Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
That is entirely subjective and debatable. But it bears pointing out that the only reason I brought up the Pittsburgh game is because it was ignored in an evaluation by a poster who is notoriously biased in the discussion of the Flames goalies:
On the first part, I agree. Rittich has been the better goalie, and I believe he will be the goalie who the Flames will win with in the playoffs.
But then you attempt to bolster your argument by exaggerating the "quality" argument in favour of Rittich. Rittich allowed a bad goal in the home game v. SJ, and then made another mistake that also resulted in a goal. It was a bad performance. It happens to every goalie, but for some reason a few posters continue to go out of their way to forgive him for them. Why can't we all just acknowledge that Rittich has not played especially well of late? Why can't we all recognize that he needs to be better?
And then you follow that up with this. Not only is Rittich forgiven for "awful efforts by his teammates," Smith is then denigrated for somehow turning in an acceptable performance in spite of himself. This is precisely the bias that I have been attempting to call out in this discussion. It's ridiculous.
|
On the first critique, here is my thought process on the SJ game. And feel free to disagree. Also - I made it pretty clear at the start of my post that I'm not saying Rittich's play hasn't fallen off, merely that I don't think people are framing things fairly. I lean more towards Pinder's take, less towards Wills, but generally I'm in the middle here and would like to see both guys succeed. What bothers me about the whole thing is that context is being lost. And when you start to talk about statistics, context is critical. Without it, there's no point in even starting the conversation. Anyways. In regards to the SJ game:
- First goal - not great. He needs to save that shot. Interestingly enough, he faced a very similar shot the next game, and kicked it to the corner. So, I don't dismiss that goal, but I don't think he shouldn't be getting roasted for it either. Things happen. Appears he learned from the shot, and made sure to stop that type of shot the next time he saw it.
- Second goal - good idea, bad execution. Context is important here. He reads the play correctly. But that play should never have happened if (I think it was Brodie?) doesn't make a terrible play 200 ft away to send the best defenseman in the league in on an almost breakaway. Burns makes a good play, Rittich should put it up the boards. But the boards are covered off by a Shark, so really, his only option was to go up the middle. Which, as it turns out, wasn't a great option. Bad overall play. If, instead, he lets Burns come in on a breakaway, and Burns scores, the conversation is about the turn over at the blue line. Not about Rittich. Context.
- Bonus coverage - Smith lets in the first shot he faces, because Smith. (Tongue firmly planted in cheek on this one).
Am I biased against Smith, I don't think so, really. I watch a lot of Flames games, and Smith is a goalie I see struggle to make routine saves. He makes it look more difficult than other goalies do. That's not me making pot shots or displaying bias. That's a statement based on my observations of Smith's goaltending.