Is Andrew Hammond the Real Deal?

Scott Miller

By Jacob Wallman

No, but his Ottawa Senators are.

You may be asking yourself “How could that be?”, which is a justifiable reaction, as the man they call “The Hamburglar” (the name of a McDonalds character, who appears Hammond’s goalie helmet) has gone 14-0-3 since being called up from the minors by the Senators, has stopped 94.58% of the shots against him, and has backstopped Ottawa’s meteoric rise into a playoff position. However, I can confidently assign Andrew Hammond “flash in the pan” status.

First of all, his save percentage of 94.58%, while undoubtedly excellent, is not unheard of. Indeed, since February 16th (Hammond’s first start), that is third among starting goalies, and with Cory Schneider threatening to pass him at 94.29%. While being third in the league over a period of around a month is nothing to scoff at, it’s hardly enough to eliminate the possibility that he isn’t really that good.

Second, which he is playing right now, is unprecedented for him. No, not in the AHL, not in college, nor even in the British Columbia Hockey League as a teenager, did Hammond post anything over 91.7%. This year in the minors, he actually took a big step back, posting a sub-par 89.8% for Ottawa’s affiliate in Binghamton. Far from establishing a precedent for Hammond’s recent play, his previous career lends itself towards the conclusion that this has simply been a mediocre player balling (or “pucking”, in this case) out of his mind.

Third and finally, the dip has already begun. Hammond bounced back with another solid performance in his last start, but in the two prior, he allowed a total of seven goals , stopping only 88.33% of shots, all despite the fact that he only faced 7 shots from the slot (which is generally where scoring chances come from) in that time span. The Hamburglar was fun while he lasted (and indeed, it doesn’t seem to be quite over yet), and the guy even got free McDonalds for life out of it, but he is not the real deal.

However, his Ottawa Senators are, as I mentioned before, actually excellent, and they’ve been that way since before Hammond-mania hit town. Since December first (a full two-and-a-half months before Hammond’s call-up), the Senators, who just yesterday jumped into a playoff spot, have been third in the league in Even Strength Corsi For %, and sixth in the league in Even Strength Scoring Chance % (third in the league in that category since the start of the new year). This recent dominance in Scoring Chances can’t be overlooked, as they are actually the more predictive of goals than Corsi or Scoring (as details in this fancy-shmansy statistical article:

This excellence has not just been limited to even strength. Since December first, they have had more Power Play Scoring Chances For than any other team and the league’s 3rd best Scoring Chances Against Per-60 Minutes on the penalty kill.

Furthermore, it’s not even as if they don’t have any options in goal other than Hammond. Though starting goalie Craig Anderson has struggled recently, he still has a solid 92.5% Save Percentage, and backup Robin Lehner, despite a career-worst season, has pulled things together in the last couple months.

“Why the sudden improvement in play?” you might ask. It’s common knowledge that sub-par teams, much like sub-par players (*eghem*Hammond*eghem*) don’t just randomly start being good, and, as it would so happen, there is a concrete reason for the Senators’ surge: on December 8th, they fired head coach Paul MacLean and replaced him with David Cameron (the former NHL player, not the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom).

The Senators have put up outstanding numbers in all areas, and, unlike Andrew Hammond, they have been doing so for a large chunk of the season, with a clear catalyst. Ottawa is absolutely making the playoffs.

4 responses to “Is Andrew Hammond the Real Deal?

  1. You’re an idiot and here’s why:
    -“No, but his Ottawa Senators are.”
    He’s 14-0-1 (not 14-0-3) let’s maybe wait for a loss before we jump to that conclusion.
    -He has the third best save percentage in the NHL since his first start “It’s hardly enough to eliminate the possibility that he isn’t really that good.”
    What an unbelievably stupid thing to say… that’s an argument for him, not against.
    -The first sentence of your next paragraph doesn’t even make sense.
    -You said the word pucking.
    -“…finally, the dip has already begun.”
    In his last game he stopped 29 of 31 to set an NHL record and go 14-0-1.
    -Since December 1st, while playing so well, they are 12-14-5 without Hammond and 14-0-1 with him. While you’re correct in saying that they’re playing better than they were earlier in the season, you’re a f*cking idiot for implying that he isn’t the reason they’re winning.
    -“It’s not even as though they don’t have any options in goal other than Hammond”.
    This sentence is a structural nightmare. To make matters worse, after reading it for the fourth time and finally understanding what you mean, I found out the point is completely irrelevant. Please don’t waste people’s time in the future and just keep your garbled thoughts to yourself.
    -“…backup Robin Lehner… has pulled things together in the last couple months.”
    In the last couple months, Robin Lehner has barely played. When he has, he’s gone 3-5-1. In his last 15 games he’s let in 4+ goals 8 times to Hammond’s 1.
    -The Senators have put up outstanding numbers in all areas, and, unlike Andrew Hammond, they have been doing so for a large chunk of the season
    The only numbers that matter are W-L. Without Hammy, they’re 11-18. With him they’re 14-1
    -“Ottawa is absolutely making the playoffs.”
    I’m a huge fan and they aren’t ‘absolutely’ making the playoffs. They’re 1 point up on a pretty good Boston team.
    You’re a knucklehead.

    1. To be honest, I’m kind of glad you read the whole article. I’ll respond to each of your points in the order that you listed them in (there will be overlap). Before I start, it seems like our main disagreement is on the validity of W-L as an indicator of play.

      – A goalie’s win-loss record isn’t the best indicator of how they’re playing (i.e sub-.500 Cory Schneider), and I try to get across in the article that (while they wouldn’t be winning quite so much) the Senators have been playing well, have been playing well since before, and will be playing well after Hammond’s hot streak.
      – I try to make sure I relay that he has been playing insanely well, but the article is about whether or not this will continue to a significant extent, and I stand by the assertion that, while he has been excellent, Hammond has not been playing at a level that he could not possibly achieve without being really good the rest of the time.
      – That was a joke; I admit it’s not funny. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
      – My bad with the poor sentences.
      -In regard to their record with and without Hammond, and with Lehner: like I said, the win-loss record isn’t a great indicator. Since Feb.1, Lehner’s had a serviceable (though far from excellent) adjusted save% of 91.12.
      – Again, for teams or goalies, you’re better off using other stats; I strongly disagree with the statement that “The only numbers that matter are W-L”. There’s actually a section of’s most recent power rankings (|NHL|home) that, while not much better than the rest of the article (’s power rankings are notoriously poor), does do an okay job of summarizing some of the evidence that some statistics are much better indicators of future success that W-L.

      In the words of the immortal Ilya Bryzgalov, “… hockey; is only game. Why you heff to be mad?”

      1. Sorry, I think I accidentally cut a sentence short: “Before I start, it seems like our main disagreement is in the validity of W-L as an indicator of play*, but I’ll wait until the end to cover that.*

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *