Too early to panic about Markstrom

[The Fisher Account]

I struggle with the 'played well aspect' when this guy CONSISTENTLY is giving up the first goal of a game within the first 5 shots.

There is no way that putting your team on their heels that early and that often isn't deflating and exasperating.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

I struggle with the 'played well aspect' when this guy CONSISTENTLY is giving up the first goal of a game within the first 5 shots.

There is no way that putting your team on their heels that early and that often isn't deflating and exasperating.

I think timing of these goals is completely coincidental. And maybe the second play near the goal last night shouldn't be a 2 on 1 (the first was a decent chance too).

At the end of 1 he'd let in one goal on (I think) 9 shots. And that goal came after 5 minutes of play. The fact it was the second shot is pretty coincidental. Halak let a goal in on the 7th shot after 10 minutes. 1 goal in 11 shots. So after the first period they were pretty darn similar.

Second period the Flames decided the first shot against should be a breakaway. Nice.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I'm still stuck on the point that the advanced stats suggested he should have given up about 3.5 goals, based on an average goalie.

They would say he cost them a point.

Now it's one game, the fact remains, Marky has been quite poor this year, at least by his standards.

All in all, I'd say he's been an average goalie this year. Which is not good enough.

I admit I don't know exactly how they come up with that 3.5 number but the goals that were scored and the other saves Markstrom made makes me think that number is a bit low. The eye test showed he played well and was the better goalie in the game. The overall defensive play of the Flames, the beautiful Kadri assist on the Rangers breakaway goal, the Backlund disconnect on the tying goal, the circus of the Flames skaters in OT.......if anyone cost the Flames a point it certainly wasn't their goalie.

[PepsiFree]

The xGA argument against Markstrom during the NYR game also needs to be looked at in context of his opposition.

Markstrom had a xGA of 3.5, Halak’s was 2.0. With the larger differential, that’s means Halak was the worse of the two goaltenders in terms of goals allowed vs expected.

So xGA actually doesn’t support the argument that Markstrom cost them a point.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The xGA argument against Markstrom during the NYR game also needs to be looked at in context of his opposition.

Markstrom had a xGA of 3.5, Halak’s was 2.0. With the larger differential, that’s means Halak was the worse of the two goaltenders in terms of goals allowed vs expected.

So xGA actually doesn’t support the argument that Markstrom cost them a point.

XGA were 3.62 to 2.45. slight advantage to Halak, but both goalies allowed about approximately 1.5 goals more than expected.

I think the goal should be for Markstrom to play more than just marginally better than the other team's 37 year old, $1.5mln backup goalie.

Edit: and I think the team played like crap and don't blame Markstrom for the loss. I just don't think he was amazing. He was as good as the rest of the team.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

XGA were 3.62 to 2.45. slight advantage to Halak, but both goalies allowed about approximately 1.5 goals more than expected.

I think the goal should be for Markstrom to play more than just marginally better than the other team's 37 year old, $1.5mln backup goalie.

Edit: and I think the team played like crap and don't blame Markstrom for the loss. I just don't think he was amazing. He was as good as the rest of the team.

Sounds about right. It's 3.5 to 2.5 league.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

XGA were 3.62 to 2.45. slight advantage to Halak, but both goalies allowed about approximately 1.5 goals more than expected.

I think the goal should be for Markstrom to play more than just marginally better than the other team's 37 year old, $1.5mln backup goalie.

Edit: and I think the team played like crap and don't blame Markstrom for the loss. I just don't think he was amazing. He was as good as the rest of the team.

Moneypuck has xGA as 3.86 for Markstrom and 1.92 for Halak. They have Markstrom allowing 1.14 more than expected and Halak allowing 2.07 more, so not 1.5 for both.

Nobody said the goal was just to outplay Halak, just that he outplayed Halak. Why does every comment have to be bigger than it is?

[USflamesfan]

Just an FYI: I am panicking

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Moneypuck has xGA as 3.86 for Markstrom and 1.92 for Halak. They have Markstrom allowing 1.14 more than expected and Halak allowing 2.07 more, so not 1.5 for both.

Nobody said the goal was just to outplay Halak, just that he outplayed Halak. Why does every comment have to be bigger than it is?

That’s great, but I don’t care if the other teams goalie plays like s***. I only care if ours is performing where he should be. Fact is he’s been anywhere from total crap to average since round 2 of last year. Not good enough.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

That’s great, but I don’t care if the other teams goalie plays like s***. I only care if ours is performing where he should be. Fact is he’s been anywhere from total crap to average since round 2 of last year. Not good enough.

Cool.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Cool.

Not really, I’d prefer he play somewhere between average and awesome.

[combustiblefuel]

The biggest worry is whether or not Markstrom plays well is Sutter has always been known to ride his #1 goalie. The media always mentions this . In the past it made sense in his coaching career he had Hasek,Balfour,Nabokov, Vernon , Quick and Kippersauf all in there Prime years . That's a coaches dream . Most of them are going to be hall of famers. He had them in there peak years to boot. Markstom isn't near any of them IMO so that leash should be shorter.


