Goaltending

[cross16]

16 hours ago, CheersMan said:

As hard as they try, the advanced stat community can not explain many parts of the game of hockey by looking solely at the numbers. The game was never conceived or invented with numbers in mind, other than the score, it evolved for entertainment purposes, but that’s not to say you can’t look at numbers and be entertained by the numbers, but don’t try to sell the common viewer on why things happen because of the numbers. I like Wilson by the way, his contributions and opinions are entertaining. 

 

That's due in large part to much of the game cannot be explained because we lack the data and also there is a very large luck component to hockey that can never be managed or measured. 

 

Just depends on what narrative you want to spin and for all the flack the advanced stats community gets, I find the hockey purists are just as bad with their narratives too. 

 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

This isn't my analogy but I've stolen it. A puck handling goalie is like a mobile QB in football. It looks cool, it gets attention and it has it's moments where it shines so people think it's a necessary skill or a boost to the team. But at the end of the season the QBs that win are the pure pocket passers. 

 

I think it especially true for Rittich as I think he is trying to be something he is not with the puck handling. It clearly does not come natural to him, so he should be coached to stay in his net. 

 

I am with you.  Twice in recent games he's blown it with a pass.  Another time he froze it and was called for delay of game.  He looks up to Smith, so MR. Goalie Coach needs to step in and simplify his game.  You want steady goaltending or risky plays with the puck?  Stick with what got you here.  Nothing wrong with stopping pucks behind the net or making short passes to the D.  They expect that.

 

Smith almost cost us one, if not for Pav hitting the post.  That was an example of the types of plays that burn me.  Rittich's was a reasonable choice not executed properly.

[MAC331]

13 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I am with you.  Twice in recent games he's blown it with a pass.  Another time he froze it and was called for delay of game.  He looks up to Smith, so MR. Goalie Coach needs to step in and simplify his game.  You want steady goaltending or risky plays with the puck?  Stick with what got you here.  Nothing wrong with stopping pucks behind the net or making short passes to the D.  They expect that.

 

Smith almost cost us one, if not for Pav hitting the post.  That was an example of the types of plays that burn me.  Rittich's was a reasonable choice not executed properly.

Couldn't agree more with both of you. I think BP pulling Rittich out of that game was a huge message to him. Smith you won't change but it doesn't hurt to remind both them we now have a very good defense core so use them.

[JTech780]

18 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

That's due in large part to much of the game cannot be explained because we lack the data and also there is a very large luck component to hockey that can never be managed or measured. 

 

Just depends on what narrative you want to spin and for all the flack the advanced stats community gets, I find the hockey purists are just as bad with their narratives too. 

 

 

Jeff Marek on the 31 Thoughts podcast has it right, I think, we need to stop using the word analytics and start calling it hockey information. The way I look at it is advanced stats helps build a picture, the other half of that picture is the eye test, both are important. I think where the trouble lies is when we say that the advanced stats are no good or that the eye test is no good, both need to be taken into consideration when making an opinion. 

 

When I look at advanced stats I like to look at the Corsi and the offensive zone start %. So if their Corsi is at 48%, but they start in the defensive zone 65% they are probably doing an alright job at getting the puck going in the right direction.

 

I am really excited about the idea of player and puck tracking, because I think it will give a better idea about possession. Now instead of using shots to track a player, we can track how long said player spends in the offensive zone, or how often they or the puck gets to the home plate area of the offensive zone.

 

Rittich hasn't looked as sharp the last little bit, he is still playing well, but there has been mental lapse or two in most of his games for the last month or so. It's nothing to freak about, because most goalies go through that, but it is something to watch for as it is his first time really being given the torch and told to run with it. 

 

Smith's game hasn't improved all season, we have to score 4-5 goals to win every time he is in net, that just isn't good enough.

[MAC331]

2 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Jeff Marek on the 31 Thoughts podcast has it right, I think, we need to stop using the word analytics and start calling it hockey information. The way I look at it is advanced stats helps build a picture, the other half of that picture is the eye test, both are important. I think where the trouble lies is when we say that the advanced stats are no good or that the eye test is no good, both need to be taken into consideration when making an opinion. 

 

When I look at advanced stats I like to look at the Corsi and the offensive zone start %. So if their Corsi is at 48%, but they start in the defensive zone 65% they are probably doing an alright job at getting the puck going in the right direction.

 

I am really excited about the idea of player and puck tracking, because I think it will give a better idea about possession. Now instead of using shots to track a player, we can track how long said player spends in the offensive zone, or how often they or the puck gets to the home plate area of the offensive zone.

