Goaltending

[conundrumed]

I'm very curious about Talbot. He looked like a machine in preseason last year. But then it didn't take long for the vacuous D to melt him down.

He was the reason Edmonton got to the playoffs 2 seasons ago (73 starts!) as much as Rittich was a huge part for us last year.

Another tandem of different goalies, but I like this idea better than having Smith's diabolically loose style of play.

Smith's mechanics and basics left a ton to be desired.

My guess is Rittich rides the bigger workload. Mechanics are more important than athleticism imho.

Rittich is one of the soundest goalies in the league imo.

His trajectory has been pretty darned handsome.

As once a low level acquisition, I'm thinking he could be our guy if he wants it enough.

Goalies come from anywhere, as was discussed earlier. No trend.

I've always been impressed by Rittich's fundamentals since he was in the A.

What's exciting is that those fundamentals are such a concrete foundation that will be consistent.

My thinking is that he can be a Holtby/Bishop for us. Not the size, but the mechanics.

Keep it quiet back there.

Wait until Edmonton finds out that Smith's tracking the puck from the hashmarks to the blueline is big time sketchy.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

I'm very curious about Talbot. He looked like a machine in preseason last year. But then it didn't take long for the vacuous D to melt him down.

He was the reason Edmonton got to the playoffs 2 seasons ago (73 starts!) as much as Rittich was a huge part for us last year.

Another tandem of different goalies, but I like this idea better than having Smith's diabolically loose style of play.

Smith's mechanics and basics left a ton to be desired.

My guess is Rittich rides the bigger workload. Mechanics are more important than athleticism imho.

Rittich is one of the soundest goalies in the league imo.

His trajectory has been pretty darned handsome.

As once a low level acquisition, I'm thinking he could be our guy if he wants it enough.

Goalies come from anywhere, as was discussed earlier. No trend.

I've always been impressed by Rittich's fundamentals since he was in the A.

What's exciting is that those fundamentals are such a concrete foundation that will be consistent.

My thinking is that he can be a Holtby/Bishop for us. Not the size, but the mechanics.

Keep it quiet back there.

Wait until Edmonton finds out that Smith's tracking the puck from the hashmarks to the blueline is big time sketchy.

Fair approximation of the situation with Talbot and Rittich.

Smith is a 2 headed monster.

Smith the good helps a team with decent defense win games.

Smith the bad can singlehandedly lose games, no matter how many goals you score.

 

I don't want to sound too high on the goalie tandem here, but last year's Rittich was one of the best on the league.

He hasn't peaked yet, IMHO.

A minor injury derailed a good finish to the year.

And lost him the net when we needed him the most.

 

Talbot's detractors say he was a 1st shot goal in 13 games last season.

Big deal.

It's not what you do on the first shot, but in the rest of the game.

 

[kehatch]

18 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Fair approximation of the situation with Talbot and Rittich.

Smith is a 2 headed monster.

Smith the good helps a team with decent defense win games.

Smith the bad can singlehandedly lose games, no matter how many goals you score.

 

I don't want to sound too high on the goalie tandem here, but last year's Rittich was one of the best on the league.

He hasn't peaked yet, IMHO.

A minor injury derailed a good finish to the year.

And lost him the net when we needed him the most.

 

Talbot's detractors say he was a 1st shot goal in 13 games last season.

Big deal.

It's not what you do on the first shot, but in the rest of the game.

 

 

When you look at the full season stats, Rittich was middle of the road.  The issue with Rittich is that he is great in the first half, but falls a part in February. This has happened two seasons in a row.  Big Save Dave from October through January.  Please make a Save Dave to finish the season.  It was bad enough last season that Mike Smith got the playoffs, and he was terrible regular season. Can he figure out how to keep it together for a full season?  What if he ends up with a legitimate starter load if Talbot doesn't work out in Calgary? 

 

Talbot might do better in Calgary.  He has shown he is a very capable goalie in the past.  But he is 32 years old and has been on a steep slide for the last two seasons.  Is a change of scenery enough to get him to rebound, or are their deeper issues there? 

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

When you look at the full season stats, Rittich was middle of the road.  The issue with Rittich is that he is great in the first half, but falls a part in February. This has happened two seasons in a row.  Big Save Dave from October through January.  Please make a Save Dave to finish the season.  It was bad enough last season that Mike Smith got the playoffs, and he was terrible regular season. Can he figure out how to keep it together for a full season?  What if he ends up with a legitimate starter load if Talbot doesn't work out in Calgary? 

