"Take that Calgary Puck!" — SN960 and Calgary sports media discussion

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's useful for helping to tell the story about a single game.

On Dec 13 Andrei Vasilevski recorded a 0.980 SP in a win against the Maple Leafs. Is that number "garbage"?

Yes.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Regardless of the objectivity or subjectivity of goaltender evaluation...

single game sv% is garbage.

but two goaltenders since November 25th isn't

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Your posts make me glad there are things like stats to actually measure goaltenders. Otherwise I'd have to check with you for every game story as to whether or not giving up six (Rittich above average against Tampa in a loss) in a loss, or giving up basically four powerplay goals against Pittsburgh in a win was an average NHL performance.

Who has time for that kind of analysis, especially with the fact that when it's done it's one person's opinion and nothing else, and said opinion may have a bias or two.

You are correct. Only one person’s analysis and opinion really counts and that is Bill Peters.

His opinion on who will start the majority of games moving forward over the next 23 games and the playoffs will have almost everything to do with ongoing current performance and subsequent building of trust.

Past months of play have determined very little and will have minimal to zero impact on future starts, IMO.

At this point, Peters will start the goalie who he believes gives the Flames the best chance of attaining their best possible Conference position and consequent opportunity to win playoff rounds.

Currently , Rittich and Smith are probably in a 1a and 1b position, respectively, in Peters view.

Where that goes depends on each goalies ongoing performance, moving forward.

IMO, al the other noise is rhetoric and personal bias.

Should be fun to see who steps up. Cheering for both of them and may the best goalie win.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's useful for helping to tell the story about a single game.

On Dec 13 Andrei Vasilevski recorded a 0.980 SP in a win against the Maple Leafs. Is that number "garbage"?

Sure, can be. Depends on what you use it for.

It is simply a fact, identifying what percentage of shots a goalie stopped. Represented as such, it is indisputable.

You can use that number to place the game as above or below statistically average, but in terms of describing how well a goalie played, it is close to meaningless.

If 49 shots are easy and the 50th goes in, it is a busy but easy night. The number doesn’t tell you that. You know that.

[Strange Brew]

This argument about the usefulness of stats has reached the point of absurdity. Of course single game stats don't tell the whole story. A guy can have two goals in a game and they were both the result of lucky bounces. A goalie can make great saves and be totally unlucky on certain others. Or have "no chance" if such a thing is truly possible.

There is not a poster on this site who would disagree with that.

But season statistics are a summation of single game statistics and referencing single game statistics as a data point in summarizing a game is entirely appropriate.

Those people who can't see past their own subjective opinion of a players performance, and believe that such perspective represents "fact" probably need a reality check. I doubt such a perspective is confined solely to one views on a hockey game.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

A performance can be statistically below average, while comprised of input data that doesn’t reflect the average.

I would quite specifically point to the Tampa game as a crystal clear demonstration of that.

I don’t care what goalie was in. For the love of god, please stop with the bias claims.

I sure as heck don’t want you to check with me, that would be silly and I enjoy reading your opinion as is. But on the days where the numbers don’t match the eye test, time and inclination permitting, I may decide to express my view.

Even the analytics guys acknowledge sv% is not good enough, shot quality exists, and that small samples of data can’t always be relied on as representative

His goals saved above average and dSV% have both cratered in the last 10 weeks. There isn't a goalie stat that exists that doesn't show he's off the game he had to start the season.

At 26 I hope Rittich finds it and is the answer for this core, that would be the best case scenario. But at the moment the Flames are dealing with two backup goaltenders and hoping one of them can be good enough to start in the playoffs.

And given the passion of defending Rittich in the last few weeks, I think the bias term is pretty fair.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

His goals saved above average and dSV% have both cratered in the last 10 weeks. There isn't a goalie stat that exists that doesn't show he's off the game he had to start the season.

At 26 I hope Rittich finds it and is the answer for this core, that would be the best case scenario. But at the moment the Flames are dealing with two backup goaltenders and hoping one of them can be good enough to start in the playoffs.

And given the passion of defending Rittich in the last few weeks, I think the bias term is pretty fair.

Right. There isn’t a stat that exists that shows his stats haven’t gotten worse because his stats have gotten worse. That’s a fact.