 

Rittich hasn't looked as sharp the last little bit, he is still playing well, but there has been mental lapse or two in most of his games for the last month or so. It's nothing to freak about, because most goalies go through that, but it is something to watch for as it is his first time really being given the torch and told to run with it. 

 

Smith's game hasn't improved all season, we have to score 4-5 goals to win every time he is in net, that just isn't good enough.

The whole team hasn't played well the last 8 or so games so this game was coming. Hopefully they wake up and quit reading their accolades.

[robrob74]

46 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

The whole team hasn't played well the last 8 or so games so this game was coming. Hopefully they wake up and quit reading their accolades.

 

Or thinking “we are winning so what does it matter which way we play? It is getting the job done.” 

 

Peters was itching to practice. But I think this is it, the make up of the team. We’ve seen it every year; the brain farts, lapses in judgment, and lazy positioning defensively is what this team does and sometimes it costs them and sometimes not.

 

sometimes it’s rewarding (high danger decisions, passed, etc).

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

Or thinking “we are winning so what does it matter which way we play? It is getting the job done.” 

 

Peters was itching to practice. But I think this is it, the make up of the team. We’ve seen it every year; the brain farts, lapses in judgment, and lazy positioning defensively is what this team does and sometimes it costs them and sometimes not.

I don't think you can keep saying "we have seen it every year" when this is a much different group of players under a new coach. I will say some of the similarities that lend itself to the lazy play is when Gaudreau, Monahan, Backlund and Brodie go missing in a bunch of games or bad habits creep back into their game.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

Or thinking “we are winning so what does it matter which way we play? It is getting the job done.” 

 

Peters was itching to practice. But I think this is it, the make up of the team. We’ve seen it every year; the brain farts, lapses in judgment, and lazy positioning defensively is what this team does and sometimes it costs them and sometimes not.

 

sometimes it’s rewarding (high danger decisions, passed, etc).

 

You can say this about all teams though. It's a long season, unrealistic to be 100% all the time. 

[conundrumed]

11 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

You can say this about all teams though. It's a long season, unrealistic to be 100% all the time. 

I know all teams are doing it, but that bump back terrifies me. The last man back carrying the puck. Sure didn't work for Bennett on the 2nd goal, and JG is going to see the double team a lot now, I'd wager.

I did like some of PP2's zone entries. SJ was standing up at their blueline, like we do.

[The_People1]

I kind of blame that Rittich puck handling blooper on Brodie because he was rushing back until he saw Rittich was going to win the race to the puck.  Brodie peels over to the side board to become a target for a pass but since he was the last man back, I think he shouldn't have peeled off.  He should have skated hard behind Rittich to cover for Rittich in case of some unlucky bounce.  Rittich could've found another target to pass to.

[conundrumed]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

I kind of blame that Rittich puck handling blooper on Brodie because he was rushing back until he saw Rittich was going to win the race to the puck.  Brodie peels over to the side board to become a target for a pass but since he was the last man back, I think he shouldn't have peeled off.  He should have skated hard behind Rittich to cover for Rittich in case of some unlucky bounce.  Rittich could've found another target to pass to.

If not for Bennett, none of that ever happens. Brodie's play was correct, because of Rittich's error. Send the puck sideways or back to the corners, never fwd with an opposing player bearing down.

I gave up that very goal back in the day, lol. Once.

I was pissed Rittich got yanked because I remember how angry I played after that big oops.

I thought Smith played well, but you don't pull Rittich for making a mistake leading to a 2-1 game. I can near guarantee that 3rd goal wouldn't have been scored on an intensified Rittich. I'm of the belief that a pissed off goalie is very hard to beat.

[cross16]

I don't think is reasonable to expect someone to assume another player is going to make a mistake and to make a decision to cover up for that "potential" mistake. Especially when you are consistently coached to do exactly what Brodie did there. 

 

Rittich broke a hockey 101 rule. It happens and you can't cover up every mistake. 

[travel_dude]

30 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

If not for Bennett, none of that ever happens. Brodie's play was correct, because of Rittich's error. Send the puck sideways or back to the corners, never fwd with an opposing player bearing down.

I gave up that very goal back in the day, lol. Once.

I was pissed Rittich got yanked because I remember how angry I played after that big oops.

I thought Smith played well, but you don't pull Rittich for making a mistake leading to a 2-1 game. I can near guarantee that 3rd goal wouldn't have been scored on an intensified Rittich. I'm of the belief that a pissed off goalie is very hard to beat.

 

I hear ya.  The end result was in question after the 2nd goal, but the 3rd goal was the beginning of a game where the Flames had to record 4 or 5 to win.