 

Talbot might do better in Calgary.  He has shown he is a very capable goalie in the past.  But he is 32 years old and has been on a steep slide for the last two seasons.  Is a change of scenery enough to get him to rebound, or are their deeper issues there? 

I think this will be BSDs year to prove he can handle the workload. Previous years as you mentioned his numbers did tail off but that can be attributed to a couple things, the first year was his rookie year, the second year he was playing through an injury that by all accounts he shouldn't have had to play through.  His fundamentals seem solid and he doesnt have to play a reactionary style. Personally I think even though its officially a 1A/1B tandem, its BSDs position to lose.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

When you look at the full season stats, Rittich was middle of the road.  The issue with Rittich is that he is great in the first half, but falls a part in February. This has happened two seasons in a row.  Big Save Dave from October through January.  Please make a Save Dave to finish the season.  It was bad enough last season that Mike Smith got the playoffs, and he was terrible regular season. Can he figure out how to keep it together for a full season?  What if he ends up with a legitimate starter load if Talbot doesn't work out in Calgary? 

 

Talbot might do better in Calgary.  He has shown he is a very capable goalie in the past.  But he is 32 years old and has been on a steep slide for the last two seasons.  Is a change of scenery enough to get him to rebound, or are their deeper issues there? 

 

When you look at the post January stats, after it was pretty clear he had injured himself, he was ok not great.

Two bad games of 6 goals (TO and TBL), while the rest of the losses were 2 or 3 GA.

So, it begs the question if he is likely to get injured or he has trouble late in the year.

 

Their starts Feb.1st onward:

Rittich 7-5-1 (pulled after 2 goals vs SJS) since Feb.1st

Smith 9-7-1 since Feb.1st

 

Talbot is more a question of the team in front of him.  When EDM was dialed in, and had their defense playing well together and healthy, the team managed to make the playoffs.  That year, combined with his previous seasons seemed to be what Talbot should look like.  The next two years something happened, with both team defense taking a huge hit and his individual stats not looking good.  He managed to win games in spite of that.  And lose a bunch as well.  

[cross16]

It is fair to pose the question on Rittich and can he handle a full season as it is something he has to prove. however, if you look closer it's not hard to find reason for optimism. Broken down monthly. 

 

Oct   .939  2.08

Nov   .911 2.30

Dec   .915 2.64

Jan    .911  2.70

Feb   .884  3.02

Mar   .902  2.90

Apr    .912  2.54

 

Even looking just game by game it was really just 4 REALLY bad games from Jan-Feb-Mar that really dragged on his stats and one of which was the Tampa game on that road trip where the Flames played arguably their worst hockey of the regular season. He ended the season strong IMO, and I don't think it's fair to say Smith took the job. That was a decision that could have gone either way IMO as down the stretch they were neck and neck. 

 

No Save Dave is not fair, especially when it does seem like both the team and player admit there was an injury in there and that would seem to be present in the stats. 

 

[jjgallow]

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

It is fair to pose the question on Rittich and can he handle a full season as it is something he has to prove. however, if you look closer it's not hard to find reason for optimism. Broken down monthly. 

 

Oct   .939  2.08

Nov   .911 2.30

Dec   .915 2.64

Jan    .911  2.70

Feb   .884  3.02

Mar   .902  2.90

Apr    .912  2.54

 

Even looking just game by game it was really just 4 REALLY bad games from Jan-Feb-Mar that really dragged on his stats and one of which was the Tampa game on that road trip where the Flames played arguably their worst hockey of the regular season. He ended the season strong IMO, and I don't think it's fair to say Smith took the job. That was a decision that could have gone either way IMO as down the stretch they were neck and neck. 

 

No Save Dave is not fair, especially when it does seem like both the team and player admit there was an injury in there and that would seem to be present in the stats. 

 

 

So,

 

Optimisim in this matter isn't my strength, so I will have to trust you

 

The problem I find with breaking down stats into small numbers is you tend to find anomallies any which way which support your theory.

 

4 bad games is  a huge percentage of the games he played...  In my head must be 25% or higher that he fell apart in?

