Goaltending conundrum

[riff raff]

I don't know that this is a case where statistics etc. tell all the story.

My recollection of that first game against Montreal was that the shutout was a 'noisy' one (i.e. lots of goalposts). But, to be fair, it was a shutout nonetheless.

The second game, however, was a major red flag as he allowed five (5!) goals in the third period and didn't look all that hot. To me, that was the moment when things started to look shaky.

At no point, before the "injury-event" did he look really good to my eyes...even though he was getting positive results.

But "not looking good" to an individual fan is impossible to quantify and it's easier to fall back on black and white numbers. It also allows the team to push their own agenda - the problem was the injury not the goalie's play.

We'll see.

 

[jonlleafs]

6 games, 4 wins, 1 shutout, .911 sv%.  He had a very good pre-season as well if I recall correctly.  I don't know why we always have to shrug off that solid start as not meaning anything.

Right, but I'm saying that his stats make his start look better than it actually was. From what I remember his performance wasn't really the reason we won those games. As riff raff says, all of the teams the Leafs beat struggled out the gate. And if you take out the one shutout against Montreal his SA% is .889 and his GAA is above 3.

edit: He was also 1-3 in the preseason (played all 4 games fully) and had a .888 SA% in them.

Don't we get to remove his worst pre season game before we compute his pre season SA% ?

If there was one that stood out as much as the Montreal shootout I would, but there isn't. With that said, even if we did remove his worst preseason performance and his best regular season performance his SA% would still be under .900.

But wait, how do we twist it so that it supports "our" theory that he's a good goalie with those numbers?  Work with me here... 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

6 games, 4 wins, 1 shutout, .911 sv%.  He had a very good pre-season as well if I recall correctly.  I don't know why we always have to shrug off that solid start as not meaning anything.

Right, but I'm saying that his stats make his start look better than it actually was. From what I remember his performance wasn't really the reason we won those games. As riff raff says, all of the teams the Leafs beat struggled out the gate. And if you take out the one shutout against Montreal his SA% is .889 and his GAA is above 3.

edit: He was also 1-3 in the preseason (played all 4 games fully) and had a .888 SA% in them.

Don't we get to remove his worst pre season game before we compute his pre season SA% ?

If there was one that stood out as much as the Montreal shootout I would, but there isn't. With that said, even if we did remove his worst preseason performance and his best regular season performance his SA% would still be under .900.

But wait, how do we twist it so that it supports "our" theory that he's a good goalie with those numbers?  Work with me here... 

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Can't we just say 4 games is too small a sample size to make any sort of conclusions from?

 

[ZBBM]

I don't know that this is a case where statistics etc. tell all the story.

My recollection of that first game against Montreal was that the shutout was a 'noisy' one (i.e. lots of goalposts). But, to be fair, it was a shutout nonetheless.

The second game, however, was a major red flag as he allowed five (5!) goals in the third period and didn't look all that hot. To me, that was the moment when things started to look shaky.

At no point, before the "injury-event" did he look really good to my eyes...even though he was getting positive results.

But "not looking good" to an individual fan is impossible to quantify and it's easier to fall back on black and white numbers. It also allows the team to push their own agenda - the problem was the injury not the goalie's play.

We'll see.

You nailed it rr. I remember at the time many saying he didn't look all that great in the first four games.

 

[bustaheims]

Can't we just say 4 games is too small a sample size to make any sort of conclusions from?

You and your logical outlook have no place here.

 

[Rebel_1812]

6 games, 4 wins, 1 shutout, .911 sv%.  He had a very good pre-season as well if I recall correctly.  I don't know why we always have to shrug off that solid start as not meaning anything.

Right, but I'm saying that his stats make his start look better than it actually was. From what I remember his performance wasn't really the reason we won those games. As riff raff says, all of the teams the Leafs beat struggled out the gate. And if you take out the one shutout against Montreal his SA% is .889 and his GAA is above 3.

edit: He was also 1-3 in the preseason (played all 4 games fully) and had a .888 SA% in them.

Don't we get to remove his worst pre season game before we compute his pre season SA% ?

