To me the big potential benefit of signing Markstrom isn't just that he makes more saves, it's that the team is able to play differently in front of him. That could be a difference maker.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
To me the big potential benefit of signing Markstrom isn't just that he makes more saves, it's that the team is able to play differently in front of him. That could be a difference maker.
Bingo.
I remember the Flames being a completely different team in front of Kipper over Turek.
One thing I know for sure is the last few years there were many games where I watched the Flames badly outplay the Canucks only to have Markstrom steal the 2 points.
Not last year. He lost both his games.
You are probably just remembering the year before, when he was 2-2 and his two wins required him to be .939 and .943.
I was at that game. There were hundreds of Flames jerseys in the building, and it was the same night that James Neal lost all his teeth. Markstrom was really, really good. We were sitting behind the Canucks goal in the third period, and it really felt like it was only a matter of time before the Flames broke through for the win. It didn't happen.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Was also at that game. It was really the first time I thought about Markstrom as actually being good. He was the sole reason they won. My Canucks fan friend agreed he was unreal that day.
To me the big potential benefit of signing Markstrom isn't just that he makes more saves, it's that the team is able to play differently in front of him. That could be a difference maker.
solid goaltending --> team confidence --> better play
I think it's been so long since we've had a goalie that some people have forgotten what it can do to a team
Man, Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm looked so dangerous in those highlights. Haven't seen a game like that from them in quite a long while. *sad face*
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
To me the big potential benefit of signing Markstrom isn't just that he makes more saves, it's that the team is able to play differently in front of him. That could be a difference maker.
The less confident players feel about their goaltender, the less confident they feel about taking chances that could win them games. Start to play safe and you're not going to do enough to win, or come back from a one goal deficit. If you think and know your goalie has your back and won't let in any stinkers, then you push harder to create scoring chances instead of worrying about how to play better defense.
The Following User Says Thank You to Buff For This Useful Post:
When Markstrom starts putting up a wall back there these guys are hopefully going to play a lot less afraid / not to lose, and start to shift to being opportunistic and that includes (hopefully) the top line at 5 on 5.
Last edited by djsFlames; 10-13-2020 at 02:54 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
I remember the Flames being a completely different team in front of Kipper over Turek.
I think the best example of this was McElhinny. I remember some people feeling sorry for him because the team could just never seem to score when he was in net.
When in reality, the team was so nervous with him in net, they seemed afraid to risk making scoring chances in the even they lose possession. When he was in net, the strategy was dump ins and board play. When Kipper played, players were way less afraid to make long passes or shoot the puck more.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
I think the best example of this was McElhinny. I remember some people feeling sorry for him because the team could just never seem to score when he was in net.
When in reality, the team was so nervous with him in net, they seemed afraid to risk making scoring chances in the even they lose possession. When he was in net, the strategy was dump ins and board play. When Kipper played, players were way less afraid to make long passes or shoot the puck more.
It was actually like watching 2 completely different hockey teams.