 

What I see there is decline, with some hope in April but he didn't have many game there.    I also see him getting worse when he plays more games.    But now we're getting into sample sizes so small they admittedly don't mean much.

 

Anyway, as the season approaches I'll be shutting my yap more until we've seen some action.    I must admit last year's regular season went much better than I had expected.    Didn't end that way, but still.    There does come a point where you just have to have some hope.

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

4 bad games is  a huge percentage of the games he played...  In my head must be 25% or higher that he fell apart in?

 

 

 

Less than 10%......

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

So,

 

Optimisim in this matter isn't my strength, so I will have to trust you

 

The problem I find with breaking down stats into small numbers is you tend to find anomallies any which way which support your theory.

 

4 bad games is  a huge percentage of the games he played...  In my head must be 25% or higher that he fell apart in?

 

What I see there is decline, with some hope in April but he didn't have many game there.    I also see him getting worse when he plays more games.    But now we're getting into sample sizes so small they admittedly don't mean much.

 

Anyway, as the season approaches I'll be shutting my yap more until we've seen some action.    I must admit last year's regular season went much better than I had expected.    Didn't end that way, but still.    There does come a point where you just have to have some hope.

 

What is strange is the splits between home and away:

 

 

 

More losses on the road, with a better SA% and GAA.

Two losses in regulation or OT at home....the whole season.

He came in on relief twice at home; once against PITTS in the "Tear it Down" game, and once against Philly, where he brough them home to a win.

[The_People1]

Sounds like Tyler Parsons is not at Flames camp and has decided to do training on his own.  Is this a good thing?

 

 

[cross16]

4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Sounds like Tyler Parsons is not at Flames camp and has decided to do training on his own.  Is this a good thing?

 

 

 

He is on the camp roster, with no reports I've heard that he won't be here, but he chose to train on his own for the summer instead of coming to Calgary. Was at development camp too. 

 

So not really a story there. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

He is on the camp roster, with no reports I've heard that he won't be here, but he chose to train on his own for the summer instead of coming to Calgary. Was at development camp too. 

 

So not really a story there. 

 

Huh.  The training on his own could be a good thing imho.  We're not exactly world renowned for goaltender development.

 

Glad he's in camp though.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

He is on the camp roster, with no reports I've heard that he won't be here, but he chose to train on his own for the summer instead of coming to Calgary. Was at development camp too. 

 

So not really a story there. 

 

Sorry i think i meant Nick Schneider,

 

 

 

 

[cross16]

33 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sorry i think i meant Nick Schneider,

 

 

 

 

 

I have not heard anything on Nick Schneider that suggests he chose not to attend. Would guess it's likely has more to do with the Flames wanting to give those 3 more minutes as opposed to a case of him not wanting to be there. 4 goalies for 2 games (not split squads) would be a lot. 

 

Would suspect you see him at main camp. 

[kehatch]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

It is fair to pose the question on Rittich and can he handle a full season as it is something he has to prove. however, if you look closer it's not hard to find reason for optimism. Broken down monthly. 

 

Oct   .939  2.08

Nov   .911 2.30

Dec   .915 2.64

Jan    .911  2.70

Feb   .884  3.02

Mar   .902  2.90

Apr    .912  2.54

 

Even looking just game by game it was really just 4 REALLY bad games from Jan-Feb-Mar that really dragged on his stats and one of which was the Tampa game on that road trip where the Flames played arguably their worst hockey of the regular season. He ended the season strong IMO, and I don't think it's fair to say Smith took the job. That was a decision that could have gone either way IMO as down the stretch they were neck and neck. 

 

No Save Dave is not fair, especially when it does seem like both the team and player admit there was an injury in there and that would seem to be present in the stats. 

 

 

Another way to look at it is that is in the 9 games since Feb 9 when he was pulled against San Jose until the Flames basically secured a spot he had 3 strong games. Two of them were against weak teams where the Flames limited the opposition to 23 shots or less. 

 

I agree it was down to the wire in who to start in the playoffs. But he wasn't up against Carey Price. It should never have been a question of who was starting in the playoffs. 

 

I am not saying Rittich is terrible or guaranteed to be bad. He was very good early and returned to form in mid March. I also agree that he should have a shot at taking on the starter role. But until he can show he can carry the team into the stretch and beyond I remain skeptical, particularly with Cam Talbot as our plan B. 

