, I think it’s wise to go with a more established option. I’d much prefer a goalie with a longer track record of solid performance even if it does cost substantially more (I’m thinking a budget of 1.5 to 2 million).

by Scott Reynolds on Mar 23, 2010 11:06 AM MDT reply actions  

Would you really rather have four to six goals against from your backup goaltender and no, say, Zack Stortini or Mike Comrie?

by Benjamin Massey on Mar 23, 2010 11:14 AM MDT up reply actions  

Well, I think your question is pretty flawed given the Oilers’ situation. It seems to assume a couple of things that I wouldn’t: (1) Jeff Deslauriers is a good bet to be a .900 goalie next season and (2) the available replacements are a good bet to be between .900 and .905. I don’t think that either of those are very good assumptions. Deslauriers’ AHL performance has been pretty bad and his statistical performance this season may end being at the high end of his ability. I wouldn’t want to take that risk. We just don’t have enough data to say that Deslauriers is a .900 goalie. If that was the line and we’re talking thirty games played, I’d probably take the under.

On the other point, I think the range of outcomes for many of the replacements would be far better than the range of outcomes for Deslauriers. You arrived at your 4-6 goal estimate with a comparison to Biron’s weakest statistical season in years. That season is being dragged down by a very poor PK save percentage (.823), which is very likely to come back toward average next year. His EV save percentage of .921 dwarfs Deslauriers’ .905 and is probably a better reflection of the gap in talent between the two.

.905, incidentally, is tied for 49th among goalies who have faced at least 200 shots. There are 59 goalies who met that standard. There are a lot of goalies well ahead of him this season and have a much stronger track record of performance that are going to be UFAs. In my opinion, the 4-6 goals figure is the number you’d get if your replacement had an off year if he ends up playing a 2000 shot season. The difference could end up being much, much larger. I think it’s reasonable to think that a guy like Biron or Mason could well shake loose may for a price between 1.5M and 2M.

But even if I grant that Biron will have another terrible year on the PK and only be a little bit better than Deslauriers overall, then yes, I still think it’s worth the extra (roughly) $1M. I’m not sure exactly how much a marginal goal costs on the UFA market but I’d be willing to bet that $300k is a good price (Deslauriers’ salary of $700k + 1.2M in extra cost for the “4 goals above Deslauriers”) and that would be at the low end of expectations.

by Scott Reynolds on Mar 23, 2010 12:42 PM MDT up reply actions  

I’m not sure exactly how much a marginal goal costs on the UFA market but I’d be willing to bet that $300k is a good price

It’s gotta be less. Conklin, Roloson, Anderson, Biron, Legace, Labarbera, Clemmensen, Fernandez and Nittymaki were the possible tenders.

The average salary of that collection is 1.2 million with Fernandez unsigned. The goalie glut has actually worsened, so I see no reason that you can’t use 1.2 as a benchmark.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Mar 23, 2010 11:32 PM MDT up reply actions  

It might be less and probably would be but I think, even if it were 300k per marginal goal, it would still be a good deal on the UFA market overall.

by Scott Reynolds on Mar 24, 2010 2:02 PM MDT up reply actions  

When you calculate dollars per marginal goal, are you counting in marginal dollars?

That might sound facetious, but it’s a serious question. What I mean is, are you calculating $$$ based on the entire cap, or on what’s available over and above the base payroll of your replacement level players. I would tend to take it a step further and set the marginal $$$ at the difference between the cap floor and the cap ceiling, “discretionary spending” if you will. In that range, $300 K per goal seems high to me. For example, in 2009-10 the difference between floor and ceiling is $16 MM, and the difference between a good team and a bad one (let’s call them “Caps” and “Oilers”) is closing in on 160 marginal goals, or $100 marginal K per marginal G.

I haven’t spent much time thinking on this so feel free to fill me in. (Is there a good introductory article somehwere?) If I were doing it one approach might be to try to establish a “replacement level” team with context to the salary cap, I wouldn’t just assume 20 guys at the minimum cuz that’s illegal. Instead I would make up an imaginary structure by role, and assign a value to a replacement level at each position. On the 4th line and 3rd pairing that would indeed be the minimum, but a replacement-level top 6 forward might be a couple million or whatever, with an entire 23-man “base payroll” that would add up to the cap floor.

