Goaltending

[DirtyDeeds]

On 01/10/2017 at 11:03 AM, kehatch said:

 

It is really tough to judge a goalie coach since we are so far removed from them.  On one hand, I agree with you.  Goal tending in Calgary has been underwhelming for so long you have to question the coach.  On the other hand, this guy has been with the organization since 2011 and has survived multiple GM and coaching changes.  Something about him has kept him with the organization despite the results and the many opportunities to fire him.  

 

It kind of reminds be of Tod Button.  The Flames had poor results in the drafting department but this guy survived Sutter, Feaster, Burke, and Treliving.  Now they have terrific results in drafting.  

He is hard worker. In early and stays late.

 

Yes he has been with Flames for a long time but in farm system before he got promoted. 

 

I would ask this one question....

Who has he developed within the system?

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

The ultimate crapshoot. Literally like throwing darts at a dart board.

 

Proof;
 

 

A valid consideration, but far from proof.   You can't just look at the failures to determine the value of elite young goalie prospects.

 

Ultimately, look at the goalies on Stanley Cup Winners.   (or if you must, look at the top 5 regular season goalies, but I prefer the long range historical Stanley cup data).

 

There's some wildcards.  For sure.   Definitely highlights the value of picking goalies late.           

 

But, there's a lot of first rounders in there too.  A LOT.     Is Matt Murray disruptive to that?   Depends if you consider the 3rd round early or late.

 

 

Crapshoot or not, what you will see is that Stanley Cup Winners tend to have the Net situation covered.    They tend to have an emphasis on drafting, developing, acquiring, conditioning, and resting their goaltenders.     There Isn't a magic formula.  And that's what makes threads like this so interesting.   

 

But the Cup winners rarely half-azsss it between the pipes.

 

[cross16]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

A valid consideration, but far from proof.   You can't just look at the failures to determine the value of elite young goalie prospects.

 

Ultimately, look at the goalies on Stanley Cup Winners.   (or if you must, look at the top 5 regular season goalies, but I prefer the long range historical Stanley cup data).

 

There's some wildcards.  For sure.   Definitely highlights the value of picking goalies late.           

 

But, there's a lot of first rounders in there too.  A LOT.     Is Matt Murray disruptive to that?   Depends if you consider the 3rd round early or late.

 

 

Crapshoot or not, what you will see is that Stanley Cup Winners tend to have the Net situation covered.    They tend to have an emphasis on drafting, developing, acquiring, conditioning, and resting their goaltenders.     There Isn't a magic formula.  And that's what makes threads like this so interesting.   

 

But the Cup winners rarely half-azsss it between the pipes.

 

 

In the last 11 years 3 first round goalies have won a cup. 3 others have played in a cup finals and in most cases they weren't with the team that drafted them. 

 

For sure teams that win have the goalie position covered thats an obvious argument but drafting them is a crapshoot. 

Just to be clear I'm not advocating that how the Flames approach their goaltending has been a good strategy. 

[Flyerfan52]

LV put Calvin Pickard on waivers. 1 year @ 1.0 then RFA.

I figure he's probably a better backup/safety net than Lack.

 

Best case scenario we lose Lack to waivers, Worst case we have a 3rd NHL  experienced goalie in the minors if needed.

[MAC331]

29 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

LV put Calvin Pickard on waivers. 1 year @ 1.0 then RFA.

I figure he's probably a better backup/safety net than Lack.

 

Best case scenario we lose Lack to waivers, Worst case we have a 3rd NHL  experienced goalie in the minors if needed.

I doubt we do that but what is up with Pickard, first he was unprotected by COL and now waived by an expansion team.

[cccsberg]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I doubt we do that but what is up with Pickard, first he was unprotected by COL and now waived by an expansion team.

They picked up Malcolm Subban off of waivers from Boston.

[cross16]

Flames system is already pretty clogged up so to me there isn't any upside in clogging it up further.

 

I'd much rather see Gilles/Rittich get a shot than pick up PIckard. Pickard really isn't very good. 

[CheersMan]

Couldn’t be happier about Smiths performance last night.  Looking forward to seeing a lot more of that, but with less rubber directed at him.

