Goaltending

[MAC331]

19 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

That is Gilles MO. There are parts of his game that get you excited. Flashes of goodness every so often. But the Flames don't need flashes of good play tarnished by 10 minutes of stink. He needs to show he can be consistent and he needs to show it before he is a NHL regular. 

 

It is the early preseason for sure and nobody should be making conclusions based on those two games. Though I think it is fair to say I wasn't high on our backups well before the preseason began. They haven't done anything to change my mind. Yet. I hope it is just yet. 

I don't think he stunk on those goals, they were good shot goals. Our Goalie doesn't necessarily stink because a goal gets by him, shooters do make good shots, no ?

Yes we are all well aware of your feelings on the subject.

[MAC331]

20 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Just to break up what I think will be a really *yaaawwn* compelling internet fight read...

I think you're right. It's McIlhenny or Pickard imo.

McIlhenhy was so solid last year, it's a tough call.

Pickard is borderline 4th on the depth chart, I'd lose him on the cheap personally.

Unless he prefers A backup or E starter.

 

As for that other thing, get lighter is my only advice...

 

Don't really care what they do with their goalies in TOR, they won't be giving up Sparks and I wouldn't want either of the other two.

[rickross]

42 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

You are especially bad for it. I'm about as light as they come.

Nice try, light weight indeed. 

[kehatch]

15 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I don't think he stunk on those goals, they were good shot goals. Our Goalie doesn't necessarily stink because a goal gets by him, shooters do make good shots, no ?

Yes we are all well aware of your feelings on the subject.

 

Gilles didn't look good to start the game. He settled in later. Which is fine in the first preseason game. He just had a lot of that in regular season games last season as well. 

 

That said, I was okay with Gilles in his debut. He wasn't great but he was fine. Rittich on the other hand was really bad. Hopefully he can rebound. 

[cross16]

17 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

Lehtonen has missed 6 games to injury since 2014. That's not that bad as far injury concerns go. The other guy they could look at is Pavelec.

 

I am hopeful that this is just first game jitters or whatever for both goalies, but they better be lights out the rest of the pre season for me to have much confidence in either goalie.

 

It's not always serious injuries that cause him to miss time but he is always on the injury report. A lot of nagging injuries which get more nerve racking when your a backup who is going to sit IMO. 

 

Pavelec has some intriguing advanced stats but they never seem to correlate to much success. Not the worst option but it's pretty debatable he's a better one. 

 

15 hours ago, robrob74 said:

A couple of friends of mine and I were chatting on Saturday and what one felt was, NHL starting goalies are all average. There are 2-3 that are truly elite, Price and Rinne.  The rest depends on what is playing in front of them. Is the system then what determines the success of s goalie? Or the defenders in front of him? 

 

 

100% agree with this and it's well said. I would expand it to more then 2-3 but that's splitting hairs but I do think it provides a solid baseline of what a starter is and why its not easy to find one. 

[The_People1]

17 hours ago, robrob74 said:

A couple of friends of mine and I were chatting on Saturday and what one felt was, NHL starting goalies are all average. There are 2-3 that are truly elite, Price and Rinne.  The rest depends on what is playing in front of them. Is the system then what determines the success of s goalie? Or the defenders in front of him? 

 

Some are of course, below average and shouldn’t be in the NHL. What have we had? Borderline NHL goalies and one or two true starter since Kipper. When our systems or D are in front of them, it really shows. Do we count Elliott as a starter or closer to a backup? Smith to me, is the only starter who can be considered average or slightly above. 

 

I think regardless less of who we slot in, unless they’re elite, they’re going to look average or below until we place an emphasis on cutting down the dangerous chances.

 

Of course if you play good possession, chances will come down. But if you have the puck just for the sake of having it and not scoring then there’s another problem. We are still giving up bad chances and don’t score or get ourselves into dangerous scoring areas to get ahead or keep up offensively.

 

But letting in 7 goals isn’t accepted as quality tending.

 

I am not a fan of letting in bad goals and then bouncing back after being down 2-0. Playing from behind is disastrous in the NHL. 

 

It is preseason and we are talking about real life games... calm down on calming us down... 

 

Definitely some goalies are made to look good because of their team's play.  

 

In terms of the Flames, we don't allow many shots.  BP in Carolina same thing.  Just let down by poor goaltending.

