Game 15 - Panthers @ Leafs - Tues 11-08 - 7 PM SportsNet

[maplesyrup]

I think he's been giving us adequate NHL backup goaltending.

I think that's the thing most of us are having trouble with. In my mind, he hasn't but that's just wheel-spinning at this point. Anyway, even if you're correct, would you agree that absent a #1, "adequate" backup goaltending isn't going to be enough right know?... especially given that there are some other holes in the boat's hull.

 

[Zee]

Fair enough.

How about adequate NHL level goaltending?

Or is that too much to ask.

Because regardless of what you, or Bullfrog, or GUSTAVSSON4LYFE fan wants to think, he hasn't been giving us even that.

I think he's been giving us adequate NHL backup goaltending.

There are 64 goalies listed on NHL.com's stat page.  Gustavsson is 59th out of 64 in save % and 61st out of 64 in GAA.

 

[Bullfrog]

There are 64 goalies listed on NHL.com's stat page.  Gustavsson is 59th out of 64 in save % and 61st out of 64 in GAA.

I'm aware of that as similar stats have been provided numerous times in the last couple of days.

 

[Bullfrog]

I think he's been giving us adequate NHL backup goaltending.

I think that's the thing most of us are having trouble with. In my mind, he hasn't but that's just wheel-spinning at this point. Anyway, even if you're correct, would you agree that absent a #1, "adequate" backup goaltending isn't going to be enough right know?... especially given that there are some other holes in the boat's hull.

Yes, I would agree with that. I've never claimed Gustavsson is the answer.

 

[Strangelove]

Fair enough.

How about adequate NHL level goaltending?

Or is that too much to ask.

Because regardless of what you, or Bullfrog, or GUSTAVSSON4LYFE fan wants to think, he hasn't been giving us even that.

I think he's been giving us adequate NHL backup goaltending.

There are 64 goalies listed on NHL.com's stat page.  Gustavsson is 59th out of 64 in save % and 61st out of 64 in GAA.

Repeatedly pointing to statistics extremely early in a long season is not going to be very enlightening.  The Leafs are fundamentally terrible defensively, whether it's failing to pressure/tie up opposing players, failing to clear the front of the net, failing to kill penalties effectively, failing to plug up the neutral zone, and so forth.  The fact that they are positionally so far out of whack is skewing the goaltending stats, insofar as opposing teams have free reign in front of the Leafs' net game after game and are able, as a result, to score unopposed.  Granted, the goaltending was not good this past game, but it's easy to understand why a goalie might lose his confidence when our defenseman leave them out to dry game after game.

 

[Rebel_1812]

by the way Nik, the monster had another bad game statistically.  His save percentage was 0.857 and his GA was 3.  As I said before, you will not win consistently with a goalie whose gaa is 3 or over and whose save percentage was below 0.900.

What did that poor straw man ever do to you?

lol!!!!  oh Nik, your poor logic and your hypocrisy will only become more laughable as the season goes on and you still defend the monster.  Just admit it he is a bad goalie by any logic.

 

[Rebel_1812]

Honestly, I just don't know if that's true. I think the team had better results with Reimer in net and they definitely looked better but that was also while they took a tour of the cream-puff division.

Just to highlight this for a second it's actually a pretty significant change. The best team, standings wise, that Reimer started against was the Senators. The worst team, standings wise, that Gus has started against have been the Bruins. Reimer started the grand total of one game against a team that wasn't last or next to last in their division.

stop trying to manipulate the numbers. This is the NHL 30 shots against by the worst team in the league is basically equal to 30 shots against by the best team.  Every team has its all stars.  A goalie with a bad gaa and bad save percentage is just a bad goalie, regardless of how one tries to skew the numbers.  I would be very interested in how you viewed Raycroft since he was also a bad goalie with some stats in his favor.

 

[Kin]

lol!!!!  oh Nik, your poor logic and your hypocrisy will only become more laughable as the season goes on and you still defend the monster.  Just admit it he is a bad goalie by any logic.

You really need to get better at reading. There's no defending of Gus anywhere here.

 

[Kin]

stop trying to manipulate the numbers. This is the NHL 30 shots against by the worst team in the league is basically equal to 30 shots against by the best team.  Every team has its all stars.  A goalie with a bad gaa and bad save percentage is just a bad goalie, regardless of how one tries to skew the numbers.  I would be very interested in how you viewed Raycroft since he was also a bad goalie with some stats in his favor.