[jjgallow]

21 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

In the last 11 years 3 first round goalies have won a cup.

 

Was that just bad math, or misleading math?   I can't tell.   Do I need to point the flaw out?

[cross16]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Was that just bad math, or misleading math?   I can't tell.   Do I need to point the flaw out?

 

It was. It's actually the last 12 years I went back. So of the last 12 cup winners 3 had goalies taken in the first round. 

[jjgallow]

32 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

It was. It's actually the last 12 years I went back. So of the last 12 cup winners 3 had goalies taken in the first round. 

 

Do I really even have to?

 

http://www.thesportster.com/hockey/ranking-all-stanley-cup-winning-goalies-since-2000/

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Do I really even have to?

 

http://www.thesportster.com/hockey/ranking-all-stanley-cup-winning-goalies-since-2000/

wait what? what part of goalies taken in the first round didnt make sense?

[cross16]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Do I really even have to?

 

http://www.thesportster.com/hockey/ranking-all-stanley-cup-winning-goalies-since-2000/

 

So you linked something that supported my point?? so thanks I guess? haha.

 

Not sure what we're discussing anymore to be honest...

[Squilliam89]

15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

So you linked something that supported my point?? so thanks I guess? haha.

 

Not sure what we're discussing anymore to be honest...

 

Is Phil Kessel a legeitimate threat to win the hot dog eating contest this year

 

[cross16]

6 minutes ago, Squilliam89 said:

 

 

Absolutely 

[jjgallow]

On 10/4/2017 at 11:51 AM, cross16 said:

 

The ultimate crapshoot. Literally like throwing darts at a dart board.

 

Proof;
 

 

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

So you linked something that supported my point?? so thanks I guess? haha.

 

Not sure what we're discussing anymore to be honest...

 

 

2017:   MAF played the most games. 1st rounder.      Matt Murray a 3rd rounder

2016:  Matt Murray:  3rd rounder

2015:   Corey Crawford  (2nd round pick)

2014:   Jonathan Quick (3rd rounder)

2013:   Corey Crawford (2nd round pick)

2012:   Jonathan Quick (3rd rounder)

2011:   Tim Thomas  (9th rounder!)

2010:   Antti Niemi (undrafted)

2009:  MAF 1st rounder

2008:  Chris Osgood (3rd rounder)

2007:  JS Giguere  (1st rounder)

2006:  Cam Ward (1st rounder)

 

 

What I am discussing is your original "proof" that you should never draft a goalie early.    Which should be obvious, since you wrote it to begin with.

 

Since the first three rounds are commonly considered "early", and everything else considered "late"...which is, by the way, clearly illustrated by your own picture...

 

Over the last 12 years, 10 of those Stanley Cups were won with Early Round goaltender draft picks.   How you took the time to look up these stats, and either didn't see this, or chose not to see this for the sake of your arguement, is odd to me.

 

4 of those cups were won using 1st rounders.  Not 3.     I am not sure if you're discounting MAF last year, or just discounting MAF because he won it Twice.   Either way, I think that's pretty blatantly misleading.   

 

4 out of 12, being 33%.       When first rounders make up less than 5% of the NHL's goalies, the fact that they make up 33% of Stanley Cup winners, means that this IS in fact A Lot.     And, NOTHING like your "proof" picture (because it's based more on averages and failures, than the successes that really matter).

 

I could go about this a million ways and it would always come out really clear.   But I don't have to, because all you need to do is look at the list.  And it's REALLY clear.

 

Knowing that you in fact looked at this list, and summarized it with "only 3 first rounder G's have won a cup in the last 12 years"....  is...well,  not great.

[cross16]

i never said don't take goalies early . Quoting a chart doesn't mean I necesssariky agree with their conclusion I'm simply using the same data. 

 

 

 

[phoenix66]

Guess we'll have to wait a few more games to start figuring out whether BT got the Goalies 100% right .

Happy with Smith and his 41 Save night 

Fleury Gets LV the Win with a 45 save night (1 goal)

Bishop was pitching a shutout into the 3rd before being pulled with injury (shot to the head )

LOL

[JTech780]

Thru two games Smith has looked great. Love the the athletiscm and the compete. There were a couple of passes last night that were a bit scary. The biggest thing is that he is making the big waves and keeping us in games, and he hasn't really let in any stinkers. We should be in good shape if he continues to give this quality of goaltending this year.