We agree on that. It’s indisputable.

But the how and why is what matters to me

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I completely agree, but on the other hand interpretations of game events are also hopelessly subjective. Your own bias towards one goalie and against another is glaringly obvious with how strenuously you work to convince others about “shot quality” from one game to another. Yes, it matters, but with how quick you are to forgive every one of Rittich’s mistakes, and with how readily you overlook the quality of Smith’s competition it is abundantly clear that your own judgement on this matter is totally unbalanced.

Rittich did not play as well in Tampa as Smith did in Pittsburgh. The numbers bear that out. The results beat that out. You appear incapable of acknowledging that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, though, a one game sample size to formulate an opinion is not a very reasonable place to start a serious debate. Never mind that the Flames did not play the same team twice in a row, or that the effort as a team, and quality of competition, varied wildly between those two games. You are also relying (in isolation) on Mike Smith stopping 31 of 32 at even strength. He let in 4 goals. Rittich let in 6 against Tampa. And the even strength quality of chances Rittich faced in Tampa were substantially superior to those faced by Smith, it’s not even close. If you disagree, please explain.

So let’s look instead at the season on aggregate. I think most people would agree that in general, Rittich hasn't been as good the last few months as he was at the start of the year. The numbers bear that out. I'm also sure that most people on this forum tend to watch most games, and so, can generally evaluate how the team has played on aggregate.

The first few months, the team played reasonably sound, structured hockey for the most part, but were undermined by poor goal tending.

They then went on a substantial run, in large part because they went to Rittich. They continued to win by playing reasonably defensively sound hockey. Then there was another inflection point, where the team was blowing the doors off other teams offensively. In the midst of the Gaudreau et al goal scoring binge, I think it is fair to say that the Flames skaters focused more of their attention on scoring, and less on defense.

Now, over this same period of time, Mike Smith was given predominantly (not exclusively), the easier starts against lesser lights in the league. Rittich was trusted to go up against the more potent offensive units.

So now let’s fast forward to post-allstar break Flames hockey. I'll always remember Peter Mahr saying you could tell when a team was about to either break out of a slump, or head into one, because they would be getting away from, or going towards, what made them successful in the first place. You have a team that is focused on scoring, not defense, headed straight into the worst part of the schedule in the entire season, playing river boat hockey.

Is it a surprise, then, that when the offense dried up, and the defensive structure and attention to details were lacking, that the Flames get lit up for a few games by some of the best teams in the league? Not really.

The Rittich vs. Smith debate isn’t a debate. Rittich is, and has been, the better goalie by far this season. It isn’t even close. The eye test supports it, the underlying numbers support it, and his record supports it. If not for some pretty awful efforts by his team mates vs. SJ and Tampa, Rittich’s SV% is still between .915 and .920.

Mike Smith has provided bottom tier goal tending for over a calendar year. He is 36. But to listen to Wills, and many of you here, he has suddenly discovered the fountain of youth by winning 2 of his last three games against the murderers row of Florida, Pittsburgh, and Arizona. Despite routinely making saves look far more difficult than they have to be.

If Mike Smith deserves credit for his recent wins, then make sure we are equally weighing the quality of the competition he’s facing and the quality of effort put forth by his team mates (and the type of chances they are allowing).

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

but two goaltenders since November 25th isn't

Why November 25th? Its the definition of an abitrary endpoint chosen to prove a point.

Rittich's save percentage by month (and yes - months are arbitrary endpoints as well but readily available)
October .939
November .911
December .915
January .911
February .853

Safe to assume October was an outlier, probably safe to assume February is an outlier as well and he hasn't turned into the world goalie in the league.

That leaves you with 3 months where he was ranging from .911-.915 - not a world beater but above average.


Here's Smith by month:
October .878
November .895
December .899
January .888
February .908


So I can ignore the rest of the season and assume Smith has become average and Rittich has become the worst goalie in the world or I can just the larger sample and draw the reasonable conclusion.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Right. There isn’t a stat that exists that shows his stats haven’t gotten worse because his stats have gotten worse. That’s a fact.

We agree on that. It’s indisputable.

But the how and why is what matters to me

Clearly. It seems to me that you care as much as you do precisely because you are struggling to accept that Rittich has not been as good in the past several weeks as he was in the first two months of the season.