[travel_dude]

18 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

The bolded is true. In the Jets exhibition win over the Wild last night Brossoit looked a more than capable backup while I was expecting him to be the tire fire he was with the Oilers. It could be that adopting Helle's off season regimen & working with his guru turned things around. He probably never put as much into an off season before but seeing what it did for his pal Helle & wanting to salvage his career would be good incentives. Sure 1/2 the team he was facing was more Ohio than Minny but the D in front of him was 50% AHL Moose or juniors. (on that it was cool to see Big Buff paired with the even bigger Stanley. @ 6'5" & 6'7" when they were side by side on the blueline it looked like they could touch sticks. )

 

Brossoit is a strange cat.  He plays lights out against certain styles.  He can play half his games at 2 GA or less, then get lit up.  

Personally, I think he's good for about 10-15  games in a season without stinking it up.

Maybe playing behind an AHL defense in EDM last year killed his game.  They sure love to bury goalies there.

Anyway, good luck with him.  He's probably a few years from being a steady backup, since he has to unlearn everything EDM subjected him to.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Definitely some goalies are made to look good because of their team's play.  

 

In terms of the Flames, we don't allow many shots.  BP in Carolina same thing.  Just let down by poor goaltending.

 

I don't think that's the case either though. The less shots thing is true, given it's in the stats, but it's the quality of the scoring chances that are given up on those few shots that are being taken against us. 

 

Yes, goalies are also a part of the let down. but I also think it's the defenders as well. Not just the D, but the forwards too. Like giving up the puck in the wrong spots that create odd scoring chances. 

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I don't think that's the case either though. The less shots thing is true, given it's in the stats, but it's the quality of the scoring chances that are given up on those few shots that are being taken against us. 

 

Yes, goalies are also a part of the let down. but I also think it's the defenders as well. Not just the D, but the forwards too. Like giving up the puck in the wrong spots that create odd scoring chances. 

 

Well, Flames and Hurricanes easily had bottom 5 goaltending in the NHL.  Had the Flames gotten average goaltending, then we may have made the playoffs last season.

 

I think we play well enough as a team that if we had an elite goaltender playing behind our team, we'd be one of the best GAA teams in the league.  

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

It's not always serious injuries that cause him to miss time but he is always on the injury report. A lot of nagging injuries which get more nerve racking when your a backup who is going to sit IMO. 

 

Pavelec has some intriguing advanced stats but they never seem to correlate to much success. Not the worst option but it's pretty debatable he's a better one. 

 

 

100% agree with this and it's well said. I would expand it to more then 2-3 but that's splitting hairs but I do think it provides a solid baseline of what a starter is and why its not easy to find one. 

 

I agree as well. I was basically just paraphrasing them, so there could be a bit more. I think it's why we are having a hard time finding one.

 

I have seen holes in our game since before the rebuild, and for some reason they've been similar. Maybe that's just what the NHL is now and I am biased because it's easier to criticize my own team heavier. I see those breakdowns a bit more... But typically, the theme has been, other teams have scored on those untimely breakdowns, like:

 

Everyone leaving the ice very lazily on a line change and the other team has a free route to our net. 

Some players giving pucks right to the other team's players giving them a free route to the slot. 

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Well, Flames and Hurricanes easily had bottom 5 goaltending in the NHL.  Had the Flames gotten average goaltending, then we may have made the playoffs last season.

 

I think we play well enough as a team that if we had an elite goaltender playing behind our team, we'd be one of the best GAA teams in the league.  

 

We supposedly got average goaltending out of Elliott as well, and he stunk it out. He was supposed to have these great numbers. For me, it's our D. They're offensive, but not defensive enough. I get what you're saying.

 

And I think yes, our goalies were below average, and most have been, but our defending has been as well. Sure, we have good advanced stats, but that means nothing when the eye test says they're not doing it right. Other teams don't care if we skate in circles with the puck. They know that eventually we are going to make a dumb pass that leads to a 2-on-1 the other way. It's a lot of things I think. Pinning it souly on the goalie, I think, doesn't do it justice. The goalie holds the numbers, but I personally think the numbers are a team stat. It's why when we got Elliott who had above average results with St. Louis and then comes into Calgary, his flaws are shown because our style of play made that happen. 

[The_People1]

40 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I agree as well. I was basically just paraphrasing them, so there could be a bit more. I think it's why we are having a hard time finding one.

 

I have seen holes in our game since before the rebuild, and for some reason they've been similar. Maybe that's just what the NHL is now and I am biased because it's easier to criticize my own team heavier. I see those breakdowns a bit more... But typically, the theme has been, other teams have scored on those untimely breakdowns, like:

 

Everyone leaving the ice very lazily on a line change and the other team has a free route to our net. 

Some players giving pucks right to the other team's players giving them a free route to the slot. 

 

We supposedly got average goaltending out of Elliott as well, and he stunk it out. He was supposed to have these great numbers. For me, it's our D. They're offensive, but not defensive enough. I get what you're saying.

 

And I think yes, our goalies were below average, and most have been, but our defending has been as well. Sure, we have good advanced stats, but that means nothing when the eye test says they're not doing it right. Other teams don't care if we skate in circles with the puck. They know that eventually we are going to make a dumb pass that leads to a 2-on-1 the other way. It's a lot of things I think. Pinning it souly on the goalie, I think, doesn't do it justice. The goalie holds the numbers, but I personally think the numbers are a team stat. It's why when we got Elliott who had above average results with St. Louis and then comes into Calgary, his flaws are shown because our style of play made that happen. 

 

Oh I totally agree.  Our D is not defensive enough and that includes supposed defensive specialist Hamonic.  He has already made critical blunders in preseason that was exactly what we saw last season.  Saving grace is Brodie looks more confident again with Gio.

 

But if Hamonic keeps playing this bad, then that drags down Hanafin. 

 

Stone is too slow.  Kulak inconsistent.  Andersson inexperienced.

 

I don't know where the solution is but to me, Hamonic has to go.  That's where real changes can begin to happen.  He's just too reactionary rather than anticipated.  Like Gretzky used to say, "good players go where the puck is.  Great players go where the puck will be.". I even see Hanifin anticipate very well but Hamonic relies on physical abilities to react.  There's no sixth sense.  Not sure there ever was but you've got a guy who has knee surgery and it took away his physical abilities.  In other words, nothing to rely on.

[Horsman1]

On 9/18/2018 at 10:15 AM, travel_dude said:

 

It's a bit early to say that Rittich isn't ready for the backup role as much as it is to say that Gillies didn't do as bad.  What it does do is re-enforce the notion that we don't know what we have in NHL depth. I'm not too concerned about one bad game or Parsons looking good against rookies.  Doesn't prove anything.

 

What does concern me is that we have this question mark in nets.  We all believe that Rittich will be the NHL backup and Gillies and Parsons will split starts in Stockton.  That can only happen if Rittich looks ready.

 

Plenty of pre-season games ahead of us, but we can't go with a 3 or 4 headed monster and giving each goalie a few pe-season starts.  If Rittich is rusty, then he needs to split games with Smith.  The team in front has to build confidence in him and he has to give them confidence.  We have a new coach and some new systems, so we need the practice and game situations to get ready as a team.

 

I really don't care about MacDonald or Schneider at this point.  They have to do something in KC to push their way into conversation.  Because of that, I don't want to see them play any pre-season games.  I would prefer to see Glass get a start, since he is closer to being a NHL goalie.

the fact remains.. we don't have an NHL qualified goalie in our system/.. Yes.. we may have some possibilities that will be ready in the future but none are ready now.. We may as well just turn the net around backwards and have opposition have to bank the puck in off the boards.. We Don'T Have A quality back up goalie!! We need one NOW!!!

 

[conundrumed]

It is camp. Why is anyone getting hung up on it? Having a good camp doesn't mean never give up a goal or "hey that guy scored 8".

This is getting your cars tuned up, not winning the Indy.

The vets know. It's a long season, why go hard in preseason?

I've been watching games all over, it's <ECHL hockey to start camp.

It's about learning things. Wins gets you 0 points.

TBay could go 0-6 in the preseason. It only tells me that they're working hard with different things. It means nothing.

[Cowtownguy]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

It is camp. Why is anyone getting hung up on it? Having a good camp doesn't mean never give up a goal or "hey that guy scored 8".

This is getting your cars tuned up, not winning the Indy.

The vets know. It's a long season, why go hard in preseason?

I've been watching games all over, it's <ECHL hockey to start camp.

It's about learning things. Wins gets you 0 points.

TBay could go 0-6 in the preseason. It only tells me that they're working hard with different things. It means nothing.

I dunno, but I am quite enjoying looking at the Canucks board. Man, are they in whining mode. They are full on drama queen level.

[sak22]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well, Flames and Hurricanes easily had bottom 5 goaltending in the NHL.  Had the Flames gotten average goaltending, then we may have made the playoffs last season.

 

I think we play well enough as a team that if we had an elite goaltender playing behind our team, we'd be one of the best GAA teams in the league.  

I have to strongly disagree, we had played close to half the games of scoring 2 or less.  That's not the recipe for success in this league, its not a 2-1 league anymore you need to be above or close to 3 goals per game to be successful.  The closest team to us in goals that qualified last season was Anaheim and they still had 15 more goals, and that awesome defence and goaltending was bounced quickly.  Lets not pretend we had one downfall last year, we had plenty and I don't believe any goalie currently playing could've made up for the lack of offence and horrible PP.

[kehatch]

Much better game from Rittich. He needed to rebound and he did. Should be good for his confidence. 

[cccsberg]

14 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Oh I totally agree.  Our D is not defensive enough and that includes supposed defensive specialist Hamonic.  He has already made critical blunders in preseason that was exactly what we saw last season.  Saving grace is Brodie looks more confident again with Gio.

 

But if Hamonic keeps playing this bad, then that drags down Hanafin. 

 

Stone is too slow.  Kulak inconsistent.  Andersson inexperienced.

 

I don't know where the solution is but to me, Hamonic has to go.  That's where real changes can begin to happen.  He's just too reactionary rather than anticipated.  Like Gretzky used to say, "good players go where the puck is.  Great players go where the puck will be.". I even see Hanifin anticipate very well but Hamonic relies on physical abilities to react.  There's no sixth sense.  Not sure there ever was but you've got a guy who has knee surgery and it took away his physical abilities.  In other words, nothing to rely on.

Nothing like the start of the season to see the bs starting to flow, the casting about for scapegpoats and the smartest guy in the room syndrome grabbing hold of various fans.  But that's fans... god bless 'em all.

[cccsberg]

12 hours ago, Horsman1 said:

the fact remains.. we don't have an NHL qualified goalie in our system/.. Yes.. we may have some possibilities that will be ready in the future but none are ready now.. We may as well just turn the net around backwards and have opposition have to bank the puck in off the boards.. We Don'T Have A quality back up goalie!! We need one NOW!!!

 

hahahahahahahahahaha.... reading the fake news US MSM is much worse than reading trash like this, but its getting close.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

Nothing like the start of the season to see the bs starting to flow, the casting about for scapegpoats and the smartest guy in the room syndrome grabbing hold of various fans.  But that's fans... god bless 'em all.

 

I already previously disclaimered that it's preseason so we need to chillax.  Just early observations.

[MAC331]

14 hours ago, Horsman1 said:

the fact remains.. we don't have an NHL qualified goalie in our system/.. Yes.. we may have some possibilities that will be ready in the future but none are ready now.. We may as well just turn the net around backwards and have opposition have to bank the puck in off the boards.. We Don'T Have A quality back up goalie!! We need one NOW!!!

 

Is there a certificate for that ?

[The_Tribal Chief]

I honestly think Rittich Can Be the Back-up And cover Smith But ill go on what Treliving Said it will Depends on the Teams on What Goalie Calgary Uses and if they use them proper they could be fine

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I already previously disclaimered that it's preseason so we need to chillax.  Just early observations.

 

TBH, you started by saying that Hamonic needs to go.

 

Really, there are some good observations by people based on a couple of pre-season games and rookie games.

As well, there are general comments based on last season results and observations so far.

 

Goaltending is still a question mark, until it isn't.  The starter is an often injured older goalie signed for this season only.  After that we have two guys fighting for the backup spot and 3 other prospects fighting for AHL jobs.  We could have a SCF team this year with the goalies achieving desired results.  But we don't know.  The expectation is that the starter will remain healthy for 55 games and the backup will be good enough for the rest.  

 

It's not a dire situation to be in, but it's not ideal considering that everywhere else we have NHL depth in spades.

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

TBH, you started by saying that Hamonic needs to go.

 

Really, there are some good observations by people based on a couple of pre-season games and rookie games.

As well, there are general comments based on last season results and observations so far.

 

Goaltending is still a question mark, until it isn't.  The starter is an often injured older goalie signed for this season only.  After that we have two guys fighting for the backup spot and 3 other prospects fighting for AHL jobs.  We could have a SCF team this year with the goalies achieving desired results.  But we don't know.  The expectation is that the starter will remain healthy for 55 games and the backup will be good enough for the rest.  

 

It's not a dire situation to be in, but it's not ideal considering that everywhere else we have NHL depth in spades.

 

Based on 2 preseason games, Hamonic needs to go.  So, it is to say, not that seriously.  If it was based on 2 regular season games then that's more serious.

[cross16]

Hamonic has struggled for 2 season plus this preseason. 

 

I get he is a fantastic human being but it's unfair to jump down everyone's throat who criticizes Hamonic. The criticism is very justified. 

[7wit]

21 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Hamonic has struggled for 2 season plus this preseason. 

 

I get he is a fantastic human being but it's unfair to jump down everyone's throat who criticizes Hamonic. The criticism is very justified. 

 

He certainly has not shown what he’s capable of. In fact, he’s not much better than Michael Stone right now. He appears tired and slow like he’s had a concussion or a family tragedy is in his mind. I hope he figures it out soon or we’re in for a long season again. Neal looks tired and slow too.