Continuing our discussion from the last thread.
Quote:
The biggest thing with Holtby is it appears something is causing him to unable to make the high danger saves.
Over the last three seasons:
Holtby:
HDSV%: .806 (54th)
MDSV%: .923 (17th)
LDSV%: .977 (12th)
Holtby Goals Saved Above Expectation Trend: https://twitter.com/chartinghockey/s...296126464?s=21
So the question with Holtby is if the High Danger has something to do with how Washington is playing, or if his athleticism has taken a hit.
Markstrom is a guy that has been a bonafide starter now over the last three seasons but I’m still not sure he’s elite. His best attribute seems to be that he’s consistent.
HDSV: .835 (22nd)
MDSV: .923 (17th)
LDSV: .968 (41st)
Markstrom Goals Saved Above Expectation Thread: https://twitter.com/chartinghockey/s...834898946?s=21
So that is comparing the best three years of Markstroms career vs the worst three years of Holtby’s. Honestly I’d be a bit worried about either guy, Holtby for high danger saves, Markstroms been a guy that’s had some low danger goals against issues for his career.
And based on Moneypuck’s logic they actually had Holtby better than Markstrom in 17-18 and 18-19, they only have Markstrom as better in 19-20 So their is risk either way IMO.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814
Call me old fashioned, but the high danger chances don't concern me nearly as much as the low danger goals.
A high danger goal is a golden opportunity. Yeah, you'd like a save there, but it's the best league in the world, and a 10-bell chance is going in the net more often than not.
There's nothing more demoralizing than a weak goal. Teams cannot overcome them.
Some cross-crease sauce to an $8M forward on his off wing that God himself couldn't save never sticks in your craw; a puck that your blind great-aunt could've handled, not so much.
Again, nobody we can get for free on the open market is going to be without flaws.
We have two very strong UFA options, and other fallbacks on the trade market.
Personally, as we have the opportunity to acquire someone who's won championship(s) as a starter, we should not pass that opportunity up. But I do acknowledge there's nothing approaching certainty with any option, be it Murray, Markstrom or Holtby.
To me, Holtby has the best body of work. He's the right age. I think his decline can be explained in large part by the pressure of having to win a championship every year when your captain is Alexander Ovechkin.
He put up .922 in the playoffs two years ago. Not six or seven. Two. That's nothing.
|
Interesting thing is if you look at the shot mix the Flames give up you can estimate what goalie would be a better fit.
Over the last three seasons Flames have given up:
HDSA: 1375 (4th least)
MDSA: 1510 (19th)
LDSA: 2364 (9th)
Based on Holtby’s numbers the Flames would have given up 437 goals over the last three seasons.
Based on Markstroms numbers over that time they would have given up 419 goals.
So based on the actual shots against the Flames gave up and the save percentage for these goalies Markstrom would have been better by ~18 goals than Holtby. Of course no goalie is playing all the games, so more like 12 goals better if you assume 65% of the starts.
I generally agree with you though. Give me the goalie that saves low danger and medium danger goals but maybe doesn’t make a huge save over the goalie that maybe makes a huge save but let’s in a softy.
Just for reference the Actual Flames goalies gave up 453 goals against.