If anything Sutter should learn his lesson again like with Kippersauf. He had Kippersauf as a backup in San jose
Before he came to Calgary . He gave him the reigns about the same age Vladar is now after turek kept ####ting the proverbial bed at Markstoms age.

I Don't know what it is but if you check this list out Calgary loves 30+ age goalies to be starters. Alot of starters 8n the last 20 years or so don't come to the Flames till 30years old. A shocking amount are 33 years +

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/CGY/goalies.html

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

The biggest worry is whether or not Markstrom plays well is Sutter has always been known to ride his #1 goalie. The media always mentions this . In the past it made sense in his coaching career he had Hasek,Balfour,Nabokov, Vernon , Quick and Kippersauf all in there Prime years . That's a coaches dream . Most of them are going to be hall of famers. He had them in there peak years to boot. Markstom isn't near any of them IMO so that leash should be shorter.


If anything Sutter should learn his lesson again like with Kippersauf. He had Kippersauf as a backup in San jose
Before he came to Calgary . He gave him the reigns about the same age Vladar is now after turek kept ####ting the proverbial bed at Markstoms age.

I Don't know what it is but if you check this list out Calgary loves 30+ age goalies to be starters. Alot of starters 8n the last 20 years or so don't come to the Flames till 30years old. A shocking amount are 33 years +

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/CGY/goalies.html

Kippersauf?

Repeatedly?

That’s gotta be worth a trip to the penalty box

[tvp2003]

Mike McKenna (former NHL goalie) breaks down what's wrong with Jacob Markstrom after watching every goal he's allowed this year:

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/di...en-off-a-cliff

So what’s up with Markstrom? Is it just confidence? Technique? The team in front of him?

Like most players that aren’t playing up to their potential, it’s a little bit of everything. I watched every goal Markstrom has given up this season, and I can say unequivocally that the Flames tend to give up catastrophic chances against.

Many goals came off odd-man rushes and backdoor plays that Markstrom really couldn’t have done much about. And I also think Calgary hasn’t been great in front of its own net. Opposing players haven’t been boxed out. Sticks haven’t been tied up. And too often, Flames players have been caught standing directly in front of Markstrom, obscuring his line of sight.

...

But Markstrom also has a nagging habit of allowing a goal early. Good goal, bad goal – it doesn’t matter. Playing from behind doesn’t equal winning hockey. Markstrom is averaging a goal against within the first six shots of the game. That needs to change.

There hasn’t been any drastic technical change to his game this season. And I don’t think Markstrom’s woes are related to confidence. He knows he can be a top-flight goaltender. If anything, I think Markstrom is guilty of trying too hard sometimes.

The Calgary netminder stands 6-foot-6, which is undoubtedly to his benefit. But size only works when it’s maximized. And when Markstrom starts pushing the envelope in terms of depth and explosiveness, holes tend to appear. Hence the high number of five-hole goals that he’s allowed. Which brings me to my first observation.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

Mike McKenna (former NHL goalie) breaks down what's wrong with Jacob Markstrom after watching every goal he's allowed this year:

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/di...en-off-a-cliff

I hadn't noticed a lot of 5 holes. More glove hand issues I thought.

Originally Posted by flamesgod

That’s great, but I don’t care if the other teams goalie plays like s***. I only care if ours is performing where he should be. Fact is he’s been anywhere from total crap to average since round 2 of last year. Not good enough.

I agree, what the other goalie does is (a) out of Markstrom's control and (b) pretty irrelevant. Yet we always get these "he was the second best goalie" posts. Who cares? He needs to win, either way. Like against Dallas.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

Mike McKenna (former NHL goalie) breaks down what's wrong with Jacob Markstrom after watching every goal he's allowed this year:

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/di...en-off-a-cliff

Good post. I like this analysis, but these things miss the changes year over year. Wonder how he was on this stuff last year.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Good post. I like this analysis, but these things miss the changes year over year. Wonder how he was on this stuff last year.

I think last year Markstrom seemed a lot less busy in net and tracked the puck exceptionally well.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I agree, what the other goalie does is (a) out of Markstrom's control and (b) pretty irrelevant. Yet we always get these "he was the second best goalie" posts. Who cares? He needs to win, either way. Like against Dallas.

I agree, I really only care about W’s. He was great in the Dallas series. He can’t control if the other goalie was in god mode.
He just needs to start winning and the criticism will dissipate.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

He just needs to start winning and the criticism will dissipate.

To some maybe. Even when he wins he gets criticized if he doesn't have a high enough save percentage.

[neo45]

I can’t think of a more ridiculously long leash a goalie has ever been given than Markstrom from Sutter this season

Team is in a dog fight for a playoff spot, he can’t win games to save his life, the other goalie is on a great streak without a regulation loss in 13 (!!!!) games, and people wonder why the team plays worse in front of one guy than the other