Henrik Lundqvist Hasn't Been Great, but 2014-15 Struggles Are Being Overblown

If there is one New York Ranger who draws more criticism at times than he should, it is no doubt Henrik Lundqvist—and I can understand why. He's a man blessed with stunning looks and skills, and he is one of the NHL's richest and most talented netminders to boot.

He is expected and paid to deliver, so when he struggles, it is easy for him to draw criticism from fans and the media.

Most detractors take umbrage with Lundqvist's moniker "the King" for the simple fact that he has never won a Stanley Cup. They also look at Lundqvist's $8.5 million cap hit and wonder at times why he isn't providing the team with the most bang for its buck (even though statistically he’s proved to be one of the league’s most consistent netminders year in and year out).

After a frustrating 6-3 loss against the Tampa Bay Lightning, Larry Brooks of the New York Post posted a column with the title: "Lundqvist’s head-scratching regression is killing the Rangers." The column speaks to the fact that the Rangers' starting netminder has posted dreadful numbers through the first two months of the season, and it is hurting the Rangers.

"

Lundqvist’s save percentage dropped to .905, 31st in the 30-team league among goaltenders with 10 or more starts after Monday’s misadventure in which he surrendered five goals on 20 shots — including a back-breaking softie for the winner — in the Blueshirts’ 6-3 empty-net-abetted defeat by the Lightning at the Garden that marked the team’s third loss in three games within 15 days to conference-leading Tampa Bay.

"

Interestingly enough, after a shoddy October, Lundqvist finished November with a 2.05 GAA, .927 save percentage and three shutouts. 

The backbreaking softie was a shot by Brett Connolly on the power play (in which the team's overall defense was average at best). Ryan McDonagh attempted to block the shot and screened Lundqvist in the process, but that's beside the point. 

While Brooks makes a valid point that Lundqvist's overall save percentage is poor, is he really regressing, or has he been a victim of circumstance early on this season?

While the .905 save percentage stat is low, there are other numbers in 2014 that can help paint a clearer picture of overall statistics and what they mean. If you go to NHL.com, you can see a breakdown of save percentage by situation—and a closer look explains why Lundqvist's overall save percentage is .905.

Not all on-ice situations are equal. There are some in which goalies will make the majority of their saves, and other situations in which they will allow the majority of their goals. When there is a disproportion in variables that includes shots, goals and saves, the result is a skewed overall save percentage.

Therefore, I find that a systematic look at performance by situation gives the most accurate look at a particular goaltender's performance.

Situation	Goals Allowed	Shots Faced	Saves	Save Percentage
5-on-5	35	448	413	.922
SH	14	78	64	.821
PP	2	10	8	.833
TOTAL	51	538	487	.905

While Lundqvist's overall save percentage is poor, his five-on-five numbers are decent.

In five-on-five situations, Lundqvist has faced 448 shots—the sixth-most in the NHL—and he's stopped 413 of them. When you do the math, he has an even strength save percentage of .922 (a number that is more than decent, and one that isn't "crippling the Rangers").

While it isn't among the top 10 in the NHL by any stretch, it is 16th amongst starters who have played at least 15 games. I used 15 because there are a number of platoons in which goalies have exactly 10 starts, and they really aren't starters in the most logical sense of the word.

Of those who have faced more shots that Lundqvist, only Jonathan Quick (with a .936 ESSV%) and Pekka Rinne (at a .946 ESSV%) have drastically better numbers than Lundqvist's.

Kari Lehtonen of the Dallas Stars has a worse total with a .915 ESSV%, Cory Schneider sits above him with a .931 ESSV% and Carey Price has a .929 ESSV%. 

It should be noted that Schneider has played in the most games of all netminders this season, and he’s also faced the most amount of shots at even strength—thus inflating his numbers just slightly.

So if Lundqvist is just below the middle of the pack for save percentage at even strength that is relative to the amount of shots that he has faced, why are his overall numbers so paltry? 

When looking at save percentage and goals allowed, the area in which Lundqvist has struggled the most is when his team is killing a penalty. That really isn't a huge shocker, because most goalies are at their worst when they have to do extra work.

More often than not, Lundqvist has made the tough saves, only for a failed clearing attempt to end up in the back of the net. Below is a perfect example of how Lundqvist usually stands on his head during the power play.