 

If it was just last season I would consider it a blip and move on. But two seasons in a row is a reason to be concerned Imo. 

[robrob74]

24 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

Another way to look at it is that is in the 9 games since Feb 9 when he was pulled against San Jose until the Flames basically secured a spot he had 3 strong games. Two of them were against weak teams where the Flames limited the opposition to 23 shots or less. 

 

I agree it was down to the wire in who to start in the playoffs. But he wasn't up against Carey Price. It should never have been a question of who was starting in the playoffs. 

 

I am not saying Rittich is terrible or guaranteed to be bad. He was very good early and returned to form in mid March. I also agree that he should have a shot at taking on the starter role. But until he can show he can carry the team into the stretch and beyond I remain skeptical, particularly with Cam Talbot as our plan B. 

 

If it was just last season I would consider it a blip and move on. But two seasons in a row is a reason to be concerned Imo. 

 

 

Wasn’t he in a collision which resulted in an injury? Or was it a stretch that injured him? He did get injured around the all-star break.  

 

He played through it. He even turned down playing in the worlds due to recovery.

[travel_dude]

22 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

Wasn’t he in a collision which resulted in an injury? Or was it a stretch that injured him? He did get injured around the all-star break.  

 

He played through it. He even turned down playing in the worlds due to recovery.

 

There was a game where he was shaken up, and Hrudey mentioned it looked like he tweaked his knee.

For some reason, I think it was the game in Carolina.

He played the whole game, but didn;t look right the next game against the Sharks.

That game in Carolina was the 9th wn in 11 games for the Flames.

Including the CAR game, Rittich had just rattled off a 9-0-1 record in 10 starts.

After the CAR game, he was pulled, lost in OT, let in 6 goals, won two games, let in 6 goals.

 

It would make sense that the CAR game was the injury.

He wasn;t as sharp afterwards.

SJS was almost as if BP knew his knee was flaring up.

Pulled him as much for health as two bad goals. 

[cross16]

9 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

 

If it was just last season I would consider it a blip and move on. But two seasons in a row is a reason to be concerned Imo. 

 

I think that's were i disagree, I don't think the 2 are the same nor is there a pattern. 2 seasons ago was strong play as a backup and a fall off a cliff once he was pressed into starter duty and never really recovered. I had little confidence in Rittich because of how that season played out, he just never looked the same once he had to start. 

Last season was great, took the starter job, small blip (that could easily be impacted by injury) with a recovery. The pattern isn't really the same. 

 

I get people are worried about goaltending and that's to each their own I'm not going to change your mind. But if the worry is due to a "pattern" I don't think its there. Rittich showed a bunch of growth last year IMO which is why I personally am encouraged. 

[kehatch]

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I think that's were i disagree, I don't think the 2 are the same nor is there a pattern. 2 seasons ago was strong play as a backup and a fall off a cliff once he was pressed into starter duty and never really recovered. I had little confidence in Rittich because of how that season played out, he just never looked the same once he had to start. 

Last season was great, took the starter job, small blip (that could easily be impacted by injury) with a recovery. The pattern isn't really the same. 

 

I get people are worried about goaltending and that's to each their own I'm not going to change your mind. But if the worry is due to a "pattern" I don't think its there. Rittich showed a bunch of growth last year IMO which is why I personally am encouraged. 

 

I don't buy the injury argument. If your hurt as a goalie then you don't play. I am sure he was nicked up, but in a 82+ game season that's going to happen. He got starts and stayed on the roster. 

 

The fact is he fell off in February two seasons in a row. We can grasp for reasons, but until he shows me he can perform during the toughest months of the year I remain skeptical. 

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I don't buy the injury argument. If your hurt as a goalie then you don't play. I am sure he was nicked up, but in a 82+ game season that's going to happen. He got starts and stayed on the roster. 

 

The fact is he fell off in February two seasons in a row. We can grasp for reasons, but until he shows me he can perform during the toughest months of the year I remain skeptical. 

 

I will hold the same true to the players too. Gaudreau, Monahan fell two years in a row too, the same two years when it mattered most. 

 

I agree, if you’re hurt, sit and get better. A healthy player might be able to do more and the injuries could hurt the team more in the end. 

