L K said:
TML fan said:
Hold on. You can't proclaim Gustavsson as the clear cut #1 based on 1 month of play, and simply disregard nearly 2 months of work put in by Reimer last season. If you want to go that route, then I could argue that it's entirely possible that the only reason Gustavsson got the net is because Reimer went down.
That doesn't mean I think that Gustavsson hasn't been the better goalie this season. I think that he hasn't done anything lately to unquestionably deserve the net over Reimer. Wilson hasn't handled the goaltending situation any differently than he has when Gustavsson was going well. The fact of the matter is that, this month, neither goalie has played particularly well. Maybe Reimer has been a little worse in his losses, but he's got 4 wins in the bank. Reimer's win % this month is .571. Gustavsson's is .000. Who am I going to go with in the majority of the games? All Gustavsson has to do is win, and this conversation is over.
Well part of the problem with win percentage over small sample size is that it is something that changes wildly. Reimer has played 7 out of 9. If Gus' played the next 5 games and won 4 of them, he would have a better winning percentage but it would be equally irresponsible to declare him as the better player over that 5 game stretch because he simply won more games when he just played more games.
And while Reimer played very well last year, we are talking about a calendar year ago on that play. I certainly wouldn't be clamouring for Tim Connolly to be getting more ice-time because in November he was PPG player.
Coming out of the all-star break, Gustavsson was the one who was performing. That meant he should have been getting the lionshare of the starts. That never happened and now we have the problem where 'win and you start' leads the team into problems because one bad showing by the team in front of a goalie can sink them for a period of time and leave them cold. Yes, you need to win games and that is the end result, but I don't come away from Reimer getting two starts against a horrid Edmonton team (both of which he played pretty mediocre in) and the Leafs were pretty much scoring at will and think, yep, Reimer was why we won those games. The team basically won independent (not in spite of) of their goaltending simply because Edmonton can't play defense and gave up way too many scoring chances for the Leafs.
But is there a reason why Reimer has played more games? Gustavsson played 11 of 12 games in January. Wilson took him out after a tough loss. Maybe he wasn't happy with his play? Maybe he thought Gustavsson needed a break? Who knows? The point is, Reimer came in and won 3 straight games. He went back to Gustavsson on the 2nd night of back to backs and he lost, so he went back to Reimer, because Reimer was on a winning streak. What is so wrong with that?
Reimer then lost in Philly, but it was a close game so my guess is Wilson gave Reimer the benefit of the doubt and put him back in against Montreal. Reimer, along with the whole team, crapped the bed so Wilson went right back to Gustavsson. Wilson did the same thing in January after back to back losses to Buffalo and the Rangers. Reimer went in and lost his game, so he went right back to Gustavsson. That seems like pretty fair treatment to me.
I'm not insinuating that Reimer was the reason we won those games. The simple fact is, he was in net when the team won. That's why he stayed in the net. How many coaches are going to switch goalies after back to back shutouts? How many coaches are going to stick with a guy who lost 5-1 going in back-to-back games? Reimer was getting results. Whether they were direct or indirect is irrelevant.
The part of the argument I am challenging is the idea that Wilson is shafting Gustavsson. That's simply not true. Gustavsson hasn't played because Reimer was getting wins. It's as simple as that. Nobody was complaining about Reimer being in the net when the Leafs won 3 in a row.