I don't think the "how and why" are as mysterious or inscrutable as you are making them out to be: some of it has to do with team defense, but certainly not all of it.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It was kind of like that, except that this time around it was Wills who was making the statistical argument, Pinder was the one moving the goalposts, and as a result Wills was losing his mind.

It was Pinder moving the goalposts but also using more advanced stats, or looking at things beyond just the basic stats.

Earlier in the year you didnt need to look at any indepth analysis or any fancy splitting of stats to know that smith was horrible. The basic stats and the advanced stats showed it.

WHile now that the goalies are closer to even it is harder to tell who is better without looking at the advanced stats like opponent etc.

I get where pinder was coming from and I also get how a homer like Wills would think "I've finally got him at his own game" before getting incredibly frustrated when that dastardly pinder slipped through his grasp again.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Why November 25th? Its the definition of an abitrary endpoint chosen to prove a point.

Rittich's save percentage by month (and yes - months are arbitrary endpoints as well but readily available)
October .939
November .911
December .915
January .911
February .853

Safe to assume October was an outlier, probably safe to assume February is an outlier as well and he hasn't turned into the world goalie in the league.

That leaves you with 3 months where he was ranging from .911-.915 - not a world beater but above average.


Here's Smith by month:
October .878
November .895
December .899
January .888
February .908


So I can ignore the rest of the season and assume Smith has become average and Rittich has become the worst goalie in the world or I can just the larger sample and draw the reasonable conclusion.

This is actually a very good way of looking at it.


The most frustrating thing is the people who seem to think Mike Smith, who hasn't won a playoff game since 2012!!! is suddenly some world beating goalie...

Just because he's a veteran netminder who has one deep playoff run in his career doesn't make him Marty Brodeur Smith mostly sucks and has sucked for a calendar year. One sort of OK month so far doesn't make up for that.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Again, though, a one game sample size to formulate an opinion is not a very reasonable place to start a serious debate. Never mind that the Flames did not play the same team twice in a row, or that the effort as a team, and quality of competition, varied wildly between those two games. You are also relying (in isolation) on Mike Smith stopping 31 of 32 at even strength. He let in 4 goals. Rittich let in 6 against Tampa. And the even strength quality of chances Rittich faced in Tampa were substantially superior to those faced by Smith, it’s not even close. If you disagree, please explain.

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:

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

...I just don’t see anything Smith has faced that was remotely like Tampa (who has scored 5+ in 22 of their last 41), in terms of offense and in terms of the Flames basically being destroyed by a greatly superior opponent.

Washington had to sit Ovechkin, and still got 4. Florida is not a good team. Arizona looked barely like a NHL team.

I think it’s arguably as simple as this. If Smith got the Tampa game, the stats aren’t close and there is no ‘controversy’

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

...The Rittich vs. Smith debate isn’t a debate. Rittich is, and has been, the better goalie by far this season. It isn’t even close. The eye test supports it, the underlying numbers support it, and his record supports it. If not for some pretty awful efforts by his team mates vs. SJ and Tampa, Rittich’s SV% is still between .915 and .920.

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?

Mike Smith has provided bottom tier goal tending for over a calendar year. He is 36. But to listen to Wills, and many of you here, he has suddenly discovered the fountain of youth by winning 2 of his last three games against the murderers row of Florida, Pittsburgh, and Arizona. Despite routinely making saves look far more difficult than they have to be

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.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Why November 25th? Its the definition of an abitrary endpoint chosen to prove a point.

Rittich's save percentage by month (and yes - months are arbitrary endpoints as well but readily available)
October .939
November .911
December .915
January .911
February .853

Safe to assume October was an outlier, probably safe to assume February is an outlier as well and he hasn't turned into the world goalie in the league.

That leaves you with 3 months where he was ranging from .911-.915 - not a world beater but above average.


Here's Smith by month:
October .878
November .895
December .899
January .888
February .908


So I can ignore the rest of the season and assume Smith has become average and Rittich has become the worst goalie in the world or I can just the larger sample and draw the reasonable conclusion.

That was the date that 960 was discussing (was it the 28th), doesn't matter, that's why I chose it.

I've been using Xmas break for Rittich as that seems to be the line in the sand for his performance.

