Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Your math assumes Price faces the same quality of shots that Flames goalies are. I don't know if that is true.
My eyeballs tell me opponents are having a free ride in our slot.
|
Well, let's look at that. Of 37 goalies who have played more than 300 minutes this year:
1. Ramo and Hiller are 35th and 36th respectively in high-danger save percentage (e.g., chances in the low slot);
2. Ramo is 32nd and Hiller is 36th in medium-danger save percentage (which would include the high slot); and
3. Hiller is 14th and Ramo is 16th in low-danger save percentage.
So, if all the shots were coming from the perimeter, the Flames' goaltending would be average. The problem, as your eye test may have revealed to you, is in fact goals from higher-danger areas rather than stinkers. Unfortunately, the Flames' goalies are abysmal at stopping quality scoring chances and really bad at stopping even just decent scoring chances, compared to other goalies in the league. So it appears to be a matter of never getting the "good" or "great" save, based on the data I'm looking at here.
Do they face significantly
more of those high-danger shots compared to other teams? Apparently not: Hiller has faced 42 such shots and Ramo 49. Compare that to Roberto Luongo, who's faced 91 in 11 games (Ramo and Hiller have played 7 each). Since we're talking about comparing to the Habs' goalies, Price in 9 games faced 49 high-danger shots, and Condon has faced 49 in 8 games. Pretty much the same as the Flames' tendys - they've just saved far, far more
of those shots, compared with Hiller and Ramo.