Of the top starters in the league, only Fredrik Andersen, Corey Crawford and Marc-Andre Fleury have a save percentage over .915—a benchmark that most would accept as a reasonable number—while their respective teams are killing a penalty.

Lundqvist has faced 78 shots while his team has been shorthanded, and the Rangers PK has allowed 14 goals. I bring this up because even though they are on the ice when a goal is scored, they don't pay for their failings in any way, whereas Lundqvist does.

There has been a number of goals allowed this season in which Lundqvist has had no chance, and those goals include tip ins and shots for which he was screened, etc.

Jared Silber/Getty Images

In theory, you could make an excuse for almost every power-play goal allowed, but I won't do that. Instead, I am just trying to highlight how a certain small sample size situation is drastically skewing his overall numbers and the perception of his play.

The low amount of shots and relatively high amount of goals allowed in power-play situations translates to a .821 save percentage for Lundqvist this season.

For the sake of comparison, Jimmy Howard of the Detroit Red Wings has faced the same amount of shots, but he's allowed seven fewer goals (so his save percentage is .910). At this point you may be asking what is the point of this comparison, but rest assured there is one.

For one, the difference between .910 and .821 is huge, both in perception and actuality. Seven goals separates Lundqvist from having an acceptable save percentage and a bad one, so it makes sense to analyze when and how he is struggling.

The main situation in which Lundqvist has struggled has been when his team is shorthanded. During those situations he's been forced to overcome a major obstacle. While elite goaltenders are supposed to always overcome this force of adversity, the rest of his team has to assume some responsibility as well.

Like I mentioned above, the Rangers PK has allowed 14 goals while Henrik is in net, but only Lundqvist has paid the price statistically. A perfect example of this has been when the Rangers have played the Tampa Bay Lightning, and Lundqvist has been in situations in which the team's lack of playing defense directly resulted in goals against.

Here are two situations involving former captain Ryan Callahan scoring on the power play with relative ease, because he was loosely defended. 

After watching the two clips, can you reasonably say that Lundqvist was 100 percent at fault?

It doesn't matter what you think, because the NHL doesn't as they count it as a power-play goal against Lundqvist regardless of who is at fault.

It doesn't impact the Rangers forwards and defenders in any way statistically, but their lack of action negatively impacts Lundqvist's overall numbers and the perception of his play.

Getting back to the original point raised by Brooks, I would wholeheartedly agree that if you look at his overall save percentage of .905 and goals-against average of 2.70 it is easy to assume that he has regressed. It is also easy to see him being in the state of regression after surrendering five goals on 20 shots versus Tampa Bay.

Jared Silber/Getty Images

But if you factor in that the area in which he is most vulnerable is the driving force for his declining numbers, it starts to make sense why his overall numbers are as bad as they are.

After all of this, don't think I am defending Lundqvist's play this season (because I am the first to admit when he is struggling). Lundqvist clearly hasn't been his usually elite self, and he realizes this. He admitted as much after the Rangers' loss to the Lightning.

From Brooks' cited article above:

"I was trying to look around screens and couldn’t find the puck a couple of times [and] I didn’t pick up the second goal or the fourth goal until they were just about past me. The bottom line is I have to fight better to pick up the puck through screens. Obviously this was not good enough."

While Lundqvist admits he hasn't been good enough, I feel that his struggles are being overblown and that he's an easy target for Blueshirts struggles this year.

I guess that comes with the territory of being the league's highest-paid goaltender. It should be noted that he is a slow starter. Here's a look at his troubling slow start last year, and how he rebounded.

Month	Record	GAA	Sv%
January	3-4-0	2.79	.904
February	5-3-1	1.98	.928
March	6-6-1	2.05	.928
April	4-1-1	1.79	.940
Totals	33-24-5	2.36	.920

Things look bleak now, but the stats certainly tell a different story. Lundqvist can and needs to be better, without question, but the brakes need to be pumped on the notion that his regression is costing the team games. 

The Rangers schedule is light over the next two weeks, and it will provide Lundqvist an opportunity to get back on track. 

Stats as of December 2 before play started. Stats via NHL.com, ESPN.com, Hockey-Reference unless otherwise noted.