I've come to measure success by the number of final fours a team makes. I lifted the idea of measuring team success in terms of pennants, as Lowetide does, and expanded it to include the conference finalists. By measuring team success in Final Fours, we can balance and crudely compare team success in the modern era to team success in the pre-expansion era. I'm aware that the odds are different, but we're talking about crude measurements. Lowetide explains it:
Before expansion in 1967, there were only 6 teams so getting your name on the Stanley was a lot easier than it is now with 30 teams. I'm not saying it was easy, but from 1928-1967 there are extremely few Norm Ullmans (guys who had terrific, borderline HOF careers without winning the Stanley) and since then there are several Norm Ullmans retiring each season.
I've kept a running list of goaltenders who have reached the Final Four since the lockout for three years, and 2010-11 is the first "year of the goaltender".
The number at the left is the individual save percentage rank in the NHL that season for qualifying goalies. In this case a "qualifying season" is one in which the goaltender played in 25 regular season games or more. In 05-06 there were 47 qualifying goalies, in 06-07 there were 44, 07-08 there were 44, in 08-09 there were 56 and the number of qualifiers in 09-10 was 47 and there were 47 again in 10-11. The number to the right is the individual save percentage rank in the NHL since the lockout based on qualified goalies with more than a single season. There are 68 such goalies since 05-06.
|Yr. Rank||2005-2006||Ovr. Rank|
2010-2011 was the first year that saw three goaltenders in the top ten in post-lockout save percentage make the Final Four. So does the NHL have a trend towards goaltending being the key to a cup, or did a few excellent teams catch their goaltenders at the right time and made their run?