 

 

[Cowtownguy]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I don't buy the injury argument. If your hurt as a goalie then you don't play. I am sure he was nicked up, but in a 82+ game season that's going to happen. He got starts and stayed on the roster. 

 

The fact is he fell off in February two seasons in a row. We can grasp for reasons, but until he shows me he can perform during the toughest months of the year I remain skeptical. 

I think that an injury is a plausible argument for his drop in play. I certainly don't know many NHL players, but I have spoken to a few over the years. There is consensus that there is a lot of pressure for players to keep playing despite an injury. They are encouraged to play through pain, keep their mouths shut when they do, and not bring down others. There is also the pressure of losing one's job. If Rittich's play drops, and Talbot just happens to go on a serious streak like he did with the Oilers that one year in the playoffs, Peters is sure to keep going with him. There is also the concern of being labelled of "injury prone". 

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, Cowtownguy said:

I think that an injury is a plausible argument for his drop in play. I certainly don't know many NHL players, but I have spoken to a few over the years. There is consensus that there is a lot of pressure for players to keep playing despite an injury. They are encouraged to play through pain, keep their mouths shut when they do, and not bring down others. There is also the pressure of losing one's job. If Rittich's play drops, and Talbot just happens to go on a serious streak like he did with the Oilers that one year in the playoffs, Peters is sure to keep going with him. There is also the concern of being labelled of "injury prone". 

 

It is plausible. It is also convenient. It's getting too common we here the injury explanation come out after a season to explain poor play. I have zero doubts it is true in some cases and a contributor in others. But just about everyone is dinged come February and its an easy out. 

 

To be clear, I am not saying that Rittich didn't have an injury that explained the down turn. I am also not saying he is destined to falter next February. I just think big questions still remain re his ability to excel down the stretch or his durability to play solid hockey for a full season. The "don't worry about it because he says he was injured" argument doesn't sway me. Not after two seasons of the same routine.

 

He needs to prove he can do it. Until he does I think his durability and ability to play down the stretch are fair questions. 

[Cowtownguy]

14 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

It is plausible. It is also convenient. It's getting too common we here the injury explanation come out after a season to explain poor play. I have zero doubts it is true in some cases and a contributor in others. But just about everyone is dinged come February and its an easy out. 

 

To be clear, I am not saying that Rittich didn't have an injury that explained the down turn. I am also not saying he is destined to falter next February. I just think big questions still remain re his ability to excel down the stretch or his durability to play solid hockey for a full season. The "don't worry about it because he says he was injured" argument doesn't sway me. Not after two seasons of the same routine.

 

He needs to prove he can do it. Until he does I think his durability and ability to play down the stretch are fair questions. 

I think that we are in agreement. I have my reservations about both goalies. I think that they both have potential, but I am not completely convinced that they will steal very many games. The defence needs to ante up given our 'tenders.

[travel_dude]

14 hours ago, kehatch said:

To be clear, I am not saying that Rittich didn't have an injury that explained the down turn. I am also not saying he is destined to falter next February. I just think big questions still remain re his ability to excel down the stretch or his durability to play solid hockey for a full season. The "don't worry about it because he says he was injured" argument doesn't sway me. Not after two seasons of the same routine.

 

Every goalie is at risk to get injured and have it impact their play.

Not saying it's 100% true that he was, but last year it seemed that it was like a light switch, not a gradual decay.

I'm as concerned about any goalie we have maintaining his play through the season.

Last year, we rode Rittich too hard at times, mostly due to Smith being crap.

Injury concern, lax play or burnt out, Rittich sat more games in the early spring.

Manage the starts better and that may not be as likely to happen.

 

I'm more concerned with Talbot being able to handle 40 games at this point.

If he's another Lack, then we will be forced to live and die with Rittich, which sets him up for regression or injury.

The only thing positive about our goaltending is we don't have to suffer through another year of Smith's ups and downs.

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I think that we are in agreement. I have my reservations about both goalies. I think that they both have potential, but I am not completely convinced that they will steal very many games. The defence needs to ante up given our 'tenders.

 

 

I agree with the D. 

 

How would you rate our Defense, and amongst the rest of the league? 

 

The talking heads thought we were deep a few seasons ago.

 

I think we are above average offensively and average defensively. Tough to rate considering the goaltending. And I think that goaltending and D are a result of each’s effort/play. 

 

D can help make a goalie better and a goalie can make D better.