[News] Flames recall Wolf on emergency basis. Vladar non-roster. Ritchie in COVID protocol.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I wonder why?

My point is, there are always stories about up and coming small goalies who are going to be an exception, but it’s really rare for it to happen.

In other words, the smaller goalie really has to buck the odds.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

In other words, the smaller goalie really has to buck the odds.

Yes, and also one has to temper expectations, because this is an old story.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

More big goalies make it than small. You can’t seriously argue otherwise.

Anyway, I’m talking about the touted small goalies who are always going to be exceptions. But hardly ever are. Enroth, for example.

More big goalies are given an opportunity to make it, yes. Even when they're Koskinen types.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

LOL - so small goalies work harder? No bias there.

The average human male height is 5'9"

It's just numbers. You're going to find more skilled 5'9" goalies than you will 6'5" goalies with the same skill level.

A little bit of extra reach might be an advantage for guys falling within a standard variation of that average height. But once you're exclusively looking for skill in players two or three standard variations away, you're being awfully optimistic. You're using selection-bias to filter out more skilled players.

There's no bias for smaller players here. It's simply a matter of fact that a 5'11 or 6'0" goalie like Wolf who has excelled at every level, is more likely to be at peak performance in the sport. Not because he's small, but because he's good without needing to not be small.

The only wrench in that above statement is due to further selection bias starting in childhood where taller players might be encouraged to play the position. I don't know how much that happens in minor hockey etc though.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

More big goalies are given an opportunity to make it, yes. Even when they're Koskinen types.

Yes, because NHL teams would rather have big than good

(Teams are going to employ the best players they can find, regardless of size. Those players tend to be larger because size is an advantage, not because there is bias from the selectors)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

The average human male height is 5'9"

It's just numbers. You're going to find more skilled 5'9" goalies than you will 6'5" goalies with the same skill level.

A little bit of extra reach might be an advantage for guys falling within a standard variation of that average height. But once you're exclusively looking for skill in players two or three standard variations away, you're being awfully optimistic. You're using selection-bias to filter out more skilled players.

There's no bias for smaller players here. It's simply a matter of fact that a 5'11 or 6'0" goalie like Wolf who has excelled at every level, is more likely to be at peak performance in the sport. Not because he's small, but because he's good without needing to not be small.

The only wrench in that above statement is due to further selection bias starting in childhood where taller players might be encouraged to play the position. I don't know how much that happens in minor hockey etc though.

Answer: it doesn't happen in minor hockey

You are trying to find a bias that isn't there (and in the process, applying your own bias)

The simple answer is that NHL goalies are getting bigger, as a group, because, all else equal, size is an added advantage

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The simple answer is that NHL goalies are getting bigger, as a group, because, all else equal, size is an added advantage

Therein lies the issue.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Therein lies the issue.

Yes, which you have been trying to avoid.

The argument, from the beginning, was that size is an advantage. You just (finally) acknowledged it

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, which you have been trying to avoid.

The argument, from the beginning, was that size is an advantage. You just (finally) acknowledged it

Size might be an advantage if the genetics and build allow for comparable quickness to a smaller, lighter person.

But assumung that all else is fundamentally equal is a flawed premise. A Canadian male between twenty and fourty who is just below 6'2" is already in the 95th percentile for height.

What is the likelyhood that one of the five percent tallest people is equally as otherwise talented?

Yes, exceptions have always existed. Vasilevsky. Malkin. Lemieux. Jagr. But on average? You're probably a lot more likely to find a Tim Thomas or a Sidney Crosby or a Patrick Kane level talent on the wrong side of these extreme outlier heights... unless you're artificially selecting for height and filling your rosters with Koskinens, Ritchies, etc.

Which is absolutely the case. Some teams have even admitted to exclusively not drafting average sized goalies. There's a difference between an advantage, and a blind spot.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Size might be an advantage if the genetics and build allow for comparable quickness to a smaller, lighter person.

But assumung that all else is fundamentally equal is a flawed premise. A Canadian male between twenty and fourty who is just below 6'2" is already in the 95th percentile for height.

What is the likelyhood that one of the five percent tallest people is equally as otherwise talented?

Yes, exceptions have always existed. Vasilevsky. Malkin. Lemieux. Jagr. But on average? You're probably a lot more likely to find a Tim Thomas or a Sidney Crosby or a Patrick Kane level talent on the wrong side of these extreme outlier heights... unless you're artificially selecting for height and filling your rosters with Koskinens, Ritchies, etc.