Wow. I've never, in my life, seen someone so slavishly devoted to such flawed statistics as you are. It's like you honestly think watching the games is entirely irrelevant compared to the SV% and GAA numbers that are produced.

 

[Zee]

stop trying to manipulate the numbers. This is the NHL 30 shots against by the worst team in the league is basically equal to 30 shots against by the best team.  Every team has its all stars.  A goalie with a bad gaa and bad save percentage is just a bad goalie, regardless of how one tries to skew the numbers.  I would be very interested in how you viewed Raycroft since he was also a bad goalie with some stats in his favor.

Wow. I've never, in my life, seen someone so slavishly devoted to such flawed statistics as you are. It's like you honestly think watching the games is entirely irrelevant compared to the SV% and GAA numbers that are produced.

Do you watch every single game played by every single goalie in the league?  Yes the Leafs have bad defensive lapses and give up way too many chances, but are you suggesting no other teams in the league do this?  Maybe the difference is they have goalies who might make a save every now and again to cover up for a mistake, and in doing so their respective GAA and Save % look better.  I've seen Reimer play behind this same team as Gustavsson and he didn't look nearly as bad.  All other things being equal, what can you compare goalies with if not their stats?

 

[Erndog]

stop trying to manipulate the numbers. This is the NHL 30 shots against by the worst team in the league is basically equal to 30 shots against by the best team.  Every team has its all stars.  A goalie with a bad gaa and bad save percentage is just a bad goalie, regardless of how one tries to skew the numbers.  I would be very interested in how you viewed Raycroft since he was also a bad goalie with some stats in his favor.

Wow. I've never, in my life, seen someone so slavishly devoted to such flawed statistics as you are. It's like you honestly think watching the games is entirely irrelevant compared to the SV% and GAA numbers that are produced.

I know what both of you are saying.

I will say this though, just because you are playing a last place team, doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going to have a good game or get a lot of chances.

We played Columbus and they had what?  40 shots?  A lot of high quality chances... we had 18 shots ourselves, I think going 10-12 minutes in the 3rd without a shot.

Yes Columbus is a terrible team but other than the fact they didn't get any goaltending they didn't have a terrible game. 

We could, theoretically play the last place team, allow 40+ shots, 15 quality chances and win, and the next game play the first place team, allow 20 shots, 5 chances, and lose. 

Without actually watching every single game that is played there's no real way of knowing?  That's why people rely on stats like SV%... it's probably the most fair metric for a goalie (certainly better than wins and/or GAA).

 

[Kin]

Do you watch every single game played by every single goalie in the league?

No. I've watched enough hockey in my life, however, to know that simply looking at shot totals and assuming that they produce scoring chances of uniform difficulty for a goalie, especially in a small sample size, is asinine.

  Yes the Leafs have bad defensive lapses and give up way too many chances, but are you suggesting no other teams in the league do this?

No. I'm suggesting that save percentage/GAA have biases and flaws to them, making them similar to every other statistic in the world, and are not to be taken as bible law.

All other things being equal, what can you compare goalies with if not their stats?

But the point is that all other things aren't equal, hence the biases and flaws. But even so, to answer your question, we can combine statistical analysis, including more complicated statistical analysis then simply GAA and SV%, with our eyeballs and brains.

I know it's not an option for everyone but that's still the way I lean.

 

[Kin]

I know what both of you are saying.

I will say this though, just because you are playing a last place team, doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going to have a good game or get a lot of chances.

We played Columbus and they had what?  40 shots?  A lot of high quality chances... we had 18 shots ourselves, I think going 10-12 minutes in the 3rd without a shot.

Yes Columbus is a terrible team but other than the fact they didn't get any goaltending they didn't have a terrible game. 

So...just so I have this straight, you're suggesting that the Leafs are so sketchy defensively that they leave their goalies hanging out to dry even against bottom feeders?

Well, it's a tough analysis but I guess I can reluctantly agree with it. It might go a ways to explaining how Ben Scrivens might produce a  4.05 GAA and .867 SV% and be a bad goalie.

Kidding aside, isn't the Columbus game maybe also an example of how when a bad team, who can still play with energy and carry the play, get a bunch of shots off and scoring chances are less likely to capitalize on those chances?

We could, theoretically play the last place team, allow 40+ shots, 15 quality chances and win, and the next game play the first place team, allow 20 shots, 5 chances, and lose.

Right. And it's not that much of a stretch theoretically because, again, part of what makes a good team is not just their ability to generate chances but to cash in on them when they do. 

Without actually watching every single game that is played there's no real way of knowing?  That's why people rely on stats like SV%... it's probably the most fair metric for a goalie (certainly better than wins and/or GAA).