[phoenix66]

52 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Thru two games Smith has looked great. Love the the athletiscm and the compete. There were a couple of passes last night that were a bit scary. The biggest thing is that he is making the big waves and keeping us in games, and he hasn't really let in any stinkers. We should be in good shape if he continues to give this quality of goaltending this year.

yup.. and don't if many caught it , but in the first period at one point , cant recall who it was but he was letting one of his D have it behind the net , just wasnt able to catch the number .. Love it 

[jjgallow]

Now not so great.

 

We know what Mike Smith is.   I never got it.  Never will.  He will have some good games.   He showed that in the first two.   It'll average out to what he's always been.

 

What we don't know, is what we have in Tyler Parsons.

 

I was liking his first ECHL game.     He's graduated from junior and it showed.   Looking forward to see where he takes it from there

[CheersMan]

8 hours ago, jjgallow said:

Now not so great.

 

We know what Mike Smith is.   I never got it.  Never will.  He will have some good games.   He showed that in the first two.   It'll average out to what he's always been.

 

What we don't know, is what we have in Tyler Parsons.

 

I was liking his first ECHL game.     He's graduated from junior and it showed.   Looking forward to see where he takes it from there

You can keep your eye on the kids while the rest of us watch elite goaltending provided by Smith on the big team.  Maybe you can provide us with frequent updates from the farm, good and bad.

[travel_dude]

40 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

You can keep your eye on the kids while the rest of us watch elite goaltending provided by Smith on the big team.  Maybe you can provide us with frequent updates from the farm, good and bad.

 

Rittich had a 36 shot shutout tonight.  Not a kid, but has shown a lot in the last year as a "prospect".

Smith has done what Elliott didn;t do for half a season (or at all) and that is to be able to stop a breakaway.  Has kept the Flames in games where the penalties were getting way out of hand.  I admit I was not impressed with the trade, but frankly it was almost the same cost as bringing back Elliott.  And the effect has been very impressive.  A goalie that can actually handle the puck.  Let Smith fire the bombs to the forwards and keep the breakout passes from the defense shorter.  

[CheersMan]

24 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Rittich had a 36 shot shutout tonight.  Not a kid, but has shown a lot in the last year as a "prospect".

Smith has done what Elliott didn;t do for half a season (or at all) and that is to be able to stop a breakaway.  Has kept the Flames in games where the penalties were getting way out of hand.  I admit I was not impressed with the trade, but frankly it was almost the same cost as bringing back Elliott.  And the effect has been very impressive.  A goalie that can actually handle the puck.  Let Smith fire the bombs to the forwards and keep the breakout passes from the defense shorter.  

We have had an excellent battle going on in Stockton for the last 1 going on 2 years.  Gillies was pegged as the next one, being the higher shiny pick and all, but Rittich has arguably been better.  One of these guys isn’t going to be back next year.

As for Smith, he has been doing it all for the Flames, so far, including leadership, puck handling, stopping the puck.  I don’t see him dropping out of sight anytime soon either, his play has been deliberate in every area.

[Cowtownguy]

8 hours ago, CheersMan said:

We have had an excellent battle going on in Stockton for the last 1 going on 2 years.  Gillies was pegged as the next one, being the higher shiny pick and all, but Rittich has arguably been better.  One of these guys isn’t going to be back next year.

As for Smith, he has been doing it all for the Flames, so far, including leadership, puck handling, stopping the puck.  I don’t see him dropping out of sight anytime soon either, his play has been deliberate in every area.

I was cautiously optimistic when we acquired Smith. He has been a solid goalie for some time on a weak team. It was hard to know what he would bring to the Flames and for how long. I think he has played quite well even while our team has not been great in supporting him.

 

I sure hope that we give Rittich a chance because it seems to me that he has earned it. I am not sure what he was ever expected to do that he has not done already. I would rather see him in net than Lack. Hopefully, he can be the backup next year if Gillies is not ready.