Another method would be to establish a median salary (say 1/23 of the cap floor or the given team’s payroll) and to fold that in to your calculations. Perhaps you are doing something like that already.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Mar 24, 2010 3:11 PM MDT up reply actions  

In the above example I was counting on top of what you were going to pay Deslauriers figuring Ben was saying that “Goalie X” is four to six goals better than Jeff rather than four to six goals better than “replacement level”. So, assuming 700k for Deslauriers + (300k per win * 4 wins) = 1.9M.

I’ve never read anyone who tried to extract just the money between the floor and the ceiling. It doesn’t strike me as being particularly helpful. I get that you can’t have all min. wage players but trying to use just that money would require a lot of extra work (pigeon-holing players into roles, assigning value to various spots in the lineup etc.) and I don’t think you gain anything from doing it that way.

by Scott Reynolds on Mar 24, 2010 3:52 PM MDT up reply actions  

$300 K per marginal goal or per marginal win? It’s kind of a big difference.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Mar 24, 2010 7:42 PM MDT up reply actions  

Good question! Marginal goal. My bad.

by Scott Reynolds on Mar 24, 2010 8:36 PM MDT up reply actions  

Take note – Brownlee writes a mean-spirited “I told you so”, Deslauriers falls apart.

You write a nice defense and the guy shuts down the Canucks.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Mar 23, 2010 11:33 PM MDT reply actions  

Brownlee ain’t no common blogger, he carries more weight!

by dawgbone98 on Mar 24, 2010 8:16 AM MDT up reply actions  

I guess I’ve shoved it up the backsides of my critics once and for all…

DAMMIT! I promised myself I wasn’t going to make any of those jokes!

by Benjamin Massey on Mar 24, 2010 8:48 AM MDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Oilers Next Head Coach
Small
Josh Anderson Scouting Report
Small
The 2012 NHL Draft and Combine - the Fanpost Almanac
Chambers-john_small
Risk Reward Radulov
Small
Joonas Korpisalo Scouting Report
2012-01-21-012338_small
Oilers Prospect Frans Tuohimaa Signs an Extension with Jokerit
Small
Ryan Murray - The Numbers
Chambers-john_small
Cody Hodgson, the game within the game, and inattention to detail
Small
Hong Kong Animators Draw NHL Violence
Small
Is Ryan Murray more NHL-ready than we think?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

32 - 40 - 10

Lost 3

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (27-11, .711)
  2. St. Louis Blues (24-10, .706)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (22-10, .688)
  4. Los Angeles Kings (18-11, .621)
  5. San Jose Sharks (18-13, .581)
  6. Phoenix Coyotes (20-15, .571)
  7. Nashville Predators (18-14, .563)
  8. Chicago Blackhawks (21-19, .525)
  9. Colorado Avalanche (16-19, .457)
  10. Dallas Stars (18-22, .450)
  11. Anaheim Ducks (14-19, .424)
  12. Edmonton Oilers (18-25, .419)
  13. Calgary Flames (13-21, .382)
  14. Columbus Blue Jackets (14-31, .311)
  15. Minnesota Wild (8-22,.267)

Eastern Conference

  1. Pittsburgh Penguins (31-13, .711)
  2. Boston Bruins (27-11, .711)
  3. New York Rangers (25-16, .610)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (21-17, .553)
  5. New Jersey Devils (18-16, .529)
  6. Ottawa Senators (19-17, .528)
  7. Washington Capitals (20-19, .513)
  8. Montreal Canadiens (16-19, .457)
  9. Winnipeg Jets (15-19, .441)
  10. Buffalo Sabres (14-18, .438)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (13-17, .433)
  12. Florida Panthers (14-19, .424)
  13. Toronto Maple Leafs (17-24, .415)
  14. New York Islanders (8-23, .258)
  15. Tampa Bay Lightning (10-30, .250)

Division Standings

  1. Central (79-58, .577)
  2. Atlantic (68-50, .576)
  3. Pacific (62-54, .534)
  4. Northeast (69-65, .515)
  5. Northwest (49-69, .415)
  6. Southeast (51-81, .386)


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Small Alan Hull

Contributors

Newtwitter2_small Jonathan Willis

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL