Mike Smith's... woes? He blows? Eating crows? Who knows! (Also David Rittich exists!)

[dino7c]

One thing about the Since Jan or Feb stats is that the Flames had the worst travel schedule in NHL history. Imean the Leafs are complaining about coming out west and playing 3 games in a week then changing time zones!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Not an effective one. I honestly don’t know what his point is.

I did object to apportioning some blame on the goalie for the TB loss. I thought that was clear

Flames scored 3, he let in 4 that he had no practical chance of stopping.

The problem is that this is no different from an assertion that he was completely blameless in the outcome. That is how language works.

Yet somehow we are left with this:

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

When your opening salvo includes portioning blame on the goalie it is tough to take the rest of the argument seriously.

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I never said completely blameless.

My ONLY point—which you seem to take issue with—has always been that Rittich has played a contributing role to the poor outcome of a few games this season.

[djsFlames]

It's true there wasn't really an upgrade available within reason, and the ones we tried for didn't pan out. It is what it is and all we can do for 18/19 is hope for the best for both of these gentlemen and maybe one will elevate to the level we hoped for when the games matter.

I do think that well see some of the best performances out of whoever starts. The importance is not lost on them and I expect the guy will bring his A game. I don't think we'll get anything like Elliott from either guy, at the very least.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

My ONLY point—which you seem to take issue with—has always been that Rittich has played a contributing role to the poor outcome of a few games this season.

That was your point?

I don’t take issue with that. I already said, for example, that I didn’t like the second Vancouver goal in the 3-2 OTL.

I have said I don’t like sv% as a stat in general, particularly in small samples and also not considering context.

(I still think he played pretty well against TB (things he could control, that is). That won’t change. The numbers sucked and he had a bad statistical night but played well.)

[dammage79]

If you can get a round or two with this goaltending, we all should consider that a resounding success.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

The problem is that this is no different from an assertion that he was completely blameless in the outcome. That is how language works.

Yet somehow we are left with this:

My ONLY point—which you seem to take issue with—has always been that Rittich has played a contributing role to the poor outcome of a few games this season.

I am going to back up, and call you out on this.

Two things to consider.

You asked if Rittich was completely blameless on all goals.
But then you are talking about being blameless for the outcome.
Two different things. (Also, context matters!)

Rittich was blameless on 4 of 6 goals, so not all goals.
Flames only scored 3, though, so he is blameless for the outcome (which I consider the L)

So I can have it both ways.

I win. �� <- picture of trophy that may have disappeared

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think it really depends on what you are trying to figure out. If you want to know who has had the better season, yeah full season stats. If you want to know who is trending or playing well leading into the POs, the last string of games is much more relevant. If you have a guy who has been playing lights out lately but really struggled in Oct.-Nov., his season stats might not give you an accurate picture of how he should be expected to perform short term. It might definitely tell you about his prospects for next year though.

I want to see proof this is true.

Regression to the mean would lead me to believe it is much more likely that the player is going to return to his normal performance level.

Take the goalies out of this equation and substitute in Gaudreau or Monahan. They've both struggled post all star game before last night. Do you believe they those 4 weeks or whatever it was is more likely to predict their future performance or the full season worth of being good. I could come in here and put up Monahan's PPG stats for the last 5 weeks and say he's a 3rd line centre or I could believe the full season and say he's fine on the top line.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I want to see proof this is true.

Regression to the mean would lead me to believe it is much more likely that the player is going to return to his normal performance level.

Take the goalies out of this equation and substitute in Gaudreau or Monahan. They've both struggled post all star game before last night. Do you believe they those 4 weeks or whatever it was is more likely to predict their future performance or the full season worth of being good. I could come in here and put up Monahan's PPG stats for the last 5 weeks and say he's a 3rd line centre or I could believe the full season and say he's fine on the top line.

So how does one determine "normal performance level" in this instance?

[1qqaaz]

With the emergence of Kuemper, it's looking like Antti Raanta might be the most sensible option that the Flames will have for goaltending. He makes 4.25 mill until 2021.

Arizona is in division, but I don't think many people consider them to be rivals.

Raanta is 29, has a career 92% in 150+ games.
He's injury prone, but I think Rittich could be a 1b if it comes to that.

I think the only question is if Arizona is willing to part with one of their goalies.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I want to see proof this is true.

Regression to the mean would lead me to believe it is much more likely that the player is going to return to his normal performance level.

Take the goalies out of this equation and substitute in Gaudreau or Monahan. They've both struggled post all star game before last night. Do you believe they those 4 weeks or whatever it was is more likely to predict their future performance or the full season worth of being good. I could come in here and put up Monahan's PPG stats for the last 5 weeks and say he's a 3rd line centre or I could believe the full season and say he's fine on the top line.

You didn't understand what I wrote. I said the full season stats would give a better indication of long term future performance - i.e. Next year. If you are looking to see who's playing better heading into the POs, I'd look at recent trends.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

With the emergence of Kuemper, it's looking like Antti Raanta might be the most sensible option that the Flames will have for goaltending. He makes 4.25 mill until 2021.

Arizona is in division, but I don't think many people consider them to be rivals.

Raanta is 29, has a career 92% in 150+ games.
He's injury prone, but I think Rittich could be a 1b if it comes to that.

I think the only question is if Arizona is willing to part with one of their goalies.

I think that would be a good option to pursue.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If you can show me any proof that using a smaller sample of goalie performance instead of the full season is a better predictor of future results than I will take this seriously. Or if it is that Jan 1st should be the cut-off instead of Dec 1st or Feb 1st.

Until then I will take larger full season sample over smaller 2.5 months sample.

Sorry that doesn't make much sense to me.

I'm with you if a person goes back and picks some perfect date where Smith stopped sucking and Rittich started playing poorly in order to make a point. Or if a person goes just five on five, or just when the games are close, or just on Tuesdays.

But when one goalie was top three in the league for the month of October and then far less than that the rest of the way I think you need to look at cut off points.

The key is to make sure they're not slated to swing a view.

Do you have a date you like more than January 1st? I'll be glad to update.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If you can show me any proof that using a smaller sample of goalie performance instead of the full season is a better predictor of future results than I will take this seriously. Or if it is that Jan 1st should be the cut-off instead of Dec 1st or Feb 1st.

Until then I will take larger full season sample over smaller 2.5 months sample.

Just spitballing here, but I think the best thing would be a metric that is weighted over time:

Last 10 games started: weigh at 100%, except for the best and worst game, which you weigh at 50%

Previous 10 games started: weigh at 75%, except for the best and worst game, which you weigh at 37.5%

Previous 10 games started: weigh at 50%, except for the best and worst game, which you weigh at 25%

Obviously you can adjust the number of games and weightings any way you'd like, but I think this would give the best sense of recent performance without completely discounting the past.

I wouldn't consider any statistics of goalies when they come in in relief (though it would be interesting to know how that impacts stats, whether it's in relief to injury or poor play)...unless you're planning to treat them like pitchers with mid-game switches, I'm not sure there's much point in knowing how good a goalie is without typical starting goalie game day preparation.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I am going to back up, and call you out on this.

Two things to consider.

You asked if Rittich was completely blameless on all goals.
But then you are talking about being blameless for the outcome.
Two different things. (Also, context matters!)

Rittich was blameless on 4 of 6 goals, so not all goals.
Flames only scored 3, though, so he is blameless for the outcome (which I consider the L)

So I can have it both ways.

I win. �� <- picture of trophy that may have disappeared

Still can't believe all this came out of a game story where I called Rittich average. He gave up six goals.

Just my opinion, but don't you find victories that you have to declare yourself a little more hollow?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dammage79

If you can get a round or two with this goaltending, we all should consider that a resounding success.

Gee, the recent woes has certainly tempered everyone’s enthusiasm.

Win one round and its time to celebrate?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Gee, the recent woes has certainly tempered everyone’s enthusiasm.

Win one round and its time to celebrate?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don’t know about you, but I will be celebrating if the Flames win their first round matchup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

With the emergence of Kuemper, it's looking like Antti Raanta might be the most sensible option that the Flames will have for goaltending. He makes 4.25 mill until 2021.

Arizona is in division, but I don't think many people consider them to be rivals.

Raanta is 29, has a career 92% in 150+ games.
He's injury prone, but I think Rittich could be a 1b if it comes to that.

I think the only question is if Arizona is willing to part with one of their goalies.

Raanta is clearly a good goalie but the injury history is obviously very concerning. Especially since he was a backup before Arizona so there is yet to be any evidence he can handle the workload of a full season starting.

But could you get him cheap? Might be worth a gamble because unlike some of the other goalie choices the Flames have made, the upside is definitely there.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Gee, the recent woes has certainly tempered everyone’s enthusiasm.

Win one round and its time to celebrate?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Considering the Flames have only made it past the first round two times in the past two decades, and the team didn't make the playoffs last year, that would be a success. Disregard how good their record have been, and where they are in the standings. At the beginning of the season, I think that would've been everyone criteria in a successful season.

The Flames window is opening, rather than closing. This is why although the goaltending does need to be improved, I don't want the team to be so desperate that they're sacrificing future pieces to get it, because it's never a guarantee that it'll pan out well for the team. Try to get one giving up pieces you can afford to let go of now, but doesn't hinders the team's success years down the road by creating a organizational hole.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This should be required reading before having a conversation about save percentage.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...s-a-team-stat/



It includes a healthy dose of E=NG as well.


Edit:
I have previously mentioned at a certain point in time that the sample size du jour that people were relying on (basically cherry picked to start when Smith started playing better in December) was about 600 shots.

A game like the 6 goal Tampa output, on a size of 600 shots, is basically .010 contribution in save percentage.

That game itself is enough to make the difference between an acceptable and an unacceptable goalie.

What a great article, really puts things into context.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So how does one determine "normal performance level" in this instance?

That's the difficult part. Do you use the full season, Rittich's NHL career, Rittich's North American career or something else.

Originally Posted by Bingo

Sorry that doesn't make much sense to me.

I'm with you if a person goes back and picks some perfect date where Smith stopped sucking and Rittich started playing poorly in order to make a point. Or if a person goes just five on five, or just when the games are close, or just on Tuesdays.

But when one goalie was top three in the league for the month of October and then far less than that the rest of the way I think you need to look at cut off points.

The key is to make sure they're not slated to swing a view.

Do you have a date you like more than January 1st? I'll be glad to update.

We've been over the sample picking so no point in rehasing.

If you really want to split Rittich's season into spots where that was definite changes in his stats its like this:

October - All world sensation

6 games, 4 starts - 939 save percentage

November 1 - Feb 3 - Average Starting Goalie

25 games, 24 starts - 913 save percentage

February 7 - March 12 - Bad goalie
*this starts with the game he was pulled against SJ

9 games, 9 starts - 876 save percentage


You can split hairs in the 1st and 3rd segments because they are smaller samples - in October he really just had 2 amazing games (1 goal on 45 shots vs NYR and 1 goal on 29 shots vs Buffalo. In Feb/March - you can pick out the 2,3 games that kill his stats (Tampa, Toronto, NJ)

You can believe whatever you want out of those numbers. I believe in using the full sample