Before Xmas Break - 20 games .923
After Xmas Break - 14 games .896

Or you could take out the outlier of October as you mentioned.

October - 6 games .939
Since - 28 games .905

Either way concerning.

But once again I'm not holding Smith up as the answer, just seems to me the Flames have gone from one of the best starters and worst backups to now having two just below average backups.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

This is actually a very good way of looking at it.


The most frustrating thing is the people who seem to think Mike Smith, who hasn't won a playoff game since 2012!!! is suddenly some world beating goalie...

Just because he's a veteran netminder who has one deep playoff run in his career doesn't make him Marty Brodeur Smith mostly sucks and has sucked for a calendar year. One sort of OK month so far doesn't make up for that.

Who are you talking about? Honestly? I haven't seen anyone suggesting Smith is anything other than maybe an equal choice to a struggling Rittich right now.

Why add hyperbole?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Clearly. It seems to me that you care as much as you do precisely because you are struggling to accept that Rittich has not been as good in the past several weeks as he was in the first two months of the season.

I don't think the "how and why" are as mysterious or inscrutable as you are making them out to be: some of it has to do with team defense, but certainly not all of it.

It’s not mysterious at all.

I really am not struggling with anything, except perhaps gaining mindshare that stats need context.

Let’s just put this out there. How many shots has Rittich faced since that not at all arbitrary Nov 25 date? About 600. What is the impact of 6 goals on .600 shots? .010 in save percentage.

Again, I can distinguish between a bad statistical night and a bad job.

There is nothing at all in the stats that distinguish shot quality or distribution. You have to assume it comes out in the wash.

People are making a case of equivalence based on sv% for a handpicked stretch of games.

Again, in 31 starts, goalie 1 has given up 4+ in regulation twice, against two of the top teams in the league.
Goalie 2 in 28 starts has given up 4+ 11 times. And in 5 of his last 10 starts

So to boil it down to one number and claim some equivalence merits a closer look

Like I said in another place, it was an unpopular opinion to say that Rittich could let in 6 but have played well. I knew it would lead to further discussion. Hence looking at it from several different angles.

But it seems that some people just want to drag it down to
- but save percentage!
- you’re biased!

Nah. I am a bit of a goaltender apologist. Always knew that in the years that Kipper was putting up .903 behind Keenan, while having seen Fernandez and Roloson both put up numbers in the .930s in Minnesota, that this was not a number you can hang your hat on

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That was the date that 960 was discussing (was it the 28th), doesn't matter, that's why I chose it.

I've been using Xmas break for Rittich as that seems to be the line in the sand for his performance.

Before Xmas Break - 20 games .923
After Xmas Break - 14 games .896

Or you could take out the outlier of October as you mentioned.

October - 6 games .939
Since - 28 games .905

Either way concerning.

But once again I'm not holding Smith up as the answer, just seems to me the Flames have gone from one of the best starters and worst backups to now having two just below average backups.

Or you could just eliminate the last 3 games and all of those stats look fine. This entire discussion boils down to were these last three games the start of Rittich falling apart or were they just a fluke.

I could come up with an excuse for two of those games - pulled super early against San Jose may have rattled his confidence and then Tampa has been blasting everyone lately

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Who are you talking about? Honestly? I haven't seen anyone suggesting Smith is anything other than maybe an equal choice to a struggling Rittich right now.

Why add hyperbole?

Hyperbole is fun.

But there were people on this here forum in the summer preaching that smith is an elite goalie.

Wills did suggest yesterday that maybe smith has reclaimed the starters role.

Also have heard those words out of Loubo and Wills mouths this year at various points.

Although not recently, but it's starting to creep back in and if Smith wins another one I could see Wills dropping it.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

This is actually a very good way of looking at it.


The most frustrating thing is the people who seem to think Mike Smith, who hasn't won a playoff game since 2012!!! is suddenly some world beating goalie...

Just because he's a veteran netminder who has one deep playoff run in his career doesn't make him Marty Brodeur Smith mostly sucks and has sucked for a calendar year. One sort of OK month so far doesn't make up for that.

He hasn't lost a playoff game since 2012 either.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by stone hands

you say this like peter maher wasnt the radio voice for the flames for over 30 years

What does Peter Maher have anything to do with what I said?