Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
For sure, but there's always some context required when looking at stats. 1/3 of Markstrom's games came before he became a starter. Tim Thomas was 33 with only 80ish games to his name (at a SV% less than .910) before he came on. Obviously I'm not making the comparison, but the closer you look at the stats, the more accurate of a story they tell. Kiprusoff is regarded as one of the best Flames of all-time, an absolute world-beater. Most of us saw him carry the team on his back for a lot of years. Career SV%? .912. Taking career SV% isn't entirely helpful for a lot of guys, nor is judging based on one season or a couple games. That's how you get boneheads relying on some revisionist history to argue Talbot was some no brainer choice over Markstrom. You have to hone in a bit more than that.
Even look at Gibson. Looked like a world-beater last night, right? He was worse than Markstrom last year. And the year before that. His SV% over the last two seasons is .904, but we can all confidently say he's a pretty stellar goaltender, right? Carey Price, good? or trash? .907 over the last two years. I think most people would still call him one of the best in the league. Maybe not $10M good, but way up there.
|
I don't believe Markstrom's performance is better reflected by slicing and dicing his stats from last year, focusing on the good games, vs. looking at career performance.
Markstrom is 32 so I would say his career save % is rather indicative. Using your comparison, is he more likely to follow the Tim Thomas path who peaked in his later years, vs. a Carey Price who seems to be declining? I hope so but that's based on hope really, not evidence.
Seems to me there is evidence that Flames bought high on Markstrom and are likely to be disappointed in his play relative to his contract. Is Talbot at 60% of the AAV and half the term a better option? Looks like it so far.