Cold goalie with little success taking over or PO'd goalie that just needed   13:42 in ice time for Rittich.  Give him to the end of the period and see how he handles it.  Talk to him after the end of the period.

 

Going back to Smith in the 2nd was a surprise to me.  He didn't do anything to change the momentum.  2 saves after the goal.

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't think is reasonable to expect someone to assume another player is going to make a mistake and to make a decision to cover up for that "potential" mistake. Especially when you are consistently coached to do exactly what Brodie did there. 

 

Rittich broke a hockey 101 rule. It happens and you can't cover up every mistake. 

 

What is the rule?

[conundrumed]

13 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

What is the rule?

Keep your head in the game.

Bennett. lol

[robrob74]

46 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Keep your head in the game.

Bennett. lol

 

Haha! 

 

We need more more games this tight and meaningful. The Playoffs are going to be tough. 

[cross16]

14 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

What is the rule?

 

Dont clear the puck up the middle of the ice

[CheersMan]

22 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

This isn't my analogy but I've stolen it. A puck handling goalie is like a mobile QB in football. It looks cool, it gets attention and it has it's moments where it shines so people think it's a necessary skill or a boost to the team. But at the end of the season the QBs that win are the pure pocket passers. 

 

I think it especially true for Rittich as I think he is trying to be something he is not with the puck handling. It clearly does not come natural to him, so he should be coached to stay in his net. 

Most would agree that Smith should stay more in the pocket (blue paint) while making tape to tape passes. Not sure I agree with your football analogy of a one dimensional QB is better than a two dimensional one. Michael Vick demonstrated the later by averaging 7 yds/carry but maybe he was not on the best teams. Teams win championships not individuals. 

 

22 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

That's due in large part to much of the game cannot be explained because we lack the data and also there is a very large luck component to hockey that can never be managed or measured. 

 

Just depends on what narrative you want to spin and for all the flack the advanced stats community gets, I find the hockey purists are just as bad with their narratives too. 

 

You can call it luck or un-luck, someone else might call it a series of unpredictable events that results in an arbitrary score after 60 minutes. You can assign numbers to players after the series of events has concluded, but that makes it history with no bearing on the future. We are now getting into the land of probabilities. It is probable that you may respond to this but not a certainty, I could assign a number to the uncertainty but what is the point when we are both being entertained by the conversation.

[JTech780]

I think we need to go back to Smith in Pittsburgh. Smith played well enough for us to win tonight, and I think Rittich needs a push and having to fight for his job a bit might be just what he needs.

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I think we need to go back to Smith in Pittsburgh. Smith played well enough for us to win tonight, and I think Rittich needs a push and having to fight for his job a bit might be just what he needs.

 

I was thinking the same to be honest. I don't think Rittich has been as bad as the numbers suggest, but he also needs to be better. 

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I was thinking the same to be honest. I don't think Rittich has been as bad as the numbers suggest, but he also needs to be better. 

Certainly would be a good time to breath some confidence into him

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, JTech780 said:

I think we need to go back to Smith in Pittsburgh. Smith played well enough for us to win tonight, and I think Rittich needs a push and having to fight for his job a bit might be just what he needs.

 

I think back to the last PITTS game.

Yikes.

 

My issue with Smith is that he follows up a good game with a stinky one.  I though he looked pretty darn good in regulation and OT.  Do I have confidence that he can duplicate that against PITTS?  No.  I think you really have to alternate goalies for awhile, but the majority still going to Rittich.

  

[DHT]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think back to the last PITTS game.

Yikes.

 

My issue with Smith is that he follows up a good game with a stinky one.  I though he looked pretty darn good in regulation and OT.  Do I have confidence that he can duplicate that against PITTS?  No.  I think you really have to alternate goalies for awhile, but the majority still going to Rittich.

  

Amen to that! Smith is inconsistent with back to back games and the haunting of the last time he started against Penguins really makes me hesitate to start him. I would like to see Rittich have a shot against Pens and perhaps go back to Smith after that unless Rittich has a shutout.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, DHT said:

Amen to that! Smith is inconsistent with back to back games and the haunting of the last time he started against Penguins really makes me hesitate to start him. I would like to see Rittich have a shot against Pens and perhaps go back to Smith after that unless Rittich has a shutout.

Look at it another way if he gets bombed against PIT it gives BT the clear decision to get another Goalie.

[conundrumed]

29 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Look at it another way if he gets bombed against PIT it gives BT the clear decision to get Howard.

Fixed that for ya. lol