Goaltending

[DirtyDeeds]

12 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I'll see your GAA and SV% argument and point out Mason faced a much easier workload devoid of high danger shots , Elliot didnt excel while also allowing his goals in even less of a workload with even less dangerous shots

Smith on the other hand faced more workload than any other goaltender with only MAF  and Halak facing more dangerous shots 

 

 

I have no idea what this chart is showing. I can't read it because it is way too blurry. What year is it? What are the parameters.. I am showing the last 10 years of data what exactly are you showing?

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I have no idea what this chart is showing. I can't read it because it is way too blurry. What year is it? What are the parameters.. I am showing the last 10 years of data what exactly are you showing?

Goalie workload --from last season

 

 Top right is Heavy and Challenged (where Smith is ).. means he had more shots and the majority of them were serious scoring chances 

Bottom left (where both Mason and Elliot are) are light and unchallenged  -- means they faced less shots and most were of the "easy save" variety

 

in easy terms , Smith got hung out to dry in a nightly basis and still put up good numbers ...  Elliot on the other hand tended to allow more "softies" (sound familiar?)

 

I say its not coincidence Elliot's resurgence just happened to coincide with Stones and Bartkowski's arrival (otherwise known as Wideman's removal). The defense was more able to cover up his deficiency.. Smith did it with basically 1 good defenseman in front of him ...1

Mason should have had way superior stats to both last year , Philly has a decent defense..  but his shortcomings showed up 

[cross16]

Last 3 years for comparison 

[JTech780]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Last 3 years for comparison 

 

For me it's that HDSV% that scares me with Mason, that's the stats I look at to really differentiate one goalie from another.

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

For me it's that HDSV% that scares me with Mason, that's the stats I look at to really differentiate one goalie from another.

 

2% difference is pretty minimal. Especially considering it's more than offset by Mason being better in the other 2 categories. If it was 4-5 % I would get it. 

 

Either way way it's moot. He isn't here and smith is so it's fine I just don't think it was the right direction. 

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Seeing what Steve Mason signed for today, I definetly would have preferred the flames go that route and save the assets rather than trading for smith. Pretty had to argue smith is an upgrade over Mason and It's marginal at best. One was free and one the Flames gave up a lot for in trade. 

 

Too bad. 

Totally agree.

*********************************************************************

Nashville getting Emilin (4.1 x 1) for a 3rd in 2018 looks pretty good too. An already great top 4 became an even better top 5.

[JTech780]

8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

2% difference is pretty minimal. Especially considering it's more than offset by Mason being better in the other 2 categories. If it was 4-5 % I would get it. 

 

Either way way it's moot. He isn't here and smith is so it's fine I just don't think it was the right direction. 

 

2% is a lot, it's the difference between a .920 season and .900 season, which is the difference between a starter and a backup.

[cross16]

13 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

2% is a lot, it's the difference between a .920 season and .900 season, which is the difference between a starter and a backup.

 

Comparing 2% to overall save percentage versus 1 category isn't a fair comparison. 2% is only a 17 goal difference based on how many high danger chances the Flames gave up last year and again that would be offset by the fact Mason is better in both other categories

 

People forget too the flames are very good at limiting high danger chances. Top 10 last season. 

[Flyerfan52]

27 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

 

I say its not coincidence Elliot's resurgence just happened to coincide with Stones and Bartkowski's arrival (otherwise known as Wideman's removal). The defense was more able to cover up his deficiency.. Smith did it with basically 1 good defenseman in front of him ...1

Mason should have had way superior stats to both last year , Philly has a decent defense..  but his shortcomings showed up 

Elliott told the Philly media that his bad start was a combination of a new team, no familiarity with his defense & a new baby in the house. He said it was after him wife told him to concentrate on hockey rather than rushing home to help with the baby that he was able to turn it around. No mention of Calgary changing D-men.

 

BTW, the Flyers defense wasn't that good last year. What helped a lot is they do play a good team defense.

[cross16]

Just now, Flyerfan52 said:

Elliott told the Philly media that his bad start was a combination of a new team, no familiarity with his defense & a new baby in the house. He said it was after him wife told him to concentrate on hockey rather than rushing home to help with the baby that he was able to turn it around. No mention of Calgary changing D-men.

 

BTW, the Flyers defense wasn't that good last year. What helped a lot is they do play a good team defense.

 

FWIW, there was basically no statistical evidence that supports the Flames D played much better once Stone and Bartowski were inserted. Any improvement was marginal at best. I think the flames win streak was Elliott getting hot and playing like he is capable when he gets hot. 

