Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbsy
didn't he keep the NYR on pace for the president's trophy this year while Lundvquist was out??
|
No.
He put them on pace for the President's Trophy while Lundqvist was out.
Quote:
|
My main fear would be that the rangers have one of the best D cores in the league. Is there any normalization that needs to be applied when viewing the strong goaltending that was seen in NYR this year?
|
That's why you isolate percentages for different danger scenarios.
Among goaltenders with over 2000+ minutes played (35 goalies) Talbot was:
27th best in low danger shots (wide angle point / wing shots)
8th best in stopping medium danger shots (i.e. high slot / center point)
5th best in stopping high danger shots (i.e. right in the slot)
while Lundqvist who had the same defense in front of him, was 7th, 20th, and 16th in those same categories.
Price, on the other side of the coin, was 4th, 5th, and 7th in the three categories.
Hiller was 14th, 30th, 8th best - you can see why Belesky ate him alive
Ramo was 12th, 28th, 31st best - you can see why Belesky ate him alive
You could make an argument that the older Lundqvist benefitted from the Rangers' team defense more, but also didn't let in as many
weak goals. But you also saw Lundqvist's lateral mobility get exposed by the Lightning.
I guess the real question is if Talbot's sample size is big enough to say his performance was as good as it was. What we know though, is that Calgary is a team that allowed a good deal of medium/high danger shots on goal, so Talbot if he's not just playing way over his head, could indeed be a great fit on our team.