If there was one that stood out as much as the Montreal shootout I would, but there isn't. With that said, even if we did remove his worst preseason performance and his best regular season performance his SA% would still be under .900.

But wait, how do we twist it so that it supports "our" theory that he's a good goalie with those numbers?  Work with me here... 

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

Not by using your twisted logic.  If we only look at the first 4 games of the 2006-2007 season (http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi) and remove the rest of the games of the season because they "stood out" . You will see that Raycroft is a good goalie with good numbers.
2 wins, 1 shutout. 152sav/165shot = 0.921 SA%

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Can't we just say 4 games is too small a sample size to make any sort of conclusions from?

You and your logical outlook have no place here.

And I mean I'd be fine with that. My whole original problem was people trying to excuse Reimer's season by saying he was good before the injury. He was... inconclusive ...at best.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

Not by using your twisted logic.  If we only look at the first 4 games of the 2006-2007 season (http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi) and remove the rest of the games of the season because they "stood out" . You will see that Raycroft is a good goalie with good numbers.
2 wins, 1 shutout. 152sav/165shot = 0.921 SA%

Now I'm confused. What does that have to do with Toskala?

 

[Kin]

I'm not really on board with the idea that we should just dismiss what happened in the bulk of Reimer's season. If he was still injured to the point that he was significantly affected he shouldn't have been playing and he was sold as being healthy when he came back.

He had a slow second season. There's no need to make excuses.

 

[ZBBM]

Water .... water ... waaaaaaaater........

Oh, we're back.

Now that Bernier's in the mix, the conundrum just got conundrummier.

 

[Zee]

Water .... water ... waaaaaaaater........

Oh, we're back.

Now that Bernier's in the mix, the conundrum just got conundrummier.

Bernier's not in the mix yet. 

 

[Rebel_1812]

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

Not by using your twisted logic.  If we only look at the first 4 games of the 2006-2007 season (http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi) and remove the rest of the games of the season because they "stood out" . You will see that Raycroft is a good goalie with good numbers.
2 wins, 1 shutout. 152sav/165shot = 0.921 SA%

Now I'm confused. What does that have to do with Toskala?

I would have to go back through Toskala's record to hand pick which games he looked good in.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

Not by using your twisted logic.  If we only look at the first 4 games of the 2006-2007 season (http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi) and remove the rest of the games of the season because they "stood out" . You will see that Raycroft is a good goalie with good numbers.
2 wins, 1 shutout. 152sav/165shot = 0.921 SA%

Now I'm confused. What does that have to do with Toskala?

I would have to go back through Toskala's record to hand pick which games he looked good in.

You will need very nimble hands to do that.

 

[louisstamos]

Well, it's still better than Toskala's last two seasons here.

Not by using your twisted logic.  If we only look at the first 4 games of the 2006-2007 season (http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi) and remove the rest of the games of the season because they "stood out" . You will see that Raycroft is a good goalie with good numbers.
2 wins, 1 shutout. 152sav/165shot = 0.921 SA%

Now I'm confused. What does that have to do with Toskala?

I would have to go back through Toskala's record to hand pick which games he looked good in.

You will need very nimble hands to do that.

So, his hands need to be better than Toskala's glove hand is what you're saying.  ;D

 

[ZBBM]

Water .... water ... waaaaaaaater........

Oh, we're back.

Now that Bernier's in the mix, the conundrum just got conundrummier.

Bernier's not in the mix yet.

He's in the speculation mix.  Just got added to the list of ingredients on the back of the box.

 

[maplesyrup]

Maybe we can just agree that this conundrum may or may not contain Bernier.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

Water .... water ... waaaaaaaater........

Oh, we're back.

Now that Bernier's in the mix, the conundrum just got conundrummier.

Whoaaaaa!!!  Conundrummier and Bernier BOTH end in ier...  Coincidence??

 

[jonlleafs]

Water .... water ... waaaaaaaater........

Oh, we're back.

Now that Bernier's in the mix, the conundrum just got conundrummier.

Whoaaaaa!!!  Conundrummier and Bernier BOTH end in ier...  Coincidence??

It's a sign

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Hasek as a vetran backup?  :-X