[MAC331]

Just now, cross16 said:

 

FWIW, there was basically no statistical evidence that supports the Flames D played much better once Stone and Bartowski were inserted. Any improvement was marginal at best. I think the flames win streak was Elliott getting hot and playing like he is capable when he gets hot. 

It is never just one thing that has positive change take effect, usually a combination of things. Just getting Wideman off the ice was fine for me.

[JustAFlamer]

Very Glad both Johnson and Elliot got half decent offers in FA.

Congrats and Best of luck to them on Sabers and Flyers (thankfully both east teams),

 

they both had stints that pushed us into the playoffs last year, thanks for the memories for the year you were flames.

[rickross]

So Parsons has essentially jumped over Gillies as the goalie of the future. He does look promising and I'm wondering now how ready is Gillies for full time NHL duties? It's not like he shut down the AHL...even though I still believe he can be a good NHL goalie. Parsons just looks like he attacks the puck with elite focus, if he turns into anything close to J Quick we could have the steal of the draft. 

[MAC331]

4 minutes ago, rickross said:

So Parsons has essentially jumped over Gillies as the goalie of the future. He does look promising and I'm wondering now how ready is Gillies for full time NHL duties? It's not like he shut down the AHL...even though I still believe he can be a good NHL goalie. Parsons just looks like he attacks the puck with elite focus, if he turns into anything close to J Quick we could have the steal of the draft. 

Is this your own assumption ?

[TheBurn]

I had Parsons leap frogging Gillies the day we got him. He has been flashing elite skills the whole time. We are spoiled with the development goalies we got. Unfortunately or Fortunately, I believe Rittich looks to be a little better than Gillies as well but don't know how to balance with Gillies having the higher ceiling. Keeping this group together another year could mean us moving one to backup next year then having 2 the year after. Would be great.

[travel_dude]

13 minutes ago, TheBurn said:

I had Parsons leap frogging Gillies the day we got him. He has been flashing elite skills the whole time. We are spoiled with the development goalies we got. Unfortunately or Fortunately, I believe Rittich looks to be a little better than Gillies as well but don't know how to balance with Gillies having the higher ceiling. Keeping this group together another year could mean us moving one to backup next year then having 2 the year after. Would be great.

 

It's hard to say about any of them at this point.  DO we have a good development coach at the AHL level?  Has Gillies' surgery set him back a little more than expected?

Consider last year a rookie year for Gillies.  This is the important development year for him.  Parsons looks elite at an early stage, but it was junior or WJC.  Excited, but let's hold off on Price talk for a little bit.

 

Let's see the positives in having 2 high rated G prospects and one that surprised coming over to NA.  

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Is this your own assumption ?

Its been written many places so its not a unique assessment, but at the same time it needs to be tempered.

Agreed Parsons is the shiny new toy and is showing all the signs of a cant miss prospect.. but lets also look at Thatcher Demko and Zach Fucale.. playing well as pros but not exactly lighting things up .. until Parsons gets some pro games in , I cant really say hes ahead on the depth chart.

Gillies had essentially his first pro season , as did Rittich..  Rittich I would say right now is an equal level to Gillies and he out performed him on the same stage, so personally I'd put Rittich ahead of Gillies at this moment in time.

Lots can change next season with both having a full season of pro to build off.

I personally dont see the problem putting Parsons as the main guy in the ECHL, its a step up from Junior and by all rights if hes the guy we think he is he should light it up and force  management make a tough decision

[rickross]

11 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Is this your own assumption ?

I think that's the general consensus right now, it's obviously very early and Gillies has had some ups and downs since going pro. I still have faith in Gillies' abilities but right now Parsons ceiling appears higher than Gillies. It's an excellent "problem" to have, Flames haven't had true net minding to get excited about since Kipper. I'm not crowning Parsons yet but he definitely seems to have a certain "it" factor about him. He was lights out amongst his peers at the WJC and I think his ability to dial in can seperate him from the other prospects

[cross16]

I agree that Parsons playing ECHL really isn't an issue and would still be preferable to junior as it is better competition so I think it is definitely advancing his career. May not be as common but it's also not as common to see someone like Parsons with a later birthdate and 3 full seasons under his belt with the accomplishments he has. Have to tailor the approach ot the situation you have.

 

Also between the crazy AHL playing schedule and injuries I think its very likely and easy to get Parsons 10-12 AHL games. Flames were very healthy last year from a goaltender perspective in the organization and odds are that won't happen again. 

