Jacob Markstrom (is better than Cam Talbot)

[Strange Brew]

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.

[madmike]

At this point I think it’s safe to say he is what he is - a mediocre goalie. Another screwup in the net for Treliving. This one will likely cost Treliving his job.

Markstrom isn’t awful, but he was brought in to be a difference maker and he just isn’t.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by madmike

This one will likely cost Treliving his job.

Signing Markstrom wont cost him his job. Failing to change the core will.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Markstrom's never posted a GAA below 2.5. Gibson and Price have. Markstrom's claim to fame is a year he posted a GAA of 2.77.

The problem with the Markstrom hype is that it revolves around "look what he did behind a team that gave up a lot of shots" and not "look what he did".

The Flames are not a team that give up a lot of shots. Goalie play doesn't translate linearly from lots of shots to few shots (hence why the quality start% stat has a modifier for shots fewer than twenty!).

In Markstrom's claim to fame year, he had a QS% of .581 which is... a good year, but not a superstar year. His career QS% is .518

In Price's peak year, he had a QS% of .667 - and his CAREER QS% is .574

See the huge gap there? Most people would tell you Carey Price is overpaid - even though his average year is about on par with Markstrom's absolute best possible year.

Markstrom has had two starts this year and neither is, statistically, a quality start. It's astounding the free pass he's been given. David Rittich as a Flame had a QS% of .559 and few felt he was good enough. Markstrom's is good enough though, somehow. Because [insert Canucks had bad D excuse, even though we know defense does not impact goalie performance outside of shot volume]

I'm not comparing their careers.

[DeluxeMoustache]

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.

Some bonehead? Grow up. Is this a playground? I like to think you are better than that

I didn’t say Talbot was a no brainer. But two things I can say for sure.
1. Talbot makes 3.67 x 3. Markstrom makes 6 x 6. Cap hit matters. Term matters. One contract is better than the other one. Clearly.
2. Data shows Talbot was better in Calgary than Markstrom was. And better in Minnesota than Markstrom was here. And better over his career. There is nothing from a statistical standpoint that makes a compelling case that Markstrom is a better goalie. Just mainly average data augmented by excuses


I have also written about Kiprusoff, breaking down and correlating coach and play style to sv%

Kipper went from .920s and .930s on defense focused teams to sub .910 on Keenan’s structureless teams.

I fully am behind the fact and have been beating the drum that goalie stats are affected by team play

But Markstrom has never shown to be elite. Individual seasons are all ~average ish except one.

Markstrom is a blocking style goalie, who benefits from his size, and who had issues with save selection at times, post save recovery, and rebound control. Kipper’s rebound control was outstanding. He caught all he could and tried directed everything else to the corners. He was a different style of goalie

Last year Markstrom had a double pad stack against Montreal which kind of looked flashy, but it was not a reaction to a quick cross crease pass. It was following the skater. Bizarre save selection. He gave up a rebound, did not leave himself in a position to recover, and got scored on. They lost that game.

Like I said, that first goal against Anaheim? Hrudey said it was a perfectly placed shot. Yeah, ok. And Markstrom was well positioned. Just he let it between his blocker and pad.

So look. I can point to things I don’t care for stylistically. I can point to specific plays to support the views. I can support my point of view with statistics.

You? Mental gymnastics and name calling. Using statistics which exclude the bad games. Lol It’s basically like talking to anti vaxxers. Hardly worthwhile

[Geeoff]

It's pretty obvious that big UFA signings are not going to turn this team around

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

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.

Nothing wrong with going with a total career. I think not looking at trends can be a mistake though.

With that said last year was a negative trend, and you could just go with that.

Don't think anyone is just picking out good games though. There was a pretty distinct change after the player got hurt, and then again when he adjusted to coming back.

The sample sizes aren't big so you can disregard them if you want, but it's not like someone is pulling out his best 20 starts and saying "See he's good!"

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nothing wrong with going with a total career. I think not looking at trends can be a mistake though.

With that said last year was a negative trend, and you could just go with that.

Don't think anyone is just picking out good games though. There was a pretty distinct change after the player got hurt, and then again when he adjusted to coming back.

The sample sizes aren't big so you can disregard them if you want, but it's not like someone is pulling out his best 20 starts and saying "See he's good!"

I agree that you should be considering different data windows, trends and whole bodies of work, and also your direct observations, and building your view in as complete a manner as possible

I think it involves a lot of mental gymnastics to declare a guy as elite, who has never actually shown to be elite, consistently or at least repeatably

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

You? Mental gymnastics and name calling. Using statistics which exclude the bad games. Lol It’s basically like talking to anti vaxxers. Hardly worthwhile

I’m struggling to read this in your self-described Morgan Freeman voice. Maybe you could try harder to nail the voice a little bit, you’re missing the mark.

That said, I’ve repeatedly used the last four years, all of which have been the starter, and haven’t used any statistics which have excluded any individual games. Idk, maybe this is one of your classic “reading comprehension” issues you need to work on. But overall, if it’s not worthwhile, you could simply stop replying to my posts. You telling me how good your takes have been doesn’t really convince me, as I don’t really take them seriously. But keep replying if it makes you happy.

[dino7c]

As usual people are ignoring the teams Markstrom have played in front of. They have all been poor.

Let's see how Grub's stats look at the end of this season.

He allowed 2 goals in regulation, if the Flames weren't shooting 4% he would have had the win

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dino7c

He allowed 2 goals in regulation, if the Flames weren't shooting 4% he would have had the win

If he stopped one of two completely stoppable, unscreened shots from distance, he would have had the win.

He has 2 goals in regulation because the team behind him played a near perfect game in terms of shot supression. The only remotely difficult save Markstrom had to make was on his blocker save on Ryan Getzlaf. The other dangerous Ducks shots all missed the net.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I agree that you should be considering different data windows, trends and whole bodies of work, and also your direct observations, and building your view in as complete a manner as possible

I think it involves a lot of mental gymnastics to declare a guy as elite, who has never actually shown to be elite, consistently or at least repeatably

Here is what we know:
- Markstrom was a high end goalie prospect and viewed as one of the best in the game in his early 20’s
- from 2016-2020 he really established himself as a legit starting goalie getting a better than .910 save % on a bottom feeding team in the league but playing the 60 game load
- in his contract and last season in Vancouver he elevated his game to a .918%, helped the team get to round 2 of the playoffs and finishing 4th in Vezina voting


It made a ton of sense for the Flames, Oilers, Canes to chase him and with Demko in the wings and expansion on the horizon it was impossible for him to stay and get the terms he wanted. It certainly looked like a player who was coming into his own joining the Flames for his peak/prime years.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I’m struggling to read this in your self-described Morgan Freeman voice. Maybe you could try harder to nail the voice a little bit, you’re missing the mark.

That said, I’ve repeatedly used the last four years, all of which have been the starter, and haven’t used any statistics which have excluded any individual games. Idk, maybe this is one of your classic “reading comprehension” issues you need to work on. But overall, if it’s not worthwhile, you could simply stop replying to my posts. You telling me how good your takes have been doesn’t really convince me, as I don’t really take them seriously. But keep replying if it makes you happy.

Lol. Drawing on what appears to be a stalkerish familiarity with my posts. I’m not happy, I’m a bit creeped out.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm not comparing their careers.

You're comparing the players, without factoring in that a down year for Price or Gibson is equivalent to an average year for Markstrom.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

If he stopped one of two completely stoppable, unscreened shots from distance, he would have had the win.

He has 2 goals in regulation because the team behind him played a near perfect game in terms of shot supression. The only remotely difficult save Markstrom had to make was on his blocker save on Ryan Getzlaf. The other dangerous Ducks shots all missed the net.

I'll give you the first goal...not the 2nd, it's a point blank look from a guy wide open. Flames totally dominate defensively and for some reason do a lazy line change at the end of a one goal game.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

And a year later he pretty much untradeable at with the contract he got from the Flames. The Flames could have left him exposed in Seattle expansion draft.

Philipp Grubauer age 29 6 x 5.9

Chris Driedger age 27 3 x 3.5

Grubauer has a .876 and a GAA over 4 after four games...team in front of you matters

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I agree that you should be considering different data windows, trends and whole bodies of work, and also your direct observations, and building your view in as complete a manner as possible

I think it involves a lot of mental gymnastics to declare a guy as elite, who has never actually shown to be elite, consistently or at least repeatably

It doesn't take mental gymnastics to see the Canucks' media picking the guy as their team MVP in each of his last two seasons there.

When Calgary signed him there were experts (Woodlief?) suggesting that Vancouver' system was tough to play in and that Markstrom was better suited for the Calgary system, and that he was elite.

So he was trending. That's why Vancouver wanted him back. That's why Calgary paid to get him.

Has he regressed? Will he regress? Time will tell. But those supporting the idea that the jury is still not in have more on their side than mental gymnastics.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Lol. Drawing on what appears to be a stalkerish familiarity with my posts. I’m not happy, I’m a bit creeped out.

Still not a moderator ... but from a cruising the topic vantage point I think you guys should both knock off the personal stuff!

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Here is what we know:
- Markstrom was a high end goalie prospect and viewed as one of the best in the game in his early 20’s
- from 2016-2020 he really established himself as a legit starting goalie getting a better than .910 save % on a bottom feeding team in the league but playing the 60 game load
- in his contract and last season in Vancouver he elevated his game to a .918%, helped the team get to round 2 of the playoffs and finishing 4th in Vezina voting


It made a ton of sense for the Flames, Oilers, Canes to chase him and with Demko in the wings and expansion on the horizon it was impossible for him to stay and get the terms he wanted. It certainly looked like a player who was coming into his own joining the Flames for his peak/prime years.

Yes, I know and acknowledge that Markstrom had one (1) above average year. Tre was counting on that being an indicator of sustained quality, but it hasn’t borne fruit yet

Pursuing the ‘good player on a bad team’ involves some risk.

When I look at an elite goalie on a bad team, the first one that comes to mind is Roberto Luongo, the years he was in Florida. He had a bad W-L and great sv%

I simply think it is a real risk that Markstrom actually is what his stats say - average - ish. And he isn’t paid to be average-ish. Talbot is paid to be average. Mike Smith is paid to be average

[1qqaaz]

I hated the prospect of signing Markstrom before it happened, I hated the contract when it was signed, and I still hate it now.

I assumed Markstrom would have a great first two years, then be subpar for the last 4 as he gets into his late 30s.

He hasn't be bad, but he hasn't earned 6 million. I wouldn't be surprised if Vladar ends the year with a higher save percentage than Markstrom.

But Markstrom does give the team a chance to win almost every night. He's rarely outright bad. And he can steal games. I love what I've seen from his interviews - he seems very professional and he's always holding himself accountable.
Again, I don't like the contract, but it could be a lot worse.