Which is absolutely the case. Some teams have even admitted to exclusively not drafting average sized goalies. There's a difference between an advantage, and a blind spot.

You are cherry picking. There are as many, if not more, more tall and talented players in the NHL. For every Fleury, there’s a Lindros, and more. For every Crosby in a given year, there’s Ovie, Thornton, Perry, Getzlaf, Marceau. I do not think smaller players are innately more skilled.

But more to the point - for goalies size is an advantage for obvious reasons, and there’s no evidence smaller goalies are better at anything in particular.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You are cherry picking. There are as many, if not more, more tall and talented players in the NHL. For every Fleury, there’s a Lindros, and more. For every Crosby in a given year, there’s Ovie, Thornton, Perry, Getzlaf, Marceau. I do not think smaller players are innately more skilled.


But more to the point - for goalies size is an advantage for obvious reasons, and there’s no evidence smaller goalies are better at anything in particular.

re: bolded

Smaller players aren't more innately skilled. However 95% of (pre-selected) players are shorter than 6'2. You're more likely to find high talent levels searching in a group of 950 players than a group of 50 players.

Again, size is one potential advantage, but it's treated as a prerequisite relative to every other aspect of puck-stopping. At a position where positioning, awareness, quickness, and mental toughness are paramount.

And size can be a disadvantage if it affects agility.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Wolf may be able to carve out a decent pro career as a back-up or as a 1B on a mediocre team, and the play out the string in Europe.

[codynw]

The best goalie to ever play the sport was 1" taller than Wolf. I won't say being tall isn't helpful, but with talent like Wolf, it very likely won't matter. And it's not like he's super short anyways. He'll make it.

[Moneyhands23]

I'm just excited that he got to see the team win and will get a practice or 2 in with the club. Guy is the best goalie prospect of my time (I'm 40). Hope to hell we finally hit on an amazing goalie!

Oooooooooooooooollllllllllllllllllllll!!!!!! Lol I may be drinking early today...hoping to be to drunk for new years dinner tonight

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Wolf may be able to carve out a decent pro career as a back-up or as a 1B on a mediocre team, and the play out the string in Europe.

I see 600 wins in him. Honestly.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Wolf may be able to carve out a decent pro career as a back-up or as a 1B on a mediocre team, and the play out the string in Europe.

That a ####ing idiotic statement to define a young players career like that!! How the hell do you know that. The kid could have a better career then Kipper for all we know.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by rooster

That a ####ing idiotic statement to define a young players career like that!! How the hell do you know that. The kid could have a better career then Kipper for all we know.

Really? That's a reasonable expectation.

That outcome for a 7th round pick (the 21st goaltender selected) would be considered a success.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

re: bolded

Smaller players aren't more innately skilled. However 95% of (pre-selected) players are shorter than 6'2. You're more likely to find high talent levels searching in a group of 950 players than a group of 50 players.

Again, size is one potential advantage, but it's treated as a prerequisite relative to every other aspect of puck-stopping. At a position where positioning, awareness, quickness, and mental toughness are paramount.

And size can be a disadvantage if it affects agility.

You're still missing the point.

Yes, there are more average-sized goalies than large goalies. And yes, there will therefore be more highly-skilled average-sized goalies. And that is why, all the way up to the NHL, there will be more average-sized goalies than large goalies.

However, the NHL doesn't need hundreds of goalies, they only need 60. So there are only a handful of new jobs each year. So with jobs being that scarce, the one guy that makes it is the guy with elite skills AND size.

Can smaller guys make it? Of course. But that added dimension of size is a big advantage.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

re: bolded

Smaller players aren't more innately skilled. However 95% of (pre-selected) players are shorter than 6'2. You're more likely to find high talent levels searching in a group of 950 players than a group of 50 players.

Again, size is one potential advantage, but it's treated as a prerequisite relative to every other aspect of puck-stopping. At a position where positioning, awareness, quickness, and mental toughness are paramount.

And size can be a disadvantage if it affects agility.

To the bold: obviously, but if the player lacks agility, they aren't making the MHL. Or at least, they aren't staying there.

[Enoch Root]

A significant portion of goaltending is positioning. A goalie that is 10% larger is going to have 10% more pucks hit him, based on positioning alone. That is a huge hill to overcome for the smaller goalie. The small goalie has to be that much better in other factors, just to be as good.