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, rickross said:

I think that's the general consensus right now, it's obviously very early and Gillies has had some ups and downs since going pro. I still have faith in Gillies' abilities but right now Parsons ceiling appears higher than Gillies. It's an excellent "problem" to have, Flames haven't had true net minding to get excited about since Kipper. I'm not crowning Parsons yet but he definitely seems to have a certain "it" factor about him. He was lights out amongst his peers at the WJC and I think his ability to dial in can seperate him from the other prospects

Can't disagree with you as Parsons is a quality piece. Gilles is also a quality piece however a few injuries have everyone in reserved caution. We have a very good Goalie pipeline brewing in the organization.

[jjgallow]

 

If you look at Gillies' last 10 games in the AHL, he was a .921 (basically the same as Riitich's season average), showing he finished the season as strong as any top 10 AHL goalie.

 

Again, in the playoffs, a respectable .915.     And in the NHL, an extremely strong single-game showing.

 

We are still seeing improvement in his game, after what was clearly an injury-related regression.  I'm hoping that he is either one of the top AHL goalies this year, or that we have a training camp upset and he spends time with the Flames.  I know that seems unlikely right now, but I also think we're about due for something unlikely.

 

 

 

[cross16]

On 7/11/2017 at 0:50 PM, jjgallow said:

 

If you look at Gillies' last 10 games in the AHL, he was a .921 (basically the same as Riitich's season average), showing he finished the season as strong as any top 10 AHL goalie.

 

Again, in the playoffs, a respectable .915.     And in the NHL, an extremely strong single-game showing.

 

We are still seeing improvement in his game, after what was clearly an injury-related regression.  I'm hoping that he is either one of the top AHL goalies this year, or that we have a training camp upset and he spends time with the Flames.  I know that seems unlikely right now, but I also think we're about due for something unlikely.

 

 

 

 

The reason I haven't lost faith in Gilles is he still showed you high end ability last year. When I look at the game he played I see alot of inconsistency from game to game. You saw, and heard about, some fantastic games and then you heard about some real clunkers that I think drove down his save % (which is pretty flawed stat to begin with but it's all we got at that level). I think inconsistency should be expected from a goalie who missed an entire year of development. That is why I actually don't consider last season a set back at all. I'd only be consdiered if he lost that ability to take over a game but by all accounts he didn't. 

 

So gets another year to iron things out but I just don't agree with the notion he is off track. If last year was his rookie season and he was say 22 years old I feel like people's attitude around his season would be more positive. 

 

 

[jjgallow]

24 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

The reason I haven't lost faith in Gilles is he still showed you high end ability last year. When I look at the game he played I see alot of inconsistency from game to game. You saw, and heard about, some fantastic games and then you heard about some real clunkers that I think drove down his save % (which is pretty flawed stat to begin with but it's all we got at that level). I think inconsistency should be expected from a goalie who missed an entire year of development. That is why I actually don't consider last season a set back at all. I'd only be consdiered if he lost that ability to take over a game but by all accounts he didn't. 

 

So he gets another year to iron things out but I just don't agree with the notion he is off track. If last year was his rookie season and he was say 22 years old I feel like people's attitude around his season would be more positive. 

 

100%.

 

but I'll take it one step further.  

 

He gets an extra year, AND... IF he blows people away in training camp or the first 10 games in the AHL.... I'm all for calling him up (to keep him up).

 

I know that's a big IF.    And even less likely the Flames would act on it.  But stranger has happened.   I haven't given up on him at all either.    If he plateaus this year....that's a different story.   But he's still got a whole season of top prospect status imho.

[AlbertaBoy12]

6 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

100%.

 

but I'll take it one step further.  

 

He gets an extra year, AND... IF he blows people away in training camp or the first 10 games in the AHL.... I'm all for calling him up (to keep him up).

I dont think you call him up if he blows people away or first 10 games in the AHL. One being we already have lack and smith for the season so youre not benching one of them to give gillies a shot after a small sample size as such. Two there is no harm in letting him dominate the AHL for a year if thats the case, and letting him marinate. 

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

 we already have lack and smith for the season

 

you never know who you have until you actually have them

 

2 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

there is no harm in letting him dominate the AHL for a year if thats the case, and letting him marinate. 

 

I don't personally trust the goalie development in our AHL team, but even if that were the case, some goalies actually just perform better at the NHL level.    I'm not saying that Gillies does.  But I am saying, if he starts to suggest it...maybe follow up on that.

 

We'll see.   Clearly the Flames won't willingly let him start the season ahead of Lack and Smith.   But there's more to it than that.