You don't need to have watched every game to say what I'm saying. You just need to have a vague and passing familiarity with hockey to know that a goalie can have a game, or even a stretch of games, where his SV% and GAA numbers are superficially bad but, when you consider the circumstances, his play was actually pretty good and/or the numbers aren't a real accurate reflection of who's to "blame" as it were for the goals going in.

 

[Erndog]

we can combine statistical analysis, including more complicated statistical analysis then simply GAA and SV%, with our eyeballs and brains.

Well, the I'll combine his atrocious statistics with my eyes that see a terrible goalie, who lets in quite a few questionable goals on a regular basis, and who is also critized by every tom dick and harry (surely, all 3 of Tom, Dick, and Harry can't be wrong!), and conclude that you know what.... he is just not very good (to use your very first reply to the Raycroft thread that reached 200 pages).

 

[Erndog]

You don't need to have watched every game to say what I'm saying. You just need to have a vague and passing familiarity with hockey to know that a goalie can have a game, or even a stretch of games, where his SV% and GAA numbers are superficially bad but, when you consider the circumstances, his play was actually pretty good and/or the numbers aren't a real accurate reflection of who's to "blame" as it were for the goals going in.

That's true and I agree.

Too bad that is not the case for Gustavsson here.

I will say, though, that did in fact apply to him in the Philly game.  He played fairly well.  Circumstances didn't favour him (3 breakaways to Jagr, etc).  His numbers that game did not bare out his performance.  Dating back to last year though I'd say his numbers more often than not accurately reflected his performance.

I know you're going to come back with, 'well the Leafs collectively as a whole haven't shown up for Gus much,' and again, as I said yesterday, I think a large part of that is due to the fact that he hasn't shown up for THEM.  Like most teams, they play poorly in front of no goalie.

 

[Redleaf]

Why are we still on Tuesday night's thread? Isn't there an apocalyptic match being held tonight?

 

[Kin]

I will say, though, that did in fact apply to him in the Philly game.

I think it applies, to some degree, to a handful of his games. The Montreal game, for instance, where he came in cold but still got the win. Coming in after Scrivens to mop-up in Boston too. I'd probably throw in Jersey there as well, although I didn't see that one, because I tend to be pretty forgiving of wins(and if that makes me a terrible hypocrite, feel free to read the Reimer vs. Ottawa thread).

I know you're going to come back with, 'well the Leafs collectively as a whole haven't shown up for Gus much,' and again, as I said yesterday, I think a large part of that is due to the fact that he hasn't shown up for THEM.  Like most teams, they play poorly in front of no goalie.

Ah yes, that old chestnut of wisdom "when the going gets tough, the tough cry like little babies and fold up their tents".

Despite the fact that you know me so well as to guess what I'm going to say in 99% of the cases, I'm actually going to throw you for a loop here. I was actually just going to go out on my hilarious joke up there.

 

[Kin]

Well, the I'll combine his atrocious statistics with my eyes that see a terrible goalie, who lets in quite a few questionable goals on a regular basis, and who is also critized by every tom dick and harry (surely, all 3 of Tom, Dick, and Harry can't be wrong!), and conclude that you know what.... he is just not very good (to use your very first reply to the Raycroft thread that reached 200 pages).

Ah, one of my greatest hits.

I tell you what, if anyone starts the "why are people criticizing Gus" thread you have my permission to dust that one off and break it out.

 

[Rebel_1812]

stop trying to manipulate the numbers. This is the NHL 30 shots against by the worst team in the league is basically equal to 30 shots against by the best team.  Every team has its all stars.  A goalie with a bad gaa and bad save percentage is just a bad goalie, regardless of how one tries to skew the numbers.  I would be very interested in how you viewed Raycroft since he was also a bad goalie with some stats in his favor.

Wow. I've never, in my life, seen someone so slavishly devoted to such flawed statistics as you are. It's like you honestly think watching the games is entirely irrelevant compared to the SV% and GAA numbers that are produced.

Jeez Nik, you criticized people that say Gus sucks as having no logic or consistency.  Yet now you criticize because I am too consistent.  Honestly, Nik you take hypocrisy and sophistry to a whole new level.

 

[Kin]

Jeez Nik, you criticized people that say Gus sucks as having no logic or consistency.  Yet now you criticize because I am too consistent. 

Wow. I can't even begin to fathom the way what I wrote could be comprehended as a criticism of too much consistency. Myopic and shallow may be consistent for you but being consistently wrong is no virtue.